ex-military fast-jet pilots on airlines
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: bored
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ex-military fast-jet pilots on airlines
I was talking to a current 747 captain recently about differences in standards of the different co-pilots he has to fly with. I was quite surprised when he said that in general the best co-pilots were those who had come through the GA ranks, and that they were almost always far better at general handling of the aircraft than ex-military fast-jet pilots. His theory was that modern fast jets are so easy to fly because of their massive power reserves, low momentum, and a draggy airframe giving good speed stability, and so ex fast jet pilots had very little experience that was relevant to airlines. I'm curious to know views of others on the topic.
There are good pilots and there are some excellent pilots..to suggest that GA are in general better than the ex-military pilots is a sweeping, and I would suggest unjustified generalisation..What was the background of the "current 747 captain..GA by any chance?
Yours, wiggy
biased ex-military fast-jet, current 747 Captain
Yours, wiggy
biased ex-military fast-jet, current 747 Captain
viva Osh Vegas
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Wichita, KS
Age: 52
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
military pilots vs. civilian pilots
female pilots vs. male pilots
short pilots vs. tall pilots
old pilots vs. young pilots
European pilots vs. USA pilots
fat pilots vs. thin pilots
The list goes on ad infinitum, as do the sweeping statements and arguements. Everyone is an individual and should be judged on that basis.
female pilots vs. male pilots
short pilots vs. tall pilots
old pilots vs. young pilots
European pilots vs. USA pilots
fat pilots vs. thin pilots
The list goes on ad infinitum, as do the sweeping statements and arguements. Everyone is an individual and should be judged on that basis.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He's not a 747 Captain, so he feels left out? 
I've flown with good & not-so-good ex-military, fast-jet, BUFF, GA, commuter, and bush pilots. Less of the not-so-good among the bush pilots.
Obviously, the best have glider experience.
unbiased glider pilot, ex-military fast-jet, current 747 Captain
I've flown with good & not-so-good ex-military, fast-jet, BUFF, GA, commuter, and bush pilots. Less of the not-so-good among the bush pilots.
Obviously, the best have glider experience.
unbiased glider pilot, ex-military fast-jet, current 747 Captain
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was quite surprised when he said that in general the best co-pilots were those who had come through the GA ranks, and that they were almost always far better at general handling of the aircraft than ex-military fast-jet pilots.
I've trained both, in the sim and on line...GA wins hand down, nearly every time.
Types, B707 and L1011.
Can't really say about new(er) types, haven't flown 'em.
NB. Had to include the L1011, just so 'others' don't feel especially left out.
I agree with the original 747 Captain. For the last 28 years I have sat in jets with Captains and FO's from all backgrounds and found in general that the most supportive and helpful FO's come from GA backgrounds. Also those Captains who maybe had some turbo prop time where they spent many a happy hour iced up to the gunnels and bounced their way through the bottom of thunderstorms rather than going around the tops had better management skills than those who relied on fast reactions in single seaters.
Of the ex-military types, I have found that transport Guys settle down to airline life with the minimum of fuss. Ex fast jet airforce take about a year but end up being fine to work with but the real anal pains are ex Naval fast jet pilots. Without exception I have found them to be 'individuals' that neither respond to nor even want to align themselves to SOPS. When I queried this syndrome with one his response summed up the problem ..."Look. You have to remember that when you blasted off from a carrier you were on your own, and the Navy expected you to look after yourself" .....This was said to me as he armed his own speed brake, lowered his own wheels and selected his own landing flap!!!
Without exception all rotary military pilots have been fine to fly with. After all the relief of knowing that at last the wings are bolted firmly to the airframe usually made them less stressed and laid back. Also, not having any preconceived ideas about how to fly an airliner made them ideal training material.
Of the ex-military types, I have found that transport Guys settle down to airline life with the minimum of fuss. Ex fast jet airforce take about a year but end up being fine to work with but the real anal pains are ex Naval fast jet pilots. Without exception I have found them to be 'individuals' that neither respond to nor even want to align themselves to SOPS. When I queried this syndrome with one his response summed up the problem ..."Look. You have to remember that when you blasted off from a carrier you were on your own, and the Navy expected you to look after yourself" .....This was said to me as he armed his own speed brake, lowered his own wheels and selected his own landing flap!!!
Without exception all rotary military pilots have been fine to fly with. After all the relief of knowing that at last the wings are bolted firmly to the airframe usually made them less stressed and laid back. Also, not having any preconceived ideas about how to fly an airliner made them ideal training material.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: The Middle East
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I was quite surprised when he said that in general the best co-pilots were those who had come through the GA ranks"
Why are you surprised? Are you from the school that thinks ex GA pilots are second rate compared to ex military? Is GA training inferior to military training?
Sorry to disappoint you, but in the airlines no one gives a rat's ass if you are ex GA or an ex red arrow, as long as you have the relevant licence/ratings thats all that matters.
Why are you surprised? Are you from the school that thinks ex GA pilots are second rate compared to ex military? Is GA training inferior to military training?
Sorry to disappoint you, but in the airlines no one gives a rat's ass if you are ex GA or an ex red arrow, as long as you have the relevant licence/ratings thats all that matters.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The biggest training challenge has always been of experienced pilots from other airlines . . . it's called: "Unlearning the old ways of doing things."
But this has always been a less complicated task when the previous operator and current operator are using the manufacturers' exact checklists and procedures.
But this has always been a less complicated task when the previous operator and current operator are using the manufacturers' exact checklists and procedures.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: AEP
Age: 80
Posts: 1,420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Military trained or GA...?
I cannot give an opinion, I have seen both extremes.
xxx
I dealt with both in the early 1970s, teaching Learjet type ratings.
Was the days of the GI Bill (a US gov't education fund for ex-servicemen).
Also had some GA pilots who had a rich daddy offering them the jet rating.
xxx
Generally, the ex USAF/USN guys were good "sticks". Especially USN...
Surprisingly, ex military helicopter pilots were always good. Excellent coordination.
Then I had fighter pilots who had never flown an ILS in their life.
I had a lot of airline F/Es (ex military jet jocks) getting the Lear rating and ATPL.
If they had spent a few years flying "sideways", they were seriously "rusty".
xxx
I recall a bad situation with a TWA L-1011 F/E, ex USAF fighter pilot.
He barely completed the training, ran out of funds. The FAA failed him on his ATPL ride.
Was so bad that the FAA inspector suspended his instrument rating...!
Although a F/E, TWA required him to hold a IR... which was suspended.
TWA grounded him, without pay.
He could no longer afford to re-train for the ATPL and Lear rating.
So he went to a GA school, and took 3 weeks to get an instrument rating...
That was the end of his "ATPL Learjet Type Rating" on the GI Bill.
xxx
So you ask me, military or GA...?
Last 20 years, I only deal with experienced pilots coming from other jet types.
The 747 is an easy airplane. So never a problem to train pilots.
I am curious how the JAR MCC and fATPL with 250 hrs would be in a Lear 24.
Aviation geeks and nerds who cannot fly...?
xxx
Happy contrails
xxx
I dealt with both in the early 1970s, teaching Learjet type ratings.
Was the days of the GI Bill (a US gov't education fund for ex-servicemen).
Also had some GA pilots who had a rich daddy offering them the jet rating.
xxx
Generally, the ex USAF/USN guys were good "sticks". Especially USN...
Surprisingly, ex military helicopter pilots were always good. Excellent coordination.
Then I had fighter pilots who had never flown an ILS in their life.
I had a lot of airline F/Es (ex military jet jocks) getting the Lear rating and ATPL.
If they had spent a few years flying "sideways", they were seriously "rusty".
xxx
I recall a bad situation with a TWA L-1011 F/E, ex USAF fighter pilot.
He barely completed the training, ran out of funds. The FAA failed him on his ATPL ride.
Was so bad that the FAA inspector suspended his instrument rating...!
Although a F/E, TWA required him to hold a IR... which was suspended.
TWA grounded him, without pay.
He could no longer afford to re-train for the ATPL and Lear rating.
So he went to a GA school, and took 3 weeks to get an instrument rating...
That was the end of his "ATPL Learjet Type Rating" on the GI Bill.
xxx
So you ask me, military or GA...?
Last 20 years, I only deal with experienced pilots coming from other jet types.
The 747 is an easy airplane. So never a problem to train pilots.
I am curious how the JAR MCC and fATPL with 250 hrs would be in a Lear 24.
Aviation geeks and nerds who cannot fly...?
xxx
Happy contrails
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Egcc
Posts: 1,695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The worst F/O I flew with was a 200 hour GA integrated ATPL cadet
PP
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,098
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I always found that the ex C130 pilots, (or ex military multi crew aircraft) pilots adapted very quickly to civvy flying but that ex fast jet took about a year to rid themselves of the 'one man band' sort of thing but all were, basically, very good. Someone coming to jets after a few years GA is also usually good but has to get used to doing things more formally!
Incidently, all jets are 'Fast Jets' if you haven't flown them before!
Incidently, all jets are 'Fast Jets' if you haven't flown them before!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I always found that the ex C130 pilots, (or ex military multi crew aircraft) pilots adapted very quickly to civvy flying ....
Fighter jet types?
Two chips on each shoulder, it seemed...and they did not like being told that they were absolutely not in charge, any longer.
They learned very quickly that this was true.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it is "horses for for courses".
Put it this way. The young, modern, average airline pilot would probably be the last person I would put in a military fast jet, as the job and skills required are vastly different. IMHO.
Keeping the above in mined, the average fast jet pilot would be the most unsuitable candidate for an airline job. Does depend on how quickly they are prepared to adapt of course and age has a lot to do with this.
Only real issue I have with some ex military crew in the civil aviation, is this. They are programmed/brain washed, to think they are the very best of the best. This of course is natural because if you don't believe you are the best and go to battle with that frame of mind you are a looser and will loose. However, this attitude can be very long lasting indeed. Humans being humans, they are not backward in reminding us mare mortals of the fact they are the "best".
I have flown with pilots from all sorts of back grounds and would say on average the military pilot does display better flying skills. What I do find lacking in most young pilots today, is they cant use their feet properly near the ground. Nothing 20 to 30 hours in a Cessna 180 (tail wheel) in max cross wind conditions, for e.g., would not sort out with most of them. A dying and valuable art, falling by the way side.
Was informed a few years ago by the Chief pilot of a large airline that "flying skills" involved in flying in modern airliners was well down the list of priorities. Looking at the videos of 2 recent attempts to land in strong cross winds by 2 "flag carrying" aircraft, I disagree.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Seen my tin hat darling?
Put it this way. The young, modern, average airline pilot would probably be the last person I would put in a military fast jet, as the job and skills required are vastly different. IMHO.
Keeping the above in mined, the average fast jet pilot would be the most unsuitable candidate for an airline job. Does depend on how quickly they are prepared to adapt of course and age has a lot to do with this.
Only real issue I have with some ex military crew in the civil aviation, is this. They are programmed/brain washed, to think they are the very best of the best. This of course is natural because if you don't believe you are the best and go to battle with that frame of mind you are a looser and will loose. However, this attitude can be very long lasting indeed. Humans being humans, they are not backward in reminding us mare mortals of the fact they are the "best".
I have flown with pilots from all sorts of back grounds and would say on average the military pilot does display better flying skills. What I do find lacking in most young pilots today, is they cant use their feet properly near the ground. Nothing 20 to 30 hours in a Cessna 180 (tail wheel) in max cross wind conditions, for e.g., would not sort out with most of them. A dying and valuable art, falling by the way side.
Was informed a few years ago by the Chief pilot of a large airline that "flying skills" involved in flying in modern airliners was well down the list of priorities. Looking at the videos of 2 recent attempts to land in strong cross winds by 2 "flag carrying" aircraft, I disagree.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Seen my tin hat darling?
Last edited by weido_salt; 5th Oct 2008 at 04:22.
I've flown or crossed aviation paths with a few ex RAF pilots, the only common factor with them is that they can't stop talking about how they did things in "The Service" and how wonderful and right and proper and correct it all was.......One guy got uptight when i referred to "the Raff", he replied "Its not called the Raff, its the R.A.F or the Royal Air Force!!".....I thought to myself "calm down princess, before you sh*t yourself". There are far more important things to worry about. There are many ways to skin a cat as they say. Let it go chaps and move on!!