JAA exam exemptions for military pilots- is it fair??
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,185
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Probably True ~ seems like a good idea to me.. Why do people think that Military Experience counts for nothing - It's beyond me.. Some of the finest pilots in the world are obviously ex military.. If you think Civil training is better you are very much mistaken! 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To add my tuppences worth:- everybody knows that the previous CAA theory exams were a pointless load of b******s with almost zero relevance to modern flying. I am assuming (please correct me if I'm wrong) that todays JAR exams are in a broadly similar vein. I really can't see the value in asking a highly experienced military multi engine pilot to pass a load of irrelevant theory exams on VP props and HF propagation in order to certify that they are safe to fly as P2 in an airliner. All the relevant theory of a specific aircraft they require will be covered in a type conversion ground school, and they have amply demonstrated during military service their ability to pole the aircraft round the sky. The only thing likely to be missing is an understanding of civil air law, a subject from which they are not exempt under JAR regs.
To return to Basils original posting, I consider it reasonable that a licenced flight engineer should be exempted from some of the technical exams in the JAR syllabus. That they have not been I put down to the dwindling numbers and political clout of the flight engineers in comparison the miltary jocks.
A number of people have offered some highly dubious statistics about the safety of ex-mil pilots. To these people I would say that any ex-mil pilot will have many years to learn the civil flying trade while they sit in the right hand seat, and when they achieve command it will be through the same rigorous training process which there civilian counterparts undergo. Furthermore I can add that in my company I've yet to fly with an ex-military captain (fast jet or ME) who hasn't been extremely competent and a pleasure to fly with. And usually a damn site less boring than some of the career civvies to boot!!!
Edited for typos!
[ 14 July 2001: Message edited by: Carnage Matey! ]
To return to Basils original posting, I consider it reasonable that a licenced flight engineer should be exempted from some of the technical exams in the JAR syllabus. That they have not been I put down to the dwindling numbers and political clout of the flight engineers in comparison the miltary jocks.
A number of people have offered some highly dubious statistics about the safety of ex-mil pilots. To these people I would say that any ex-mil pilot will have many years to learn the civil flying trade while they sit in the right hand seat, and when they achieve command it will be through the same rigorous training process which there civilian counterparts undergo. Furthermore I can add that in my company I've yet to fly with an ex-military captain (fast jet or ME) who hasn't been extremely competent and a pleasure to fly with. And usually a damn site less boring than some of the career civvies to boot!!!
Edited for typos!
[ 14 July 2001: Message edited by: Carnage Matey! ]
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Bit nosey aren't you
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm ex-military fast jet and now fly big busses! I massively respect the pilots that I fly with that have come through the civil training route. They are skilled at operating in an airline environment. I learnt an immense amount from them and will always be greatful.
When I first arrived I found that most of the questions I asked the Captains that I flew with were to do with passenger handling and the flight operation manuals rather than how to handle the aircraft, aircraft tech or how to operate along routes. My time in the military had covered all those bases neatly. The transition course furnished me with enough knowledge to fly a different aircraft type. Don't forget, apart from galleys and toilets, military fast jets have just about all the main sub-systems that a modern airliner does. Yes they differ in exact detail but I used to have to understand the system so that I could diagnose flaws. In an airline environment, that is positively discouraged, the key is just to follow the ECAM.
I shelled out my own money for the exams and got an exemption from only the GFT. I worked reasonably hard, passed all the exams first time and the lowest mark that I got was in the low 90%s. The exams were not difficult just a learn/dump examination exercise. The whole process from start to finish took 4 months. I can honestly say that the CAA academic exams have had no bearing at all on how I operate on the flightdeck today. The only pleasant surprise was that I didn't have to do Astronav and that Dip is a thing of the past. My military training covered pretty much all of the important aspects of operating within controlled airspace both at home and abroad. Yes, military aircraft do operate in Class A-G airspace, in and out of major airports.
Lets face it, the academic exams in the UK are a hoop jumping exercise. We are just not as good at it as the FAA. There you get the book with the Master Question File, learn the answers to the questions: Ques. What is the beam width of an ILS beam. Ans. D. Yep, most of the guys I did my FAA exams with didn't even bother to learn the actual answer because the questions never changed. I think this might be the reason that the US majors like hiring ex-mil pilots because they are known quantities with a known training background.
I don't personally know of any ex-mil pilot that failed to pass the CAA exams or IR (eventually) in the last 5 years. Some have spent a little more money than others but c'est la vie. Since I have left, the military now pay for the civil exams and instrument training anyway so that guys will sign on for a bit longer.
I had a great time in the military, awesome flying but I now have a life away from work. Every time I flew I made decisions, now I eat meals. I don't begrudge the Long Haul flyers their flight time. I just wish I could have claimed for the time spent in the crew room eating between sorties. The other day a guy gave me a hard time saying that the key to experience was hours. He said that experience could only be gained that way. He did spit some food onto the newspaper that he had been reading for the last 2 hours as he said it.
I believe experience is exposure to all types of inputs and situations that will make you an effective commander. It can be done by osmosis or it can be ticked off methodically. The only real difference I see between the military and the civvies is that the military tick off the boxes and make certain the pilot has been exposed to everything that it is necessary for them to see to operate effectively in their environment. A lot of civvy companies 'hope' that by waiting a bezillion hours for command the boxes will be ticked.
I think the whole system should be overhauled, the CAA should decide exactly what is required of a First Officer and Captain and produce some training and exposure objectives. Then all the companies should make certain that those objectives are met by their crews irrespective of background.
I am now a civvy, I was in the military. The bottom line is that the CAA exams are a hoop jumping exercise designed to insulate the industry from no-hopers. They are not difficult, you just have to have average intelligence and be committed to pass! The flying test is different but probably harder in a Herc than a Duchess.
Ghost
When I first arrived I found that most of the questions I asked the Captains that I flew with were to do with passenger handling and the flight operation manuals rather than how to handle the aircraft, aircraft tech or how to operate along routes. My time in the military had covered all those bases neatly. The transition course furnished me with enough knowledge to fly a different aircraft type. Don't forget, apart from galleys and toilets, military fast jets have just about all the main sub-systems that a modern airliner does. Yes they differ in exact detail but I used to have to understand the system so that I could diagnose flaws. In an airline environment, that is positively discouraged, the key is just to follow the ECAM.
I shelled out my own money for the exams and got an exemption from only the GFT. I worked reasonably hard, passed all the exams first time and the lowest mark that I got was in the low 90%s. The exams were not difficult just a learn/dump examination exercise. The whole process from start to finish took 4 months. I can honestly say that the CAA academic exams have had no bearing at all on how I operate on the flightdeck today. The only pleasant surprise was that I didn't have to do Astronav and that Dip is a thing of the past. My military training covered pretty much all of the important aspects of operating within controlled airspace both at home and abroad. Yes, military aircraft do operate in Class A-G airspace, in and out of major airports.
Lets face it, the academic exams in the UK are a hoop jumping exercise. We are just not as good at it as the FAA. There you get the book with the Master Question File, learn the answers to the questions: Ques. What is the beam width of an ILS beam. Ans. D. Yep, most of the guys I did my FAA exams with didn't even bother to learn the actual answer because the questions never changed. I think this might be the reason that the US majors like hiring ex-mil pilots because they are known quantities with a known training background.
I don't personally know of any ex-mil pilot that failed to pass the CAA exams or IR (eventually) in the last 5 years. Some have spent a little more money than others but c'est la vie. Since I have left, the military now pay for the civil exams and instrument training anyway so that guys will sign on for a bit longer.
I had a great time in the military, awesome flying but I now have a life away from work. Every time I flew I made decisions, now I eat meals. I don't begrudge the Long Haul flyers their flight time. I just wish I could have claimed for the time spent in the crew room eating between sorties. The other day a guy gave me a hard time saying that the key to experience was hours. He said that experience could only be gained that way. He did spit some food onto the newspaper that he had been reading for the last 2 hours as he said it.
I believe experience is exposure to all types of inputs and situations that will make you an effective commander. It can be done by osmosis or it can be ticked off methodically. The only real difference I see between the military and the civvies is that the military tick off the boxes and make certain the pilot has been exposed to everything that it is necessary for them to see to operate effectively in their environment. A lot of civvy companies 'hope' that by waiting a bezillion hours for command the boxes will be ticked.
I think the whole system should be overhauled, the CAA should decide exactly what is required of a First Officer and Captain and produce some training and exposure objectives. Then all the companies should make certain that those objectives are met by their crews irrespective of background.
I am now a civvy, I was in the military. The bottom line is that the CAA exams are a hoop jumping exercise designed to insulate the industry from no-hopers. They are not difficult, you just have to have average intelligence and be committed to pass! The flying test is different but probably harder in a Herc than a Duchess.
Ghost
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Bristol, England
Age: 65
Posts: 1,806
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually the new JAR exams, for all their failings, include sections on MNPS, RVSM, Operations Manuals and MELs. They also have much more on FMS and EFIS operation than the old national exams. These are some of the sections of the exams military pilots (other than truckies) still have to sit.
Alex - are you guys going to be running the 'bridging courses' for the non-truckies needing them under the new 2000 hr accreditations? Will Lulsgate become a one-stop shop for such folk with the IR and MEP Class Rating work also available on-site?
Hi to Basil, by the way!
Hi to Basil, by the way!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a friend and former colleague who was for many years a FE in the RAF. He then left and did his FE licences and got a job as a FE. He subsequently went through pilot training, paid for by his company and only had to do the Nav writtens and Air Law. It would seem to me that he did get relavent exemptions. i.e. the stuff that he had already covered as a flight eng.
His company have also given him credit, albeit not much, for his experience as a flight eng.
His company have also given him credit, albeit not much, for his experience as a flight eng.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alex Whittingham!! Top Bloke!! That's all I'll say. Yes I'm ex-military, ex-slowprop and I would have qualified for the latest round of exemptions. If i'd have stayed, but no I may'd my choice and did the last of the old Consolidated Mil Exams(taught by Alex!).
Exams were still a load of boxxocks and JAR's still will be. Fact is that ME guys were and are qualified to fly WorldWide from way dot and these days even FJ Pilots have to be procedurally qualified for an IR. Notwithstanding all that, I work for the Woollypully Brigade and I don't care what you're back-ground is. As long as I feal that you are a safe and steady operator than that's good for me!!
Exams were still a load of boxxocks and JAR's still will be. Fact is that ME guys were and are qualified to fly WorldWide from way dot and these days even FJ Pilots have to be procedurally qualified for an IR. Notwithstanding all that, I work for the Woollypully Brigade and I don't care what you're back-ground is. As long as I feal that you are a safe and steady operator than that's good for me!!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: london
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So now we are all talking 'badger' you wont mind if an FAA rated pilot on 'heavy' jets comes across to the U.K. gets exempt from all JAA exams and swipes a job at B.A.
It should 'NOT' be the case of one law for one and one for another, I am sure that ex-mil pilots are extremely competant but why should they be exempt? The answer is they shouldn't, either have a system that applies to all or don't have one at all.
I am astounded by the sheer level of prejudice and favouritism that the CAA conveys on this matter.
Mind you the CAA is mostly ex-mil anyway so I suppose it's a case of 'you scratch my back', and here's a shiny new ATPL.
It should 'NOT' be the case of one law for one and one for another, I am sure that ex-mil pilots are extremely competant but why should they be exempt? The answer is they shouldn't, either have a system that applies to all or don't have one at all.
I am astounded by the sheer level of prejudice and favouritism that the CAA conveys on this matter.
Mind you the CAA is mostly ex-mil anyway so I suppose it's a case of 'you scratch my back', and here's a shiny new ATPL.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crash Barrier: If the CAA is full of ex-mil types why then has it taken years of hard work to get these exemptions or has the CAA just recruited all the latest drop-outs from the mil ???
Prior to these exemptions our mil flying was worth 3/4 of F%&k all when trying to get civil recognition. Hours yes there was something to wave with your CV but try to short-cut the exams no chance.
IMHO the exams system has been long overdue a re-haul and needs to be more relevant to todays operations, and yes I think people like Basil should get accreditation for all his work, but sorry BF don't get bitchy with us mil types because at last we've got something good from the Campaign against......
I certainly will make use of these new rules to gain an ATPL, but at the minute I have no intention to use it as I don't intend to jump ship, but it's always good to have something in the back pocket.
As many have already said, and I will repeat to get through some thicker skulls, there are &rseh*les in all walks of life so let's not have the thread denigrate into a civ vs mil slanging match, and if you're going to throw statistics around be prepared to be.
a) accurate
b) back them up
Just cos I'm paranoid, don't mean they ain't out to get me
Edited due to spooling mistoks
[ 17 July 2001: Message edited by: Max Brakin ]
Prior to these exemptions our mil flying was worth 3/4 of F%&k all when trying to get civil recognition. Hours yes there was something to wave with your CV but try to short-cut the exams no chance.
IMHO the exams system has been long overdue a re-haul and needs to be more relevant to todays operations, and yes I think people like Basil should get accreditation for all his work, but sorry BF don't get bitchy with us mil types because at last we've got something good from the Campaign against......
I certainly will make use of these new rules to gain an ATPL, but at the minute I have no intention to use it as I don't intend to jump ship, but it's always good to have something in the back pocket.
As many have already said, and I will repeat to get through some thicker skulls, there are &rseh*les in all walks of life so let's not have the thread denigrate into a civ vs mil slanging match, and if you're going to throw statistics around be prepared to be.
a) accurate
b) back them up
Just cos I'm paranoid, don't mean they ain't out to get me
Edited due to spooling mistoks
[ 17 July 2001: Message edited by: Max Brakin ]
Join Date: May 2001
Location: london
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Max Brakin, I am fully aware that ex-mil pilots used to have to sit the old ATPL exams, I know because I trained in Bournemouth with a VC10 skipper, ex mil fast jet pilot and numerous military heli-pilots.The good thing was that we all helped each other to study. We all griped about the cost etc, but we knuckled down and passed the exams. I would like to say that they were an extremely professional bunch. I get the impression of a tad of arrogance with yourself and a few others on this thread. I say again if your colleagues can pass a few exams without whining about the injustice of it all then why cant the rest of you.
There should be 'NO' exam credits, you should all sit the same as the rest of us had to...
Grow UP!!!!!!
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crash Barrier:
You do seem to have the wrong end of the stick here. I was quite willing to do the b@lls ache of the CAA's money making scheme, to wit the exams and would have done so if not for recognition of the hours I've put in doing essentially the same job as any shiny airliner. I don't think I'm better than anyone who has had to put up with hours or learn and dump for the CAA and I am not arrogant enough to think that should I apply and be lucky to get a job in civvie land that I will have a lot to learn about the aircraft and SOPs for flying in that company.
The only arrogant person here is I'm afraid YOU CB who has taken the stand of 'I did it so should everyone else.' I also believe that CAA/JAA ATPLs should be transferrable to FAA and vice versa. After all if we are happy for them to operate in our little bit of airspace why can't we recognise their licenses ??
So Crash get off your high horse and move with the times there are people out there who have relevant experience that can be put to good use. The 'I did it......' attitude makes for bitter and twisted people who don't want any progress.
You do seem to have the wrong end of the stick here. I was quite willing to do the b@lls ache of the CAA's money making scheme, to wit the exams and would have done so if not for recognition of the hours I've put in doing essentially the same job as any shiny airliner. I don't think I'm better than anyone who has had to put up with hours or learn and dump for the CAA and I am not arrogant enough to think that should I apply and be lucky to get a job in civvie land that I will have a lot to learn about the aircraft and SOPs for flying in that company.
The only arrogant person here is I'm afraid YOU CB who has taken the stand of 'I did it so should everyone else.' I also believe that CAA/JAA ATPLs should be transferrable to FAA and vice versa. After all if we are happy for them to operate in our little bit of airspace why can't we recognise their licenses ??
So Crash get off your high horse and move with the times there are people out there who have relevant experience that can be put to good use. The 'I did it......' attitude makes for bitter and twisted people who don't want any progress.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: london
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Max,The point of the matter is that the CAA have their favourites, the ex-mil pilots mainly.
I am all for scrapping the JAA exam b*llocks the majority of it being worthless, but it probably wont happen. So if you exempt military pilots then you will have to allow all other national licence holders such as FAA to transfer their licences directly without sitting the multi-guess pepsi-challenge. I don't have a problem with that, but the majority of UK commercial pilots would. Also if that were to happen the UK commercial schools would close down, potential pilots would go stateside, get their FAA and transfer it to a JAA with no hassle.
The whole point of the CAA/JAA exams is money making, we both know that. If the CAA are so hypocritical to grant exemptions to one group, they will surely have to grant it to all regardless of the impact on the industry it would have.
Will it happen? probably not..
Campaign Against Aviation you see!!!
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crash: We do seem to agree on some things (definition of CAA for one) but I still believe you're missing the point. Lets stop calling it 'Military Exemptions' and I know I've used that phrase once or twice myself. How about Military Accreditation which is truer to what the CAA/JAA have done.
All that has happened is that 'adequately experienced pilots' have had the years of training in the military recognised. (I won't enter the debate on yearly flying and knowledge checks, that has been done sufficiently)
And while you bring up the point why not allow FAA/JAA/CAA cross recognition of ATPL/CPL etc etc? Go for a unified license, people already go to the sunnier and cheaper climes of the US of A to hours build.
To repeat it's accreditation not exemption.
All that has happened is that 'adequately experienced pilots' have had the years of training in the military recognised. (I won't enter the debate on yearly flying and knowledge checks, that has been done sufficiently)
And while you bring up the point why not allow FAA/JAA/CAA cross recognition of ATPL/CPL etc etc? Go for a unified license, people already go to the sunnier and cheaper climes of the US of A to hours build.
To repeat it's accreditation not exemption.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BF makes a good point in his first post. Relevant engineering experience and examination passes should be given accreditation. Likewise, there would also seem to be a strong case for holders of FAA or equivalent licences to be given accreditation towards JAA licences. Rather than a means of ensuring suitable levels of professional knowledge amongst Europe's aviation fraternity, the current system seems to smack of protectionism. Whilst standards of professional knowledge should stand, the JAR exam papers should be only one of several ways of assessing a person's professional knowledge.
The accreditation of military training was carried out after a very detailed assessment of the military's training system. The CAA having assessed the content of the various training routes leading to a variety of aircraft types and tailored the accreditation given for each type accordingly.
What perplexes me BF is that one the one hand you would welcome accreditation for your own engineering experience, but feel that my experience and training, as the captain of a military multi-engined aircraft, should not receive such accreditation. If I were to be uncharitable, I'd say it was a childish case of sour grapes. Of course, I accept I may have misinterpreted your first post.
Finally it would also seem strange that someone who didn't want a slagging match to develop would fan the flames with post full of words obscured by lots of F*****g '*'s! Unless of course this is a top wind up - if so, nice one, I've thoroughly enjoyed this thread.
Now where did I put that Air Law book............
The accreditation of military training was carried out after a very detailed assessment of the military's training system. The CAA having assessed the content of the various training routes leading to a variety of aircraft types and tailored the accreditation given for each type accordingly.
What perplexes me BF is that one the one hand you would welcome accreditation for your own engineering experience, but feel that my experience and training, as the captain of a military multi-engined aircraft, should not receive such accreditation. If I were to be uncharitable, I'd say it was a childish case of sour grapes. Of course, I accept I may have misinterpreted your first post.
Finally it would also seem strange that someone who didn't want a slagging match to develop would fan the flames with post full of words obscured by lots of F*****g '*'s! Unless of course this is a top wind up - if so, nice one, I've thoroughly enjoyed this thread.
Now where did I put that Air Law book............
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Aus
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gentleman,
I realise this has nothing to do with me (being Australian (1-0 ASHES !) and all) and I usually stay out of these sort of discussions but I am a little confused
The facts of this as I understand them are:
That military types have managed to put together a convincing (it must have been because they got it !) submission to have certain qualifications and experience recognised for the new ATPL.
Now Basil Fawlty and others believe, for a variety of reasons, that this either unfair, unsafe and/or unwelcome (is this a fair summary ?)
For unfair, I believe that the ball is now in your court. If you believe that you should have some accreditation for your qualifications and experience then; commend Beagle for his triumph, humbly asked how it was achieved and you start the ball rolling !!! The worst response you can get is NO !?!
For unsafe, I presume that the people responsible for setting the standards for the ATPL were the ones who conducted the review of mil training etc. This seems to be accepted as NOT being deficient in meeting the appropriate standards.
For unwelcome, I think this says more about you than the ex-mil guy.
Do not malign others because they saw an opportunity to improve their lot in life and then achieved it !! A pervading attitude in Australia at the moment is "if I can't have it, why should they !" Some of you should come on over....you would fit right in.
I realise this has nothing to do with me (being Australian (1-0 ASHES !) and all) and I usually stay out of these sort of discussions but I am a little confused
The facts of this as I understand them are:That military types have managed to put together a convincing (it must have been because they got it !) submission to have certain qualifications and experience recognised for the new ATPL.
Now Basil Fawlty and others believe, for a variety of reasons, that this either unfair, unsafe and/or unwelcome (is this a fair summary ?)
For unfair, I believe that the ball is now in your court. If you believe that you should have some accreditation for your qualifications and experience then; commend Beagle for his triumph, humbly asked how it was achieved and you start the ball rolling !!! The worst response you can get is NO !?!
For unsafe, I presume that the people responsible for setting the standards for the ATPL were the ones who conducted the review of mil training etc. This seems to be accepted as NOT being deficient in meeting the appropriate standards.
For unwelcome, I think this says more about you than the ex-mil guy.
Do not malign others because they saw an opportunity to improve their lot in life and then achieved it !! A pervading attitude in Australia at the moment is "if I can't have it, why should they !" Some of you should come on over....you would fit right in.
Just a numbered other
Csash,
As Max points out, the mil types are not being exempted anything. The CAA is simply recognising that they have already jumped through the hoops in their previous life. There is no point (apart from money making) in making them take a bunch of worthless exams again (standfast air law).
As I pointed out earlier, the ex military people are not being favoured here. They will almost all wind up worse off financially over their entire flying careers than the straight through civvy. That was their choice, but why do you insist that a further round of exams, which prove naff all at great expense, should be sat?
As Max points out, the mil types are not being exempted anything. The CAA is simply recognising that they have already jumped through the hoops in their previous life. There is no point (apart from money making) in making them take a bunch of worthless exams again (standfast air law).
As I pointed out earlier, the ex military people are not being favoured here. They will almost all wind up worse off financially over their entire flying careers than the straight through civvy. That was their choice, but why do you insist that a further round of exams, which prove naff all at great expense, should be sat?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: london
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Arkroyal,Because if you had the scenario of any other professional licence holder trying to convert to a JAA, i.e FAA etc, then they would 'HAVE' to sit the 'EXPENSIVE' written exams.
No exemptions, no excuses, should be one rule for all!!!
C.A.A. prejudice beyond belief!
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: england
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many seem to be harping on about iv`e done my time blah,blah,blah,but nobody has given BF an answer.His experience is worth more than enough to exempt him all of the techie exams.Are you seriously telling me that a mili pilot knows more technical stuff about aeroplanes than a ground or flight engineer?.I thought not!.BF is not asking for a total exemption,just what he feels he should be entitled to.Who cares who is the best trained.As long as we all get jobs,but we get there with an even playing field.The CAA system stinks from top to bottom,this we are all quite clear on.Points on people who have FAA licenses,should be able to be afforded the same luxury with exemptions as those of our mili freinds.Likewise ground and flight engineers should also get there slice of the cake.
Spare a thought for those that are financing the whole thing themselves,and people like myself who have studied,and worked full time,to jump through all the hoops,only to be told that my failing on a mesley 1%,entitles me to sit everything again under JAR.If i was a mili pilot,then yes i would be taking full advantage of the loop hole,but i`m not,and so i will fight my corner just as CB is entitled to do.OUT OF TRIM you state that why do people think that mili training counts for nothing?.Well outside the world of the CAA bubble,it counts for exactly that...NOTHING.You will learn that entering civi street,on a commercial carrier,will entitle you with the same respect that a cleaner,caterer,dispatcher,loadie,or whatever gets,and thats that they all treated with the same respect,and nobody is afforded the title of SIR.Get used to it!.I feel your reply to mine smells of a touch of arrogance,you might want to lose it if you want to work in civy street
Spare a thought for those that are financing the whole thing themselves,and people like myself who have studied,and worked full time,to jump through all the hoops,only to be told that my failing on a mesley 1%,entitles me to sit everything again under JAR.If i was a mili pilot,then yes i would be taking full advantage of the loop hole,but i`m not,and so i will fight my corner just as CB is entitled to do.OUT OF TRIM you state that why do people think that mili training counts for nothing?.Well outside the world of the CAA bubble,it counts for exactly that...NOTHING.You will learn that entering civi street,on a commercial carrier,will entitle you with the same respect that a cleaner,caterer,dispatcher,loadie,or whatever gets,and thats that they all treated with the same respect,and nobody is afforded the title of SIR.Get used to it!.I feel your reply to mine smells of a touch of arrogance,you might want to lose it if you want to work in civy street
Time to enter the fray....
Military Accreditation is a national responsibility. Thc CAA has recognised that the flying abilities and knowledge base of certain military pilots with specific experience meet the requirements of parts of the licensing structure. Lucky old them, I say.
If other groups (FE etc) feel that they have a case for accreditation (and I believe that they do, though can't be specific because I don't profess to have intimate knowledge of their training and licensing) then put the case and keep putting the case to the CAA and keep fighting the corner -and good luck to you, because I'm sure it's a justified case.
I predict that this one will run and run.... and before you ask I am ex-mil, now civ, with all the exams under my belt. Having qualified under both training systems and operated in both, I feel that I can legitimately pass comment on both.
Military Accreditation is a national responsibility. Thc CAA has recognised that the flying abilities and knowledge base of certain military pilots with specific experience meet the requirements of parts of the licensing structure. Lucky old them, I say.
If other groups (FE etc) feel that they have a case for accreditation (and I believe that they do, though can't be specific because I don't profess to have intimate knowledge of their training and licensing) then put the case and keep putting the case to the CAA and keep fighting the corner -and good luck to you, because I'm sure it's a justified case.
I predict that this one will run and run.... and before you ask I am ex-mil, now civ, with all the exams under my belt. Having qualified under both training systems and operated in both, I feel that I can legitimately pass comment on both.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: oxrord uk
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
got to agree with Hoppy on this one (hiya mate)having done a bit of time in civvie aviation, not long but long enough, the ex mil guys take a totally different view to the job, safety and profesionalism being paramount. The 52 weeks at Finningley on the F/E course count for nothing as far as the CAA is concerned, the only reason being that if they gave us the exemptions how would they rake in the cash.
The SOP,s on the RAF tri* vary very little from what BA Cali etc used!!!! the biggest difference is mil pilots go in the sim every 2 months and get checked out on all the systems!! Basic training requirements have to be fulfilled to maintain currency
Having 5000hrs on the tri* did the course with BA and I still had to stump up the cash to the CAA what does that tell ya?
And just think about it, how many operators out there now have the full worldwide ops that the military do! thats why the guys train so hard and are checked so often!!!!!!
The SOP,s on the RAF tri* vary very little from what BA Cali etc used!!!! the biggest difference is mil pilots go in the sim every 2 months and get checked out on all the systems!! Basic training requirements have to be fulfilled to maintain currency
Having 5000hrs on the tri* did the course with BA and I still had to stump up the cash to the CAA what does that tell ya?
And just think about it, how many operators out there now have the full worldwide ops that the military do! thats why the guys train so hard and are checked so often!!!!!!