CAP Talk

Operations => Aviation & Flying Activities => Topic started by: flyguy06 on September 16, 2009, 12:34:26 PM

Title: Military flyng vs. Airline flying
Post by: flyguy06 on September 16, 2009, 12:34:26 PM
In the thread on airline pilots Helidoc said he goes out of his way to explain to cadets (and some seniors) about the realities of the airline industry today. I think thats a great idea. Thats why I try to tell cadets to go the military route. Its harder but  its probably the best flight training you will ever recieve in the world, its free flight training, you are serving your nation,and you never have to worry about being furloughed.

Military flying is a whole lot more fun that airline flying also or so it seems ( I have never done military flying).

As far as the pay. it sucks in the begining but gets better as you move up to the majors. The averge cycle for an airline is go to flight school get all theway up to Flight Instrucor. Flight instruct for a few years to get either part 135 minimums and go fly frieght or flight instruc until a regional hires you. Then fly for the reginaoal as an FO for two to three years and make captain. Then buikd jet PIC time unti youhave enough time to apply to a major airline.

Why not just go into the Air Force as an officer and fly jets as a young 1st LT then when they get out they can go straight to the majors and bypass the low paying regional jobs,
Title: Re: Military flyng vs. Airline flying
Post by: notaNCO forever on September 16, 2009, 01:06:08 PM
  Good luck getting an aircraft and not a UAV.
Title: Re: Military flyng vs. Airline flying
Post by: DC on September 16, 2009, 04:47:40 PM
Quote from: notaNCO forever on September 16, 2009, 01:06:08 PM
  Good luck getting an aircraft and not a UAV.
UAVs are still pretty hard to get these days, and there is talk about creating a new career field specifically for UAV operators, so they can stop giving UPT students nightmares.
Title: Re: Military flyng vs. Airline flying
Post by: Flying Pig on September 16, 2009, 05:20:48 PM
^ that would be a nice option for those who want to be involved in aviation but may otherwise be unqualified, eyes, other DQ items etc.
Title: Re: Military flyng vs. Airline flying
Post by: aveighter on September 16, 2009, 07:10:09 PM
The path to a military cockpit is not for the fainthearted. 

It is a very exclusive process which may start after four years of college and about two years after that drinking from the fire hose at which point a ten year commitment clock starts running.  And, after all that, you may not get the airframe you desire to spend the next several years flying doing a mission you may not like one bit.  If the flying thing doesn't work out you may find yourself in a non-flying position to serve out your commitment.

If you are particularly cursed, you may get a UAV.

God Bless the ones that take this path.  For the rest, call ATP.  It is a fine program.  Someone has to fly the freight.
Title: Re: Military flyng vs. Airline flying
Post by: Flying Pig on September 16, 2009, 09:31:13 PM
Live the dream, 1-800-B-A-DEPUTY
Title: Re: Military flyng vs. Airline flying
Post by: Gunner C on September 17, 2009, 01:17:37 AM
Quote from: aveighter on September 16, 2009, 07:10:09 PM
The path to a military cockpit is not for the fainthearted. 

It is a very exclusive process which may start after four years of college and about two years after that drinking from the fire hose at which point a ten year commitment clock starts running.  And, after all that, you may not get the airframe you desire to spend the next several years flying doing a mission you may not like one bit.  If the flying thing doesn't work out you may find yourself in a non-flying position to serve out your commitment.

If you are particularly cursed, you may get a UAV.

God Bless the ones that take this path.  For the rest, call ATP.  It is a fine program.  Someone has to fly the freight.

For the cargo haulers, there's always AFSOC.  Nothing wrong with flying really low, really fast, really dark!  Not for the faint hearted.  I quit looking out the windows of MC-130s very early on.  I never saw dirt go by so fast.
Title: Re: Military flyng vs. Airline flying
Post by: aveighter on September 17, 2009, 01:44:06 AM
Amen on that brother.  Makes fighter flying pale by comparison.
Title: Re: Military flyng vs. Airline flying
Post by: PHall on September 17, 2009, 02:26:47 AM
Life begins at 250 feet at 250 knots on NVG's! ;D
Title: Re: Military flyng vs. Airline flying
Post by: SarDragon on September 17, 2009, 05:33:35 AM
NOE in fling-wings gets pretty exciting, too.
Title: Re: Military flyng vs. Airline flying
Post by: bosshawk on September 17, 2009, 05:55:28 AM
Korea in a OV-1 Mohawk at 50 ft at 200-210 kts is a bit dicey, too.  Especially when you encounter wires that are not on the chart.
Title: Re: Military flyng vs. Airline flying
Post by: Gunner C on September 17, 2009, 06:11:49 AM
I guess what we're saying there's plenty of exciting flying in the military outside of fighters.
Title: Re: Military flyng vs. Airline flying
Post by: Flying Pig on September 17, 2009, 01:50:35 PM
Quote from: bosshawk on September 17, 2009, 05:55:28 AM
Korea in a OV-1 Mohawk at 50 ft at 200-210 kts is a bit dicey, too.  Especially when you encounter wires that are not on the chart.

Did you mean Korea or the DEA Overflight Course?
Title: Re: Military flyng vs. Airline flying
Post by: flyguy06 on September 17, 2009, 04:04:52 PM
This is true if you can get into it.
Title: Re: Military flyng vs. Airline flying
Post by: bosshawk on September 17, 2009, 04:21:17 PM
Rob: it's a bit different in Korea and a Mohawk is a different beast than a 182.  Wires are the same in Ukiah or Ulsan.