Pilot: FAA or RAF
 

Just a bit of help if you would guys.

What are the differences between the FAA and RAF in respect of being a pilot? What is the role of a pilot in the RAF compared to that of a pilot in the FAA?

Cheers,
amb

Careful study of this forum could lead you to develop the opinion that they are quite different, one of the services being staffed by highly professional aviators, the other appearing to be staffed by a group who, judging by recent posts, appear to be something less than the responsible professionals one would expect to find.

I will lead you to decide which is which.:confused:

Safety_Helmut (Engineer)

Strange question.



How about, "What's the difference between the police and the fire service?"


Or am I being a tad harsh?

Once I would have said "boats", but that's no longer true. I have to confess, my initial thoughts were: Federal Aviation Authority, but perhaps that says a lot about my perspective at the moment!

Good luck finding a useful answer - there are bound to be plenty!

One is a small flying club without any serious offensive capability, the other is a professional and formidable airborne fighting force. Simple really.

16B

16B

I think that is a tad unfair - I have met some pretty offensive crab aircrew in my time

:ok:

Anyone can land on a runway 1 mile long that stays in the same place and doesn't bounce around.
But some of us relish a challenge.

16 Blades. Please tell me what the entire Crab force brought to Telic that the Yanks could not have done better themselves? To my mind probably Airborne refueling. And now ask yourself what they would have done without the Junglies at Al Faw (when they grounded their entire Sea Knight force on night one because they couldn't operated in the bad conditions, or what they would do about the Iraqi navy which was destroyed in GW1 by a Lynx because they didn't have suitable kit, or who they would use to do the Bagger job.
The difference between the RAF and FAA, is that we bring something to the party, even when operating with the Yanks

amb,

Would you want to join a Service that actively argues against the one capability that would have enabled them to take part in the offensive side of Afghanistan post 9/11 ie the CV(F). Apart from the (very) LR bombers of the USAF the only offensive capability was provided by a/c from the carriers of the USN.

Flying from the sea is the most challenging flying you will experience and whether you want to be a FJ or RW pilot you can do both with the Fleet Air Arm. Little known fact but in the next decade the FAA will provide about 25% of the UK FJ pilots, flying what will probably be the best a/c in the world (JSF).

What is more the RN offer more responsibility to its officers and there is no better club in the world than the Fleet Air Arm.

Fly Navy, you know it makes sense

Please don't forget that you can land on carriers in the RAF too, it's not just the RN that have to endure that!

Bismark,

“Little known fact?”

“FAA will provide 25% of UK FJ pilots?”

WHAT are you on man?

25%? To man 2 relatively small FJ squadrons that will not even be 100% RN manned as opposed to at least 12 pure RAF FJ units plus another two with a small RN complement embedded not including OCU/OEU 100 Sqn the Reds etc etc etc……

On top of all this the small RN fixed wing element will be located on RAF stations under the command and control of Royal Air Force Strike Command.

amb_211085

If you want to fly FJ;

Join the Royal Air Force or the Fleet Air Arm of the Royal Air Force.

Well, if we are embedded at least you guys might learn a thing or two about flexibility, fun and flying!

and you will have access to a bloody good club with lots of added responsibilities.:yuk:

amb_211085

The reason the light blue get all defensive when asked this question is that they know that FW Naval Aviation is the only certain way to project power across the globe. (check here)

Both arms are highly trained, professional forces, and you should get yourself a visit to both, and then you will decide that the RN has the edge
:ok:

That will be on the carriers (not yet ordered), to fly carrier born aircraft (also not yet ordered). Based on procurment and funding track records you could be an OAP before you join this club.

Some of you might find this link interesting as it discusses some of these issues. Perhaps it should be on the recruiting thread?

I guessed that some of these problems would arise when the decision was made to move the Sea Harrier from away from Yeovilton to Coss/Witt. The early retirement of the Sea Jet - as discussed here can only make it worse. And now they are claiming that the runway at Yeovilton is too short for it to be a possible JSF base - despite the fact that we are buying the STOVL version.

PS Who decided that it was a good idea for carrier aircraft to come under Strike Command, instead of CINCFLEET? Surely this can only cause problems?

If you can ignore all the inter-service willy-waving that a question like that is bound to provoke, I think it boils down to a couple of questions:

1. What do you dream of flying? If you're a helicopter kind of guy then look at the various types and roles that each of the services have. But don't overlook joining the AAC to fly Apache. If you want to fly big planes, with one eye on getting your airline licence, it's got to be RAF. If you want to fly jets, either Typhoons or JSF then you probably stand more chance of doing so in the RAF, but do some research.

2. What do you think about going to sea? As an RAF chap, who's done 9 months at sea, I think it's a miserable way of life, and a miserable way to restrict the way you operate your aircraft. But it does have some advantages and it does appeal to some people. If you're one of them, then the FAA is as good a place as any, and their uniforms are much sharper than the RAF's. All RN and USN aviators will wax lyrical about the joys of landing on a boat. If you end up on Harriers, or JSF, as an RAF chap, you'll land on a boat too, and won't think much of it.

And now for some willy-waving:

Tourist,

It seems that you've taken some kind of selective memory pill. Perhaps you'll recall from GW1 that RAF Tornados were specially requested by the US to go in low and close the major Iraqi airfields on the first few nights of the war (you can argue about the necessity to at great length, but it was a capability the US didn't have). Having operated with a US unit during OIF I can tell you that the UK tanker crews are known as the best and most flexible AAR force in the world. Our AWACS guys are a regarded by the US as far far better than their own. Our SF Herc and Chinook force is envied. Our Storm Shadow missiles were specially requested on several occasions by the CAOC. Our EPW bombs were acknowledged to be better than a plain old JDAM. And our own land units would much rather have an RAF CAS aircraft overhead than a USAF one, given the choice. The Junglies did a great job at Al Fawr, but to suggest no one else brings anything to the party smacks either of ignorance or absurd arrogance.

Single Seat, Single Engine, The Only Way To Fly

Tourist:

And of course no one else with rotary wings was any where to be seen on the Al-Faw were they.......oh no my mistake! Tit.

:zzz:

amb 211085

If rotary is your bag it doesn't matter who you join; as you can see when the chips are down we all get amongst it.

From an Internet source:

UK helicopter crews see the al Faw operation as the high point of the war for them. In a matter of hours, RAF Chinooks and Pumas, supported by RN Westland Sea King HC4s/HC6s, put the main
combat elements of 3 Commando Brigade ashore on an enemy-held coastline. As the troops began to lay siege to Basra, helicopters were used to support operations, with AAC and RN Westland Lynx AH7s and Westland Gazelle AH1s working as tank-hunting teams. In the Rumailah oil fields, Pumas and Lynxs were used to move security patrols and vehicle checkpoints to protect the facilities from sabotage. At sea, the Sea King 7 ASaC (airborne surveillance and control) machines and Merlin HM1s provided command and control top cover, managing the helicopter traffic in the congested airspace of the northern Gulf. Multi-tasking was common, with one Sea King HC4 attacking and sinking an Iraqi patrol boat with a machine gun.

Hope that helps.

Forget all the political wrangling etc....

Didn't someone once say....

I don't know but I've been told
Navy wings are made of gold
I don't know but it's been said
Air force wings are made of lead

Or even further back...

They say in the airforce a landings OK
If the pilot gets out and can still walk away
but in the fleet air arm your prospects are dim
If the landings piss poor and the pilot can't swim!

Just about says it all as far as I'm concerned!!!!

Cr@pinCab.
From an internet source, is that supposed to definative is it?
As I said in my origional post, we have RAF airborne refueling.
If you think the AAC did much then you have not looked into it, and as to the SK4 sinking a patrol boat with a GPMG, dont make me laugh. 7.62 ship killing I think not. Tw@t

Tourist,

Selective reading ability too? I mentioned more than just AAR in my post. And I didn't even get onto the Nimrod R1, or ALARM, or the RAF's much sought after recce capability - RAPTOR, JRP and, until recently, the old Canberra's camera system. Your statement is just plain daft I'm afraid old chap.

Single Seat, Single Engine, The Only Way To Fly