Check Airman vs Stan/Eval vs NATOPS evaluator
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Posts: 153
Check Airman vs Stan/Eval vs NATOPS evaluator
I am looking for some help understanding the definitions, roles and qualifications of Air Force and Navy Instructor Pilots, Evaluators, Stan/Eval pilots and NATOPS evaluators. I want to make sure I don’t misrepresent my qualifications on applications and interviews to organizations who have little experience with Army aviators.
In the Army we have Instructor Pilots (IP), who, by definition train and evaluate and are qualified through a course of instruction for IPs at an authorized Aviation Proponent School in the aircraft category in which IP duties are to be performed.
Unfortunately, due to 40 years of tradition on the rotor wing side dating back to the Vietnam days when only a few pilots were instrument rated, we also have an additional, separate school and designation for Instructor Pilots to become an Instrument Examiner (IE). Instructor pilots can train and evaluate instrument tasks, except for the required annual proficiency evaluation which may only be administered by an Instrument Examiner. This still almost makes sense for helicopter gun bunnies who only have basic instrument capabilities and flying on instruments is an emergency procedure, but not for lift helicopters or fixed wing pilots where instruments are an integral part of the mission.
The Army also has the designation of Standardization Instructor Pilot (SIP or SP), which is a designation, no school required, for usually the most experienced Instructor Pilot in an organization. The Standardization Instructor Pilot is responsible for evaluating other Instructor Pilots and is also responsible for administrating the training and evaluation program in an organization. Standardization Instructor Pilots are evaluated by:
Department of Evaluation and Standards (DES), which is the Army organization responsible for creating standards and ensuring all aviation units and schools within the Army are adhering to those standards.
Any help would be greatly appreciated. As I said, I don’t want to represent my qualifications as something they are not, but I also don’t want to understate my qualifications either.
In the Army we have Instructor Pilots (IP), who, by definition train and evaluate and are qualified through a course of instruction for IPs at an authorized Aviation Proponent School in the aircraft category in which IP duties are to be performed.
Unfortunately, due to 40 years of tradition on the rotor wing side dating back to the Vietnam days when only a few pilots were instrument rated, we also have an additional, separate school and designation for Instructor Pilots to become an Instrument Examiner (IE). Instructor pilots can train and evaluate instrument tasks, except for the required annual proficiency evaluation which may only be administered by an Instrument Examiner. This still almost makes sense for helicopter gun bunnies who only have basic instrument capabilities and flying on instruments is an emergency procedure, but not for lift helicopters or fixed wing pilots where instruments are an integral part of the mission.
The Army also has the designation of Standardization Instructor Pilot (SIP or SP), which is a designation, no school required, for usually the most experienced Instructor Pilot in an organization. The Standardization Instructor Pilot is responsible for evaluating other Instructor Pilots and is also responsible for administrating the training and evaluation program in an organization. Standardization Instructor Pilots are evaluated by:
Department of Evaluation and Standards (DES), which is the Army organization responsible for creating standards and ensuring all aviation units and schools within the Army are adhering to those standards.
Any help would be greatly appreciated. As I said, I don’t want to represent my qualifications as something they are not, but I also don’t want to understate my qualifications either.
#2
I can answer on the USN/USMC side.
Depending on the level of training (Primary, Advanced, FRS/RAG, Fleet, Advanced schools/Qualifications (MAWTS/TopGun/NVG/Low Altitude Tactics and Training).
I was an FRS/RAG IP and Fleet IP/Stan guy so I'll take a shot at those.
In the FRS/RAG (fleet aircraft initial training) - there are your standard Instructor Pilots. Within each phase (Air-ground, Air-Air, FAM, etc...) there are Standardization Pilots who give training to the IPs in each stage. If I remember correctly - all IPs could give instrument checks to students, but only a few could give the NATOPS checkride. The guy who administered the NATOPS qualification to the few IPs who gave NATOPS checkrides to students were the NATOPS Standardization checkpilots.
Fast forward to the fleet. Basically the same responsibilities for the INstrument chekers and NATOPS checkers. The standardization roles being at the MAG (Marine Air Group) level rather than at the squadron level and going on up through the Wing and higher.
Tactically at the fleet/squadron level - different instructor qualifications came with your different qualifications - section lead, division lead, NVG IP, LATT IP, ACTI/SWFTI quals, etc.... This is one area that although you might not have been an *instructor* in a primary, advanced, or fleet training center - I would emphasis instructor experience in whatever role you instruct - even if it was only as a SME at the squadron level giving training to fellow squadronmates.
This same tactical level training applies to the higher level of training schools like MAWTS and TopGun who have their own levels of IPs, Stan/Eval, etc....
For the USAF folks - this is similar to the IP/EP quals correct. IP = instructor pilot and EP = evaluator pilot (checking the IPs), and STAN fits in there how...making sure the IPs are all teaching IAW the regs/stan?
Depending on the level of training (Primary, Advanced, FRS/RAG, Fleet, Advanced schools/Qualifications (MAWTS/TopGun/NVG/Low Altitude Tactics and Training).
I was an FRS/RAG IP and Fleet IP/Stan guy so I'll take a shot at those.
In the FRS/RAG (fleet aircraft initial training) - there are your standard Instructor Pilots. Within each phase (Air-ground, Air-Air, FAM, etc...) there are Standardization Pilots who give training to the IPs in each stage. If I remember correctly - all IPs could give instrument checks to students, but only a few could give the NATOPS checkride. The guy who administered the NATOPS qualification to the few IPs who gave NATOPS checkrides to students were the NATOPS Standardization checkpilots.
Fast forward to the fleet. Basically the same responsibilities for the INstrument chekers and NATOPS checkers. The standardization roles being at the MAG (Marine Air Group) level rather than at the squadron level and going on up through the Wing and higher.
Tactically at the fleet/squadron level - different instructor qualifications came with your different qualifications - section lead, division lead, NVG IP, LATT IP, ACTI/SWFTI quals, etc.... This is one area that although you might not have been an *instructor* in a primary, advanced, or fleet training center - I would emphasis instructor experience in whatever role you instruct - even if it was only as a SME at the squadron level giving training to fellow squadronmates.
This same tactical level training applies to the higher level of training schools like MAWTS and TopGun who have their own levels of IPs, Stan/Eval, etc....
For the USAF folks - this is similar to the IP/EP quals correct. IP = instructor pilot and EP = evaluator pilot (checking the IPs), and STAN fits in there how...making sure the IPs are all teaching IAW the regs/stan?
#4
The AF system is a bit simpler. At least in the CAF and RTUs, if you're an IP, you are qualified to teach everything from instruments to tactics, with the exeption of maybe NVGs, but that's generally part of the IP upgrade as well. If you're an EP (same as stav/eval) you can give a checkride for instruments or mission tasks to anyone, IP or regular line pilot. from what I remember EPs have to get evaluations from squadron Stan/Eval guy or above (DO or CC or group level Stan/Eval). Commanders (always EPs) get their checkrides from group stan/eval (usually the OG/CC) essentially insuring that there is no command or supervisor influence on the evaluator. There are some local restrictions on who can give checkrides to who, but that's above and beyond what'd dictated in the reg.
#5
]
As a Gold to Silver (USMC to ANG) guy who is now a part 121 guy as well, I would put like this.
IP in the AF/airlines very different than Naval Aviation/Army. You need to think about how you would explain it in the interview, military or civilian. If you are designated to teach and write a grade sheet on someone in a formal syllabus, one could plausibly call that being an IP. Also, how did you log it on your time sheet. Possibly a gray area to AF and airlines who have very specific definitions of IP/SEFE/Check airman. USMCFLYER did a good job of explaining the Gold side. If you are authorized to evaluate a checkride such as a Form 8 or Natops/Inst, consider that to equal a check airman in the airlines or SEFE to AF. If you are authorized to evaluate an Upgrade to flight lead, NVG, something tactical, sounds like IP and not SEFE. Some very fine lines here. My advice is to be conservative and be able to explain it to their satisfaction. I have interviewed several Army types for Guard positions and it was never that big of a deal. I definitely would not try and overinflate or oversell myself. When I interviewed with the Guard there was a former Navy guy in the unit who acted as my translator. He was like the old lady in the movie Airplane who says, "Yes, I speak jive."
As a Gold to Silver (USMC to ANG) guy who is now a part 121 guy as well, I would put like this.
IP in the AF/airlines very different than Naval Aviation/Army. You need to think about how you would explain it in the interview, military or civilian. If you are designated to teach and write a grade sheet on someone in a formal syllabus, one could plausibly call that being an IP. Also, how did you log it on your time sheet. Possibly a gray area to AF and airlines who have very specific definitions of IP/SEFE/Check airman. USMCFLYER did a good job of explaining the Gold side. If you are authorized to evaluate a checkride such as a Form 8 or Natops/Inst, consider that to equal a check airman in the airlines or SEFE to AF. If you are authorized to evaluate an Upgrade to flight lead, NVG, something tactical, sounds like IP and not SEFE. Some very fine lines here. My advice is to be conservative and be able to explain it to their satisfaction. I have interviewed several Army types for Guard positions and it was never that big of a deal. I definitely would not try and overinflate or oversell myself. When I interviewed with the Guard there was a former Navy guy in the unit who acted as my translator. He was like the old lady in the movie Airplane who says, "Yes, I speak jive."
#6
It's as simple as this: if you give evaluations, you are an evaluator/examiner of some type. If you teach but do not give evaluations, you are an instructor.
It's been a very long time since my Army days, but I'd say if you have given others a check ride that fits the bill.
It's been a very long time since my Army days, but I'd say if you have given others a check ride that fits the bill.
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2013
Position: FO
Posts: 627
There are certainly varying levels of IPs in the Navy world. Each squadron has a NATOPS Instructor, with a few assistants, to administer annual check rides. This is a good check in the block.
Maybe 2/5 of fleet pilots go on to instructor billets in training squadrons. This is a more valuable check in the block, and comparable to a traditional CFII job. Unless you do something wrong, you will likely accrue the qualifications of (civilian equivalent) stage check instructor, line check airman, or assistant chief instructor. The "chief instructor" is obviously the CO.
The NATOPS Evaluator is a much more singular job, with only one person for each community and coast (fighter, maritime patrol, etc) occupying the job at any time, typically for 12-18 months. They administer annual check rides to squadron NATOPS instructors, conduct inspections of squadron NATOPS programs, and basically run the NATOPS program for their airframe. This is a very valuable check in the block. A comparable position would be an instructor at the weapons and tactics school (I.e. Top gun), or the chief instructor at a major aviation program.
Maybe 2/5 of fleet pilots go on to instructor billets in training squadrons. This is a more valuable check in the block, and comparable to a traditional CFII job. Unless you do something wrong, you will likely accrue the qualifications of (civilian equivalent) stage check instructor, line check airman, or assistant chief instructor. The "chief instructor" is obviously the CO.
The NATOPS Evaluator is a much more singular job, with only one person for each community and coast (fighter, maritime patrol, etc) occupying the job at any time, typically for 12-18 months. They administer annual check rides to squadron NATOPS instructors, conduct inspections of squadron NATOPS programs, and basically run the NATOPS program for their airframe. This is a very valuable check in the block. A comparable position would be an instructor at the weapons and tactics school (I.e. Top gun), or the chief instructor at a major aviation program.
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Posts: 153
Thanks for all the input.
It sounds like a NATOPS Evaluator is a much more specific and specialized designation above the Squadron level, much like the Army's DES.
For the Air Force, though, Stan/Eval can be at the Squadron level?
Anybody know how the Coast Guard organizes things? Being a small aviation community, they may have the same problems as us Army guys trying to get a foot in the door at an airline.
A very specific part of my dilemma are questions from Southwest Airlines. (They just had an app window and I am working on my Pilot Credential questionnaire, but I'm sure when I start working on others, they will have similar specific questions.)
Southwest asks:
Have you ever been a:
Check Airman, Stan/Eval, NATOPS evaluator in a Jet/Turbine/Turbo Prop Aircraft?
Line Check Airman?
Standards Check Airman?
Again, I don't want to sell myself short, but want to make sure I can at least explain my qualifications in terms an interviewer will understand.
It sounds like a NATOPS Evaluator is a much more specific and specialized designation above the Squadron level, much like the Army's DES.
For the Air Force, though, Stan/Eval can be at the Squadron level?
Anybody know how the Coast Guard organizes things? Being a small aviation community, they may have the same problems as us Army guys trying to get a foot in the door at an airline.
A very specific part of my dilemma are questions from Southwest Airlines. (They just had an app window and I am working on my Pilot Credential questionnaire, but I'm sure when I start working on others, they will have similar specific questions.)
Southwest asks:
Have you ever been a:
Check Airman, Stan/Eval, NATOPS evaluator in a Jet/Turbine/Turbo Prop Aircraft?
Line Check Airman?
Standards Check Airman?
Again, I don't want to sell myself short, but want to make sure I can at least explain my qualifications in terms an interviewer will understand.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post