Quote:
Originally Posted by MFT1Air  . . .and that's not my point either. I'm not so arrogant as to believe that simply because you've C-5 typed, it makes any other training such as SWA a piece of cake. Quite the contrary. Is that what you were implying by your comment? My point relates to your comment: IF you can fly a C-5, you sure as hell can fly a 737-200-300-500-NG-and whatever else stupid configuration the thing comes in.
My point? Fly YOUR OWN typed aircraft with zero tolerance before you assume you can transition without effort to another aircraft type without issues. Maybe if you were to have said a C-17, I might have agreed with you. . .A C-5? A couple of 737 "stupid" configuration might make a C-5 jock soil one's flight suit. 
Oops, I digressed. |
I will not digress. No point in it. I do have one question for you though. What is the difference between the C-5 and the C-17 in respect to the flightcrews that opeate them? If you are in the know with the AF, take a trip down to your local flight safety office and look up some reports on the C-17 and some of those crews and what they have done to some perfectly good airplanes.
The original argument is WHY does SWA REQUIRE the type?!? It is so accepted and no one ever questions it, but those in the av community bash the living hell out of all the PFT programs out there. I only asked the question...If I want to fly for SWA, I HAVE to PAY for the rating to BE PAID by that company.
What configuration of the 737 would you be referring too? I am pretty sure if you can fly an airplane 200 feet off the ground at 350kts @ 769,000 pounds, then there isn't a 737 that is going to soil your monkey-suit. Now a SAM taking out an engine...that is a different story.
Finally, I didn't mean to say that the training is a piece of cake...I simply think that if you make it through the rigors of AF flight training, then you will *most likely* make it through SWA's groundschool....even without the type.