Airbus intercepted by Mirage 2000

[TVR1]

el stovey said:

You can't justify your statements because as I said earlier, you are talking utter drivel.

Nope, you may disagree with my opinion but historically, the majority of civilian pilots came through the military stream, that is fact. I have agreed that this may not now be the case. There are plenty of discussions about this on pprune, airlines.net, aviablog.com etc etc.... MY OPINION, is that if things go wrong, I would prefer to have an ex mil up front. You may not care, as long as its a cheap flight.That is your choice. Defence research institute good enough for you? page 12 to 13 and 22 I believe is what you are after..

www.rand.org/pubs/documented_briefings/2008/DB118....

Or perhaps a linky to the pros and cons of ex military compared to civilian..

http://aviablog.com/why-it-is-said-that-the-fighte...

Clearly you are getting wound up about something? Touched a nerve have I? Well really, get over it. It is just my opinion!

Edited by TVR1 on Saturday 4th June 15:16

[TVR1]

eccles said:

TVR1 said:

I always chose the airline i fly, based on 'does this airline employ ex RAF/French/SA airforce pilots? Only on the basis that when it all goes wrong, you can at least know that they have actually 'flown' an aircraft, rather than spent hours on a sim.

Look up as many air crashes as you like...but the truth still remains, that most of the unrecoverables, where still recovered by ex military pilots. Gimli Glider,United 232...and many more. When put in a simulator....civilian pilots where dead.

How does that work then, do you phone up said airline, ask for HR and ask if they employ ex military pilots? It's not something I've noticed on their adverts!

http://www.pilotjobsnetwork.com/jobs/Air_France-KLM

eccles, not trying to be a pedant but many airlines do like and value military experience. Whilst this isn't an 'actual advert' it does indicate qualifiers. You can review most airlines recruitment wants by changing the fields.

[anonymous-user]

TVR1 said:

el stovey said:

You can't justify your statements because as I said earlier, you are talking utter drivel.

Nope, you may disagree with my opinion but historically, the majority of civilian pilots came through the military stream, that is fact. I have agreed that this may not now be the case. There are plenty of discussions about this on pprune, airlines.net, aviablog.com etc etc.... MY OPINION, is that if things go wrong, I would prefer to have an ex mil up front. You may not care, as long as its a cheap flight.That is your choice. Defence research institute good enough for you? page 12 to 13 and 22 I believe is what you are after..

www.rand.org/pubs/documented_briefings/2008/DB118....

Or perhaps a linky to the pros and cons of ex military compared to civilian..

http://aviablog.com/why-it-is-said-that-the-fighte...

Clearly you are getting wound up about something? Touched a nerve have I? Well really, get over it. It is just my opinion!

I've been involved in both recruitment and the training/checking of pilots in my large UK legacy airline and I can confirm to you there is no empirical evidence to support your nonsense whatsoever. I know what I'm talking about based on years of direct experience checking pilots from a variety of backgrounds, you clearly do not know what you are talking about at all.

This discussion started when you said you chose to fly on airlines that prefer to recruit ex military pilots but appear to be unwilling to name these operators or given the wide variety of background of pilots any airline has, how on earth you know the background of the pilots flying the aircraft you will be on? In short you are talking complete bks.

To answer your question though, I don't care who i'm flying with as long as they can do the job and anyone in my airline who can't get's the chop.

Feel free to announce your opinions on matters you don't understand but don't be surprised when people point out where your statements are wrong.

Edited by el stovey on Saturday 4th June 18:41

[Grant76]

I'd like to know which airline TVR goes on his holidays with..

As mentioned above, utter drivel.

[Ginetta G15 Girl]

Simpo Two said:

On a more serious note, what level of aerobatics are combat pilots trained to, if any?

All RAF Pilots are taught aerobatics from a very early stage post first solo at Basic Flying Training. Initially this consists of the 'Basic 5', ie: Loop, Barrel Roll, Slow Roll, Stall Turn (both ways) and Roll off the Top.

In fact the first test you take post first solo is the 'Spin/Aeros' test. By the time you get to the 'Final Handling Test' you are expected to be able to produce an aeros sequence of your own design (working to a base height) and utilising the more advanced manoeuvres such as Cubans, Horizontal 8s, Quarter Clovers, Prince and Princess of Wales Feathers, Vertical Rolls, Hesitation Rolls, Canadian Breaks, etc. Some Examiners will want to see negative G manoeuvres such as Outside Turns and Push-up Cubans.

The best students will then compete for an aerobatic trophy by doing a sequence in front of a panel of judges, usually with a 1000ft Base Height.

While nowhere near as accomplished as the professional Aero pilots on here such as E Harding, you are expected to produce a high standard, since Aeros are seen by the RAF as a good indicator of a/c handling ability and spacial orientation. What you won't see are the more esoteric autorotative 'flick' manoevres because the a/c aren't cleared for them (although I was taught Porteus Loops).

At Advanced Flying Training on the Hawk you are expected to show a high degree of aerobatic skill because it is seen as the handling skill intro into Basic Fighter Manoeuvres, so you end up doing things like Twinkle Rolls and Derry Turns. The Hawk, however, is not cleared for Stall Turns owing to the risk of engine surge. This then builds into Tail Chasing and things like High G Barrels, High Speed and Low Speed Yo-Yos, Rolling and Vertical Rolling Scissors, where you try to stay within a fixed 'bubble' behind an a/c flown by an Instructor.

That is the 'Sport of Kings' (and Queens). I always used to think that if people knew we got paid for having so much fun they'd ban it immediately!

[Ginetta G15 Girl]

BliarOut said:

I 'dissed GGGirl once and she all but tore me a new one. I then went back and read her posting history.

She's a top nerd in a good way

Thank you (blush). I don't remember the thread, but if I was rude to you I apologise.

[BliarOut]

Ginetta G15 Girl said:

BliarOut said:

I 'dissed GGGirl once and she all but tore me a new one. I then went back and read her posting history.

She's a top nerd in a good way

Thank you (blush). I don't remember the thread, but if I was rude to you I apologise.

To be fair ir's probably me that owes you the apology

[Prawo Jazdy]

Ginetta G15 Girl said:

Stuff about aerobatics...

I had no idea this was the case. I assumed that aerobatic skill was a by-product of training, rather than forming a part of it. I'm now even more annoyed that I was too lanky to pass OASC.

[Ginetta G15 Girl]

While not wishing to go O/T, it would have been rude not to answer your Q.

el stovey said:

You were an RAF C130 pilot (is that right?)

Amongst other Types, yes.

el stovey said:

after you left the RAF didn't move into commercial flying and became an engine builder instead. That's still a very unusual career path for an RAF pilot to take. Did you consider going into an airline and working part time and building engines in your time off?

There was a whole raft of personal reasons why I decided not to go into Civil Aviation, with which I won't bore you.

However 2 major considerations for me (and which I have discussed [and argued!] at length with a good personal (male) friend who is a Captain with BA) were:

Firstly, having been an a/c Captain (as well as an Instructor) I wasn't sure I wanted to become a Co-Pilot (First Officer) again and work for a Company (such as BA) where promotion is via 'dead men's' (or women's!) shoes.

Secondly, and no offence to all of you on here who do work in CivAir (and do a bloody good job too!), it felt like it would be an anti-climax after my Service career. What I mean by this is that I didn't want to do Corporate Bizjet (I'm not diplomatic enough!) and, while on the Herc I'd done multi-sector Short-Haul as well as global Long-Haul, I'd also done things like Tanking, Receiving, Formation, DACT, Tac Low-Level and Air-Drop. For me, the upshot was that I didn't want to slot into just Long Haul (and live out of a suitcase), or just Short-Haul with all the multi-sector days, and feel I was missing what I did in the Service.

I therefore decided to change direction and go and do my other love (aside from flying), ie concentrate on Motor Sport.

While it's not a secure income it's fun and I get to be my own boss.

PS: With a screen-name like 'Stovey' I'm guessing you are ex-FAA?

Edited by Ginetta G15 Girl on Saturday 4th June 22:24

[eharding]

Ginetta G15 Girl said:

professional Aero pilots on here such as E Harding

Ha! - in my dreams I'd be getting paid for fly aerobatics!

Sadly, the flow of cash is all one way, directly out of my bank account.

Whilst it's true the RAF don't engage in the more esoteric end of the aerobatic spectrum, I do know of one still serving ex-Red who did pretty well on the competition circuit a few years back in his Christen Eagle. All of that tail-wheel time clearly helped, because the RAF then gave him a Spitfire, and he's now O/C BBMF.

It does contrast with the French approach, where the military are far more closely involved with competition aerobatics, and probably the reason they manage to produce so many world champions.

The British Aerobatic Association did start a cadetship scheme to try and foster the next generation of talent, with the long-term hope of matching countries like France. The trouble is, the successful candidates also fit exactly the same profile that the RAF is looking to recruit, and they generally disappear off to the service and we never see them again.

Have to agree with G3G about the Sport of Kings though. Simply the most entertaining way of burning hydrocarbons ever invented!

[Ginetta G15 Girl]

eharding said:

I do know of one still serving ex-Red who did pretty well on the competition circuit a few years back in his Christen Eagle. All of that tail-wheel time clearly helped, because the RAF then gave him a Spitfire, and he's now O/C BBMF.

That'll be 'Smiffy' then, ex-Jag Mate. I knew him when he was with the 'Reds'. Got banjaxed with him in the bar a few times.


That Boy done good.

[Simpo Two]

Ginetta G15 Girl said:

All RAF Pilots are taught aerobatics from a very early stage post first solo at Basic Flying Training...

Thanks, very interesting. I wasn't sure by how much combat training was different from aerobatics. Good aerobats (is that a word?) don't always make good combat pilots and possibly the reverse is also true. 'Vertical rolling scissors' reminded me of a section in 'Aces in Command' between Mahurin and Blesse 'On one flight, they had reversed, then counter reversed, and wound up in a spiralling dive, canopy to canopy, noses pointed straight down... "Mahurin looked like a decal on my mirror; mo matter what I did, he never moved out of position"

I find the personalities behind the aces and other pilots more interesting than the hardware. But as we seem unlikely to meet much opposition in the air for the forseeable future (bandits in Toyota pickups being the preferred choice), perhaps the age of the ace is over?

Edited by Simpo Two on Saturday 4th June 22:15

[eharding]

Ginetta G15 Girl said:

eharding said:

I do know of one still serving ex-Red who did pretty well on the competition circuit a few years back in his Christen Eagle. All of that tail-wheel time clearly helped, because the RAF then gave him a Spitfire, and he's now O/C BBMF.

That'll be 'Smiffy' then, ex-Jag Mate. I knew him when he was with the 'Reds'. Got banjaxed with him in the bar a few times.


That Boy done good.

Indeed. He would have been Standard National Champion in 2005 as well, but for the infamous 'Dipstick' incident, but he had the good grace not to make a formal objection (the chap who won it took off without replacing his oil dipstick - only to find out shortly afterwards in his inverted check - which strictly speaking means he could have forfeited the sequence, leaving Smithy the winner). I finished nowhere in that comp, but managed to squeak a medal the following year, by which time Smithy was poking about in something with a Merlin at the front.

[Ginetta G15 Girl]

Simpo Two said:

Good aerobats (is that a word?) don't always make good combat pilots and possibly the reverse is also true.

This is very true, but the RAF thrust is to build on the skills to develop the handling of an a/c at the limit, as well as to improve spatial orientation during high G manouevring.

Simpo Two said:

But as we seem unlikely to meet much opposition in the air for the foreseeable future perhaps the age of the ace is over?

It's also about the ability to Disengage and Run Away. While the Fighter Jocks are all into the (ultimate case of a) 'Knife Fight in a Telephone Box', the 'Mud-Movers' would rather not get involved in that but 'Select Fully Fine Pitch and Foxtrot Oscar'!

[Grant76]

Edited by Grant76 on Sunday 5th June 13:11

[Chuck328]

TVR1

As Stovey says, you're talking rubbish. Like Stovey, my out fit has a fair number of ex mil from all branches. All these chaps are really decent and great to know. I have a lot of respect for what they have done. However, the standards required by the company/CAA are high and generally, commensurate with experience, even the fast jet guys are no better or worse than the life time airline guys.

Also consider this (going back to the original point of this thread)

thatone1967 starts off saying he would be bricking it if in the Airbus. Take a look around you next time you fly. Spot the woman kicking off at the security guard going through the metal detector. Spot the angry businessman who doesn't get to board first.

It doesn't take long to see just how many people are scared of flying, (might not be quite catatonic - however there are a few) but they'd rather not be there. Heightened anxiety often leads to these types of situations, and herein lies the point. As an old and not bold skipper once said to me "passengers do NOT want drama on board, they want to get from A to B with the minimum of fuss, hassle and stress.

So think about this video, as much as I did enjoy watching it from my nice warm house, devoid of any explanation from the flight deck, had I been sitting there watching that Mirage, I'd have raised any eyebrow and muttered that wonderful 'yoofimism' 'WTF'!

A point both you and G15girl have blatantly missed.....

Edited by Chuck328 on Sunday 5th June 01:21

Edited by Chuck328 on Sunday 5th June 01:46

[Mojocvh]

Chuck328 said:

TVR1

As Stovey says, you're talking rubbish. Like Stovey, my out fit has a fair number of ex mil from all branches. All these chaps are really decent and great to know. I have a lot of respect for what they have done. However, the standards required by the company/CAA are high and generally, commensurate with experience, even the fast jet guys are no better or worse than the life time airline guys.

Yeah that's right.

Remind us of the training, on aircraft, of post stall/deep stall recovery [not approach to stall] carried out by civilian airline line pilots.

NONE.

Ref. http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/435.pdf

Mil FJ [and others] HAVE to routinely fly their aircraft to specific limits [and sometimes (accidentally) beyond] to maximise their survival chances.

This training and experience cannot be conducted/gained in a box on jacks and brings with it, at the minimum, the ability to recognise "the upset" and react correctly.

Don't believe me? Well just pull back and ride that sucker down.




[image from pprune discussion]

[anonymous-user]

Mojocvh said:

Yeah that's right.

Remind us of the training, on aircraft, of post stall/deep stall recovery [not approach to stall] carried out by civilian airline line pilots.

NONE.

Ref. http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/435.pdf

Mil FJ [and others] HAVE to routinely fly their aircraft to specific limits [and sometimes (accidentally) beyond] to maximise their survival chances.

This training and experience cannot be conducted/gained in a box on jacks and brings with it, at the minimum, the ability to recognise "the upset" and react correctly.

Don't believe me? Well just pull back and ride that sucker down.




[image from pprune discussion]

I think you're completely missing the point Mojo.

This discussion was started by TVR1 and about whether ex mil pilots are better in an airline and more able desirable to recruit than civilian trained pilots. NOT whether military pilots are better at flying military aircraft than civilian pilots are in whatever they fly.

Both sets of pilots have the same training on the aircraft in the airline.

With regards to your example of stall recovery, the only example I can think of where a civilian airliner has stalled in the UK was a 737 for thomsonfly into leeds (i think) The pilot was ex military and didn't recognise the aircraft had stalled and tried to go around by retracting the gear and flap making it even worse. It doesn't mean the RAF produce anything other than excellent crew but your example of stall recovery isn't that relevant.

Edited by el stovey on Sunday 5th June 07:31

[Brother D]

Mojocvh said:

Yeah that's right.

Remind us of the training, on aircraft, of post stall/deep stall recovery [not approach to stall] carried out by civilian airline line pilots.

NONE.

Ref. http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/435.pdf

Mil FJ [and others] HAVE to routinely fly their aircraft to specific limits [and sometimes (accidentally) beyond] to maximise their survival chances.

This training and experience cannot be conducted/gained in a box on jacks and brings with it, at the minimum, the ability to recognise "the upset" and react correctly.

Don't believe me? Well just pull back and ride that sucker down.




[image from pprune discussion]

I guess you are inferring if the pilots of AF447 were ex-mil they wouldn't have made the same mistake?

Its usually prudent to wait for the final report before jumping to conclusions.

[Simpo Two]

Ginetta G15 Girl said:

It's also about the ability to Disengage and Run Away. While the Fighter Jocks are all into the (ultimate case of a) 'Knife Fight in a Telephone Box', the 'Mud-Movers' would rather not get involved in that but 'Select Fully Fine Pitch and Foxtrot Oscar'!

I think it was Rickenbacker who coined the phrase 'scientific killing' - the clinical ace would see his prey, attack, kill and get clear before the enemy knew what had happened. No point getting yourself killed; a dead ace is no use. Rickenbacker of course had been a racing driver before WW1; I'd always thought the two occupations had characteristics in common and so did he - which I suppose brings us onto clinical science vs passionate flair. But that's for another debate!

Mud moving it is then