Opteryx

I would be interested to have you expand on that. Of course they're not the same but I thought they are somewhat similar (we even taught CRM in the schoolhouse). I've got a great story about when we had a four ship of IPs come off a strike and the tanker had abandoned us. We had some great CRM there.....

Yeah, I had a lot of .8s and .9s - a lot of decision-making in that short time....

ForeverFO

I have no idea, but if I have a guy in front of me who hasn't flown anything more complex than a VFR C-152 for 12 years, it's doubtful he's going to be up to speed on the stuff that matters, and I'd guess his performance in training is going to suffer.

Opteryx

Sure, but it's not likely you're going to jump in the cockpit and start flying passengers from the left seat, by yourself, the day after you're hired. And if you have the kind of experience we've been talking about from 10 years ago, AND you've been flying recently (even if it's only a 152 - you still get practice with your cross check and making aviation decisions), IMO, that pilot would still be a better choice than someone right out of flight school...or at least a pilot you wouldn't want to just write off. And, I think they would come up to speed pretty quickly.

ForeverFO

All I'm saying with the currency thing is that there are a lot of qualified pilots out there, and a pilot who has been out of the game for a long time is going to be less desirable than one who is recent and current. It's an extremely competitive market for the few better positions that are available right now.

That's the kind of story they'd like to hear in an interview.

Don't misunderstand me... fighter guys are desirable because they have shown that they have the leadership skills and decision-making ability to make the transition, and do so with relative ease. But that skill set is a bit different.

A fighter lead is very used to doing everything on his own, while simultaneously leading others, being directive, and making decisions for the group. These are useful and powerful skills. But they bear little resemblance to what is so heavily emphasized in a Bus or 7X7 cockpit, whereby the CA directs, the FO provides useful input, and both divide the tasks to accomplish a goal, like dealing with a complex emergency or coordinating a divert with bad wx and diminishing fuel.

I was hired with 1500 PIC, all in fighter aircraft, and the transition was not difficult, but I did have to un-learn a few things. "No, that's the Pilot-Flying function, you're pilot-momitoring." and "Ask the CA before you bleed the engine or change aircraft configuration" etc.

USMCFLYR

The military has been pushing single-seat CRM since at least '95 (that is when it started to hit my community). The FAA teaches single pilot CRM in its courses. Sometimes you have the same obstacles with pilots who have not been brought up in that culture to understand the concept as you had push back initially from people in the different communities who thought CRM only applied to a multi-person cockpit.

After 20+ years of single-seat flying, I found the transition to a multi-person cockpit an initial challenge. I had to learn to let go of certain responsibilities (comm having always been one of the hardest for me to let go) and to involve the *crew* more in decision making - whereas even with single-seat CRM (especially in an instructor role), the decision making was firmly in the hands of the formation leader/IP for example.

Opteryx

That's a fair statement.


I think your statement there is a little bit on the "old school" side. Yes lead does all that but there is a lot more coordination going on with datalink and other other "cooperative" systems. Not saying things have changed completely, but we've come a long way from #2 only saying "toop, bingo, and lead you're on fire".

Your statement about dealing with a complex emergency or coordinating a divert with bad wx and diminishing fuel is exactly what CRM means in a fighter flight too, to a "T"... the only difference in that comm is happening over the radio instead of mouth to ear (and that only makes it more difficult/impressive IMO) and that was my story too.
I guess if I ever find myself in an interview I should have a few of those ready.

xjtguy

That's pretty much ALL you have to do. Use the S.T.A.R. method, talk about how you worked with ALL your resources (whether another pilot and/or ground personnel) to solve a problem and achieve a positive outcome.

H.R./interview people know that single seat/tactical jet is simply a different situation than multi crew.

They just care that the applicant is a team player and works well with others, etc. And as USMC pointed out, making the transition to multi crew environment will be easy and bringing the "I'm hear to learn" type of attitude. You already have a leg up on the leadership aspects.

BE02Driverz

Now if that's not creative, half full thinking I don't know what is. Good on ya, and good luck.

I would gladly trade you a couple thousand hours of my multi turbine PIC, for a few of your dogfight sorties.

ForeverFO

I guess I was old school, a Reagan-era pilot. There was no data link. Lead forms a picture in his head based upon the inputs available, and then directs.

If 2 says "Uh, that heading will take us over a SAM site" then of course I'll listen and be flexible, but in general, #1 says "Do it" and #2 says "toop."

Then, on the ground, we can have a fist fight over it and then drink a beer.

gr8vu

I just connected with a prior squadron friend who is now a recruiter for sandbox jobs. If you fly F-15s, C-130s, or King Air and want to live there full time with family and excellent pay PM me.