AT-SA Pass Rate Statistics and What They Mean
Defining 'Pass' vs. 'Referral' in the AT-SA
In the context of the AT-SA, the term "pass" is technically a misnomer. The FAA does not utilize a raw score cutoff where, for example, 70% correct constitutes a passing grade. Instead, the assessment is a ranking mechanism designed to categorize candidates into specific bands: Best Qualified (BQ), Well Qualified (WQ), Qualified (Q), and Not Qualified (NQ). The AT-SA exam pass fail ratio is effectively the ratio of those who achieve a BQ or WQ status versus those relegated to the Q or NQ categories. Historically, only those in the Best Qualified tier—and occasionally the upper echelon of Well Qualified—are referred to the next stage of the hiring process. This distinction is critical because a candidate may "pass" by being labeled Qualified, yet still face an Air Traffic Skills Assessment failure rate of 100% regarding their actual employment prospects for that specific bid. The referral is the only metric that carries weight in the cognitive screening phase.
Analyzing Published and Anecdotal Success Rates
While the FAA does not maintain a public, real-time dashboard for AT-SA test results data, aggregated reports from freedom of information requests and aviation forums suggest a highly competitive environment. On average, the AT-SA candidate success percentage—defined as reaching the Best Qualified tier—hovers between 10% and 15% of the total testing pool. When expanding the definition of success to include the Well Qualified tier, the figure typically rises to approximately 30-40%. However, the how many people pass the AT-SA question is complicated by the volume of applicants. In a typical "off-the-street" bid attracting 20,000 applicants, the sheer density of high-performing candidates can push the AT-SA scoring percentiles required for a referral significantly higher. Data suggests that achieving a raw score in the 85th percentile or higher is often the baseline requirement to be considered truly competitive for an academy seat.
Factors That Influence Annual Pass Rate Fluctuations
Fluctuations in pass rates are rarely a result of the test getting "easier" or "harder" in a vacuum; rather, they reflect changes in the Total Candidate Pool (TCP) and FAA staffing mandates. If a hiring bid is restricted to those with prior aviation experience or veterans, the success percentage often shifts because the applicant pool possesses higher baseline spatial awareness and situational orientation. Conversely, during massive open public bids, the AT-SA pass rate statistics often show a wider distribution of scores, leading to a higher failure rate among unprepared candidates. Furthermore, the FAA may adjust the weighting of the Weighted Composite Score based on longitudinal studies of trainee success at the Oklahoma City Academy. If trainees struggle with radar simulations, the FAA may increase the difficulty or the scoring weight of the Air Traffic Simulation subtest in subsequent AT-SA iterations to filter for higher innate aptitude.
Historical Analysis of AT-SA Score Trends
Historically, the AT-SA replaced the older AT-CTI and AT-SAT assessments, introducing a more cognitively demanding suite of subtests. Since its inception, the scoring benchmarks have evolved to emphasize multi-tasking and stress tolerance. Early versions of the AT-SA had more predictable patterns in the Variables and Math section, but recent data indicates a shift toward higher-complexity stimuli. This evolution is reflected in the AT-SA scoring percentiles, where the raw performance required to hit the "Best Qualified" mark has steadily increased. This trend suggests that as prep materials become more widely available, the "average" performance rises, forcing the FAA to adjust the normative curve to maintain its selectivity. The benchmark is no longer just about accuracy; it is about maintaining that accuracy under an increasing Cognitive Load.
When comparing different versions of the AT-SA, the most significant variance appears in the Collision Avoidance (Scenarios) subtest. Historical data shows that as the FAA refined the algorithm for calculating "misses" and "strikes," the average candidate score in this section dipped, despite better overall preparation levels. This indicates a tightening of the scoring logic. In contrast, the Dials and Instruments section has seen more stable performance trends, as it relies on a more static form of visual processing. By looking at AT-SA test results data over the last five years, it is evident that the FAA is prioritizing candidates who show high recovery speeds after making an error. The scoring system now penalizes "cascading failures"—where one mistake leads to several more—much more heavily than it did in the assessment's first two years.
Identifying Patterns in High-Scoring Candidate Profiles
Data analysis of candidates who consistently reach the 90th percentile reveals specific performance patterns. High-scoring individuals typically demonstrate a high Information Processing Speed (IPS) and an ability to compartmentalize tasks. For example, in the multi-tasking section, BQ candidates do not necessarily solve every math problem; instead, they maintain a 100% success rate on the primary task (collision avoidance) while maintaining a consistent, albeit slower, pace on the secondary task. This strategic prioritization is a hallmark of the top 10% of performers. Statistical trends also show that candidates with backgrounds in music, gaming, or athletics often have a higher AT-SA candidate success percentage, likely due to developed hand-eye coordination and the ability to process multiple streams of sensory data simultaneously.
Breaking Down the AT-SA Candidate Success Percentage
Demographic and Background Correlations with Success
While the AT-SA is designed to be a blind assessment of cognitive ability, certain background factors correlate statistically with higher success rates. Candidates with previous exposure to Vector Geometry or those who have completed Private Pilot License (PPL) ground school tend to perform better on the spatial orientation and angles sections. However, the FAA's goal with the AT-SA is to find "raw" talent. Therefore, the AT-SA exam pass fail ratio across different age groups shows a slight advantage for younger candidates (ages 18-25) in terms of raw reaction speed, while candidates in the 26-30 range often show better performance in the personality and situational judgment modules. These demographic variances are minor, but they contribute to the overall shape of the bell curve used to determine the final percentile rankings.
The Impact of Preparation Methods on Outcomes
There is a quantifiable correlation between structured preparation and an increase in AT-SA pass rate statistics among specific cohorts. Candidates who utilize high-fidelity simulators to practice the Dials and Collision Avoidance sections typically see a 15-20% improvement in their raw scores compared to their initial baseline. This is because the AT-SA measures "trainable" cognitive skills to an extent—specifically the ability to internalize a new set of rules and apply them under pressure. Data suggests that the Air Traffic Skills Assessment failure rate is significantly higher for those who attempt the test with zero prior exposure to the subtest formats. The ability to minimize the "novelty shock" of the interface allows the candidate to dedicate more neural resources to the actual problem-solving requirements of the exam.
From Test Score to Academy Selection: The Full Pipeline
Achieving a Best Qualified score is not a guarantee of employment, but it is the strongest statistical predictor of an eventual Academy invite. The pipeline from the AT-SA to the FAA Academy involves a secondary screening known as the Tier 2 medical or psychological review for some, and a standard background check for others. Statistically, about 60-70% of those who reach the BQ tier will eventually receive a Tentative Offer Letter (TOL). The attrition rate between the AT-SA and the Academy is roughly 30%, accounting for medical disqualifications, security clearance issues, or candidates declining the offer. Understanding this pipeline helps candidates realize that the AT-SA is the most significant bottleneck in the entire hiring process; once the AT-SA is cleared with a high percentile, the statistical probability of becoming a controller increases exponentially.
Statistical Difficulty of Key AT-SA Subtests
The Dials subtest often has the highest raw accuracy across all candidates, but the lowest time-per-question margin. This means that while many pass this section, only the top percentiles do so with the speed required for a BQ rating. Conversely, the Scenarios (Collision Avoidance) subtest has a much higher variance in performance. It is common to see a high Air Traffic Skills Assessment failure rate within this specific subtest due to the "Red Screen" penalty—a total failure state when a collision occurs. Statistically, the Scenarios section acts as the primary differentiator in the AT-SA scoring percentiles. A candidate who manages zero collisions while maintaining a math accuracy of over 80% is almost statistically guaranteed to land in the top tier, as this combination is mathematically rare in the general applicant pool.
Spatial Awareness and Memory Recall Success Rates
The Spatial Orientation and Memory Recall sections test distinct neurological functions. In the Memory Recall (Variables) section, the difficulty is scaled by the number of letters a candidate must track (e.g., A=1, B=A+2, C=B-1). Data indicates that the success rate drops sharply once the variable chain exceeds three steps. Most candidates can maintain two variables with 90% accuracy, but the 80th percentile is defined by those who can manage four or more variables without losing track of the primary task. Similarly, in the Visual Relationship subtest, the statistical "wall" occurs when the orientation of the leading aircraft is inverted. Candidates who can mentally rotate objects in less than 1.5 seconds represent the top 5% of the success percentage, whereas the average candidate takes 2.5 seconds or longer.
Why the 'Personality' Section Has a High Pass Rate
The Personality or Situational Judgment section is often misunderstood. It does not have a "pass rate" in the traditional sense, but it is used to flag outliers who may not be suited for the high-stress environment of an ATC facility. Statistically, over 90% of candidates "pass" this section by falling within the acceptable range of traits like conscientiousness, stress tolerance, and teamwork. However, the remaining 10% who are flagged for extreme traits (e.g., extremely high risk-taking or extremely low impulsivity control) may have their entire AT-SA score invalidated regardless of their performance on the cognitive subtests. This section serves as a binary filter rather than a percentile-ranking tool, ensuring that those who move forward possess the psychological temperament necessary for the Air Traffic Basics (ATB) course and beyond.
To maximize your AT-SA candidate success percentage, your preparation should be weighted toward the subtests with the highest statistical variance: Scenarios and Variables. Since the Dials and Personality sections have relatively high average scores, there is less opportunity to "outperform" the competition there. However, because many candidates struggle with the simultaneous demands of the Multi-tasking section, significant gains can be made by practicing the integration of math and collision avoidance. If you can move your performance in the Scenarios section from the 50th to the 90th percentile, it has a much larger impact on your final Weighted Composite Score than a similar jump in a section where everyone performs well. Data-driven prep involves identifying where the "points" are easiest to gain relative to the rest of the pool.
Benchmarking Your Practice Scores Against Historical Data
When using simulation software, it is vital to compare your results against the AT-SA scoring percentiles rather than just looking at your raw percentage of correct answers. For example, if your practice software shows you are getting 80% of the math problems right in the multi-tasking section, but your reaction time is slow, you may actually be in the 40th percentile. High-tier candidates usually aim for 95% accuracy in the Dials section with an average response time under 2 seconds, and zero collisions in the Scenarios section. By benchmarking against these "Best Qualified" metrics, you align your training with the statistical reality of the exam. Remember that the AT-SA test results data shows that consistency is favored over occasional brilliance; the FAA's algorithm looks for steady, reliable performance across all repetitions of a task.
Setting Realistic Score Goals Based on Percentiles
Setting a goal to simply "pass" the AT-SA is statistically insufficient for securing a career. Given the AT-SA pass rate statistics, your goal must be to reach the top 10-15% of the applicant pool. This requires a strategy of "defensive testing": ensuring you do not have any catastrophic failures in any single subtest that would drag your composite score down. Even a perfect score in five sections cannot always compensate for a "Not Qualified" performance in the Spatial Awareness or Collision Avoidance modules. The statistical goal is a balanced, high-level profile. Aim for the 80th percentile in your weakest areas and the 95th percentile in your strongest. This balanced approach is the most reliable way to ensure your name appears on the Referral List, moving you one step closer to the radar room.