F16 and a Heavy

[maverick_fp00]

My friend goes to the Air Force Academy and she was telling me that most people want to fly a Heavy, and if he/she goes the fighter rough everybody seems to want the F16. Does anybody know if this is true and if so, why does everybody want the F16? She was even saying that nobody wants the Eagle.

Thanks

 

[JPAtki]

I've been told that if you want to have a civilian career as an airline pilot you should fly heavies in the AF b/c that gives you the
best experience. Apparently the airlines look for pilots of heavies and not fighters. I'm just throwing this out there, I personally do not think people go into the AF just to get a civilian job 10 years down the line, seems to me there are better ways if all you want is to be an airline pilot.

 

[Alaskawannabe]

I agree with your assesment on there being easier ways to get to the airlines instead of the military especially now with the long pay back required. I disagree with your opinion on the airlines not wanting fighter guys however. The airlines look for pilots with high-quality experience no matter what the airframe. Heavy drivers, fighter types, regional pilots, cargo haulers all do well at the majors. Every major airline out there is full of AF, Navy, and Marine TacAir guys as well as cargo, bomber, and tanker pilots. Take a look at some of the posts on this board and you'll see a good mix of pilots from all backgrounds having equal success (or lack of it these days!)

 

[Toro]

WTFO?

My friend...was telling me that most people want to fly a Heavy, and if he/she goes the fighter rough everybody seems to want the F16

Your friend is an idiot. People's preferences change constantly, but from what I saw as a student and instructor, the number of people wanting heavies has always been about equal to or less than those wanting to fly fighters. The reasons are numerous, but generally those who want heavies do so because of the perceived lifestyle. I say perceived because many times heavy guys are deployed and away from their families just as much, or more than fighter guys. As far as everybody wanting F-16s, that's a crock, too. In terms of percentage most people get F-16s because that is the airframe that has the most FTU classes and highest overall numbers. If anything, most of the guys I saw come through UPT leaned towards Eagles.

I've been told that if you want to have a civilian career as an airline pilot you should fly heavies in the AF b/c that gives you the best experience.

Not necessarily. It gives you experience that more closely parallels what you will be doing in the airlines, but I've seen plenty of fighter guys get picked up with the airlines. One argument I heard from somebody who had just been hired was that heavy time isn't necessarily all pilot-in-command time or even actual hands on time (autopilot) versus fighter time.

 

[talondriver]

I've been told that if you want to have a civilian career as an airline pilot you should fly heavies in the AF b/c that gives you the
best experience.

Then who ever told you this needs to tell the forty-odd bros in my squadron that fly for one of the majors (oh...and have a fighter background) that they should quit their airline job because they don't rate flying a heavy. RIIIIIGHT!!
That rumor was started by some heavy person who wanted a fighter but graduated at the bottom of his/her class in pilot training. We hear from our students in T-38s that some T-37 IPs with tanker/airlift backgrounds were telling them that if they want airline jobs they need to go T-1. What a crock!!

 

[Purple Haze]

...most people want to fly a Heavy, and if he/she goes the fighter rough everybody seems to want the F16. Does anybody... --- ...why does everybody want the F16? She was even saying that nobody wants the Eagle.

Who knows? Fighter lifestyle is much more intense than heavys. Airlift is comparatively laid back and you get to spend crew rests in a multitude of places a fighter pilot will never go, plus you have inflight meals and a flush toilet. However, fighter pilots have a lifestyle beyond compare -- especially in the air -- (work hard, play hard). Your chances of successfully completing the training are higher in heavys (this should be obvious).

Also don't know why the F16 preference, but many see the F16 as a more hands-on "see and shoot" low altitude fighter. Perception is, as the world's premier air superiority fighter, the F15 spends more time at altitude engaging distant targets. I'm sure this is a flawed perception -- but none the less, it is a common one (not mine, of course).

As for airline hiring, I am not aware of a major airline that dislikes fighter pilots. An airline will consider a lower-hours fighter and a higher-hours heavy equal (some favor fighter pilots). A potential future airline career should have nothing to do with a personal decision to fly a fighter or a heavy. You need to do what makes you happy.

 

[fredflyer]

If you are flying military to eventually get to an ariline job, I don't think it really matters what you fly, it's probably all a wash. Fighter/Heavy, there are good and bad pilots from every community. I think the perception from someone that hasn't been through the hiring/application process is that a heavy may give you the same type of experience as you would get flying for an airline, and a hiring comittee (sp?) may look at that more favorably, but reality that I have seen (and I by no means am an expert in knowing what an airline is looking for) is that, across the board, one does not have an advantage over another. Some airlines may appear to favor one or another, but I think in the end, it's a wash. In my new-hire class, there were just as many heavy guys as fighter guys. The only difference is that the fighter guys got on with less time than the ones who flew heavies, and that's probably for two reasons: first, all their time is PIC (so the heavy pilot and the fighter pilot probably get hired on with an equal amount of PIC time), and second, they usually log less time per year than their heavy counterparts, and our airline sees that and adjust the requirements accordingly.

 

[talondriver]

Does anybody know if this is true and if so, why does everybody want the F16? She was even saying that nobody wants the Eagle.

In the mid 90's (at Columbus) it seemed like students who were in a position to take an F-15C were passing them up for F-16s and A-10s...and even B-1s and KC-10s. The main reason was the "higher" wash-out rate at Tyndall (eagle RTU).

During a class career brief (where IPs from the different MWSs would talk up their aircraft to the students) an eagle drivin', patch wearin', Desert Storm vet told the studs that eagle RTU was the hardest program he ever went through...and he's a weapon school grad!! I'm sure that was enough to intimidate even the top students in that class.

 

[maverick_fp00]

Thanks for the answers.

Talondriver: That seems right.

During the end of UPT do guys from other RTU bases come and talk to you about their training program? (For instance, do any IPs come from Tyndall and tell you bout the Eagle Training)

Thanks.

 

[AlbieF15]

Eagle FTU is tough but doable.

If there are UPT dudes on the board waffling about going to the C-model, pm me with your email and we can have a serious chat.

Other sources for REAL gouge on F15 training (vice heresay) on these boards will come from Zulu, Eagleflip, and CCDiscoB.

As Tom Hanks said in A League of Their Own "Its the Hard that makes it GOOD". I know for a fact the bros in my squadron will give their very best to get you through a demanding but extremely rewarding program.