The end of aviation as we know it?

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?

Listen, here's the truth. The military applicant does go through a very thorough vetting (new catch phrase!) process in terms of academic scoring and ability. And, they do get a first rate training curriculum. I'm sure most here would agree. However, the military doesn't necessarily produce superior pilots over their civilian counterparts as far as stick and rudder skills go.

The military does a very good job of teaching someone how to evade enemy radar, drop bombs, pull G's and dog fight. None of these skills translate to the civilian world of pax flying. ATC hates it when you sneak up on them. The FAA frowns upon dropping bombs on civilians. Pulling G's upsets the passengers and dog fighting, while fun, usually ends in a lot of messy paperwork, fines and rug dances in the chief pilot's office.

I've flown with and taught many folks from a wide variety of backgrounds (military, civilian, bush, aerobatic, cropdusters, combo of mil/civ, etc.). I've seen and flown with the worst and had the pleasure of flying with the best of them. My personal observation has been that once someone attains a certain amount of flying time/experience (I've heard the 5000 hr mark) that background doesn't really matter and flying ability begins to blur.

Also, from my own personal observation and experience, both flying with and training when it comes to the type of flying we do are the young ex-Regional airline pilots. Some here may disagree. I'm going by my experience. Some of the worst, and I do mean WORST aviators I've flown with are the single seat fighter guys. That's not to say that there haven't been many exceptional fighter guys because there have been, it's just that many have been, let's say...lackluster in their ability to fly a big jet in the civilian environment and make good decisions.

My point: They are exceptional mil/civ pilots, there are good mil/civ pilots and there are bad mil/cil pilots. Some one's ability doesn't necessarily dictate which one they came from or what type of pilot they'll end up being. So, can we stop beating this dead horse?!? :dunno:
 
There are exceptional mil/civ pilots, there are good mil/civ pilots and there are bad mil/cil pilots. Some one's ability doesn't necessarily dictate which one they came from or what type of pilot they'll end up being. So, can we stop beating this dead horse?!? :dunno:

:clap: x100
 
ATC hates it when you sneak up on them. The FAA frowns upon dropping bombs on civilians. Pulling G's upsets the passengers and dog fighting, while fun, usually ends in a lot of messy paperwork, fines and rug dances in the chief pilot's office.
:rotfl:that's why I keep getting into trouble!
 
So with the start of the Copenhagen summit I found this article from the Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/29/rajendra-pachauri-climate-warning-copenhagen

So, any guesses about how much will air carriers have to downsize due to the hefty taxes that might come in the future? Will General Aviation be killed off with the taxes?

Please I'm not discussing the merits of climate science, just the hypothetical scenarios for the aviation industry arising from this.

I suppose to most directly address your post I should say military pilots have a different background than civilian pilots, and this may or may not contribute to different flying abilities between the two groups. :P

Now to the actual topic:

http://aa.stanford.edu/aeroastro/50th/presentations/Kroo.pdf

This is a presentation given by a professor of aircraft design at Stanford. He is also chief scientist at Aerion (a company seeking to build a supersonic business jet, posted about a few weeks back). He talks about the environmental impact of aviation and the technologies we need to bring to market to mitigate it. You might find it interesting Charlie. Hopefully our technology advancement will keep up with fuel price increases (whether they be real or politically induced), allowing continued growth in aviation. Aviation will look different, to be sure, but that does not mean it will look stifled.
 
Some of the worst, and I do mean WORST aviators I've flown with are the single seat fighter guys. That's not to say that there haven't been many exceptional fighter guys because there have been, it's just that many have been, let's say...lackluster in their ability to fly a big jet in the civilian environment and make good decisions.

:

Some of the worst pilots I ever flew with were fatty airplane guys riding in a fighter. Low tactical SA, inability to do anything without challenging/replying with someone....anyone, and low ability to think at anything over 5 miles a minute. :D

My point: They are exceptional mil/civ pilots, there are good mil/civ pilots and there are bad mil/cil pilots. Some one's ability doesn't necessarily dictate which one they came from or what type of pilot they'll end up being. So, can we stop beating this dead horse?!? :dunno:

Heck A300, I fully agree! And I wish we could apply this same logic to:

FBO vs Academy
Cirrus vs Cessna/Piper
shock cooling
University vs FBO
Is it PIC time, or not?
....and a host of other beaten-to-death topics on JC. :)
 
FBO vs Academy
Cirrus vs Cessna/Piper
shock cooling
University vs FBO
Is it PIC time, or not?
....and a host of other beaten-to-death topics on JC. :)

Lets start a discussion about abortion, the existence of the flying spaghetti monster and if Michael Hasselhoff is finally off the sauce.
 
Lets start a discussion about abortion, the existence of the flying spaghetti monster and if Michael Hasselhoff is finally off the sauce.

We could reasonably add those to the previous list too of beaten-to-death and to-be-beaten-to-death topics!
 
Back
Top