Flying School vs RAAF
Bell_Flyer,
Admittedly the bit about not going flying with less than 100% serviceable aircraft is stretching it a bit, but the telling difference with military maintenance is the focus on flying safety from the management point of view.
Not saying that some GA owner/managers don't have a similar outlook, but when it's coming directly out of their pocket, the pressure can certainly be brought to bear on the pilots (either directly or in other subtle ways) to press on with unserviceable aircraft.
In normal peacetime ops, military crews are strongly encouraged to make safety calls when required, and censured if they don't.
I would imagine the Sea Kings were hot refuelling in accordance with their approved procedures for a good reason.
Caribous have been on the list for retirement for probably half their 45 year service life, and have you ever seen a big radial that doesn't leak oil? The maintainers have done an excellent job over the years.
Certainly there are mistakes made, as in the split pin tragedy you refer to, but the ethos is there to put safety first rather than the almighty dollar.
The focus is on getting the job done, but if there's a safety issue, aircrews know they can U/S an aircraft when they have to without being hauled over the coals for doing so, which is a damn sight better than what a lot of GA pilots have to put up with.
Re the helicopter scene, the big bucks may not be there as much as they are for airline pilots, but how many fixed wing guys get there? There's usually a lot more RW jobs around every time I look in the Australian, and the IFR multi work's becoming more prevalent, and better paid, compared with your average single engine day VFR gig.
Admittedly the bit about not going flying with less than 100% serviceable aircraft is stretching it a bit, but the telling difference with military maintenance is the focus on flying safety from the management point of view.
Not saying that some GA owner/managers don't have a similar outlook, but when it's coming directly out of their pocket, the pressure can certainly be brought to bear on the pilots (either directly or in other subtle ways) to press on with unserviceable aircraft.
In normal peacetime ops, military crews are strongly encouraged to make safety calls when required, and censured if they don't.
I would imagine the Sea Kings were hot refuelling in accordance with their approved procedures for a good reason.
Caribous have been on the list for retirement for probably half their 45 year service life, and have you ever seen a big radial that doesn't leak oil? The maintainers have done an excellent job over the years.
Certainly there are mistakes made, as in the split pin tragedy you refer to, but the ethos is there to put safety first rather than the almighty dollar.
The focus is on getting the job done, but if there's a safety issue, aircrews know they can U/S an aircraft when they have to without being hauled over the coals for doing so, which is a damn sight better than what a lot of GA pilots have to put up with.
Re the helicopter scene, the big bucks may not be there as much as they are for airline pilots, but how many fixed wing guys get there? There's usually a lot more RW jobs around every time I look in the Australian, and the IFR multi work's becoming more prevalent, and better paid, compared with your average single engine day VFR gig.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it a flying career you want stay away from the Military as they only have aircraft to look at not fly ...A fast jet pilot only gets 120 hours a year .I don't think that is a good choice for the effort!!
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Buck Rogers,
No idea if you are in the RAAF but that is horse Sh*t. Most F/A-18 line drivers I know (and that is most of them!) get around double that a year and except for the flight to a different base/country for an exercise, all of it is quality flying. 200-220 odd hours a year in a Hornet means our drivers are some of the best in the world at what they do.
Cheers
CB
No idea if you are in the RAAF but that is horse Sh*t. Most F/A-18 line drivers I know (and that is most of them!) get around double that a year and except for the flight to a different base/country for an exercise, all of it is quality flying. 200-220 odd hours a year in a Hornet means our drivers are some of the best in the world at what they do.
Cheers
CB
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Aus
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They dont go flying without a 100% serviceable aircraft
(But I think your sentiment is correct)
WRT the Sea King accident. It was the culmination of entrenched problems within the ADF (partucularly 817Sqn) that led not only to the accident but also, separately, the fatal results. It was problems of culture, lack of quality leadership, pressure from senoir officers to maintain the flying schedule, junior maint. pers doing as they were directed (as opposed to the safest choice) and finally a maintenance error under arduous conditions.
This pattern has repeated itself in both military and civil aviation circles over the years. Aviation comes with pressures and risks regardless of which side of the fence you sit.
Mil aviation offers greater risks, such as being shot at. Although thats rare. Training carries greater risks and mil aircraft are not generally built with the same redundancies as civil aircraft. Remember, in the Army and Navy flying does not come first the way it does in the RAAF. But that said, it can be great fun and you will make friends for life. I would never trade the experiences I had while serving.
I miss the freedom of flying with the military, particularly overseas. But I grew tired of the military beaurocracy.
Civilian flying is very different. I hope it gets better after GA. The people are also very different. I still have that sense of purpose and would like to fly for RFDS eventually. I must admit, I am sick of turning up to find my aircraft u/s. I refuse to take it every time and cop a bit of stick for it but I would rather be an out of work pilot than dead. I wait while the fault is fixed and then fly. You just have to stand up for yourself, be reasonable but don't do anything that could come back to bite you just because the operator doesn't want to shell out to have problems fixed.
Overall, I would say a taste of flying in the ADF is a good thing if your son is that way inclined, but the RAAF IMPS is very long.
This pattern has repeated itself in both military and civil aviation circles over the years. Aviation comes with pressures and risks regardless of which side of the fence you sit.
Mil aviation offers greater risks, such as being shot at. Although thats rare. Training carries greater risks and mil aircraft are not generally built with the same redundancies as civil aircraft. Remember, in the Army and Navy flying does not come first the way it does in the RAAF. But that said, it can be great fun and you will make friends for life. I would never trade the experiences I had while serving.
I miss the freedom of flying with the military, particularly overseas. But I grew tired of the military beaurocracy.
Civilian flying is very different. I hope it gets better after GA. The people are also very different. I still have that sense of purpose and would like to fly for RFDS eventually. I must admit, I am sick of turning up to find my aircraft u/s. I refuse to take it every time and cop a bit of stick for it but I would rather be an out of work pilot than dead. I wait while the fault is fixed and then fly. You just have to stand up for yourself, be reasonable but don't do anything that could come back to bite you just because the operator doesn't want to shell out to have problems fixed.
Overall, I would say a taste of flying in the ADF is a good thing if your son is that way inclined, but the RAAF IMPS is very long.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NSW
Age: 64
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good on you CB! I was hoping such facts would come out.
Very small point to add to CB's comment which may or may not be relevant. Pilots often compare flying rates Military versus Civil, with Civil hours chasers often leading by several magnitudes. As CB says, 200-220 hours per year in a Fighter is a good effort, and those hours are nearly always exciting and varied. It is probably fair to say that in the Military no hour is the same as any other. Having flown both Military and Civil, I make the simple observation that Civil hours are frequently the same hour flown over and over again, and that can be less exciting. Not meant as a criticism or as a debate starter, just a view from an old bloke directed at a youngster who sounds like he is considering his options.
If you want to be a pilot, go for it! There are plenty of paths to follow and they will all have pro's and cons.
No idea if you are in the RAAF but that is horse Sh*t. Most F/A-18 line drivers I know (and that is most of them!) get around double that a year and except for the flight to a different base/country for an exercise, all of it is quality flying. 200-220 odd hours a year in a Hornet means our drivers are some of the best in the world at what they do.
If you want to be a pilot, go for it! There are plenty of paths to follow and they will all have pro's and cons.
Military vs civil
guys you are forgetting one thing. The young man in question has already made up his mind, therefore the Military vs Civil argument is kind of redundant. The only person trying to change his mind is his mother, and I believe that is from a cost cutting point of view.
Just getting in before the thread descends into a bull-blown slanging match
j3
guys you are forgetting one thing. The young man in question has already made up his mind, therefore the Military vs Civil argument is kind of redundant. The only person trying to change his mind is his mother, and I believe that is from a cost cutting point of view.
Just getting in before the thread descends into a bull-blown slanging match
j3
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How many F-111's were knowingly flown unservicable (eliminating legal CFU's from the debate)? Looks like you're struggling to state truthful facts in this thread Buck???
Civil or military there will always be pressures to take US's airborne either from a commercial or mission driven angle. Professional pilots from either side manage these effectively and safely. Enough said.
I agree with j3pipercub here, sounds like mum is pushing son into blues. In these financial times, I would be hesitant to fork out the big bucks too. Still there is nothing like 'living the dream'. Just have to do it for the right reasons.
FH
Civil or military there will always be pressures to take US's airborne either from a commercial or mission driven angle. Professional pilots from either side manage these effectively and safely. Enough said.
I agree with j3pipercub here, sounds like mum is pushing son into blues. In these financial times, I would be hesitant to fork out the big bucks too. Still there is nothing like 'living the dream'. Just have to do it for the right reasons.
FH
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Down Under
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saving Private Ryan-Cookie
Arm out the window,
Your points are good ones and I agree with most of them except the helo job prospects. Aveng needed some perspective - that's all. But he got that in spades after his post.
The key point to Cottage Cookies is this. If her son chooses a career (as a stepping stone) that includes shooting people for a living - and you are required to do that if you get posted into a war zone, then someday, someone is going to shoot back, perhaps accurately. It reads like her son doesn't want to be a uniform from the post. The ADF appears not to care too much for its returned troops from a psychological standpoint - if "4 Corners" on last Monday night is to be believed.
Dangerous stuff, all in all, just to avoid paying civilian flying school fees. This probably explains why almost no Prime Minister, Defence Minister or Cabinet Minister has his son/daughter fighting, being maimed, suffering Post Traumatic Stress Disorder in Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, etc. Come to think of it, I can't say I have read any sons/daughters of CEOs of ASX 100 companies fighting and dying in a war zone recently.
It is this that must be weighed up as well when deciding to join the uniforms as a stepping stone.
I think it was Tom Hanks who said, "I'm glad I didn't have to fight in any war. I'm glad I didn't have to pick up a gun. I'm glad I didn't get killed or kill somebody. I hope my kids enjoy the same lack of manhood".
Your points are good ones and I agree with most of them except the helo job prospects. Aveng needed some perspective - that's all. But he got that in spades after his post.
The key point to Cottage Cookies is this. If her son chooses a career (as a stepping stone) that includes shooting people for a living - and you are required to do that if you get posted into a war zone, then someday, someone is going to shoot back, perhaps accurately. It reads like her son doesn't want to be a uniform from the post. The ADF appears not to care too much for its returned troops from a psychological standpoint - if "4 Corners" on last Monday night is to be believed.
Dangerous stuff, all in all, just to avoid paying civilian flying school fees. This probably explains why almost no Prime Minister, Defence Minister or Cabinet Minister has his son/daughter fighting, being maimed, suffering Post Traumatic Stress Disorder in Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, etc. Come to think of it, I can't say I have read any sons/daughters of CEOs of ASX 100 companies fighting and dying in a war zone recently.
It is this that must be weighed up as well when deciding to join the uniforms as a stepping stone.
I think it was Tom Hanks who said, "I'm glad I didn't have to fight in any war. I'm glad I didn't have to pick up a gun. I'm glad I didn't get killed or kill somebody. I hope my kids enjoy the same lack of manhood".
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not saying that some GA owner/managers don't have a similar outlook, but when it's coming directly out of their pocket, the pressure can certainly be brought to bear on the pilots (either directly or in other subtle ways) to press on with unserviceable aircraft.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it was Tom Hanks who said, "I'm glad I didn't have to fight in any war. I'm glad I didn't have to pick up a gun. I'm glad I didn't get killed or kill somebody. I hope my kids enjoy the same lack of manhood".
Thread drift... I love it how people hold up celebrities as bastions of whats right and wrong or as hero's. They are nothing of the sort and their opinion is no more or less valid than anyone elses. They just get the publicity.
I just get all wound up when people start quoting ACTORS (yes people who pretend to be someone else for a living), as if their opinion is more valid than anyone elses.
Sorry, back to the thread at hand.
Cheers
Mr B
Edited to add, I do not mean to say that people who chose not to serve in the military as being less of a person than someone who does, but I would hope that most would not be as arrogant about it as Tom Hanks appears in that quote (it is probably out of context anyway!) And I know most Australians (and most western nations civilians) that I know are thankful to those who do serve, and would not put a negative connotation on it, as does the above quote in my not-so-humble opinion.
And the only reason he can say that is better men (and women) than himself have chosen to do so... He may hope that for his son, well I hope there are still plenty of better women and men than him and his son out there to make sure his son doesn't have to.
I have deployed, as a soldier and an aircrewman with the Australian Army. I don't find what Tom Hanks says offensive, especially since he is speaking from an American perspective.
Thread drift anyway...
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CC
You have been provided with some sound advice from some of the posts. From the point of view of someone who was trained by the RAAF and for the past 15 years has been an observer of the civilian training system, my only advice is to ensure you pick the right school with the right aircraft and the right instructor. Generally speaking you get what you pay for.
RAAF instructors have generally all flown operationally and have significant experience before completing an arduous training regime. In flying schools many instructors are inexperienced and are using the instructional time to gain their own hours and experience to move on. While there are some excellent civilian instructors the percentage of average and inexperienced ones ones is high. This is normally due to the minimum pay they receive that reduces their motivation to do more than is necessary in mentoring their trainees.
Check out the flying school thoroughly, meet the instructors to ensure your son is comfortable with them. Ask the instructors why they are instructing what their experience is and what motivates them. What is the ground school like? Is it self learning or is their mentoring and formal lecturing.
Others may offer other advice and their may already be other threads on this forum on this subject.
Best wishes for your son in what is generally a rewarding experience once the hard yards have been had.
You have been provided with some sound advice from some of the posts. From the point of view of someone who was trained by the RAAF and for the past 15 years has been an observer of the civilian training system, my only advice is to ensure you pick the right school with the right aircraft and the right instructor. Generally speaking you get what you pay for.
RAAF instructors have generally all flown operationally and have significant experience before completing an arduous training regime. In flying schools many instructors are inexperienced and are using the instructional time to gain their own hours and experience to move on. While there are some excellent civilian instructors the percentage of average and inexperienced ones ones is high. This is normally due to the minimum pay they receive that reduces their motivation to do more than is necessary in mentoring their trainees.
Check out the flying school thoroughly, meet the instructors to ensure your son is comfortable with them. Ask the instructors why they are instructing what their experience is and what motivates them. What is the ground school like? Is it self learning or is their mentoring and formal lecturing.
Others may offer other advice and their may already be other threads on this forum on this subject.
Best wishes for your son in what is generally a rewarding experience once the hard yards have been had.
