Military multiengine fighter time doesn't "count" as centerline thrust -- that's the mistake in your thinking. The centerline thrust only refers to a restriction placed the Commercial tickets issued to military-only trained pilots who take the FAA competency test.

If you have your multi BEFORE the AF, you won't have a centerline thrust restriction, obviously. If you are a military-only trained pilot, then your Commercial will have the restriction until you go do a Vmc demo with an FAA examiner and get it removed.

There's nothing magically different about the multiengine time you get in a military fighter...it's not "centerline thrust multiengine" time. The restriction is on the ticket of the military-trained pilots, not on the airplane. The hours still go in the multi column of the logbook and still count juyst like any other multi hours at the airline interview.

 

Thank you a lot Hacker15e

 

Hacker is correct. Airlines don't care if your multi time is CLT or not. Multi is multi. They really don't care that much if your mil time is mult or not either. If you are worried about that, you may be in trouble. What happens if you do make it that far and get a F-16 or F-35 (high odds). You will be logging single-engine time.

 

FNG1,

If you get F-16s, you may even get the chance to log some glider time!

 

Amazing how very wrong you are. The PW or the GE series engines of late on F-16's are extremely reliable. The days of continuous engine problems on the F-16 are many years old. The GE models are amazingly stable - much more so than the PW -100 engines on the F-15C's.

 

Correct. Fighter CL thrust time is not a problem for the airlines at all, in fact F-16 SE time is almost universally accepted also. You only need to get the CL thrust limit removed from your COMM or ATP.

 

And the humor impaired scarf wearing stereotype lives!!

 

Yeah, that's why JSF is going single engine too. Engines are so reliable now that they can say that it will be cheaper (because it always comes down to money) to have a single engine aircraft, even if they know they will lose some aircraft due to engine failures, than it would to pay for the extra engines, systems, maintenance, etc, on a dual engine aircraft.

BTW, I lost an engine over Iraq a few years ago because of a bad oil pump, luckily I had another. You can show me all the statistics in the world that these new engines are more reliable than the two I have now, and I'll agree every day and twice on Sunday as long as I'm day, VFR, and in CONUS. Put me in bad weather, at night, over bad guy country, and I want two engines!!

 

Better engines but still lots of birds and FOD out there waiting to be ingested. I doubt the SFO requirements are being relaxed.

 

I took a bird on a simulated pop attack in Gamecock Charlie in SC. GE-129 chewed it up and spit it out bypass. Never even knew I hit it until I found blood in the intake and feathers in the nozzle on the post-flight.

Good thing I was wearing my lucky scarf....