US Military critical pilot shortage
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 1,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
US Military critical pilot shortage
Good article regarding the 'raiding' of the US military by the US airlines, who are desperate to replace the many thousands of retiring airline pilots. You would think CX management would be smart enough see the coming tidal wave of options for pilots. Oh, wait....
Stop-Loss an Option for Air Force to Keep Departing Pilots
Stop-Loss an Option for Air Force to Keep Departing Pilots
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: HK
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I guess they know that trainers will keep on training the retirees' replacements, so CX is still a better option than, say, Air Asia for people without US passports/ green cards
My, my, my...the general is gettin' a little testy ?
"The goal of the meeting will be to find ways to solve the exodus of Air Force pilots to the industry in a way that is mutually acceptable for the U.S. military and the airlines — without the Air Force having to resort to 'stop-loss,' a means of forcing Air Force personnel to stay in the service beyond the period of their commitment.
Everhart said he has already told airline executives that stop-loss is an option. 'I said to the industry … if we can’t meet the requirements, the chief could drop in a stop-loss — and you need to understand that,' he said."
:-))))
Last edited by bafanguy; 11th Apr 2017 at 11:47.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Read the article Sam. The US general says that they are already suffering from a crisis, and the US airlines say that within a few years they will not be able to fill enough of their seats after taking into account retirements. What is your point?
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not me, don't lump me in with the trainers trying to take zero (or near zero experience) pilots into the right seat of widebodies. That will never happen with my help. An A320 or 737 is one thing, this is entirely different. B747s should not be flown by those with double or triple digit flight hour experience. Period. Full stop. The notion that these neophytes belong in these cockpits is absurd. Any arguments to the contrary are truly fake news.
Last edited by cxorcist; 12th Apr 2017 at 16:04.
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Oz
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not me, don't lump me in with the trainers trying to take zero (or near zero experience) pilots into the right seat of widebodies. That will never happen with my help. An A320 or 737 is one thing, this is entirely different. B747s should not be flown by those with double or triple digit hour flight experience. Period. Full stop. The notion that these neophytes belong in these cockpits is absurd. Any arguments to the contrary are truly fake news.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having flown both widebody and narrow body I would much rather see a low hour pilot go into the wide body. That said with the proper training I don't see the issue with either.
What exactly makes a narrow body a better place for these low hour pilots?
What exactly makes a narrow body a better place for these low hour pilots?
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Put it simply. What's easier?
Cessna 172 or PA-44?
PA-44 or DHC-8?
DHC-8 or B737?
B737 or B747?
Pretty simple math, my lady. Sure, full automation might be easier on larger and more complex aircraft, but aside from that, the job gets harder, not easier.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The other issue that everyone has missed is narrow bodies tend to have short sectors and often fly during the day when the capt is wide awake . We fly 5-7 sectors on heavy freighters most of which are back of the clock for HK crews
Landing a heavy 744 after a 12 hour flight is a very different animal to a 737 after a 2 hour flight
Landing a heavy 744 after a 12 hour flight is a very different animal to a 737 after a 2 hour flight
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Uh, yeah. You must be new to this, Juliet. Keep at it for a few more years. Have a few kids, become RQ, maybe a failed marriage and/or financial pressure, sleep less easily as you get older; then tell me which flying creates more fatigue. You come across as very young.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about, when you are landing three times a day, you build your proficency more quickly than when landing three times a month. Then your total time really means something besides hours spent sleeping and reading.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jesus you guys are defensive. I've got a different viewpoint, doesn't make either of us right or wrong.
Unfortunately I've had the divorce, have the usual financial pressures, have the kids and been doing this for over 20 years now so frankly I do know what I'm talking about. Long haul, short haul and military, I have enough experience to know what makes me fatigued. Others will be different, but for me short haul narrow body ops has been the worst.
If some of you did a bit more listening and were open to other views you might find it beneficial.
Unfortunately I've had the divorce, have the usual financial pressures, have the kids and been doing this for over 20 years now so frankly I do know what I'm talking about. Long haul, short haul and military, I have enough experience to know what makes me fatigued. Others will be different, but for me short haul narrow body ops has been the worst.
If some of you did a bit more listening and were open to other views you might find it beneficial.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I found my systems and SOPs knowledge was better long haul, but my operational manipulation skills were better short haul. Maybe it all balances out.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Absolutely, fair point. I'm just trying to highlight that short haul, narrow body ops are generally busier. Again, personally I would take a single 12 hour sector over a 4-5 sector 11 hour duty day. Each to their own though.
My, my, my...the general is gettin' a little testy ?
"The goal of the meeting will be to find ways to solve the exodus of Air Force pilots to the industry in a way that is mutually acceptable for the U.S. military and the airlines — without the Air Force having to resort to 'stop-loss,' a means of forcing Air Force personnel to stay in the service beyond the period of their commitment.
Everhart said he has already told airline executives that stop-loss is an option. 'I said to the industry … if we can’t meet the requirements, the chief could drop in a stop-loss — and you need to understand that,' he said."
"The goal of the meeting will be to find ways to solve the exodus of Air Force pilots to the industry in a way that is mutually acceptable for the U.S. military and the airlines — without the Air Force having to resort to 'stop-loss,' a means of forcing Air Force personnel to stay in the service beyond the period of their commitment.
Everhart said he has already told airline executives that stop-loss is an option. 'I said to the industry … if we can’t meet the requirements, the chief could drop in a stop-loss — and you need to understand that,' he said."
"The Air Force moved quickly last week to quell concerns that it would force pilots to stay in uniform beyond their agreed-to separation dates."
Stop-Loss Rejected By Air Force - AVweb flash Article
A bit more. Gee, do ya really think so ?:
"The Air Force feels that implementing a stop-loss policy would cause pilots to flee the Air Force before the door closed, and they won't stick around to see if things improve."
https://www.airforcetimes.com/articl...-retain-pilots
Last edited by bafanguy; 17th Apr 2017 at 12:41.