Gulfstream Girl
02-19-2013, 07:34 PM
#111
Organizational Learning
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: Directly behind the combiner
Posts: 4,948
Originally Posted by UAL T38 Phlyer
To get this thread back on-course: I believe that if Gulfstream Girl were given an unusual attitude in the sim of 40 degrees up; 135 degrees of bank, and airspeed south of 100 kts, she would crash, regardless of how much altitude she had to start with.
But most Air Force or Navy-trained pilots would know what to do, even with only 250 hours.
.
02-19-2013, 07:44 PM
#112
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2012
Position: Holding over Macho Grande
Posts: 602
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
I know all too well about the above. I found out that my vision wouldn't qualify me.
I never understood the egotistic want of a fighter jet. Oooh, a shiny fighter. Big deal, I would have been perfectly happy flying a cargo airplane or refueling tanker. A bomber or a fighter pilot would have been good too, but I wouldn't care.
I never understood the egotistic want of a fighter jet. Oooh, a shiny fighter. Big deal, I would have been perfectly happy flying a cargo airplane or refueling tanker. A bomber or a fighter pilot would have been good too, but I wouldn't care.
I hear a lot of pain in your comments.
Perhaps that's because I've felt it myself, at least in part. I learned the hard way. After 3 years in the NROTC and being chosen for a flight training slot at Pensacola, I learned I would be taking my senior year summer cruise on board the USS Carl Vinson to observe flight ops for 3 weeks. "Excited" doesn't even begin to describe how I felt in the days thereafter. But I had to take a pre-cruise physical, and my eyesight had changed from 20/20 to 20/30. I begged the flight surgeon not to say anything, but I may as well have been a Jew begging Hitler not to send me to the camps. This was back during the Bush #1 defense cuts (thanks to the end of the Cold War and the "Peace Dividend") and I was subsequently denied a waiver for my eyesight. So I understand and empathize with your disappointment.
But the rest of your post here is total BS. You never understood the desire to fly the equivalent of a Formula 1 race car, eh? What you are essentially saying is that you would have been perfectly fine driving a station wagon, that you "didn't care". LOL
That's total and complete BS. More accurately, it's what you tell yourself (and have told yourself) to lessen the mental and emotional pain of being passed over and told you weren't good enough (nevermind the reason why). We know this because you said you "would have been perfectly happy flying a cargo airplane or refueling tanker"....the point is you wanted IN, just like 100% who ever tried to do so. Just like me.
Now you go around calling yourself "ShyGuy". Man, did you ever let all that (and likely a lot more) get into your head...right on up to saying "I never understood the egotistic want of a fighter jet. Oooh, a shiny fighter. Big deal."
Know what? It IS a big deal. A very big, huge deal. The really sad part is that you know that, too, and you wanted that for yourself...but you spew guff like this crap, all the while walking around with the self-given handle of "ShyGuy".
You are a walking psych case, and it's a damn good thing you never made it into the fighter/attack community because you would've either gotten yourself killed or gotten someone else killed.
Wanna know something else? There is NO SHAME in admitting you wanted it and tried for it, but fell short for whatever reason. Fact is, all the armed services put together x 10 don't have enough fighter/attack planes for all the people who...like you...wanted to fly them, but would've been happy just flying in the service. But instead of simply admitting that you fell in with the majority, you say it was "no big deal" and you "never could understand" why anyone would want to fly Ferarri's for a living??
Pathetic. Get some self-respect and stop sounding like an idiot.
02-19-2013, 07:48 PM
#113
Banned
Joined APC: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,134
Originally Posted by bcrosier
XJT - Excellent post! I was discussing almost this exact subject a while back with colleagues at the schoolhouse. We were all pretty much in agreement on exactly what you've posted above - and I doubt anyone was familiar with the study you mentioned (certainly not all of us). On average, there is a pronounced difference in the ability to take in the big picture.
I believe that in that same study, the most "dangerous"/accident prone hour range for military was somewhere around the 300-400 hr point. For civilian aviation it was 6-800 hrs. You know, the point at which one is trained, but doesn't quite have the benefit of experience, and the judgment gained from experience, etc. Just enough knowledge to be dangerous. In the "license to learn" phase of the learning curve/skill set building, etc.
Last edited by xjtguy; 02-19-2013 at 08:07 PM.
02-19-2013, 09:59 PM
#114
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,898
Originally Posted by UnderOveur
I hear a lot of pain in your comments.
Perhaps that's because I've felt it myself, at least in part. I learned the hard way. After 3 years in the NROTC and being chosen for a flight training slot at Pensacola, I learned I would be taking my senior year summer cruise on board the USS Carl Vinson to observe flight ops for 3 weeks. "Excited" doesn't even begin to describe how I felt in the days thereafter. But I had to take a pre-cruise physical, and my eyesight had changed from 20/20 to 20/30. I begged the flight surgeon not to say anything, but I may as well have been a Jew begging Hitler not to send me to the camps. This was back during the Bush #1 defense cuts (thanks to the end of the Cold War and the "Peace Dividend") and I was subsequently denied a waiver for my eyesight. So I understand and empathize with your disappointment.
Perhaps that's because I've felt it myself, at least in part. I learned the hard way. After 3 years in the NROTC and being chosen for a flight training slot at Pensacola, I learned I would be taking my senior year summer cruise on board the USS Carl Vinson to observe flight ops for 3 weeks. "Excited" doesn't even begin to describe how I felt in the days thereafter. But I had to take a pre-cruise physical, and my eyesight had changed from 20/20 to 20/30. I begged the flight surgeon not to say anything, but I may as well have been a Jew begging Hitler not to send me to the camps. This was back during the Bush #1 defense cuts (thanks to the end of the Cold War and the "Peace Dividend") and I was subsequently denied a waiver for my eyesight. So I understand and empathize with your disappointment.
But the rest of your post here is total BS. You never understood the desire to fly the equivalent of a Formula 1 race car, eh? What you are essentially saying is that you would have been perfectly fine driving a station wagon, that you "didn't care". LOL
That's total and complete BS. More accurately, it's what you tell yourself (and have told yourself) to lessen the mental and emotional pain of being passed over and told you weren't good enough (nevermind the reason why). We know this because you said you "would have been perfectly happy flying a cargo airplane or refueling tanker"....the point is you wanted IN, just like 100% who ever tried to do so. Just like me.
Now you go around calling yourself "ShyGuy". Man, did you ever let all that (and likely a lot more) get into your head...right on up to saying "I never understood the egotistic want of a fighter jet. Oooh, a shiny fighter. Big deal."
Know what? It IS a big deal. A very big, huge deal. The really sad part is that you know that, too, and you wanted that for yourself...but you spew guff like this crap, all the while walking around with the self-given handle of "ShyGuy".
Know what? It IS a big deal. A very big, huge deal. The really sad part is that you know that, too, and you wanted that for yourself...but you spew guff like this crap, all the while walking around with the self-given handle of "ShyGuy".
You are a walking psych case, and it's a damn good thing you never made it into the fighter/attack community because you would've either gotten yourself killed or gotten someone else killed.
Wanna know something else? There is NO SHAME in admitting you wanted it and tried for it, but fell short for whatever reason. Fact is, all the armed services put together x 10 don't have enough fighter/attack planes for all the people who...like you...wanted to fly them, but would've been happy just flying in the service. But instead of simply admitting that you fell in with the majority, you say it was "no big deal" and you "never could understand" why anyone would want to fly Ferarri's for a living??
Pathetic. Get some self-respect and stop sounding like an idiot.
Wanna know something else? There is NO SHAME in admitting you wanted it and tried for it, but fell short for whatever reason. Fact is, all the armed services put together x 10 don't have enough fighter/attack planes for all the people who...like you...wanted to fly them, but would've been happy just flying in the service. But instead of simply admitting that you fell in with the majority, you say it was "no big deal" and you "never could understand" why anyone would want to fly Ferarri's for a living??
Pathetic. Get some self-respect and stop sounding like an idiot.
02-20-2013, 01:36 AM
#115
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,837
Originally Posted by xjtguy
Yeah, I found it to be pretty interesting. What was funny was that a friend of mine that got hired at a legacy in 2001 told me it was weird. He was civilian, and talking to the other civ only guys in his class, they ALL fell into the same range. 4-5K TT, 1000-1500K PIC, all of them former regional. And none of them fell into any specific demographic other then fellow pilots writing recs for them. IOW, no interns, no sons and daughters, etc. Granted, that was just one class, and not at all represents ALL classes.
I believe that in that same study, the most "dangerous"/accident prone hour range for military was somewhere around the 300-400 hr point. For civilian aviation it was 6-800 hrs. You know, the point at which one is trained, but doesn't quite have the benefit of experience, and the judgment gained from experience, etc. Just enough knowledge to be dangerous. In the "license to learn" phase of the learning curve/skill set building, etc.
I believe that in that same study, the most "dangerous"/accident prone hour range for military was somewhere around the 300-400 hr point. For civilian aviation it was 6-800 hrs. You know, the point at which one is trained, but doesn't quite have the benefit of experience, and the judgment gained from experience, etc. Just enough knowledge to be dangerous. In the "license to learn" phase of the learning curve/skill set building, etc.
At O-3 you had better not be making the basic mistakes anymore.
02-20-2013, 01:39 AM
#116
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,837
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
Grew up near the Offut AFB. I knew. Air shows annually drew me to my interests, and it wasn't the fighters.
I believe you when you say that you didn't want to fly fighters. I had a roommate in college who's only goal was to fly KC-10s for the minimum commitment and then get out and fly with American (ideally).
But he also didn't go around saying anyone in his class who wanted to fly fighter/attack was egotistical either. That comment alone - especially with your lack of exposure to the communities - is off base and stems from something under the surface.
Last edited by USMCFLYR; 02-20-2013 at 02:16 AM.
02-20-2013, 01:57 AM
#117
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2012
Position: Holding over Macho Grande
Posts: 602
Personally, I think you are completely FOS, "ShyGuy". You came onto this thread, boasting about how you managed to buy your way into an airline job (hint: no one in their early 20's has $27k for an RJ rating unless mommy gives it to them) and that people shouldn't give the Gulfstream Girl a hard time.
Then you go on to say crap like "I never understood the egotistic want of a fighter jet. Oooh, a shiny fighter. Big deal" and "My concern was being able to pass a FAA 1st class. Once I passed that, I knew I had it made."
O'rly? You "knew you had it made", eh? LOL
Well, you may or may not be "an airline pilot", but IF (<---and that's a big "if") you are, you bought your way into the job with money someone else gave you, and here you are bragging about it while insulting a lot of folks in the process.
Me? I've got crisp $100 says you're a ramp rat who tosses bags for a living while dreaming of flying that big, shiny airliner someday, who has read just enough of these forums to know a little lingo.
LMAO! Maybe he will! 
This nails it perfectly (assuming he is what he says he is)...
Gents, haven't you been listening? ShyGuy doesn't care about all that, all he cares about is being a 2nd year FO flying an A320, and nevermind how he got there. Oh wait....yes he does....he wants to laugh at everyone who didn't do like he did and buy his way into the job while lecturing them not to look down on such people.
Want a little truth, Shy? No one will ever respect you for buying your way into your job (assuming you are what you claim to be). You'll always and forever be "that guy". Always. Have fun with that.
Oh, and go ahead and tell us all....once again....how you don't care because you got what you wanted. Protest some more, big britches.
LOL!
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
She got hired into a Gulfstream II with 250 hrs. Big deal. I got hired in a CRJ-200 with less than 250 hrs
Then you go on to say crap like "I never understood the egotistic want of a fighter jet. Oooh, a shiny fighter. Big deal" and "My concern was being able to pass a FAA 1st class. Once I passed that, I knew I had it made."
O'rly? You "knew you had it made", eh? LOL
Well, you may or may not be "an airline pilot", but IF (<---and that's a big "if") you are, you bought your way into the job with money someone else gave you, and here you are bragging about it while insulting a lot of folks in the process.
Me? I've got crisp $100 says you're a ramp rat who tosses bags for a living while dreaming of flying that big, shiny airliner someday, who has read just enough of these forums to know a little lingo.
Is it really any surprise that someone with this background would have zero problem with "Gulfstream Girl"?
Shy, maybe you can start a blog called "Airbus Virgin".
Shy, maybe you can start a blog called "Airbus Virgin".
This nails it perfectly (assuming he is what he says he is)...
He’ll never be the same as a pilot who has spent thousands of hours hand flying, working his scan, basic stick and rudder skills and instrument approaches. He’ll be an adequate systems operator that can fly basic maneuvers, stick to the script, follow company procedures and read a checklist and that is about all. Throw him a serious curve ball and the fact that he really has very little flying skills to fall back on is going to become a serious issue.
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
She got hired into a Gulfstream II with 250 hrs. Big deal. I got hired in a CRJ-200 with less than 250 hrs
Oh, and go ahead and tell us all....once again....how you don't care because you got what you wanted. Protest some more, big britches.
LOL!
02-20-2013, 04:18 AM
#118
Super Moderator
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,945
Originally Posted by UnderOveur
Well, you may or may not be "an airline pilot", but IF (<---and that's a big "if") you are, you bought your way into the job with money someone else gave you, and here you are bragging about it while insulting a lot of folks in the process.
Me? I've got crisp $100 says you're a ramp rat who tosses bags for a living while dreaming of flying that big, shiny airliner someday, who has read just enough of these forums to know a little lingo.
Me? I've got crisp $100 says you're a ramp rat who tosses bags for a living while dreaming of flying that big, shiny airliner someday, who has read just enough of these forums to know a little lingo.
02-20-2013, 07:14 AM
#119
Banned
Joined APC: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,134
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
I remember hearing that it was a 500 hr range in my community and then another at 1500 hrs. I would agree with the 1000 hr experience range. That first 'patch' meant something. You were definitely expected to perform just a little better when you slapped that thing on your shoulder. Sort of like not being a O-1/2 anymore At O-3 you had better not be making the basic mistakes anymore.
At O-3 you had better not be making the basic mistakes anymore.
02-20-2013, 07:20 AM
#120
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,026
Interesting to see that there are apparently some airline pilots that are also part time psychologists. Lordy! If you disagree with the guy’s statements, just say so and move on. No need to get into a lathered up tirade. Talk about over-kill and some possible underlying problems surfacing in the responses. ALL types of personalities each with their own quirks out there behind the sticks, isn’t there?
Keeps us all guessing.
Keeps us all guessing.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
