Why hire military over your competition?

[SWA Bubba]

That is beyond evident.

Let's put it this way, I'd rather hire a very high time regional captain over a freshly released military pilot if I was hiring street captains. The idea that military training would automatically make a low time military pilot superior to a 10,000 pilot who has been doing the job for years is absurd.

Of course it's absurd. Despite your conclusion about military-trained pilots' "tribalism," I doubt that anyone is advocating the words that you're putting in their mouth. You're exaggerating wildly to make your point. Nobody is suggesting what you've insinuated above.

All most of us are saying is that military flight training is more rigorous, more standardized, and more likely to be based solely on merit than civilian flight training. It produces a much more consistent, known quality of pilot. That's all they're saying.

Does that make a 10,000 hour regional pilot a "worse" choice than a fresh-out-of-the-military pilot? Of course not; he would be, all else being equal, likely a much better choice. What we have said is that, for lower-hour/experience pilots, early military flight time is more valuable than early civilian flight time. That's pretty much it. For pilots with many thousands of hours flying all over the country/world, it really doesn't matter where you learned to fly.

You've mentioned military pilots' use of the "power card," insinuating that that's the norm. You really think it is? How about you re-read some of these threads again. Let me ask you--who starts them? Every single, friggin' time? Civilian pilots, that's who. Have you ever seen a military-trained guy start a thread whining about their company hiring too many civilian-trained pilots? I'd bet not. It's always civilian-trained guys, whining about military-trained guys, who start these pissing contests. Always. It's guys with inferiority complexes, like Wave, whining about how many military guys SWA has hired recently, despite the company being much more than half civilian-trained. And then, the military-trained guys respond. What does that tell you? Who's really promoting tribalism here? I'd say that it's the guy starting the argument.

Keep watching, Livin', and I'd bet you see what I'm saying. You're not going to see military-guys starting these bitchfests, just responding when some ego-challenged civilian guy makes absurd claims like the "fact" that his first thousand hours in a Cessna is exactly as good experience as a military guy's first thousand hours flying complex jets all over the world.

Hey, for the most part, we're just happy to be here. It's a good job, and I could give a rat's a$$ where my flying partner got his or her training. As long as they know what they're doing (this is not too hard of a job), and more importantly, that they have a good attitude.

And, of course, that they're junior to me.

Seriously, Livin', look at who always starts these things, and then get back to me on your thoughts about tribalism.

Bubba

 

[maru657]

I don't know of any civilian trained pilot who claims the first 150 hours in a Cessna is superior but, I do know that roughly the first 3000 hours are almost always superior.

 

[PBRstreetgang]

It's ironic, mil vs civ. while it's true not every civilian could make the military cut, it is also true that not every military guy wants to fly civilian.
It's really apples and giraffes, the essence of military flying is working to the very edges of the envelope to make the mission successful. In airline flying the essence is staying smack dab right in the middle of the envelope with as little deviation as possible. That's the reason that the regionals can take a 23 year old flight instructor and have him flying a jet in 6 weeks with 50 passengers behind him/her. Airline flying is about enduring hours of absolute mind numbing boredom, if a military guy wants to do it they will do fine.

 

[SWA Bubba]

I don't know of any civilian trained pilot who claims the first 150 hours in a Cessna is superior but, I do know that roughly the first 3000 hours are almost always superior.

I'd wager that you "know" nothing of the kind.

You've made comments about "military officers' boys' clubs," when you've never been one. You don't know jack. You were civilian-trained, so you claim that civilian hours are "almost always superior." You don't know the first thing about military flight training and what it entails. And after reading some of the absurd and inane things that you write, with your fifth-grade writing skills, I suspect that you've never been in a position to train or evaluate any pilot. All you do is pop up every now and then to throw random turds into conversations.

So let me change what I said to Livin': Civilian guys like Labatts and Wave start these arguments, bitching about military guys getting hired when they're not "qualified" enough, and then military guys respond. And then, guys like you like to chime in with the insults, as if you actually know anything.

As far as "any pilot claiming Cessna hours as superior," that would be Waveflyer. He claimed that he was "just as qualified coming out of Cessnas" as a military-trained pilot. Perhaps you might actually read the thread before you chime in to add dumb stuff. Just a thought...

Bubba

 

[freightdogfred]

I'd wager that you "know" nothing of the kind.

You've made comments about "military officers' boys' clubs," when you've never been one. You don't know jack. You were civilian-trained, so you claim that civilian hours are "almost always superior." You don't know the first thing about military flight training and what it entails. And after reading some of the absurd and inane things that you write, with your fifth-grade writing skills, I suspect that you've never been in a position to train or evaluate any pilot. All you do is pop up every now and then to throw random turds into conversations.

So let me change what I said to Livin': Civilian guys like Labatts and Wave start these arguments, bitching about military guys getting hired when they're not "qualified" enough, and then military guys respond. And then, guys like you like to chime in with the insults, as if you actually know anything.

As far as "any pilot claiming Cessna hours as superior," that would be Waveflyer. He claimed that he was "just as qualified coming out of Cessnas" as a military-trained pilot. Perhaps you might actually read the thread before you chime in to add dumb stuff. Just a thought...

Bubba

You seem upset

 

[maru657]

Well sorry Bubba. Did I hurt your feelings. Figure it this way, you were mass produced by the government and like any mass production line, the lowest common denominator was in play. The kid who traveled the country flying any piece of junk that would produce a paycheck has had far better experience. That guy would not have been surprised by windshear in Dallas or Ice at Washington National. But that dose'nt matter, you'll still get the job because it's your old squadron buddies setting the standards.

 

[livin'thesim]

Extreme pro-civilian=you
Extreme pro-military=xxx

Pott-kettle-black... Get it?

Nope, you're confusing me with someone else. From the very beginning, I have said "it all depends on the pilot".

Neither is automatically better. I think you need to read more carefully, because if you have drawn any conclusion that I am pro-civilian (let alone EXTREME pro-civilian), then you are not really paying attention.

I can't really help you if you are unable to determine that.

 

[livin'thesim]

Of course it's absurd. Despite your conclusion about military-trained pilots' "tribalism," I doubt that anyone is advocating the words that you're putting in their mouth. You're exaggerating wildly to make your point. Nobody is suggesting what you've insinuated above.

All most of us are saying is that military flight training is more rigorous, more standardized, and more likely to be based solely on merit than civilian flight training. It produces a much more consistent, known quality of pilot. That's all they're saying.

Does that make a 10,000 hour regional pilot a "worse" choice than a fresh-out-of-the-military pilot? Of course not; he would be, all else being equal, likely a much better choice. What we have said is that, for lower-hour/experience pilots, early military flight time is more valuable than early civilian flight time. That's pretty much it. For pilots with many thousands of hours flying all over the country/world, it really doesn't matter where you learned to fly.

You've mentioned military pilots' use of the "power card," insinuating that that's the norm. You really think it is? How about you re-read some of these threads again. Let me ask you--who starts them? Every single, friggin' time? Civilian pilots, that's who. Have you ever seen a military-trained guy start a thread whining about their company hiring too many civilian-trained pilots? I'd bet not. It's always civilian-trained guys, whining about military-trained guys, who start these pissing contests. Always. It's guys with inferiority complexes, like Wave, whining about how many military guys SWA has hired recently, despite the company being much more than half civilian-trained. And then, the military-trained guys respond. What does that tell you? Who's really promoting tribalism here? I'd say that it's the guy starting the argument.

Keep watching, Livin', and I'd bet you see what I'm saying. You're not going to see military-guys starting these bitchfests, just responding when some ego-challenged civilian guy makes absurd claims like the "fact" that his first thousand hours in a Cessna is exactly as good experience as a military guy's first thousand hours flying complex jets all over the world.

Hey, for the most part, we're just happy to be here. It's a good job, and I could give a rat's a$$ where my flying partner got his or her training. As long as they know what they're doing (this is not too hard of a job), and more importantly, that they have a good attitude.

And, of course, that they're junior to me.

Seriously, Livin', look at who always starts these things, and then get back to me on your thoughts about tribalism.

Bubba

Please reread my comments, and note again my judicious use of words like "some military pilots" "some commenters", etc.

Only a person with a persecution complex would assume that I was insinuating a majority of military pilots were exhibiting these attributes.

Was I not the one that said that if I could only know one fact about a pilot, I would probably pick a military pilot over civilian?

My comments are directed to those who have an unbelievably defensive attitude about military training. I would be even more derisive to anyone who thinks that civilian pilots are automatically better (thinking of someone in particular here).

All things equal, I would probably pick a very high time regional pilot over a low time military pilot. But that is all about EXPERIENCE, rather than training or pedigree.

 

[maru657]

Bubba is an excellent example of the military mindset that permeates the majors these days. It seems like he literally cannot accept or understand that someone else might be better and have far more applicable experience.

 

[Dan Roman]

My Air Force buddy got a ration of ******************** because he fell asleep in the DC-9 sim, that's how exciting 121 is.

This is a pretty classic example of someone who probably would be a fairly weak airline pilot. Rough on the controls, not the greatest CRM, and frankly probably not as wonderful as he thinks he is.
That said, MILITARY PILOTS ARE JUST AS GOOD AS CIVILIAN OR VICE VERSA. what sim says is true. It all boils down to attitude, not your background. Those that think their particular background somehow makes them superior are invariably the weak ones, military or civilian.