Civilian Pilot to Military Pilot

[Poose]

Hypothetical question,

"Can a civilian pilot get in the forces as a military pilot?"

My ambition from a young age was to fly in the military and either make a long career of it - or leave for a second career in the airlines after a 'good stint'.

I didn't make the grade on the Pilot Aptitude test at OASC when I was sixteen but was given a Flying Scholarship and told to come back at eighteen. I re-applied at eighteen and failed the aptitude test again. I was told that, since this was now my second attempt I was now barred from applying for Pilot with the RAF and by default the FAA. I was told that I had passed for the AAC - something about the testing being loaded slightly different.

Anyhow, I changed my branch choice to NCO Aircrew and completed part two of the selection. I was unsuccessful - but encouraged to reapply in eighteen months time with some 'life experience'. I was encouraged to join the TA by the Officer that was dealing with my application.

I joined the TA, enjoyed soldiering, did a degree in Engineering and eventually became a Troop Commander in the RA.
Come the end of my degree, I discussed the Regular Army with friends who were serving and a lot of them discouraged me from applying. So I never took it any further and resigned my Commission in 2006 when I graduated from University.

I am now working in Engineering and funding a CPL part-time with a view to the airlines.
Been thinking outside of the box lately and wondering whether or not the AAC or indeed either of the other services would be interested in me; bearing in mind I'm now thirty.

I just want to fly for a living - military or civil.

Thoughts or insights greatly appreciated!

[Airborne Aircrew]

It won't be much help but I salute your determination...

[orgASMic]

Please search out the numerous threads on the subject on this forum but the long and the short of it is, at 30, you are now too old to start to train as a UK military pilot.

Best of luck with whichever path you choose.

[The Old Fat One]

I too salute your determination...it is an admirable quality and one that will take you far in life.

Another admirable quality is knowing your limitations...I wanted to play centre forward for Man U when I was 10 years old, even though I could not get in my school's first team. Somewhere about 13 or 14, the penny dropped.

OASC have given you a pretty clear message regarding your suitability for aircrew and in pressing on down the civvy route you are exposing yourself to some serious financial risks.

I would never come between somebody and their dream, but please make sure you evaluate your progress in civvy flying training with honesty and no hint of self-delusion (and beware the messages from your flying school...not all are as honest as they should be).

I have worked in a civvy flying school and seen large sums of money spent by people that are never, ever, going to be professional aviators. The outcome is never pretty.

As to your original question (already succinctly dealt with above)...in a word, no.

Good luck...your perserverance deserves success.

[Whopity]

I didn't make the grade on the Pilot Aptitude test at OASC when I was sixteen but was given a Flying Scholarship and told to come back at eighteen. I re-applied at eighteen and failed the aptitude test again.

Back in 1975 I completed the Selection Officers Course at Biggin Hill and that involved looking at the aptitude selection process. We were told that you only ever get one go at the aptitude tests, if you really failed first time, you won't get a second chance. If for any reason you go back for reselection, because you failed selection for some other reason, the aptitude tests on the second run are conducted but the scores from the initial set are used. The reason given is that you can learn how to do them. Some of the staff could get very high scores. They also used to exchange scores with Hamble if candidates had conducted their tests.

Back in 1968 a bunch of pilots graduated from Hamble with SCPLs, there were no jobs for them, and 3 to my knowledge joined the RAF hoping to become military pilots; they were all trained as Navigators.

Things have changed a lot over the years and I see lots of military pilots trying to obtain civilian licences, I don't see or hear of many reversing the direction.

[Albert Driver]

My ambition from a young age was to fly in the military and either make a long career of it - or leave for a second career in the airlines after a 'good stint'.

The implication here is that you think an airline career is second best. It isn't. It's just different.

The OASC experience tells you that you are not suited to military flying. It does not by itself indicate you are unsuited to flying generally.

Given you have tried the military in a ground role and it has not satisfied you, your motivation to fly exceeds your motivation to succeed in the military.

So you have simply arrived at the start of your "second career" much earlier and by a different route than you intended, that's all. That could be to your advantage in a possible future airline career dominated by seniority issues.

Commit to that CPL and catch the next airline recruitment window.

[Albert Driver]

Back in 1975 I completed the Selection Officers Course at Biggin Hill and that involved looking at the aptitude selection process. We were told that you only ever get one go at the aptitude tests, if you really failed first time, you won't get a second chance. If for any reason you go back for reselection, because you failed selection for some other reason, the aptitude tests on the second run are conducted but the scores from the initial set are used. The reason given is that you can learn how to do them. Some of the staff could get very high scores. They also used to exchange scores with Hamble if candidates had conducted their tests.

That's quite interesting.
I attended Biggin Hill not knowing I was developing influenza, performed poorly in my estimation, reported sick (well, collapsed really) and was sent home before completing the tests. I was invited back, found the tests straightforward the second time, and passed.
I also did the Hamble selection procedure twice and passed, having rejected their offer the first time in order to go to University.

Certainly I can confirm the tests got a lot easier with practice!!
But it never occured to me that Hamble and Biggin Hill might compare notes. Why would they?

[Aileron Drag]

But it never occured to me that Hamble and Biggin Hill might compare notes. Why would they?

Having resigned from the RAF during my JP3 course, I went through the Hamble selection procedure, which was remarkably similar to OASC. At one interview, I was grilled by three gentlemen. On the desk, in front of them, were RAF documents which were obviously records of my service and flying instruction.

They really knew everything about me!

The RAF and Hamble clearly communicated.

[The Old Fat One]

The OASC experience tells you that you are not suited to military flying. It does not by itself indicate you are unsuited to flying generally.

That's a wee bit of a loose statement. I take your point that, taken as a whole, OASC is geared to military flying. But elements of it are geared just towards flying training...full stop. And aptitude is aptitude. You may skew the measurement for different purposes, but only between narrow limits.

I would suggest that a very low aptitude score at OASC is a least an indicator of potential problems in any job requiring good aptitude.

And its not just a theory. I have seen first hand quite a few people whose desire to fly has overcome their common sense and awareness of their capabilities and limitations.

The resulting outcome is usually a fairly large bank transfer from Joe Bloggs to We Fleece Em Flying School Limited.

eg 40K and growing for a foreign student who probably should not hold a PPL (which took 75 hours to gain) and last I heard was still struggling to solo in a complex type after 100+ total hours...light years from his CPL). I hazard a guess his aptitude would have been significantly south of mine, which was only 110 (many, many moons ago).

PS...An afterthought. I believe the Air League (which is a civvy organisation, offering civvy first solo scholarships use OASC aptitude tests as part of their selection procedure???

[airborne_artist]

No-one has actually answered the question!

Been thinking outside of the box lately and wondering whether or not the AAC or indeed either of the other services would be interested in me; bearing in mind I'm now thirty.

The upper age limit for AAC commissioned service is I think 28 on entering RMAS. Waivers may be possible, but an RMAS place is no guarantee of an offer from AAC.

Contact AAC Officer Recruiting for the complete answer. Your TA commission may help.

[The Old Fat One]

AA

Attention to detail before posting....

No-one has actually answered the question!

orGASmic wrote...

but the long and the short of it is, at 30, you are now too old to start to train as a UK military pilot.

And I wrote....

As to your original question (already succinctly dealt with above)...in a word, no.

XX

[Albert Driver]

I take your point that, taken as a whole, OASC is geared to military flying. But elements of it are geared just towards flying training...full stop. And aptitude is aptitude. You may skew the measurement for different purposes, but only between narrow limits.

If I understand his post correctly, OP was awarded a Flying Scholarship. He doesn't say if he completed it or has done any flying since, but clearly aptitude was displayed.

The airlines have many pilots who failed OASC, some very successful in airline training and checking roles. They would say the Biggin Hill experience simply gave them the determination to prove the Selection Officers wrong. And as we know, focus and determination are useful, even essential, assets in a successful flying career.

OP should consider your points well, but not be put off by them, if he finds the military door is now closed but the CPL option open.

[Shiver me timbers!]

Correct me if I'm wrong but this guy did it however I doubt he failed initially. Still possible though...

RAF Hawk Display Team - Tom Saunders

Also - he was grounded in 2010 due to flying dangerous manoeuvres. Anyone know if he's back flying yet?

[orgASMic]

Totally irrelevant. Tom Saunders (from the biography at the link) was 29 in 2010 and joined in 2004 ie 23 or thereabouts thereby getting into flying training before his 26th birthday (the RAF requirement).

What would be relevant is the tale of a mate of mine who went through IOT as Commonwealth student, having passed OASC, was trained in the USA and then flew a couple of thousand hours for his own country's defence force then joined the RAF pushing 30 (not as a pilot) and is now flying multis after a branch change in his early 30s.

The OP got a flying scholarship, 2 fails at OASC and is already 30 with no other declared flying history.

The differences to the OP are that my mate passed OASC, passed flying trg, got his wings and had plenty of P1 hours before the RAF gave him the nod and waived the age limit.

[Whopity]

Also - he was grounded in 2010 due to flying dangerous manoeuvres

Nothings changed then; he formated on me inverted whilst I was teaching a student back in 2001

[Poose]

Gentlemen,

Thankyou for the encouraging and honest feedback.

To go into a bit more detail and help settle some arguments on here.
I applied for a Flying Scholarship and Sixth Form Scolarship back in 1997, upon receipt of my GCSE results.

I attended Part One of OASC which was the assessment for these schemes. I passed the medical and the interview. I was pulled to one side - as is customary and informed of my aptitude failure for Pilot, Navigator and Air Traffic Controller. I had passed for Fighter Controller, NCO Aircrew and for Army Air Corps Pilot. I was advised that I had just missed out on RAF/FAA Pilot and that I had done very well on one of the newer tests which was considered difficult - but had messed up one of the 'easier' tests.
I believe the 'harder' test consisted of coloured diamonds moving across the screen that you had to 'target', mental arithmetic and memory recall - simultaneously. The one I failed was the red spots running down the screen and you had to track them with a white spot - moving a joystick left and right. If I remember right.

The aptitude test was sold to me by one of the reviewing officers as a statistic - nothing more. If you could pass the RAF/FAA Pilot aptitude, then you would be statistically likely to go on to pass a Fast Jet OCU. That was how the test was skewed - or so I was told.

Prior, to my attendance at OASC my flying experience consisted of about twenty hours of 'cadged' AEF flights, from my time as a Flight Staff Cadet on the Bulldog at RAF Woodvale in the late nineties.

I attended the Flying Scholarship the following year at Cumbria Aero Club in 1998 and soloed after 6:25 on the Cessna 152. I was assessed as an 'Above Average' pilot on the Final Progress Check.

I returned home and completed the PPL in a 'sporadic' fashion on a different aircraft over the following two years with various instructors and considerable gaps in the training, primarily due to shortages of funds and the weather. I was unaware of 'unscrupulous' hours builders and schools that weren't interested in their students at this stage... Needless to say, the school went bust in 2001, a few months after I passed my Skills Test.
My CPL is going okay at the minute...
Feel free to assess my aptitude, gentlemen! I appreciate honesty!

I do not consider airline flying second best - I just quite liked the idea of 'hooning' around at low-level in something green, before going on to more 'sedate' flying.
In my opinion, the average military pilot is far more skilled than the average civilian pilot due to the standard of training they have received. Just my view.
I believe that I have also been rumbled - the military side of things was always a close second to the flying. Henceforth, that is why I decided to pursue a self funded CPL, funded by my Aerospace Engineering day job... rather than go for a ground based military role.

Thanks again for the feedback - it has been enlightening!