Fighter/Bomber vs Tanker/Cargo Track

[AFAMOM08]

A few questions for Bullet and all of the others who have been there and done that--
My son is at a point in UPT where he is being asked to declare his preference --He has always wanted to be a fighter pilot. Now that the decision point is here what are the pros and cons of each track? What should he take into consideration? If you had it to do over would you still pick the same track?

[Christcorp]

Alright; if you take the "Little Boy Dream" out of the equation; (Every little boy dreams of being a fighter pilot); here are some of the pros/cons:

FIGHTERS PROS:
1. Fun
2. Prestige
3. Fun
4. Stay at local base a lot more (Great if you have wife/husband/kids)
5. Fun
6. More mission oriented
7. Fun
8. Great for the loner or 2 person.
9. shorter flights usually

CONS:
1. Don't get to travel that much
2. Can actually get boring
3. Lot more desk paper duties

HEAVIES PROS:
1. Lot of traveling (Fighter bud of mine did just normal PCS, war, exercises. C-5 friend of mine has been TDY to MORE THAN 80 countries; including russia, china, chile, India, etc..
2. Change out style of planes easily. Cargo friend has flown C-5 as well as C17 all the way down to a C-21 learjet taking VIP/generals around the world.
3. Very commercial oriented so commercial jobs are much simpler to pick up
4. You don't get shot at as much.
5. Have more contact with others (Crew mates)

CONS:
1. Traveling. Pro/Con up to you
2. Don't see the family as much
3. Pretty simple flying compared to fighter
4. Longer flights. cross country; globally.

Now this is basically fighters and cargo. Refueler/tanker, transport, mission control, etc... type of aircraft have their own set of pros/cons. The thing is; NONE of it is really a PRO OR A CON. Some people like staying at one base for a few years; being home most nights, flying every couple days; flying fast; and only going away for war or exercises. Some prefer the TDY, multi-day missions, seeing the world, etc... Same with all the other pros/cons; each person sees it differently.

Bullet would be a better brain to pick for the fighters. (But I have to admit, the F-15 is my FAVORITE PLANE.) later... mike.....

[oldgrad]

This is basically an answer which must come from within and is based primarily on physiological attributes. Different personalities and motor skills, among many other variables, lend themselves to different communities. Hopefully, once a student has reached the decision stage, he is both aware of his assets and liabilities and has the maturity to reach the correct decision. Being home at night should have very little, if anything, to do with it.

Originally Posted by Christcorp

HEAVIES PROS:
.............

.............

.............

4. You don't get shot at as much.

To paraphrase Winston Churchill from the Boer War:

The greatest exhilaration a man can experience is to be shot at and missed.

[Pima]

This really is an easy question.

What does he want to fly? I have met few who don't know what they want to fly and many who accept what ac frame they are given.

Back in Bullets day when he graduated there were no Strikes for them, but the top of the class got 111s. He always wanted the Strike and when it became operational he jumped out of a perfectly good airplane to get one.

I am sure if he got a heavy he would have been proud to fly it also, but as you stated it has always been a dream of your DS to fly fighters. If that is the dream, no pro/con list should divert you from obtaining it.

Both fighters and heavies have pros/cons, and to take it one step further in a few months it will be assignment night that is when the question because more intense...F-15, F-16, A-10, etc. That is when you need to ask what do I want to do in the fighter...Air to Air or Air to Ground. Some people love blowing up things, some love the dog fight and some love both.

You can spin yourself in circles wondering what if, but truly it is a gut check. If you turn to him and say 10 seconds which one, count it out loud, by 9 he will say what is in his gut. Tell him to follow that and not to look back. It really is that simple. Over thinking it can actually be detrimental since you might talk yourself into it.

[tpg]

The greatest exhilaration a man can experience is to be shot at and missed.

I don't know if I would call it exhilaration, but the adrenalin sure was pumping....

The pilots that I always had the most respect for (Coming from a ground pounders point of view) were the transport Helo Pilots. Low and slow. They were nothing but great big targets allot of the time. But those pilots would hold those things right in there and take it…..very dedicated group.

[oldgrad]

Originally Posted by Pima

............ in a few months it will be assignment night that is when the question because more intense...F-15, F-16, A-10, etc. That is when you need to ask what do I want to do in the fighter...Air to Air or Air to Ground. Some people love blowing up things, some love the dog fight and some love both.

Again, just another phase in examining ones physiological attributes, being honest with oneself, and, insteading of going with pure wishes, show maturity and do what they are best at.

[Pima]

Oldgrad, I took the question as they are ranked high enough to have a choice between fighter and heavies. You are taking a different approach.
I took the question that this pilot is high enough in the track to choose, thus they have already surpassed any physiological issues at this point that is required. Pulling 9 Gs in the centrifuge comes later.

Maturity does have a factor in the issue, I just see it differently than you. I see it as don't live life with what ifs, but understand and accept that your path you designed might not be your reality. However, do everything in your control to push the envelope and never ask what if.

TPG I think that is why many AF pilots want the A-10, it sounds very similiar

[air_power]

What do people think about having prop ground attack fighters again?

[oldgrad]

Originally Posted by Pima

Oldgrad, I took the question as they are ranked high enough to have a choice between fighter and heavies. You are taking a different approach.

Not really. Simply because one meets the minimum standards for a particular pipeline does not necessarily mean that particular pipeline is the best personality type match for that individual.

Previous civilian flight time will normally cause one to do better than they would otherwise in flight training. Does previous flight time cause one to have a Type A personality which would bode one well as a fighter pilot? Not at all.

Does the fact that a student who loved, and did well on, cross country training flights but hated aerobatics, yet passed with a high enough grade to select any pipeline he wished, make a better fighter than transport pilot? Not at all.

Is the Type A who enjoys yanking and banking and pushing things to the limit, going to be happy flying transports? Probably not.

Actually, just for example, back in the days before the one size fits all strike fighter, I would say that introverts made better bombers while extroverts make better fighters.

All I am saying is that, no matter the grade, matching platform with personality type will result in the more likelihood of a successful career. There have been books written on this very subject.

[oldgrad]

Originally Posted by air_power

What do people think about having prop ground attack fighters again?

I cannot imagine what the overall advantage of a propeller-driven plane would be nowadays. Maybe loiter time and payload to weight ratio but nothing that would justify an entire new platform.