Whats up with civi pilots?

[AdlerDriver]

Nice Stereotype

Over my career I've had the opportunity to fly with dozens of current and ex-military pilots from all branches of the service. I've seen some very sharp ex-military pilots and I've seen ones that didn't quite measure up - and in about the same proportion as the civilian pilots I've flown with. From what I have seen, it all boils down to this: There is generally no substitute for flight time and experience. I'll be the first to admit that flight time isn't everything (I've flown with some high-time bozos. and some low-time guys that flew a good airplane), but you guys know what I'm saying.

Several years ago, I was an instructor at a 141 flight school that did a lot of "GI Bill" training for military and ex-military pilots. I worked with many individuals whose military experience that ran the whole gamut - fighter, bomber, and transport. The transport guys did the best. They were the ones whose experience most closely paralleled what one would encounter in the "real world" of civilian flying. In most cases, it was very easy to transition these people in the allotted time and they, as a group, did very well on the check rides that followed.

The fighter pilots were an entirely different story. The attributes that make a good fighter pilot do not necessarily make the transition into the civilian world. While most of the transport guys were ready well within the allotted time, almost all of the fighter types required the entire program time allotment and even then, there were a few who were pretty "rough". They were good fighter pilots – they could "mix it up" with the best of them. Unfortunately, these are skills rarely required in today's world of airline and corporate flying. The problem was they were good and they knew it and it was hard to tell them anything - they already knew it all.

Three or four years ago I had the opportunity to fly with a recently retired F-15 fighter pilot. The colonel and I flew an Astra SPX all over the country - a couple of hundred hours worth. On paper, his credentials were impressive - nearly 6,000 hours of jet fighter time and all that goes with it. In reality, his 6,000 hours of military time provided him with an equivalent of perhaps 2,000 hours of civilian experience. Basic things that we would take for granted with a civilian pilot with 6,000 hours were just not there. Skills like the use of weather radar, FMS operation, etc. and even basic instrument approaches had not been honed because they were of little practical use in the military environment. In this particular pilot's case, by his own admission, he had flown less than 5 actual ILS approaches to minimums during his entire career. (We did more that that the first month we flew together.) He was also not comfortable in serious IFR weather or operating at the various high density airports that we frequented. He felt as out of place in "our" element as I would have felt in his. He was forced to play some serious "catch up ball" but he eventually caught on; just as many of us would also be able to catch on if given the opportunity to fly in the military.

You military guys definitely have a leg up when your service flying is over, but don’t for a minute think that you’re going to be able to step right out of your military jet into the left seat of a civilian bizjet. It most likely ain't going to happen. The big issue I've found when it come to military guys is attitude - it will make or break you in the civilian world.

Merry Christmas

'Sled

Sled,
Your post is so obviously based on your own uninformed stereotypes it’s almost comical. I’m sure you’ve had the opportunity to work with some military pilots who were “tools”. I don’t doubt some had flown fighters.
In my experience, people who paint with the broad brush you are using, usually have very little first hand knowledge of what flying fighters really involves.

………….. The attributes that make a good fighter pilot do not necessarily make the transition into the civilian world.

Please enlighten us, in your expert opinion, what are these attributes? The ones you think you learned from “Top Gun” or the ones you and the rest of the part 141 instructors decided amongst yourselves? You obviously don’t have a clue what attributes make a good fighter pilot.

………. They were good fighter pilots – they could "mix it up" with the best of them. Unfortunately, these are skills rarely required in today's world of airline and corporate flying.

How do you know they were good fighter pilots? Did you see them flying fighters? Did you personally experience them “mixing it up with the best of them”? Obviously not. So you don’t have any idea what kind of fighter pilots they were. And, once again, those elusive skills that one must possess to succeed in airline and corporate flying are totally unrelated to the skills of a fighter pilot according to you. Give me a break.

I spent 12 years in the F-15 and 3.5 years in the F-15 schoolhouse training new and previously qualified F-15 pilots. I saw an occasional tool who might fit your stereotype. Most of the hundreds of pilots I saw going through training did not. Here’s the reality, Sled. Some of the attributes that make a great fighter pilot are: an effective leader and follower, a real team player, an excellent stick and rudder pilot (including precision instrument flying), an aircraft systems expert, a quick thinking multi-tasker, an effective communicator and a disciplined professional who is ready for every mission. Sounds like a lot of the good civilian pilots I know too. Obviously, if a pilot like this was to show up and attempt to fly as part of a crew on an airliner or corporate jet, he would fail miserably, right?

It sounds to me that you might be surprised to learn that the fundamentals of good CRM are a daily part of a good fighter pilot’s training. They rarely work alone and are constantly part of a team. They must effectively utilize the assets at their disposal, inquire and advocate when necessary, provide inputs to aid the leader in choosing a course of action or use those inputs to make that decision if they’re leading. They delegate tasks both during mission planning as well as during the mission itself. You name a tenant of CRM and I’ll give you an example of a fighter pilot using it. You don’t have to be sitting 2 feet away from your crew to use CRM. The unique thing is, unlike an airline Captain, fighter pilots routinely switch back and forth between the roles of leader and subordinate. I acted as mission commander of a Red Flag mission one day and was a wingman the next. This might even happen in a heartbeat during a mission. A #3 in a 4-ship is kind of a deputy flight-lead. If the 4-ship lead is lost or has a mechanical issue, leadership responsibilities automatically shift to #3.

You attempt to use a few isolated cases and draw some fairly significant conclusions. It sounds to me like the 6000 hour Colonel you flew around with was not typical. He sounds like some of the older pilots I’ve met (both military and civilian) who are not products of the computer age and spent most of their years on round dial jets. They’re just old dogs and new tricks like the FMC are not going to be easy for them. As far as the weather radar…. Give me a break. Do you realize the F-15 has one of the most complex and capable radars available? Do you really think pushing “on”; adjusting antenna tilt, maybe selecting one or two other operating modes and a range is going to be that difficult? If that was giving him trouble, he probably wasn’t a very good F-15 pilot. Just as a contrast for you, I spent 5 years stationed in Germany and flew hundreds of approaches to mins throughout Europe. I developed outstanding instrument skills as did every other pilot I was stationed with. Your 6000 hour wonder is not the norm. Any disciplined fighter pilot who spent a disproportionate time flying from bases blessed with lots of VFR weather found other ways to ensure their instrument skills remain honed. Extra time in the sim, requesting an approach when it’s VFR or using a portion of an occasional single ship sortie to practice approaches. Constantly challenging oneself and ensuring you’re prepared are the marks of a professional whether they’re flying fighters or not. My first experience with an FMC took maybe a couple of hours in the trainer to get comfortable with. Most fighter pilots I know my age and younger have similar stories. Please don’t try to make using an FMC out to be more complex than it really is. Once again, if this guy was having trouble, I think you were dealing with an “old dog”.
One of the few things I agree with you about is attitude. The guys with bad ones who think they can fly an airliner like a fighter and it won’t have its share of challenges give the rest of us a bad name. You’ll always find a few unprofessional pilots from any background. I would never have considered myself ready to jump in the “left seat of a bizjet” by virtue of my military experience. Most of the fighter pilots I know wouldn’t either.

Happy New Year

 

[Say Again Over]

AdlerDriver

Thanks for saying that! :beer:

 

[Caveman]

"I spent 5 years stationed in Germany and flew hundreds of approaches to mins throughout Europe."

Hundreds? To mins?

 

[Spooky 1]

"I spent 5 years stationed in Germany and flew hundreds of approaches to mins throughout Europe."

Hundreds? To mins?

Very possible in some parts of Germany and other parts of Europe as well.

 

[AdlerDriver]

"I spent 5 years stationed in Germany and flew hundreds of approaches to mins throughout Europe."

Hundreds? To mins?

Yeah, I'd say that's accurate. 15-ish sorties per month. Typical German winter weather from Nov-Mar is 300/1 and clear above 5000. Say half the sorties were in bad weather, thats over 30 per winter times 5 years and not counting bad weather the rest of the year. I'm not sure why that's so hard to believe.BTW, our mins were ceiling/vis. Maybe a little different from what you're used to. 300-1 off station and 200-1/2 at home base.

 

[Gorilla]

Good post Adler.

What makes a really good fighter pilot shine is an amount of situational awareness so great that under punishing physical stress he not only continues to fly his own jet at a peak of performance, he can also "fly" the jets belonging to his flight by proxy. The information flow is so high, and the situation in his own aircraft so brutal, the only parallel I can create is a guy in a crippled 767 filled with smoke, on fire, and with a medical emergency on board, with ATC and his own flight attendants screaming at him, not only recover his own airplane, but simultaneously guide a lost GA aircraft to a safe landing, and also do a few position report relays to oceanic pretty much at the same time.

This sounds ridiculous, but it has a foundation in fact. I've heard it and been a part of it. I'll use "Mongo" as an example. Mongo is a real guy.

Mongo is engaged in a 2V4 in a major 40+ aircraft Nellis exercise, and has averaged 6G for 2 or 3 minutes. AWACS is screaming at him, "THREAT North 10, low. Additional threat West 20, angels 10." Mongo has gunned one guy and is about to gun track another. Despite this, he has mentally tracked the larger world around him and continues to do so.

Mongo: "Two, pitch right, bandit 5 o'clock high. Four, come North, you are about to enter prohibited airspace. Three, your targets are rounding Worthington low, head 330 and push it up to intercept. Two, GD it you are about to get GUNNED, JINK NOW. Let me gun this guy, then I'll help you. 'Guns kill two MiG's in the left hand turning fight South of Worthington at 5,000 feet.' Hoser flight, the fight is East of you, come off those guys, they are friendlies."

Mongo dominates and leads the entire local war in a physical environment that would leave 99.99% of the U.S. population unconscious, puking, or both.

A fighter pilot might not be able to program a route offset in a 767 FMC on day one, but when things get really ugly, and the world is on fire, and everyone is screaming at him, that's where he shines. And that to me is more important, and what we are paid to do, than understand the standby hydraulic system, or know the correct formatting for obtaining a NAT Track clearance from Shanwick.

 

[Caveman]

I interpreted 'hundreds' as meaning more than 200. IOW at least 300. The term 'mins' usually means the bottom of a 200 and 1/2 approach. I have no doubt that in the course of 5 years you flew a bunch of actual IMC and a ton of instrument approaches but were 'hundreds' of them really all the way down to mins? If you say they were, then I guess they were. I wasn't questioning your integrity. I was raising an eyebrow at what appeared to be a little bit of literary license.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

I am sorry to read Gorillas #23 post. (and now #111). I do have repsect for the mil. guys and of course who doesn't want fly a tactical jet, especially off of a carrier. (this includes all the USAF types. )

I do believe that most of us, with the right training and attitude, can do either military flying or civilian flying. We really don't have anything on anyone.

We all know military flying can be demanding. One of several reasons is experience. Sure the military guys get lots of great training. A DOD budget far exceeds by millions any airline training dept. budget. Nonetheless, a 300 hour F-18 guy (25 years old) flying his first tour on the boat has got to be demanding! Certianly much more demanding than 25 year old working on his commercial.

But since I am civilian, I'll try and justify my world.

There is limited funds in airline training. No bucks means the traveling public is counting on our brains to make good decisions. Combined with the on time demands of the company..... (this isn't a comparison to tactical mil flying!)

Mission planning takes hours. We take less than 30 minutes and we do up to six or seven legs a day. In all types of weather for days in a row.

As others have said, the Mil guys are always trying to get on the flight schedule. We fly enough that we want off. 85+ hours a month. 800+ a year.

Despite the ab initio programs of todays, there were times, when pilots would take 135 jobs were ever they could, packing what they could in their economy car, living in crashpads, living paycheck to paycheck. It does add to character doing this with no script, no guidance and no cash. Just a dream and determination to fly.

Throughout history civilian pilots have proven thier worth. Over 70 years ago, after WWI, Airmail was being flown by civilian pilots. There was a dispute over PIC authority and the civ pilots stood down in unity. The gov called in the Army Air Corp pilots to fly the mail. They started crashing and dying because they didn't know the routes and how to fly in marginal weather. The entire operation was halted. Eventually the civ pilots resumed after they earned PIC total authority. The mail got thru again and the killing stopped.

In WWII civilian pilots and flight crews did amazing flying. Consider this:

American Airlines pilot Bill Evans stated;

“When we got there, the Army pilots were getting the Air Medal for fifteen trips over the Hump, and the Distinguished Flying Cross for thirty flights. They never flew at night. We were making three round trips a day, and when we started flying the Hump at night, that ended the medals.”
​

Air Line pilots have been taking hits for over 5 years now. Our industry is in ruins. Our career expectations are in the toilet. Many of us have had our pay slashed from 30 to 100%. Our retirements are vaporized. Our job security is non existant. I know, cry me a river. However, with all this personal stress and uncertainty, we have not increased the accident rate. In fact we have done quite well.

While no accident is acceptable, there is a certain level of understadning that in the high stress high, demanding flying of the mil., there will be accidents. However, in the civ world, there is no acceptable accident rate.

Fact is the flying is different but with the right training and attitude anyone of us can do what we do.

Let's find common ground instead beating our chest like gorilla's in a cage. Besides chicks don't dig it....

 

[Gorilla]

RoL, I'm sorry you don't like my postings and think I'm "Chest beating". Please look at my other posts and you'll see that I am generally pretty mild and not a pot-stirrer. My earlier postings in this beat-up thread almost all have an addition/addendum, basically saying "Sorry guys, bad mood this morning, etc".

When a guy earlier says that fighter pilot skills don't "translate" to a 737, Adler made a sound response, and I attempted to back him. I've consistently maintained that there are challenges in all types of flying.

Mongo is the fighter-world's equivalent of "The Duke". I am not Mongo, but I tried to be and honor his vast skill. All decent fighter pilots to some degree have his abilities to do the multitasking as described. Fighter pilot stuff translates better to the abnormal/emergency civilian environment rather than daily ops.

Where in my posts am I denigrating excellent pilots with civilian backgrounds? Am I saying that a great civ. pilot cannot do what Mongo does with apparent ease? No. But not all of them can. Likewise, I cannot perform certain civilian evolutions as well as some exceptional civilian guys.

There are two camps in this fight. One is those of us with the experience in both worlds. I count myself among them. The other is a more ascerbic and bitter camp without experience in both, who have posted slams that simply aren't true.

Maybe you are looking at this quote: "Mongo dominates and leads the entire local war in a physical environment that would leave 99.99% of the U.S. population unconscious, puking, or both." This is simply the truth, and is what would happen if you grabbed the average Joe off the street and stuck him in the back seat of Mongo's tub. It is my attempt at describing the physical reality of a fighter cockpit in a heavy engagement. I still have pain and health problems 15 years later from my days in a fighter.

 

[ePilot22]

Professional what?

To those civilian pilots who like ragging on military pilots who are new to the civilian side: we (military pilots) could do the same to you and more if you came over to the military side, but most of us don't when we get new pilots in. Its called being professional.

Really? I must have missed that in your first post. Could you point out YOUR professionalism for me?

Are most civilian pilots a bunch of whining pussies? Or is it just the pilots on the various forums? I expect to have to work at a job, not get paid to fly a few hours. I can't see a reason to get out when I would take a 30K pay cut and have to work more than I do now with a bunch of complainers and bitch artists.

Nope, don't see any here. Try working on it!!! :erm:

Thanks to those of you that wrote sane, intelligent answers to my first questions. I appreciate it. To those of you that took offense to my first post -- get a life and some thicker skin.

I wonder why we took offense to you first post. Was it the name calling or your lack of any professionalism. Isn't it ironic that you would tell us what professionlism is or the fact that YOU are complaining about civilian pilots being pu$$ies? Or is it your thanks to those who wrote what you could not, "sane, intelligent answers"? :nuts:

Here's a suggestion to your first post, stay where you're at. We civilian pilots don't need another thing to complain about.

On another note...Avbug, nice post. #82! :laugh:


eP.

 

[AdlerDriver]

I interpreted 'hundreds' as meaning more than 200. IOW at least 300. The term 'mins' usually means the bottom of a 200 and 1/2 approach. I have no doubt that in the course of 5 years you flew a bunch of actual IMC and a ton of instrument approaches but were 'hundreds' of them really all the way down to mins? If you say they were, then I guess they were. I wasn't questioning your integrity. I was raising an eyebrow at what appeared to be a little bit of literary license.

Okay,
Perhaps I should have said "lots". Would that be better. I have flown over 2000 sorties in the F-15. Is it that much of a stretch to say that 10% of them involved an instrument approach to my mins? Not really, considering almost half my time flying was in Europe. If you've never had the pleasure of flying there, in the winter, the weather is dogsh!t.

For whatever reason, it liked to hang at 200-300 feet and just under a mile vis. Maybe you have a different perspective than I do about mins. At 150-160 knots, single-pilot, hand flown ILS or PAR, sometimes following your wingman 2 miles in front of you with your radar, without the "christmas tree" approach light show that I find at most airports now (most NATO bases had basic approach lights/sequenced flashers, rwy edge lights and a vasi) - flying to 200-1/2 or 300-1 was flying to mins. If that's not mins to you, okay - like I said, maybe you have a different perspective.

BTW, Gorilla, I know Mongo well. There was a reason they called him "Baby Jesus". I'm not worthy. He's da MAN - he helped get me hired at Fedex .

 

[AdlerDriver]

.........Mongo is the fighter-world's equivalent of "The Duke". /quote]

Careful with this now, Gorilla. I assume you're referring to Mr. Wayne. Say "Duke" and fighter pilot in the same sentence and people used to think you were talking about a now disgraced Vietnam ace.

 

[Gorilla]

Ahh you're right, I forgot about "The Duke" Cunningham, new callsign Mr. Bribe. If you see Mongo, tell him one of his Gorilla Boys says "hi". Mongo, Kmart, JonBoy, Opie, Blade, and others, made our weapons shop a great one!

I'm off to the Caribbean today. Unfortunately, no beach, just a leg back. Guys, if I stepped on any toes, my apologies. Happy New year!

 

[AdlerDriver]

.......Mission planning takes hours. We take less than 30 minutes and we do up to six or seven legs a day. In all types of weather for days in a row.....

Good post overall, Rez. In a couple of areas you're kind of mixing apples and oranges - but I get your point.

There's not much point in pointing out a civilian jumped in a stearman and did the job better than a pilot from the Army Air Corps. There's no real equivalent to that in 2005 and it's not really germane to what this thread has degenerated to. Back then there was a great deal more commonality in equipment than there is now.

One final note on the mission planning comment. Military mission planning is a pretty broad topic to compare to civilian mission planning. Let's call a spade a spade. Whether you do it all for yourself or a dispatcher helps you, what does mission planning really involve. You check wx/notams, decide on a route, file a flight plan.... what else... weight and balance? help me out - good grief - with a dispatcher you don't even deal with the route or filing.

Military mission planning might be exactly the same (minus the dispatcher) or it could be a lot more. Depends on the aircraft, mission, location, etc. If it takes 2 hours, it's because it needs to. Some Red Flag missions or missions during Desert Storm took many more hours than that.

I have never flown anything but dispatched 121 stuff in the civilian world - so my perspective is obviously limited. If showing up and checking the fuel, route, wx/notams takes me more than 15 minutes, I probably need another cup of coffee (whether it 1 leg or 6-7 legs a day).

Again, I'm not trying to disagree with the basic gist of your post - you just kind of lost me with the mission planning thing.

 

[say again]

What it comes down to is that BOTH know how to fly!!! No one is better than the other. Different backgrounds, different ways of doing things. BOTH are correct.:beer: