Forum: Future F-16 crew

I am not sure whether to be upset about my AFOQT scores or not. I was hoping for a Reserves or ANG UPT slot, but after seeing my AFOQT results I might have to wait until next years boards.

They redesigned the AFOQT and took out a few sections of the test which put more weight on the math portion. They also added Arithmetic reasoning to the pilot portion. I am a bit rusty at doing math by hand and I think this hurt my scores tremendously. Plus, I have always been bad at taking standardized tests.

Here are my scores:
Pilot: 84
Nav: 37
AA: 37
Verbal: 56
Quant: 25

As you can see, my quantitative was fairly low which inevitably lowered my pilot, nav, and AA scores. However, my pilot score isn't too bad, which tells me that I would have easily been in the 90's if my quantitative was a bit higher. I just don't know how my scores compare with others who have taken the new version of the AFOQT.

I will probably submit my applications anyway, but I do plan on taking the test again and really focusing on the math next time around.

F-16.net Sponsor

I just wanted to add this:

Doesn't it seem odd, seeing as though the scores are based on a curve, that my pilot score is in the mid 80's, but my quantitative is only in the mid 20's? I am confused as to how that works. If I scored 84% better on the pilot composite than most AFOQT takers, and this composite includes both math portions of the test, how could I possibly have scored a mere 25% on the quantitative composite?

I am also confused about my nav score. I feel as though I did very well on the sections that make up this composite, besides the math of course, and yet I only received a 37 Shrug

Something seems off about all of this.I have never seen anyone on this forum, or any other forum, have a pilot score above 80 and a nav score below 70. Bang Head

aint no connection between being good in math and being good as a fighter pilot.
never understood this system.
good luck anyway, hang in there, im sure you will do better next time.
cheers.
fezy.

True, and not that I am necessarily bad at math, its just been a few years since I studied math, especially math by hand, and so I was a bit rusty when it came to this portion of the test. I didn't put much emphasis on the math when I studied for the AFOQT because I thought I would be taking the old version in which the math was really only a small percentage of the nav composite, and had zero bearing on the pilot composite.

They removed the sections I was strongest at (mazes, scale reading, data interperatation, etc.) and I feel as though if I would have taken the old version of the AFOQT my pilot and nav scores would have both been in the 80's and 90's. My quantitative would have been the same, but that's neither here nor there.

Long story short, I am worried that I will be competing against people who have taken the old version of the test and in a sense there is really no comparison between the new and the old scores. Anyone know how the AF distinguishes between the two versions?

FYI - I feel as though I smoked the rotated blocks and hidden figures portion of the test. I am an Architectural technician and so these sections were cake for a guy like me. I've come to find out however that these portions do not make up any of the composite scores. I am not sure why they even test you on these.

Anyway...is that a violin I hear playing. LOL Wink

It makes sense your pilot score is so high and not your quantitative. Look at it this way...

Everyone needs a what? 15 or 25 (forget which) to pass quantitative? So every officer in the USAF, reserve, ANG etc... is going to try their #@%@ off to get as high a score possible in that area to ensure they pass. But only a handful of people want to be pilots and even admist those only a handful study and try. Im willing to bet there are just a good clump of 10-20% of people that dont even bother with the pilot/nav sections. They just fill in C all the way down and leave.

So naturally your pilot score can get pretty high based on that.

-Aaron

I believe its 15 to pass quantitative, if you have your undergrad. That does make sense when you put it that way. Still, I am surprised that my pilot score is as high as it is since both math portions were included in that composite and obviously my math had some room for improvement. Wink

Still curious as to how they will compare my scores with others who took the old version of the AFOQT. Has anyone who completed the old version of the test checked their scores recently? Supposedly they re-normed the test and everyones scores should have been affected.

If I remember the briefing on the new AFOQT correctly the reason they took those extra sections out was because the time and money it took to have them didnt provide a great enough difference in accuracy (remember the purpose of the pilot selection is to determine you aptitude to pass UPT) to rationalize having them in there; so they removed them. With that said, it might be unfortunate for you that they will just compare them the same way. 84 is NOT BAD though. I got an 81 and I was strongly advised not to retake it and ultimately decided not to. Remember you can perform the exact same on 2 different test days but your scores may change radically because of the crowd your up against on that day. Your score is based off the percentage of the people who took the same test on the same day as you. So you have a 50% of having an easier crowd to compete against and a 50% chance of having a tougher one. Only 16% of the people that took the test on your test day scored above you. So when you weigh yourself out think that you have a 50% chance that 16% of the new test takes underperform you from your last test.

AND in addition to that, taking the AFOQT twice is EXTRMELY risky. What if you retake it the same day as MIT ROTC det (If they have one) takes there!? My point is you can only take the test twice. If you fail your second time, your done. Getting a waiver is pretty difficult. I've seen an AFROTC cadet lose his scholarship because he could not get a 3rd take waiver. So I wouldnt risk it.

My advice to you; keep the score, work on other stuff to boost you resume. More fail safe stuff... like spending your next pay check on some flight time. Remember, out of an interview, your gpa, bat test, AFOQT and flight time, the AFOQT weighs very little in the end of things. 20% of 20% isnt even that much; so think about that.

Ok, im done...

-Aaron

Well, I do have a few things going for me, but with how competitive these pilots slots are I need to max out everything. My 3.6 GPA, and forty hours of flight time will only go so far. My only hope for this summer's UPT boards is that I have a PCSM in the 90's after taking the BAT, and somehow pull a letter of recommendation from the Commander in Chief himself. LOL

Now, this is where timing might play in my favor. I can't take the AFOQT again until October 2006, so I can send my applications out this summer with my current scores and hope for the best, and if nothing happens I can take the AFOQT again and raise my nav and quant. scores (hopefully) and try for next years boards. If a Guard or Reserve unit doesn't pick me up I may try for an AD slot.

I have been working too hard these past few years working full time to put myself through college and flight school, tackling more than a full load of college courses, as well as taking flying lessons so I could get my pilots license, and I would hate for the results of a standardized test to spoil all of that. Doh

Well, I just talked with my recruiter who said that my pilot score is competitive and as long as I can get a PCSM in the 90's I should have a decent chance at an interview. That's taking into account my GPA, flying experience, and work/leadership experience, and the fact that I put myself through college and flight school while maintaining a full time job.

I just hope they don't weed out applicants by AFOQT scores first.

I have a question for all of you who have taken the AFOQT.

How many equations were you able to work out on the Arithmetic Reasoning portion before time ran out? Did you come up with the right answer or did the equation leave you with an educated guess?

To be honest I was only able to work out about four questions before I ran out of time and started guessing, but then again I had only about a week to study for the test.

Riddler the trick to the Arithmatic reasoning section is to not completely work out the equations. What you need to do is work them to a point where you can narrow your choices down to one or two and then make the best guess off logic. (i.e. if the question is using all whole numbers and you narrow it down to 2 answers, one with a decimal and one with out, you can pretty much bet your britches it will be the one without unless there is division in the problem.)

In light of that, I answered all of them. I dont recall having time to check though.

Ok, heres the real secret to math sections like that. Dont spend all your time studying line equations, train problems, stuff from HS trig and calc that you dont remember well. First off, the number of high level math questions they ask in relation to the lower ones is always something like 1-10. Especially on the AFOQT which wasn't designed for use with a calculator. Secondly, instead of wasting your time studying the complicated stuff, start doing hundreds of addition, subtraction, multiplication and division problems and work on memorizing all the numbers 1-10's 2-5th powers. Why? This is the secret to going fast on standardized math test. Rather then waste time working out the basics it will just come to you and you will breeze through 50% of the problem mentally. Thats my million dollar secret. I plan to market it in a book one day.

-Aaron

TenguNoHi wrote:

Riddler the trick to the Arithmatic reasoning section is to not completely work out the equations. What you need to do is work them to a point where you can narrow your choices down to one or two and then make the best guess off logic. (i.e. if the question is using all whole numbers and you narrow it down to 2 answers, one with a decimal and one with out, you can pretty much bet your britches it will be the one without unless there is division in the problem.)

In light of that, I answered all of them. I dont recall having time to check though.

Ok, heres the real secret to math sections like that. Dont spend all your time studying line equations, train problems, stuff from HS trig and calc that you dont remember well. First off, the number of high level math questions they ask in relation to the lower ones is always something like 1-10. Especially on the AFOQT which wasn't designed for use with a calculator. Secondly, instead of wasting your time studying the complicated stuff, start doing hundreds of addition, subtraction, multiplication and division problems and work on memorizing all the numbers 1-10's 2-5th powers. Why? This is the secret to going fast on standardized math test. Rather then waste time working out the basics it will just come to you and you will breeze through 50% of the problem mentally. Thats my million dollar secret. I plan to market it in a book one day.

-Aaron

What the F$%^ ???
What does all this have to do with being a good pilot?
i think there is something wrong with this AFOQT thing...
it seems to me its not a good predictor of pilot skills.
cheers.
Fez.

I think so too Fezt,

But if you ever see the briefing on the new AFOQT they have a pretty good relationship graph going with the PCSM scores and UPT passers; so there must be something there. My theory is that strong math skills are indicators that someone is good at doing sequence patterns. Who knows though?

-Aaron

That's a good strategy Aaron. I will work on that.

I think Math can predict someone's ability to be a pilot up to a point, but if I was looking at an applicants entire package, and they had a high college GPA, at least a private pilots license, and a high PCSM score, then that would outweigh their results on one standardized test.

Funny because I aced all my college math, statistics, and data analysis courses, but that's where calculators came in handy. LOL

I am still young (24) and I still have another chance at the AFOQT. I'm sure I will do much better next time around. Thanks fellas. Cheers

TenguNoHi wrote:

I think so too Fezt,

But if you ever see the briefing on the new AFOQT they have a pretty good relationship graph going with the PCSM scores and UPT passers; so there must be something there. My theory is that strong math skills are indicators that someone is good at doing sequence patterns. Who knows though?

-Aaron

I think it's all about quickly getting through the OODA loop. Can you break it down quickly enough to get the right answer accurately? They will get you to apply that knowledge pattern elsewhere, they just want to know if you can make those connections in your brain already.

as a side note: I will be taking the AFOQT in the end of May. We'll have to compare scores then.

Forum: Future F-16 crew

NEW AFOQT - just received my results