Wheels up

[jonjuan]

Along the same lines. I got a resume a few year back from a USAF EC-135 pilots, he had 1200 hours total time, he had been in 10 years. I hear F/A-18 pilots are getting about 12 hours a month when not deployed.

Training aside, who is ultimately more proficient, the guy who flies 100 hours/year or 700+/year?

 

[Pervis]

Training aside, who is ultimately more proficient, the guy who flies 100 hours/year or 700+/year?

Unlike the civilian world where two sim sessions/year are a necessary evil to stay current (only in the eyes of the FAA), military pilots, especially fighter pilots, do a lot of training in very advanced simulators. The only thing missing is the g's.

I got out a long time ago (1988), and our sims sucked. But before I did exit military service, I had the opportunity to fly a new Redifusion C130 sim in the UK. Unbelievable. That was before electric motion level D sims we now have in the civilian world. I can't imagine how much more advanced they are today in the military. And a lot cheaper than JP8.

 

[gret]

Things change I came out of my first squadron tour in 1971 with over 2000 hours, 700 of that came in six months flying around Vietnam. But then over the next 6 years I only got another 700 hours. I would imanine that those flying in support of Iraq or Afghanistan also see those kinds of numbers.

Yip...appreciate your service...I was a kid graduating from high school in 1971 who thought he was pretty smart when accepted at the university...didn't know crap and maturity was lacking...should have spent time in the military and then gone to school.

 

[pilotyip]

Training aside, who is ultimately more proficient, the guy who flies 100 hours/year or 700+/year?

As Pervis said unless you been on both sides it is hard to compare. Building time on cross country's is a thing of the past, every flight has a training objective. 700 hours of monitoring the auto-pilot is much different than a 1.5 hour night flight on goggles into a unlit LZ to pick up a bunch of ninja turtles in 30 seconds. You might spend 5 hours planning this mission, then fly it in the simulator before doing it real time. But then again the military may have no idea how to enter the pattern at an uncontrolled airport, two different worlds.

 

[jonjuan]

As Pervis said unless you been on both sides it is hard to compare. Building time on cross country's is a thing of the past, every flight has a training objective. 700 hours of monitoring the auto-pilot is much different than a 1.5 hour night flight on goggles into a unlit LZ to pick up a bunch of ninja turtles in 30 seconds. You might spend 5 hours planning this mission, then fly it in the simulator before doing it real time. But then again the military may have no idea how to enter the pattern at an uncontrolled airport, two different worlds.

Are we talking about training and experience to be an airline pilot or picking up ninja turtles? Who is better adapted to be a 121 major pilot, a 5,000 hour RJ driver or a 1,200 hour rotor head or f-teen flying on nvgs in combat? We're talking about flying pax straight and level here and making a few PAs.

 

[pilotyip]

Are we talking about training and experience to be an airline pilot or picking up ninja turtles? Who is better adapted to be a 121 major pilot, a 5,000 hour RJ driver or a 1,200 hour rotor head or f-teen flying on nvgs in combat? We're talking about flying pax straight and level here and making a few PAs.

No we are not talking abot that. This thread drifted into a discussion of PIC time. That led to where would be the best place to build the skills to be a PIC. Someone compared 700 hours year as a measure vs the lower time F-15 guy. My point is 700 hr of watching the auto-pilot does not compare to the intensity of the training environment of the military. Learning to be an airline pilot is just another training event for the military guy and their success rate for low time guys speaks for itself.

 

[Pervis]

Consider the fighter pilot graduated in the top 2-3 in his/her class. Even the last place UPT grad is hands down a very good pilot. A known entity with the most rigorous training program behind them is a sure bet in the eyes of employers. The only candidates where hours of experience are secondary.

That's just the way it is. That does not say civilian only pilots are any less the pilot. That said, the pool of miltary pilots is drying up fast. More pilots are trained for drones than fixed wing at present, and commitments are longer than the pre-drone period.

That leaves regional, frac, and freight to compete against each other. I can't speak for all, but when I flew with Wings West (AE), our SOPs and call outs were the same as there were at AA. One would think that would create that "known entity" situation. Problem was that Crandal did not believe in hiring one pilot twice. He would rather keep the regional folks under his boot heel, and hired only enough to avoid any appearance of discrimination. Does that mind set still affect AE and/or other regionals? What does that have to do with today? Just another consideration some HR departments may employ.

 

[Downwind]

I'm ex-mil and still the worst pilots I have ever flown with were all trained by Uncle Sam. Helicopter to fixed wing transitions being the absolute worst from both Army and Navy.

 

[pilotyip]

I'm ex-mil and still the worst pilots I have ever flown with were all trained by Uncle Sam. Helicopter to fixed wing transitions being the absolute worst from both Army and Navy.

Then you have not worked at the same places I have if you have never run across at non-mil worse than every mil pilot you have flown with. Your helo bias is showing, but it does not match my experience in dealing with these professional pilots.

We are not a great target for the military pilot, but about 30% of our hires are military trained pilots. We like to hire them because of a higher percentage successfully complete training, like one failure of 47 new hires and the civilian side it is like 14 failures out of 119 hires. In addition, no military pilot has needed additional IOE time or had any problem going through upgrade. This includes Helo pilots, which normally on the second sim session, blow their fixed wing non-turbine civilian counter parts out of the water.

Another thing is the lack of respect for mil helo driver's. 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 coupled approach.

Someone has to figure out why uninformed management knuckleheads don't view a multi-crew Captain time in an advanced IFR helo like the H-60, H-46, H-53 or H-47 as 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.

 

[jonjuan]

I'm ex-mil and still the worst pilots I have ever flown with were all trained by Uncle Sam. Helicopter to fixed wing transitions being the absolute worst from both Army and Navy.

Uncle has been a sim instructor at a major airline after retiring flying the line. Previously he was an AF tanker guy. He has said for years that the single biggest demographic with the most difficult time in training has been the single seat fighter guy. Not that it's often, but when he runs into additional training required, it's usually the fighter guy versus the multi thousand hour 121 RJ drivers who are easy to train primarily because it's not as foreign to them. They usually are able to adapt, but may take a little longer.