Flight Aptitude Tests

I recently took my flight aptitude test at RAF Cranwell, which unfortunatley I did not pass. As I am 17 I was told to try again after uni or maybe as a sub-specialisation if I do go to BRNC after leaving school. I did not crash and burn for want of a better phrase but I was wondering if anyone with more experience than me can tell me if I am likly to do better the second time?

 

I failed my atitude test first time round whilst playing with the idea of joining AAC, didn't take it very seriously and failed by a gnats! Then came to my senses and just a few months later went to Biggin Hill again and romped it for FAA but only as pilot. At that time AAC test was pilot test and FAA was pilot and observer, as they were short of observers at the time everyone who passed both was sent observer, didn't want that so as I knew which tests were which I flunked the observer ones.

As it turned out, couldn't land my damn Chipmunk so failed pilot training anyway so had to leave, if I had passed both would maybe still be in and a Cdr rather than a crumby sales manager. Ahhhh!!!

The advice bit! Take it seriously and give 100%. Do lots of stuff that involves hand eye co-ordination, I was advised to play squash and tennis as playstations hadn't been invented then, and play fast games on PC or games console. Eat healthy food and keep physically fit as this improves your co-ordination too. Finally, relax and enjoy it, you'll perform better.

Good luck!!

ps. Have you done your AIB yet?

 

Thanks mate thats confirmed exactly what I thought, I reckon i was just too young for it, aptitude increases with age apparently. I havent done an AIB yet but i need to get talking about it with my liason officer.

 

Noemis - what do you mean only as a pilot?

 

Paddy-45, I'm not convinced that aptitude increases with age (Wolfgang Amadaeus Mozart being a classic example) - "aptitude" is an inate ability as opposed to something that is nurtured. What does increase with age is maturity (common sense), experience and foresight - that's what is required.

 

that may well be the case, I am just going on the information which I recieved in my interview afterwards. Apparently their banks of statistics indicate thst candidates arround the age of 21 are most likley to pass.

 

Rather than as a pilot and an observer! As I said, who would want to be an observer!

 

I took my first aptitude tests when i was only 6 days into being 16 years old, i passed observer but failed pilot at Cranwell, they said come back in a few years. Was just wandering how long should i wait? I'm now 17 (18 in 6 months) Possibly after i'm 18? And ideally i'm hoping to join the RM as an officer, does anybody know of the route you take to become an RM Pilot / Observer as i've looked everywhere but cannot find anything, many thanks in advance, Sam

 

Eh, em. I think we call them Flying Aptitude Tests. It's to see if it's worth a Flying Instructor's time, at a Flying School, to engage you in Flying Training. The Americans, of course, think differently.

It's worth noting, incidentally, that the RN doesn't recruit pilots; or didn't 40 years ago. They select officers who will specialise in flying, in the same way as some will specialise in underwater warfare.

Read the advice of noemis. Do anything that might speed up your reactions and anticipation. Similarly for things that exercise your hand/eye(and foot) coordination and ability to monitor several things at the same time and detect change. Also learn as much as you can about aircraft and how they fly and are controlled. If you looked at a picture of a "blind flying panel" (altimeter, ASI, VSI, turn and slip, artificial horizon, direction indicator), would you have a mental picture of the aircraft's attitude and condition of flight?

Best of luck and trust your own judgement and abilities.

 

To become a RM pilot first you must become a RM and then be selected for pilot training, which is not guaranteed. There is no such thing as a RM observer, but there are RN Observers with green lids (All Arms Commando Course)

 

Hi. I was just wondering what eyesight standards you need to become as pilot/observer, coz i saw this programme the other day, were there was a person with glasses who was training to become a helicopter pilot with the FAA, and they passed. And if u have had laser surgery, can u become a pilot? as surely the eyesight problem has now been corrected? or could u just lie if u had a medical? thanks

 

Your best bet is to either ask at the AFCO where they'll give you a form for an optician to fill out and return or, if you know your prescription, have a look at Association of Optometrists Visual Standards website - scroll down the page to the Armed Forces section, open the RN .pdf and it's in there somewhere. Only thing I'm not sure about is how up-to-date their info is. (Anyone have any idea?)

PNG

 

From memory (and that is fading with time) on entry you need to have uncorrected 20/20 vision, thereafter vision can be corrected by glasses etc.

Lying is not an option!

As a word of caution, when applying to become an Officer (Pilot/Observer), try to avoid street spelling in any correspondence, it really sets the wrong tone! Appreciate in this type of forum it is not a problem, but staff work (writing) is a major part of the final job.

 

You need 20/20 or better (ie. 20/16), with a maximum astigmatism of +/- 0.5. The bloke you saw on TV would have had perfect eyesight when he entered, and then it would have deteriorated afterwards, forcing him to wear glasses. As for laser correction- they don't like it, because no one knows about the long-term effects- and they will find out if you've had it when they map your corneas during the aircrew medical. Hope that helped.
Al :wink:

 

Hey, yes, that really helped. thanks guys

 

Paddy 45 - be thankful that you will be allowed to take the aptitude tests again; age is on your side. If I were you, I'd go to university and re-take the tests in a few years. If you are successful then join the FAA once you have completed your degree. Don't get suckered into going mainstream Warfare with a promise (from someone who can't deliver) that you can go P/O at a later date. Yes, there are a certain number of places every year for transfer from JWO to P/O, but I have lost count of the number of OsOW who have told me their tale of being promised a transfer to Aircrew. Competition for these transfers is (quite rightly) very fierce.
Also, don't discount Observer. In the aircraft in which Os are part of the crew, it is very much their aircraft. The latest FAA advert (Merlin P vs O) may be typical of crewroom banter, but any Lynx (Grey one, before I get a barrage of abuse from 847) Pilot worth his salt will admit that it is true.

Noemis - your signature is 'I like things that go BANG' but you also say 'Who would want to be an Observer?' Can you explain?

For Alcon - Concur with all the medical/eyesight issues answered by bored wafu and aljh. Although laser corrections are becoming more widespread, I don't believe it is acceptable for aircrew (or potential aircrew) to undergo the procedure. Also, don't lie about anything to do with your medical (or previous) condition. The rules are there for a very good reason. Could you ever live with yourself if you caused a fatal accident because of a medical condition that you did not declare 5/10/15/20 years previously? That's if you survive yourself!

 

aljh and others.

Can someone explain to an old buffer (no, not boatswain) like me, when 6/6 distant or correctable to 6/6 with glasses became 20/20 on this side of the Atlantic?

Anton_007

All you need to know can be found at http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=256238&page=22 , Srl 434.

Stick at it and good luck,

P o L

 

PoL,
It's old money chap. Some of us haven't adjusted to these hoity toity Euro Froggish measures.

 

For anyone's reference, the eyesight standards are the same across the board for all three services. Any refraction outside +1.75 Spherical is a nogo. I.E. If your prescription for either eye exceeds +1.75 CAAMB won't pass you.

I'd like to know a good reason why laser correction is such a sin for rotary aircrew though. As far as Ive heard, and Ive done plenty of digging believe me, the big arguments against were high-G retinal detachment and the potential for gradual deterioration of eyesight. Given that both are rare/unproven consequences of the surgery, and Im just guessing that most lynxes/seakings might have issues pulling enough
G to pop your retina off in the first place, why is it so strictly forbidden? Ive certainly heard tales of valuable WAFU's late in service being offered laser surgery to keep them flying. Is it perhaps an investment risk, or indeed more of a medical issue?

Feel free to correct me though, Im all ears. TUB