Rotor & Wing Free e-Mail Newsletter Free Aviation Job Alerts
Home Aviation Today's Daily Brief Avionics Aviation Maintenance Rotor & Wing Air Safety Week Aircraft Value News
Advanced Search
Geographic Search

Aviation Today Market Leaders
2009 Company Profiles
Alpha List 2009 Company Profiles
Photo Archives
Video Archives
Subscribe to R&W
R&W Media Kit
R&W BPA Statement
Press Release Archive
Digital Subscription
Twitter
Facebook

Top Stories
Information
- AC 70-2
- Bomb Threat
- Emergency
- Hazardous Cargo
- Heliport
- PIW
- Recall Roster
Subscribe
Jobs
Podcasts
Webinars
Videos
Blogs
Databases &
   Buyer's Guides

White Papers/
   Technical Reports/
   Supplements

Research Reports
Article Archives
Press Releases
From the PR Wires
Industry Links



Top Stories
Aviation e-letter
Financial Center
Calendar
Media Kits
About Us
Contact Us

Friday, May 1, 2009

Editor’s Notebook

BDUs vs. Blue Jeans

I said I was going to stay away from this subject, but darned if it doesn’t keep coming up. So, since this issue of Rotor & Wing will be handed out the annual Army Aviation Association of America conference (aka Quad-A), I’m going to address the age-old contention that military-trained pilots are usually, if not always, better then civilian-trained pilots. This way, our camouflage-clad readers can come past our booth and lob a grenade at me if I anger them.

Is the pilot in camouflage better trained than the one in jeans?

First of all, let me remind everyone that I’m a civilian-trained helicopter pilot. I wanted to be a U.S. Coast Guard or U.S. Army pilot, but by the time I had developed an interest in flying, I was on the high side of the acceptable age range and my uncorrected eyesight was below the minimums. So, I had to pay for my training in the private sector.

I was, however, fortunate enough to have two primary instructors who were military-trained. Tim Berry was a U.S. Marine who flew in Vietnam, and Todd Roy was an Army Reserve pilot who didn’t happen to see combat, but was still very competent. A third buddy, Mike Miles, wasn’t officially one of my instructors, but taught me lot of things he learned at Fort Rucker and while flying in Vietnam. Todd and Mike even got me in some Army simulator time, which still doesn’t make me a military pilot by any stretch of the imagination, but gave me some training the average civil pilot will never get.

Now, as I said in my February 2009 "Editor’s Note," there is no finer helicopter school anywhere in the world than the Army’s school at Fort Rucker, Ala. (Did you catch that THIS time, McConnell, or do I need to say it a third time?!) But in my mind, that’s no guarantee that a person who learned how to fly there automatically ends up being a better driver than the guy who learned at the little general aviation airport on the outskirts of town.

The vast majority of the military-trained helicopter pilots I have flown with have been great aviators, as well as walking textbooks on rotary-wing aerodynamics and procedures. But there was one guy who was very far from either of those things. I’ll call him Pilot X.

Pilot X was transferred into the police helicopter unit I was in because he had been a pilot in the Army. To make a long story short, the instructor pilot he flew with during transition school questioned whether he graduated from Fort Rucker at all, let alone had 2,800 hours of PIC time he said he had earned while in the service. I wondered, too, when I was ordered to fly with him to see if I, a lowly less-than-1,000-hour pilot at the time, could help him fly better. I was surprised at the amount of difficulty he had holding heading, airspeed and especially altitude.

When the division commander found out, an investigation was launched which reveled Pilot X did graduate from Rucker, but with a very low score. He also had only 400 hours of PIC time, not 2,800. Other records, at least the ones our investigator could get his hands on, suggested that X had his wings taken from him shortly after reaching his duty assignment because the Army thought he was just plain dangerous. His history and false statements aside, my department felt his flying was unsafe and booted him out of the unit.

So much for "every" Army-trained pilot being great, as I frequently hear. I know that most are, but the point I’m trying to make is that no training system makes perfect pilots 100 percent of the time. Pilot X, and others like him, are proof.

Most of the civilian-trained pilots I have known, however, emerged from basic flight training with far less experience than the military folks. They weren’t exposed to turbine engines, night vision goggles or hundreds of full-touchdown autorotations. Most did, however, seem to have much better aircraft control, regardless of what you threw them in. I believe it’s because most of the men and women I know learned how to fly in the sprite, little Robinson R22, which is incredibly sensitive. That sensitivity gives them a touch that makes flying anything else a piece of cake. Military pilots, however, are usually all over the place the first few times they try to hover in an R22.

So, for my money, military-trained aviators do tend to be the best of the two kinds of pilots right out of primary flight school, but there are plenty of exceptions as well. That doesn’t mean the differences will remain the same throughout their flying careers. We have to remember that both sets of pilots will have varying amounts of inherent talent; gain and lose proficiency; and receive varying amounts of additional training and experience. During time, these changes, I believe, will pull some military pilots down and lift some civilian pilots up. Then, before you know it, you can’t judge one better than the other based solely on who was service trained and who wasn’t.

Maybe I’d feel differently about this if I had gone to Fort Rucker. But since I didn’t, that’s how I see it.

I’m done. You can begin yelling at me now.

Reader Comments

1.
In aviation there are no absolutes except that you will have a landing for every takeoff. Every pilot is different. As a military trained pilot you are given a better tool box from which to hone your skills with but, it\'s up to the individual to use the tools. You can own a million dollar hammer but, if you can\'t drive a nail you\'re not going to build any houses. As a former Army Aviator, Airline Captain, and current Law Enforcement Pilot I have flown with folks with very diverse backgrounds. The atributes that remain constant for success are attitude, aptitude, and experience. Someone that has a positive value in all three is unstoppable. The military has a fairly rigid screening system for flight school applicants to hedge the chance for success. However, nothing is perfect. I have seen people get through that couldn\'t fly a kite at the beach and others that would make exceptional pilots be denied. Some of those folks followed the civilian route because all they wanted to do was fly. In closing, some of the best and worst pilots I have flown with have been military and civilian trained...
Posted by Ron Nelson on Monday, May 18, 2009 @ 11:05 AM
2.
Ernie,
Yes, I believe that I got it this time, so there is no need for a fourth time. My point, as I stated before, is that the military pilot has made a greater sacrifice in terms of lifestyle than the civil trained pilot. And yes, generally, the military pilot is better trained. There are exceptions to both groups, as you stated in your editorial this month. I too fly for a LE unit, one that is located in Southern California. Our missions require us to fly not only basic law enforcement patrol, but high altitude mountain rescue missions and fire supression in medium\'s. I too have flown with and trained both civil and military pilots in these missions. With very few exceptions, I will take a military pilot over an R-22 pilot. The Silver State Model pilot does not have the experience or training to perform our missions. Now, I\'m done. You can continue to yell at me :)
Posted by McConnell on Monday, May 18, 2009 @ 02:32 PM

Post a Comment

Name:
Email:
Comments:

Please enter the letters or numbers you see in the image.

 
Your message will be reviewed before it is posted.

Copyright © 2009 Access Intelligence, LLC. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part
in any form or medium without express written permission of Access Intelligence, LLC is prohibited.
View Privacy Policy







Asia/Japan China India/Pakistan Middle East Eastern Europe Western Europe Central America USA Canada Australia/New Zealand South America Africa Russia