Aeronautical experience

I might also propose that "airline pilot" is not the be-all end-all of flying, and I didn't mean to imply that it was. I myself have no real interest in the airlines -- My dream has always been to be a tanker pilot, though I've been forced to aim elsewhere due to the state of the industry, and now I'm looking at freight, alaska float flying, etc. I'd rather not fly a(n unarmed) jet of any sort.

That said, there's a palpable gap between a wet commercial and -any- flying job, which can -only- be filled by flight instruction or flying out of pocket at the moment, and I'm just wondering if people think that flight instruction is the correct stepping stone--or if not, what they think should take its place, in an ideal world.

The problem with a cadet program, in that case, is that the last way you want to learn to fly floats in alaska (for example) is to be stuck with a 'fast track to the airlines' sort of program, wash-out rates and such aside. Likewise, the military won't accept/may wash out plenty of candidates who would make fine pilots for other duties; the military really isn't a valid flight training option, no matter how often it's proposed. (I considered it in my teens, but I first and foremost wanted to fly; If you don't get into pilot training, you don't get a pass out of the military ... and I wanted to fly, period.)

-Fox

I was very disappointed to find out that civilan aviation training wasn't that way. I'm still a little disappointed, to this day.

From everything I was told, growing up, military aviation is almost impossible to get into ... and I had too many little things working against me.

As near as I can tell, there isn't. I think ATP tries to foster that sort of environment ... but when I got my commercial multi with them, flying was just business there. Talking to one of the other students, at the time, I was shocked to find that he had no interest in aviation whatsoever, and was just there because his uncle had told him it was 'an easy job'.

If something like that came along, I'd be so excited that I'd probably drop everything and voluntarily surrender my airman certificate just to go through it all. :> Modern flight training is fairly half-hearted and very non-immersive, in my experience.

-Fox

A lot of 121 airline training programs are like that. You geek out on the airplane, eat/sleep/breathe company procedures for about 2 months and encounter a similar (I would imagine) type of total immersion situation, granted some guys that have "been there, done that" don't need to study as much. Most of the time you will have military types in your class and they probably use the same type of study habits as they did in the air force or navy; you end up hanging out with them and doing the same thing.

On the other hand, most airlines want to "train you to proficiency" and won't actively try to weed you out unless they really feel you aren't trying. Once a student starts simulator training they've already invested a lot of money in them and want to get a return on that investment. In my experience 121 new-hire and upgrade washout rates are usually in the neighborhood of 10-20%.

By putting people in a 40 hr/week classroom? Teaching them how to push buttons by repetition ? Cadet program graduates are akin to monkeys in space. They know how to do whats been taught to them and lack basic ADM.
I hate to say it but the airline pilot of the 21st century is not going to be the cream of the crop. Low pay, poor Qol and the loss of prestige associated with the job are just a few of the reasons the best a brightest will go elsewhere in choosing a profession.

So if you want to fly an airplane you have to pay union (sorry, association) dues to while in training? Would there be multiple pay scales for doing the same job? Who would pay the trainees? Airline sponsors? Would students have to sign life long contracts like other students in the world do when attending airline sponsored cadet programs?
I think I understand what you're trying to say but you're trying to force a square peg through a round hole. Look at our current national airspace. Its the safest in the world. We let people demonstrate a minimum standard, give them a certificate and say "Now go learn". I have no problem with guys getting into the right seat at 250 hrs. They can't really mess too much up since most planes fly themselves anyways even without autopilots.

Actually they did. Which is why they're on a 35-99 seat aircraft.

Lovely tanker, but I'd prefer



... sigh.

-Fox

I've only ever watched the industry from the sidelines (no contacts), but that's the latest I've heard as well.

Leaves me to wonder what the future of contract tankers will be... but I've been watching and wondering since before the blue ribbon panel days.

-Fox

When I called home and told my father that the AF had slotted me as a T-38 instructor, he was irritated with the stupidity of the military for picking his son to be an instructor (I thought he'd be pleased but he wasn't). He said I was far too impatient to be an instructor at anything. What my dad didn't know was that all my students were like you, dedicated. I loved that no excuses attitude and environment. I didn't need to be patient, my students were ready to move as fast as I could push them, and they drove me. We drove and pushed/helped each other to improve.

In the civilian world I ask relaxed CFI's why they don't teach their students spins, upset recovery, etc. They answer, "Why? It's not required. Besides, I didn't really get too much of that myself, just an orientation to pass my CFI level checkride."

Not sure what your reasons were for not going military, but it sounds like you've got the right attitude. It wasn't just the flying that I liked. I love their culture of total dedication.

(Aren't tankers Bumblebee's -JC Moderator- area of expertise?) What's the attraction to tankers? That's something else I know nothing about, and I've never met anyone involved in it. How do you explain the calling when someone asks?

.

It's going to be interesting to see how this ends up for people like me who can't get into the airlines before the ATP rule due to their age. It gets a little frustrating to hear "Flight instruct until 1500 hours" when nobody is learning to fly around here anymore. At least not enough to build a respectable amount of hours in a reasonable amount of time. On top of that, it seems like getting a job doing that can be a crapshoot if you don't have 500TT or a bunch of dual given that's supposed to magically appear in your logbook. Fly checks? Nope, that's mostly gone too. Traffic watch? Nobody's doing that anymore. Aerial survey? Sure, if I want to give up my entire life and go live out of an FBO for months at a time. Hopefully some good comes out of the new rule, but it's seriously discouraging to watch all the time building options dwindle away and wonder how the hell I'm ever going to get to 1500.

Not this guy. Spin recovery, unusual attitude recovery was first week. And you didn't have a panel to look at until you understood all those round dials. I pumped out some good stick and instrument pilots. Maybe those cfis claiming its not required are afraid of it? hell I know 2 cfis who fear stalls. One chirp of the horn or one bump of chop they feel is adequate.


Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

Hey man, nothing is forever. It's real PIC and is what you make it. Could build up some good interview stories as well as some solid hours in a turbo charged twin in the FLs little bit of single pilot IFR and be command of your operation and crew. Sure it's not for everyone but if you were offered the opportunity to do it to fatten your logbook , would you take it?

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

... But as far as I've seen, these places, too, want 500 hours... No?

-Fox

-- Sent from my Palm Pre3 using Forums

Sounds like you've already given up without even testing the water. There are still jobs doing traffic watch, and flying checks, and i would hardly say you're giving up your "entire life" to fly survey. I dont mean to piss in your cheerios, but if you're getting that discouraged because you cant go straight to the right seat, then theres a problem.

I got a job flying checks with 600 hours TT, flying 5.5 hours a day. that went away then i slept on an air mattress at an FBO for 10 months while i was flying freight. Once that drove me fruit i went back to my old company who i was hauling checks for and they trained me on floats. Now all i do is work 0800-1600 monday through friday.

The point is, theres always going to be options out there. Pipeline companies will hire with 250 hours, but it sounds like you wouldnt want to subject yourself to that. Theres still ways to get into that barbie jet, you're just going to have to work for it now. Good Luck

Sometimes I think we've created a generation of pilots who are in love with being pilots, but largely hate to fly.

It's actually somewhat hard to answer, except to say that it's the type of precision low-level large-aircraft mission-oriented flying that I'd love to do, and it involves props (even though now they're almost all turboprops and not radials).

There's really no other sort of flying that I know of that offers that sort of mission profile.

Does that make any sense?

-Fox

All of these types of jobs that I've seen now require 500+ in all the postings I've seen. For better or worse, that's the reason I'm trying to find out what people think of that 200-hour gap. :>

Now, I'll grant you that 300 TT isn't much, and 500 isn't much more in the grand scheme of things or in reference to a truly experienced pilot... but it's a period that every experienced pilot MUST pass through.

-Fox

What's so wrong with instructing for 1500 hours? That's only 3 years if you average 500 a year. The way I hear pilots talking about it, it might as well be a death sentence. Maybe if CFIs actually spent more time instructing and evolved in their teaching to specialize in certain areas, the quality of instruction would go up.

However, from your post above, it sounds like you've already talked yourself out of everything.

The majority of the flying I do for my job is some kind of survey work. I little charter here & there. Yeah I'm gone a lot but I also make a damn good living doing it. I'm not at fancy FBOs and often based in the boonies, but I don't care about that kind of stuff anyway. Working for a company that treats it's pilots well is far more important to me than what I fly.


There's a company out in Bakersfield, CA who hires pipeline pilots with 250hrs. They'll even get you your tailwheel. They have great equipment (all new GCBC Citabrias) the weather is always good and it pays really well (for what it is). I knew several guys who flew for them. I did their tailwheel training. One logged almost 1400 hours in a year with them. Almost all of that was low level. Having all the LL time looks really good if you apply for a specialized survey job or crop duster. Not many have that much LL or tailwheel time.

Man, you sound like 80% of the kids that come out of Embry Riddle with a silver spoon in their mouth, that think just because they have a certain degree, they should just have everything handed to them. So you might have to take a non-flying job, or a CFI job at a mega-school to get hours. Or find some niche job that you can slide into at low hours.

And giving up your entire life to fly photography? Don't think so. Want to give your life up, I've got the job that fits that description better than anything other than the military.

Wow, everone jump on me and accuse me of being entitled for merely posing a question. I never knocked instructing, but I'm saying it's probably kind of hard to make a living doing it when hardly anybody is learning to fly anymore. Ive seen. TON of freight runs disappear from the local field.