"Eric Scheie" wrote in message
...
"No Badge For Frank" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 18:17:36 GMT, "Eric Scheie"
wrote:
Put yourself in an observer's shoes,
would you rather fly with pilot with maybe 250-300 hours who just got
their
commerical rating, or a pilot with 2000 hours? Ask the taxpayers who
they
want flying their aircraft.

How many hours do you think our military pilots have when we turn them
loose in an F-18? A few hundred. It all comes down to the quality of
the training.


the F/A-18 pilot - not even a valid argument. There is a popular
misconception that a new pilot in the single seat version is trained and
then "let loose all by themselves". Granted, they are the only one sitting
in the Hornet, however, they are FAR from alone. While they may do certain
training or cross country flights by themselves, they do not go into
combat
alone. A new pilot will fly along with another, more experienced pilot.

Exactly- no nugget is "turned loose." Or, how about the typical military
helicopter pilot:

They get their "wings" and qualify simply as a pilot around 200 hours. This
is equivalent to a commercial license.

Next, they qualify as a "second pilot" (or copilot) between 200-300 hours,
and finally, as an aircraft commander around 500. An aircraft commander is
"turned loose." Two second pilots may do cross countries and certain
training flights by themselves, and one of them will be "pilot in command,"
but a qualified aircraft commander is required for a real mission.

I agree that experience in police tactics and procedures is important.

How about this though? Compare an experienced pilot as trained as a cop, to
an experienced cop trained as a pilot. I believe in you will find a
difference in decision making priorities, namely safety of flight vs the
mission.