The first flight into Mogadishu for C-5 was flown by a 1500 hour Captain doing 17.8 hours, non-stop with 4 air refuelings and a combat off-load at a hot airstrip. Do you think the average 1500 commuter pilot could do it.
It's really a nonsensical question. Yes, the 1500 hour commuter pilot could do it if he had been training in and performing aerial refueling, and had the equivilent amount of time in the C5.
I was doing formation flight beneath powerlines in ag aircraft as my first job out of high school...do you think the C5 pilot could do it? Again, a nonsensical comparison. We routinely did steep turns at 75' to the stall, and flew extremely tight tolerances with respect to altitude and ground track, very close to the surface, amid powerlines, and obstacles, in aircraft which were loaded to their performance limits on hot days, often in stiff winds...in tailwheel airplanes landing on short grass runways surrounded by powerlines. This isn't something the C5 pilot was trained to do...so no, without proper exposure to that environment, he shouldn't be expected to be able to do it, any more than one would expect to pull a 1500 hour pilot out of a Brasillia and expect him or her to perform an aerial refueling in a C5.
That the C5 pilot is performing transoceanic flights (let's face it, long legs on autopilot...not exactly demanding...and yes, I've done plenty of them, too) isn't really a ringing condemnation on the training, skill or ability of the average pilot trained at a "mom and pop" Part 61 school. Fact is, some very qualified, very skilled individuals come out of such training, where one takes from it an equivalent value to what one puts in.
More disciplined about following good procedures, regulations.
Better educated, esp about aerodynamics, theory of flight, fatigue, aircraft systems, flight physiology
Exposed to wider range of maneuvers--stalls, recovery from unusual attitudes, high performance aircraft. You won't make a stall recovery error if trained repeatedly in stalls, spins and departures from controlled flight.
Get continually debriefed and evaluated for upgrade and promotion.
The military aviators are very proud of themselves. We all get that. You're stretching it a mite (more than a mite) to suggest that this training isn't found in most operations. What flight school doesn't teach unusual attitudes? What school doesn't teach proficiency in stall recovery? Spin training is debatable and may be saved for another thread. I've never seen a flight training program that didn't cover aerodynamics, fatigue, aircraft systems, meteorology, etc. Standard stuff.
I understand the military position and mindset too, but disagree with the lofty assumption that's usually given that the product of training is more gifted, or superior in airmanship, skill, judgment, or ability. It's a poor assumption, and in this business, one should never assume. The same statement applies equally to the assumption that training provided in a part 141 environment produces a better product graduate. In my experience, this is certainly not so.