Hacker News Reader

Comment by bluedino | Hacker News Reader

Is it possible for a 22-year old kid to be a pilot without going to the military in the US? I would imagine Delta doesn't train people off the streets.

In that case, wouldn't it be worth just sticking around in the armed forces, making more than $21k/yr and getting all the benefits that go along with it?

View on HN

Most commercial pilots are hired from flight schools. Officers have a 5 year commission, minimum. More than likely flight officers are in for 10-15 years because no way is the AF, Army, Marines, or Navy investing millions in training and not getting their moneys worth. And you can't simply quit the military for a better job. Commissions are in 3-5 year blocks (your re-up occurs during a recession? you're probably staying) and they can stop-loss you, or reactivate you, at anytime.

Simply put, there are not enough flight officers discharging to meet civilian demand. They aren't getting $21K offers either. FAA changed the rules so that 1500hrs are required to be copilot. So new pilots are really glorified interns.

Edit: Also, military flight training is highly competitive. You can get a commission and never log a single flight. Your career is at the behest of the military's needs. If they have a shortage of supply depot officers guess where you're headed.

You can certainly decide to go to flight school yourself. As mentioned in the article though, it's not cheap. The armed forces may or may not be worth it--having to kill people is a deal breaker for a lot of people.

Wow, between you & Trufa, one would think that joining the military necessarily means killing people. Yes, it happens. But let's not pretend that's the only thing that happens. Maybe air-dropping food to refugees & people in distress[1]. Airlifting people out of bad situations[2]. There are plenty of examples.

Most of the people I've known and worked with in the military never had to kill anyone.

[1] http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/4678...

[2] http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/4667...

You may never kill anyone, but you have to sign up swearing that you will kill someone if asked to. It's the entire point of the armed forces. That is a deal breaker for many people (myself included). Similarly, I would never work for a military contractor or on a weapons project. My work product isn't going to kill or injure anyone.

Your friends may never have killed anyone directly, but they have certainly assisted in it. For every supply trip to Haiti, there are thousands of supply trips moving weapons and soldiers around the world.

Your first point is true, and that's a fair criticism. If that is a 100% deal-breaker, then it's probably best not to join the military.

But if you don't want to contribute to anything that could be used to kill people, you are severely limited. Anything from open-source code (Linux comes to mind) to chip design can be used to kill people. Remote control airplane hobbyist? If you have a breakthrough on your hobby, it can presumably be used in drone technology.

"For every supply trip to Haiti, there are thousands of supply trips moving weapons and soldiers around the world." What's wrong with that? We have soldiers on the ground in lots of places. In a lot of ways, that's probably a good thing. The 2011 involvement in Libya, for instance, is generally viewed as a responsible intervention of US military.

I don't think we're arguing "good" vs "bad", but if you're have no interest in supporting military operations, then you have no interest in supporting military operations. I don't want my work being used by active duty military and their contractors, and that includes supplying them with food, weapons, water, more people, etc. Me saying "OK, I'm against this war but as long as you hold the gun I'm ethically fine with giving you all the housing, healthcare, food, logistics, weapons, and entertainment you need" is somewhat hypocritical.

> Your friends may never have killed anyone directly, but they have certainly assisted in it.

I personally don't see joining the military as fundamentally more supportive of its actions (conceptually) than being a normal (US?) citizen who isn't politically involved in reduced military action. Sitting back and just working in our economy also indirectly supports the military, and doesn't make you any more moral (or less culpable in our military's actions) than someone who joins the marines. Likewise, what if you do join the military but vote against (and otherwise support) any and all people involved in reducing foreign military action?

I appreciate how this sounds, but think its a point worth discussing given the moral implications (blame) of your statements.

Your second example actually involves killing people, even if it was in an attempt to help US ground forces.

lets not pretend the military is not about killing people now, dont even try to sugar coat it with air dropping food for children in distress because lets get real here if that was the case they'd be developing drones to shoot dinners on tables not missiles on villages.

The military is more about the ability to kill people than it is actually killing people, I'd argue.

sure in a fantasy world where the weapsons arent used.

The point though, is that if you are vehemently opposed to taking the life of another human being, there is absolutely zero way that any branch of the military could ensure that would never happen as a part of service.

Yes, a lot, maybe even most people that enroll in the military eventually leave without ever having seen combat, action, or any situation in which they were asked to kill another person, but there is no way to enroll in the military with the assurance that you'll never be asked to perform that duty.

There used to be the Coast Guard, but even that has been re-purposed into the failed narco war.

Agreed. There's a somewhat tangible concern these days with the militarization of the Coast Guard, and their restructuring to exist under DHS, that they're specifically being positioned as the 'go-to' agency should Posse Comitatus need to be enforced.

Coast Guard, at this point, is not only not guaranteeable to avoid action, but should they see action, it's not unforeseeable that it would be against American citizens.

If you do go into the military to learn to fly, you'll have to take a plane that is compatible to what Delta has. If you're a fighter pilot, you're not as needed by Delta. You need to be cargo. They are two totally different beasts even being fixed wing.

But in general, military service needs to be more than just pragmatic. You are going to be called into areas to either kill or help people being killed. Either way that's a lot more psychologically speaking than going to pilot school.

That's a narrow view of the military. Most flying is cargo, support, simple taxi service. Most is done in peacetime or in peaceful venues.

"having to kill people is a deal breaker for a lot of people..."

And having people trying to kill you is probably a deal breaker for even more people.

Please don't join the military because you want to learn to fly. Only join the military if you fully agree with the political and human action that joining the US military government is.

I don't want to say that you shouldn't, we could discuss all night about it, just don't do it for the wrong reasons.

Flying will be only a part of what you do in the military, consider if you are REALLY OK with all the other aspects of military life before joining.

It's possible, but it's not a fun lifestyle. You live like a stereotypical broke college kid. You have to pay for your initial training, and then you spend several years instructing to build hours. Instructing pays around $15 an hour or so, but only while the prop is spinning and you're not guaranteed any hours.

Once you get 1500 hours you can make the jump to that $21k/yr regional airline job. Getting from your first lesson to this point could be done in 2 years, but that would be pretty quick. Realistically it's going to take 3 or 4.

Then you need 1000 hours as pilot in command of a jet to get hired by one of the big airlines. It will probably take 4 to 6 years at a regional airline to get those hours.

So all told you've got a large initial investment (not sure on the exact amount, a rough guess would be $75k for all the certs) and 10 years of horrible pay to get a $65k/year job. Eventually you make good money, but it takes a while to get there and if your health or eyesight takes a hit along the way it was all for nothing.

About 10 years ago, I was looking to switch careers and wanted to jump to my 2nd love - flying. So, I went and interviewed flight schools. I was talking to the owner of one school and the topic of military pilots came up.

It was mentioned that in the current model the only military pilot that will be hired by commercial carriers are the cargo pilots - the guy who can fly heavy. Helicopter pilots make an easy transition but that is not a "commercial" job like we normally think but it is well paying and almost impossible to get into. Fighter pilots are a different breed and do not transition well into commercial piloting.

But, to answer your real question - YES! Absolutely you can. It is hard work. You can go different routes. Ignoring the military option, you can go directly to your commercial license or go to a university that has a flight school. The benefit of the university option is that you have a real degree that goes along with your commercial certification. Both options cost a ton of money. Planes are expensive. Fuel is expensive. There are loans.

Going direct for your cert can also take different routes. You don't have to go to a big-name school. There are a lot of schools that offer a fast track. You'll get your private in 6 weeks the commercial some months after that and the entire time you're building the hours you need. Some will help find you a job after. If you have the option of living at home, you can get a commercial license yourself. Find a local flight school and just go at your own pace. Get your private license first and see how you like it.

For me, I had to stop midway through my private license. I loved it but becoming a commercial pilot is a choice for the young. The union/seniority/salary structure of the airlines doesn't lend itself to older guys switching over. I had a family to take care of the the benefits and money wouldn't really kick in until 5-8 years down the road. Plus, my wife was freaking out big time about me plummeting to my death.

I have nothing against service in the armed forces, but I doubt it would be more lucrative. You may sign up to be a pilot and wind up doing something completely different (if you don't make it through the training). Also, if consider time on base as time on the job, it may equate to less than minimum wage overall. At least, that's the way it is with mandatory service in Israel. Not sure how it works in the US though.

I used to skydive years ago, at a small grass field airport, jumping out of Cessna 182s and such.

Many of the jump pilots worked there mainly to accumulate hours for other qualifications.

Is getting shot at a benefit?

It pays extra.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com