Guardian

You strike me as either a troll or an idiot, but in any case, having flown a few different planes now, and a few more in their simulators, the tanker (135) is probably the second hardest to land in the AF. I haven't flown a fighter, but I have yet to meet anyone who has flown both fighters and stratotankers and thought the fighter harder to land. Sure it may be harder to land. Fine. You can have that. What other avenues of difficulty make it more challenging to employ than any other airplane? On the average, the tanker as a whole is one of the easiest airplanes in the Air Force inventory to fly. That is my argument and I have yet to hear anyone disagree. So please, stop taking my argument out of context or attacking one little thing while missing the big picture. I am not emotional about this nor have I been. It is characteristic of those who can't form a logical argument or who have nothing left to provide on a topic to get emotional and start bringing up ill conceived thoughts like using the dead as an example how the tanker is harder to fly than other platforms in the inventory. Also 2nd hardest to land in the inventory or your personal platforms flown? Qualify your position.

You strike me as either a troll or an idiot, but in any case, having flown a few different planes now, and a few more in their simulators, the tanker (135) is probably the second hardest to land in the AF. I haven't flown a fighter, but I have yet to meet anyone who has flown both fighters and stratotankers and thought the fighter harder to land. Sure it may be harder to land. Fine. You can have that. What other avenues of difficulty make it more challenging to employ than any other airplane? On the average, the tanker as a whole is one of the easiest airplanes in the Air Force inventory to fly. That is my argument and I have yet to hear anyone disagree.

Just repeating what other guys I know who have been fighter, bomber, or RPA pilots who have also flown the tanker have told me. In all cases those individuals have said that those airframes are much more challenging than the tanker. If you don't like it then maybe you should talk to some individuals like that and ask yourself. Or better yet go strap one on and get some first hand knowledge. Might be something smart to do instead of getting emotional about skills required to do something or not. Your argument isn't grounded in anything but emotion. Having fun with assumptions yet jaded or are you ready to throw some more unfounded BS out?

Nope. I'm comfortable knowing that it takes more skill to fly what I do than the 135. Not belittling anyone just stating fact. That is all. If you choose to get emotional about the facts of your vocation then perhaps you should look internally instead of blaming me.

Weird, AIB's aren't privileged information. Sounds like someone needs to be educated by their safety shop. Deflect deflect deflect. Just admit fault and move on dude.

Well since you knew Trey, and you apparently aren't a tanker guy, guess you met at Creech. An assumption Which also regardless of if true or false still doesn't make your bringing them up right. So deflect all you want. You apparently are comfortable using their deaths at your convenience.

Yes I read the Saftey privileged AIB as well. I know that your oversimplification of the findings wasn't everything found.

Things that don't require bottom of pilot training class to graduate. And yes I knew Trey for 6+ years.

Military eval pilot. Civilian instructor pilot. Your turn.

Show me where it says you have to be a rated military pilot vs student pilot. The same thing holds true of civilian pilots. Is a civilian student pilot not a civilian pilot? Yes they are. They have the same third class medical certificates as certified or rated civilian pilots. Again rating is not tied to this requirement. Just that you need to be in some status of a military pilot with a corresponding medical. Until I see otherwise it doesn't seem that your argument of official documents (which are cited nowhere in the FARs that I can tell) are required to prove that you are a military pilot for the purposes of having the pilots version of a medical and be on some status as a pilot. Even more reason of the FSDOs don't agree to then take it to the people who write the regulations and ask instead of making up requirements.

Or your afsc showing student pilot.

At least you are trying to use logic and reason in an intelligent discussion instead of dragging the dead out on parade. And yes hopefully no more Shell 77's happen but who in the tanker fleet could have stopped or recovered? It was a flawed stupid selfish embarrassing argument to use them and we need to change the subject to honor the dead not trample on them as I am sure they nor their families don't deserve this inconsiderate and inappropriate usage of their deaths. I hope one of the webmasters deletes this whole exchange. That would be the most appropriate thing to do. And if I insulted you then I truly apologize. Maybe I should have attacked it as you did. Which is to say there is a reason that people who finish last in pilot training largely get non volunteered to tankers. Because comparably they aren't as difficult to fly as other platforms. RPA's included. And not having any hours but having the required training shouldn't be a huge factor. Happens al the time in other more difficult and demanding airframes.

TnkrToad. I see you thumbs up' his post of using three Air Force members deaths as justification for flying tankers is hard when they died from a massive hardware issue not through any fault of their own. I just formed my opinion on you. It makes me sad that their are members in the AF that think like yourselves. I hope you don't take the bonus and choose to go elsewhere with your "talents" You both make me sick. Just think of others before you go and do stupid stuff like that or even think about the logic you are trying to employ and realize that it's flawed and failed.

Whoa. That's frightening, if I understand what you're saying correctly. I assume folks should have no problem getting their 1,500 hrs in their first assignments, given the number of deployments they're doing. Why, then, are they not going to CFIC while still in their first assignments? Are there not enough CFIC slots at KLTS, or are flying units so overtasked that they can't afford to put folks through CFIC and allow them to build a little IP time before going to Altus? Umm, yes. Next time you see a tanker on the flight line, check out the clearance between the motors and the tarmac. Next, understand that the flight controls are 1950s technology, and the airplane is kind of big and unwieldy. Imagine taking a student good enough to graduate UPT, but not necessarily the greatest, and pair him or her with an instructor who spent the bulk of the prior three years deploying to the desert, and flying most every sortie one to a full stop. The instructor hasn't gotten a whole lot of variety or quantity of experience, and the student is flying a jet that's very different from the one they flew before. Not a recipe for success. Let a student land a bit off centerline, combine the crown of the runway with minimal clearance between the motors and the runway, and pod scrapes ensue. TT Copy. Not harder than any other airplane and has normal problems that trained pilots are trained to deal with.

Dude. That's low. I wasn't implying emotionally either. I happen to have been really good friends with one of the crew members and I know he would if he could say that flying a tanker isn't hard. Massive structural failure happens to any airframe. Azimuth I think that was a stupid dick move. I realize you had no idea that I was friends with one of them but pulling on emotional strings just to make someone else look bad is what happens in politics and it makes them look stupid also. I forgive you for being an ignorant person. You should retract what you said. Seriously low dude.

I don't get it? Why does an IP who has never taught before showing up at tanker FTU concern you? Is flying a tanker hard?

Nobody wants to be held liable for reading the publications they wrote. I would recommend calling the FSDO back and getting a number for someone in Oklahoma City who could make a more definitive ruling. I still think it's not worth spending your money on.

If the flight doc isn't qualified to, or no other docs in your clinic or flight medicine aren't qualified to give FAA medicals, it has been my experience that they know nothing or next to nothing about the topic. Why spend the money with them when if you are a DSG flying for the airlines you need a class 1 anyways or you get an equivalent class 3 by just having your medical? Class 2 does almost nothing for people doing what we are doing. You don't even need a class 2 to civilian flight instruct so why bother with spending extra money for it?

Sorry threeholer. Your reference backs my claim because 61.73 makes a distinction between rated military pilot and military pilot. Remember that medicals operate independently of if you are rated or not. You had to have one to be a student pilot in both the civilian and military world. And in fact since he is in the military and a pilot his medical should suffice unless another reference denying that is to be found. Thanks for your help. I'm sure that there are people who would disagree. However if he is only seeking his medical to count as an FAA medical then it seems perfectly legit. However since he is not rated he can not yet go after his commercial equivalency. Make sense?

And your reference is?

What base are you at?

Sounds like there might be a question buried in there somewhere Tonka......fire away.

The local FSDO is who you need to ask if you want to save money and get it in writing. Are you just wanting this to get your atp?

I think student pilots are military pilots. It's in your title. You are in the military and a pilot just not rated to fly anything yet and you have a valid medical. Civilian pilots don't need to be rated to have a medical. But I don't know if there is an FAA glossary somewhere that defines the military pilot. I would call the local FSDO.

61.23 b9 (9) When a military pilot of the U.S. Armed Forces can show evidence of an up-to-date medical examination authorizing pilot flight status issued by the U.S. Armed Forces and— (i) The flight does not require higher than a third-class medical certificate; and (ii) The flight conducted is a domestic flight operation within U.S. airspace.