Who's training is the best ??

[Randy_g]

In one simple word; everyones. Each of us believes that the training we received was the best. Whether it be civil or military. To say one or the other was the best only shows how uninformed, or to the extreme how ignorant a person is.

The military offers very good training for those who are lucky enough to have gotten through selection. The civilian standards, and syllabus , for those interested to learn, was developed from the military. We are a product of what your predecesors have sown.

Judging other countries training without all the facts is also not a sign of intelligence. In other words, don't tar everyone with the same brush. Here in Canada most of our instructor have spent many years flying operationally, and are a very motivated, and highly skilled group. They aren't in it as a stepping stone for their career (as in some countries). They do it because they want to teach, and pass their hard earned knowledge/experience to a new group of pilots. Our commercial operations are varied, and very challenging.

There are great pilots, and there are idiots in both groups. They also seem to be in about the same proportion as well. Great pilots all have the same qualities: they continually learn, they keep their minds open to new ideas and ways of doing things, they listen to others, they know that they don't know all the answers, and they keep trying to improve themselves.

Cheers

http://randyspics.tripod.ca/gifs/naughty.gif Randy_G

http://randyspics.tripod.ca/gifs/man_grilling_hamburgers_sm_wht.gif

[[email protected]]

Randy, I take it that was directed at my comments on another thread then!

[BlenderPilot]

Overall military pilots get much better initial and recurrent training than civilian pilots, I don't think anybody can deny that.

Frankly I am jealous of some pilots who have gotten all that training in the military. Although after a few years of flying its mostly about common sense and experience, at least in my area of the world, military pilots get higher quality training, but lesser hours in a much stricter enviorment.

Learning to fly helicopters safely is something you can teach almost anyone to do properly, here is a story:

Here in Mexico we have what we call PGR which is the goverment agency in charge of dealing with drug erradication, they operate a fleet of 130 aircraft mostly helicopters and they have different branches (erradication, interception, field, transport, etc.)

A few years back they got 50 "kids" with airplane CPL's (average 200 hrs. TT in fixed wing "cessnas") and gave them 90 hours of "pure instruction" in Bell 206's, then they took them out for 40 more hours of supervised work flying, then went to work on their own. Their work is difficult, they do 24hr all WX night time interceptions of aircraft, boats, spray drug crops in tight canyons above 7 or 8,000 feet, and routienly get shot at, and after all this guess what? They had better safety record than the U.S. trained military counterparts. Nobody knows why this came out this way since these guys were new to the business but, it just happened this way, so that proves that if required civilians can get good training too. They are still called the "FedExos" because they were made "overnight"

See a picture of one of PGR's shot down helicopters here:

http://homepage.mac.com/helipilot/helicopterpictures/PhotoAlbum15.html

This helicopter is one of the recently purchased batch of 24 new 206 L4's and 3 407's, it was only about a year old.

Personally I would have NEVER spent years of my life "living the military way" to get ANY training, but I guess for those that have, having all that training now must be a nice thing to have.

[3top]

Hey Blender!

We need to go for a beer or two, sometime!!!

:D :D :D
3top

[Randy_g]

Crab yes, and no, I hope you didn't think it was an attack on you. If so then please accept my apologies, that's not what it was intended to do.

It was a rant for everyone, and I am as guilty of prejudice as anyone. I get tired of hearing everyone talk about how they are the only ones who know all about whatever type of flying they do, or their training was the best, or whatever. In order to promote safety, and improve the quality of all of our flying we have to remind ourselves that we are not perfect, nor do we know everything. I feel that it is important for us all to take a step back and realise that we all have something to offer one another. We shouldn't allow pride, or prejudice to get in the way of our learning something from each other, and possibly saving our arses one day. Without sounding maudlin, or soppy, the best part of forums like these is the information we can gain from one another. I'm not here to compete with anyone, I'm here to learn, and to pass on any info that I think might help. I may be wrong, but then that's great, because someone will correct me and I will have learned something. No one learns when we get into a "I'm better than you" debate. Both will be right, but only in their realm of expertise. Usually with those types of debates, most just tune them out, and then any good info will be lost. To put it bluntly, I wish we could stow the bull crackers, it only gets in the way. That in no way means you can't have a little fun, with good natured ribbing.

Helicopter pilots in the Western world are all trained to a high standard, military or civillian, yet no-one is the best, and no system is best. They all have drawbacks and benefits. What I was trying to do was to try and get rid of the one-eyed way of looking at things. As I mentioned earlier in this post, I am as guilty of it as anyone.

As an example of this co-operation; the Cdn military did not have instructors that had very much mountain experience, so they contracted to a civillian flight training unit to teach them. They could have done it themselves, but they went to a place that has been in operation for over 50 years now, and saved them from repeating mistakes that had been learned a long time ago. It wasn't one sided, as there were some good lessons that the military guys were able to pass on. Both learned and benefitted from the exchange.

Cheers

http://randyspics.tripod.ca/gifs/naughty.gif Randy_G

http://randyspics.tripod.ca/gifs/man_grilling_hamburgers_sm_wht.gif

[Yoho]

Couldn't agree with you more Mr Randy g and that's regardless of the profession one is in. It's about what we know and don't, what we can share and gain, its about a common passion and oh gawd, yes that "bond", whether we like it or not. Also, we must not forget that the older we get - the better we were. Frig, to a point that's ok too! We all have told a story at one time or another using brighter colors;)

[Aladdinsane]

Whilst I do not disagree with anything that has been posted above, most students do not have the capacity in many ways to absorb much of what a 5000 hr instructor can pass on from his vast experience.

There is no substitute for experience, but what can a 5000hr instructor teach about 'flying a circuit' (for example) that a 500hr instructor can't??

[S76Heavy]

I found that a lot of the teachings from my grey haired instructors started to make sense after I had started flying the line. So besides flying the circuit they had managed to teach me a lot more but I only recognised this after passing the exams.

[GLSNightPilot]

'Flying a circuit' is a minor part of flying in general. You need to know much, much more than that. And a good, experienced instructor can teach a lot of that even in the circuit, while one with only a few hundred hours, most of it in the circuit, may not know much more than the circuit. At 500 hours, you're still learning to fly. Make no mistake, experience counts.

I remember training in TH-55's, lo those many long years ago, doing autorotations, mostly 180's, & when I thought I had them down, my instructor would take the controls & say "Let me try one". He'd do the entire pattern (circuit), 180 auto to touchdown, pick it up & hover off the lane, without touching the cyclic with his hand except to roll the throttle off & back on, talking all the time. Flew the whole thing with his knees. Taught me humility, how to do an auto, & ambition to get better all at the same time.

[Aladdinsane]

S76,

yes I would agree with your comments entirely.


GLS,

I knew someone would say exactly what you said about there being more to flying than circuits..........the point i was trying to make was that in the early stages of ab initio training, speed and attitude control for example are skills that are just as well taught by a 500 hr pilot as a 5000 hr pilot. (I am hesistant to use examples lest I am told there is more to flying than............) Unless of course there is something magical about picking an attitude and holding it.

S76's comments are spot on, yes of course all those 'tricks' are invaluable but it would probably be awhile before a new pilot has the knowledge to appreciate them himself.

[Heliport]

[TheWayWeWere]

Hey Randy_G

You make sense.

Those CF military instructors were great for hammering home procedures and emergency drills. I was away from flying for a while and then went on a civvy job. The civvy training pilot just shook his head after my first full-on auto and said, "Well I guess we don't have to spend much time reviewing that." What I did need was all the good operational stuff that civvies do so much of and we military guys may or may not do occasionally. I had never slung poles or huge cargo nets at that early point in my career.

Those Civvy instructors they contracted for our mountain flying course were great for passing on their experience - we couldn't have done it without them. What a plum course that was - high competition to get on it too!

And then on those times when I flew civvy contracts, those company training pilots, so long in the tooth, could sure pass along the "why" and "how" of what they do, backed up by some great stories that usually started with, "I remember one time . . ."

And then there was the time I was sent on the Underwater Egress Course - what an eye-opener that was! I would have died if I had ditched before that course - I'm sure. Afterwards, I felt I had a chance of surviving. I was never so grateful for a course! I would tell people - don't fly over water without it!

Cheers. :ok:

[Red Wine]

Without taking sides on Civilian and Military Training....there are some interesting observations that I have seen over many years.

A pilot by default is a product of his/her training and open mindness.

The more thorough the training is, together with the post licence support, then that pilot will have his/her nose ahead of the folk that are left to their own.

The Military is good at producing bunches of similarly type of folk that, think, talk, drink and *&^%$ together, hence you could say they are from the same mould. Which of course is the aim of the selection [or deselection] programs.
What the Military does not do well is to broaden the base and flexibility of pilots [particularly helicopter pilots] and prepare them for civil markets where they will most likely end up. [But then that is not their role]

The civil schools don't have the luxury of having a tailored student to commence with! These schools are there to initially make the owners richer, then to do their best to produce a licenced pilot at the cheapest rate!
Even if the student will not make the grade in the end, then they can still fly!...

From a straight poling ability, the hand eye co-ordination aspects, anyone with 500 - 1000 hours [less in combat] it’s difficult to differentiate their training background.
Their mouths will normally do that over the first beer after work.:yuk:

I am not talking about flying around tourist’s camp here; I mean desert, mineral, exploration type work in a small turbine, stuff that really makes you work.

I have known some extremely capable pilots from both backgrounds.

Personal attitude, flexibility, openness, honesty are aspects that I look at when giving pilots a start rather than where they came from. [But that is also important].:ok:

[vorticey]

after 2 months and 70hrs i had a CPL(H) i'm sure i would have learned a little more from 6 years in the army flying all the good expensive stuff (wouldnt the tigers be fun) but hopfully ill have more hours by the time 6 years are up. if i did it all over again id go in the army simply for the living conditions and benifits. :ok:

[Ascend Charlie]

In the civil world, it can take anything from 4 months to 4 years to get your minimum qualifications: 105 hours, maybe a second piston endorsement if the school has one of another type than a Robbo and the CFI is feeling generous, you will have 5 hours of low flying, and that is it.

In the military, you do your 105 hours in 3 months, and it includes a turbine endorsement, low flying, instrument rating, sling endorsement, hoist endorsement, formation endorsement, night rating, and some simulated tactics. It is a concentrated course, done by dedicated people. Don't keep up with the pace, lose the race.

[Helipolarbear]

And at the end of the day, be it military or civil training background.....you know how to fly a helicopter....so enjoy and continue to experience and appreciate that fact!;)