Percent that pass

[CapitalGuy]

I am a controller for Nav Canada. My point was I am not a 'washout troll' as someone had suggested. My POV is that our training system is and has always been lacking. The fact that a 30% qualification rate (assuming that's accurate) seems quite acceptable to anyone is an alarming indictment of our culture. If any system is only 30% efficient, it needs fixing.

I was illuminating the fact that military pilot training is no walk in the park. I would suggest it's right up there with the most difficult ATC training, and in fact more demanding than most. I'm not comparing skillsets. I'm saying that if the RCAF can acheive 85% success then don't tell me that we can't do better than 30% in ATC. Even fighter pilot training in Cold Lake does a whole lot better than 30%, and it is, without doubt, the most demanding training in aviation, bar none.

Anything can be taught if you have the right student, the right instructor and the right system. We (controllers) all know that the learning really kicks into high gear after you qualify. No better teacher than experience. I still maintain that the original statement I took exception to (low checkout rate has nothing to do with the quality of instruction) is ridiculous. It is not the only factor but it's certainly one of them.

[cyeg66]

I still maintain that the original statement I took exception to (low checkout rate has nothing to do with the quality of instruction) is ridiculous. It is not the only factor but it's certainly one of them.

Nope, IFRATC was closer to the mark than you. How would you improve checkout rates? I suppose we could lower our expectations... Oh, and threaten harm to those 20%+ of students who voluntarily 'pull the plug' even before getting down to the real work. Don't get me wrong, though, I do agree with some of the arguments you're making.

By the way, your Hornet success rate comparison is a little disingenuous, to say the least.

[CapitalGuy]

Diengenuous how?