Fast jets flown by non-military pilots. Is it safe?
What you need is a CAA requirement to have a CAAFU examiner established for each type you wish to put on the British register.
Said examiner would then be soley responsible for conducting type checkouts in the same way that CAA IR flightests are conducted. A high and broad standard could then be set and it need not cost that much to train the CAA examiner spread across all the applicants over a decade or so.
Self regulation is unlikely to work 100%. Pity it *does* work 95% of the time.
I'm not one for more regulation but there you go.
Cheers
WWW
Said examiner would then be soley responsible for conducting type checkouts in the same way that CAA IR flightests are conducted. A high and broad standard could then be set and it need not cost that much to train the CAA examiner spread across all the applicants over a decade or so.
Self regulation is unlikely to work 100%. Pity it *does* work 95% of the time.
I'm not one for more regulation but there you go.
Cheers
WWW
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: MAN
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many ex-military pilots are at the top of the game with good reason, but some...
It would appear that there are a disproportionately high number of accidents during display flying when ex-military pilots are at the controls. Even when one considers that they make up the majority of display pilots. Could it be a built in over confidence?
Had to chuckle when the fellow in charge of the shuttleworth collection went on about how they only had ex-RAF pilots (even those with Empire). How their experience makes them qualified to fly a Mk1 Bleriot, etc. I do not know. Maybe that’s why they are ground looping them so often?
Anyway food for thought and all that.
It would appear that there are a disproportionately high number of accidents during display flying when ex-military pilots are at the controls. Even when one considers that they make up the majority of display pilots. Could it be a built in over confidence?
Had to chuckle when the fellow in charge of the shuttleworth collection went on about how they only had ex-RAF pilots (even those with Empire). How their experience makes them qualified to fly a Mk1 Bleriot, etc. I do not know. Maybe that’s why they are ground looping them so often?
Anyway food for thought and all that.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 1,234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Casper t
The problem I suspect, is that all FJ pilots think they are exceptional. Possibly many people even tell them they're exceptional.
The loss rate clearly shows they are not.
Apply that loss rate to any civilian application and you have a situation that is totally unacceptable.
The problems of more machismo than intellect????
The problem I suspect, is that all FJ pilots think they are exceptional. Possibly many people even tell them they're exceptional.
The loss rate clearly shows they are not.
Apply that loss rate to any civilian application and you have a situation that is totally unacceptable.
The problems of more machismo than intellect????
Gasax,
Firstly, I am not an RAF pilot, fast jet or otherwise, so before you think i have an axe to grind, I don't!
However, in contrast to almost all of the civilian world, all RAF pilots are selected as such. Once they have passed extremely tough selection criterion they then have to make it past officer training. If successful at Cranwell, they then have to succeed at basic flying training on the Tucano where virtually every trip is an effective chop-ride. If they do well on Tucano they might, if they're lucky, get a posting to valley to fly the Hawk. If they are sufficiently good to graduate from 19 and 208 Sqn they will then get posted to a FJ OCU. If they pass the OCU they'll get posted to a sqn...where they can and do still chop people.
Point to all this is that for someone to reach the point where they have successfully completed a tour as a fast jet pilot they have jumped through more hurdles and shown more determination than you can obviusly comprehend. They are undoubtedly pleased with themselves but I think you would be too if you'd got that far. Perhaps some exhibit more machismo than others but fast jet flying is to train men and women for combat where aggression wins.
You sound as though you've had a bitter experience but I think fast jet pilots have more intellect, skill and determination than you give them credit.
If I've bitten a rather large, baited hook then I'm more stupid than I thought. If yours was a genuine post then I suggest that you ought to find out more about the RAF FJ world before offering quite ill-informed opinions.
Firstly, I am not an RAF pilot, fast jet or otherwise, so before you think i have an axe to grind, I don't!
However, in contrast to almost all of the civilian world, all RAF pilots are selected as such. Once they have passed extremely tough selection criterion they then have to make it past officer training. If successful at Cranwell, they then have to succeed at basic flying training on the Tucano where virtually every trip is an effective chop-ride. If they do well on Tucano they might, if they're lucky, get a posting to valley to fly the Hawk. If they are sufficiently good to graduate from 19 and 208 Sqn they will then get posted to a FJ OCU. If they pass the OCU they'll get posted to a sqn...where they can and do still chop people.
Point to all this is that for someone to reach the point where they have successfully completed a tour as a fast jet pilot they have jumped through more hurdles and shown more determination than you can obviusly comprehend. They are undoubtedly pleased with themselves but I think you would be too if you'd got that far. Perhaps some exhibit more machismo than others but fast jet flying is to train men and women for combat where aggression wins.
You sound as though you've had a bitter experience but I think fast jet pilots have more intellect, skill and determination than you give them credit.
If I've bitten a rather large, baited hook then I'm more stupid than I thought. If yours was a genuine post then I suggest that you ought to find out more about the RAF FJ world before offering quite ill-informed opinions.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: U.A.E.
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What must be remembered as far as ex/serving military aircrew is concerned is this.
He or she has been programmed/brain washed, to the point that believe they are the best. If they don't believe they're the best, then, in times of conflict, they are a looser. Nothing wrong with that! I hear you all scream. Quite right, nothing wrong with that, except when they cease to become public servants, they try and tell us civil mortals they are the best.
Apart from that, there is only:
the self-confidence, bordering on the arrogant,
the sarcasm and
the cockpit bullies
the culture that common courtesy is looked upon as a weakness, to deal with.
I've encountered a lot of ex military pilots in 35 years of aviation. I have experienced the above with the majority of them. There are exceptions of course, as some of them have been very nice people and quiet reasonable flyers IMHO.
He or she has been programmed/brain washed, to the point that believe they are the best. If they don't believe they're the best, then, in times of conflict, they are a looser. Nothing wrong with that! I hear you all scream. Quite right, nothing wrong with that, except when they cease to become public servants, they try and tell us civil mortals they are the best.
Apart from that, there is only:
the self-confidence, bordering on the arrogant,
the sarcasm and
the cockpit bullies
the culture that common courtesy is looked upon as a weakness, to deal with.
I've encountered a lot of ex military pilots in 35 years of aviation. I have experienced the above with the majority of them. There are exceptions of course, as some of them have been very nice people and quiet reasonable flyers IMHO.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Military pilots are selected to do a specific job. Their ability will vary within their sphere but they will all have achieved a high standard to earn their wings. As has been pointed out this does not mean they will achieve the same standard in the civil world! but most seem to do fine. Likewise many civil pilots are selected and achieve a high standard but may not make very good military pilots!
I have sadly not flown a FJ but have no doubt I would happily cope with flying the beast but it is another thing to operate the aircraft to the limit which is what a military pilot is trained to do, horses for courses!
I see no problem with civil pilots flying FJ's as long as they receive proper training and know their limits and most importantly fly within them.
I have sadly not flown a FJ but have no doubt I would happily cope with flying the beast but it is another thing to operate the aircraft to the limit which is what a military pilot is trained to do, horses for courses!
I see no problem with civil pilots flying FJ's as long as they receive proper training and know their limits and most importantly fly within them.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am surprised at some of the opinions expressed here about ex military/FJ pilots. In fact, it only makes sense to me if I consider that there's a lot of winding-up going on.
The ex mil guys are often knocked, but I don't hear or see evidence of them dishing it out, especially on PPRUNe. Wonder why that is?
IMHO, it is probably best not to generalise about pilot types (ex mil/civvy professional/private/wealthy). It would be correct to treat each on his/her merits.
It is so tempting to enter the banter fray........................
...........
This is a P (professional) PRUNe. Sometimes the first P is misplaced.
The ex mil guys are often knocked, but I don't hear or see evidence of them dishing it out, especially on PPRUNe. Wonder why that is?
IMHO, it is probably best not to generalise about pilot types (ex mil/civvy professional/private/wealthy). It would be correct to treat each on his/her merits.
It is so tempting to enter the banter fray........................
...........
This is a P (professional) PRUNe. Sometimes the first P is misplaced.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Northern Hemisphere
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ex Mil Pilots
I couldn't agree more with Mowgli 
After the rigours of military life one is entitled to the comparative stability of a civil aviation job. Mil types have risked their lives, seen their friends die- seen a lot of life, so to speak!
The immaturity with which on the one hand the purely 'civil' aviation tries to extract or use their expertise and on the other derides them as 'egoistic' etc. Well I detect envy. Don't misunderstand please.... something you are taught in the military is to be proud of your profession without this pride you wouldn't be able to function.
As long as it is restricted to envy... well thats fine... but when one becomes unprofessional and unethical well thats a whole new ball game. Because most military types ignore this behaviour- because of their maturity- its kudos for them.
I speak from experience....
and so life goes on...
After the rigours of military life one is entitled to the comparative stability of a civil aviation job. Mil types have risked their lives, seen their friends die- seen a lot of life, so to speak!
The immaturity with which on the one hand the purely 'civil' aviation tries to extract or use their expertise and on the other derides them as 'egoistic' etc. Well I detect envy. Don't misunderstand please.... something you are taught in the military is to be proud of your profession without this pride you wouldn't be able to function.
As long as it is restricted to envy... well thats fine... but when one becomes unprofessional and unethical well thats a whole new ball game. Because most military types ignore this behaviour- because of their maturity- its kudos for them.
I speak from experience....
and so life goes on...
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: MAN
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My posts on this subject, deal specifically with "arrogance without the ability or experience to back it up" aspect of certain mil and ex-mil types, which has lead to several incidents and accidents.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: AZ
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure that many civilian types could handle the rigors of flying a fast jet, BUT only under the following conditions as a rule:
1. They get an indepth checkout in the aircraft they plan on flying, not some 2 week ATP course with 5 flights. Remember, our military fighter and trainer pilots spend months, if not slightly over a year, training to fly these types, and they fly a lot of sorties over a short period, after months of academics and sims.
2. They maintain currency in a sim and in the jet. Again, if our military fighter types are flying 15 hours +/- a month (now more with the war), we can't expect some rich doctor type to let the plane sit idle in the hangar for 3 months, and then jump in for a flight and realistically know what he is doing. Trust me, our military guys want to fly a lot more than 20 hours a month, not only because they love it, but because they know it makes them more proficient and comfortable in the jet.
1. They get an indepth checkout in the aircraft they plan on flying, not some 2 week ATP course with 5 flights. Remember, our military fighter and trainer pilots spend months, if not slightly over a year, training to fly these types, and they fly a lot of sorties over a short period, after months of academics and sims.
2. They maintain currency in a sim and in the jet. Again, if our military fighter types are flying 15 hours +/- a month (now more with the war), we can't expect some rich doctor type to let the plane sit idle in the hangar for 3 months, and then jump in for a flight and realistically know what he is doing. Trust me, our military guys want to fly a lot more than 20 hours a month, not only because they love it, but because they know it makes them more proficient and comfortable in the jet.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: EGUK
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems to be a lot of chips on shoulders here! It seems to me that all professional aircrew (military or civil) are exactly that - professional. We check our egos at the cockpit door and do the job to the best of our abilities. I am sure that any military pilots who get the chance to fly with a commercial civil pilot would be impressed - and vice versa. And the only time I've ever seen rampant pilot egos is in the bar - which is exactly the right place for them.
The simple truths about operating ex-military jets in the civil sphere are:
1. It takes a lot of money!
2. Money is always short.
3. Ex military pilots have the best chance of maintaining limited proficiency with the available hours.
4. There is always risk; but I'd rather see aircraft flying than in museum. And I'd rather see them flying in the hands of GA pilots than not at all.
5. All pilots are taught to assess risk. GA pilots flying ex military jets (with minimal currency, experience and tuition) are braver than I am - but that is their choice!
As for the implied comments in this thread and others about the L39 crashes, and in particular the M11 one: The pilot involved is one of the finer ex military instructors I have met. Before anybody thinks to criticise they should give themselves a reality check. In the situation that he found himself I doubt anybody would have done better. There but for the grace of God go I!
The simple truths about operating ex-military jets in the civil sphere are:
1. It takes a lot of money!
2. Money is always short.
3. Ex military pilots have the best chance of maintaining limited proficiency with the available hours.
4. There is always risk; but I'd rather see aircraft flying than in museum. And I'd rather see them flying in the hands of GA pilots than not at all.
5. All pilots are taught to assess risk. GA pilots flying ex military jets (with minimal currency, experience and tuition) are braver than I am - but that is their choice!
As for the implied comments in this thread and others about the L39 crashes, and in particular the M11 one: The pilot involved is one of the finer ex military instructors I have met. Before anybody thinks to criticise they should give themselves a reality check. In the situation that he found himself I doubt anybody would have done better. There but for the grace of God go I!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: EGUK
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My first post because I was fed up with reading some of the b*****it that is circulating.
I read the report and since the AIB couldn't reproduce the braking fault - any conclusion about what the pilot could or couldn't have done to avoid the accident is speculation. I have taken part in a few boards and I'm afraid this one, personal opinion, is not one of the finest bits of investigation.
Have you ever had a braking problem in a FJ on a short runway with an extremely inexperienced student who may or may not be taking the right actions, may or may not react correctly to your instructions, may or may not understand the emergency systems. You run out of room - v quickly.
I've had my fair share of incidents and / or student induced problems on the runway including burst tires, fractured oleos, multiple birdstrikes, high speed burner blowouts, and one engine failure at rotation - and to this day I feel I that I have only avoided a major incident with a little bit of luck. At Duxford that little bit of luck was missing.
The RAF has lost a goodly proportion of its Hawk fleet to braking problems on landing and it is so easy in the cold light of day, when reading the accident report, to think you would do better. There but for the grace...........etc.
I read the report and since the AIB couldn't reproduce the braking fault - any conclusion about what the pilot could or couldn't have done to avoid the accident is speculation. I have taken part in a few boards and I'm afraid this one, personal opinion, is not one of the finest bits of investigation.
Have you ever had a braking problem in a FJ on a short runway with an extremely inexperienced student who may or may not be taking the right actions, may or may not react correctly to your instructions, may or may not understand the emergency systems. You run out of room - v quickly.
I've had my fair share of incidents and / or student induced problems on the runway including burst tires, fractured oleos, multiple birdstrikes, high speed burner blowouts, and one engine failure at rotation - and to this day I feel I that I have only avoided a major incident with a little bit of luck. At Duxford that little bit of luck was missing.
The RAF has lost a goodly proportion of its Hawk fleet to braking problems on landing and it is so easy in the cold light of day, when reading the accident report, to think you would do better. There but for the grace...........etc.
Last edited by SterlingBlake; 14th Aug 2003 at 06:07.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Wet Coast
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yet another L-39 down
Pilots' Pal
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: USA
Age: 63
Posts: 1,158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guest
Posts: n/a
Jagbag,
A life in the military entitles you to nothing except your pension. It was your choice of career live with it, the world and more specifically your country doesnt owe you a favour. You were well paid for the risk and lived a life of rielly. As for the tabloidesque "seen friends die"statement, that is not a monopoly of the military. I have probably taken more ground fire and seen more people buy the farm in my civil avaition career than i did as a foot grunt in the military.It didnt make me more employable as an airline pilot tho. That took more hard work and another apprenticeship. Horses for courses.
Other wise you seem like a well balanced chap.
A life in the military entitles you to nothing except your pension. It was your choice of career live with it, the world and more specifically your country doesnt owe you a favour. You were well paid for the risk and lived a life of rielly. As for the tabloidesque "seen friends die"statement, that is not a monopoly of the military. I have probably taken more ground fire and seen more people buy the farm in my civil avaition career than i did as a foot grunt in the military.It didnt make me more employable as an airline pilot tho. That took more hard work and another apprenticeship. Horses for courses.
Other wise you seem like a well balanced chap.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Northern Hemisphere
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Jack Point
I think a suitable clarification is in line here....
But firstly, I am really curious as to where in civil aviation other than a war (Iran Air 747 during the 1991 Gulf Crisis) or missile threat zone (Korean Air 747 or the Dead Sea accident)- an aircraft has picked up ground fire. Having been in civil aviation for four years now, I am not aware of any other cases.
In today's scenario however things seem to be more directed against innocent civilians. In any case I did not imply that unfortunate sacrifices do not happen anywhere else that is 'your' reading. It is a fact, however, that a military man deals with this kind of thing on a daily basis - especially if he/she is in one of the more 'happening' units.
The point I was trying to make is specific to one of my own experiences and 'may' not be a general case. In this the person did come and make up, but after some damage had been done (which could have been avoided).
Also, please, lets leave the country out of it, shall we?
Thanks for appreciating "the balanced part". You can't expect to sit on the Left seat of an airliner flight deck without being balanced can you? I may voice my views here on an informal, anonymous forum, possibly to trigger some other view points- but the sanctity of the flight deck will be maintained.
To get back to the thread, a military pilot is exposed to the entire flight envelope of fast jet flying. He learns to deal with emergency procedures by applying his memory and experience. Since flying is limited due to financial constraints, there are extensive brainstorming sessions. To give an example - for a 2 hour flight on a Jaguar the formation members would prepare for as much as 8-10 hours or more, before the briefing - which would be atleast 45 minutes.
Having dealt with emergency situations in both civil and miltary, it seems that there is an emphasis on 'read and do' in civil flying whereas in mil flying more emphasis is given to the briefing, adaptation to the mission and instinctive training which is more appropriate to fast jet flying. There is no co pilot in a jet to read, assist and advise one in case of emergency.
With that kind of training - it seems more in line for a fast jet jock to be a safer bet in ex military fast jet flying then a civilian counterpart.
I think a suitable clarification is in line here....
But firstly, I am really curious as to where in civil aviation other than a war (Iran Air 747 during the 1991 Gulf Crisis) or missile threat zone (Korean Air 747 or the Dead Sea accident)- an aircraft has picked up ground fire. Having been in civil aviation for four years now, I am not aware of any other cases.
In today's scenario however things seem to be more directed against innocent civilians. In any case I did not imply that unfortunate sacrifices do not happen anywhere else that is 'your' reading. It is a fact, however, that a military man deals with this kind of thing on a daily basis - especially if he/she is in one of the more 'happening' units.
The point I was trying to make is specific to one of my own experiences and 'may' not be a general case. In this the person did come and make up, but after some damage had been done (which could have been avoided).
Also, please, lets leave the country out of it, shall we?
Thanks for appreciating "the balanced part". You can't expect to sit on the Left seat of an airliner flight deck without being balanced can you? I may voice my views here on an informal, anonymous forum, possibly to trigger some other view points- but the sanctity of the flight deck will be maintained.
To get back to the thread, a military pilot is exposed to the entire flight envelope of fast jet flying. He learns to deal with emergency procedures by applying his memory and experience. Since flying is limited due to financial constraints, there are extensive brainstorming sessions. To give an example - for a 2 hour flight on a Jaguar the formation members would prepare for as much as 8-10 hours or more, before the briefing - which would be atleast 45 minutes.
Having dealt with emergency situations in both civil and miltary, it seems that there is an emphasis on 'read and do' in civil flying whereas in mil flying more emphasis is given to the briefing, adaptation to the mission and instinctive training which is more appropriate to fast jet flying. There is no co pilot in a jet to read, assist and advise one in case of emergency.
With that kind of training - it seems more in line for a fast jet jock to be a safer bet in ex military fast jet flying then a civilian counterpart.
Last edited by Jagbag; 3rd Sep 2003 at 11:00.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Jag bag,
Try africa,
sudan, somalia, rwanda, took hits in all three, gnd to gnd and gnd to air and somali to white man.no government backing, no side arm, and no afterburner, jut a turbo prop ,neotiatin skills and a willing f/o to give it a go.
As for the rest im not really bothered about fast jets just having a fish,
cheers off to work.
Try africa,
sudan, somalia, rwanda, took hits in all three, gnd to gnd and gnd to air and somali to white man.no government backing, no side arm, and no afterburner, jut a turbo prop ,neotiatin skills and a willing f/o to give it a go.
As for the rest im not really bothered about fast jets just having a fish,
cheers off to work.