"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
Let me make it as clear as I can for you. Your premise that by my
standards, the flight test must produce either an incompetent pilot or
send a failure back to the drawing boards is flawed. You have totally
misinterpreted what I have said.
What I said was that I had never flown with a product of an accelerated
basic training program where that pilot didn't in my opinion need
remedial training to bring them up to what I consider to be appropriate
comprehension standards.

So is that a product of the acellerated training itself or is it a product
of the typical acellerated student who "graduates" with only 40 to 50 hours
under his belt instead of the usual 70 or so? If that accelerated student
had the blazed through 70 to 100 hours would he be "as good as" the
traditional student? Perhaps. Perhaps not.

Perhaps the typical accelerated student represents a particular mindset of
people who perhaps aren't as dedicated to learning to fly as traditional
students. Perhaps they just aren't as passionate about flying as "normal"
people. After all, these students probably tend to be doctors, busy
businessmen and folks with more money than time. They just need to get this
"training nonsense" behind them so they can be more productive in their
careers. If they had instead gone through traditional training, would they
tend to display the same kinds of weaknesses? Perhaps. Perhaps not.

That's my whole point, Dudley. Not one soul here - including you - has
provided any more than lightweight ancedotal evidence and baseless theories
that accelerated students tend to suck.

The reality and the body of evidence (consisting of thousands of successful
graduates of these programs going back 100 years) tends to indicate
otherwise.

--
Jim Fisher