Author Topic: Helicopters and Money  (Read 80256 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

aesop081

  • Guest
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #50 on: November 23, 2008, 22:57:33 »
Yet the US army seems quite happy have NCO's fly their gunships,

US Army Warrant Officers are not NCOs. They are specialist officers as oposed to generalists.


aesop081

  • Guest
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #51 on: November 23, 2008, 23:01:37 »
Considering the skill shortages facing the military, one would think they would bend over backwards to get trained pilots.

IMHO, we do not have a shortage of applicants for the pilot MOC but we do have a shortage of training space and resources. Bringing in more applicants (officers or otherwise) will do nothing to help any shortages at the operational units.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 100,970
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,808
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #52 on: November 23, 2008, 23:26:25 »
Are you sure the US has NCO pilots?  A US Warrant Officer is not an NCO.

You are correct a CWO pilots appear to be commisioned officers in the US army, now that is strange, but a WO is not yet a commisioned rank either, but holds a Warrant.

http://www.ngb.army.mil/news/archives/2007/07/072407-Apache_save.aspx
http://www.militaryspot.com/military-rank.htm

How to become a WO in the US Army
http://www.usarec.army.mil/hq/warrant/download/Warrant_Officer_RPI.pdf

The nice thing about been proven wrong here is you certainly learn something new.

Offline KingKikapu

  • Member
  • ****
  • 6,020
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 160
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #53 on: November 23, 2008, 23:54:57 »
I feel sorry for arts degree holders because they always get picked on, and I don't understand why.  They learned how to critically analyse and disseminate information like the rest of us.  I respect that, and I suspect it would help them greatly in any venture.  Stop using them as scapegoats.

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 182,982
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,648
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #54 on: November 24, 2008, 00:27:23 »
And you would be wrong- but thanks for coming out!

He's absolutely right.

Degrees were not required for most officer classifications for decades. It became universal again at the time that two of the three military colleges were cut as part of the post-Cold War "peace dividend" slashings. Coincidence? Stated reason or not, it certainly appeared to me to be nothing more than a means of justifying the continuing expense required to maintain RMC when the other two were closed.

I went through as OCTP - no degree. A larger percentage of the DEO candidates on my courses washed out than us unedumacated bums. Their degrees did not help them get through, or be better pilots if they did.

The military training given was perfectly adequate, including the various staff etcetera courses later.

I continue to view the requirement for a degree as a needless waste of time and tax money at the entry level.

As for Army and Navy pilots - yes.

NCO pilots, at least in the Army - yes.

The current system and structure, on the Tac Hel side, is cumbersome, expensive, and ineffective.

You do not need two people in each cockpit trained to lead and command acting as drivers, any more than you need a commission to command a LAV III or a tank.

Battlefield helicopters are vehicles with a different method of mobility - rotary wings instead of tracks or wheels.

I have written about this here in numerous threads in the past.

I missed this whole discussion while I was in Wainwright cut off from the interweb while on my Sperwer course, or else there would be lengthy rants from me in this one too.

Offline SupersonicMax

    is back home.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 70,510
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,569
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #55 on: November 24, 2008, 01:27:23 »
I'll jump here.  I'm not a helo pilot (thank god :D), I fly fast jets. 

Either way, a degree in basket weaving or liberal arts sure doesn't sound to me like something very 'useful' to be a officer or a pilot. 

Maybe it doesn't help, maybe it does.  For myself, I feel it helped me tremendously.  Not for the material I learned during the degree, but rather the way of approaching a problem and solving it and the study habbits.  But it depends on every individual and how they use the skills they learn from their degree.  A degree isn't about the subject you're studying but rather, developping problem solving skills.  The subject is just a way of delivering that.

A 1000 hr. civilian pilot would make a better prospect for a WO grade helo-pilot than some recent college/university green horn that has to learn from the bottom. 

Civilian flying is very different than military flying.  There are commercial pilots and airline pilots that go through the CF Pilot Training system and yes, some of them fail.  In the end, everyone has to learn from the bottom again, the CF way.

A piece of paper with B.A. after his name, doesn't make him pilot material.
The piece of paper with the B.A. doesn't make him pilot material, the Aircrew Selection process makes him pilot material.

Spending thousands of dollars to 'see' if he can be a pilot sounds like a waste of resources.
It's spending thousands of dollar to form an officer.

I'm speaking strictly rotary-wing here, not the jet-jockey's who may require a higher education in physics or calculus to fly a fast mover.
I don't think you can really speak for any pilot here (unless you have a license or are in the process of getting one).  Riding shotgun doesn't mean you understand everything the pilot does. 

While having a science/engineering background may help you understand concepts on the ground, you never actually do math and physics in the plane (god, my brain cell (yup, no mistake, no s after cell... Singular) has already the hardest time making simple additions).  The ability to process information fast is much more useful that any type of theory/math/physics.  We sometimes have to use "math" in the cockpit, however it's Grade 6 level math.

Like any field, on the job training is where you really start to learn, the school part is just so much theory and book learning.  My point is, a good set of hands on the stick is better than a head full of university mush.
Again, it's not the theories you learned that you use but the problem solving skills you got in University.  In that respect, I do believe that a University degree is usefull for any Officer trade, pilot included.

Max
« Last Edit: November 24, 2008, 01:32:57 by SupersonicMax »

Offline arctic_front

  • Guest
  • *
  • 140
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #56 on: November 24, 2008, 02:33:46 »
Eye In The Sky:

With utmost respect, I have to ask, what university teaches those things?  Except RMC?  No civilian university offers courses in military tactics or strategy except a military college.  You learn those things after you join the military.  I'm not trying to disrespect military officers or the military in general.  I'm stating only that a university degree doesn't make a person a pilot.  A gifted intellectual does not make you a pilot.  An un-educated slob may be a gifted pilot based on his ability.   My point is just that the military discards gifted pilots on a basis of a university education, when that education is not a requirement to be a pilot.  Unless the candidate is a total dummy, he can learn the tactics and the rest of the regime, on the job,  like every other pilot candidate.   Requiring a university education smells strongly of elitism.   Flying is a hands-and-feet job.  Mission planning is a learned job like most jobs.

Obviously, skill alone is not enough.  Intelligence is required.  A simple aptitude test can suffice.  The rest can be taught.  A university education of any kind may be helpful, but it doesn't make you a better warrior.  It certainly doesn't make you a better pilot.   A degree in an unrelated field to aviation serves no purpose.  It is a cop-out to fulfill a minimum requirement for entry and nothing more.  I would offer this:  Canada needs a strong military academy  program to teach our future warriors,,,,,  opps,  silly me....  we used to have one....  where did it go?   

In these times, to close doors instead of opening  them, for potential members of the elite of the elite military, is simply foolish.  Doors should  be opening, not closing.  Keep the standards very high.  Allow no person past those very   high standards unless they meet the requirements, but an artificial standard of elitism is not helping.  Smarts, skills, talent, intelligence is what the CAF needs.  University is not a true measure of ability.  Intellect is the true measure.  Don't dumb-down a thing, but require a minimum intelligence.  A university degree doesn't make you a better warrior,  or make you smarter, just more educated. They are mutually exclusive.

Talent and ability is what the CAF needs, not elitists


Offline KingKikapu

  • Member
  • ****
  • 6,020
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 160
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #57 on: November 24, 2008, 02:48:27 »
A few things:

  • University education sharpened my analytical and problem solving skills a great deal.  That is something I will cherish and apply for as long as I can think on my own.
  • University is elite?  Have you seen some of the people coming out of school?
  • If you use intellect as one of your standard measures, then what do you propose we use as a testing methodology for candidate pilots?

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 182,982
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,648
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #58 on: November 24, 2008, 02:54:38 »
arctic_front - You are out of your lane, as you have no direct knowledge of the military, however I agree with much of what you say.

And Max - you would have done just as well without a degree, as thousands of us have done in the past.

KingKikapu - my analytical and problem-solving skills are quite adequate, I believe, without university. I developed them through military training beginning at the age of seventeen. Generations of pilots were adequately screened, trained, and tested without university.

Offline KingKikapu

  • Member
  • ****
  • 6,020
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 160
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #59 on: November 24, 2008, 03:01:00 »
I'm sure they are, and I apologize if you thought I was implying that they weren't.  I actually believe that you are right in that it probably isn't too beneficial to be university trained to be a pilot.  It might help the admin end of things.  Can it really hurt to have more education though?  All other things remaining the same that is.

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 182,982
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,648
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #60 on: November 24, 2008, 03:20:13 »
I'm sure they are, and I apologize if you thought I was implying that they weren't. 

No apology necessary, and I didn't. You have to try much harder to annoy me - and that's not a direct challenge.

I was just pointing out that these skills can be honed within our own system, and are.

It might help the admin end of things.

We teach that, too.

Can it really hurt to have more education though?  All other things remaining the same that is.

No, not at all. Education is a good thing. I only wish to point out that it is not necessarily relevant or of direct benefit to certain jobs/functions.

Offline arctic_front

  • Guest
  • *
  • 140
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #61 on: November 24, 2008, 03:53:00 »
   
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #55 on: Today at 06:27:23 »
 MilPoints  Quote
I'll jump here.  I'm not a helo pilot (thank god ), I fly fast jets.  

Quote from: arctic_front on Today at 00:21:33
Either way, a degree in basket weaving or liberal arts sure doesn't sound to me like something very 'useful' to be a officer or a pilot.

Maybe it doesn't help, maybe it does.  For myself, I feel it helped me tremendously.  Not for the material I learned during the degree, but rather the way of approaching a problem and solving it and the study habbits.  But it depends on every individual and how they use the skills they learn from their degree.  A degree isn't about the subject you're studying but rather, developping problem solving skills.  The subject is just a way of delivering that.

Quote from: arctic_front on Today at 00:21:33
A 1000 hr. civilian pilot would make a better prospect for a WO grade helo-pilot than some recent college/university green horn that has to learn from the bottom.

Civilian flying is very different than military flying.  There are commercial pilots and airline pilots that go through the CF Pilot Training system and yes, some of them fail.  In the end, everyone has to learn from the bottom again, the CF way.

Quote from: arctic_front on Today at 00:21:33
A piece of paper with B.A. after his name, doesn't make him pilot material.
The piece of paper with the B.A. doesn't make him pilot material, the Aircrew Selection process makes him pilot material.

Quote from: arctic_front on Today at 00:21:33
Spending thousands of dollars to 'see' if he can be a pilot sounds like a waste of resources.
It's spending thousands of dollar to form an officer.

Quote from: arctic_front on Today at 00:21:33
I'm speaking strictly rotary-wing here, not the jet-jockey's who may require a higher education in physics or calculus to fly a fast mover.
I don't think you can really speak for any pilot here (unless you have a license or are in the process of getting one).  Riding shotgun doesn't mean you understand everything the pilot does.  

While having a science/engineering background may help you understand concepts on the ground, you never actually do math and physics in the plane (god, my brain cell (yup, no mistake, no s after cell... Singular) has already the hardest time making simple additions).  The ability to process information fast is much more useful that any type of theory/math/physics.  We sometimes have to use "math" in the cockpit, however it's Grade 6 level math.

Quote from: arctic_front on Today at 00:21:33
Like any field, on the job training is where you really start to learn, the school part is just so much theory and book learning.  My point is, a good set of hands on the stick is better than a head full of university mush.
Again, it's not the theories you learned that you use but the problem solving skills you got in University.  In that respect, I do believe that a University degree is usefull for any Officer trade, pilot included.

Max


Max, I appreciate your input as you have covered the bulk of my post.  Thank you.  

I am not dissing pilots, I'm maybe dissing the the system.  Sure, being a pilot is hard.  So is every other trade in the CAF.  As the GRUNT who spends hours making your ship good to go, so you can do your job, (which is appreciated by THIS civilian) I have to ask, respectfully, do you know how hard and how long your engineer/tech worked all night?,,,,,  or how many months he spent learning the same technical skills you have?    I'd give dollars to donuts that your crew chief on that sea king/ Cormorant/ Griffon could do a much better job starting that ship on any given day than you.  He could probably fly it nearly as good as you....  he understands it's systems better than you, can trouble-shoot it better than you....  you getting my point?  Not Dissing you....  you do your job well....  he does his job better.  He has too.  He is under-manned, short of supplies, parts, and ultimately wears the blame if anything goes wrong mechanically.  He works twice as many hours, gets paid half as much, and gets zero recognition.  

He knows that his flight crew, who become friends, are out over the water in the dark...  he knows the dangers you face....  he knows your wife and your kids.....  he does what he does because he is dedicated to his job and his machine.  He loves what he does.  He loves that he has earned your trust, and he wouldn't want to do anything else.  He is a master at his job.  But with all that responsibility, and in MY view, he has every bit the same responsibility as you have as a pilot, lives are on the line, same as you.  He loves his job as much as you.  

So how come you need a degree to carry the same responsibility as he carries every day?  Are you saying you carry more?  He doesn't have a degree....  is he too stupid to carry the same responsibility?.....  after-all...  he doesn't have a degree!  He has the required training, he has earned the position of 'crew chief' after years of doing his job well...  But he is a lowly grease monkey.  Is  he is a dim-wit grunt...?  
He didn't go to university, so he must be stupid.  But you pilots put your very life in his hands every single time you go flying....

If you pilots need a degree to fly....  shouldn't your crew-chief need one too?  He has your life in his hands every time to leave the ground.  Do you respect his skill?  Do you appreciate it?....  of course you do!    Is he smarter than you?  Dumber?..  He doesn't have a B.A, or a M.D, or a PhD.   But he can make you live or die.  How can that be?  If he doesn't have a degree in ANY field, and he has just as much responsibility as you......  how can that be?

I guess it must be pure fluke that you survive each and every flight.  Some un-educated dumb-*** just checked the oil and tire pressure before you slipped the surly bonds of earth to allow you to take flight.  After-all,
some non-university educated flunky just did the pre-flight on your machine.

Are you feeling guilty yet, Sea King Taco?....  you should be.    "thanks for coming out" was the quote as you dismissed my honest comments...  

Max, again with all due respect, you don't learn problem solving skills in university, you learn them even better in the REAL world.  University is great for learning formulas and theories, but universities fill your head with bullshit.  walk the walk with your crew chief just ONE day and you'll realize the folly of your words.  Theories work great in theory...  but they seldom measure up in practice.  Reality bites.  

I will say again, Max, thank you for addressing me with respect, and my respect goes back equally to you for being a gentleman.  University doesn't make you smarter.  LIFE makes you smart.  Your crew chief is proof of that.  Pay attention.





Offline arctic_front

  • Guest
  • *
  • 140
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #62 on: November 24, 2008, 04:09:52 »
I'm sure they are, and I apologize if you thought I was implying that they weren't.  I actually believe that you are right in that it probably isn't too beneficial to be university trained to be a pilot.  It might help the admin end of things.  Can it really hurt to have more education though?  All other things remaining the same that is.

Sir, and I do mean Sir, you may think I'm out of my lane, but I disagree.  Aviation, be it military or civilian is about SKILL.  Military aviation is about  A WARRIOR instinct, and guts.  You will never learn THAT in any Canadian university.

I would heartily agree with you IF Canada had a proper military academy to train our military.  Education is always a plus.  But a 'liberal' education is not a net benefit to a warrior class student.  West Point, Annapolis or the Air Force Academy is useful.   McGill or any other Canadian institute of higher learning just doesn't cut it.  Military men and women deserve better. 



Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 182,982
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,648
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #63 on: November 24, 2008, 04:46:25 »
Again, you are out of your lane, as you have no direct experience with our circumstances. Continually stating things with which you have no direct knowledge as fact will bite you here. Please be careful how you say things.

As the GRUNT

A "Grunt", in the strict sense of the colloquialism, is an Infantryman.

Techs do not use the term when referring to themselves.

I have to ask, respectfully, do you know how hard and how long your engineer/tech worked all night?,,,,,  or how many months he spent learning the same technical skills you have?

Yes. The vast majority of us do. The rest have problems and wonder why.

I'd give dollars to donuts that your crew chief

We do not have crew chiefs, at least not in Tac Hel.

on that sea king/ Cormorant/ Griffon could do a much better job starting that ship on any given day than you.  He could probably fly it nearly as good as you....

No, he/she could not, nor are they permitted to.

he understands it's systems better than you,

He/she had better.

can trouble-shoot it better than you....

Generally with input from the crew.

you do your job well....  he does his job better.

No, he/she does not.

He is under-manned, short of supplies, parts, and ultimately wears the blame if anything goes wrong mechanically.

We are all undermanned, and have our challenges, and they always blame me if something goes wrong mechanically.

He works twice as many hours, gets paid half as much, and gets zero recognition.

The first and last are untrue, and I've not got the time to call up the pay rates, but yes, they are lower.

So how come you need a degree to carry the same responsibility as he carries every day?

We do not, as thousands of military pilots have proven in the past, but the responsibilities are nowhere near the same regardless. We are responsible for more than airworthiness.

Are you saying you carry more?

Yes. Mission accomplishment is more than airworthiness. Civilian pilots are not putting weapons on targets, or moving troops into and out of hostile situations, in a carefully choreographed ballet involving large numbers and varieties of people, machines, and lethal weapons operating in four dimensions.

He didn't go to university, so he must be stupid.

I didn't, and I'm not - I even used "colloquialism" earlier, and have used even bigger words before.

But seriously, you are exaggerating a little...

But you pilots put your very life in his hands every single time you go flying....

I do like to take hostages along for rides as often as possible, to give them a little incentive - not that they know that they are hostages.

If you pilots need a degree to fly....

We don't, even to choreograph lethal four-dimensional ballets.


"thanks for coming out" was the quote as you dismissed my honest comments...

It was, in my opinion, somewhat brusque, however you have inserted yourself into a conversation without understanding the circumstances. That never goes over very well here.


Your presence is welcome here, but, again, please be careful how you word things and do not try to tell us what our lives are like until you know.

Offline KingKikapu

  • Member
  • ****
  • 6,020
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 160
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #64 on: November 24, 2008, 04:51:14 »
Sir, and I do mean Sir, you may think I'm out of my lane, but I disagree.  Aviation, be it military or civilian is about SKILL.  Military aviation is about  A WARRIOR instinct, and guts.  You will never learn THAT in any Canadian university.

I would heartily agree with you IF Canada had a proper military academy to train our military.  Education is always a plus.  But a 'liberal' education is not a net benefit to a warrior class student.  West Point, Annapolis or the Air Force Academy is useful.   McGill or any other Canadian institute of higher learning just doesn't cut it.  Military men and women deserve better. 
Uh you quoted the wrong guy.  You're looking for Loachman.

Personally, I'm far more impressed with people who push themselves physically/mentally (degree or not) with humility than people who do the same, but espouse warrior bravado crap.

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 182,982
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,648
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #65 on: November 24, 2008, 04:57:02 »
Sir, and I do mean Sir,

There is no rank here.

Sir, and I do mean Sir, you may think I'm out of my lane,

You are, and moving even farther.

You have no direct knowledge of the CF, yet you persist in trying to tell us what it is like and/or what it should be like.

I agree, as I have said, that your premise regarding university is correct, however you are going way beyond that.

Military aviation is about  A WARRIOR instinct, and guts.

You are telling me/us this?

I would heartily agree with you IF Canada had a proper military academy to train our military.  Education is always a plus.  But a 'liberal' education is not a net benefit to a warrior class student.  West Point, Annapolis or the Air Force Academy is useful.   McGill or any other Canadian institute of higher learning just doesn't cut it.

What do you know about our training system?

Anyway, I have to go and get ready to look for bad guys. I'll be back in a few hours.


Offline boot12

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 9,505
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 84
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #66 on: November 24, 2008, 05:01:08 »
If civilian universities are only good for filling students' heads with "bullshit", and teaching concepts that "work great in theory...  but they seldom measure up in practice.", I wonder where the designs and plans for the helicopters you guys are flying and maintaining came from.  God?  Santa?   ???

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 182,982
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,648
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #67 on: November 24, 2008, 05:32:02 »
I would like to point out that none of us flying them used that term.

Offline boot12

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 9,505
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 84
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #68 on: November 24, 2008, 05:35:06 »
I would like to point out that none of us flying them used that term.

I realize that it was only one specific user.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2008, 05:41:56 by boot12 »

Offline SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 105,615
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,392
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #69 on: November 24, 2008, 07:40:17 »
Loachman and Arctic_Front,

Just to be clear- crystal clear- we are in heated agreement.  Piloting skills and university education are independent of each other.  Hell, Piloting and Officership can be independent of each other- many nations have proven that in the past and continue to do so today.

Arctic_front kicked this whole mess off with an ill-informed post about the CF that did not describe reality.

Let's talk reality: 1.  All pilots in the CF are Officers.  Whether it should be that way is the subject of one of these threads around here that just goes around in circles without resolving anything.

2. All Officers in the CF require degrees.  Again we can debate whether or not it is a good idea, but it is still a requirement.  The fact that Loach doesn't have a degree puts him increasingly in the minority. Does that make him a bad person, officer or pilot?  No, of course not.

I used to be of the opinion that degrees were unnecessary for Officers- until I got one myself.  Bit of a revelation, there.


Offline Baden Guy

    Full Member.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 41,172
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,699
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #70 on: November 24, 2008, 07:54:00 »
Loachman and Arctic_Front,

I used to be of the opinion that degrees were unnecessary for Officers- until I got one myself.  Bit of a revelation, there.


I  used to be of the opinion that degrees were unnecessary for NCMs until I got one myself.  Bit of a revelation, there.   ;)


Offline NFLD Sapper

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 265,511
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,891
  • Regimental Headquarter Staff
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #71 on: November 24, 2008, 10:11:20 »
Sir, and I do mean Sir, you may think I'm out of my lane, but I disagree

You are so far outside your lane that no amount of engineer support will get you back into your lane.

My 2 cents worth, your milage will vary.
CHIMO!
First in, Last out
Sappers Lead the Way

Just tell your wife she owes your life to some Muddy Old Engineer,
Some dusty, crusty, croaking, joking Muddy Old Engineer

Offline 22B

  • Guest
  • *
  • 210
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #72 on: November 24, 2008, 11:04:30 »
Let me jump in here.  I was a M/Cpl Combat Arms, got out, and have been a Commercial Helicopter since 1980.  A University Degree is not required to fly, and  is of no benefit what so ever, unless you move into non flying managment, and then, only a Business degree would be of any value.  I have worked with many ex Mil pilots, some fit well, some don't fit at all.  Based on that observation, I consider each on their own merits. It is fun, though, when they askwhat Sqn I flew with, I tell them 408, but from a Lynx (No, not the Brit Helicopter).  I will be the first to admit that there are far more civilian pilots who would not blend well with the Military, but for the most part, its irrelevant.  The one thing I really wanted to do, but missed out by two days, was to deliver 408's 206 back after maint.  The entry in the Log Book would have been most interesting, to say the least.  For the record, I fly lights and mediums and have about 7000 hours. (All as a M/Cpl 011)

Offline KingKikapu

  • Member
  • ****
  • 6,020
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 160
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #73 on: November 24, 2008, 11:05:57 »
I also agree that whole civilian university comment was out to lunch regarding theory.   Just the other day I made a high precision ring laser gyroscope used in inertial navigation systems aboard jet fighters for fun.  This isn't exactly something that I would do on a weekend had I not earned my degree, but it has immediate applications for jets and satellites, among other things.

Next week an electrical engineering grad student and I are going to attempt to make a real time interferometric optical autocorrelator with femtosecond speeds.  Because we can, and because one of these babies will be very useful for ultra fast physics.  

Theory is serving me very well.  You are right in that it probably wouldn't help me instinctively fly better.  Other moc's might benefit from a myriad of other skill sets learned at civilian universities.  We should not discount them just because they aren't always hands-on.

Offline Ditch

  • Established 1998
  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 26,362
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,341
  • I routinely step in it, but like conflict...
Re: Helicopters and Money
« Reply #74 on: November 24, 2008, 11:35:13 »
Wading in again for the first time since March.

The CF is not short of flying pilots - we are short pilots to fill ground jobs.  Ground jobs are usually considered staff jobs - thus an Officers' domain.

Per Ardua Ad Astra