kellwolf
Piece of Trash
I know some former students in their 30s that scare the bejesus out of me knowing they're at a regional now. And I KNOW you didn't just compare military training to civilian training.....
FAA Releases NPRM for 121 Pilot Mins.
- Thread starter FlyGuy9k4
- Start date
I know some former students in their 30s that scare the bejesus out of me knowing they're at a regional now. And I KNOW you didn't just compare military training to civilian training.....
Cessna414JJB
Unknown Member
Could have been your boobs! :rotfl:
Question on regulations:
Is it allowed to put a tip jar ar the exits of regional airliners?
Depending on the size of the plane, that with a well written flyer may get people into a "giving mood". If done collectively (I know, nothing is ever done collectively in this bottomless barrell) it could yield quite some short term return?
lhornaday
Well-Known Member
You need an STC for the tip jar. I had a similar idea that involved dancers and a pole in the galley.
motoboy
Well-Known Member
I'm not necessarily for or against this rule...Just a thought but what about all the Asian carriers that send their potential f/o's over here for training, then go back to their country to the right seat flying heavy metal with 230tt. I haven't heard of a lawn-dart epidemic going on overseas due to low time pilots. I agree 250tt is not suitable in a 121 flight deck, but shouldn't we focus on rest regulations and more thorough training as apposed to a total time in somebody's log book?
Boris Badenov
Fortis Leader
I need a macro for these threads. I'm still looking for the posts from guys with 4000+ saying "nah, I was just as good then as I am now." Crickets? You're not a "bad pilot" because you're low time, but you're not as good as you're going to be. Training is good. Experience is better. Both is best.
They're not. Last I checked, there were no specific minimums for an FO for 135 other than a commercial certificate. You don't need an ATP to be a 135 CA, whereas you do to be a 121 CA. If we're going to get into the 135 mins vs. 121 mins discussion, we could at least compare apples to apples - comparing SIC to PIC qualifications doesn't really work.
Honest question: what do you believe is an appropriate level of coaching at the airline level? What is it okay for new FOs not to know?
Individually, they're all out there. And, in principle, I have no quarrel with taking several jobs before going to the airlines. But the problem is there aren't enough 135 gigs out there to go around, partially because the airlines have annexed some of that flying. So having a progression scheme like that, while a good idea, doesn't seem all that practical.
ppragman
No pasa nada.
Training doesn't even do it. Think, you spend 250hrs learning the "basics" then in another year you triple to quadruple the amount of hours you have? No, experience is the key. Training only keeps you from killing yourself initially, I've learned much much more from time on the job working than I did getting my ratings.
Someone touched on theory, yeah, you need that, but that can be learned at any time. You just need to spend the requisite time doing the bookwork for it. If you're lazy, and don't study, then whaddaya know, you won't get that much theory.
Good stuff right there. Someone should grab that as a signature.
Firebird2XC
Well-Known Member
I would, but mine is full. Or, so it tells me. How do folks get such huge signature lines?
ahsmatt7
Well-Known Member
no one ever told you....people who have bigger signature lines are only making up for something else:rotfl:
Firebird2XC
Well-Known Member
Uh... fictional airline jobs?
deadstick
Well-Known Member
Yea because they got in those jets because daddy stroked a check to Hornet-U.
The washouts in military flight training are due to a limited ability, not a limited credit line.
ahsmatt7
Well-Known Member
ehhh Fail on my part there buddy..trying to lighten the mod in here...
Firebird2XC
Well-Known Member
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
Upgrade at those carriers is a lot different than "When's my seniority number up?" What scares me the most are the low time guys that have been in the right seat for 2 months talking about how they can't wait to upgrade and complaining about how it's gonna be a year before they meet the mins. Or at least, that's how it was a couple of years ago. Heck, 9E even started a "mentor" program to let the jet jocks get over to the left seat even quicker because they didn't have enough guys with the time to bid CA.....
Douglas
Old School KSUX
I was thinking about my schools "washout rate" (drop-out rate) and wondered what percentage of military student pilots are not ability washouts but are more of a "this isn't what I expected it would be and I want myself out".
vikingair
Well-Known Member
Last September I had a conversation with a guy who was all sorts of pissed that he wasn't at an airline yet. Thats what they had told him at the beginning of the summer just 3.5 months earlier when he had his very first flight. "60K and a couple months and you'll be in a shiny jet."
Hell it might take you 3 months to be promoted to the guy who gets to use the guacamole gun at Taco Bell so being a jet setting high flying mustache wearing get all the ladies pilot sounds mighty good! Right as rain the next hiring hiccup there will be somebody swallowing the hook.
That brings up another question: if someone decides to get out of military flying because it isn't what they thought it would be, is that because they just don't like flying, or because they don't like all the work that they have to do for it? I'd consider people in the second category to be ability washouts, even though they may not have gotten to the point where the decision to get out was made for them.
Overall, I do think that most of the pilots who don't make it through military training leave for ability-related reasons.
ppragman
No pasa nada.
Let's be serious though, mil flight training isn't the end all either, the majority of those guys are good, but typically have a limited level of experience in other types of airframes. Experience is what counts (not that I really have any of it, but I know it when I see it, ya know, kind of like pornography). I know a guy who was telling me stories about doing checkouts for F16 guys at his local airport. He'd pull an engine on them and they wouldn't know what to do, or they'd try to fly their approach to land at 120KTS in a 172. I'm sure they're badass stone cold killers in the F16, but a lot of those guys still had only 500TT, and only in a couple of different planes, but they had no business being in a 172 without a little dual given (which they didn't want to get according to my friend). Experience counts for something.
You get a guy with 3000hrs of single seat fighter jock time, with a bunch of it on sorties, and in crap conditions, and then yeah, the guy is gonna be awesome, but remember, not all military guys do that. I've met guys who were career FOs in the transport world, or SAC back in the day. There are also guys who got into the military world of flying and got out with less than 1000TT (yep they exist, we had one apply this summer) after a full term in the navy. That doesn't mean he's not a good pilot, but training only goes so far. A buddy of mine who worked at a cargo outfit up here told me about an FO who would use non-standard callouts because "they used them in the guard," and wouldn't change, or follow directions because this 1000hr FO knew better because the FO was a current military copilot. One bad apple? Sure, absolutely, but this person had only about 500TT and no outside experience in civil aviation when this person knocked on the door of the company in question. The training is very good, but training is only half of the equation at best. You've still got to have time in the saddle.
Who do you pick? The 5000TT freight dawg with 3800hrs 135 time, and 3000hrs MTPIC, all of it single pilot? or the 2500hr military pilot? Depends. FedEx grabs the military guy because they know he can follow procedure, and is committed (hell, he just did 10 years). Other hiring boards may think otherwise.
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
Oh, hell, not this comparison again.
This isn't indicative of these guys being idiots or inexperienced as pilots in any way.
These are simply pilots who have spent their 500 hours doing something completely different. They're using their experience that works perfectly well in the job they do every day -- and that is very different than the procedures required to horse a 172 around the pattern.
They drive around in the Viper fast and high for the most part. When they're close to the airport, they're fast enough that they go to High Key when they lose an engine there. When that fails, then they punch out. That's what they are trained to do and practice doing.
Whenever I hear stories like yours -- it seems to be the GA pilots' favorite way of saying "fighter pilots are a bunch of over-rated retards" -- I have to laugh. How about we turn the tables and put your scoffing wonder CFI in a Viper and give him the same scenario and see how well he handles it. My guess is, poorly.
Different airplanes have to be flown different ways. It takes training and experience to do it. Unless you're Bob Hoover, you don't just jump in any airplane and have the skills to fly it well based off your past experience in a completely different type of airplane.
The fact that a military fighter guy tried to fly his 172 fast on final isn't indicative of them being morons -- it's indicative of the difference between what they have most of their experience in (where you fly a power-on final that is 100 knots faster than in a Cessna) and the proper technique in a 172. They're not morons because they "didn't know what to do" when the power was pulled in a 172 -- they were trying to take their knowledge base of cruising around at 300 knots, their trained reaction to make it to 10,000 feet overhead the field at High Key, and fit that into the altitude/airspeed scenario they were presented. There are no scenarios in a military fighter where an engine failure results in an off-field landing. A Viper dude isn't constantly looking for a field or a road to land in should he lose an engine. There aren't any that are survivable...so that's neither their habit pattern or in their crosscheck.
So, I'll throw down an open invitation for any one of those guys to come on out to where I work and I'll put them in the T-38 sim and we'll do some flying. I guarantee you it won't take long to make any GA CFI look like a complete buffoon at 300 knots. Why? Not because they are a complete buffoon, but because they simply have no experience flying this fast, with this type of airplane.
It's a red-herring argument. It has absolutely no bearing on the hours/experience discussion in this thread.