The end of aviation as we know it?

well still concept applies. it doesnt matter where you train being civilian or military either you can or you cant. its like my old college baseball coach said. I can make good players better. but i cant make good players great. its the same in aviation. theres just certain things that cant be taught.
 
Jbroz04 said:
well still concept applies. it doesnt matter where you train being civilian or military either you can or you cant. its like my old college baseball coach said. I can make good players better. but i cant make good players great. its the same in aviation. theres just certain things that cant be taught.
Click to expand...

...And Naval Aviation is the varsity team that always wins state.
 
SteveC said:
Since you got it so completely wrong right off the bat...well, that's where I quit reading.


< edit to add: >

All right, I'll elaborate. What I hear being said throughout this thread is that:

1. Military pilots have to go through fairly rigorous screening that removes many of the less skillful, lower aptitude individuals.
2. Military training is of a higher quality than civilian.
3. The result is that military pilots are, on average, better overall pilots than their civilian trained counterparts.
Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly here. That doesn't mean their are many civilian trained pilots who are just as good, it's just that there are a lot more civilian pilots in compairison with those who were military trained. Since the bad apples are usually weeded out in the beginning with te military, they do produce some of the best, because they find those who "can". Again, many who "can" choose to not join the forces and they are just as good.


That's my .2 fwiw.
 
I wont disagree. My point is that I have met a few military aviators over the years including my uncle who thinks if they wanted to they could show up any of the civilian airshow pilots. And I think that mindset is foolish. Its a totally different type of aerobatics than you do in military airplanes.
 
Jbroz04 said:
I wont disagree. My point is that I have met a few military aviators over the years including my uncle who thinks if they wanted to they could show up any of the civilian airshow pilots. And I think that mindset is foolish. Its a totally different type of aerobatics than you do in military airplanes.
Click to expand...

I think your mindset is totally off too. (no offense).
I bet I could show up a military guy who has never toucwd a 320, just as he could school my ass in something I've never flown. Your title doesn't make you a great pilot, what you've experienced and how you take it in makes you a great pilot. And a great airline pilot may not be a great ag pilot, military pilot, ga pilot, exct...


It doesn't just have to be Aerobatics.
 
A-300F4-622R said:
How come the Aussies routinely wax US Naval aviators in ACM matchups?
Click to expand...

Asking the wrong guy, but I would ask first how were the exercises setup, was it weighed more towards the Australians because their Hornets are older? Were the Aussies trying to repulse an attack with Navy aircarft carrying simulated external stores and alot of gas?
 
rpfeif said:
Asking the wrong guy, but I would ask first how were the exercises setup, was it weighed more towards the Australians because their Hornets are older? Were the Aussies trying to repulse an attack with Navy aircarft carrying simulated external stores and alot of gas?
Click to expand...


Straight up 1v1 ACM. There was an article a few years ago in AWST stating that the Aussies were overall, the world's best at ACM.
 
Since I was born outside Sydney I guess that makes me the worlds best civilian RJ pilot. Sweet. Can I put that on my resume?
 
A-300F4-622R said:
There was an article a few years ago in AWST stating that the Aussies were overall, the world's best at ACM.
Click to expand...

Don't want to talk about subjects above my paygrade or experience, but...I wouldn't believe a freaking thing that is written about tactics, techniques, procedures, or what happens at exercises in open source material. Until the guy who writes the article was there for the brief, riding in the back for the flight/fight, and the debrief and he actually knew what the hell it took to do ACM and be good at it, everything he is writing is second or third hand information that was censored.
 
Blackhawk said:
I have. The government decided which airlines succeeded and which failed rather than the market. It was based upon politics. How do you think Pan Am got where it was? They did not beat the competition by providing a product the masses thought was better, they got where they were by getting the government to stop other airlines from flying their routes.
Click to expand...

Can you provide an example of this?

Which airlines were halted by the government from flying "Pan Am's Routes"?
 
Doug Taylor said:
Can you provide an example of this?

Which airlines were halted by the government from flying "Pan Am's Routes"?
Click to expand...

You need to read up on the CAB. The CAB had three functions: 1. Award routes to airlines. 2. Limit the entry of air carriers into new markets 3. Regulate fares for passengers. The government controlled the routes and the prices airlines could charge on the routes. You could not just start flying a route.
This began at the begining when the government bid out the mail contract which was being flown by the Army Air Corps at the time. A fraternity brother of Trippes married into the Mellons family from Pittsburgh. This fraternity brother set up a meeting for Trippe with the House Post Office committee and... what do you know. Pan Am was awarded the lucritive New York-Boston route. No one else could fly it.
Pan Am was later given a virtual monopoly on the international routes but was excluded from domestic routes.
Part of the reason Pan Am ended up failing was the way deregulation was structured. The Deregulation Act of 1978 contained two clauses. Clause A permitted other domestic carriers to compete with Pan Am on international routes. Clause B would permit Pan Am to compete on domestic routes. Clause A was put in effect, but then the other domestic carriers convinced congress that Pan Am would monopolize the domestic routes, so Clause B was shelved. Pan Am was screwed.
http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Commercial_Aviation/Dereg/Tran8.htm
 
Are military pilot generally better than civilian pilots, probably. Are all military pilots better than civilian pilots, probably not. Will most pilots entering particular airlines of any level be from a military background in the future, probably not.

Look at the current requirements to fly in the military. When I went through OCS for the Marines I believe it was 9 years, I think the Air Force was even longer (thank god I didn't decide to stay in). Add to that the fact that there are significantly fewer military pilots than there were in years past. My dad was a Navy pilot in the 70's, I think he only had a 4 or 5 year commitment. He added an extra year to his commitment so that he would be able to fly F-14s. He was still out in 6 years though.

When he got hired at Southwest in like 1981 they were comprised of almost exclusively military pilots. Now he tells me that he rarely fly's with new hires that come from a military background. Most of them are civilian pilots and he says that they do fine. Why if you spent the last 10+ years in the military would you take a pay cut/say no to just a few more years for a government guaranteed retirement? I don't see the lack of a military background as a hindrance to entry at any major airline in the future. If anything it would seem the lack of jobs (which will all change in a few years with the 65's retiring and the comeback of the economy) will cause difficulty in getting on at a major.

As far as military pilots being better than civilian pilots I think that it depends. Will a fighter pilot with 1500 hours be better than an RJ pilot with 1500 hours? Probably. Take the same two pilots with 10,000+ (the last 6,000 or so at the same airline) and they'll probably be equal.

The one thing I do find annoying about military pilots is how THEY have to tell you constantly how great they are. I know my Navy pilots are the best only because my dad constantly told me that as a kid. It wasn't a good thing to hear as a kid, I internalized that they only way I could be great is if I was a fighter pilot like my dad. It wasn't really something I was interested in or had a particular aptitude for but I constantly pursued it. I wasted my entire 20s pursuing someones dream that wasn't my own, now I have to figure out what mine is. Just something for the rest of the people on the thread to keep in mind when raising your own kids.
 
LoadMasterC141 said:
I guess I fit in the "wannabe" category. I won't even set foot at the "other" forum because there are FAR too many "I am an airline pilot and your not, so you suck" types. For the most part, JCs seasoned folks seem to show a desire to help the wannabes and lower ranks rather than flame and stereotype them.
Click to expand...

:dunno: I think the difference is that some here are not the airline career hungry kinda guys (like myself) and the guys that are ...well, understand the similar satisfaction we all get out of aviation as a whole rather than the typical "Hey babe, I'm an airline pilot" one liners sporting top gun sunglasses with huge egos. However, can a military pilot learn from an GA pilot? :D
 
I did both military and civilian basic pilot training, both in the same type of airplane. I didn't made it past the basic training (before you step on the turbine trainers) because I failed the medical, I had to start wearing glasses.

the basic airforce training was 3 steps, 2 full weeks of flying each. The training was done on gliders and PA28s, now I think they use Diamonds.

Solo was after 10 hours of TT , not one minute more. The first step ck ride was basic maneuvers, the standards were about the same that you have for an ATPL ck ride. we started in 1300 (they were far more then that but most of them did not even made it to be an officer), about 300 made it to the basic flying training, 30 made it to the trubine training....9 made it on the jets...

I'm sure there is some very good civilian pilots out there, that maybe could even be military pilots, they just decided not too. But I can say that for the majority, military pilots are more skilled then civilians

As for aerobatics, yes I think there is some civilian pilots out there that are better then any airforce or navy guy, but how many are they? 2-3?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top