Flightradar24 interview questions

The process moved quickly, which I appreciated. It had four stages. First an intro meeting with a hiring manager, then a technical interview, then a meeting with the CTO and a technical advisor, and finally a conversation with HR. The first meeting with the manager was the only one that felt genuinely good. It was conversational and engaging. The technical interview was a letdown. The questions themselves were fairly standard, but they were asked in a rapid fire, definition checking way with no real discussion or follow up. The two engineers stayed focused on their screens the entire time and seemed disengaged. The CTO round followed the same pattern. It felt more like a technical advisor trying to catch you out than an actual conversation. The HR meeting itself was fine, and to their credit they were upfront about expectations. That said, there were some red flags. I was told that although the role is listed as 50% on-site, the real expectation is significantly more, and that the company isn't a fit for anyone who values remote work. I appreciated the honesty, but it was a dealbreaker for me. Overall the process was efficient, but the interviews lacked any sense of genuine engagement or two way conversation.