re-enlistment for civvy pilot - any options?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Not sure yet.
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
re-enlistment for civvy pilot - any options?
Hello,
First post - so apologies if this has been asked before.
I left the RN in 1999 (Instructor Officer - not FAA), did CPL/IR in Australia, and have subsequently been flying Islanders then latterly King Airs.
I've just moved back to UK, and have been getting the urge to serve again. In these days of acute manpower shortages, might there be any options to rejoin on flying duties? I know the idea would have been laughed at a few years ago, but maybe things might be different now?
Now, I'm not expecting the FAA to retrain me on Harrier (though that would be nice) but given that AAC and RAF operate the types that I am civvy-qualified on, might there be some way forward there? Has anybody ever tried this?
First post - so apologies if this has been asked before.
I left the RN in 1999 (Instructor Officer - not FAA), did CPL/IR in Australia, and have subsequently been flying Islanders then latterly King Airs.
I've just moved back to UK, and have been getting the urge to serve again. In these days of acute manpower shortages, might there be any options to rejoin on flying duties? I know the idea would have been laughed at a few years ago, but maybe things might be different now?
Now, I'm not expecting the FAA to retrain me on Harrier (though that would be nice) but given that AAC and RAF operate the types that I am civvy-qualified on, might there be some way forward there? Has anybody ever tried this?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: bored
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sorry to disappoint you, but I have already tried, and it is still a no-goer, even with the manpower shortages that we currently have.
I'm ex-UAS, ex-Army (airborne, but not pilot) and now ATPL(A), with King Air type rating. I first rang the RAF(R) recruiting hotline - they told me "no" straight away. I also wrote to AAC, who did take their time to consider it, but eventually turned it down because there is no structure for them to take on short term engagement pilots outside the standard AAC career route. I know of another ex-Army civvy trained RW pilot, with a lot of civvy hours, who also asked, and was also told politely that it was not possible - though in his case they said that civvy RW was too different from military RW to be of much relevance.
It is a disappointment because like you I'm really motivated to serve again, and give something back to the Army. I was not expecting any sort of long term career - just to serve again for a few years (or however long they want while current shortages last) as a dedicated pilot. It is not like I would be motivated by getting FW flying quals and then buggering of to BA at the earliest opportunity (which, lets face it, is the motivation of some mil pilots) as I would be bringing the quals with me, already paid for by myself, and very motivated to do the job, rather than just biding time grabbing as many hours as possible before the earliest leaving date. Nor was I expecting any investment in training me to fly anything armed or tactical like RW - I'd be chuffed as hell to go on Defender or whatever they want.
Maybe somebody high up the brass ladder might suddenly have a brainwave, stick an add in FI for civvy CPL/IR/ME level pilots with some previous military background, get together half a dozen or so well motivated ready-qualified pilots, push them through a bit of gentle marching and saluting refresher training at Crandhurst or wherever, and stream them as onto Defender and King Air which (presumably) civvy trained pilots could be adapted to relatively easily. You could organise them into a little saga-squadron, held together just while the current shortages continue. That would then free up a few master-race pilots to fly the armed and more tactical airframes which obviously no useless civvy pilot could ever hope to cope with;-)
I'm ex-UAS, ex-Army (airborne, but not pilot) and now ATPL(A), with King Air type rating. I first rang the RAF(R) recruiting hotline - they told me "no" straight away. I also wrote to AAC, who did take their time to consider it, but eventually turned it down because there is no structure for them to take on short term engagement pilots outside the standard AAC career route. I know of another ex-Army civvy trained RW pilot, with a lot of civvy hours, who also asked, and was also told politely that it was not possible - though in his case they said that civvy RW was too different from military RW to be of much relevance.
It is a disappointment because like you I'm really motivated to serve again, and give something back to the Army. I was not expecting any sort of long term career - just to serve again for a few years (or however long they want while current shortages last) as a dedicated pilot. It is not like I would be motivated by getting FW flying quals and then buggering of to BA at the earliest opportunity (which, lets face it, is the motivation of some mil pilots) as I would be bringing the quals with me, already paid for by myself, and very motivated to do the job, rather than just biding time grabbing as many hours as possible before the earliest leaving date. Nor was I expecting any investment in training me to fly anything armed or tactical like RW - I'd be chuffed as hell to go on Defender or whatever they want.
Maybe somebody high up the brass ladder might suddenly have a brainwave, stick an add in FI for civvy CPL/IR/ME level pilots with some previous military background, get together half a dozen or so well motivated ready-qualified pilots, push them through a bit of gentle marching and saluting refresher training at Crandhurst or wherever, and stream them as onto Defender and King Air which (presumably) civvy trained pilots could be adapted to relatively easily. You could organise them into a little saga-squadron, held together just while the current shortages continue. That would then free up a few master-race pilots to fly the armed and more tactical airframes which obviously no useless civvy pilot could ever hope to cope with;-)
Last edited by CirrusF; 1st Jul 2008 at 11:57.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"as I would be bringing the quals with me"
You would bring no quals that are militarily recognised whatsoever.
Not being funny, but it aint hard to fly an islander or King air in a civvy environment.
The problem with civvy flying training is that if he had enough money, a monkey would pass it.
You may be fantastic, but the only way to find out would be to put you through military flying training.
You would bring no quals that are militarily recognised whatsoever.
Not being funny, but it aint hard to fly an islander or King air in a civvy environment.
The problem with civvy flying training is that if he had enough money, a monkey would pass it.
You may be fantastic, but the only way to find out would be to put you through military flying training.
Alex I think that having been through a military flying course and having a military record might actually help them make a positive decision rather than an unknown quantity (genuinely no offence to Cirrusfrance) who has not gone thru their system.
Give them a call, but I suggest presenting your case in person.
Give them a call, but I suggest presenting your case in person.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: bored
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You would bring no quals that are militarily recognised whatsoever.
Not being funny, but it aint hard to fly an islander or King air in a civvy environment.
The problem with civvy flying training is that if he had enough money, a monkey would pass it.
Not being funny, but it aint hard to fly an islander or King air in a civvy environment.
The problem with civvy flying training is that if he had enough money, a monkey would pass it.
It is even more difficult to understand how this guy could have failed, as having learnt to fly myself with RAF instructors at CUAS, their instruction was simply the best ever, and I never yet come across civilian instructors with such patience and tolerance.
But as I admit in my original post no useless civvy rich-monkey pilot would ever be able to fly a military aeroplane - ever. So I won't argue with you any more.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Not sure yet.
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you for the head's up. I think there may have been some misreading of my initial post, as I have no military flying training at all (except a bit of gliding at RNAS Culdrose - if that counts!!). All my training was doing Australian PPL, then CPL, then IR etc so it seems like this is a total non-starter.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cirrus.
Leaving aside your frankly enormous chip for a second, when exactly did I impugne your flying skills?
You may be the new Winkle Brown, but the point is that unless you went through the Military training system how would we know, and how could we judge your areas of knowledge and be sure that no areas were missed?
There is a reason that we do not get any civvy quals, and it's because they are not applicable to what we do.
Also, what makes a good military pilot may not tally with what you might imagine, or what might make a good civvy pilot. There are vast gulfs between what is desirable in a military pilot and in a civvy. In part, that may account for the occasional problems that occur, such as in the case of the ex mil pilot you mention having difficulties with his IR.
"get together half a dozen or so well motivated ready-qualified pilots, push them through a bit of gentle marching and saluting refresher training at Crandhurst or wherever, and stream them as onto Defender and King Air which (presumably) civvy trained pilots could be adapted to relatively easily."
The entire paragraph above but particularly the bits I have highlighted show the vast gulf between your impression of what a military pilot does and what he actually does.
I assure you, that everybody mil on this forum will read that paragraph and wince.
Flying is easy as we all know.
Operating a military aircraft can be a very different thing.
Leaving aside your frankly enormous chip for a second, when exactly did I impugne your flying skills?
You may be the new Winkle Brown, but the point is that unless you went through the Military training system how would we know, and how could we judge your areas of knowledge and be sure that no areas were missed?
There is a reason that we do not get any civvy quals, and it's because they are not applicable to what we do.
Also, what makes a good military pilot may not tally with what you might imagine, or what might make a good civvy pilot. There are vast gulfs between what is desirable in a military pilot and in a civvy. In part, that may account for the occasional problems that occur, such as in the case of the ex mil pilot you mention having difficulties with his IR.
"get together half a dozen or so well motivated ready-qualified pilots, push them through a bit of gentle marching and saluting refresher training at Crandhurst or wherever, and stream them as onto Defender and King Air which (presumably) civvy trained pilots could be adapted to relatively easily."
The entire paragraph above but particularly the bits I have highlighted show the vast gulf between your impression of what a military pilot does and what he actually does.
I assure you, that everybody mil on this forum will read that paragraph and wince.
Flying is easy as we all know.
Operating a military aircraft can be a very different thing.
Last edited by Tourist; 1st Jul 2008 at 19:17.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A suggestion for cirrus would be that if he is genuine about
"It is a disappointment because like you I'm really motivated to serve again, and give something back to the Army"
Then maybe some consideration to coming back using his previous military skills would go some way towards easing said disappointment
"It is a disappointment because like you I'm really motivated to serve again, and give something back to the Army"
Then maybe some consideration to coming back using his previous military skills would go some way towards easing said disappointment
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Muscat, Oman
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let me start by saying I know nothing about the King Air and Islander tasks, but how difficult can they be, especially for a civil trained pilot qualified on type who has previous military experience. He would have the ethos and understanding of the "customer" point of view from his previous time in. At the very least, it might release a current King Air/Islander pilot for a cross-over to something more aggressive.
A reminder of my opening statement, but feel free to shoot the argument down in flames!
A reminder of my opening statement, but feel free to shoot the argument down in flames!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Northwest
Age: 64
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ali B
"At the very least, it might release a current King Air/Islander pilot for a cross-over to something more aggressive."
I think that in these days of overstretch some M/E aircrew may see a tour on the aforementioned types a chance to spend some time with family and regular hours; and a rest from deployments to somewhere sandy for long periods. Would this help retention rates?, I suspect not.
I think that in these days of overstretch some M/E aircrew may see a tour on the aforementioned types a chance to spend some time with family and regular hours; and a rest from deployments to somewhere sandy for long periods. Would this help retention rates?, I suspect not.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Tourist
I had the pleasure of the army pilots course in the early 1990s and then the pleasure of a civilian Type rating course onto a medium sized twin jet and I can assure you that both had their moments.
If anything the civil route is more intense in its examination of both theory and practical skills. The operation of the civil types is probably easier day to day . The annual checks in the simulator are more thorough and of a longer duration than the military equivalent.
Plus the younger people I work with are far more intelligent than both myself and most of my ex military pals and far less arrogant.
I had the pleasure of the army pilots course in the early 1990s and then the pleasure of a civilian Type rating course onto a medium sized twin jet and I can assure you that both had their moments.
If anything the civil route is more intense in its examination of both theory and practical skills. The operation of the civil types is probably easier day to day . The annual checks in the simulator are more thorough and of a longer duration than the military equivalent.
Plus the younger people I work with are far more intelligent than both myself and most of my ex military pals and far less arrogant.
If it's any help I was military trained, became a civvy and then offered my services back a few, well, quite a few years back, and was politely declined ... I think I am now grateful for small mercies 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
richatom.
Never sneered, just explained why.
I'm guessing that an instructor officer is what we used to call a schoolie. In which case sod all.
Gspot.
There is a difference between availing yourselves of some sim time in Flightsafety's sims after military flying training, and being "trained by"
Santa.
"If anything the civil route is more intense in its examination of both theory and practical skills. The operation of the civil types is probably easier day to day . The annual checks in the simulator are more thorough and of a longer duration than the military equivalent."
Having also done both, I disagree, though having done some time at Wallop, I may grant your point compared to the Amateur Air Corp
Never sneered, just explained why.
I'm guessing that an instructor officer is what we used to call a schoolie. In which case sod all.
Gspot.
There is a difference between availing yourselves of some sim time in Flightsafety's sims after military flying training, and being "trained by"
Santa.
"If anything the civil route is more intense in its examination of both theory and practical skills. The operation of the civil types is probably easier day to day . The annual checks in the simulator are more thorough and of a longer duration than the military equivalent."
Having also done both, I disagree, though having done some time at Wallop, I may grant your point compared to the Amateur Air Corp
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Oxenfforrdde
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do think the title of this thread gives the lie to all the usual bitching... towit....
RE -enlistment.
This is not a ''plaintive cry to be able to serve''.
This is ex servicemen looking to RE Offer their SERVICES, based upon skills gained, & possibly built upon.
& has been misinterpreted
RE -enlistment.
This is not a ''plaintive cry to be able to serve''.
This is ex servicemen looking to RE Offer their SERVICES, based upon skills gained, & possibly built upon.
& has been misinterpreted
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
push them through a bit of gentle marching and saluting refresher training
I assure you, that everybody mil on this forum will read that paragraph and wince.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Location: Location:
Age: 53
Posts: 1,110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tourist
The aircraft can only do what it can do and despite being a good airframe the aircraft does not know that its being flown by a mil pilot or civilian pilot, there are a great deal of Kingair Pilots out here who have got a great deal of time operating these things into some very short unfavourable surface airfields- single crew.
I fly along at 480 knots most days, you wont find me applying to fly a typhoon anytime soon. Kingairs and Islanders are a little bit different. You are running the risk at the moment of sounding like an elitist ass - sorry.
The fact remains your Beech 200 guys were taught to fly that type by civilian instructors in a civilian sim on a civilian syllabus checked by civilian examiners on a course that I can write a cheque for and sit for £7K.
However much you try to distance yourself from it, those are I'm afraid the facts.
It makes me quite glad that this is the case as it no doubt saved a shedload of money from the Money Pit that is BAE or Marshalls and it might and I repeat just might end up in the form of body armour on some squaddies back.
The aircraft can only do what it can do and despite being a good airframe the aircraft does not know that its being flown by a mil pilot or civilian pilot, there are a great deal of Kingair Pilots out here who have got a great deal of time operating these things into some very short unfavourable surface airfields- single crew.
I fly along at 480 knots most days, you wont find me applying to fly a typhoon anytime soon. Kingairs and Islanders are a little bit different. You are running the risk at the moment of sounding like an elitist ass - sorry.
The fact remains your Beech 200 guys were taught to fly that type by civilian instructors in a civilian sim on a civilian syllabus checked by civilian examiners on a course that I can write a cheque for and sit for £7K.
However much you try to distance yourself from it, those are I'm afraid the facts.
It makes me quite glad that this is the case as it no doubt saved a shedload of money from the Money Pit that is BAE or Marshalls and it might and I repeat just might end up in the form of body armour on some squaddies back.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some posters here are extremely dismissive.
There have been civvy-trained people who work in the military system in a variety of places. Linton instructors come to mind - a trained, keen and motivated poster such a the OP might well be of use in such a situation (as opposed to joining the mil structure outright). Other places I can think of include the chaps who fly the bizjets as simulated targets (their name escapes me).
While front line roles might require people who have been through the whole system in the first place to permit a rejoin, many of the responses seem to be from sniffy prats who tend to occupy PPRuNe and the darker corners of mess bars.
Perhaps engaging brain and thinking about where he/she can help instead of being outright hostile may be a great use to our overstretched services.
There have been civvy-trained people who work in the military system in a variety of places. Linton instructors come to mind - a trained, keen and motivated poster such a the OP might well be of use in such a situation (as opposed to joining the mil structure outright). Other places I can think of include the chaps who fly the bizjets as simulated targets (their name escapes me).
While front line roles might require people who have been through the whole system in the first place to permit a rejoin, many of the responses seem to be from sniffy prats who tend to occupy PPRuNe and the darker corners of mess bars.
Perhaps engaging brain and thinking about where he/she can help instead of being outright hostile may be a great use to our overstretched services.