Airtanker reservist pilots
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, I'm sure I'm not alone in objecting to purebred civilian pilots pitching up ready type rated and donning a RAF uniform to fly for this new company having passed an interview and sim check. I (like a lot of folk on this forum) have worked bloody hard over the years for the RAF. As an organisation we may be a bit dog eared after years of cost cutting and underfunded overwork, but all of the people I work with, regardless of their talent, are first and foremost, members of the military. I like working with them because we all seem to have a common outlook and sense of humour. I know plenty of civilian pilots, and would love to work along side them in their work environment, but for the large part, they decided against military careers so I would not want them on my squadron just because the pay is good and times are hard outside.
There are some truly great pilots out in the airlines, I know. And when my time comes to join an airline, I look forward to learning from them. But for the moment, I like to see people wearing the uniform who have earned the right.
Arty out.
There are some truly great pilots out in the airlines, I know. And when my time comes to join an airline, I look forward to learning from them. But for the moment, I like to see people wearing the uniform who have earned the right.
Arty out.
Like I said, I don't believe the RAF should have to pursue such PFI, but there's nothing we can do to increase political commitment to the Forces and the RAF is not going to be able to retain its independence.
I would never support the civvy crews wearing RAF wings on their uniforms. I did Cranwell and about half the flying training before being canned, like most in my year. I have worked hard at getting where I am, too, and having earned a Commission in the past, a uniform with the reservist pins would not seem unreasonable, but I know what RAF wings mean and would feel a fraud for wearing them. Most of us on this side of the fence would feel the same way. People like me are not especially rare in the airlines, and hopefully we'd be amongst the sort they're looking for, though I'd expect ATr to be aiming primarily for ex-tankies who have been in legacy carrier wide body fleets for a few years. Surely they'd be fit for the uniform, in your eyes?
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Much-Binding-in-the-Marsh
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wings ....
During a briefing about FSTA at HQ Great Ideas the then CINC got very hot under the collar about the prospect of non-Service pilots wearing RAF Wings if mobilised as SRs.
Of course his fears were groundless as we already had a category that covered this eventuality: when I was at a not so secret Scottish base our AEF commander was a non-regular VR pilot who had never been through any Service flying training (except perhaps Tutor conversion) he was badged as a flt lt (or maybe a sqn ldr - I forget) and wore wings which either said RAFVR or just plain VR in the middle. There's always a way around these things!
During a briefing about FSTA at HQ Great Ideas the then CINC got very hot under the collar about the prospect of non-Service pilots wearing RAF Wings if mobilised as SRs.
Of course his fears were groundless as we already had a category that covered this eventuality: when I was at a not so secret Scottish base our AEF commander was a non-regular VR pilot who had never been through any Service flying training (except perhaps Tutor conversion) he was badged as a flt lt (or maybe a sqn ldr - I forget) and wore wings which either said RAFVR or just plain VR in the middle. There's always a way around these things!
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
they decided against military careers so I would not want them on my squadron just because the pay is good and times are hard outside.
That's the best response to the original post sofar. I think it sums up what has been proposed. The potential for things getting really bad and the crew being in a bad place is not impossible. Under difficult circumstances, the crew need to know they have at least ccs to fall back on, without wondering how the "civvy drivers" are going to manage on hostile ground.
When it's all going well, it may be fine, but when the going gets tough, someone is going to get hurt.
That's the best response to the original post sofar. I think it sums up what has been proposed. The potential for things getting really bad and the crew being in a bad place is not impossible. Under difficult circumstances, the crew need to know they have at least ccs to fall back on, without wondering how the "civvy drivers" are going to manage on hostile ground.
When it's all going well, it may be fine, but when the going gets tough, someone is going to get hurt.
It seems a few people have a terrible set of unfounded prejudices which are not only arrogant but insulting.
(Apologies to all for the slight thread creep .......)
Sorry Whippersnapper, I still can't agree. Many of the crews for the new jets will come from the 747-400 fleet as it is slowly wound down. That is one of the reasons that BA are buying A380s and 777-300s - to replace ageing, relatively fuel inefficient 747-400s. The 787s will sort of fill the 757/767 slot.
Sure, there will be pilot retirements, but with the Iberia merger and the American Airlines tie-up, more aircraft does not necessarily mean more routes/route expansion. For example, to get the AA deal approved, BA has had to give up slots at Heathrow!
As I said, BA may recruit 20-30 pilots in 2011. Any of those that are in the hold pool now, from the recruiting processes of the last couple of years, will have to reapply all over again.
This is the best info I currently have on BA, and I am on the inside.
I would think they're [BA] after more than 20-30, though, given the amount of new aircraft they're getting and the number of replacements for retirees and resignees.
Sure, there will be pilot retirements, but with the Iberia merger and the American Airlines tie-up, more aircraft does not necessarily mean more routes/route expansion. For example, to get the AA deal approved, BA has had to give up slots at Heathrow!
As I said, BA may recruit 20-30 pilots in 2011. Any of those that are in the hold pool now, from the recruiting processes of the last couple of years, will have to reapply all over again.
This is the best info I currently have on BA, and I am on the inside.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Witney UK
Posts: 616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the days when things were rather more relaxed I was doing a rating check on a squadron pilot and we had a checker on board for the chaps civilian rating. The checker was an ATC officer but had never been a regular military pilot. He had flown the VC10 for BA many years before. By way of return for services rendered I let him have a bit of handling. He produced an A cat standard in all aspects including formation. As for loyalty, he had many years of ATC service under his belt.
There is no guarantee that all civilian pilots can produce results like this but undoubtedly some can so let us wait and see how things turn out shall we.
There is no guarantee that all civilian pilots can produce results like this but undoubtedly some can so let us wait and see how things turn out shall we.
Last edited by Art Field; 29th Aug 2010 at 18:39. Reason: Sperlin
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I feel that there are a few points that must be made.
1. I have a ex mil friend who has been flying A320s for 2 years since he left and has just gone onto A330s.
He says that the 330 is easier than the 320 to fly and both are "a piece of piss, I can't believe that I get paid for this sh1t"
2. Is it just me that finds RAF multi types complaining about the fact that the civvys involved in flying this beast will not be military enough absolutely hilarious? I mean, seriously?!! Pot this is kettle, etc....
1. I have a ex mil friend who has been flying A320s for 2 years since he left and has just gone onto A330s.
He says that the 330 is easier than the 320 to fly and both are "a piece of piss, I can't believe that I get paid for this sh1t"
2. Is it just me that finds RAF multi types complaining about the fact that the civvys involved in flying this beast will not be military enough absolutely hilarious? I mean, seriously?!! Pot this is kettle, etc....
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join.................. why?
Above is some of the worst small minded predudice that I have seen in a long time, according to some civil pilots who join ATr will be unable to have the brain to fly the task, unfit wear the uniform, are likely to be disloyal and are likely to be unreliable when things get tough.
I know that these opinions are likely to be those of a small minority who can't see past the gates of the station but why would you want to work in an enviroment that seems encourage this small mindedness?
I think I would rather stay in an airline that has an open minded culture and a lack of predudice..............................Oh ! the crew are much more pleasing to the eye as well!
I know that these opinions are likely to be those of a small minority who can't see past the gates of the station but why would you want to work in an enviroment that seems encourage this small mindedness?
I think I would rather stay in an airline that has an open minded culture and a lack of predudice..............................Oh ! the crew are much more pleasing to the eye as well!
they decided against military careers so I would not want them on my squadron just because the pay is good and times are hard outside.
That's the best response to the original post sofar. I think it sums up what has been proposed. The potential for things getting really bad and the crew being in a bad place is not impossible. Under difficult circumstances, the crew need to know they have at least ccs to fall back on, without wondering how the "civvy drivers" are going to manage on hostile ground.
When it's all going well, it may be fine, but when the going gets tough, someone is going to get hurt.
That's the best response to the original post sofar. I think it sums up what has been proposed. The potential for things getting really bad and the crew being in a bad place is not impossible. Under difficult circumstances, the crew need to know they have at least ccs to fall back on, without wondering how the "civvy drivers" are going to manage on hostile ground.
When it's all going well, it may be fine, but when the going gets tough, someone is going to get hurt.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London Village
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given the lack of variety and lack of hours the average RAF Multi-Engine pilot gets these days, it is extremely arrogant to suggest civilian pilots, who probably average 3 x the hours per year, could not do AAR.
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I know a few civvy pilots that would be far handier in those circumstances than the average RAF AT type. For example, Easyjet pilot who is serving RMR and has done a tour of Iraq, a training captain at Ryan Air who is ex SAS(V), and a serving RNR on another fleet.
Last edited by airborne_artist; 30th Aug 2010 at 08:15.
A and C
You will always get these attitudes ref civil/military flying due lack of knowledge of each others operations, and reluctance to acknowledge that they may be a better way of doing things.
In a previous Post I tried to comment on a possibly unsatisfactory trip pattern in the AT fleet ref lack of proper rest before duty.
I was then shot down by the '' I lived in a tent in the desert for six months and flew my Harrier/Tornado etc etc. with no problems, and lived,'' brigade!!
But it is good to share the various opinions, that's what PPrune is all about.
In a previous Post I tried to comment on a possibly unsatisfactory trip pattern in the AT fleet ref lack of proper rest before duty.
I was then shot down by the '' I lived in a tent in the desert for six months and flew my Harrier/Tornado etc etc. with no problems, and lived,'' brigade!!
But it is good to share the various opinions, that's what PPrune is all about.
Champagne anyone...?
Thread drift - No, you were passing presumptuous judgement on things you have no experience of. You weren't "shot down", you were corrected by the people with first hand experience 
There's no "reluctance to acknowledge that they may be a better way of doing things" (I am well aware a fluffy hotel is much nicer than a grotty portacabin or that 20hrs rest beats 11) but there is an acceptance that military operations require an element of privation and "making-do" to get the job done. Quoting union rules at people serves no purpose but nor does just accepting every stupid order thrown at you. That's why flying military aircraft isn't just black and white.
I have no first hand experience of flying an A330 but I can safely bet that 90% of the folk that do it aren't idiots and that there's no reason why those that are suitably motivated couldn't perform discrete military tasks such as AAR given suitable training.
Hours are utterly meaningless. If you do 10 x 15 hour sectors is that 150hrs "worth" more than 100 x 1hr sectors? On paper 150 beats 100 but the bloke with 100 landings vs 15 wins hands down in reality. Don't confuse hours with experience.
There's no "reluctance to acknowledge that they may be a better way of doing things" (I am well aware a fluffy hotel is much nicer than a grotty portacabin or that 20hrs rest beats 11) but there is an acceptance that military operations require an element of privation and "making-do" to get the job done. Quoting union rules at people serves no purpose but nor does just accepting every stupid order thrown at you. That's why flying military aircraft isn't just black and white.I have no first hand experience of flying an A330 but I can safely bet that 90% of the folk that do it aren't idiots and that there's no reason why those that are suitably motivated couldn't perform discrete military tasks such as AAR given suitable training.
who probably average 3 x the hours per year
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chigley
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Redcarpet said "Given the lack of variety and lack of hours the average RAF Multi-Engine pilot gets these days, it is extremely arrogant to suggest civilian pilots, who probably average 3 x the hours per year, could not do AAR."
Agree. However military pilots tend to use the full flight envelope with their flying (especially C130 guys). My civvy employer got a hardon if anyone flew below V enroute icing except on final approach.
( VER ICING – Minimum En-Route Climb Speed (Icing Conditions)
Gives the optimum climb gradient as well as rate of climb with residual airframe ice. This speed gives a margin of 1.4 VS. )
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Erehwon
Posts: 1,146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I was on 216 Sqn, we still did flights that allowed - in fact it was the whole purpose, pilots to fly manually.
This was NORMAL, touch and goes, EFATO (simulated), different sorts of approaches too - manually.
I'm not sure any airline would accept the cost overhead - and I'm not talking about the check ride as part of the licence, this was pure currency flying.
I've known civvy operators who stipulated that the AP be engaged as soon as possible, it was rare for the FOs to get their hands on the aircraft manually at all - virtually simulator only.
I am not convinced that the assertion above is wrong, perhaps a trifle arrogant, but civvy pilots are not 'encouraged' to explore the envelope, merely because they ARE just that (and quite right too).
Personally, I wonder where all this cost-cutting mania will stop. I always feel there has to be a hull loss or body count before 'someone' realises that it can't be done - safely.
I daresay with this too, we shall see. It's just very depressing - all driven by the lowest form of life . . . the bean counters (the very people, along with most politicians, with absolutely no idea what it is their spreadsheets are demanding).
This was NORMAL, touch and goes, EFATO (simulated), different sorts of approaches too - manually.
I'm not sure any airline would accept the cost overhead - and I'm not talking about the check ride as part of the licence, this was pure currency flying.
I've known civvy operators who stipulated that the AP be engaged as soon as possible, it was rare for the FOs to get their hands on the aircraft manually at all - virtually simulator only.
I am not convinced that the assertion above is wrong, perhaps a trifle arrogant, but civvy pilots are not 'encouraged' to explore the envelope, merely because they ARE just that (and quite right too).
Personally, I wonder where all this cost-cutting mania will stop. I always feel there has to be a hull loss or body count before 'someone' realises that it can't be done - safely.
I daresay with this too, we shall see. It's just very depressing - all driven by the lowest form of life . . . the bean counters (the very people, along with most politicians, with absolutely no idea what it is their spreadsheets are demanding).
Last edited by Dengue_Dude; 30th Aug 2010 at 13:44. Reason: spelin
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: South
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't forget, the aviation world is based on the 'if you haven't done it this way, you can't do it' attitude! That goes whether you're crossing 1 Gp to 2 Gp, ISTAR to ATAAR or mil to civ (and vice versa in all cases). I know a civ guy adjusted his attitude once he noted the difference between his and my hours tally. I just smiled, knowing what I knew AND finding out what I could learn from him - and I think that's the key. This point of view seems more relevant to either the new and inexperienced, and the experienced and insecure!
There was an addage:
At 100 hours, you think you know it all.
At 1000 hours, you know you know it all.
At 10,000 hours you know you're still learning.
I know pilots who could cope and pilots who couldn't - it doesn't actually matter if they're mil or not. On the other hand, we weren't born one type of pilot or the other - it is influenced by supervision, training (beyond the OCU) and cross-pollination; the further we seem to progress down that list, the less emphasis we apply to those influences.
Happy to fly with and learn from anyone ...
Snow Dog
There was an addage:
At 100 hours, you think you know it all.
At 1000 hours, you know you know it all.
At 10,000 hours you know you're still learning.
I know pilots who could cope and pilots who couldn't - it doesn't actually matter if they're mil or not. On the other hand, we weren't born one type of pilot or the other - it is influenced by supervision, training (beyond the OCU) and cross-pollination; the further we seem to progress down that list, the less emphasis we apply to those influences.
Happy to fly with and learn from anyone ...
Snow Dog
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dengue Dude
I do fear the lack of hand flying & raw data flying in the civil world, it is becoming a real issue.
I do as much hand flying of the aircraft as I can if conditions permit and encourage FO's to do the same. Fortunaty I work for an airline that values hand flying skills and the management know that these skills can only be kept current with practice.
Some airlines use the FDM as a tool to beat the pilots, one airline has a policy of sending a text message to the captain of an aircraft if he busts an FDM limit to explane his actions, this "bust" might only be a few KTS below Vref.
The airline that I work for would take no action for a small Vref "bust" as long as the FDM showed that action was quickly taken to increase the airspeed.
The FDM was intended to increase flight safety, what it had done in some airlines is de-skill the pilots by encouraging the over use of automatics (Vref bust....... "not me John ! it was the autothrottle guv").
So getting back to the thread I do have some time for those who suspect the civil flying world would not fit in to the military tanker business however two good pilots on the interview team should be able to weed out the button pushers.......................but don't let the personel depatment within a mile of this job.
I do as much hand flying of the aircraft as I can if conditions permit and encourage FO's to do the same. Fortunaty I work for an airline that values hand flying skills and the management know that these skills can only be kept current with practice.
Some airlines use the FDM as a tool to beat the pilots, one airline has a policy of sending a text message to the captain of an aircraft if he busts an FDM limit to explane his actions, this "bust" might only be a few KTS below Vref.
The airline that I work for would take no action for a small Vref "bust" as long as the FDM showed that action was quickly taken to increase the airspeed.
The FDM was intended to increase flight safety, what it had done in some airlines is de-skill the pilots by encouraging the over use of automatics (Vref bust....... "not me John ! it was the autothrottle guv").
So getting back to the thread I do have some time for those who suspect the civil flying world would not fit in to the military tanker business however two good pilots on the interview team should be able to weed out the button pushers.......................but don't let the personel depatment within a mile of this job.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: retirementland
Age: 79
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't help thinking that some in the military seem to focus on job preservation by claiming superiority over civilians rather than fielding innovative and effective capability with modern technology.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Midlands
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't help thinking that some in the military seem to focus on job preservation by claiming superiority over civilians rather than fielding innovative and effective capability with modern technology.
.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For all those getting a little bit grumpy about the 'military' saying the 'civvys' are not up to the job..... Not one person who is currently on the AAR fleet (or indeed still serving in the military) has voiced a negative opinion on this subject.... but feel free to show me the thread i have perhaps missed as my attention to detail is not great.
.
.
But then again go back through almost every thread and you will find some sad sorry ****er who having left feels compelled impart "knowledge"
