Good point, I missed that. That route might, with luck and timing, get you to a major faster and result in long-term economic advantage despite the high upfront costs.

But the risks are high...getting stuck with a large loan, no job, and zero competitive experience to get one. The safer route is lower cost, pay-as-you-go, training followed by flight instructing and/or other GA work to get that 1500 hour experience base that gives you competitive chances at a variety of jobs.

Also most (but not all) regionals that hire kids out of puppy mills are bottom-feeders ...if you get stuck at one of those, you will probably end up applying for a job as a wholesale truck tire salesman just to escape aviation.

And don't forget the pending ATP requirement...the days of 300-hour wonders will probably end in 2013.

 

When I got into this business I didn't do it for the love of flying, I did it for the "margaritas and senoritas" but after 28 years I'm starting to think that somebody done lie to me

 

Frankly, I'm torn between those two options and I'm not sure if there is a "right" answer to that. To me, until the prospects for the airline pilot profession change, it makes no sense to spend six figures at ERAU, for example, even though ERAU is a fine school (not picking on Embry-Riddle, that example just pops to mind). However, if one can find a quality flight school that would cost about the same as a local FBO, and it provides a direct path to a regional airline job, should that path not be recommended?

I realize that we all say that EVERYONE should flight instruct because of the valuable experience it provides, but let's say that a young pilot has 2 options, go to Part 141 "private to regional airline" OR local FBO, flight instruct, then get on with a regional. Which one would you recommend? Is there a right answer?

I also lean towards the direct track Part 141 schools because if you follow my (our) advice to avoid an ERAU type school because it's just too expensive, then the structure that a Part 141 direct track school will provide would probably be even more beneficial because you're not going to get that structure from that name brand aeronautical university you're saving money on by not going to it. Know what I mean? If a young person or a career changer gets an accounting degree at the local university instead of going to ERAU, then gets his ratings at a FBO, flight instructs for a while, then shows up at a regional airline, I would imagine there's going to be some pretty serious culture shock there, even if he has 1,000-1,500 hours of total time. Perhaps the structure of a Part 141 school would be better?

Regardless, if you have an opposing view, click the link on the website and put together some concise sentences and provide the differing opinion. I'll post it on the website, even if it is contrary to the advice I give. I think a young guy or a career changer should read BOTH sides of arguments, and I don't claim to be right all the time.

 

"then shows up at a regional airline, I would imagine there's going to be some pretty serious culture shock there,"

I'm less worried about culture shock and more worried about people going for some direct track program as a way to bypass paying their dues. I think airline pilots are simply normal pilots who happen to work for an airline. The more experience a pilot has, the better, dot period. I just have a problem with dangling the carrot of "direct entry for a price" into pilot training. It opens a whole can of worms that we have already seen causes trouble.

 

Keep your debt non existant,compress the flight training as much as possible, fly to the legal limit , as close to 1000 hrs a year as possible.

 

Thats a nice job, but, like any pilot, I have my two cent opinion. When you define the airline pilot career path, you fail to make mention that, traditionally and still to this day, many airline pilots are former military pilots. This method, at least to me, remains the most practical way to reach a major airline job. It will depend on what you fly, but I have met all services and platforms (including helicopters) at my major airline. 1 out of 2 seem to be military. More often than not, the guys who came through civilian routes indicate that they regret not seizing this opportunity. Obviously I am former and pro-military aviation.

The military career path you define is Air Force-centric. The Army operates more aircraft than any other service. You may know that a college degree is not required to fly in the Army. In fact, your flying career there may be prolonged if you do not have one (Army aviation doctrine). The boat services (my background);USMC, USN, and USCG; have great flying opportunities. These services seem to take more non-elite commissioning sources to flight training. Remember, the USAF largely revolves around its flying service members. In the other services, flying is an elite assigment, but it is not always the most desirable assignment--possibly more opportunity.

Somebody mentioned "senoritas and margaritas" enticed him into the job. You will find that in military flying. You may also find combat, hardship, and some very traumatic life experiences. All routes to a successful flying career have their benefits and, of course, their costs.

 

A lot of trueth in this. Also the military pilots will always find a way to get a buddy hired even if he is a poor pilot. I have seen it over and over where they find a way to get rid of the civilian trained pilot so someone in their reserve or guard unit can have the job. Its a great club to belong too.

 

You are right about not including enough about the military. A pretty knowledgeable APC forum guy just gave me a pretty extensive Air Force path that I'm going to try to condense down to a few paragraphs and include it on the site. If you (or anyone else) would like to describe a typical Navy or Army path, that would be great as well. Please PM me with what you think I should include and I'll put it on the site.

 

The military may offer great experiences and/or education about life or otherwise... But it's definitely not for everyone. Some people don't believe in the governments decisions and don't want to be forced to carry out those decisions... Many young people may overlook this side of the equation so the possible negatives of this route should be mentioned in an unbiased manner as well.

Not saying I'm one of them, but still something to think about. I have plenty of friends that regret ever enlisting despite the education or VA benefits... There are plenty of life lessons that can be learned as a civilian trying to make ends meet as well - at least if they didn't start out with a trust fund. I don't believe any career field should be limited to military or civilian or rich or poor or otherwise. If you are good at what you do, work hard and smart - you should have the same and equal opportunity regardless of where your skills came from. I despise favoritism and nepotism and it plagues corporate America and Washington, DC as it is.

 

Apologies if my comments about a military flying experience caused you to construe that I was advocating military service. I was advocating flying in the military as a pathway if military service is compatible with the individual. Please don't join our volunteer services if you don't really want to be there. The guy or gal on your wing or in your foxhole deserves better. I left active service when my commitment became a burden to my family. Honestly, with that in mind, I didn't want to be there anymore. Of course, a lifetime of flying offers fantastic experience and challenges no matter what you fly or who pays you to do it--if you get paid at all to do it. I have a family friend whose career was all civilian and some forty years long with 36 years at American. He retired there at #2 about a decade ago (seriously #2). Very knowledgeable and highly successful.

Your point is valid: In the service, your individual politics don't get a say. If our country says there is a fight to be had, we go throw the punches (and take some punches). My past grants me the right to speak casually about combat. In action, though, you forget about politics. The experience is primordial. You fight aggressively, you worry about right now, and you look out for the guys/gals in that place with you. In short, you first survive, then gain an advantage, and finally capitalize on the enemy. (Ironically, more often than not, that advantage is the guy overhead with bombs and rockets...a pilot) It happens ultra-fast and what Bush and Obama think doesn't count during the experience. Sorry for the diatribe...its what really happens there.

Good luck to any who find my thoughts valuable to a flying career or life.