Lab Rat

A few comments:
First, the correct grammar would be "if you for work for an airline." "An" is an indefinite article and is used to precede words beginning with a vowel sound.

Second, my post was sarcastic in nature. Would you like a definition of sarcasm?

And third, no, I am not a kid.

Lighteningspeed

Well put, although there will always be people lining up to do this job for free or worse pay to do it thanks to the false advertising by pilot factories.

These posts prove that military training is second to none but they sometimes fail to produce pilots with personalities one likes to fly with. Arrogance is actually encouraged in the military to help pilots cope with ones fear and a sense of mortality but once out of the military, it's hard for them to become well, humble, it seems.

These so called experts, including the subject of this original thread, if anyone care to remember at this point, have done their job by perpetuating the false premise that all airline pilots should come from the ranks of the military. A good pilot can come from any background. He or she can be a former cropduster, military, CFI, an artist, a musician or a school teacher. Some of the best pilots I have ever flown with came from very diverse background but they all shared a common trait, that is, a love of flying and a certain knowledge of their shortcomings.

taurus12

I think you are spot on with your assessment that a love of flying and knowledge of on one's shortcomings yields some of the best pilots. It shows when people enjoy what they do and it's a privillege working with those types.

I would like to add my thoughts on arrogance. I have never seen arrogance encouraged in my fledgling career. Assertiveness & confidence... absolutely. But arrogance is very much frowned upon from my experience. If you have ever sat in on a military debrief, especially one from a fast-mover, you will often find that every minute detail of the flight is covered. It is not uncommon for a debrief to last longer than the actual sortie. Most pilots/instructors I fly with fess up and take responsibility for anything they did that wasn't perfect (it would surprise most people how trivial some things may seem that still get hammered in the debrief). These are not characteristics that I would attribute to an arrogant pilot. Unfortunately, there are some pilots out there who do have personality/arrogance problems... but as far as the military encouraging arrogance, I'd have to disagree.

dojetdriver

I won't ever doubt, debate, or argue that military training is far superior to civilian training. But when you have a very selective screening process, a very high standard of training, and well over a million dollars spent on it, that's what would be expected.

But to tie an incident that has not been mentioned, look at this one;

YouTube - C-5 Galaxy crash at Dover

Having superior training should (and usually does) make for a superior pilot. But as you mentioned, just because you had superior training, doesn't mean you are a superior pilot. How many eye balls were in the cockpit of that C5? How many instructors were in the front of that C5?. What is said on the CVR of that airplane? Something along the lines of "guys, I'm concerned", as well as "I don't know why we're even doing this anyway".

We can all point to the problems of the Colgan accident. Mainly, a training/competence issue. The guys is in the C5 obviously didn't have a training issue, but did they have a competency issue?

You can flame me if you wish, tell me something along the lines of "what you civilian types don't understand is blah blah blah". Sorry, won't change my point of view. Pilots are all prone to errors, regardless of the training we've received.

We all know the training differences between the Colgan crew and the C5 crew. But you want to know what one very, very, very big difference was between the C5 and Colgan? The C5 guys got lucky. Lucky their lack of competence didn't cause that fuel laden, heavy, 4 engine behemoth to slam into a populated area and kill a bunch of people on the ground. As well as they walked, hobbled, or were carried away from away from their mistake but live to tell about it.

Too bad we can't say the same of the Colgan crew.

R.I.P. guys.

Like I said, flame away. Not much more I can say.

taurus12

Initial training gives you a foundation for success, but it does not make you competent... even if you had the best instructor with the best equipment that money could buy. Competency is something that you gain from re-current training, getting the most from every hour, and generally being proactive with your own improvement. Complacency can affect anybody, military or civillian. I think complacency has more to do with your attitude and professionalism, which is not the focus of most flight training programs.

PIC2009

It seems to me the issue isn't whether a pilot is PIC in a regional, mainline, private, etc.... The issue is how well the pilot performs with the equipment she/he is flying. My friend is left seat 767 for a legacy carrier and I fly bugsmashers. He adapts to the requirements to fly his equipment; I adapt to mine. The results are the same: no metal bent, no hapless passengers or groundlings killed. It isn't the size of the plane, it's the skill of the pilot.

the King

Maybe someone got to this before me, but I noticed some very bad grammatical mistakes on the "expert's" site within two paragraphs. We often spend too much time correcting each other here, but I find Mr. Yurman's site inexcusable and pathetic. It's been said before: Language is the first impression people give off. How you speak and write always forms an opinion in your audience. So grammar police, have at our "aviation expert."

Lab Rat

I uhgree. They're is to many grammatical errors and they need to be kahrected.

bryris

Civilian pilots need to just go into the corner and suck their thumb. They'll never amount to crap.

Gunpig

--deleted---