Emirates near disaster on takeoff

Given that your experience and data set is broader than mine - do you think the traditional time building routes would benefit military-trained pilots?

I think it would do tremendous good, for sure. Flying in AK, or flight instructing, or flying survey for a season or two would probably be great for their development as aviators, honestly.

Also, though it's sure to be a controversial statement, in my opinion they get enough of a leg up.
 
....Lots of stuff....

I did both, part 141 school to get my private/commercial/IR, and then a few years later, USN flight training. There are pros and cons to both. I wouldn't say that mil aviators are inherently better aviators. Nor would I say that about civilians. I would say that mil flight school itself is for sure more challenging. But that is more due to circumstance (much higher performance aircraft, more dynamic flying, threat of attrition, etc) than it is due to standards. A lot of civilian programs are really great, including the one I attended some 20 years ago. You are on the mark about attitude, that is basically everything in learning, which is always a thing in aviation, no matter how experienced you are.
 
I did both, part 141 school to get my private/commercial/IR, and then a few years later, USN flight training. There are pros and cons to both. I wouldn't say that mil aviators are inherently better aviators. Nor would I say that about civilians. I would say that mil flight school itself is for sure more challenging. But that is more due to circumstance (much higher performance aircraft, more dynamic flying, threat of attrition, etc) than it is due to standards. A lot of civilian programs are really great, including the one I attended some 20 years ago. You are on the mark about attitude, that is basically everything in learning, which is always a thing in aviation, no matter how experienced you are.
Thank you for your reply—I was hoping you'd chip in. I have a lot of respect for you, and value your opinion. (That said, always feel free to tell me if I'm full of crap.)
 
I think it would do tremendous good, for sure. Flying in AK, or flight instructing, or flying survey for a season or two would probably be great for their development as aviators, honestly.

There are many mil pilots who fly in AK doing any number of mission types, many who are IPs in any number of airframes, and a number of mil flying gigs in aerial recon that are merely a more complex version of survey flying. I would say many are already developed in these ways and more. The above aren’t necessarily inherent to only civilian flying, they’re merely the same or very similar things, just done in different ways as it comes to the mil side.
 
Let’s not get ahead of ourselves. He needs a private first.


1641313429067.png
 
I think it would do tremendous good, for sure. Flying in AK, or flight instructing, or flying survey for a season or two would probably be great for their development as aviators, honestly.

Also, though it's sure to be a controversial statement, in my opinion they get enough of a leg up.

Sure - I mean, it's about what level of experience is "enough" for an ATP, and the folks who framed the rule decided that the military background was enough for the ATP. Experience comes in a variety of ways, right?

I think we're actually in favor of mostly the same things....I just don't have a problem with the ATP exception for mil, but you make some good points from a frame of reference that I don't have, so thanks.

I did both, part 141 school to get my private/commercial/IR, and then a few years later, USN flight training. There are pros and cons to both. I wouldn't say that mil aviators are inherently better aviators. Nor would I say that about civilians. I would say that mil flight school itself is for sure more challenging. But that is more due to circumstance (much higher performance aircraft, more dynamic flying, threat of attrition, etc) than it is due to standards. A lot of civilian programs are really great, including the one I attended some 20 years ago. You are on the mark about attitude, that is basically everything in learning, which is always a thing in aviation, no matter how experienced you are.

I guess the biggest difference I see is that a civ pilot can keep throwing money at proficiency/training until they can pass. Mil pilots can't do that. You would think that very fact alone would yield better aviators but both you and Sasha are saying this isn't necessarily the case. I find that really interesting.
 
I guess the biggest difference I see is that a civ pilot can keep throwing money at proficiency/training until they can pass. Mil pilots can't do that. You would think that very fact alone would yield better aviators but both you and Sasha are saying this isn't necessarily the case. I find that really interesting.

You are correct about that difference. My point was just that training background type doesn't make an inherently good aviator. You can be great from either background. But I agree that a struggling aviator will more easily slip through the cracks in the civilian system. The "weeding out" process due to lack of performance or decision making errors does not end when you get your wings. I've known folks who were shown the door after years of flying, though this most commonly occurs during their first operational tour (after flight school and initial training in type). We had two guys in my first tour get booted via FNAEB (Field Naval Aviator Evaluation Board) for poor performance. That's more of an example of the system partly failing - they should have been removed during flight school, or at least by the FRS (initial training for your primary airframe) - but it still self corrected in the end.
 
You are correct about that difference. My point was just that training background type doesn't make an inherently good aviator. You can be great from either background. But I agree that a struggling aviator will more easily slip through the cracks in the civilian system. The "weeding out" process due to lack of performance or decision making errors does not end when you get your wings. I've known folks who were shown the door after years of flying, though this most commonly occurs during their first operational tour (after flight school and initial training in type). We had two guys in my first tour get booted via FNAEB (Field Naval Aviator Evaluation Board) for poor performance. That's more of an example of the system partly failing - they should have been removed during flight school, or at least by the FRS (initial training for your primary airframe) - but it still self corrected in the end.

You quoted 'Fox there but I think you meant me. :)
 
There are many mil pilots who fly in AK doing any number of mission types, many who are IPs in any number of airframes, and a number of mil flying gigs in aerial recon that are merely a more complex version of survey flying. I would say many are already developed in these ways and more. The above aren’t necessarily inherent to only civilian flying, they’re merely the same or very similar things, just done in different ways as it comes to the mil side.

Flown with and worked with a lot of these dudes who’ve gone from flying for Uncle Sam to flying part 135 in AK.

They fare about the same as anyone else coming up to Alaska - even the guys who flew in Alaska for the military. An advantage the mil guys have is they can usually learn to do things differently. A disadvantage is the “mission mentality” - we ain’t saving babies (usually) so being able to turn off “last flight out of Saigon thinking” is something they struggle with. With some exceptions, I still believe that after 3k hours or so, you’ve either “get it” and are adaptable or you don’t/aren’t. That is the key to doing well and being safe as much as anything else. At that point, you will be able to do the job or you won’t. The military guys flew about the same as the civvie guys in this regard.

A notable exception being the coast guard guys - those guys have always been pretty damn good when i came across them, also generally the guys who flew on boats or did “weird” flying. They tended to be able to adapt well to “ok, we have inadequate procedures, what do you do?”

Worst guys I flew with with prior mil background were the dudes who’d never had variety in their career. They had flown the same airframe for their whole time in etc. They were “adequate” but they also had very little adaptability in my experience.

All that being said, the best aviator I’ve ever met was an Airforce FAIP who came to Alaska after he got out. So, you know, depends, ymmv.

Things for guys getting out to avoid in their first flying job:
1. You’re not better than everyone else. Now you are the FNG, cooperate to graduate and don’t be a nob. Nobody cares about your squadron patch.
2. You can’t take 8 hours to plan a 45min flight anymore unless it is stupidly complex for some reason. Figure out a solution - not necessarily an optimal solution.
3. You still have a lot to learn. No, you’re not an idiot and you completed a great course of training and have experience - but this is new to you. Act like it and learn - the same way you’d expect things to go if roles were reversed.
4. You will not be prepared for the workload in Alaska 135. You will be tired. The rest and duty regulations are hot garbage. You may be a •-hot fighter pilot, but after 15 legs and 14hrs of duty 15 or 20 days in a row you will be tired. You must listen to your body and know when to say, “dude I’m tired, I can’t do this anymore,” and adjust what you are willing to do. There’s no shame in it. The stakes aren’t high it’s ok to say “I’m tapping out.”
5. Oh my god, please for the love of god listen to the old guys. Your 5,000hrs is not “high time,” Dave over there has 31,000hrs, and CFIT and lived. Listen to him. He’s got wisdom - he may be rough around the edges and unimpressed with you - good, he’s seen you and 8 others like you. Find out why he’s still alive and emulate the good parts.
6. Understand that you’re going to have to make a lot more decisions now. This was one thing that the military guys struggled with I saw a lot. Analysis paralysis would wipe them out. Learn to recalibrate decision making because often times there will be nobody to ask while you’re flying.
7. Finally, have fun. There’s no need to be as serious as you’re being right now. Yes it’s safety critical work, but tell a joke, smile, be happy about your life. What we do (or what I did) is fun! Enjoy it! I’ve seen a lot of these guys not have any fun - it was like they didn’t know how. That doesn’t mean go buzz caribou or other stupid pilot tricks (that’s more of an issue with the civvie guys tbh) - but it does mean go enjoy yourself. What you are doing is fun! Enjoy that feeling! Even when it’s hard it can be fun. Enjoy the flying.


Anyway, those are the things I can think of that I noticed along the way. Like almost every job the biggest asset mil guys can bring to the table is a good attitude and willingness to learn.
 
Hit ‘em with the “standby” next time. They love that.

I don’t particularly care for the mid-clearance control transfer. Some guys will hear the call coming and say “I GOT IT!” while the controller is telling us where to exit. It usually creates a clunky transfer with some swerve or brake tap and I usually don’t get the read back right.

How about this? Mentally note the clearance and respond to it after the transfer of controls.

Way back in the way back times...I was doing IOE in the metro at AMF. PHX tower/ground issued a taxi instruction from one side of the airport to the other side of the airport as soon as the mains touched. I completed the landing, pulled off onto the taxiway, and asked the controller to repeat it all over again. They can get huffy about it, but that's about all they can do. So I let them huff their hearts content.
 
6. Understand that you’re going to have to make a lot more decisions now. This was one thing that the military guys struggled with I saw a lot. Analysis paralysis would wipe them out. Learn to recalibrate decision making because often times there will be nobody to ask while you’re flying.

This is one of the biggest reasons why I saw people attrite from mil flying. In many cases, those folks already had earned their wings. A part 135 operation in faraway AK might seem like a good place to get a fresh start for some of those folks, and build the hours they need to get back in the game on the civilian side. I say this because, aside from RW folks (like the coasties you mentioned) who often need to build FW/multi time after getting out, this is a pretty unusual place for a mil aviator to go after a successful mil flying career. Of course some just have the interest and the passion, but I suspect that you are seeing a rather odd mix of cats and dogs who, for whatever reason, did not choose to take the standard post-military route, or did not have it available to them.

Not trying to poo poo AK 135 flying, or anything along those lines. It sounds awesome and would be a very challenging job. That being said, after a decade or two of mil flying, most folks are ready for the QOL and $$$ that 121 can provide.
 
Last edited:
This is one of the biggest reasons why I saw people attrite from mil flying. In many cases, those folks already had earned their wings. A part 135 operation in faraway AK might seem like a good place to get a fresh start for some of those folks, and build the hours they need to get back in the game on the civilian side. I say this because, aside from RW folks (like the coasties you mentioned) who often need to build FW/multi time after getting out, this is a pretty unusual place for a mil aviator to go after a successful mil flying career. Of course some just have the interest and the passion, but I suspect that you are seeing a rather odd mix of cats and dogs who, for whatever reason, did not leave the service with mainline 121 hours.

Depends. I saw some guys go 121 afterwards, then come north, some guys came north fresh out of working for the military, some guys had terrible careers and were looking to start over, but mostly it was guys who’d been stationed at Elmendorf or Eielson and didn’t want to move “yet again.” Flying in Alaska isn’t some kind of exile from “real aviation.” It’s typically decent money and allows you to be home, and fly a reasonable amount.

Some of these guys had 3k to 5k hours when they got out and would be fine to go to any 121 operation…. some were great, some couldn’t figure it out. 99% of it was attitude and adaptability.

Now I’ll say this, the prior service enlisted guys who’d come to flying after they got out - in particular the guys who’d done something dangerous or technically difficult were really great. I remember a couple Marines that I taught ground school to. One didn’t make it through flight training (he was very low time), but I wish we could have hired him anyway because those two guys worked really hard, and unlike literally every other class I’d taught, cleaned up the training room and took the garbage out without being asked. Like, they just did it. And the guy who did make it through turned out to be a great hardworking and humble guy to be around. But again, this was probably more an attitude and adaptability thing than anything else.
 
How about this? Mentally note the clearance and respond to it after the transfer of controls.

Way back in the way back times...I was doing IOE in the metro at AMF. PHX tower/ground issued a taxi instruction from one side of the airport to the other side of the airport as soon as the mains touched. I completed the landing, pulled off onto the taxiway, and asked the controller to repeat it all over again. They can get huffy about it, but that's about all they can do. So I let them huff their hearts content.
Sure. I just say standby. Same effect.
 
I will say this too - all the guys (military or civilian) who did well loved flying and loved learning in some way.

That “growth mindset” was really helpful. I reckon only about half of the people I ran into really exhibit that.
 
I think the military exception makes sense. I do not think the Restricted ATP options for University 141 programs make sense at all, especially since they can be taught by people who do not/did not actually qualify for the R-ATP because they didn't do a university program. Like you and me.

The point that the 141 universities make is that since they take a full 4 years to teach all this material that their students wind up with a more complete education than they would have received at a 141 flight school much less a mom and pop 61 operation. Having been involved in both types of schools I can say that their argument has some merit.

Now, I don't for one second believe that the universities did this out of altruism. They had to create a reason to justify spending 3 extra years and another small fortune for a worthless piece of paper to hang on your wall. Honestly a 500 hour discount on your ATP still isn't worth it, but the marketing guys can pitch it to the kids looking at colleges.
 
Back
Top