|
The biggest jerks and the finest bros I’ve met have both been former military aviators.
|
Originally Posted by DreadWing
(Post 2761664)
Completely true. I'm addressing more the popular perception that military officers (specifically that officer aviators are managers FIRST, that cannot be denied) are "better equipped" for airline management...as seen by pilot managers.
It's totally plausible that officers/NCOs in other MOSs are completely INVISIBLE to pilot managers (especially ones with a military background). I've never heard anyone compliment management as being particularly...imaginative. Have you? Airline management is ALWAYS going to biased toward what they perceive as more "management," and for a myriad of largely indefensible reasons, none of which have any meaningful bearing on which candidate is (actually) better qualified to operate transport category aircraft conservatively. That's my theory, at any rate. I seriously doubt that airline management (in general), for all their grotesque inadequacies, actually BELIEVES that military aviators are superior pilots. No, it's far more likely they've been hiring future chief pilots, et al, and they've been doing so for DECADES. Reading your posts reminds me of reading this bad boy: https://www.amazon.com/Everything-Ex.../dp/0974261300 And I mean that as a compliment. Okay, back to the popcorn.... |
Flow upgrade time with military experience
Originally Posted by DreadWing
(Post 2761791)
Yeah, so I should have realized night cargo and military are basically the...same job? Come on.
Two different professions with some LIMITED overlap do not make for identical experiences. You’re missing the point. Military pilots fly in the exact conditions (busted up antiquated aircraft, horrendous weather at night, fuel guzzling, maintenance problems, surviving, etc) you described as being 1000% more relevant to an airline than ANYTHING the military has to offer. Military pilots fly in those same EXACT conditions from point A to point B, but add in the stress of a mission enroute and then landings and approaches at constantly unfamiliar fields in foreign countries. Also add in a wingman (or 3) whose problems also become your own. They are managing emergencies in multiple cockpits and making decisions for multiple aircraft at once. You would think an airline would want to hire someone who can do all of that safely, just as they should want to hire you. I’m not saying that night cargo pilots aren’t suited for the majors. They are. But so are military pilots. Just because they haven’t logged 10,000 hours with a regional doesn’t mean they don’t have the skills and experience necessary to succeed at a major airline. 1000 hours at 3 hours each leg is much different than 1000 hours at .9 each. |
Originally Posted by Rg11
(Post 2762330)
You’re missing the point. Military pilots fly in the exact conditions (busted up antiquated aircraft, horrendous weather at night, fuel guzzling, maintenance problems, surviving, etc) you described as being 1000% more relevant to an airline than ANYTHING the military has to offer. Military pilots fly in those same EXACT conditions from point A to point B, but add in the stress of a mission enroute and then landings and approaches at constantly unfamiliar fields in foreign countries. Also add in a wingman (or 3) whose problems also become your own. They are managing emergencies in multiple cockpits and making decisions for multiple aircraft at once. You would think an airline would want to hire someone who can do all of that safely, just as they should want to hire you.
I’m not saying that night cargo pilots aren’t suited for the majors. They are. But so are military pilots. Just because they haven’t logged 10,000 hours with a regional doesn’t mean they don’t have the skills and experience necessary to succeed at a major airline. 1000 hours at 3 hours each leg is much different than 1000 hours at .9 each. |
Originally Posted by Prettywhacked1
(Post 2760816)
I’m retired AF FW guy, I don’t understand in this job market why ANYBODY with competitive TT/PIC would go to any regional, if they are willing to put in the time at Recruitment events......imho, of course.......
|
The pro-.mil guys in this thread have weak arguments. I'd expect more articulate discussion points from superior pilots.
|
Originally Posted by Varsity
(Post 2762802)
The pro-.mil guys in this thread have weak arguments. I'd expect more articulate discussion points from superior pilots.
|
Originally Posted by Varsity
(Post 2762110)
The military has some great people and some absolute garbage humans in it. It's not a league of saints.
The slobbering over the .mil is largely an American concept. In other countries people in the military are often viewed as being on government welfare, which it is. |
Flow upgrade time with military experience
Originally Posted by Cyio
(Post 2762353)
OK, so by your comments then, should military pilots get preferential treatment over non military assuming we are comparing to say a 5+ year 121 regional pilot with several years as a captain?
It depends on their resumes when compared side by side. Hours (and quality of those hours), experience, qualifications, leadership, interview answers, etc. It’s not preferential treatment. It’s who is more qualified. You seem to think the 121 captain is always more qualified, but that’s just your opinion. My point is that you and DreadWing both expressed a sentiment that YOUR experiences were more relevant than that of a military pilot (see your exact quotes below). Not the other way around. When you gave examples of those experiences, you precisely described the administrative portion of a military pilots’ routine flight. It showed your ignorance as to what a military pilot experiences, going so far as saying that a military pilot could “pick up all that very easily.” It turns out that airlines like to hire people who have proven to perform safely and routinely under extreme pressures that are rarely recreated in civil aviation. They also like to hire regional captains, so don’t feel that this is unfair. Both are being hired with approximately the same amount of years flying (the pay your dues argument). So why is it so unfair to you? “...you cant tell me that experience is more relevant than that of a regional pilot who has probably had a dozen or more 121 emergencies, countless re-routes, fuel issues etc...I also agree that a military pilot can pick up all that very easily...” “...1000% more relevant than ANYTHING the military has to offer” Two unbelievably ignorant statements that show a profound lack of basic military aviation knowledge. I would think the hiring practices of major airlines were unfair too if I didn’t realize that military pilots do more than just drop bombs and play volleyball. If I didn’t realize military pilots had fuel problems, flew in bad weather, dealt with emergencies, and were re-routed, I too would be angry that they were hired even by a regional. |
Originally Posted by Rg11
(Post 2763251)
It depends on their resumes when compared side by side. Hours (and quality of those hours), experience, qualifications, leadership, interview answers, etc. It’s not preferential treatment. It’s who is more qualified. You seem to think the 121 captain is always more qualified, but that’s just your opinion.
My point is that you and DreadWing both expressed a sentiment that YOUR experiences were more relevant than that of a military pilot (see your exact quotes below). Not the other way around. When you gave examples of those experiences, you precisely described the administrative portion of a military pilots’ routine flight. It showed your ignorance as to what a military pilot experiences, going so far as saying that a military pilot could “pick up all that very easily.” It turns out that airlines like to hire people who have proven to perform safely and routinely under extreme pressures that are rarely recreated in civil aviation. They also like to hire regional captains, so don’t feel that this is unfair. Both are being hired with approximately the same amount of years flying (the pay your dues argument). So why is it so unfair to you? “...you cant tell me that experience is more relevant than that of a regional pilot who has probably had a dozen or more 121 emergencies, countless re-routes, fuel issues etc...I also agree that a military pilot can pick up all that very easily...” “...1000% more relevant than ANYTHING the military has to offer” Two unbelievably ignorant statements that show a profound lack of basic military aviation knowledge. I would think the hiring practices of major airlines were unfair too if I didn’t realize that military pilots do more than just drop bombs and play volleyball. If I didn’t realize military pilots had fuel problems, flew in bad weather, dealt with emergencies, and were re-routed, I too would be angry that they were hired even by a regional. Fantastic that military guys/gals can do all that you said they can, I dont think that is the argument. The argument is that a military guy automatically moves to the front of the line because, to summarize you, have proven capable of handling tense situations under stress. You know what, you are absolutely correct in that statement. However, if you are comparing that person to a 5+ year 121 pilot, guess what, they probably already have experienced a great number of crappy situations as well and are still alive to talk about it, hence proving themselves capable of doing the job. So again, it isn't fair that a military pilot is chosen over a civilian pilot strictly on the basis of military time when compared to a capable and experienced civilian. They should both be given equal treatment and wait their turn. I am not sure why this is even a debate to be honest. In terms of veterans being given priority in all fields, this is true, however most fields dont require 10 years of work just to start your final career. As an example, if a veteran is given a spot over a civilian to join the police force, its not like the civilian has been working as a cop for 10 years and then someone shows up and jumps in front of them, or worse, stops them from being hired at a hire position. We are a unique industry and just because something works elsewhere doesn't mean it will hear. I will end it with this, I respect the hell out of our armed services and I sincerely hope that I am not misrepresenting myself on that. I am going to just call it spades here and agree to disagree, not like my voice really matters in this debate anyway. As I stated way back on page one, I wish you the best of luck and one day when I make it mainline and you are my captain, a thousand or so numbers ahead of me, we can reminisce about the good ole days of forum discussion. ;) Take care. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:32 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands