How to become a Test Pilot
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 360
Likes: 0
From: Clipperton island
For ITPS, just go on <a href="http://www.itps.uk.com/profile.html" target="_blank">www.itps.uk.com/profile.html</a>
Also when speaking about costs, consider that it's not in the same category as, say, a type rating ! An organisation (government, air force, company)will have to pay for your training and you must be sponsored by one of those organisation(usually in the "big ones": ETPS, USNTPS, EPNER...)
Yes, in some case (Bombardier, Dassault) those companies hired experienced pilots for ferry flights or other duties, and felt the need after to send those people they had learned to know, to the course to get them a test pilot licence
In many countries they prefer to train fighter pilots as test pilots, and they will fly the big aircraft. Very seldom will they take transport pilots - because usually they fail the course when it's time to fly a little bit agressively.
And taking airline pilots is simply out of question, but they have been flying their thousands of hours on autopilot only, which is irrelevant to the task
But believe me, when you are a test pilot and after many years in the business, your time has elapsed and rather to spend the rest of your life in meetings, you choose to go to the airlines... they will make you pay for that! (because they know what I've said in the former paragraphs!)
Also when speaking about costs, consider that it's not in the same category as, say, a type rating ! An organisation (government, air force, company)will have to pay for your training and you must be sponsored by one of those organisation(usually in the "big ones": ETPS, USNTPS, EPNER...)
Yes, in some case (Bombardier, Dassault) those companies hired experienced pilots for ferry flights or other duties, and felt the need after to send those people they had learned to know, to the course to get them a test pilot licence
In many countries they prefer to train fighter pilots as test pilots, and they will fly the big aircraft. Very seldom will they take transport pilots - because usually they fail the course when it's time to fly a little bit agressively.
And taking airline pilots is simply out of question, but they have been flying their thousands of hours on autopilot only, which is irrelevant to the task
But believe me, when you are a test pilot and after many years in the business, your time has elapsed and rather to spend the rest of your life in meetings, you choose to go to the airlines... they will make you pay for that! (because they know what I've said in the former paragraphs!)
Moderator
Joined: Feb 2000
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 14,480
Likes: 178
From: UK
The thing that you have to understand, is that test flying is in small measure about flying ability, but mostly about technical understanding and ability. The 1-year ETPS course probably contains about 60 hours of flying, but 14 hours a day times 7 days a week or study for 11 months.
Assuming that you don't have a major government behind you, the right starting point is probably a good technical degree, probably in aeronautical engineering (with your physics BSc I'd look perhaps at an aeronautical MSc at somewhere like Cranfield or Embry-Riddle), plus a CPL. You then need to be working somewhere that test flying is going on to start gaining the understanding and experience of how test flying works. It is then, anywhere but the military, a slow progression up to the point where the senior test pilots and FTEs are convinced that you have the understanding and ability to tackle minor tasks or work as an assistant to an experienced TP/FTE, and hence upwards. It's slow and unprofitable, but incredibly interesting. Some organisations formalise what I've just described, most don't, but the basic principles don't really change regardless.
Recceguy is wrong so far as the UK and Australia at-least are concerned, fighter pilots are trained to flight test fighters, and truckie pilots are trained to flight test trucks. In many ways truckies or ex-QFIs make better TPs because they are much better team operators - the necessary self dependence of a single seat pilot can get in the way in a test programme which is very necessarily a team effort. It may be that the US still has a fast-jet hangup on test flying, and I know that the French tend to also, but that's dieing out. However he is quite right that a high hour airline pilot is almost completely useless as a TP, military transport pilots are a very different beast who have done a great deal more genuine handling flying.
G
N.B. I know that their website is still there, but I think that ITPS have ceased trading.
[ 31 January 2002: Message edited by: Genghis the Engineer ]
[ 31 January 2002: Message edited by: Genghis the Engineer ]</p>
Assuming that you don't have a major government behind you, the right starting point is probably a good technical degree, probably in aeronautical engineering (with your physics BSc I'd look perhaps at an aeronautical MSc at somewhere like Cranfield or Embry-Riddle), plus a CPL. You then need to be working somewhere that test flying is going on to start gaining the understanding and experience of how test flying works. It is then, anywhere but the military, a slow progression up to the point where the senior test pilots and FTEs are convinced that you have the understanding and ability to tackle minor tasks or work as an assistant to an experienced TP/FTE, and hence upwards. It's slow and unprofitable, but incredibly interesting. Some organisations formalise what I've just described, most don't, but the basic principles don't really change regardless.
Recceguy is wrong so far as the UK and Australia at-least are concerned, fighter pilots are trained to flight test fighters, and truckie pilots are trained to flight test trucks. In many ways truckies or ex-QFIs make better TPs because they are much better team operators - the necessary self dependence of a single seat pilot can get in the way in a test programme which is very necessarily a team effort. It may be that the US still has a fast-jet hangup on test flying, and I know that the French tend to also, but that's dieing out. However he is quite right that a high hour airline pilot is almost completely useless as a TP, military transport pilots are a very different beast who have done a great deal more genuine handling flying.
G
N.B. I know that their website is still there, but I think that ITPS have ceased trading.
[ 31 January 2002: Message edited by: Genghis the Engineer ]
[ 31 January 2002: Message edited by: Genghis the Engineer ]</p>
Guest
Posts: n/a
The most important single qualification for an experienced pilot who wishes to become a test pilot is a quality engineering degree, preferably in Aerospace Engineering, and experience in design or flight test. TPS is highly touted, but not imperative, as an engineering degree is quite a bit more valuable in terms of actual knowledge needed in the job of being a Manufacturer's test pilot. Surprisingly few graduates of military test pilot schools are engineers.
TPS is actually quite poor in preparing TP to do real development work, as the course work at all the TPS I am familiar with is almost exclusively devoted to the testing needed to assure compliance with requirements. Virtually no coursework is associated with the essence of Aero Engineering, or of structural/dynamic concepts that are usually the source of development problems and therefore the root of the manufacturer test pilot's challenges.
In industry, a sharp engineer, usually with test or design experience in the organization, is quite able to become a test pilot. This is doubly true in General Aviation.
I represent that pool of non-TPS pilot, I was Chief Project Pilot on two development aircraft, 3 research aircraft, and also Chief R&D Test pilot for a major helicopter manufacturer. Our Chief of Flight Operations and the senior test pilot on most of our product line helicopters were top-notch graduate engineers with experience in test or design. They all have waivers of TPS requirements due to equivalent experience.
TPS is actually quite poor in preparing TP to do real development work, as the course work at all the TPS I am familiar with is almost exclusively devoted to the testing needed to assure compliance with requirements. Virtually no coursework is associated with the essence of Aero Engineering, or of structural/dynamic concepts that are usually the source of development problems and therefore the root of the manufacturer test pilot's challenges.
In industry, a sharp engineer, usually with test or design experience in the organization, is quite able to become a test pilot. This is doubly true in General Aviation.
I represent that pool of non-TPS pilot, I was Chief Project Pilot on two development aircraft, 3 research aircraft, and also Chief R&D Test pilot for a major helicopter manufacturer. Our Chief of Flight Operations and the senior test pilot on most of our product line helicopters were top-notch graduate engineers with experience in test or design. They all have waivers of TPS requirements due to equivalent experience.
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
From: where I shouldn’t be
Thanks all,
From I could gather here, having gone through Embry-Riddle, majoring in "Aviation Technology/Flight", I should have a decent base to get started. I’m actually looking for a GA company expecting nice mix of engineering and flying – I hope.
I think I got the right feel and understanding for this business now.
From I could gather here, having gone through Embry-Riddle, majoring in "Aviation Technology/Flight", I should have a decent base to get started. I’m actually looking for a GA company expecting nice mix of engineering and flying – I hope.
I think I got the right feel and understanding for this business now.
