Required Pilots v Training Pilots

KwackerJack

Boeing say the EU needs 5k pilots a year.....I'm currenty training as a pilot at PPL level and will hopefully go onto ATPL.

My question is how many pilots are training versus how many are required

---

'Boeing, the world's largest plane manufacturer, has estimated that by 2034, there will be a need for 95,000 new commercial airline pilots in the European Union alone. This equates to 5,000 pilots a year'

Source :

http://m.independent.ie/business/irish/ryanair-tries-to-entice-rival-airlines-pilots-as-fleet-expands-rapidly-34574465.html

robclay26

Been hearing about this shortage bla bla for years now! the shortage is with airlines looking for experienced crews, mostly in Asia and the Middles East. But yes we do have the likes or Ryanair continuously taking in "cadets" and perhaps Easyjet and Wizzair (am open to correction) but other wise it is rather hyped up in my opinion. But go for it, follow your dreams and enjoy the trip

martinsvi

First we need to look at why is Boeing and Airbus coming up with such forecasts. There's no pressure or liability for them to be accurate in these statements - they are free to make an impression that the industry is rapidly growing simply to boost their stock value. My personal view is that European skies are very crowded as they are. It is getting increasingly difficult for airlines to get their slots for waypoints/airways when they want them. If your flight goes right across EU and flight for whatever reason misses it's slot, chances are you will be sitting on apron for an hour or more before ATC can issue you a new slot. If nothing dramatically changes in technology or regulations, I just don't see how you can add some 50% more flights or whatever some of the resources are quoting..

To answer your question - I read somewhere that 3 largest schools in EU - CTC, FTE and CAE produce 650 cadets a year. AFTA adds 75 as the forth largest school. I would like to speculate that all other combined add about 1000-1500 per year, but it's difficult to get accurate data for this.

Then you have to remember that just because you have a licence doesn't mean companies will hire you. You hear airlines and training organizations talk about things like "soft skills" or personality traits that cannot be trained or are very difficult to change. Some pilots are just not employable.. thus you will always hear about airlines being in demand and pilots not being able to get jobs

these estimates are only correct as long as everything's going fine, but we know that these recruitment drives never last long and the industry is very cyclic. We are always just a recession or a terror act away from any forecast going right through the window..

Stovepipe

you also have to include the downsizing of militaries, which has the effect of dumping qualified aircrew into the market. Also, airlines fold and new ones open and the actual market for pilots shifts every day. When someone throws a nice round figure like "5000" into the ring, it's white noise, because the need rises and falls constantly and anyone who can predict with absolute accuracy should be buying lotto tickets. What is guaranteed is that commercial pilot training is expensive and keeping the qualifications current is also expensive.

KwackerJack

It sure is expensive......ive stopped counting at this stage and wont be counting ha

The typical pilot wage in Europe is pretty good at the moment so once I get employment on even a turbo prop I'll be delighted

martinsvi

Stovepipe wrote: »

you also have to include the downsizing of militaries, which has the effect of dumping qualified aircrew into the market.

experienced - yes, qualified - no. Military have to undergo ATPL conversion, MCC and pass the relevant skill tests before they are of any interest to airlines. It's not a straight forward process and it definitely costs money. If you leave the service as a restricted pilot, you might even have to re-do quite a bit of practical flight training

Negative_G

martinsvi wrote: »

experienced - yes, qualified - no. Military have to undergo ATPL conversion, MCC and pass the relevant skill tests before they are of any interest to airlines. It's not a straight forward process and it definitely costs money. If you leave the service as a restricted pilot, you might even have to re-do quite a bit of practical flight training

Not true.

Many of the pilots who have left the Air Corps in recent years have done so with their Unfrozen ATPL, MCC, and Instructor ratings and walked into various jobs with Aer Lingus, Ryanair, CityJet and ASL only needing to complete a type rating.

And the Air Corps is only a small organisation. The RAF have had and continue to have a strong intake of DE pilots from the RAF and Royal Navy.

Your assertion is far away from reality.

martinsvi

Negative_G wrote: »

Not true.

Many of the pilots who have left the Air Corps in recent years have done so with their Unfrozen ATPL, MCC, and Instructor ratings and walked into various jobs with Aer Lingus, Ryanair, CityJet and ASL only needing to complete a type rating.

And the Air Corps is only a small organisation. The RAF have had and continue to have a strong intake of DE pilots from the RAF and Royal Navy.

Your assertion is far away from reality.

I can't speak for Air Corps, but have been sitting in the same class room in Bristol with number of ex RAF C130/C17/heli pilots doing the same ATPLs as me. So don't try to make me look like a liar please

martinsvi

Negative_G wrote: »

Not true.

Many of the pilots who have left the Air Corps in recent years have done so with their Unfrozen ATPL, MCC, and Instructor ratings and walked into various jobs with Aer Lingus, Ryanair, CityJet and ASL only needing to complete a type rating.

And the Air Corps is only a small organisation. The RAF have had and continue to have a strong intake of DE pilots from the RAF and Royal Navy.

Your assertion is far away from reality.

you might find this EASA flow chart handy - https://www.bristol.gs/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/EASA-Part-FCL-MILITARY-ACCREDITATION-AEROPLANE-FLOWCHART-1.pdf

I would really love to know how many Air Corp pilots a year leave the service with minimum 500 hours on multi pilot aircraft+ additional 1000 to qualify for unfrozen ATPL

Negative_G

martinsvi wrote: »

you might find this EASA flow chart handy - https://www.bristol.gs/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/EASA-Part-FCL-MILITARY-ACCREDITATION-AEROPLANE-FLOWCHART-1.pdf

I would really love to know how many Air Corp pilots a year leave the service with minimum 500 hours on multi pilot aircraft+ additional 1000 to qualify for unfrozen ATPL

Considering that a Cadet will attain somewhere in the region of 180/200 hours during their wings course and are contracted for a further 12 years its really not that difficult. 1,500 hours would be quite achievable even at a very low annual total and considering that the entire 'fleet' bar the cessnas and PC-9's are ME, 500 ME hours really is not that much either. They also have the opportunity to complete LSTs as part of their recurrent training when they meet the requirement.

I have no published statistics because they dony exist but I have been told first hand that at least 4-6 a year have left directly for the airlines without having to sit ATPLs as you stated. This doesn't include the large numbers that left to fly rotary aircraft in the Middle East.

The Air Corps Cadet course qualifies them to CPL (Frozen ATPL) standard. The exact same as their civilian counterparts. I can't speak for the RAF on whether they complete CAA ATPL exams during their training but the Air Corps certainly do.

I'm not making anyone out to be a liar, your post was untrue and I corrected you on it. I get that you have an agenda as you have forked out a lot of money for your own training but there is no need to be so sensitive because someone disagreed with you.

When/if you get into one of the airlines I mentioned above, I've no doubt you will cross paths with some of them and you can ask them yourself.

martinsvi

Negative_G wrote: »

I'm not making anyone out to be a liar, your post was untrue and I corrected you on it. I get that you have an agenda as you have forked out a lot of money for your own training but there is no need to be so sensitive because someone disagreed with you.

we were discussing situation in EU in general. I'm surprised that Air Corps are so generous as most military organizations across the globe don't really care much about lives or future career opportunities for their service men thus spending tax payers money on civilian education is a bit more of a luxury not a norm (for the record, well done to Irish Air Corps, this should really be the norm)

the fact itself that you called my post untrue simply because there are 4-6 people who go into airlines a year is just too much. Again, we are discussing Europe here, those 4-6 people are a spit in the ocean ..

And no, I don't have any agenda.. I'm not sensitive, I'm annoyed by you .. there's a big difference! Next time when you want to contribute and add to topic with your own experience and findings, please do so by not jumping on other posters throat. Just because our experiences and knowledge are different doesn't mean that one of us is definitely wrong

basill

The typical pilot wage in Europe is pretty good at the moment so once I get employment on even a turbo prop I'll be delighted

I disagree. The return on investment is crap. The majority of trainees will never ever see the inside of a commercial cockpit.

You will spend roughly 100-120k to get trained up to a basic standard. Like the majority of trainees you self selected yourself as being the next best thing to aviation and no one thought to do any sort of aptitude testing before embarking on this path. The schools have zero interest in telling you that you are crap and only want your cash. At the end of the training the majority of jobs are Ryanair or turbo prop. Each will want another 20-30k for a type rating. You can read all about block hours and the ins and outs of self employment at Europes largest LCC on pprune but the upshot is it will take you a huge number of years to get repaid your training costs. You will probably not get a base of your choosing and will no doubt fall into the same dilemmas that everyone else faces who start down that pathway. So you head to the desert to fly a big shiny wide body only to yet again find out that you were sold a pup as you hate the heat, are working illegal rosters, are paid poorly, no bonuses as promised, crap accommodation, rising costs of living and have no leave to avail of staff travel even if there were any seats. So you go back to that favourite low cost airline or decide that what everyone says about the other Scandinavian version is wrong and jump ship there. So after another base changes and a new airline you are what is termed a journeyman in this industry. Next step is a contract command chasing the tax free USD in Asia assuming you are up to standard. By this time you have zero pension or savings and are only 1 failed medical away from losing it all. Heaven forbid what the relationship/home life is like.

Few people will ever get into the majors, especially those that are self sponsored. Hot majority of he recruitment is from the big schools. Even then the majority find themselves in a low cost trying to get out. I would suggest you do some serious research and have a fallback plan such as another career if it all goes tits up. And remember that your return on investment will be zilch.

pepe the prawn

basill wrote: »

I disagree. The return on investment is crap. The majority of trainees will never ever see the inside of a commercial cockpit.

You will spend roughly 100-120k to get trained up to a basic standard. Like the majority of trainees you self selected yourself as being the next best thing to aviation and no one thought to do any sort of aptitude testing before embarking on this path. The schools have zero interest in telling you that you are crap and only want your cash. At the end of the training the majority of jobs are Ryanair or turbo prop. Each will want another 20-30k for a type rating. You can read all about block hours and the ins and outs of self employment at Europes largest LCC on pprune but the upshot is it will take you a huge number of years to get repaid your training costs. You will probably not get a base of your choosing and will no doubt fall into the same dilemmas that everyone else faces who start down that pathway. So you head to the desert to fly a big shiny wide body only to yet again find out that you were sold a pup as you hate the heat, are working illegal rosters, are paid poorly, no bonuses as promised, crap accommodation, rising costs of living and have no leave to avail of staff travel even if there were any seats. So you go back to that favourite low cost airline or decide that what everyone says about the other Scandinavian version is wrong and jump ship there. So after another base changes and a new airline you are what is termed a journeyman in this industry. Next step is a contract command chasing the tax free USD in Asia assuming you are up to standard. By this time you have zero pension or savings and are only 1 failed medical away from losing it all. Heaven forbid what the relationship/home life is like.

Few people will ever get into the majors, especially those that are self sponsored. Hot majority of he recruitment is from the big schools. Even then the majority find themselves in a low cost trying to get out. I would suggest you do some serious research and have a fallback plan such as another career if it all goes tits up. And remember that your return on investment will be zilch.

May I ask, are you speaking from experience (yours) or hearsay?

martinsvi

basill wrote: »

I disagree. The return on investment is crap. The majority of trainees will never ever see the inside of a commercial cockpit.

You will spend roughly 100-120k to get trained up to a basic standard. Like the majority of trainees you self selected yourself as being the next best thing to aviation and no one thought to do any sort of aptitude testing before embarking on this path. The schools have zero interest in telling you that you are crap and only want your cash. At the end of the training the majority of jobs are Ryanair or turbo prop. Each will want another 20-30k for a type rating. You can read all about block hours and the ins and outs of self employment at Europes largest LCC on pprune but the upshot is it will take you a huge number of years to get repaid your training costs. You will probably not get a base of your choosing and will no doubt fall into the same dilemmas that everyone else faces who start down that pathway. So you head to the desert to fly a big shiny wide body only to yet again find out that you were sold a pup as you hate the heat, are working illegal rosters, are paid poorly, no bonuses as promised, crap accommodation, rising costs of living and have no leave to avail of staff travel even if there were any seats. So you go back to that favourite low cost airline or decide that what everyone says about the other Scandinavian version is wrong and jump ship there. So after another base changes and a new airline you are what is termed a journeyman in this industry. Next step is a contract command chasing the tax free USD in Asia assuming you are up to standard. By this time you have zero pension or savings and are only 1 failed medical away from losing it all. Heaven forbid what the relationship/home life is like.

Few people will ever get into the majors, especially those that are self sponsored. Hot majority of he recruitment is from the big schools. Even then the majority find themselves in a low cost trying to get out. I would suggest you do some serious research and have a fallback plan such as another career if it all goes tits up. And remember that your return on investment will be zilch.

obviously there's a lot of truth to what you're saying, but I would also like to counterweight a couple of things - not because I want to argue, but just to provide a different perspective

when we use terms like "majority", "most", "many" etc, it is as subjective as anything. From my point of view looking at how my friends and acquaintances are doing, from roughly 20 freshly qualified pilots in last two years literally everyone has gotten an interview - some of them are flying jets now, some are doing type ratings, some are still going through application/assessment, but very few, I think maybe 3 or 4 have been actually rejected. Things seem to be very different now to what they were just 2 years ago when getting in that right hand seat seemed mission impossible.

next topic expenses - you don't need 100-120k to go through training. In Ireland alone you can go do the whole thing in AFTA just under 70k, but there are cheaper options around. Yes, the typerating for a LCC will be another 30k, but if you offset it via taxes, you pretty much get it back so I don't think it's fair to add it in equation of return of investment

Salary - if you set out in any paid job with a some sort of entitlement that just because you finished training you're now worth big bucks, you're going to have a bad time. I wouldn't mind working a couple of years in Eastern/Southern Europe for couple of years earning some 25-30 grand - that money lasts longer over there with life being cheaper. Yes the Investment return is poor initially, but the question is where isn't it? Do you honestly expect to, let's say, open your own business, invest into equipment and then drive around in a Bentley the following year? That doesn't happen anywhere, why would it be true for airline pilots? If you're silly enough to believe bling-bling offers from ME/Asia, that's all another problem, again - pilots are not in any way unique in this situation. Many migrate, some do well, some not so well.

You hear experienced pilots complaining a lot about race to the bottom, deterioration in Ts and Cs. Open your eyes, it's happening all over the place. The wealth of the west, that we're so used to, is not sustainable. Either you do the job or get replaced by the machine or outsourced to 3rd world.. no point continuing this rant

the bottom line is everyone is a maker of their own destiny - you can follow your dream and take your chances or just listen to what everyone else is saying and be reasonable.. the passion doesn't listen to reasoning. I rather give my best shot, fail and live with no regrets rather than go on being safe about my choices and slowly die wondering - what if?

Irish Steve

I could do this by private messages, but in order to make it clear to everyone, I will instead post in thread,

MartiSVL and Negative G, please tone your responses down, or we will have to close the thread. I'd prefer not to do that, as the underlying subject is one that has generated huge controversy over an increasing period of time.

To clarify things a little, over the last 25 or so years, there has been a massive change in the numbers of military pilots that have moves into commercial aviation, as a result of downsizing and the reduction in the number and types of aircraft being flown. The manner in which commercial pilots are trained has also changed, with one of the reasons being that there is now a much stronger emphasis in the airlines on Multi Crew operations, as it had become clear that the style of operation that was acceptable to the military was no longer appropriate to civilian flying, especially where the military experience was on single seat fast (combat) aircraft.

To add to that problem, we now have the Low Cost operators, who do not operate training schemes in the same way as the flag carriers, they have decided that there are enough people with access to significant finance to pay to get their licences and ratings, so they are happy to let those people spend their money in order to get onto the bottom rung of the ladder.

The old self improver route via instructing and then a right hand seat with a small operator is not as readily available as it used to be, as there has been a significant reduction in the number of operators outside of the major players, and the old lower cost instructing route using a PPL initially has been closed.

Yes, there are a number of people who manage to get access to the finance to enter training, but the reality is that they are not suited to the job, and will struggle to gain employment in any flying job, because they are just not a good fit into the mould that is required by the airlines.

A long time ago, when instruction was the start of the route to the airlines, I flew with several people who were never going to be able to get into the airlines, some because their flying skills were not good enough, and some because they were not going to be team players. The same issues are still there, but as has been mentioned, the training organisations are not going to turn potential students away, if the student has the funding, then they will train them, even if after training they will then struggle to gain employment in the industry.

In terms of numbers, they change almost weekly. The airlines are employing more people because (especially the Low cost operators) they are getting much greater utilisation out of each airframe, and (rightly) the regulators have specific limits on the number of hours that each pilot can fly each year. That is an area of much controversy, both in terms of the absolute number of hours that may be flown in a period of time, and the manner in which rostering is operated in terms of shift pattern changes.

There are very apparent and real physical limits to the number of aircraft that can fit into a given area of airspace, and (more significantly) on to the airports that people want to fly to or from. There are also very significant issues to be addressed (though not all agree) on the continued usage of fossil fuels for aviation, and there appears to be no easy solution to that issue

So, when everything is considered, the future of aviation world wide has a number of issues that are going to have to be addressed, and that's without considering the impact (possibly literally) of conflicts in a number of areas of the world.

I would like to see this thread continue, there are many issues that are contributory, I have mentioned a few, I am sure that others will find more. On that basis, a balanced and reasonable discussion should be possible.

If it is not, then the thread WILL be closed, and other actions may follow if the participants do not remain within the guidelines that are clearly laid out in the forum charter

martinsvi

Irish Steve wrote: »

Yes, there are a number of people who manage to get access to the finance to enter training, but the reality is that they are not suited to the job, and will struggle to gain employment in any flying job, because they are just not a good fit into the mould that is required by the airlines.

it sounds like you're saying that people who worked and saved their arses off simply to reach their goal are simply no good? Like in general? Is that what you meant?

Irish Steve

martinsvi wrote: »

it sounds like you're saying that people who worked and saved their arses off simply to reach their goal are simply no good? Like in general? Is that what you meant?

No, I am saying that.

To be capable of flying an aircraft. there are a number of specific skills that are required, some of them can be learnt, and practice will improve them, but some have to be part of the instinctive nature of the individual, and can't be taught or learnt, and if the individual does not have those abilities, while they may well end up with a licence at the end of the course, in most cases, they will struggle to get through the very demanding selection processes that are used by the airline recruiting system, as those selection processes will focus on finding the people who do have the natural skills that will make them effective as part of the airline flight crew team.

In a sense, it's a bit like professional football. Pretty much every child kicks a ball around, but only a very small number of them rise to become the players that are the core of the professional game at the highest levels, and for a lot of those top notch players, it's not the time they spend training, or their degree of determination to succeed, it's down to the fact that they have a natural ability to do the right thing at the right moment to achieve the result that's needed for the team.

Another example of this is computer gaming, there are some children that are absolute naturals at computer game play, they don't have to learn how to interact with the computer, it's almost instinctive in the way that they respond, and the same is true in aviation.

martinsvi

Irish Steve wrote: »

No, I am saying that.

To be capable of flying an aircraft. there are a number of specific skills that are required, some of them can be learnt, and practice will improve them, but some have to be part of the instinctive nature of the individual, and can't be taught or learnt, and if the individual does not have those abilities, while they may well end up with a licence at the end of the course, in most cases, they will struggle to get through the very demanding selection processes that are used by the airline recruiting system, as those selection processes will focus on finding the people who do have the natural skills that will make them effective as part of the airline flight crew team.

In a sense, it's a bit like professional football. Pretty much every child kicks a ball around, but only a very small number of them rise to become the players that are the core of the professional game at the highest levels, and for a lot of those top notch players, it's not the time they spend training, or their degree of determination to succeed, it's down to the fact that they have a natural ability to do the right thing at the right moment to achieve the result that's needed for the team.

Another example of this is computer gaming, there are some children that are absolute naturals at computer game play, they don't have to learn how to interact with the computer, it's almost instinctive in the way that they respond, and the same is true in aviation.

yep, I agree to that, in fact, if you look at post #3 of this thread, this is exactly what I tried to bring across .. I really need to work on my communication skills if I ever want to achieve anything in this industry

KwackerJack

I have been looking into this for many years, thankfully I know a nunber of Ryanair captains and an FO for Norwegian who give me guidance whenever I need it. They to have relayed the **** wages at start but are now on a very decebt wage that allows them to live comfortable and have a job they love doing.

I am taking this is stages which is why I chose the modular route. I have acsess to funding for the intergated course however as other posters have outlined it is a massive amount to hand over and be left struggling for work. So as I progress I stop, think of my future as a pilot v my current occupation, I then speak to the captains to see if anything has changed that would force me to stop and then continue.

I have been informed that the airlines do like to hear of a pilot working his backside off to be able to get the qualifications to even sit the interview, this shows passion and commitment which is key to a good pilot. I've sold my car, my motorbike, motorbike gear, tools and whatever I could to fund this endeavour. I have military experience and I am currently in training with the Civil Defense as an EFR so teamwork and social skills are pretty good.

Am I the next Top Gun......no of course not but I do have a passion for flying and I'll do my best to achieve my lifelong dream, should that fail or should I stop due to lack of work then I can fly privately and know I at least tried.

If it was easy everyone would try and if everyone took the view that its impossible then we would all be taking the boat or the train.

Yes I'll be on **** wages for a while but I'll be happy in a job I've worked my ass off to get, im already living week to week to pay for this so living week to week and sitting in a 737 cockpit will still be a step up!!

Every job has its bad days and some days in training I think jesus what am I at but I always walk away from my battered C150 with a smile and an urging to go back up and if I'm that happy in a tin can I'll be very happy in a bigger tin can

If I succeed great and if not well I've tried my best and I'll buy that battered C150, be broke maintaining it but happy buzzing the neighborhood and annoying Eurocontrol 😊

newcavanman

Negative_G wrote: »

Not true.

Many of the pilots who have left the Air Corps in recent years have done so with their Unfrozen ATPL, MCC, and Instructor ratings and walked into various jobs with Aer Lingus, Ryanair, CityJet and ASL only needing to complete a type rating.

And the Air Corps is only a small organisation. The RAF have had and continue to have a strong intake of DE pilots from the RAF and Royal Navy.

Your assertion is far away from reality.

Doesn't the Air Corp help most of their guys to get a lot of their license work done before they leave. I met a few lad s over the years, who had switched from fixed wing to rotary to multi. In the RAF or similar, you are on one thing or the other, it's not so easy to change. Also the RAF want to get their money's worth out of you, . They aren't as bothered about what you do after you go into civvie life, so I service conversion to civvie licenses is not their priority

Negative_G

newcavanman wrote: »

Doesn't the Air Corp help most of their guys to get a lot of their license work done before they leave. I met a few lad s over the years, who had switched from fixed wing to rotary to multi. In the RAF or similar, you are on one thing or the other, it's not so easy to change. Also the RAF want to get their money's worth out of you, . They aren't as bothered about what you do after you go into civvie life, so I service conversion to civvie licenses is not their priority

I don't know if they do or not. All I know from what I've been told is that there seems to be very little 'extra work' involved when making the transition to airliner's.

KwackerJack

Negative_G wrote: »

I don't know if they do or not. All I know from what I've been told is that there seems to be very little 'extra work' involved when making the transition to airliner's.

I know going from say cityjet to Aer Lingus or Ryanair you still obviously require to sit some of the type rating and if going from an ATR to a jet you are required to sit the entire type rating all at your cost. I am not sure what a PC9 pilot gets paid, either way getting up 30k then most likley a drop in wages for some months must be a turn off.

So if coming from an Air Corps PC9 you would need to sit the entire type rating, granted you are a skilled pilot but its like going from a sports car to a truck and that does not mean you will be great in the big jets.

With the likes of the RAF if you are on the heavy jets then the transition will obviously be eaiser but then again will a seasoned military pilot, use to flying an aircraft to its limits enjoy civilian flying

Negative_G

KwackerJack wrote: »

I know going from say cityjet to Aer Lingus or Ryanair you still obviously require to sit some of the type rating and if going from an ATR to a jet you are required to sit the entire type rating all at your cost. I am not sure what a PC9 pilot gets paid, either way getting up 30k then most likley a drop in wages for some months must be a turn off.

So if coming from an Air Corps PC9 you would need to sit the entire type rating, granted you are a skilled pilot but its like going from a sports car to a truck and that does not mean you will be great in the big jets.

With the likes of the RAF if you are on the heavy jets then the transition will obviously be eaiser but then again will a seasoned military pilot, use to flying an aircraft to its limits enjoy civilian flying

Generally the longer one spends in the military, the emphasis leans more toward management and non flying duties. Therefore if you were someone who wanted to be a pilot and pilot only, the obvious choice is to move to the airlines. Taking a hit in salary for a while might be well worth it in the long run to some especially if they had a more rewarding career.

All Direct Entry pilots have to go through the same assessment process. I would expect that any perceived weaknesses would be identified and the candidate would be cut, regardless of background. I have no doubt there are plenty of military guys who would love to go to the airlines but can't pass the aptitude tests for one reason or another.

It's rarely clear cut especially when you're comparing like with like.

On paper you could be comparing someone in their 30's who has anywhere from 1500-2000 hours on various types in a multitude of different roles, is in possession of an unfrozen ATPL, may hold an unrestricted instructor rating, be a CRM instructor and has organisational management experience.

On the other hand you have someone who has 200 hours on light aircraft and light twins with a Frozen ATPL and a plethora of different life experience.

On paper at least, there is a clear advantage for the former candidate. But as I said, it all counts for nothing if you cannot pass the assessment process.