so you want to be a military pilot?
 

After reading that other thread, I think we're missing a great opportunity to help the plethora of young civilian pilots out there who want to become airline pilots and would also like to fly in the USAF, USMC, USN or USCG.

So what sage advice or experiences would you military folks like to share with the average college or post college pilot who has a dream of becoming an airline pilot and is trying to weigh the pro's and con's of fulfilling another dream of becoming a pilot in the military beforehand over taking the regional pilot path to the majors?

And what questions do you civilian guys have for those who've been there, done that and looked good the whole way? :D

I know there are plenty of good threads on this military forum about this very thing and many of them are very specific questions, this is just a more generic question.

My advice, from my own personal experience, would be to be cautious about joining the military.

Killing people for a living should be something that disturbs you. There's a lot of cliches repeated often by many with a wide variety of motivations that serve to distance all of us, military and civilian, from the full effect of the use of military violence. There's all sorts of things about "heroes" "freedom" and "something bigger than you" that are repeated so often that they are simply assumed to be true, and people who challenge them are quickly vilified, so we don't question them.

My advice to someone considering joining the military for any reason, to include furthering a career as a pilot, is to not sacrifice your humanity for anything, to include "patriotism, "service," and "your country" as much as personal goals.

If the thought of killing people disturbs someone, but they have taken time to think about this and feel that despite this it is still justifiable and necessary, I disagree with them on some things but I can still respect that. The people who join the military and relish the chance to "kill bad guys" are more a danger to free society than they are defenders of freedom.

Yes.

But I think I have to disagree somewhat with the rest. Not on political grounds, but on the fact that your perspective is missing the big picture...

Most military personnel don't "kill people for a living", they contribute in a myriad of other ways. Even most strike/attack pilots are somewhat removed from killing...they deliver ordnance which may be targeted for a variety of reasons (infrastructure, suppression, etc). Their mission may or may not harm anyone. Of course you have to be prepared to accept that fact you may well harm people (hopefully bad people), or if you are in a support role be OK with supporting combat forces.

Most people who join the military have dual or multiple motivations....usually to serve their country AND further their own education, job skills, personal growth. Nothing wrong with that.

Blind "patriotism" or nationalism is not really a good thing. However...

Service to your country/society (civic duty) is a fundamental pillar of western civilization going back thousands of years (this includes military and civic service). There really is no debating the merits of this, unless you live alone a desert island or in a tyrannical dictatorship.

No one should have any hesitation to serve in some capacity, if you do, you are part of the problem. If you don't want to kill people or support those who do, I can respect that...there are plenty of other ways to contribute.

If you are simply afraid (we all are) and unwilling to overcome that and risk yourself in the common cause...that makes you a coward. Cowards like to cloak themselves in all manner of moral and conscientious trappings...but that doesn't change what they are.

Of course the world is imperfect...one of the big challenges we must confront while doing our military/civic duty is that fact that no system is perfect. Our efforts might be wasted or misdirected for the wrong purposes. Battles might be mismanaged, simple mistakes made, the wrong people harmed...wars might even be fought for the wrong reasons. You can serve and still participate in the political process to help guide the big-picture direction of things.

What we have to do is commit ourselves to a long-term greater good and worthy goals and accept that due to the imperfect nature of world we live in that there will be ups and downs along the way to those goals. Electing not to participate because you cannot guarantee that innocents will always be protected is not realistic or even rational. If things go our way in the long run more innocents will be better off.

It's a tough world out there, and we are not yet at the point where violence is not a reality.

Not entirely true. Leaders must be reluctant to kill or place others at risk...the higher the rank, the greater the reluctance hopefully. But at the lowest tactical levels, the guys who have to confront combat on a daily basis often need a very aggressive mindset to survive, overcome fear, and do the mission...just the nature of the beast. That mindset is usually cultivated, but a few guys may have just shown up that way. Oh Well...whatever gets them through it is fine by me. Of course they have to shift gears when they come home, and it is imperative that their leaders channel their personnel to accomplish the necessary mission in the correct manner.

Aren't you glad that you live in a country where you can type your thoughts out? In my opinion - your views are very misguided; but I'm ok with that. Btw - I'm a danger to society and very proud if it.

USMCFLYR

Wow, how to even reply to CapnFuzz. I am sure those unfortunates in Haiti were not happy to see the military show up. I am sure those on a sinking ship are not happy to see the military Coast Guard show up. Don't need to go on.

But to the original post, after being in this business over 30 years is this, run, hide, sell insurance......don't go to the airlines.

If one has the calling to serve in the military, now that is the only route I would suggest to the airlines. Retire at 42, have 23 years with the airlines and be on your way. When you get furloughed, you will have your military retirement to help out with, you will have saved enough money, hopefully to sustain your lifestyle until the furlough is over. And at age 65 you will have two nice retirements to work with.

But to start from scratch, I just can't honestly recommend it. Learn a skill that doesn't belong to a coorporation. Hell, barge boat captains on the Mississippi make more money than a 777 captain at Delta. Learn a skill that requires people to come to you for whatever. The time, the money and the heartache it takes to reach a major is just not worth it in my mind. And once you reach the majors or wherever, nothing is written in stone, ask the Eastern, PanAm, National, Ozark,TWA, retired Delta, United, UsAir pilots. Would any Delta pilot hired in the late 70s ever think that Delta would one day be the largest airline in the world after emerging from bankruptcy. No one is immune to the good or the bad.

With a cozy military retirement in one's background, the whole landscape changes. But again, no way in the world would I recommend this career to anyone starting from zero. It is an addiction to many, me included.

Seriously??? The young men and women of this country are what has allowed you to speak your mind. They put their lives in harms way, they sacrifice time that could be spent with their loved ones, and they do these things without question so that you can live in the greatest country in the world. You have the right to pursue any dream you wish, while carrying any opinion you see fit. To sit there and say these individuals are a danger to society is more than a little off base. You need to take a long hard look in the mirror and see where you contribute positively to this country. I'd be willing to bet that you happily take the things that are given to you, without lifting a finger to give back in any way.
I'm sure you will enjoy your time with your family and friends at home tonight.
I've got to go fly a mission into the AOR on your behalf...

Dear Lord, Captfuzz, this ain't the huffington post and while they may appreciate your pacifism most of us appreciate those willing to serve and what they're willing to do and support those thinking about joining.

USMCflyer:

http://usmcshop.grunt.com/prodimg/BS227.jpg
___
So back to the topic.

Capt Fuzz,

I've served for 13 years, and I never killed anyone. If anything, I saved way more people than I killed or contributed towards killing. I have been shot at while conducting several humanitarian missions.

I respect the fact that you urge people not to blindly charge into the military without conducting some deep soul searching. That's wise advice. But I think you're using a pretty broad brush and painting the entire military as inhumane bloodthirsty killers- from chaplains to doctors to cargo pilots, and yes, fighter and bomber pilots included. I have a lot of fighter/bomber pilot friends, and I have yet to run into anyone who is bloodthirsty.

To any aspiring military professionals: remember that you take an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Sometimes that means killing bad guys. Sometimes that means training Iraqi police even though you're a pilot. Sometimes that means putting your life at risk, and accepting a lot of potential pain and agony on behalf of your family that you might leave behind, in the name of a cause far away.

Riddler

Flying is part of it....but a small part.
 

USN, USCG, and USMC fleet flying are desk jobs with flying privileges. Not sure about AD USAF. TRACOM is a little more flying centric.

Falcon (FA20) pilots at my unit have been averaging 15 hours, or about 5 flights a month at home since last summer. More flying to be had on two week deployments (about 2 a year).

Lots of awards to be written, spreadsheets to be filled in, emails to be answered, and taskers to be completed.

If you're cool with this ground job to flying ratio (I sort of am, still beats working for a living) military aviation is an awesome place to be.

I don't understand what you are saying. I've tried to read this statement in several ways and break it down, but the statement leaves me with the questions "how so?" or "why?"......

The purpose of military members is to execute the will of the political leadership of whatever country or organization they represent.... in other words they are the "enforcers of policy"----policy of their leaders.

To do this, the civilian leadership gives outcomes or desires (ie the political outcomes they want) The military then formulates missions objectives and strategy to achieve those objectives. This may OR MAY NOT involve killing to achieve those objectives. The leadership gives the strategies to achieve the objective to those who carry out the mission or "orders".... these are the military members. They may order them to accomplish the objective by killing, almost always under a tight set of rules of engagement.

The military member then carries it out. Hopefully he kills them, and they do not kill him. Hopefully, he kills the bad guys only.

The mental state of the military member is irrelevant. He may "relish" the killing or be haunted by it. Either way, he accomplishes the orders. By "relishing" it or "feeling bad" about it, doesn't make him a "danger to a free society".......

If you had said, if he just 'relishes killing' (for the sake of killing) and it doesn't matter whether it's "bad guys" or not or it doesn't matter if it is part of the country's objectives, and he doesn't follow the ROE, then he is a danger----otherwise he's not; and deserves our respect.