DGI Dead in the water?
05-27-2018, 08:08 AM
#291
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2016
Posts: 2,559
A degree is not necessary to be a 121 pilot. And being military does not make a person a better pilot than a civil-only pilot.
However, both of those things are desirable to Delta. It shows that you can commit to something, and stick to it til the end. Desirable qualities in someone that the company is about to invest (potentially) millions in. Nothing more. It’s about the person, and what they have already been thru to get to where they are now.
You are not required to like that a degree is required, nor that military have a certain advantage in getting the call to interview. But it is a fact that both are looked upon favorably by all companies.
However, both of those things are desirable to Delta. It shows that you can commit to something, and stick to it til the end. Desirable qualities in someone that the company is about to invest (potentially) millions in. Nothing more. It’s about the person, and what they have already been thru to get to where they are now.
You are not required to like that a degree is required, nor that military have a certain advantage in getting the call to interview. But it is a fact that both are looked upon favorably by all companies.
05-27-2018, 08:30 AM
#292
Rodeo clown
Joined APC: Feb 2017
Position: Tractor seat
Posts: 703
Originally Posted by Cyio
Everything you stated is accurate and I fully can get behind except that flying an airbus doesn’t require formation flying skills during inclement weather. A pilot that can do that is awesome, but doesn’t guarantee they can shoot approaches better than someone who has done 1000’s of them.
Through training I have flown with and partnered with the gambit of aviators from rotor to bomber pilots to civilian and cargo. All had the same pass rate and generally all had the same attitude and skill set for the tasks the job required. Sure my sample size is small but the military can’t fill all the slots that need filling so the airlines, in my opinion, need to widen their scope.
For the worlds sake, I hope your wrong as we are training and certifying thousands of foreign aviators with zero military or civilian training to then go back to their home country and fly the same narrow and wide bodies we are. It’s not unheard of for them to be right seat in one with less than 1000 hours total time. If the job requires such a high degree of training and mental fortitude that the military provides, why are we not seeing planes dropping from the sky on a constant basis in countries like China?
If the premise that military training somehow makes you a superb employee versus not, than I would argue how do airlines even survive when many of their employees don’t come from that background? It’s not like civi employees are just enmasse not showing up for work, having a bad attitude or constantly abusing the system.
I guess my point is, as I mentioned earlier, is that this is a new age and I think some of the mindsets of the past need to be revisited.
As for the comment about disparaging military aviators, I don’t feel I have done that.
Through training I have flown with and partnered with the gambit of aviators from rotor to bomber pilots to civilian and cargo. All had the same pass rate and generally all had the same attitude and skill set for the tasks the job required. Sure my sample size is small but the military can’t fill all the slots that need filling so the airlines, in my opinion, need to widen their scope.
For the worlds sake, I hope your wrong as we are training and certifying thousands of foreign aviators with zero military or civilian training to then go back to their home country and fly the same narrow and wide bodies we are. It’s not unheard of for them to be right seat in one with less than 1000 hours total time. If the job requires such a high degree of training and mental fortitude that the military provides, why are we not seeing planes dropping from the sky on a constant basis in countries like China?
If the premise that military training somehow makes you a superb employee versus not, than I would argue how do airlines even survive when many of their employees don’t come from that background? It’s not like civi employees are just enmasse not showing up for work, having a bad attitude or constantly abusing the system.
I guess my point is, as I mentioned earlier, is that this is a new age and I think some of the mindsets of the past need to be revisited.
As for the comment about disparaging military aviators, I don’t feel I have done that.
When one reads, “widen their scope,” a cynical person might interpret that as “they haven’t called or hired me, so they obviously are doing something wrong.” Major airlines are businesses that want to make as much money as possible, and will therefore pursue their interests as they see them, independent of your views on how they hire. My original post could be summed up as follows: 1) DGI is good, but it could certainly be better for EDV pilots, but a guaranteed flow isn’t necessary for Delta because they have plenty of qualified candidates from other sources and because early SSP candidates did not convince Delta that EDV is so perfect a source for future Delta pilots that it needs to hang the golden carrot in front of them. 2) My experience with EDV pilots that had been passed over by Delta versus what I saw when I interviewed (an admittedly small sample, as all anecdotes are) was that the mil background candidates had put more blood, sweat, and tears into prep, and that future EDV DGI candidates would serve themselves and EDV well to sacrifice all the blood, sweat, and tears appropriate to the opportunity.
You may not intend it that way, but when someone says, “I have nothing against the military (insert “Americans,” “men,” “women,” vegetables, etc.), that’s exactly what they have a problem with. You seem to be confused about the utility of formation flying and conflating that with flying, we monitoring and Airbus down final. I made the point about the steep learning curve for military training makes it an attractive sorting tool for companies because of what it represents. Perhaps an easier analogy to grasp would be the difference between a doctor that graduates from Stanford Medical School (one of the most competitive) and Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine. Both are doctors, but given limited time to find out any more about them, which one would you prefer to hire?
As for the argument about planes dropping out of the sky in China or elsewhere, reference previous difference between medical school grads, recognize how many pilots they’re hiring from outside China, and consider that monkeys that throw their own poo might be the threshold for what primates to manage an Airbus. MD-80 not so much, but Airbus yes.
Good luck.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
05-27-2018, 08:37 AM
#293
Rodeo clown
Joined APC: Feb 2017
Position: Tractor seat
Posts: 703
Originally Posted by HighFlight
A degree is not necessary to be a 121 pilot. And being military does not make a person a better pilot than a civil-only pilot.
However, both of those things are desirable to Delta. It shows that you can commit to something, and stick to it til the end. Desirable qualities in someone that the company is about to invest (potentially) millions in. Nothing more. It’s about the person, and what they have already been thru to get to where they are now.
You are not required to like that a degree is required, nor that military have a certain advantage in getting the call to interview. But it is a fact that both are looked upon favorably by all companies.
However, both of those things are desirable to Delta. It shows that you can commit to something, and stick to it til the end. Desirable qualities in someone that the company is about to invest (potentially) millions in. Nothing more. It’s about the person, and what they have already been thru to get to where they are now.
You are not required to like that a degree is required, nor that military have a certain advantage in getting the call to interview. But it is a fact that both are looked upon favorably by all companies.
Yep. They are screening indicators that cost Delta nothing. Imperfect, but cheaper and easier than a more invasive and intensive process to interview everyone that applies.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
05-27-2018, 08:51 AM
#294
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 3,659
Originally Posted by Funk
Yep. They are screening indicators that cost Delta nothing. Imperfect, but cheaper and easier than a more invasive and intensive process to interview everyone that applies.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You can choose to interpret my patriotic comments as some thin veil to cover up some animosity but that is the farthest from the truth. In the end, even Delta will have to change, it’s just a matter of time. I was simply trying to show some alternative viewpoints. I am well aware of all the points made by the other posters and undertsand the comment about school choice, as someone who has a son strong ready to attend Stanford.
Guess we can agree to disagree. Time will tell who was right. Good luck to you all. I’m out.
05-27-2018, 09:56 AM
#295
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2018
Posts: 579
Originally Posted by Cyio
Eh. Yes and no. Many employers like military vets for less than noble reasons as well. An easy background is one and in some cases financial incentives.
Again, let’s not turn this into a military vs the rest argument as it was never meant to be that. I was just simply having a thought discussion about old ways of thinking and that they should be revisited. Military and civilians alike have good and bad apples.
Again, let’s not turn this into a military vs the rest argument as it was never meant to be that. I was just simply having a thought discussion about old ways of thinking and that they should be revisited. Military and civilians alike have good and bad apples.
It’s simply an easy identifier of a group which experience has shown produces a majority of good candidates. The same can be said for varying civilian paths. Organizations like DL are not stupid, they track things and use data to refine their selection criteria, if they see huge success with applicants who trained at X school and less than desired results from applicants who trained at Y school, they will favor the applicant from X school. That doesn’t mean that any individual from X school is a better pilot than any individual from Y school, but given the data the organization has at hand it helps them to make outcome based decisions.
05-27-2018, 12:01 PM
#296
On Reserve
Joined APC: Apr 2018
Posts: 15
Originally Posted by CBreezy
No need to show over the top patriotism. If you want to be critical of military pilots, be so. That doesn't mean you don't support the military. BLAH BLAH BLAH
Also, regarding your "...far more..." comment: how much "far more than regional pilots" can anybody do while flying less than 100 hours a YEAR in some cases?
Many military folks, including myself, have respect for regional pilots. Those folks fly their asses off, and do it damn well at that. Don't disparage anybody.
It is very true that the pilot supply mindset of WW2 is not needed here anymore. We are no longer the damn near sole source of experienced aviators as we were back then. We have our turds just as the civilian world does.
Keep in mind, sometimes the only difference between a person having gone mil or civi comes down to things like a few inches on either side of the height requirements or a slight miss on the vision requirements. Hardly things that would define a person's ability.
05-27-2018, 12:45 PM
#297
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 10,067
Originally Posted by XxcloudcutterxX
Did you even read the guy's post before you decided to climb up his ass? If you had, you would notice that he said/implied exactly NONE of what you accuse him of.
Also, regarding your "...far more..." comment: how much "far more than regional pilots" can anybody do while flying less than 100 hours a YEAR in some cases?
Many military folks, including myself, have respect for regional pilots. Those folks fly their asses off, and do it damn well at that. Don't disparage anybody.
It is very true that the pilot supply mindset of WW2 is not needed here anymore. We are no longer the damn near sole source of experienced aviators as we were back then. We have our turds just as the civilian world does.
Keep in mind, sometimes the only difference between a person having gone mil or civi comes down to things like a few inches on either side of the height requirements or a slight miss on the vision requirements. Hardly things that would define a person's ability.
Also, regarding your "...far more..." comment: how much "far more than regional pilots" can anybody do while flying less than 100 hours a YEAR in some cases?
Many military folks, including myself, have respect for regional pilots. Those folks fly their asses off, and do it damn well at that. Don't disparage anybody.
It is very true that the pilot supply mindset of WW2 is not needed here anymore. We are no longer the damn near sole source of experienced aviators as we were back then. We have our turds just as the civilian world does.
Keep in mind, sometimes the only difference between a person having gone mil or civi comes down to things like a few inches on either side of the height requirements or a slight miss on the vision requirements. Hardly things that would define a person's ability.
05-27-2018, 01:32 PM
#298
On Reserve
Joined APC: Apr 2018
Posts: 15
Originally Posted by CBreezy
Did you read my post before you climbed up mine? Don't be so sensitive, Sally. Nothing I said showed disrespect toward military or civilian pilots. If you read it that way, it is because you are projecting your own insecurities.
Your "...far more..." statement did imply "this better than that". You did say that, or did you fail to even read your own post? Do you read anything?
And there's nobody up your ass. Yet. But clearly you want somebody up there so you must be the female here. Or are you just a bottom trying to play the role?
Cut the passive-aggressive insults. Why would you even take it there?
Last edited by XxcloudcutterxX; 05-27-2018 at 01:42 PM.
05-27-2018, 05:40 PM
#300
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 10,067
Originally Posted by XxcloudcutterxX
Obviously I did, dumbass.
Your "...far more..." statement did imply "this better than that". You did say that, or did you fail to even read your own post? Do you read anything?
And there's nobody up your ass. Yet. But clearly you want somebody up there so you must be the female here. Or are you just a bottom trying to play the role?
Cut the passive-aggressive insults. Why would you even take it there?
Your "...far more..." statement did imply "this better than that". You did say that, or did you fail to even read your own post? Do you read anything?
And there's nobody up your ass. Yet. But clearly you want somebody up there so you must be the female here. Or are you just a bottom trying to play the role?
Cut the passive-aggressive insults. Why would you even take it there?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
