Fair enough.

Does anyone know how many people the military trains a year for pilot slots vs the civilian schools, I dont believe it comes even close to what the civilian world puts out. So the regionals are never going to have the cream of the crop. The whole problem is a broken system of pay and duty rules leading to many and I mean many incompetent and inexperienced pilots getting ahead and into spots they should not be. I have been to Flight Safety and I know you have to screw up pretty royally to fail a Checkride, I dont know from personal experience but I guarantee this does not happen in the military. There are many very good Civilian pilots and many good Military pilots, it all comes down to having enough real world experience to safely do the job you are assigned. This may not have been the case on 3407.

I did read your post, in it's entirety. I wrote what I wrote because your missing the context of our conversation, as you still are. Neither of us was making an argument about who the better pilot was, or who had the better training. We were basically discussing the gene pool, and how the military has barriers to who gets into it to swim. That's all. Nothing more.

Why? Maybe because were bored, or maybe because we don't like being "constructive". Regardless, it's a great piece of irony that you put yourself in the middle of it, and then advise us to find something more "constructive" to do. Maybe you should work on following your own advice first, before you dish it out to others.


Your right! It is irrelevant in that it has no bearing on what makes a good pilot. In the context of statistical averages, it also happens to be very true. This is why on a normal distribution graph, the curve slopes gradually to the extremes. When the same graph is manipulated by barriers, curve slopes more steeply and the phase(or length) of the curve is shorter.

No, anyone who has taken a statistics course does not know what your talking about.

Anytime you create barriers, you artificially manipulate the natural distribution of scores (for better or worse)for that group. By the way, I learned about this in Quantitative Analysis.

Let me ask you this. If tomorrow the military made it a requirement for flight training to have a PHD in Quantum Physics from MIT, would you still be singing the same "Need to take a statistically significant sampling of the people involved to say they are smarter." song? So why is it such a stretch that selection barriers, that exist in the military today, would ensure that the brightest and most intelligent individuals get selected? Barriers that, by the way, don't exist in the civilian world.

If there truly was no statistical difference in intelligence, than why have the barriers? Are you saying the military's recruiting philosophy is flawed? That they are wasting their time because there methods of recruiting more intelligent individuals does not work? That they would have better results by selecting people using the "eeny, meeny, miny, moe" method? Seriously?

Bottom line is, I'm not in a p@ssing contest with you about who has the better pilots, or who has the better training, or who has the better ....
I really don't care, because it really doesn't matter. The original posts were not even about that. It was about pointing out that the military recruits the sharpest and most intelligent individuals. That on average, they have more per capita, than the civilian world.

This is my last post on this topic, because now I really am "bored". I guess I'll find something more constructive to do, like watch my grass grow.:D

Bubba the MILITARY have DEEP POCKETS called the TAXPAYERS the Airlines Not so much...

Rough Numbers
 

I believe for Fiscal Year 2009, the total Air Force pilot production is 800-900.

It had been averaging around 1200 (I think) for the last 10 years.

I think Navy numbers are similar, although a huge percentage of their pilots are helo, who normally aren't entering the airline pool.

Looked at another way: in 2013, when age 65 retirements start, each major carrier will average about 200 retirements a year.

The Top 10 carriers could absorb every military pilot produced (assuming they were all looking for airline jobs, and that the airlines hired only military).

If the Top 10 hired a 50-50 mix of mil/civilian, then there are only 800 military guys to spread among all other carriers.

Just looked up Airman stats on the FAA site. For the last 10 years:

1, About 60,000 student certificates issued, per year.
2. About 22,000 Private Licenses, per year
3. About 14,000 Instrument
4. About 10,000 Commercial
5. ATP: a high of 19,000 to 15,000 in 2008.

The ATP was perplexing, since it is more than the other ratings that 'feed' it, but I think it is because the FAA counts a new Type Rating (and the subsequent re-issue of your license) as a "new' issue, as well as one that a guy got for the first time.

I would guess the actual 'first-ever' ATP numbers would be about 5-6000.

So mil guys are outnumbered 7 or 8 to one.

You must be one bored individual. How in the world did you jump to the clonclusion that I think military selection process is flawed? I have gone through the process successfully so I should be defending the military selection process. No, I never said the military selection process is flawed. I was responding to the vague statement that you agreed with Atpcliff that military pilots are smarter than civilian pilots which has no real substantive scientific basis. I was not addressing who is a better pilot. I was addressing the specific statement Atpcliff made regarding whether military pilots on average are smarter than civilian pilot. It just shows my point about you not understanding my point or you have a reading comprehension problem. Your example of requiring PHD is beyond absurd and is not even a reasonable basis for discussion. You are beginning to convince me that maybe Atpcliff is right and military trained pilots are smarter because I don't have this much problem explaining my position to my colleagues who are military trained even if they happen to believe that we, military trained pilots, are smarter than civilian pilots. I guess you have successfully proved Atpcliff's point.

My point on the military selection process is that it selects certain individuals with a knack for certain talents for that type of training. It appears you are civilian trained and know nothing about the military selection process so I find it amusing and ironic that you are arguing with me, who HAS gone through the military selection process successfully, about this issue. If I wanted to be irrational like the others I could just agree with Atpcliff and claim that yeah military pilots are smarter than civilian pilots. Does that make it a REALITY? Not unless it is proved scientifically through a meaningful statistical analysis. One of the things we were taught in the military is to objectively evaluate the situation instead of making a general assumption. Making general assumptions just because it appears that way can lead to a very false conclusion and in war that can mean a total defeat.

Your argument has made it clear to me you do not know statistics. For if you did you would know what I was referring to when I wrote taking a "statistically significant random sampling." This is my last response on this fruitless topic.

You guys know that everytime there is an accident it doesn't mean that you have to start the military vs. civilian argument, right? It's old and the last time I checked both types of pilots have been involved in incidents and accidents that were attributed to pilot error.

Yet for some strange reason SWA seems to not only want military trained pilots but seek them out!

I only got to page 5 or 6 before I got tired of hearing who is better when it comes to training. Bottom line, BOTH side's need to get down from their high horses, and do a reality check. WHO CARES WHO IS BETTER!!!!:mad: The bottom line is that both training enviroments lack something/offer something the other ones doesn't. To say "I got my training from the mil/civil, so I am better" is puffing up your chest and trying to be "hollier than thou." Knock it off. Act your age!:mad::mad:

I guess Military guys need more experience with making bad jokes and corny PA announcements.

I know that's big part of the South-West Way:)