First flight of the P-8A Poseidon and all things related to transition

[wink]

But won't alot of pilot's view flying the P-8 as their ticket to the airlines? Whether they select it for that reason or not, eventually there will be alot of guys getting out with 737 experience. The market gets flooded with military 737 guys, and the airlines make out.

I would think this would be a real good thing for the enlisted maintainers. Navy pilots are always going to be at the top of the list for the airlines, but now instead of the e's having a tone of experience maintaining a plane that none of the major carriers use they will have experience on an airframe that almost ALL of the major carriers use. I'm interested to hear the opinions of the experienced guys on this one.

No airline takes a guy from the cockpit of a KC-10 or E-6, E-8, C-9, or whatever the military equivalent is, and just put them in the cockpit of an airliner. Everyone, whether a S-3 guy, C-9 guy or civilian commuter guy gets the same training. The airlines will save no money on training P-8 pilots and all the advancement and future training is based on strict seniority and FAA mandated recurrent training regardless of the number of hours you have in the plane. Guess what, the 2500 hour KC-10 FNG that was an AC in the AF is going to be the junior first officer (copilot) to the brand new DC-10 Captain with 30 hours total time in the aircraft. Anyone that goes to a P-8 because they think it will get them a better shot at an airline job is missing a great opportunity. Fly the fast movers while you can, there will be plenty of boring hours for you in the large mulitengine stuff and the airline will not care what you flew.

 

[Fezz CB]

No airline takes a guy from the cockpit of a KC-10 or E-6, E-8, C-9, or whatever the military equivalent is, and just put them in the cockpit of an airliner. Everyone, whether a S-3 guy, C-9 guy or civilian commuter guy gets the same training. The airlines will save no money on training P-8 pilots and all the advancement and future training is based on strict seniority and FAA mandated recurrent training regardless of the number of hours you have in the plane. Guess what, the 2500 hour KC-10 FNG that was an AC in the AF is going to be the junior first officer (copilot) to the brand new DC-10 Captain with 30 hours total time in the aircraft. Anyone that goes to a P-8 because they think it will get them a better shot at an airline job is missing a great opportunity. Fly the fast movers while you can, there will be plenty of boring hours for you in the large mulitengine stuff and the airline will not care what you flew.

So basically get drunk and collect per diem while you still can. That's all I needed to know. GOD I love this job

 

[heynowlookout]

I would think this would be a real good thing for the enlisted maintainers. Navy pilots are always going to be at the top of the list for the airlines, but now instead of the e's having a tone of experience maintaining a plane that none of the major carriers use they will have experience on an airframe that almost ALL of the major carriers use. I'm interested to hear the opinions of the experienced guys on this one.

I seem to recall when they brought the trailer down to Corpus being told that there will be contract maintenace for the P-8, meaning civilians as it is in the training commands, so no enlisted maintainers.

 

[hscs]

Wink, I was pointing out that the Air Force guys still have a fair shot and what service you happened to be in did not matter when the airlines were looking.

 

[HercDriver]

No airline takes a guy from the cockpit of a KC-10 or E-6, E-8, C-9, or whatever the military equivalent is, and just put them in the cockpit of an airliner. Everyone, whether a S-3 guy, C-9 guy or civilian commuter guy gets the same training. The airlines will save no money on training P-8 pilots and all the advancement and future training is based on strict seniority and FAA mandated recurrent training regardless of the number of hours you have in the plane. Guess what, the 2500 hour KC-10 FNG that was an AC in the AF is going to be the junior first officer (copilot) to the brand new DC-10 Captain with 30 hours total time in the aircraft. Anyone that goes to a P-8 because they think it will get them a better shot at an airline job is missing a great opportunity. Fly the fast movers while you can, there will be plenty of boring hours for you in the large mulitengine stuff and the airline will not care what you flew.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your post, but I know of quite a few folks who have gotten a type rating (at a cost in the thousands) prior to putting in their package (for some airlines I believe it was required, for others it just made you more competitive).

 

[wink]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your post, but I know of quite a few folks who have gotten a type rating (at a cost in the thousands) prior to putting in their package (for some airlines I believe it was required, for others it just made you more competitive).

Getting a type rating may be required at some airlines. The only one I can think of that is worth investing in a career is Southwest. But a type rating is a type rating. The A-10 pilot has just as much a chance of getting hired with his B737 type rating as the P-8 guy will with his B737 type rating. In fact, at Southwest, they were well known for many years as just loving F-16 guys. Sure they had a type rating, but had never flown the aircraft. Most all those guys got their ratings in a level D sim so they did not have to fly the plane for the rating. To go back to the cost saving statement, even with a type rating, you go through all the same company training.

 

[HercDriver]

Sure, I understand. My point was if it was at an airline that flew 737s the prospective pilot would have a leg up (no cash for the type rating, either from the airline or the hiree). But if the airline did not fly 737s everyone is on equal ground.

 

[wink]

Sure, I understand. My point was if it was at an airline that flew 737s the prospective pilot would have a leg up (no cash for the type rating, either from the airline or the hire). But if the airline did not fly 737s everyone is on equal ground.

Actually, that is not true. For one thing, many airlines have multiple "entry" level aircraft, B737 and Airbus, B737 and MD-80. Some new hires go to larger aircraft like the B757. Depends on lots of things. I know it defies logic to an outsider, but it just doesn't matter what you flew in 99% of the cases. The bottom line is, do not choose an aircraft to fly in the military because you think it will look better on an airline app. If anything, chose an aircraft or mission that gets you the most hours, regardless of the type aircraft. If it were me, and it once was, fly something that is 1. fun, and 2. you are not likely to ever get to fly or perform the mission in the civilian world.

 

[xmid]

I didn't mean that the airlines would save money on training. I know for a fact that when my dad got hired at Delta he had to pay to get a 737 type rating out of pocket. What I meant is that probably turns some people away that would otherwise apply for the heck of it. If you are an F-16 pilot thats getting out and you're toying with the idea of applying to some airlines, the 3-4k that its gonna cost you to get type ratings and an ATP to apply may turn you away. I was just saying that there could be more guys in the airlines hiring pool, and theres a whole list of ramifications that would cause (most being good for the airlines).



(And I wasn't advocating selecting it as a stepping stone to the airlines.)

 

[Fezz CB]

I would have gone with the P-8 "Bada$$ MuthaF-cka." But I can live with Poseidon.

 

[Flash]

I seem to recall when they brought the trailer down to Corpus being told that there will be contract maintenace for the P-8, meaning civilians as it is in the training commands, so no enlisted maintainers.

Maybe at home or for depot-level maintenance but it would be impratical for many overseas duties, especially when there are P-3's deployed in the middle of war zones.

Don't get me started on contractors maintaining or flying operational aircarft, it is not a good thing....... Works fine for training birds but it gets really messy with operational ones.......

 

[Machine]

I don't see the relevance regarding war zones. There's tons of contractors in war zones right now.

 

[scoober78]

Works fine for training birds

Says who?

 

[Gatordev]

You don't know how good you have it. Just wait until you don't have the CNATRA budget behind you.

 

[Flash]

Says who?

I never had a problem at VT-4, 10 and 86 with contractor maintenance. I had very few flights canceled for maintenance when I was in Pensacola, I could count them on one hand. That is saying something compared to my time in EP-3's and EA-6B's........