Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




View Full Version : Butthurt (formerly Baffled)


Bucknut
01-25-2019, 07:58 PM
I am sitting in a hotel having a crappy dinner at the Marriott. I meet a fellow pilot and ask him if he is here for The FedEx interview. He looks at me and says yes . I then find out that he is ex-Military, I believe Air Force and has never flown anything larger than a KIng Air. I am thinking this B.S. I have five type ratings with 121 pic and two check airman qualifications and a letter of rec. and can't get a call!!


toolowterrain
01-25-2019, 09:30 PM
Waaaaaaa. Such is life. We could have all gone the military way yet we didnít. We can start an argument about who is more qualified: a mil guy dropping bombs in Iraq, or someone like myself (like lots of others out there) with many types, thousands of 121 hours, and more approaches into the NY metro area than one can count.

However, it wonít change anything. It is what it is. Its not even the fact they are veterans, because honestly, screw the people that play that card. I am a veteran (non aviation) and have never used that to gain anything major in life other than a 10% off here or there. And to be fair, I donít think the vast majority of mil guys that are hired at the majors do so either. If the finger has to be pointed somewhere, it should be at the people that do the hiring.

As a side note there is a whole other extreme opposite. Iíve personally know of a 24 year old Delta new hire. RJ guy, 0 TPIC, no fancy college, dad was not VP of flight ops. Just right timing. So it goes both ways.

In the end itís all a lottery. Keep playing, keep a good attitude, and you will get the call. You should also befriend that guy interviewing..you never know....

chronomaster31
01-25-2019, 09:47 PM
I bet as the younger millenials move into higher corporate positions and/or are more involved in the hiring of pilots, you'll see less of the military fetish and more of hiring based on your relevant accomplishments, skills(ets), and merits.

Sent from my LG-H931 using Tapatalk


BeatNavy
01-25-2019, 10:14 PM
I am sitting in a hotel having a crappy dinner at the Marriott. I meet a fellow pilot and ask him if he is here for The FedEx interview. He looks at me and says yes . I then find out that he is ex-Military, I believe Air Force and has never flown anything larger than a KIng Air. I am thinking this B.S. I have five type ratings with 121 pic and two check airman qualifications and a letter of rec. and can't get a call!!

Cool story.

Floobs
01-25-2019, 10:21 PM
I bet as the younger millenials move into higher corporate positions and/or are more involved in the hiring of pilots, you'll see less of the military fetish and more of hiring based on your relevant accomplishments, skills(ets), and merits.

Sent from my LG-H931 using Tapatalk

Letís hope so. I donít know why we worship the military in this country.

wrxpilot
01-25-2019, 10:34 PM
Itís frustrating Bucknut, I know. Just keep working towards youíre goal, and do whatís in your power to be competitive. You will get called, just donít give up.

DENpilot
01-25-2019, 11:41 PM
Letís hope so. I donít know why we worship the military in this country.

Because your pansy butt would never defend this country...

at6d
01-26-2019, 01:20 AM
Bingo.....

Hetman
01-26-2019, 03:17 AM
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=th8lBCNRVKM

Floobs
01-26-2019, 04:23 AM
Because your pansy butt would never defend this country...

It hasnít needed defending since ww2.

60av8tor
01-26-2019, 04:46 AM
It hasnít needed defending since ww2.

Youíre exactly right. It hasnít - thanks to the men and woman willing to keep it that way.

LNL76
01-26-2019, 04:49 AM
DON'T feed the troll!

Bucknut
01-26-2019, 05:01 AM
Yes , I spent 8 years in the Air Guard so it's not that I have anything against Military people. Enlisting is one of the best things I have ever done

Pogey Bait
01-26-2019, 05:21 AM
25 pages plus till this gets closed and only read the first one and a half posts.

Floobs
01-26-2019, 05:38 AM
Youíre exactly right. It hasnít - thanks to the men and woman willing to keep it that way.

Thatís not what I meant.

Excargodog
01-26-2019, 05:51 AM
I think it's more than a military fetish or even gung-ho comradeship or respect for the quality of military training. It keeps the cost of the payroll down.

Why WOULD an airline wish to hire a 25 year old at a major when they could hire a 45.year old military retiree? Both are going to get paid based on their seniority.

Say both spend ten years climbing the FO Payscale, then become captains. That's a push for payroll. But then two years later both are going to go over 12 years, essentially maxing out top Payscale for a lot of airlines. But one guy is going to stay there for eight years and then retire - to be replaced if possible with another 45 year old and the process gets repeated. The other is going to stay there for 28 years and retire.

So which group of pilots is going to represent the LOWEST annual personnel cost to the airline over the course of their career? The guy who spends half of his career as an FO - who are needed on a pretty much one for one basis as captains - or the guy who spends three quarters of his career as a captain, most of that at the top of the Payscale? That's pretty simple arithmetic for the HR and accounting people to do.

No, given their druthers, the guys with the green eyeshades and sharp pencils will always prefer the older guy, other factors being essentially equal. The training cost of bringing two 45 year olds up to standard are trivial compared to the cost of bringing one 25 year old up to standard and then eventually paying him top scale for three decades.

Given their druthers, the accountants would rather start the 25 year olds out at a wholly owned regional, and keep him there for 20 years, plugging older flyers from the military and older OTS hires from somebody else's regional in above him so they can reset his seniority back to zero when he does eventually flow to the major.

It isn't personal, just bookkeeping.

Hossharris
01-26-2019, 05:57 AM
I am sitting in a hotel having a crappy dinner at the Marriott. I meet a fellow pilot and ask him if he is here for The FedEx interview. He looks at me and says yes . I then find out that he is ex-Military, I believe Air Force and has never flown anything larger than a KIng Air. I am thinking this B.S. I have five type ratings with 121 pic and two check airman qualifications and a letter of rec. and can't get a call!!

Perhaps youíve been blacklisted ...

Winston
01-26-2019, 06:47 AM
So which group of pilots is going to represent the LOWEST annual personnel cost to the airline over the course of their career? The guy who spends half of his career as an FO - who are needed on a pretty much one for one basis as captains - or the guy who spends three quarters of his career as a captain, most of that at the top of the Payscale? That's pretty simple arithmetic for the HR and accounting people to do.

It doesn’t matter how much an individual pilot makes because you’re still going to have to pay for the same number of Captains and FOs to staff the airline whether they start at 25 or 45, and if you’re talking about a career of 20 vs. 40 years, they’re both going to be at the top payscale for their seat for the majority of it. You’re also going to have to significantly increase training costs to run twice as many bodies through training events to account for those shortened careers.

I don’t know that the numbers you’d come up with are that different.

Packrat
01-26-2019, 07:06 AM
Letís hope so. I donít know why we worship the military in this country.

It doesn't have anything to do with worship. When I interview an ex-military pilot I KNOW the standardization of training and qualifications that he/she has been required to meet over the course of his/her career.

I KNOW for a fact that they didn't "earn" their licenses at some cheesy Mom and Pop FBO that will pass you as long as you can pay. They didn't get their type ratings at some sim center that will sign you off when your check clears.

They didn't get their PIC experience at some backwater "regional" airline that flies between Denver and Gillette three times a day.

That's why ex-military guys get preference. But, I wouldn't expect non-military types to even begin to comprehend that simple fact.

PotatoChip
01-26-2019, 07:13 AM
That's why ex-military guys get preference. But, I wouldn't expect non-military types to even begin to comprehend that simple fact.

What? Iím non-military and this is pretty easy to comprehend.
So all us civilians are brain dead, eh? Thanks. At least we know where you stand.

sailingfun
01-26-2019, 07:15 AM
I bet as the younger millenials move into higher corporate positions and/or are more involved in the hiring of pilots, you'll see less of the military fetish and more of hiring based on your relevant accomplishments, skills(ets), and merits.

Sent from my LG-H931 using Tapatalk

What you state is exactly why mil guys get hired. Most have fantastic resumes on the non flying side including masters degrees, good to excellent performance in college, lots of leadership schools combined with lots of actual leadership experience. I find many civilian pilots focus on the flying and neglect to build out the rest of their resume.

Floobs
01-26-2019, 07:21 AM
It doesn't have anything to do with worship. When I interview an ex-military pilot I KNOW the standardization of training and qualifications that he/she has been required to meet over the course of his/her career.

I KNOW for a fact that they didn't "earn" their licenses at some cheesy Mom and Pop FBO that will pass you as long as you can pay. They didn't get their type ratings at some sim center that will sign you off when your check clears.

They didn't get their PIC experience at some backwater "regional" airline that flies between Denver and Gillette three times a day.

That's why ex-military guys get preference. But, I wouldn't expect non-military types to even begin to comprehend that simple fact.

The guy flying Denver to Gillette probably has more practical experience and more and more skill than some guy who flew a fighter a couple hours a month.
What you state is exactly why mil guys get hired. Most have fantastic resumes on the non flying side including masters degrees, good to excellent performance in college, lots of leadership schools combined with lots of actual leadership experience. I find many civilian pilots focus on the flying and neglect to build out the rest of their resume.

Honestly why? We just fly from point A to B. This career requires a very specific set of skills.

Hetman
01-26-2019, 07:23 AM
Yeah, what good is the military? (Rhetorical question)


This is kind of long, but worth the watch. Funny in a smh way.


Marines in Berkeley - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart (Video Clip) | Comedy Central (http://www.cc.com/video-clips/9fgyc6/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-marines-in-berkeley)

Packrat
01-26-2019, 07:28 AM
What? Iím non-military and this is pretty easy to comprehend.
So all us civilians are brain dead, eh? Thanks. At least we know where you stand.

I never said that. What I did say is that military training is standardized and I know what I'm getting when I interview a person.

I'm never quite sure with a civilian background candidate. Its expensive to get a guy in class only to find out he can't cut the mustard either in the sim or on IOE.

Varsity
01-26-2019, 07:32 AM
I never said that. What I did say is that military training is standardized and I know what I'm getting when I interview a person.

I'm never quite sure with a civilian background candidate. Its expensive to get a guy in class only to find out he can't cut the mustard either in the sim or on IOE.

lmao. :rolleyes:

Most of the guys who can't cut it are .mil guys with no 121 experience. RJ drivers have been doing the exact same check ride, in transport jets in and out of the the exact same airports with the exact same passengers in the same paint job as mainline for decades.

I have yet to encounter a .mil pilot that impresses me with their awesome Uncle Sam flying skills.

PotatoChip
01-26-2019, 07:39 AM
I never said that. What I did say is that military training is standardized and I know what I'm getting when I interview a person.

I'm never quite sure with a civilian background candidate. Its expensive to get a guy in class only to find out he can't cut the mustard either in the sim or on IOE.

You literally said you couldn’t expect civilian guys to understand a simple fact.
You don’t think training at ExpressJet, Endeavor, Air Wisconsin, Envoy, Republic... UND, Purdue, Embry-Riddle, Auburn, WMU etc is standard?!? Hahah, okay. Sure.
I understand perfectly well why military pilots are desired. I also understand why certain 141 universities train pilots exceptionally well. It’s not a pi$$ing match to me.

BeechedJet
01-26-2019, 07:46 AM
Ladies and gentlemen, can we all agree the best pilots are the ones that volunteer on their off days by passing out Christmas gifts in their uniforms and then posting the photos on Facebook to make sure everyone knows how nice they are?

Those are the only ones I want in that cockpit when the no2 engine pops out of BogotŠ.

Excargodog
01-26-2019, 08:02 AM
It doesnít matter how much an individual pilot makes because youíre still going to have to pay for the same number of Captains and FOs to staff the airline whether they start at 25 or 45, and if youíre talking about a career of 20 vs. 40 years, theyíre both going to be at the top payscale for their seat for the majority of it. Youíre also going to have to significantly increase training costs to run twice as many bodies through training events to account for those shortened careers.

I donít know that the numbers youíd come up with are that different.

Do the math. Take a pay scale and actually run through it. Any time someone's seniority is reset, the new employer benefits. Initial training is NOT that expensive, and recurrent training is the same whether someone has 6 months or 20 years in the seat. But the difference in AVERAGE PAY between being an FO for half of his career and for 30 years is huge. Bringing in fresh OLD blood keeps the percentage of pilots earning the highest rates as low as possible and also keeps the youngsters laboring in the "C" scale of the regional as long as possible. If the major has a wholly owned, it's a win-win.

Which doesn't even count the fact that with a second income (military pension) military retirees are less concerned about money than their peers, less often pro-Union, and with TRICARE to back up the basic company medical, are going to be less demanding of benefits. But like I said, just do the math. Go to the payscales and figure out the lifetime payroll difference for hiring two 45 year olds vs one 25 year old to get 40 pilot years of flying. Assume the initial type-rating costs $125K (and you know it doesn't or seat locks would be longer). It's not even close to the same cost per pilot year.

chronomaster31
01-26-2019, 08:09 AM
It doesn't have anything to do with worship. When I interview an ex-military pilot I KNOW the standardization of training and qualifications that he/she has been required to meet over the course of his/her career.



I KNOW for a fact that they didn't "earn" their licenses at some cheesy Mom and Pop FBO that will pass you as long as you can pay. They didn't get their type ratings at some sim center that will sign you off when your check clears.



They didn't get their PIC experience at some backwater "regional" airline that flies between Denver and Gillette three times a day.



That's why ex-military guys get preference. But, I wouldn't expect non-military types to even begin to comprehend that simple fact.

You know the standards for civilian too, it's called acs/pts.

Sent from my LG-H931 using Tapatalk

ShyGuy
01-26-2019, 08:10 AM
I like how troops were sent to the border to help with the migrant invader situation and the entire country seemed to go up in arms about troops being stationed at the border. Yeah, how dare our troops go and defend our physical boundary! :rolleyes: I think we as a nation are just used to overseas wars where troops get killed for oil, Israel security, and the military industrial complex that requires a good war every decade to justify military budgets and spending.

Peacock
01-26-2019, 08:11 AM
The guy flying Denver to Gillette probably has more practical experience and more and more skill than some guy who flew a fighter a couple hours a month

Haha. Bless your heart.

ShyGuy
01-26-2019, 08:12 AM
Ladies and gentlemen, can we all agree the best pilots are the ones that volunteer on their off days by passing out Christmas gifts in their uniforms and then posting the photos on Facebook to make sure everyone knows how nice they are?

Those are the only ones I want in that cockpit when the no2 engine pops out of BogotŠ.

Look at the bright side, you'll have the entire event covered in 1080p on GoPro :D

chronomaster31
01-26-2019, 08:12 AM
Because your pansy butt would never defend this country... well some parts of this country aren't worth defending...
Sent from my LG-H931 using Tapatalk

Floobs
01-26-2019, 08:45 AM
Haha. Bless your heart.

Yes bless my heart.
Iím betting a regional pilot flies more in 2 months than the mil guy does in a year.

well some parts of this country aren't worth defending...
Sent from my LG-H931 using Tapatalk
Yeah the states in between Nevada and North Carolina.

TiredSoul
01-26-2019, 09:11 AM
I think it's more than a military fetish or even gung-ho comradeship or respect for the quality of military training. It keeps the cost of the payroll down.

Why WOULD an airline wish to hire a 25 year old at a major when they could hire a 45.year old military retiree? Both are going to get paid based on their seniority.

Say both spend ten years climbing the FO Payscale, then become captains. That's a push for payroll. But then two years later both are going to go over 12 years, essentially maxing out top Payscale for a lot of airlines. But one guy is going to stay there for eight years and then retire - to be replaced if possible with another 45 year old and the process gets repeated. The other is going to stay there for 28 years and retire.

So which group of pilots is going to represent the LOWEST annual personnel cost to the airline over the course of their career? The guy who spends half of his career as an FO - who are needed on a pretty much one for one basis as captains - or the guy who spends three quarters of his career as a captain, most of that at the top of the Payscale? That's pretty simple arithmetic for the HR and accounting people to do.

No, given their druthers, the guys with the green eyeshades and sharp pencils will always prefer the older guy, other factors being essentially equal. The training cost of bringing two 45 year olds up to standard are trivial compared to the cost of bringing one 25 year old up to standard and then eventually paying him top scale for three decades.

Given their druthers, the accountants would rather start the 25 year olds out at a wholly owned regional, and keep him there for 20 years, plugging older flyers from the military and older OTS hires from somebody else's regional in above him so they can reset his seniority back to zero when he does eventually flow to the major.

It isn't personal, just bookkeeping.

This ^^^ thank you.

deltajuliet
01-26-2019, 12:07 PM
I think it's more than a military fetish or even gung-ho comradeship or respect for the quality of military training. It keeps the cost of the payroll down.

Why WOULD an airline wish to hire a 25 year old at a major when they could hire a 45.year old military retiree? Both are going to get paid based on their seniority.

Say both spend ten years climbing the FO Payscale, then become captains. That's a push for payroll. But then two years later both are going to go over 12 years, essentially maxing out top Payscale for a lot of airlines. But one guy is going to stay there for eight years and then retire - to be replaced if possible with another 45 year old and the process gets repeated. The other is going to stay there for 28 years and retire.

So which group of pilots is going to represent the LOWEST annual personnel cost to the airline over the course of their career? The guy who spends half of his career as an FO - who are needed on a pretty much one for one basis as captains - or the guy who spends three quarters of his career as a captain, most of that at the top of the Payscale? That's pretty simple arithmetic for the HR and accounting people to do.

No, given their druthers, the guys with the green eyeshades and sharp pencils will always prefer the older guy, other factors being essentially equal. The training cost of bringing two 45 year olds up to standard are trivial compared to the cost of bringing one 25 year old up to standard and then eventually paying him top scale for three decades.

Given their druthers, the accountants would rather start the 25 year olds out at a wholly owned regional, and keep him there for 20 years, plugging older flyers from the military and older OTS hires from somebody else's regional in above him so they can reset his seniority back to zero when he does eventually flow to the major.

It isn't personal, just bookkeeping.

This is the reason no major will staple a regional to its seniority list; always cheaper to reset.

But this also begs the question: why donít the majors just generally hire 53-year-olds? Seems like Delta doesnít mind young guys, and it seems like most mainline new hires are in their 30ís and 40ís.

GuardPolice
01-26-2019, 12:08 PM
This is the reason no major will staple a regional to its seniority list; always cheaper to reset.



But this also begs the question: why donít the majors just generally hire 53-year-olds? Seems like Delta doesnít mind young guys, and it seems like most mainline new hires are in their 30ís and 40ís.


IIRC, the average age since hiring resumed in 2014 has been about 37.

terminal
01-26-2019, 12:24 PM
I am sitting in a hotel having a crappy dinner at the Marriott. I meet a fellow pilot and ask him if he is here for The FedEx interview. He looks at me and says yes . I then find out that he is ex-Military, I believe Air Force and has never flown anything larger than a KIng Air. I am thinking this B.S. I have five type ratings with 121 pic and two check airman qualifications and a letter of rec. and can't get a call!!

Ever examine why youíre not getting ďthe callĒ?
I doubt it has anything to do with your resume.

Good luck.

sailingfun
01-26-2019, 12:34 PM
This is the reason no major will staple a regional to its seniority list; always cheaper to reset.

But this also begs the question: why donít the majors just generally hire 53-year-olds? Seems like Delta doesnít mind young guys, and it seems like most mainline new hires are in their 30ís and 40ís.

Most if not all major airlines use a feedback system for hiring. They note how new hires perform in the training programs and first year. They adjust their target hiring parameters based on that. If a segment demonstrates poor average performance itís going to handicap individuals from the background. Doesnít mean they wonít get hired but they will need a stronger resume.

galaxy flyer
01-26-2019, 12:41 PM
After 50+ years of intensive experience in hiring, mountains of data, probably tens of thousands of interviews, airlines have a real good idea of the person they believe will be successful employees generating profits and good will. They wouldn’t be hiring who they are hiring unless they were positively convinced those hires will work out.

Then, they watch every pilot’s performance over the years, more mountains of data of who handled the training, and more importantly, who performed during daily ops and in emergencies best. What backgrounds did best for the company. Any one pilots experience rating their peers is anecdotal compared to the data.

GF

Hacker15e
01-26-2019, 01:40 PM
Every time I read one of these threads, I have to wonder if folks just do not have the logic and reasoning skills to look at facts and come to some conclusions about why things are the way they are.

The airlines have a lot of experience hiring pilots, and a substantial economic motive to pick the "right" ones -- those who will likely pass training and not cause problems over the long term either as employees or technicians. Regardless of if you think their selection logic makes sense, most of them have very good reasons to interview and hire the people they do.

Don't understand why? The answers to all of that can be found posted many times over among the debris in threads on this very topic over the years here on APC. A couple posts in this thread already hit the nail on the head, regardless of if any of you want to believe the truth of what was posted.

It isn't personal, it is just business.

There isn't some conspiracy to benefit others over you -- life just isn't fair.

The folks who are hiring set the rules of the game, not any of us.

Packrat
01-26-2019, 02:17 PM
You know the standards for civilian too, it's called acs/pts.

And you know as well as I do that those standards aren't applied evenly.

PotatoChip
01-26-2019, 02:45 PM
And you know as well as I do that those standards aren't applied evenly.

At any 141 university they are pretty strictly followed.

Catboatsailor
01-26-2019, 04:27 PM
And you know as well as I do that those standards aren't applied evenly.

Itís anecdotal but says a lot. I know of a major airline with Sim training protocols set in place. They ideally pair a new hire military with a Captain switching airplanes, if thatís not available then an upgrading CA, then with a new hire regional pilot, last resort with another military new hire. The regional pilots they really donít worry about.

Claim what you want about standards in training but by the time civiallian applicants get to the level of Majors, itís a mute issue except for a few bad apples. Military pilots are smart to, they learn the game. Theyíre learning curve is much steeper. When it comes to comparing, apples to apples, 121 operational knowledge and experience, regional pilots are more qualified. Itís not a dig at military pilots, they catch up. Itís just the truth.

RckyMtHigh
01-26-2019, 04:40 PM
When it comes to comparing, apples to apples, 121 operational knowledge and experience, regional pilots are more qualified. Itís not a dig at military pilots, they catch up. Itís just the truth.

I would agree with that. I would also say the military pilot has probably had more hand-flying experience, has dealt with significantly more emergency and dynamic situations, and has had more opportunity in leadership roles.

An airline that draws from both of those pools is probably doing it right.

Mjm8710
01-26-2019, 04:43 PM
Most military pilots are brilliant...Most have engineering degrees, good to great gpaís, and a lot are academy graduates. Plus they served. Iím a 121 guy and I get it..it is what it is. At the same time, explain why a 23 year old that barely made it out of indoc got hired at a major over a lot of captains I fly with that have degrees, havenít failed checkrides, and have been applying for 10 years. Thatís the bigger question. Thatís the only time I shake my head, not about the military guys getting hired.

Regardless, keep working on your resume-volunteer, do the best you can at your job, and prep for the interviews and your time will come. At least thatís what I hope for myself.

Flying Boxes
01-26-2019, 04:53 PM
At any 141 university they are pretty strictly followed.

At what point does the 141 university kick someone out of flight training? After X number of failures? Or $x,000 amount of dollars?

PotatoChip
01-26-2019, 05:28 PM
At what point does the 141 university kick someone out of flight training? After X number of failures? Or $x,000 amount of dollars?

Probably after theyíve been placed in academic probation... you know, like a university. More to the point is that fact that they do fail students on checkrides, and those will affect their career.

Flying Boxes
01-26-2019, 05:57 PM
Probably after theyíve been placed in academic probation... you know, like a university. More to the point is that fact that they do fail students on checkrides, and those will affect their career.

3 bad days and AF pilots are pedestrians again. I think that is what Packrat and others were getting at. Doesnít mean 141 U/civic trained pilots are bad or lesser pilots. I have military friends not getting calls as well! Not a golden ticket either. :mad:

If a military pilot needs RJ time to ďqualifyĒ for major airlines. Do RJ pilots need to fly ACMI to get heavy jet, oceanic/international experience to be qualified to fly for majors? :rolleyes: All pilots have to learn new things when hired. Military pilots arenít ready for DEC but.learn quickly.

HR picks which pilots to interview, pilots are involved in the interviewing those selected. HR doesnít really care about flying after the minimums are exceeded, they look at other things. I donít agree with everything they consider but Iím not HR. :D

PotatoChip
01-26-2019, 06:13 PM
3 bad days and AF pilots are pedestrians again. I think that is what Packrat and others were getting at. Doesnít mean 141 U/civic trained pilots are bad or lesser pilots. I have military friends not getting calls as well! Not a golden ticket either. :mad:

If a military pilot needs RJ time to ďqualifyĒ for major airlines. Do RJ pilots need to fly ACMI to get heavy jet, oceanic/international experience to be qualified to fly for majors? :rolleyes: All pilots have to learn new things when hired. Military pilots arenít ready for DEC but.learn quickly.

HR picks which pilots to interview, pilots are involved in the interviewing those selected. HR doesnít really care about flying after the minimums are exceeded, they look at other things. I donít agree with everything they consider but Iím not HR. :D

Again, Iím not making this a pi$$ing contest, and feel that most airlines hire a good group of pilots. Iím just refuting what Packrat has said, ďBut, I wouldn't expect non-military types to even begin to comprehend that simple fact.Ē Yeah, because we ALL have such a hard time with simple facts, and understanding reasons why a military pilot is desirable. Thanks for that insult.
And, ďI'm never quite sure with a civilian background candidate. Its expensive to get a guy in class only to find out he can't cut the mustard either in the sim or on IOE.Ē Really? You donít know what youíre getting with a UND grad with a 3.8 who went to Envoy, was a Line Check Airman and has 1300 TPIC. Really?? Sure, you might not know with a part 61 trainee who then went to a part 91 corporate job and flew King Airs for a few years, but letís not use such a broad stroke, shall we?
I have NO idea what algorithms are used. Seems a good mix of pilots gets through overall, with the occasional dud from both sides of the fence.

Sputnik
01-26-2019, 06:18 PM
Most military pilots are brilliant...Most have engineering degrees, good to great gpaís, and a lot are academy graduates.

Brilliant? Appreciate the sentiment, but let's not get carried away.

HIFLYR
01-26-2019, 06:40 PM
And you know as well as I do that those standards aren't applied evenly.

Be honest you know in the military they arenít either! Bad ones fall through the cracks civillian and military.

Dolphinflyer
01-26-2019, 07:00 PM
I'm not impressed with any of you unless you've been an underpaid, overworked Part 135 20 Series Lear Charter pilot flying some borderline, but definitely drunk crackheads changing their destination from PWK to LAS at 10pm while over GRR into your 14 hour day.

Air Force Academy guys, "Don't we get a Mission Planning Day before this?" :D

(It's a joke, ;) Plenty of locked in thinking knuckleheads from all backgrounds in these situations)

trip
01-26-2019, 07:16 PM
It doesn't have anything to do with worship. When I interview an ex-military pilot I KNOW the standardization of training and qualifications that he/she has been required to meet over the course of his/her career.

I KNOW for a fact that they didn't "earn" their licenses at some cheesy Mom and Pop FBO that will pass you as long as you can pay. They didn't get their type ratings at some sim center that will sign you off when your check clears.

They didn't get their PIC experience at some backwater "regional" airline that flies between Denver and Gillette three times a day.

That's why ex-military guys get preference. But, I wouldn't expect non-military types to even begin to comprehend that simple fact.

Didn't you just say you're interviewing NAI guys in that other thread? LOL!!!
I'll give equal standing to the one who's been flying pax into GCC at midnight as the kingair intel gatherer (drones around for hours in circles). Your personality will probably be the deciding factor.

freezingflyboy
01-26-2019, 07:51 PM
Again, Iím not making this a pi$$ing contest, and feel that most airlines hire a good group of pilots. Iím just refuting what Packrat has said, ďBut, I wouldn't expect non-military types to even begin to comprehend that simple fact.Ē Yeah, because we ALL have such a hard time with simple facts, and understanding reasons why a military pilot is desirable. Thanks for that insult.
And, ďI'm never quite sure with a civilian background candidate. Its expensive to get a guy in class only to find out he can't cut the mustard either in the sim or on IOE.Ē Really? You donít know what youíre getting with a UND grad with a 3.8 who went to Envoy, was a Line Check Airman and has 1300 TPIC. Really?? Sure, you might not know with a part 61 trainee who then went to a part 91 corporate job and flew King Airs for a few years, but letís not use such a broad stroke, shall we?
I have NO idea what algorithms are used. Seems a good mix of pilots gets through overall, with the occasional dud from both sides of the fence.

Your comment reminded me of a conversation I had on the flight deck a few months back. Captain (mil background) is moaning about all these "darn RJ guys working for C-scale pay doing flying WE should be doing at MAINLINE!" As a former RJ guy I of course took umbrage with his comments and pointed out that the seeds of the current ecosystem of large RJ carriers were laid many moons ago by his generation of pilots before most of the "darn RJ guys" were even in high school. And that almost to a person, those "darn RJ guys" would happily watch their carrier wither on the vine if it meant a shot at more mainline jobs. He did agree that it wasnt possible for solely the military to supply the need for pilots in this country. His answer when I asked him what path he would suggest for aspiring civilian pilots if not the regionals? Fly corporate:confused:

Talk about a total head scratcher and real lack of SA with how the industry works.

dera
01-26-2019, 09:12 PM
The only thing that annoys me about the mil guys is their sense of entitlement.
"Yeah, I'm only here for a year and then I'm off to a major. I just need to tick the 121 box".
I'm not kidding - a guy said this the day before he failed is SV.
And it's probably still true...

Floobs
01-26-2019, 10:54 PM
The only thing that annoys me about the mil guys is their sense of entitlement.
"Yeah, I'm only here for a year and then I'm off to a major. I just need to tick the 121 box".
I'm not kidding - a guy said this the day before he failed is SV.
And it's probably still true...

They should have to start out at the bottom like the rest of us.

dera
01-26-2019, 11:19 PM
They should have to start out at the bottom like the rest of us.

I don't care if they get picked up before the rest, life ain't always fair. It's the entitlement I don't like. It must suck to fly with someone like that. "I didn't do my walkaround because it's raining outside. And who cares, I'm out of here in a year anyway".

This guy was the only one to fail the SV, and I can almost guarantee he will have his major interviews lined up before anyone else.

captjns
01-27-2019, 04:23 AM
This guy was the only one to fail the SV, and I can almost guarantee he will have his major interviews lined up before anyone else.

But then again NOT... and the individual will continue to pay his dues?

Hacker15e
01-27-2019, 04:59 AM
They should have to start out at the bottom like the rest of us.

They do.

What you mean is that you think military flying time shouldn't count for anything when it comes to applying for civilian flying jobs, as some sort of way to "even" the playing field?

Taco280AI
01-27-2019, 05:10 AM
Most people put in their time and pay their dues whether it is military, corporate or 121. Complaining about others isn't going to help you achieve your goals.

I know nothing of the corporate flying world, so won't say anything about that. I do know 121 is the easiest job I've had. Military you get less flying hours, but there is a lot more involved than simply flying and if you haven't done it then you really have no idea.

The head scratcher I can understand is the 23 year old that goes to mainline with 2500 hours while good 6000 hour pilots can't get a call. Does mom or dad work there? Do they check a box that gets certain consideration? Did they simply luck out? Who knows. But knocking them doesn't help you out.

rightside02
01-27-2019, 05:37 AM
To add to the million repeated responses, I happened to fly with a Alpa training rep at United , he said the the guys that have been at XYZ regional for 15 plus years have the highest failure/termination rate. Said the numbers just donít lie . Old dogs stuck in their ways and have a harder time learning new tricks I guess. I was pretty surprised by the numbers he was showing me of guys having problems and their backgrounds. Meanwhile the young kids surely
Donít have the same history , will learn anything you show them . I mean give a 2 year old a iPad , 30 seconds later he works it better than you. Meanwhile Tom 57 who still uses DOS 2.0 gets overwhelmed by it .

The OP may not have any issues in training and may be a star , but the guys before you have not paved a pretty path for you , it seems.

Best of luck , frustrating I know . Keep at it .

Airbum
01-27-2019, 05:41 AM
[QUOTE=PotatoChip;2750628]Probably after theyíve been placed in academic probation... you know, like a university. More to the point is that fact that they do fail students on checkrides, and those will affect their career.[/QUOTE

I went to a 141 school, It was pay your money until you pass. The trainee was the person paying all the bills and supporting the school.

Entry requirements for a 141 school where much lower the Navy/USAF fixed wing training. If you could pass and class 3 and pay money you where a student at a 141 program.

TeamSasquatch
01-27-2019, 05:50 AM
I'll give equal standing to the one who's been flying pax into GCC at midnight as the kingair intel gatherer (drones around for hours in circles). Your personality will probably be the deciding factor.

Iím glad Iíve been to Gillette a few times! Never figured it would weigh so heavily in my career goals! :D

rickair7777
01-27-2019, 06:08 AM
To add to the million repeated responses, I happened to fly with a Alpa training rep at United , he said the the guys that have been at XYZ regional for 15 plus years have the highest failure/termination rate. Said the numbers just donít lie . Old dogs stuck in their ways and have a harder time learning new tricks I guess. I was pretty surprised by the numbers he was showing me of guys having problems and their backgrounds. Meanwhile the young kids surely
Donít have the same history , will learn anything you show them . I mean give a 2 year old a iPad , 30 seconds later he works it better than you. Meanwhile Tom 57 who still uses DOS 2.0 gets overwhelmed by it .

The OP may not have any issues in training and may be a star , but the guys before you have not paved a pretty path for you , it seems.

All true.

If they've been in the same seat in the same jet for 10+ years they are likely to have trouble in training, especially if they're much over age 40.

Once they get on line there have been a lot of issues with that demographic not adapting to a new culture, and especially their new role as a new-hire FO.



Best of luck , frustrating I know . Keep at it .

You have to go full-court-press, network, job fairs, keep the apps updated. Get a new type if you can. Volunteer for union, professional-related organizations, etc. Get in shape, get groomed, and get a new suit. That first impression is huge, and it doesn't have to be "old" or "tired".

Hiring is just starting to ramp up so the opportunity will come , but of course it's better to get hired sooner rather than later.

rickair7777
01-27-2019, 06:29 AM
They should have to start out at the bottom like the rest of us.

Wish in one hand, poop in the other, see which one fills up first.

The best majors essentially feel they have plenty of qualified (ie safe) pilot applications, so they are trying to cherry-pick those who fit their version of the "good employee" template.

Military officers often went to "name brand" schools, often on scholarships, often athletes, usually have a masters, always have leadership, management, and organizational skills. If they've completed ten years, they demonstrated a continuously upward progression in skill, responsibility, and leadership. That's all good "organizational fit" stuff. I have know civilian-only RJ drivers who had similar resumes, they generally get scooped up by majors pretty quickly too.

Mil pilots are not all chuck yeager, it's possible to be a "good enough" military pilot and still be a good organizational player. Military "good enough" is probably also going to equate to civilian "good enough". Fighter/attack pilots are by definition selected from the higher ranked primary training output, they have a very busy mission (ie lots of work and training), and almost all of them today actually do both fighter and attack missions, so really two jobs. And more aerobatic maneuver flight than most other communities. If you want to prove yourself as an aviator there's really no better way to do it. Flying your line in the right seat of an RJ and playing lots of video games on your days off doesn't really stack up (yes I had an RJ FO complain about how the fighter pilots were getting all the jobs... he felt that as some sort of "ranked" video gamer his skills were better than a fighter pilot).

As I said, civilians with similar resumes have no problem getting major jobs. Even without fighter time.

rickair7777
01-27-2019, 06:33 AM
The only thing that annoys me about the mil guys is their sense of entitlement.
"Yeah, I'm only here for a year and then I'm off to a major. I just need to tick the 121 box".
I'm not kidding - a guy said this the day before he failed is SV.
And it's probably still true...

Keep in mind if you were anywhere near them, they were not the cream of military aviation, or not current, or not both...

They are not helping themselves but transmitting attitude. Guys like that might be around longer than they think.

Airway
01-27-2019, 06:56 AM
It doesn't have anything to do with worship. When I interview an ex-military pilot I KNOW the standardization of training and qualifications that he/she has been required to meet over the course of his/her career.

I KNOW for a fact that they didn't "earn" their licenses at some cheesy Mom and Pop FBO that will pass you as long as you can pay. They didn't get their type ratings at some sim center that will sign you off when your check clears.

They didn't get their PIC experience at some backwater "regional" airline that flies between Denver and Gillette three times a day.

That's why ex-military guys get preference. But, I wouldn't expect non-military types to even begin to comprehend that simple fact.

That "backwater regional flying" comment...I can't believe an airline put you on their hiring team. That's not only offensive, but also incredibly ignorant.

I get that you prefer the military pilots, but your reasons for that might have a poor foundation.

Some of the best experience I got was flying turboprops into those "backwater" airports late at night after honing in on the NDB and keying the runway lights to land, in a crew environment.

Yeah pretty worthless stuff :rolleyes:

If you don't think those experiences contributed to what I do at the majors, you're mistaken.

CoefficientX
01-27-2019, 07:00 AM
Military officers often went to "name brand" schools, often on scholarships, often athletes, usually have a masters, always have leadership, management, and organizational skills. If they've completed ten years, they demonstrated a continuously upward progression in skill, responsibility, and leadership. That's all good "organizational fit" stuff. I have know civilian-only RJ drivers who had similar resumes, they generally get scooped up by majors pretty quickly too.

Mil pilots are not all chuck yeager, it's possible to be a "good enough" military pilot and still be a good organizational player. Military "good enough" is probably also going to equate to civilian "good enough". Fighter/attack pilots are by definition selected from the higher ranked primary training output, they have a very busy mission (ie lots of work and training), and almost all of them today actually do both fighter and attack missions, so really two jobs. And more aerobatic maneuver flight than most other communities. If you want to prove yourself as an aviator there's really no better way to do it. Flying your line in the right seat of an RJ and playing lots of video games on your days off doesn't really stack up (yes I had an RJ FO complain about how the fighter pilots were getting all the jobs... he felt that as some sort of "ranked" video gamer his skills were better than a fighter pilot).

After 19 years in the right seat of my major airline I can say I see no difference in airmanship between civilian and military. Iíve flown with excellent captains, military and civilian and Iíve also flown with not so excellent captains, military and civilians.

Letís not make the assumption that all pilots tried to get in the military and only the best made it. There are plenty of outstanding pilots that had no desire whatsoever to join the military.

Lots of chest thumping going on here. After 19 years of observation from the right seat I can say to all the ex military guys who think just because you are ex military youíre better than the civilian guys........you arenít.

Poser765
01-27-2019, 07:01 AM
That "backwater regional flying" comment...I can't believe an airline put you on their hiring team. That's not only offensive, but also incredibly ignorant.

I get that you prefer the military pilots, but your reasons for that might have a poor foundation.no might. They do.

Joachim
01-27-2019, 07:10 AM
Didn't you just say you're interviewing NAI guys in that other thread? LOL!!!
I'll give equal standing to the one who's been flying pax into GCC at midnight as the kingair intel gatherer (drones around for hours in circles). Your personality will probably be the deciding factor.


My NAS training experience was seven months long. It consisted of an EASA medical and Norwegian air force swim test, One month at Boeing Miami, one month in Norway doing corporate training including CRM with an ex Norwegian air force pilot psychologist. We did the cabin crew cooperation CRM course and security equipment training with British Airways. My three line trainers were a Dutch ex-navy instructor with over 20 years of TRI/TRE experience at KLM, an ex Luftwaffe Tornado instructor, and an Emirates TRI/TRE. Many in my class were ex military and we had a couple of Red Bull racers at the company as well.


You may not like the political aspect of Norwegian but to say the training experience is somehow subpar to U.S. domestic or even a regional carriers is completely disconnected from reality.

terminal
01-27-2019, 07:18 AM
After 19 years in the right seat of my major airline I can say I see no difference in airmanship between civilian and military. Iíve flown with excellent captains, military and civilian and Iíve also flown with not so excellent captains, military and civilians.

Letís not make the assumption that all pilots tried to get in the military and only the best made it. There are plenty of outstanding pilots that had no desire whatsoever to join the military.

Lots of chest thumping going on here. After 19 years of observation from the right seat I can say to all the ex military guys who think just because you are ex military youíre better than the civilian guys........you arenít.
Seriously? You saw his comment as chest thumping?
Basically what it boils down to is that a

1. military officer in his 30s has done much more than just fly a plane.
2. Theyíre a known quantity. Thereís a huge difference between North dakota and a mom and pop FBO, thereís even a difference between Purdue and Embry Riddle. You donít see those differences on military flight school with the exception of the Navy vs the Air Force

chronomaster31
01-27-2019, 07:20 AM
Seriously? You saw his comment as chest thumping?

Basically what it boils down to is that a 1. military officer in his 30s has done much more than just fly a plane.

2. The requirements to get winged are very standardized.What exactly constitutes "very standardized" versus "standardized"

Sent from my LG-H931 using Tapatalk

CoefficientX
01-27-2019, 07:22 AM
Seriously? You saw his comment as chest thumping?
Basically what it boils down to is that a

1. military officer in his 30s has done much more than just fly a plane.
2. Theyíre a known quantity. Thereís a huge difference between North dakota and a mom and pop FBO, thereís even a difference between Purdue and Embry Riddle. You donít see those differences on military flight school with the exception of the Navy vs the Air Force

I see chest thumping throughout the thread.

And apparently you locked on my chest thumping comment and read nothing else.

terminal
01-27-2019, 07:22 AM
What exactly constitutes "very standardized" versus "standardized"

Sent from my LG-H931 using Tapatalk

Is there standardization between mom and pop FBO and North Dakota? Is there a difference in the type of pilot that comes out of there?
Iíd say so.

terminal
01-27-2019, 07:24 AM
I see chest thumping throughout the thread.

And you didnít read past my chest thumping comment apparently.

Oh the part where you said we arenít hot stuff? Which is basically you doubling down on your chest thumping comment. Thereís no chest thumping going on.
After 19 years, yeah weíre all the same, but in the context of new hires. the hiring board looks at a 40 year old military officer differently than they look at a 23 year old-and they should.

Packrat
01-27-2019, 07:27 AM
Seriously? You saw his comment as chest thumping?
Basically what it boils down to is that a

1. military officer in his 30s has done much more than just fly a plane.
2. Theyíre a known quantity. Thereís a huge difference between North dakota and a mom and pop FBO, thereís even a difference between Purdue and Embry Riddle.

Exactly my point. I'm referring to TRAINING and qualification period. If I'm talking to an ex-military or UND guy I know what I'm getting (P.S. I'm a graduate of the UND Accident Investigation Course). I've seen the license mills in operation as well.

I also recognize the difference between what it takes to get accepted to a military pilot training program and if Mommy and Daddy can write a check to Mom and Pop.


It appears from all the butthurt that has been exhibited on this thread you "Mom and Pop" guys recognize the truth. You have quite a chip on your collective shoulders.

chronomaster31
01-27-2019, 07:30 AM
Is there standardization between mom and pop FBO and North Dakota? Is there a difference in the type of pilot that comes out of there?

Iíd say so.Sounds more like a personal opinion rather than a claim backed up by data

Sent from my LG-H931 using Tapatalk

Airway
01-27-2019, 07:30 AM
Exactly my point. I'm referring to TRAINING and qualification period. If I'm talking to an ex-military or UND guy I know what I'm getting (P.S. I'm a graduate of the UND Accident Investigation Course). I've seen the license mills in operation as well.

I also recognize the difference between what it takes to get accepted to a military pilot training program and if Mommy and Daddy can write a check to Mom and Pop.


It appears from all the butthurt that has been exhibited on this thread you "Mom and Pop" guys recognize the truth. You have quite a chip on your collective shoulders.

Mom and pop FBOs bring a huge variety of experience. And most airlines like diversity of experience for the same reasons Universities don't often hire their own graduates as professors.

Everyone brings something. The sad thing isn't any butthurt, it's the fact that someone with that extreme sort of prejudice is in a hiring position.

Packrat
01-27-2019, 07:33 AM
Everyone brings something. The sad thing isn't any butthurt, it's the fact that someone with that extreme sort of prejudice is in a hiring position.


Better get used to it. The simple fact is the airline hiring process will always tilt toward military trained pilots.

TeamSasquatch
01-27-2019, 07:36 AM
Sweet..... now we can debate UND vs ERAU vs 61!

Iíll start the popcorn!

CoefficientX
01-27-2019, 07:39 AM
Better get used to it. The simple fact is the airline hiring process will always tilt toward military trained pilots.

If anyone is coming across here as butthurt itís you. Youíre not happy about being challenged and probably because you havenít been saluted in awhile.

My original observations remain unchanged. I have flown with outstanding captains, military and civilian. Iím not seeing where all the leadership courses etc are creating a better 121 captain. Itís a simple observation and itís my own. If that doesnít sit well with you, thatís on you.

Joachim
01-27-2019, 07:39 AM
Better get used to it. The simple fact is the airline hiring process will always tilt toward military trained pilots.


The actual truth is that the interview panel consists of human beings. Human beings identify with people who share similar views and experiences. The experienced and older pilots are the ones involved involved in hiring. As long as the older generation are predominantly military there will be a strong bias towards people with military background. Rationalizations to support that bias will sometimes be based in reality and other times be just that: rationalizations.


We as pilots often mistake the world outside our cockpit to be based on facts, numbers, and statistics as we've been trained to do.

Airway
01-27-2019, 07:40 AM
Better get used to it. The simple fact is the airline hiring process will always tilt toward military trained pilots.

You're dense if that's what you took away... Or you're unsure how to bow out so you're arguing something different now.

I have nothing against the military dominance in the airline world. I understand it. Most of my friends at work are former fighter guys, and they would not agree with you.

I was commenting on your poor judgement and lack of understanding of the way civilian pilots are brought up.

As far as butthurt, the OP definitely was. But you took the thread in an entirely different direction.

JetDoc
01-27-2019, 07:42 AM
What you state is exactly why mil guys get hired. Most have fantastic resumes on the non flying side including masters degrees, good to excellent performance in college, lots of leadership schools combined with lots of actual leadership experience. I find many civilian pilots focus on the flying and neglect to build out the rest of their resume.

LOL! A masters to fly an airplane! What a colossal waste of an education. You are blue collar my friend, by every definition of the term. You punch a time clock every time the door is shut and the brake is dropped and you punch it again the second the brake is set and the door is opened. Once again though, your over-inflated sense of self value and self worth is duly noted.

terminal
01-27-2019, 07:45 AM
If anyone is coming across here as butthurt itís you. Youíre not happy about being challenged and probably because you havenít been saluted in awhile.

My original observations remain unchanged. I have flown with outstanding captains, military and civilian. Iím not seeing where all the leadership courses etc are creating a better 121 captain. Itís a simple observation and itís my own. If that doesnít sit well with you, thatís on you.

I thought the theme of the thread is that some 26 year old was butthurt because a military guy got a FEDEX interview, and he canít.
The premise of the entire thread is that military guys shouldnít be hired because of their lack of 121 experience. Which stops mattering after about a month on the line.

The thread started with a butthurt RJ guy discrediting another pilot.

MiLa
01-27-2019, 07:47 AM
Honestly why? We just fly from point A to B. This career requires a very specific set of skills.

That is true but eventually most will be captains... moving to the left seat entails a lot more than learning captain flows. Leadership and mentorship is a part of what makes a great captain, all of which involves a lot more than the specific skill set to fly from point A to B.

Floobs
01-27-2019, 07:49 AM
They do.

What you mean is that you think military flying time shouldn't count for anything when it comes to applying for civilian flying jobs, as some sort of way to "even" the playing field?

Not in the industry.

That is true but eventually most will be captains... moving to the left seat entails a lot more than learning captain flows. Leadership and mentorship is a part of what makes a great captain, all of which involves a lot more than the specific skill set to fly from point A to B.

For the Most part the job is the same. Very little extra ďleadershipĒ is required.

CoefficientX
01-27-2019, 07:52 AM
The thread started with a butthurt RJ guy discrediting another pilot.

Agree 100%

It morphed into something else along the way.

captjns
01-27-2019, 08:01 AM
Sweet..... now we can debate UND vs ERAU vs 61!

Iíll start the popcorn!

Lightly salted and buttered please😀

Packrat
01-27-2019, 08:02 AM
Agree 100%

It morphed into something else along the way.

And it continues due to the defensiveness of non-military trained pilots. Perhaps they recognize something after all...:rolleyes:

CoefficientX
01-27-2019, 08:05 AM
And it continues due to the defensiveness of non-military trained pilots. Perhaps they recognize something after all...:rolleyes:

Iím not biting. Nice try.

TeamSasquatch
01-27-2019, 08:07 AM
Lightly salted and buttered please😀

You got it! Still have 15 pages to go before the ETC (expect thread closed) of 25 pages.

vagabond
01-27-2019, 08:09 AM
You got it! Still have 15 pages to go before the ETC (expect thread closed) of 25 pages.

I changed the title of this thread.

Hope y'all like the new name! :)

TeamSasquatch
01-27-2019, 08:17 AM
I changed the title of this thread.

Hope y'all like the new name! :)

+1

Filler

labbats
01-27-2019, 08:24 AM
Iíve trained civilians and Iíve trained military. Some were good and some were bad... on both sides.

Iíve flown thousands of hours from both seats in the airlines. Some with military and some with civilians. Some were good and some were bad... on both sides.

The difference is that civilians wonít inherently think they are better than military because we respect and honor their sacrifices.

captjns
01-27-2019, 08:36 AM
Honestly why? We just fly from point A to B. This career requires a very specific set of skills.

Yep. Positive rate... gear up. 400’ LNAV, Center Autopilot - Command. 10,000’ lights off. Transition Level... Set STD. Now where’s my Sunday Times Magazine Crossword Puzzle?;)

Peacock
01-27-2019, 09:14 AM
Not in the industry.



For the Most part the job is the same. Very little extra ďleadershipĒ is required.

Tell us more about how the military should be disbanded, Marx should be required reading in schools, China is a better place to live, the FFDO program is a waste of time and...

Military pilots should start at the bottom ďlike the rest of usĒ. You seem to be an excellent source of informed opinions.

vessbot
01-27-2019, 09:16 AM
The difference is that civilians wonít inherently think they are better than military because we respect and honor their sacrifices.

I dunno, this thread was started with a post complaining about a military pilot with subpar qualifications getting the call first.

Hacker15e
01-27-2019, 09:21 AM
I dunno, this thread was started with a post complaining about a military pilot with subpar qualifications getting the call first.

Where in the post did it say anything about the mil guy's "qualifications" relative to "par"?

All he said was that the guy...
has never flown anything larger than a KIng Air.

Is size of largest aircraft flown relative to a King Air a major component of "qualifications" for getting an interview at FedEx?

Hacker15e
01-27-2019, 09:25 AM
Not in the industry.

For the Most part the job is the same. Very little extra “leadership” is required.

Troll game getting kind of weak here, dude.

"The industry" is apparently so complex that the airmanship that military guys get during their careers is apparently not sufficient to skip years of experience-building at a regional....but the 121 gig is also simultaneously so simple that a move to the left seat barely requires more knowledge or experience than the right seat.

Riiiiiight.

rickair7777
01-27-2019, 09:35 AM
After 19 years in the right seat of my major airline I can say I see no difference in airmanship between civilian and military. I’ve flown with excellent captains, military and civilian and I’ve also flown with not so excellent captains, military and civilians.

Like I said, there's such a thing as "good enough" pilots.

Mil people bring more to the table than basic pilot skills, and it's a known predictable quantity. This is how HR looks at it.

Also to "graduate" from the military requires a lot of work ethic. But there's nothing that forces such graduates to keep up the pace once they get to the airlines. Some of them certainly slack off.


Let’s not make the assumption that all pilots tried to get in the military and only the best made it. There are plenty of outstanding pilots that had no desire whatsoever to join the military.

Not so much. I grew up in civil aviation, I've flown with all of them. Most wanted to fly in the mil. The ones who didn't were typically on the wealthier side.


Lots of chest thumping going on here. After 19 years of observation from the right seat I can say to all the ex military guys who think just because you are ex military you’re better than the civilian guys........you aren’t.


Without getting into the details, I did the full civilian track up to RJ's. Seen both worlds.

The "average" military guy jumped through a lot more hurdles and filters than the "average" civilian. Some of that is because they were forced to, I certainly benefited from military structure when I was young. It's a combination of screening/filtering, and the experience gained.

But again, it's as much about "good employee" as "good pilot". According to HR, which is the left seat on hiring.

You could make the same argument about industry, nuclear power plants, etc. They all like to hire ex-military officers too. Many big companies have custom fast-track management programs for ex-mil. Why should THEY hire mil?

Bottom line, this is pee-ing into the wind.

ItnStln
01-27-2019, 09:43 AM
My NAS training experience was seven months long. It consisted of an EASA medical and Norwegian air force swim test, One month at Boeing Miami, one month in Norway doing corporate training including CRM with an ex Norwegian air force pilot psychologist. We did the cabin crew cooperation CRM course and security equipment training with British Airways. My three line trainers were a Dutch ex-navy instructor with over 20 years of TRI/TRE experience at KLM, an ex Luftwaffe Tornado instructor, and an Emirates TRI/TRE. Many in my class were ex military and we had a couple of Red Bull racers at the company as well.


You may not like the political aspect of Norwegian but to say the training experience is somehow subpar to U.S. domestic or even a regional carriers is completely disconnected from reality.

Was this at NAI?

captjns
01-27-2019, 09:54 AM
You got it! Still have 15 pages to go before the ETC (expect thread closed) of 25 pages.

Want some in the mean time?

dawgdriver
01-27-2019, 10:01 AM
The best majors essentially feel they have plenty of qualified (ie safe) pilot applications, so they are trying to cherry-pick those who fit their version of the "good employee" template.

Military officers often went to "name brand" schools, often on scholarships, often athletes, usually have a masters, always have leadership, management, and organizational skills. If they've completed ten years, they demonstrated a continuously upward progression in skill, responsibility, and leadership. That's all good "organizational fit" stuff. I have know civilian-only RJ drivers who had similar resumes, they generally get scooped up by majors pretty quickly too.



^^^this^^^

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iI9Hfqbuz

So amusing. Couldn't resist.

After years spent on a hiring committee, I can assure you HR doesn't care "who the best pilot is"; the application process itself ensures the minimum experience, training, licensing and skill sets are met. As with any labor group, HR looks for the best fit with the fewest potential problems. No headaches, no liabilities, plain and simple. FWIW, I've spent a career flying with both Mil and Civ, trained both, and seen equally great--and horrible, with both. The mil guys justifiably take a bit more time to spool up to -121, but generally at a rate few accountants would quibble over, given the end product is delivered.

HR teams use proven, straightforward methods in their screening process to find their 'lowest risk' candidate': flush out potential training liabilities ("...Any training failures, accidents, incidents"?) followed by what kind of employee you will be?: happy 'company pilot' who spreads the cheer to customers and fellow employees, rarely calls out sick, average joe, or 'disgruntled, sick call abuser, union thug, blah, blah. Ain't rocket surgery...

Notice the -121 folks getting called first are generally the ones who've filled the leadership/management boxes on their application: College? What level? GPA? Instructor, Check airman, Chief Pilot, Ass. Chief pilot, etc.

Why? Documented evidence aligning priorities listed above (liability, good fit, etc)

A) Proven abilities to handle challenges associated with trainees
B) Selected among peers to represent the company
C) Inclined to align with 'company values'
D) Generally positive attitude

All other things being equal, makes sense.

As for the Mil guys, same logic: most were officers, which by definition are management material (at least on paper). Fully documented management, leadership and flight training, disciplined, from reputable schools, successfully competed for limited OTS, ROTC, or Service Academy slots. In management's eyes, cutting one's teeth in such highly structured environments causes one to be more conformist, conservative, and management-minded than civilian counterparts. In other words, 'company-men', less likely to follow the dreaded union mindset. That may change later (often does), but to HR, that's the product. Throw in a secondary income and medical and the picture should become clearer.

Bottom line: "It's not your flying, Maverick..."

To the OP: be patient; barring a catastrophe, you'll get your call eventually. The stunning numbers of retirements will ensure those who meet the mins and can fog a mirror will get the call.

Burton78
01-27-2019, 10:02 AM
I changed the title of this thread.



Hope y'all like the new name! :)



Accurate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CAirBear
01-27-2019, 10:17 AM
I changed the title of this thread.

Hope y'all like the new name! :)

Cool. And you could also start by closing it as well.

Sincerely,

Everyone

kevbo
01-27-2019, 10:25 AM
On the maintenance side, military kids make the best worker bees. They will go farther, faster, and ask for less than most civilians that tend to look out for themselves. Airlines are structured so that kids with military backgrounds are right at home. They usually do poorly in GA where a mechanic has to be crafty.

DWC CAP10 USAF
01-27-2019, 10:38 AM
https://www.reddit.com/r/reactiongifs/comments/7vc5kl/mrw_was_i_see_another_tide_ad/

ShyGuy
01-27-2019, 11:10 AM
Looking at the Fedex Milennial oddity thread, it doesnít seem to be military guys having problems...

vessbot
01-27-2019, 11:12 AM
Where in the post did it say anything about the mil guy's "qualifications" relative to "par"?

All he said was that the guy...


Is size of largest aircraft flown relative to a King Air a major component of "qualifications" for getting an interview at FedEx?

I don't know, that's a matter between FedEx and... FedEx. But the post clearly compared the size of the military pilot's airplane experience as negative against the poster's own 5 type ratings, 2 check pilot quals, and 121 command time. That comparison was so clear that he characterized the resulting decision as "BS." I'm straining at how it can possibly be intended, or read, in a different way.

Hacker15e
01-27-2019, 11:37 AM
I don't know, that's a matter between FedEx and... FedEx. But the post clearly compared the size of the military pilot's airplane experience as negative against the poster's own 5 type ratings, 2 check pilot quals, and 121 command time. That comparison was so clear that he characterized the resulting decision as "BS." I'm straining at how it can possibly be intended, or read, in a different way.

You're the one who used the phrase "subpar qualifications", not the OP.

Sub par for whom? "Negative" for whom?

Obviously not sub par for the pilot hiring folks at FedEx, but apparently in the minds of a bunch of posters in this thread (including the OP) who are not professionally evaluating the qualifications of pilots being interviewed at Purple.

The reasons for the situation the OP encountered have been covered well in several other posts in this thread, and given that info, the "nothing larger than a King Air" benchmark isn't an indicator of "subpar qualifications."

Prettywhacked1
01-27-2019, 11:40 AM
Read back through this thread........lots of opinions, so Iíll offer my .02........

Iíve had many guys & a few gals next to me in the cockpit lead (or answer during intros at cruise) with the ďI was gonna go fly in the (fill in the branch of service here), BUT (insert excuse here).......Ē

Never had a veteran lead (or same reply) with ,ďI wish I couldíve gotten here (seat) without serving my country, but came up blank.....Ē

Any questions?

vessbot
01-27-2019, 12:04 PM
You're the one who used the phrase "subpar qualifications", not the OP.
Yes it was a 2 word summary of a longer post, so I can make a quick reference to it. He didn't actually say that phrase, (and if it is a false characterization of his post, he has my apologies) yet I think it's an accurate summary (as do you apparently, since you literally wrote that it is "in the minds of a bunch of posters" here, yet nobody used it.)


Sub par for whom? "Negative" for whom?


The original poster, of course. This should be obvious since I've been talking about him since the beginning. Who else?

The reasons for the situation the OP encountered have been covered well in several other posts in this thread, and given that info, the "nothing larger than a King Air" benchmark isn't an indicator of "subpar qualifications."

I agree. A huge deal is often made about 121 experience, and it matters some, but I don't think it is the end all be all. Yes one should go through at least a few IROPS (both summer and winter) before doing it in the left seat, but all the 121 stuff can be learned on the job (and is, every day), especially by someone with leadership and management experience in a dynamic environment. What's far more difficult to learn on the job is how to fly. The training curriculum already assumes you can do it, and you need that in your background. I think someone in this thread said that in 121 you need a very specific specific set of skills, and that's partly true. What you need going into the job, is the generalist set of skills of an aviator and pilot (yes pilot, not just "automation manager"). That, from how I've seen things described, is something the military does. Civilian background, it's hit or miss depending on each person's history. The specialist skills of 121 are gained on the job and developed in the right seat.

at6d
01-27-2019, 12:14 PM
Factual evidence? LOL yeah some fishing there for sure.

My best tool to bring the best of the best pilots down to earth (military or civilian) for a bit is my antique bare bones no electrical system 65hp fabric and wood tailwheel airplane.

I wanted to fly military. Like from age 5 bad. Lucky for you top guns out there, they stopped issuing waivers for color vision during the early 90’s drawdown. I basically got the TBNT.

In my 20 years of being paid to fly, I have learned that the military airline guys can be further categorized by branch and aircraft.

With humor in mind, I’ve learned:

F-15 guys are typically pretty wound up. Very much into “the book says exactly this.” Chardonnay drinkers, and only one. Lots of rules and books. And micro managing the energy. Like a lot.

F-16 guys are less wound up knowing that they can pull on the stick and engage without worrying about over G. They like to use this against F-15’s. They love Germany. They like to live in Colorado Springs and drink Coors Light.

A-10 guys speak with one volume, loud. They drink straight whiskey. They have mixed emotions that the currrent fight is a high one, not a low one. Whatever that means. They like football and avoiding icing conditions of any kind.

Navy Hornet guys are fairly relaxed. They love Top Gun. And the boat. Those that flew Tomcats wish they still flew them. They don’t want to discuss the volleyball scene. Lots of high fives.

Marine Aviators hate the boat and don’t give a **** about rules or any other branch of service for that matter. Tequila shooters and stories about Okinawa and fighting sailors. They are part of the infantry.

Cobra guys like Air Force installations because of ice cream and air conditioning. They know nothing about not being deployed. They are also infantry.

AH64 guys are usually serious and quiet. They have generally killed any sort of military vehicle used in battle.

C-17, C-130, KC, and C-5 crews like breaking down in a Caribbean destination. Or Australia.

AC-130 guys are angry at the leadership.

Anyhow, thank you vets for your service. Glad to fly with you.

Burton78
01-27-2019, 12:22 PM
Factual evidence? LOL yeah some fishing there for sure.



My best tool to bring the best of the best pilots down to earth (military or civilian) for a bit is my antique bare bones no electrical system 65hp fabric and wood tailwheel airplane.



I wanted to fly military. Like from age 5 bad. Lucky for you top guns out there, they stopped issuing waivers for color vision during the early 90ís drawdown. I basically got the TBNT.



In my 20 years of being paid to fly, I have learned that the military airline guys can be further categorized by branch and aircraft.



With humor in mind, Iíve learned:



F-15 guys are typically pretty wound up. Very much into ďthe book says exactly this.Ē Chardonnay drinkers, and only one. Lots of rules and books. And micro managing the energy. Like a lot.



F-16 guys are less wound up knowing that they can pull on the stick and engage without worrying about over G. They like to use this against F-15ís. They love Germany. They like to live in Colorado Springs and drink Coors Light.



A-10 guys speak with one volume, loud. They drink straight whiskey. They have mixed emotions that the currrent fight is a high one, not a low one. Whatever that means. They like football and avoiding icing conditions of any kind.



Navy Hornet guys are fairly relaxed. They love Top Gun. And the boat. Those that flew Tomcats wish they still flew them. They donít want to discuss the volleyball scene. Lots of high fives.



Marine Aviators hate the boat and donít give a **** about rules or any other branch of service for that matter. Tequila shooters and stories about Okinawa and fighting sailors. They are part of the infantry.



Cobra guys like Air Force installations because of ice cream and air conditioning. They know nothing about not being deployed. They are also infantry.



AH64 guys are usually serious and quiet. They have generally killed any sort of military vehicle used in battle.



C-17, C-130, KC, and C-5 crews like breaking down in a Caribbean destination. Or Australia.



AC-130 guys are angry at the leadership.



Anyhow, thank you vets for your service. Glad to fly with you.



Haha. Truth! However, I will say that you can't categorize everyone that precisely. I've flown with some pretty mellow F-15 guys on occasion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

deadseal
01-27-2019, 12:43 PM
Factual evidence? LOL yeah some fishing there for sure.

.

Sooo, funny synopsis. How exactly do you disagree with my only point that mil training is better than civilian?

What possible evidence? I can spout in depth academics, stand ups, ep training massive amounts of simulator time.....please enlighten me.
Also....you got the drinks all wrong
F16 pilots drink Jeremiah weed bruh

TeamSasquatch
01-27-2019, 12:43 PM
Finally something that makes sense....


Factual evidence? LOL yeah some fishing there for sure.

My best tool to bring the best of the best pilots down to earth (military or civilian) for a bit is my antique bare bones no electrical system 65hp fabric and wood tailwheel airplane.

I wanted to fly military. Like from age 5 bad. Lucky for you top guns out there, they stopped issuing waivers for color vision during the early 90ís drawdown. I basically got the TBNT.

In my 20 years of being paid to fly, I have learned that the military airline guys can be further categorized by branch and aircraft.

With humor in mind, Iíve learned:

F-15 guys are typically pretty wound up. Very much into ďthe book says exactly this.Ē Chardonnay drinkers, and only one. Lots of rules and books. And micro managing the energy. Like a lot.

F-16 guys are less wound up knowing that they can pull on the stick and engage without worrying about over G. They like to use this against F-15ís. They love Germany. They like to live in Colorado Springs and drink Coors Light.

A-10 guys speak with one volume, loud. They drink straight whiskey. They have mixed emotions that the currrent fight is a high one, not a low one. Whatever that means. They like football and avoiding icing conditions of any kind.

Navy Hornet guys are fairly relaxed. They love Top Gun. And the boat. Those that flew Tomcats wish they still flew them. They donít want to discuss the volleyball scene. Lots of high fives.

Marine Aviators hate the boat and donít give a **** about rules or any other branch of service for that matter. Tequila shooters and stories about Okinawa and fighting sailors. They are part of the infantry.

Cobra guys like Air Force installations because of ice cream and air conditioning. They know nothing about not being deployed. They are also infantry.

AH64 guys are usually serious and quiet. They have generally killed any sort of military vehicle used in battle.

C-17, C-130, KC, and C-5 crews like breaking down in a Caribbean destination. Or Australia.

AC-130 guys are angry at the leadership.

Anyhow, thank you vets for your service. Glad to fly with you.

AntiPeter
01-27-2019, 02:09 PM
If the airlines desire to hire the safest and most efficient pilots I believe there is great opportunity to reform the hiring systems that exist.

Sometimes it would seem the airlines would do better throwing darts blindfolded.

at6d
01-27-2019, 03:55 PM
Sooo, funny synopsis. How exactly do you disagree with my only point that mil training is better than civilian?

What possible evidence? I can spout in depth academics, stand ups, ep training massive amounts of simulator time.....please enlighten me.
Also....you got the drinks all wrong
F16 pilots drink Jeremiah weed bruh

Nope something went south here.

I was replying to a comment in a previous post which I believe may have been deleted or I just jacked it up from another topic.

The post referenced the ďfactual evidence of Trump/Russia collusion.Ē Hence my fishing analogy.

In my opinion, the civilian world of commercial aviation and the military world of combat have very little crossover and most is apples vs. oranges. Itís just a different world.

I would love to see what happens when a 10,000 hour plus airline guy goes to fighter school. Iím guessing lots of un-learning?

I used to teach multiengine students in older Beech aircraft. This served me well when I went to the ATR and SF3. I couldnít imagine the learning curve for a single-engine/single-seat tactical guy that gets the firehouse directly into a Q-400 or 737.

MelT
01-27-2019, 04:13 PM
How do you feel about the Coasties?

deadseal
01-27-2019, 04:16 PM
Nope something went south here.

I was replying to a comment in a previous post which I believe may have been deleted or I just jacked it up from another topic.

The post referenced the ďfactual evidence of Trump/Russia collusion.Ē Hence my fishing analogy.

In my opinion, the civilian world of commercial aviation and the military world of combat have very little crossover and most is apples vs. oranges. Itís just a different world.

I would love to see what happens when a 10,000 hour plus airline guy goes to fighter school. Iím guessing lots of un-learning?

I used to teach multiengine students in older Beech aircraft. This served me well when I went to the ATR and SF3. I couldnít imagine the learning curve for a single-engine/single-seat tactical guy that gets the firehouse directly into a Q-400 or 737.

Thatís totally fair. I almost failed my atp checkride in an old Seneca. It wouldnít trim!!! It was the hardest airplane to hand fly in my whole career. God I have ptsd just thinking about it

at6d
01-27-2019, 04:20 PM
MelT, my hat is off to them! I have a buddy that was one. Spent a few years on a cutter first, then went C-130. Now he is a computer science professor in CT.

If I think too much about it Iíll get sea sick.

Coasties donít like flying unless itís moderate turbulence and a 40 knot gusting crosswind and heavy rain.

Excargodog
01-27-2019, 05:10 PM
F-15 guys are typically pretty wound up. Very much into ďthe book says exactly this.Ē Chardonnay drinkers, and only one..

Cannot let that stand unchallenged. Even for mud hen backseaters, the drink of choice was traditionally Jeremiah Weed and at least two shots at the first bar at the start of every deployment.

https://youtu.be/S13G08KKrcA

HIFLYR
01-27-2019, 05:15 PM
Iíve trained civilians and Iíve trained military. Some were good and some were bad... on both sides.

Iíve flown thousands of hours from both seats in the airlines. Some with military and some with civilians. Some were good and some were bad... on both sides.

The difference is that civilians wonít inherently think they are better than military because we respect and honor their sacrifices.

My experience as a PCA/LCA also!!!

at6d
01-27-2019, 05:20 PM
Cannot let that stand unchallenged. Even for mud hen backseaters, the drink of choice was traditionally Jeremiah Weed and at least two shots at the first bar at the start of every deployment.

https://youtu.be/S13G08KKrcA

LOL. These here must be a special refined breed.

Galaxy5
01-27-2019, 07:02 PM
F-15 guys are typically pretty wound up. Very much into ďthe book says exactly this.Ē Chardonnay drinkers, and only one. Lots of rules and books. And micro managing the energy. Like a lot.

And they all have some ďreally closeĒ crew chief friends iirc.

C-17, C-130, KC, and C-5 crews like breaking down in a Caribbean destination. Or Australia.

One of the most overlooked and difficult pieces of the transition is learning PBS...Iíve been preferencing the Caribbean for months and havenít been awarded anything there. Totally unrelated, but Iíve also had great aircraft reliability, idk.

Al Czervik
01-27-2019, 07:15 PM
I would say the VAST majority of guys on DNP’s are mil. Old mil guys.

PSU Flyer
01-27-2019, 08:44 PM
F-15 guys are typically pretty wound up. Very much into ďthe book says exactly this.Ē Chardonnay drinkers, and only one. Lots of rules and books. And micro managing the energy. Like a lot.



Somewhere out there is an F-15C guy going ballistic because you lumped him in with the F-15E guys.

CessnaGril
01-27-2019, 08:52 PM
It hasnít needed defending since ww2.

I take it you are not from NYC, Shanksville, PA, or Washtington, D.C.

ShyGuy
01-27-2019, 09:13 PM
I take it you are not from NYC, Shanksville, PA, or Washtington, D.C.

To be fair, the military didnít stop this from happening. Fighters were scrambled but not much protection came because it was too late. Unless you are a conspiracy theorist who believes UA 93 was shot down, in which case I really donít want to get involved in this argument.

at6d
01-27-2019, 10:39 PM
I fear the USís biggest threat will come from within.

rightside02
01-28-2019, 01:45 AM
Factual evidence? LOL yeah some fishing there for sure.

My best tool to bring the best of the best pilots down to earth (military or civilian) for a bit is my antique bare bones no electrical system 65hp fabric and wood tailwheel airplane.

I wanted to fly military. Like from age 5 bad. Lucky for you top guns out there, they stopped issuing waivers for color vision during the early 90ís drawdown. I basically got the TBNT.

In my 20 years of being paid to fly, I have learned that the military airline guys can be further categorized by branch and aircraft.

With humor in mind, Iíve learned:

F-15 guys are typically pretty wound up. Very much into ďthe book says exactly this.Ē Chardonnay drinkers, and only one. Lots of rules and books. And micro managing the energy. Like a lot.

F-16 guys are less wound up knowing that they can pull on the stick and engage without worrying about over G. They like to use this against F-15ís. They love Germany. They like to live in Colorado Springs and drink Coors Light.

A-10 guys speak with one volume, loud. They drink straight whiskey. They have mixed emotions that the currrent fight is a high one, not a low one. Whatever that means. They like football and avoiding icing conditions of any kind.

Navy Hornet guys are fairly relaxed. They love Top Gun. And the boat. Those that flew Tomcats wish they still flew them. They donít want to discuss the volleyball scene. Lots of high fives.

Marine Aviators hate the boat and donít give a **** about rules or any other branch of service for that matter. Tequila shooters and stories about Okinawa and fighting sailors. They are part of the infantry.

Cobra guys like Air Force installations because of ice cream and air conditioning. They know nothing about not being deployed. They are also infantry.

AH64 guys are usually serious and quiet. They have generally killed any sort of military vehicle used in battle.

C-17, C-130, KC, and C-5 crews like breaking down in a Caribbean destination. Or Australia.

AC-130 guys are angry at the leadership.

Anyhow, thank you vets for your service. Glad to fly with you.



Hands down Best response on this thread

Hacker15e
01-28-2019, 04:58 AM
Somewhere out there is an F-15C guy going ballistic because you lumped him in with the F-15E guys.

The opposite is usually more true.

Scott Stoops
01-28-2019, 09:37 AM
My best tool to bring the best of the best pilots down to earth (military or civilian) for a bit is my antique bare bones no electrical system 65hp fabric and wood tailwheel airplane.

I couldnít agree more. I refuse to pigeon hole any one group. Iíve seen good and bad from all groups mentioned. What Iím more interested in is flying with guys that like being airmen. If it has wings, letís fly it and fly it well. Hand fly when appropriate, understand the system youíre working in, and learn from the guys you fly with. The job isnít hard, but to be really good at it takes work. I see too many guys just mailing it in. I consider it to be a craft that takes dedication to be really good at.

atpcliff
01-28-2019, 05:23 PM
I fear the USís biggest threat will come from within.

So far, true. White domestic terrorists have killed more people on American soil than any other terrorist group. An example, that is not too well known illustrates the point: The largest loss of life in a K-12 terrorist attack was when a White farmer in Michigan blew up his local school.

galaxy flyer
01-28-2019, 05:28 PM
So far, true. White domestic terrorists have killed more people on American soil than any other terrorist group. An example, that is not too well known illustrates the point: The largest loss of life in a K-12 terrorist attack was when a White farmer in Michigan blew up his local school.

Also, happened 91 years ago, involved a disgruntled public employee and was hardly aimed at domestic political regime change. Crime? Yes. Tragic? Yes. Terrorism as presently understood? No.

GF

Varsity
01-28-2019, 05:39 PM
And it continues due to the defensiveness of non-military trained pilots. Perhaps they recognize something after all...:rolleyes:

I'm still waiting to hear what exactly a 'mom and pop shop' means.

Maybe you're just indicating that you don't trust your own resume/interviewing skills.

captjns
01-28-2019, 06:09 PM
I'm still waiting to hear what exactly a 'mom and pop shop' means.

Pop Belkins Flying Service.

Mattio
01-28-2019, 07:18 PM
It seems like having a zillion hours doesn't mean what it used to. I don't know if it's the supposed accident data linking both very high time and low time guys to more accidents (than guys that are somewhere in the middle), but, there seems to be a little more focus on the person and a little less focus on the flight hours nowadays. That said, joining and succeeding in the military implies many characteristics that employers want to see. Getting mad because a military guy is getting interviewed with less hours is silly. So is getting mad that the girl who devoted most of her life to charity had her resume moved to the top of the list. Like others said, most people with the work ethic can succeed in this job, but it matters who you're going to be sitting 2 feet away from in a cockpit for 8 hours a day and, moreover, it matters how that person is going to react when a once in a lifetime ****storm of a situation happens (God forbid) that goes beyond tapping into knowledge from past flying and requires a lot of those aforementioned characteristics to truly work as a crew and survive.

Grumble
01-28-2019, 07:23 PM
Letís hope so. I donít know why we worship the military in this country.

Because theyíre better than you.

BeechedJet
01-28-2019, 07:29 PM
You can just flow from a wholly owned or pass the CPP during new hire and nothing you do other than waiting for a date in a few years matters.

Military, civilian, who cares at that point right? Purple Runway will rule over all.

DWC CAP10 USAF
01-29-2019, 02:12 AM
The opposite is usually more true.

Twoop.....

Airhoss
01-29-2019, 04:00 AM
With diversity being such an important factor now days it is of little wonder why fighter pilots are at the top of the stack. Especially F-15 guys.

Poser765
01-29-2019, 04:16 AM
Because theyíre better than you.I donít know about that... Iím not a mouth breather.

Sputnik
01-29-2019, 11:05 AM
With diversity being such an important factor now days it is of little wonder why fighter pilots are at the top of the stack. Especially F-15 guys.

I don't know when that's gunna get old. I'm damn near 50 and it's still funny.

4runner
01-29-2019, 03:39 PM
It hasnít needed defending since ww2.

Dude...can someone put this on TOTD thread? You donít deserve to be in this profession or this country.

Poser765
01-29-2019, 04:43 PM
Dude...can someone put this on TOTD thread? You donít deserve to be in this profession or this country.Ēyou disagree with me. Therefore get out of my profession and my America.Ē

I nominate this as TOTD.

Tweetdrvr
01-29-2019, 04:51 PM
Letís hope so. I donít know why we worship the military in this country.

So du kannst Englisch sprechen und nicht Deutsch oder Russisch!

CAirBear
01-29-2019, 07:15 PM
Ēyou disagree with me. Therefore get out of my profession and my America.Ē

I nominate this as TOTD.

Bingo.

Filler

detpilot
01-31-2019, 05:07 AM
I don't know when that's gunna get old. I'm damn near 50 and it's still funny.Yeees!!! Haha!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

Big E 757
02-01-2019, 03:39 PM
Factual evidence? LOL yeah some fishing there for sure.

My best tool to bring the best of the best pilots down to earth (military or civilian) for a bit is my antique bare bones no electrical system 65hp fabric and wood tailwheel airplane.

I wanted to fly military. Like from age 5 bad. Lucky for you top guns out there, they stopped issuing waivers for color vision during the early 90ís drawdown. I basically got the TBNT.

In my 20 years of being paid to fly, I have learned that the military airline guys can be further categorized by branch and aircraft.

With humor in mind, Iíve learned:

F-15 guys are typically pretty wound up. Very much into ďthe book says exactly this.Ē Chardonnay drinkers, and only one. Lots of rules and books. And micro managing the energy. Like a lot.

F-16 guys are less wound up knowing that they can pull on the stick and engage without worrying about over G. They like to use this against F-15ís. They love Germany. They like to live in Colorado Springs and drink Coors Light.

A-10 guys speak with one volume, loud. They drink straight whiskey. They have mixed emotions that the currrent fight is a high one, not a low one. Whatever that means. They like football and avoiding icing conditions of any kind.

Navy Hornet guys are fairly relaxed. They love Top Gun. And the boat. Those that flew Tomcats wish they still flew them. They donít want to discuss the volleyball scene. Lots of high fives.

Marine Aviators hate the boat and donít give a **** about rules or any other branch of service for that matter. Tequila shooters and stories about Okinawa and fighting sailors. They are part of the infantry.

Cobra guys like Air Force installations because of ice cream and air conditioning. They know nothing about not being deployed. They are also infantry.

AH64 guys are usually serious and quiet. They have generally killed any sort of military vehicle used in battle.

C-17, C-130, KC, and C-5 crews like breaking down in a Caribbean destination. Or Australia.

AC-130 guys are angry at the leadership.

Anyhow, thank you vets for your service. Glad to fly with you.



This is hilarious! Well done.

stabapch
02-02-2019, 05:39 AM
lmao. :rolleyes:

Most of the guys who can't cut it are .mil guys with no 121 experience. RJ drivers have been doing the exact same check ride, in transport jets in and out of the the exact same airports with the exact same passengers in the same paint job as mainline for decades.

I have yet to encounter a .mil pilot that impresses me with their awesome Uncle Sam flying skills.

Thank you. This includes regionals and the direct hires into majors. I had experience with two former military applicants who had no idea what a flow was. According to them everything they did was READ-DO. The simple flow concept like blew their mind causing some embarrassing struggle. When I finished college 5-years ago the big talk was about airlines not preferring military candidates due to the lack of CRM training. However, like someone else said it ainít the flying experience that gets them into the door, itís the padded resumes. Thereís a lot of lazy OTS guys who like to play the Ďsee how fast I can reach the minimumsí game (side note: kind of unsettling knowing thereís regional captains up there with only 2 years total industry exp all as an FO) then apply to a legacy only to get hired 10 years later because their resume doesnít separate them from the rest of crowd. Then complain about it... airlines hire Ďprofessionalsí not Ďpilotsí and your background should reflect that.

stabapch
02-02-2019, 06:10 AM
It doesn't have anything to do with worship. When I interview an ex-military pilot I KNOW the standardization of training and qualifications that he/she has been required to meet over the course of his/her career.

I KNOW for a fact that they didn't "earn" their licenses at some cheesy Mom and Pop FBO that will pass you as long as you can pay. They didn't get their type ratings at some sim center that will sign you off when your check clears.

They didn't get their PIC experience at some backwater "regional" airline that flies between Denver and Gillette three times a day.

That's why ex-military guys get preference. But, I wouldn't expect non-military types to even begin to comprehend that simple fact.

I KNOW for a fact that my DPEís/FAA Examiners held me to the standards set in the PTS that lead to me earning my ratings, despite my training coming from the local FBO.

I KNOW for a fact that military pilots are held to similar standards by their examiners after their training.

In the end, regardless of training you still have to pass the same Ďcheckrideí.

And yes, the 121 PIC experience at some ďbackwaterĒ regional flying between two cities is FAR less valuable than the guy who does 1 sortie a month in blocked airspace or the guy wasting my taxpayer money dropping bombs on innocent people in the eyes of the hiring manager at a legacy... itís all clear to me now where I took the wrong turn in my career...

Itís funny because the airline I fly for basically has a Ďseparateí training department with additional allocated funds/resources for mil guys with no 121, so there canít be that much cost savings...

deadseal
02-02-2019, 07:21 AM
And yes, the 121 PIC experience at some ďbackwaterĒ regional flying between two cities is FAR less valuable than the guy who does 1 sortie a month in blocked airspace or the guy wasting my taxpayer money dropping bombs on innocent people in the eyes of the hiring manager at a legacy... itís all clear to me now where I took the wrong turn in my career...


You were actually doing pretty well with your point of view until you dropped this little rat turd of a totally inaccurate statement that is so far off the mark of reality, it made me ram dump your entire perspective. You sir, just slam dunked yourself into the butthurt category.

Passing one checkride in no way validates the true depth of ones training. Only a noob with no depth nor experience would believe that

rickair7777
02-02-2019, 07:47 AM
I KNOW for a fact that my DPEís/FAA Examiners held me to the standards set in the PTS that lead to me earning my ratings, despite my training coming from the local FBO.

I KNOW for a fact that military pilots are held to similar standards by their examiners after their training.

In the end, regardless of training you still have to pass the same Ďcheckrideí.

And yes, the 121 PIC experience at some ďbackwaterĒ regional flying between two cities is FAR less valuable than the guy who does 1 sortie a month in blocked airspace or the guy wasting my taxpayer money dropping bombs on innocent people in the eyes of the hiring manager at a legacy... itís all clear to me now where I took the wrong turn in my career...

Itís funny because the airline I fly for basically has a Ďseparateí training department with additional allocated funds/resources for mil guys with no 121, so there canít be that much cost savings...

This is the most naive and clueless post I've read in a while. Go on thinking that if it makes you feel better.

tomgoodman
02-02-2019, 07:50 AM
https://target.scene7.com/is/image/Target/GUEST_0ded356d-8784-41be-8590-cdb3a1277edf?wid=1400&fmt=pjpeg

stabapch
02-02-2019, 08:06 AM
You were actually doing pretty well with your point of view until you dropped this little rat turd of a totally inaccurate statement that is so far off the mark of reality, it made me ram dump your entire perspective. You sir, just slam dunked yourself into the butthurt category.

Passing one checkride in no way validates the true depth of ones training. Only a noob with no depth nor experience would believe that

No butthurt here son. Iím right where I want to be thanks to my own effort.

Only a person with zero common sense would argue that military training is more favorable than civilian training in a civilian industry. Military pilots are trained to handle ďweapon deployment systemsĒ to complete a mission; civilian pilots are trained to handle ďpassenger/cargo air transport category aircraftĒ from point A to point B. A monkey can fly an aircraft, but the mindset of the pilots are molded differently through training for the goal that needs to be accomplished.

Military pilots are not better candidates than civilian for a 121 Air Carrier operation and vice versa for a military operation. Plain and simple.

60av8tor
02-02-2019, 08:20 AM
Only a person with zero common sense would argue that military training is more favorable than civilian training in a civilian industry.

Man, youíre seriously showing your butt on this one. While I canít speak to oneís common sense, or lack thereof, I can tell you this statement is patently false. Have a lot of experience with mil-civ hiring do you? If this comes from a position of experience, Iíll gladly defer to you, but something tells me you havenít been around mil or civ hiring environments very long - if at all - with this statement.

Looking forward to your next bit of wisdom...

stabapch
02-02-2019, 08:30 AM
This is the most naive and clueless post I've read in a while. Go on thinking that if it makes you feel better.

Whatís so naive about it? Itís pretty naive and illogical to argue that military pilots are better suited for a CIVILIAN industry than a civilian trained pilot.

I donít have to think that to make me feel better, I witness it in training and on the line. It doesnít make me Ďfeel better,í but the arrogance you get from the average military guy amounts to a good laugh every now and then.

deadseal
02-02-2019, 08:33 AM
No butthurt here son. Iím right where I want to be thanks to my own effort.

Only a person with zero common sense would argue that military training is more favorable than civilian training in a civilian industry. Military pilots are trained to handle ďweapon deployment systemsĒ to complete a mission; civilian pilots are trained to handle ďpassenger/cargo air transport category aircraftĒ from point A to point B. A monkey can fly an aircraft, but the mindset of the pilots are molded differently through training for the goal that needs to be accomplished.

Military pilots are not better candidates than civilian for a 121 Air Carrier operation and vice versa for a military operation. Plain and simple.

Do you know how many full vis EP sims a UPT grad has gone through? Jesus man, you literally have no idea what you are talking about. I have done both sets of training. Civilian side through Instrument, and the mil side. They don't even compare. If you wont take someones word for it who was boots on the ground for both programs, then there really is no hope for your butthurtness.

I like the "son" part....really mature and made me want to listen to you

vessbot
02-02-2019, 08:44 AM
A monkey can fly an aircraft,

This is at the root of your error. If you take knowing how to fly for granted, then all that remains is the application to the two different industries; and in that case you'd be right that a civilian background is automatically better for a civilian job.

But you shouldn't take flying for granted. It itself is a huge body of knowledge and ability, and all the particular applications on top of it can be learned in the training department and on the job. But the flying part is outside the scope of that, and only a fool would ignore it.

stabapch
02-02-2019, 08:48 AM
Do you know how many full vis EP sims a UPT grad has gone through? Jesus man, you literally have no idea what you are talking about. I have done both sets of training. Civilian side through Instrument, and the mil side. They don't even compare. If you wont take someones word for it who was boots on the ground for both programs, then there really is no hope for your butthurtness.

I like the "son" part....really mature and made me want to listen to you

Your response sure sounds like youíre the one going through some Ďbutt problems.í I donít want to use Ďbutthurtí because I donít want to come across as less mature than you.

Please enlighten all of our civilian trained selves out there why a UPT grad is more qualified for a 121 operation than those like myself. Apparently Iím not equal to you, youíre better than me with a military background in a civilian operation.

Maybe itís not arrogance? Tiny d*ck syndrome?

60av8tor
02-02-2019, 08:50 AM
Whatís so naive about it? Itís pretty naive and illogical to argue that military pilots are better suited for a CIVILIAN industry than a civilian trained pilot.

I donít have to think that to make me feel better, I witness it in training and on the line. It doesnít make me Ďfeel better,í but the arrogance you get from the average military guy amounts to a good laugh every now and then.

Simple yes or no. Do you have personal experience in both civil and military aviation?

vessbot
02-02-2019, 08:53 AM
It would be illuminating (maybe not for Stabapch, but at least for the general reader) for some of you guys that have gone through both training systems to post a summary of both of them.

---

Stabapch, you should ask yourself 1) If it is POSSIBLE that one system is more rigorous and reliable in producing a consistent and capable product, and 2) if it is the case, who would have meaningful insight into that (people who have gone through both, or those who have only gone through one?)

stabapch
02-02-2019, 09:01 AM
This is at the root of your error. If you take knowing how to fly for granted, then all that remains is the application to the two different industries; and in that case you'd be right that a civilian background is automatically better for a civilian job.

But you shouldn't take flying for granted. It itself is a huge body of knowledge and ability, and all the particular applications on top of it can be learned in the training department and on the job. But the flying part is outside the scope of that, and only a fool would ignore it.

Decision making is what makes a pilot from a robot. A Chinese FO can be a great pilot, superior stick/rudder skills and knowledge, but they severely lack the ADM and thatís why they seldom make it to the left seat at their own carriers. Robots, not pilots. Iíll tell ya that from experience.

vessbot
02-02-2019, 09:05 AM
Decision making is what makes a pilot from a robot. A Chinese FO can be a great pilot, superior stick/rudder skills and knowledge, but they severely lack the ADM and thatís why they seldom make it to the left seat at their own carriers. Robots, not pilots. Iíll tell ya that from experience.

Yes, ADM is very important. No, you cannot take flying ability for granted.

Varsity
02-02-2019, 09:12 AM
Do you know how many full vis EP sims a UPT grad has gone through? Jesus man, you literally have no idea what you are talking about. I have done both sets of training. Civilian side through Instrument, and the mil side. They don't even compare. If you wont take someones word for it who was boots on the ground for both programs, then there really is no hope for your butthurtness.

I like the "son" part....really mature and made me want to listen to you

Civilian side through instrument :rolleyes: lmfao.

The civilian track most people are discussing here is 1500ATP -> regionals THEN competitiveness for a major app.

I would argue that anyone with 1000hrs 121 TPIC from a regional is more qualified than any single pilot coming out of the military. The are applying for the EXACT same job, different airplane. Already proven themselves.

The .mil guys have proven they can read checklists and QRH's that end up telling them to divert/exactly how to make a decision. Not even remotely applicable in the 121 world.

RhinoBallAuto
02-02-2019, 09:14 AM
floobs and stabapch should consider dating

vessbot
02-02-2019, 09:20 AM
Civilian side through instrument :rolleyes: lmfao.

The civilian track most people are discussing here is 1500ATP -> regionals THEN competitiveness for a major app.


I'm not laughing. What's funny about experience prior to the regionals?

If they aren't talking about it, then they should be.

The .mil guys have proven they can read checklists and QRH's that end up telling them to divert/exactly how to make a decision. Not even remotely applicable in the 121 world.
Now I AM laughing.

Peacock
02-02-2019, 09:28 AM
Civilian side through instrument :rolleyes: lmfao.

The civilian track most people are discussing here is 1500ATP -> regionals THEN competitiveness for a major app.

I would argue that anyone with 1000hrs 121 TPIC from a regional is more qualified than any single pilot coming out of the military. The are applying for the EXACT same job, different airplane. Already proven themselves.

The .mil guys have proven they can read checklists and QRH's that end up telling them to divert/exactly how to make a decision. Not even remotely applicable in the 121 world.

How exactly do you think military checklists vary from civilian ones?

stabapch
02-02-2019, 09:32 AM
It would be illuminating (maybe not for Stabapch, but at least for the general reader) for some of you guys that have gone through both training systems to post a summary of both of them.

---

Stabapch, you should ask yourself 1) If it is POSSIBLE that one system is more rigorous and reliable in producing a consistent and capable product, and 2) if it is the case, who would have meaningful insight into that (people who have gone through both, or those who have only gone through one?)

1) Yes, itís possible. The military training system is better for the military aviation goals. The civilian training system is better for the civilian aviation goals (designed by the FAA for the industry run by the FAA...). Itís really not that hard to comprehend. CRM is one example of a HUGE issue airlines were having with mil guys adapting in the past. Great study out there. College curriculums that put emphasis on CRM skills have been proven to be better than any candidate with military training. Airlines had to take extra steps in implementing programs to combat this deficit from the military side.

2) This question is irrelevant. I donít need to have experience with both training systems when my end goal is to be a product of the civilian industry, hence why my training/background is tailored towards that. I donít need to know how to drop bombs, evade air defense, how to abandon my injured aircraft. This stuff doesnít make you a better candidate to get the 737 A to B.

Flying Boxes
02-02-2019, 09:34 AM
The .mil guys have proven they can read checklists and QRH's that end up telling them to divert/exactly how to make a decision. Not even remotely applicable in the 121 world.

This statement proves you don’t know or have much experience with military flying/pilots or the training. :eek:

You lost all crediability with this statement! Sorry for your inferiority complex! :D

FYI
Your above statement is unique to 121 flying, military is not safety/divert centric...it’s mission centric.

Zard
02-02-2019, 09:40 AM
Iíve been through both. Iíll feed the troll.

UPT - regimented groundschool. Multiple tests, passing grade is between 80-90% depending on the manpower requirements. Fail two and you go to a review board that might kick you out or remediate you and return you to training. Those two failures follow you, so if you fail a check ride down the road prior to winging, youíre right back at a review (elimination) board. Youíre also going through in depth survival and physiological training that gets repeatedly refreshed over the course of your flying career.

80ish hours of primary flying. Multiple sorties most days as a student. Emergency procedures on every contact flight are practiced repeatedly. Students get multiple simulated engine out landings on every flight. Everything in the pocket checklist that we can simulate, we do, and the syllabus tracks and makes sure itís not just an exposure item but that they get multiple looks at every EP. Formation flying. Full instrument procedures with 3-5 approaches per instrument hop. Each of these sections has at least one if not two jeopardy check rides. Fail it and you start down the elimination process which is two more flights.

More of the same in advanced training. No flap, single engine, compound complex EPS are your bread and butter, in the weather in the airplane. SIMs are more of the same. I was never as good of an instrument pilot in the 3500 hours since Advanced as I was leaving Corpus Christi after flying the C-12 around the Valley of the Downs. Lots of real world practice getting into and out of fields ranging from untowered all the way up to busy class B. Lotís of Ďhereís what the book says, hereís how it works in real life.í Tons of CRM taught, either inter-cockpit or inter-flight depending on which track one is on.

Tons of system knowledge required from my platform...remember, you may operate with your crew and a maintenance kit at a remote location and need to know what is safe and possible and what is not.

More of the same at the RAG or RTU, just in your actual platform now.

121 training: disjointed by comparison. Multiple days with no real rhyme or reason and multiple instructors at the training center whoíd never actually flown the line for my company. Lots of FAA mandated stuff slopped together. The sims were excellent at training me to do more of the same EPs in the weather, but very little on what we actually do 99.99% of the time. Fast time to train, but looking at the material afterwards, it could have been way more efficient. The days are not densely packed and have way too much death by PowerPoint.

Both have positives and minuses. Proficiency develops more fully at the training command because thereís less of a demand signal in terms of cost and you obviously get tons of reps at everything. You are Ďqualifiedí faster at a 121 training center because you arenít worth a damn until you have that check ride complete.

Point A to Point B is an afterthought in the military. Itís just assumed you will know how to do it because we donít have time to teach a winged aviator how to do all the admin stuff once they are at a squadron. They should know it the way the book says it so they are plug and play with every other nugget is a squadron.

Time is spent on tactics, upgrading, and accumulating qualifications, all while doing multiple ground jobs that increase in responsibility and leadership requirements. As a 25 year old, I lead a division of about 100 maintenance sailors, was a mission commander, and qualified as an instructor pilot in my platform. My experience is not unique, itís just expected that you will figure out how to manage that. You develop resourcefulness and maturity, or you fail.

After about a year on the line, thereís no functional difference in a prior regional FO or a prior mil guy. Each airline has its own way of doing things, so other than being sharper at bidding and knowing some of the acronyms, unless someone has time in that airframe, thereís not much that a regional guy brings that a mil guy canít learn just as quickly in training.

As far as why hiring likes mil guys the bell curve is much tighter and the standard deviation much smaller when you can look at a guys resume and see if he got the good jobs or the not so good jobs, if you know what youíre looking for. Thereís just not that much room for someone who really really sucks to keep flying long enough to get to the stay or go point in the military. Iím sure bad apples snake through, but overwhelmingly, we are a known quantity (plus or minus a few quirks based on service and platform). Other than learning the automation and company specific CRM, the plane is still just a plane. 99% of what I do in this job was the part that was taken for granted in mil aviation. No one gave a **** how good an ILS you could shoot...all they cared about was the mission. What was important was how you dealt with everything else that can go sideways on a mission. Essentially, hiring people like us because weíve already practiced for the .01% of the time things go poorly.

Anyone can go from point a to point b on the autopilot. It isnít that hard.

stabapch
02-02-2019, 10:08 AM
Iíve been through both. Iíll feed the troll.

UPT - regimented groundschool. Multiple tests, passing grade is between 80-90% depending on the manpower requirements. Fail two and you go to a review board that might kick you out or remediate you and return you to training. Those two failures follow you, so if you fail a check ride down the road prior to winging, youíre right back at a review (elimination) board. Youíre also going through in depth survival and physiological training that gets repeatedly refreshed over the course of your flying career.

80ish hours of primary flying. Multiple sorties most days as a student. Emergency procedures on every contact flight are practiced repeatedly. Students get multiple simulated engine out landings on every flight. Everything in the pocket checklist that we can simulate, we do, and the syllabus tracks and makes sure itís not just an exposure item but that they get multiple looks at every EP. Formation flying. Full instrument procedures with 3-5 approaches per instrument hop. Each of these sections has at least one if not two jeopardy check rides. Fail it and you start down the elimination process which is two more flights.

More of the same in advanced training. No flap, single engine, compound complex EPS are your bread and butter, in the weather in the airplane. SIMs are more of the same. I was never as good of an instrument pilot in the 3500 hours since Advanced as I was leaving Corpus Christi after flying the C-12 around the Valley of the Downs. Lots of real world practice getting into and out of fields ranging from untowered all the way up to busy class B. Lotís of Ďhereís what the book says, hereís how it works in real life.í Tons of CRM taught, either inter-cockpit or inter-flight depending on which track one is on.

Tons of system knowledge required from my platform...remember, you may operate with your crew and a maintenance kit at a remote location and need to know what is safe and possible and what is not.

More of the same at the RAG or RTU, just in your actual platform now.

121 training: disjointed by comparison. Multiple days with no real rhyme or reason and multiple instructors at the training center whoíd never actually flown the line for my company. Lots of FAA mandated stuff slopped together. The sims were excellent at training me to do more of the same EPs in the weather, but very little on what we actually do 99.99% of the time. Fast time to train, but looking at the material afterwards, it could have been way more efficient. The days are not densely packed and have way too much death by PowerPoint.

Both have positives and minuses. Proficiency develops more fully at the training command because thereís less of a demand signal in terms of cost and you obviously get tons of reps at everything. You are Ďqualifiedí faster at a 121 training center because you arenít worth a damn until you have that check ride complete.

Point A to Point B is an afterthought in the military. Itís just assumed you will know how to do it because we donít have time to teach a winged aviator how to do all the admin stuff once they are at a squadron. They should know it the way the book says it so they are plug and play with every other nugget is a squadron.

Time is spent on tactics, upgrading, and accumulating qualifications, all while doing multiple ground jobs that increase in responsibility and leadership requirements. As a 25 year old, I lead a division of about 100 maintenance sailors, was a mission commander, and qualified as an instructor pilot in my platform. My experience is not unique, itís just expected that you will figure out how to manage that. You develop resourcefulness and maturity, or you fail.

After about a year on the line, thereís no functional difference in a prior regional FO or a prior mil guy. Each airline has its own way of doing things, so other than being sharper at bidding and knowing some of the acronyms, unless someone has time in that airframe, thereís not much that a regional guy brings that a mil guy canít learn just as quickly in training.

As far as why hiring likes mil guys the bell curve is much tighter and the standard deviation much smaller when you can look at a guys resume and see if he got the good jobs or the not so good jobs, if you know what youíre looking for. Thereís just not that much room for someone who really really sucks to keep flying long enough to get to the stay or go point in the military. Iím sure bad apples snake through, but overwhelmingly, we are a known quantity (plus or minus a few quirks based on service and platform). Other than learning the automation and company specific CRM, the plane is still just a plane. 99% of what I do in this job was the part that was taken for granted in mil aviation. No one gave a **** how good an ILS you could shoot...all they cared about was the mission. What was important was how you dealt with everything else that can go sideways on a mission. Essentially, hiring people like us because weíve already practiced for the .01% of the time things go poorly.

Anyone can go from point a to point b on the autopilot. It isnít that hard.

Thanks for the effort spent on the write-up.

But, this isnít about whoís a better pilot. Itís about whoís a better candidate for 121 comparing mil to civ training PRIOR to any 121 experience.

Interesting though, because other than the survival and physiological training this is almost identical to my training at the local FBO. Except, I was financing it. Putting myself and then family under huge amounts of pressure. Knowing that any failures accumulated would follow me to the hiring board. Iíve received nothing but training to go from A to B and how to deal with the million things that can go wrong in between. Basically the only thing that 121 carriers do...

C130driver
02-02-2019, 10:19 AM
I KNOW for a fact that my DPEís/FAA Examiners held me to the standards set in the PTS that lead to me earning my ratings, despite my training coming from the local FBO.

I KNOW for a fact that military pilots are held to similar standards by their examiners after their training.

In the end, regardless of training you still have to pass the same Ďcheckrideí.

And yes, the 121 PIC experience at some ďbackwaterĒ regional flying between two cities is FAR less valuable than the guy who does 1 sortie a month in blocked airspace or the guy wasting my taxpayer money dropping bombs on innocent people in the eyes of the hiring manager at a legacy... itís all clear to me now where I took the wrong turn in my career...

Itís funny because the airline I fly for basically has a Ďseparateí training department with additional allocated funds/resources for mil guys with no 121, so there canít be that much cost savings...

People like you are what is wrong with this thread. Did you always have such contempt for your pilot brethren who came up a different (and much more challenging route,) or was this a recent development?

Zard
02-02-2019, 10:20 AM
Thanks for the effort spent on the write-up.

But, this isnít about whoís a better pilot. Itís about whoís a better candidate for 121 comparing mil to civ training PRIOR to any 121 experience.

Interesting though, because other than the survival and physiological training this is almost identical to my training at the local FBO. Except, I was financing it. Putting myself and then family under huge amounts of pressure. Knowing that any failures accumulated would follow me to the hiring board. Iíve received nothing but training to go from A to B and how to deal with the million things that can go wrong in between. Basically the only thing that 121 carriers do...

That was your experience. That may not be true with every civilian flight school. Seeing the 3.5 hours of Ďtrainingí I got at my ATP compared to what guys had to do for the type ride at a place like CPT, there is a huge variation in standards. Being in the job and seeing the lack of reps between recurrent, there is no doubt I was a more prepared aviator for all the things that can go wrong when flying in the military. Once a year just doesnít compare to how often we practiced all the weird stuff all the way through my entire mil flying career.

Not saying regional guys suck at all, in fact most of my studying/beer drinking was done with an equal split of regional guys and corporate dudes, Iím just pointing out that in terms of standardization, there is a much more known quantity with the mark 1 mil guy to the hiring goons.

stabapch
02-02-2019, 10:46 AM
People like you are what is wrong with this thread. Did you always have such contempt for your pilot brethren who came up a different (and much more challenging route,) or was this a recent development?

No contempt. Just defending civilian pilot training.

People like you are the ones thinking youíre better candidateís in a 121 operation because of your background. Arrogance with no results to back it up.

Peacock
02-02-2019, 11:01 AM
No contempt. Just defending civilian pilot training.

People like you are the ones thinking youíre better candidateís in a 121 operation because of your background. Arrogance with no results to back it up.

I remember reading stuff like this when I was still in the military and wondering how difficult the transition would be.

Turns out it was incredibly easy. I spent most of my time in training drinking and shopping for a house. Somehow the other military pilots and I breezed through the gauntlet of 121 training. The only guy that really struggled was a long time regional captain who had been going ďpoint A to point BĒ for a long long time and couldnít shift gears.

galaxy flyer
02-02-2019, 11:03 AM
But, this isnít about whoís a better pilot. Itís about whoís a better candidate for 121 comparing mil to civ training PRIOR to any 121 experience.

Then, why is there a clear preference by airlines over the decades for former military trained pilots? Theyíre the ones deciding what makes a better candidate.

GF

Packrat
02-02-2019, 11:35 AM
Military pilots are not better candidates than civilian for a 121 Air Carrier operation....

With that attitude, I'm glad I'm doing the hiring for my airline and not you.

60av8tor
02-02-2019, 11:39 AM
Then, why is there a clear preference by airlines over the decades for former military trained pilots? Theyíre the ones deciding what makes a better candidate.

GF

You know, because of their lack of common sense as he so eloquently put it😄. This guy is so far off base, he has to be trolling. Has it be😄

Packrat
02-02-2019, 11:41 AM
It would be illuminating (maybe not for Stabapch, but at least for the general reader) for some of you guys that have gone through both training systems to post a summary of both of them.

I will. I was Navy trained. I also got my civilian ATP from an outfit at DeKalb-Peachtree airport on an off weekend.

It consisted of a day of ground school, a single training flight in an airplane I'd never flown before and a checkride the next day. Complete joke. You pass if the check cashes.

Since then I've seen both the best and worst passenger airline training departments. I've also been at places where the Company APD takes his job seriously.

To say there is a wide range of quality in the civilian world is a gross understatement. Which is why, to reiterate my original position, I'll choose a military trained pilot (regardless of branch) for an interview over any civilian trained candidate.

That doesn't mean once it gets to actually flying the airplane on IOE a lot of civilian background guys can do the job more seamlessly. Military guys do, I'll admit, have a learning curve when it comes to Part 121 operations. That said, they come up to speed quickly and again their background shows through when it comes to discipline, maturity and leadership qualities.

stabapch
02-02-2019, 11:45 AM
Then, why is there a clear preference by airlines over the decades for former military trained pilots? Theyíre the ones deciding what makes a better candidate.

GF

This isnít the case anymore over the last few years. Airlines prefer the candidate with the 141 college program background. Deltaís training department admitted this and showed positive results of training proficiency against military pilots in a study in the past. It was mainly about adapting to CRM in the 121 world.

Guys coming from the military usually have a padded resume that demonstrateís leadership (by default as an officer). Hiring managers look for the overall ďprofessional image.Ē Atleast at the majors.

stabapch
02-02-2019, 12:02 PM
With that attitude, I'm glad I'm doing the hiring for my airline and not you.

LOL yeahhhhh... judging by some of your posts on here, you ainít doing any hiring anywhere.

Vector Victor
02-02-2019, 12:11 PM
Civilian side through instrument :rolleyes: lmfao.

The civilian track most people are discussing here is 1500ATP -> regionals THEN competitiveness for a major app.

I would argue that anyone with 1000hrs 121 TPIC from a regional is more qualified than any single pilot coming out of the military. The are applying for the EXACT same job, different airplane. Already proven themselves.

The .mil guys have proven they can read checklists and QRH's that end up telling them to divert/exactly how to make a decision. Not even remotely applicable in the 121 world.


Wow, that was the most clueless and incorrect post Iíve read on this forum.

deadseal
02-02-2019, 01:22 PM
Civilian side through instrument :rolleyes: lmfao.

The civilian track most people are discussing here is 1500ATP -> regionals THEN competitiveness for a major app.

I would argue that anyone with 1000hrs 121 TPIC from a regional is more qualified than any single pilot coming out of the military. The are applying for the EXACT same job, different airplane. Already proven themselves.

The .mil guys have proven they can read checklists and QRH's that end up telling them to divert/exactly how to make a decision. Not even remotely applicable in the 121 world.

Sorry, I guess it was assumed that Iím an airline pilot too. My military training was way above and beyond either the regional crj course, or 7er major course. Not sure what else you need or want to know.

The fact that you would say a 1000 hour regional guy is more qualified than a 3000 hour mil pilot after they graduate from the same type rating is so far beyond ridiculous it sort of makes me feel like you must be joking.

Is this really what you mean?

Poser765
02-02-2019, 02:03 PM
Jesus Christ this thread is embarrassing. I feel like both sides are getting their feelings hurt then making some ridiculous counter claims. Is it really hard to imagine as a civilian trained pilot there are military pilots who are more qualified for a job at delta? Of course there are also military pilots who arenít.

Packrat
02-02-2019, 02:51 PM
LOL yeahhhhh... judging by some of your posts on here, you ain’t doing any hiring anywhere.

As usual, you're 100% wrong. Had to wade through a stack of resumes just this morning. Not exactly what I want to do on one of my few days off.

stabapch
02-02-2019, 03:03 PM
Sorry, I guess it was assumed that Iím an airline pilot too. My military training was way above and beyond either the regional crj course, or 7er major course. Not sure what else you need or want to know.

The fact that you would say a 1000 hour regional guy is more qualified than a 3000 hour mil pilot after they graduate from the same type rating is so far beyond ridiculous it sort of makes me feel like you must be joking.

Is this really what you mean?

If itís a regional guy with 1000 121-PIC compared to a military guy with 0 121-PIC, then yes heís more qualified. Iíll make this real elementary. A regional pilot is no different than mainline other than pay, equipment and airline. 100 percent SAME JOB. So in a logical world one with industry experience would be favored over another with no industry experience. But then thereís the ĎPR factorí for cooperations to hire vets and then comes before qualifications....

Packrat
02-02-2019, 03:08 PM
Again, 121 experience when selecting candidates for INTERVIEWS is less important than military training. Its called STANDARDIZATION, something you have no idea about when dealing with civilian trained pilots.

When it comes to IOE there is a difference, but you have to get past the interview board first then qualification training. Military guys been there, done that. Plus they've selflessly given something to the nation. That alone gives them a leg up on someone who couldn't even qualify for military service.

Burton78
02-02-2019, 03:11 PM
If itís a regional guy with 1000 121-PIC compared to a military guy with 0 121-PIC, then yes heís more qualified. Iíll make this real elementary. A regional pilot is no different than mainline other than pay, equipment and airline. 100 percent SAME JOB. So in a logical world one with industry experience would be favored over another with no industry experience. But then thereís the ĎPR factorí for cooperations to hire vets and then comes before qualifications....



Ugh. What you fail to comprehend is that in just about any competitive job in the world, the people hiring are looking at entire package of the candidate, not just whether or not they can do the basic requirements of the job. That's all I'll contribute to this pointless thread. Carry on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

rickair7777
02-02-2019, 03:16 PM
If it’s a regional guy with 1000 121-PIC compared to a military guy with 0 121-PIC, then yes he’s more qualified. I’ll make this real elementary. A regional pilot is no different than mainline other than pay, equipment and airline. 100 percent SAME JOB. So in a logical world one with industry experience would be favored over another with no industry experience. But then there’s the ‘PR factor’ for cooperations to hire vets and then comes before qualifications....

All wrong. There was no PR factor related to vets when airlines started hiring military pilots en masse... they were all that was available.

The airlines grew up and evolved with a strong military pilot culture. Taking that out would have consequences.

If you just need seat-meat, then any RJ FO is fine.

But majors want pilots who have leadership experience (perhaps more than leading one FO and one FA out to dinner at Applebys in Shebogan). They also want "whole people" who can represent well and interact with their customers. Ex-mil are known quantities. Also guaranteed to have performed under real stress, not all civilians can say the same.

The other thing you're conveniently glossing over is that mil people have passed several quality cuts for stamina, mental fortitude, mission accomplishment, and leadership all in a competitive environment. That kind of stuff builds character. It's possible (perhaps with parent's money) to come up the civilian track without any real hardship.

Not to say that no civilian meets all those criteria, many do and others would rise to the occasion if they had the opportunity. But mil is known quantity...

Again you're peeing into the wind, your emotional prejudices aren't going to change the world.

m3113n1a1
02-02-2019, 03:18 PM
The few times I've been through airline training both civilian and military guys got through just the same...the ones who struggled or had to repeat lessons were always the older guys regardless of whether they were military or civilian.

Enough mil vs civ, let's turn this to old vs young!!

rickair7777
02-02-2019, 03:19 PM
The few times I've been through airline training both civilian and military guys got through just the same...the ones who struggled or had to repeat lessons were always the older guys regardless of whether they were military or civilian.

Enough mil vs civ, let's turn this to old vs young!!

As an "older" guy and experienced instructor, I would agree with that.

Poser765
02-02-2019, 03:24 PM
As an "older" guy and experienced instructor, I would agree with that.as someone almost 40 and just went through initial on a new airplane, I can agree as well. Just donít think Iíve got another type rating in me.

Poser765
02-02-2019, 03:25 PM
Again, 121 experience when selecting candidates for INTERVIEWS is less important than military training. Its called STANDARDIZATION, something you have no idea about when dealing with civilian trained pilots.

When it comes to IOE there is a difference, but you have to get past the interview board first then qualification training. Military guys been there, done that. Plus they've selflessly given something to the nation. That alone gives them a leg up on someone who couldn't even qualify for military service.so your assumption is that anyone who didnít do the military thing didnít do it because they couldnít? Thatís a bit pretentious, isnít it?

captjns
02-02-2019, 03:32 PM
Way too much testastaron from both sides.

Day one of that dream job... civilian and former military check in and report for training. They either make the grade or they donít. Success from both groups is primary. Camaraderie should germinate and develop into an Esprits de Corps... one team... one goal... success among all without the ego.

How many remember the selection process way back when??? no MMPI, HOGAN, academic or other tests developed by snake oil salesmen.

Many of my colleagues reminisce our first interview experience... many of us fresh ATPs with the ink still wet on the certificate, and the FE writtens out of the way.

I remember when the C/P presided with minions on either side of him. Typical questions of the day.... drunk captain... captain flies below the VASI. After the Q & A session... off to the waiting room. Seemed like an eternity but was only 10 minutes. I get called back into the inner sanctum. The C/P rendered the verdict agreed upon by unanimous consent. The pronouncement... ďSeems like youíll get along with the others. Welcome aboard.Ē Before taking my leave, the C/P said... ďIts not where you came from... its where your journey takes you. 40+ years later, and Ive never and never want to work a day in my life.

Iíve been on the hiring board for for US and foreign carriers. Reminiscent of the C/P from my first interview, Iím not interested in the canned answers to the canned questions... why my airline... why should we hire you and not the guy outside. Itís not the number of of degrees... nor being number one in oneís class.... military/civilian. I like to hear why flying... love of flying. Perhaps Iíll never do that again story... and what not. After all... besides the three Sís... what do pilots like to take about??? flying!

Try to embrace each other... not as civilian or military but people who love to fly.

Ben Kenobi
02-02-2019, 03:36 PM
These are not the droids you're looking for. Oops.....sorry, wrong thread.

Carry on......

deadseal
02-02-2019, 03:43 PM
If itís a regional guy with 1000 121-PIC compared to a military guy with 0 121-PIC, then yes heís more qualified. Iíll make this real elementary. A regional pilot is no different than mainline other than pay, equipment and airline. 100 percent SAME JOB. So in a logical world one with industry experience would be favored over another with no industry experience. But then thereís the ĎPR factorí for cooperations to hire vets and then comes before qualifications....

So to be clear let me ask you a question that should sum this up. You are sitting left seat and you have an angine failure just after V1, heavy weight, Venus is in retro and gremlins are attached to the right side hydraulics trying to make the fat shamer freak out and punch the tinder gay dude trying to hook up with your relief FO.
Would you want a 1000 hour regional FO in that seat or a 3000 hour military pilot?

Look dude training doesnít make you a better pilot, but there are definitely better training programs. Not sure why you get all bent out of shape for this

captjns
02-02-2019, 03:49 PM
as someone almost 40 and just went through initial on a new airplane, I can agree as well. Just don’t think I’ve got another type rating in me.

^^^^ I’ve been on Boeing products from the onset of my career. An overseas carrier I flew with asked if I wanted to transition to the Air Bus. I expressed my appreciation for the invite, and said I just don’t have enough room in my tiny Aviating brain for another rating on an airframe thats on opposite sides of the universe.

stabapch
02-02-2019, 04:03 PM
So to be clear let me ask you a question that should sum this up. You are sitting left seat and you have an angine failure just after V1, heavy weight, Venus is in retro and gremlins are attached to the right side hydraulics trying to make the fat shamer freak out and punch the tinder gay dude trying to hook up with your relief FO.
Would you want a 1000 hour regional FO in that seat or a 3000 hour military pilot?

Look dude training doesnít make you a better pilot, but there are definitely better training programs. Not sure why you get all bent out of shape for this

Lol Iím not the one displaying arrogance toward civilian trained pilots. So when we can compromise and consider each other equal Iíll stop, but Iím proud of my background and itís only got me success to this day while remaining humble on the line, so the arrogance will end.

Pats or Rams?

Excargodog
02-02-2019, 04:06 PM
Pats or Rams?

:( Seahawks....

Tring
02-02-2019, 04:13 PM
Had to WADE through a stack of resumes just this morning. Not exactly what I want to do on one of my few days off.



If you really are a recruiter, which I doubt, I question your professionalism with a comment like this. I feel bad for the people that have to deal with your incompetence if this how you are in real life. You DO NOT represent my profession.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

HIFLYR
02-02-2019, 04:37 PM
How exactly do you think military checklists vary from civilian ones?

Civilians must have landing gear on the checklist and Mil guys don't because the mil tower always tells them to check their gear on final. Sorry guys could not resist.:D

deadseal
02-02-2019, 04:40 PM
Lol Iím not the one displaying arrogance toward civilian trained pilots. So when we can compromise and consider each other equal Iíll stop, but Iím proud of my background and itís only got me success to this day while remaining humble on the line, so the arrogance will end.

Pats or Rams?

Nice work not answering the question.
Thank you come again

stabapch
02-02-2019, 04:41 PM
All wrong. There was no PR factor related to vets when airlines started hiring military pilots en masse... they were all that was available.

The airlines grew up and evolved with a strong military pilot culture. Taking that out would have consequences.

If you just need seat-meat, then any RJ FO is fine.

But majors want pilots who have leadership experience (perhaps more than leading one FO and one FA out to dinner at Applebys in Shebogan). They also want "whole people" who can represent well and interact with their customers. Ex-mil are known quantities. Also guaranteed to have performed under real stress, not all civilians can say the same.

The other thing you're conveniently glossing over is that mil people have passed several quality cuts for stamina, mental fortitude, mission accomplishment, and leadership all in a competitive environment. That kind of stuff builds character. It's possible (perhaps with parent's money) to come up the civilian track without any real hardship.

Not to say that no civilian meets all those criteria, many do and others would rise to the occasion if they had the opportunity. But mil is known quantity...

Again you're peeing into the wind, your emotional prejudices aren't going to change the world.

Everything you said here can apply to anyone completing a rigorous college degree program with high honors (outside of an aviation degree).

Donít quote me on this, but nowadayís itís like 3/4 civ to 1/4 mil background in the majors is what I read. Could that be because of all the 141 college programs thriving, where they basically give you all the knowledge just short of a type rating to succeed in a 121 environment? Making you a more qualified pilot for the airline operation? Lack of qualified military applicants nowadays? Shortage of military applicants? A flooding of civilian applicants? Thatís a big proportion shift from the past.

stabapch
02-02-2019, 04:51 PM
Nice work not answering the question.
Thank you come again

I would take the 1000 hr regional guy, as long heís not a millennial with a GoPro.

Mesabah
02-02-2019, 05:16 PM
I would take the 1000 hr regional guy, as long he’s not a millennial with a GoPro.
I would take the pilot with 1000 hrs of 121 experience over a new hire of either civilian, or military background. As a captain of over a decade, and seeing major hiring booms, 121 experience is king over everything else. That said, military pilots make better employees, in terms of reliability, like lower sick calls, following uniform standards, and overall outward presentation.

deadseal
02-02-2019, 05:29 PM
I would take the 1000 hr regional guy, as long heís not a millennial with a GoPro.

Copy........

Excargodog
02-02-2019, 09:37 PM
Donít quote me on this, but nowadayís itís like 3/4 civ to 1/4 mil background in the majors is what I read. Could that be because of all the 141 college programs thriving, where they basically give you all the knowledge just short of a type rating to succeed in a 121 environment? Making you a more qualified pilot for the airline operation? Lack of qualified military applicants nowadays? Shortage of military applicants? A flooding of civilian applicants? Thatís a big proportion shift from the past.


Strangely enough, I AM quoting you.

In WWII the US Army Air Corps produced 50,000 pilots a year. There were 105 Air Training Command bases IN CALIFORNIA ALONE. During the Vietnam era we had about ten USAF UPT bases EACH turning out a thousand FW pilots annually and the Navy was doing about the same at Pensacola.

Many of these AF UPT bases are simply GONE, lost to Base Realignment And Closure.

Craig, Webb, Williams, Laredo, Reese, are no longer bases, and neither the bases nor their training airspace is ever coming back. Other bases have been scaled back as well. Some, like Sheppard, wth itís European NATO Joint Jet Training now are used for teaching foreign pilots for NATO rather than just US personnel, decreasing their number of US graduates.

Currently the US military turns out about 2500 FW pilots a year including Guard and Reserve. Active duty service commitment for USAF UPT graduates is ten years after graduation so they are not even eligible to leave until they have been in for 11 years and many will incur additional active duty service commitment with upgrades or bonuses. Right now the USAF has 88% of their authorizations filled and are struggling to keep their squadrons filled.

So yeah, with fewer military aviators than ever before being created, and those that are created indentured to the services for longer than ever before, and with projected retirements at Delta, United, and American alone just about equaling annual US military FW pilot production, I donít think itís too surprising that there is a big shift from the past when military pilot production was far higher.

The entire current production of US military pilots couldnít possibly meet current demand in the majors.



Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1