Air Force Fighter Pilot Shortage

[AdlerDriver]

Rotary wing guys have more piloting skills overall than fighter pilots.

I'll have to take your word on that since I have only flown fighters and various airliners - no rotary wing. So, I wouldn't feel qualified to make such a definitive statement.

Since you must have flown both fighters and rotary wing to develop such an opinion, maybe you can give us the scoop on why that is.

 

[B-J-J Fighter]

No I haven't flown fighters but I have flown both fixed and rotary. I can assure you I can fly a fighter better than you can fly a rotary. You wil barely be able to keep a rotary in the air the first few times.

 

[Paradoxus]

Both of you seem to have tunnel vision. I'm agreeing with you!!

Acknowledged. I like to fight though, and love exposing the acccounting/economics/business majors as the dollards they are when their/there/its/it's/your/you're confuses them whilst atop the soapbox.

(?‿?)凸

Obviously, you're not a hostile. Cheers.

 

[AdlerDriver]

No I haven't flown fighters but I have flown both fixed and rotary. I can assure you I can fly a fighter better than you can fly a rotary. You wil barely be able to keep a rotary in the air the first few times.

It sounds like you're saying that if a person had only rotary wing experience, they would be able to use that skill foundation to have some basic success during a first attempt flying fixed wing. But, the reverse would not be true. A fixed wing pilot can't take his skill set and extend it to rotary without some additional training. I can buy that.

How about a total novice with no training in either? Does it take longer for them to master rotary or fixed or is it about the same?

About your comment: In my experience, it's usually a mistake to make such one-way, absolute statements like you did. It's probably better to avoid big generalizations and not assume everyone with a certain type of training is better or more qualified than others who are in a very different line of work. I don't doubt that the skills required to fly a helo are substantial. From what I hear, it's sort of like rubbing your head and patting your stomach and you always have to be doing one or the other or both? No gliding either.

If you want to take your personal fixed and rotary wing experience and come to the conclusion that your average rotary wing pilot possesses "more piloting skill" than your average fixed wing pilot, I won't argue. Like I said, I don't have the experience to form an opinion. It seems to me that you might make your point better if you defined what you mean by "more piloting skill". There are lots and lots of varied and unrelated skill sets in both rotary wing and fighter aviation that have nothing to do with each other.

Once you start specifically addressing fighter pilot skills and the quality of those skills, you lose credibility since you've never done it. When you talk about you being able to fly a fighter, you're really just talking about flying it around the sky, from A to B or maybe taking off or trying to land. That's just flying an airplane, just like you do now but probably a bit faster. Employing a fighter as a weapons platform against other aircraft and all that goes along with that would be just as foreign to you as rotary wing would be to me. The skills required to do that well are developed over years and years and have nothing to do with rotary wing flying.

One final comment: the first guy to wash out of my Air Force pilot training class was a former Army Cobra pilot. Among his many struggles in his failed transition was being able to think fast and stay ahead of the jet. Maybe he had some great piloting skills as long as he could keep the T-37 at helicopter speed - we'll never know - He didn't even make it to the first solo. That particular individual obviously did not benefit from his rotary wing training in the way you claim others might. It probably comes down to each individual and their strengths and weaknesses rather than what category of aircraft they happen to be trained on.

 

[pilotyip]

Helo pilots are looked down upon because they fly low and slow. But having hired a bunch ino the fixed wing world I can attest to their flying skills. Army training is the best rotor wing in the world, more corporations are using helos, they will hire almost only ex-military, because where else does someone turbine helo PIC? I know the fixed wing brotherhood looks down on the helo drivers as lessor pilots, I mean they have never been to FL410, or done a M.78 descent. Hovering into a dark LZ on goggles is much more demanding of a pilot?s skills than shooting a Cat II approach.

Someone has to figure out why uninformed management knuckleheads don't view a multi-crew PIC in a multi-engine turbine glass cockpit time in an advanced IFR helo like the H-60, H-46, H-53 or H-47 is not real flight time. However, PIC in a VFR only C-150 in the traffic pattern is the breakfast of champions for an airline career by those who set hard fixed wing limits and ignore helo time in total time. Why are most management and insurance company?s sooooo waaaayyyy out of touch with reality? Ops I am sorry I was management bashing again.

 

[JimNtexas]

Are fighters really that hard to just fly around compare to say, an R-22? I think not.

Taking off, flying around, landing a fighter? My impression is that the modern generation of fighters are pretty straightforward to just takeoff, fly somewhere, and land.

Fighting a fighter so as to win against another fighter...that's hard, very hard.

 

[SIG600]

Are fighters really that hard to just fly around compare to say, an R-22? I think not.

Taking off, flying around, landing a fighter? My impression is that the modern generation of fighters are pretty straightforward to just takeoff, fly somewhere, and land.

Fighting a fighter so as to win against another fighter...that's hard, very hard.

Jim gets it. Modern fighters are very easy to fly. Employment is a completely different world, and running intercepts at 1000+ knots closure, in a dynamic 3D environment, running 5 radios, multiple sensors, managing your three wingmen, executing CAS, and SEAD, etc etc etc. And yes I've flown helo's and in particular the R-22 mentioned. Night traps with pitching deck are FAR more challenging and completely terrifying, every single time.

Yip you're a broken record. A college degree is required, get over it. I'm pretty sure Adler has no fighter pilot envy, as he's an Eagle homo. Go back to fleecing aspiring pilots.

No I haven't flown fighters but I have flown both fixed and rotary. I can assure you I can fly a fighter better than you can fly a rotary. You wil barely be able to keep a rotary in the air the first few times.

http://toolmonger.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/CM_camotoolbag.jpg

(Hint, It's a picture of a toolbag)

 

[AdlerDriver]

I'm pretty sure Adler has no fighter pilot envy, as he's an Eagle homo.

Thanks for the support..... I think.

 

[JimNtexas]

Back when dinosaurs roamed the earth I was an EWO in an F-4 Weasel Squadron that converted to the F-15A (Go Fighting Cocks!).

When I'd run in to my front seats friends after the conversation I'd ask them about the difference between flying the F-4 and the F-15. To a man they would always say that the F-15 was much easier to fly than the F-4.

The Eagle just didn't have the weird quirks and convoluted switchology that characterized the F-4 and other earlier generation fighters. It also had way better visibility and vastly better ergonomics.

Employing it as a weapon was said to be more challenging in a lot of ways than the F-4 because for one thing, they didn't have me to keep them out of trouble.

And because the airplane presented a lot more information and involved a much higher net energy level during engagements (and the F-4 was no slouch in the energy department).

From the little bit I know about the F-16, it's probably a bit more of a handful to just fly around than an F-15.

 

[pilotyip]

Yip you're a broken record. A college degree is required, get over it. I'm pretty sure Adler has no fighter pilot envy, as he's an Eagle homo. Go back to fleecing aspiring pilots.

My doesn't that make the world a better place, a colelge degree is required for what? to be a good pilot? Nah! I suppose you think helo pilots are low lifes also because they can fly with a degree?

Night traps with pitching deck are FAR more challenging and completely terrifying, every single time.

And you have expereince with this? I spend 2.5 years on the USS Enterprise, if they are pitching very much you don't fly in peace time. So is this carrier pilot evny?

 

[Traderd]

Choppers harder to fly than fighters? Going forward, won't that question be which is harder to program?

http://www.boeing.com/boeing/history/boeing/x45_jucas.page

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/kmax.html

 

[Huggyu2]

I only log onto this site a couple of times a year now. And I don't remember much about who posted what in the past.
One of the few things I remember, though, is pilotyip's disdain for the whole "college degrees to fly" thing. Funny!

 

[SIG600]

My doesn't that make the world a better place, a colelge degree is required for what? to be a good pilot? Nah! I suppose you think helo pilots are low lifes also because they can fly with a degree?


And you have expereince with this? I spend 2.5 years on the USS Enterprise, if they are pitching very much you don't fly in peace time. So is this carrier pilot evny?

No, it's several hundred traps of experience, many on the Big E. And yes we fly pitching deck, even during works ups. Your time as ships company playing PLAT cam LSO doesn't count.

 

[Indy319FA]

A College degree is the equivalent of a high school degree in the 40s and 50s. Somebody mentioned the NAVCAD program Lehman brought back in the 80s. Looked at it myself and had a couple of buds in the program. You had to complete two years of college to get in, and you had to complete your degree within 10 years of commissioning. So to say you could get in under this program is correct, but you would still need the degree to remain a commissioned officer.

 

[pilotyip]

No, it's several hundred traps of experience, many on the Big E. And yes we fly pitching deck, even during works ups. Your time as ships company playing PLAT cam LSO doesn't count.

Congrats, I know we did cancel flight ops for too much deck movement, so definition of pitching deck is a wide envelope. I got to fly the C-1 on day VFR only. It is hard to tell from a skimpy profile what the heck your background it. Tells us more

BTW Yes the skipper did have a Plat camera on the bridge, it was entertaining.

 

[nwaf16dude]

Back when dinosaurs roamed the earth I was an EWO in an F-4 Weasel Squadron that converted to the F-15A (Go Fighting Cocks!).

When I'd run in to my front seats friends after the conversation I'd ask them about the difference between flying the F-4 and the F-15. To a man they would always say that the F-15 was much easier to fly than the F-4.

The Eagle just didn't have the weird quirks and convoluted switchology that characterized the F-4 and other earlier generation fighters. It also had way better visibility and vastly better ergonomics.

Employing it as a weapon was said to be more challenging in a lot of ways than the F-4 because for one thing, they didn't have me to keep them out of trouble.

And because the airplane presented a lot more information and involved a much higher net energy level during engagements (and the F-4 was no slouch in the energy department).

From the little bit I know about the F-16, it's probably a bit more of a handful to just fly around than an F-15.

The F-16 can be a little tricky to land well, but overall it's very easy to fly. Employing the thing in all the varied and constantly evolving missions is, however, always a challenge. The "constantly evolving" part is what really makes it difficult, because even the best of the best have to keep working to stay there. You can't ever really coast or rest on your prior knowledge. I can think of plenty of highly respected pilots that did their last few years as useless attached types because they just ran out of the energy or time required to stay current and proficient.

OBTW...if you go ugly early, you can go twice.

 

[Vingus]

Well not completely true, 45 years ago flying around Vietnam my PPC was a LTJG with only two years of college, got out went on to a fantasic career at DAL. In 1981, Secertary of the Navy Leman dropped the college degree requirement for Navy pilots and NFO's and went back to the Cadet program. And of course the Army has been cranking out pilots for years without a degree. BTW From my expereince a college degree also has nothing to do with leadership

Yip, I bet you make a fantastic grandfather.

But as far as a PROFESSIONAL pilot, all your talk perpetuates lowering the bar. You are a hobby pilot. Period.

 

[pilotyip]

Yip, I bet you make a fantastic grandfather.

But as far as a PROFESSIONAL pilot, all your talk perpetuates lowering the bar. You are a hobby pilot. Period.

Thank you it has been a fantastic adventure If you call it a hobby then so be it. I am sure you feel much better about yourself with your contribution to the enlightenment of the FI members on the true meaning of being a professional. After all you are a true professional and I could never measure up to your standards. Wish we knew more about you but we understand it is much easier to post anything you want if no knows who you are. BTW Are all of my buddies who careers similar to mine hobby pilots also?

 

[Vingus]

Yip,


I have an extensive military flying/non-flying background. I'm currently still serving in a non-flying billet in the reserves and am actually deployed as I type. My life has been an "adventure" as well.

My point with my attacks against you has been this. Being a major airline pilot is one of the last good paying jobs out there. Sure, there is medicine, law and business as well. But as far as a skilled profession, being an airline pilot can still make one quite comfortable. Constantly saying that one should be doing this job just because you love it and stating that you don't need a college degree to do such a rote task such as flying airplanes just furthers the argument to lower our pay.

If enough people keep talking like you do about doctors, the same result might happen to them. So what if they went to med school, many pilots had years of flight training (at least the good ones did). All they do is look in your mouth and have them say "ahh". Anyone can do it!

I'm glad you like your job. I like flying too. But I do it for more than the fun of flying and I expect to be paid to the level of my responsibility and training. Like I have said to you on another thread, maybe I just had good timing or luck but I'm glad I have finally gotten to the level where I currently am. I started my "adventure" back in 1990 and have finally gotten to a point where I can provide for my family to a comfortable level.

Maybe I should just move into a condo, have my kids take on huge student debt, not fund a comfortable retirement and just enjoy working for a discount.

Remember, it's not what you deserve (although I do feel that I deserve to make what I do), it's what you negotiate!!!! If you have no leverage at your current position in life, then you better get comfortable where you are.

It seems that you have, just stop busting our balls for trying to maintain this profession into one worth having.

 

[SIG600]

^^^^^gets it.