Page 1 of 1

Navy Pilots

Posted: Thu Apr 4 2013, 01:19
by MaccaM
Hi all,

I'm looking into a career in the Navy as a pilot, and would be interested to hear for any ex or currently serving members about their experiences, and would be greatful for any advice.

By way of background, I spent 4 years in the Army reserves as an armoured crewman, and left to pursue a career in aviation (nearly 2 years ago now). I now hold by CPL(H), and anticipate having over 500 hours by the time I get into the nitty gritty of the selection process (of which I know fairly well after a previous attempt at a corps transfer into Army aviation, however was rejected due to my seated height being 1 cm too tall).

Once again I would be greatful for any coments about experiences, lifestyle, pros and cons, etc...

Thanks

MaccaM

P.S. I've already searched through the forum

Re: Navy Pilots

Posted: Thu Apr 4 2013, 03:47
by pavlov's dog
Hi Macca,

Don't want to sound too negative but you might find the Navy seating height requirements may be more restrictive than Army due to the ejection seat considerations for PC9 training. Maybe chase that info down via recruiting first? How tall are you? Someone may be able to offer a more qualified comment based on that.

Best of luck.

PD

Re: Navy Pilots

Posted: Thu Apr 4 2013, 05:47
by Queestce
PD, that would make sense but is not actually the case. Both Navy and RAAF have the same height requirements, they are as follows:

Height - minimum 163 and maximum 193cm.
Sitting Height - maximum 100cm.
Buttock to knee length - maximum 67cm.
Buttock to heel length - maximum 122cm.


Army sitting heights are slightly reduced - I was told it's due to the Kiowa but who knows?

Height - minimum 163 and maximum 193cm;
Sitting Height - maximum 95cm;
Buttock to knee length - maximum 67cm; and
Buttock to heel length - maximum 122cm.


I have heard of a few people taller than the 95cm sitting height getting through as Army pilots though, that limit seems to be somewhat arbitrary depending on who measures you...

Can't help in regards to the Navy Pilot role unfortunately, but wonder the exact same thing myself. Apologies for jumping in on the thread, but if anyone happens to know whether Navy Pilots work in a generic officer capacity like Army GSO's when not flying I'd love some insight. I had heard the role was much more specific to flying when compared to that of a GSO, but word from the horses mouth is always the most valuable...

Cheers

Re: Navy Pilots

Posted: Thu Apr 4 2013, 05:49
by MaccaM
Hi PD,

I believe the seating height requirement for the Army is based around fitting into the Kiowa with a helmet on. I was told at the time that no such restriction was in place for the Navy . About 1 month after I withdrew my application, I was informed that the height restriction had been changed and I would now just squeek in. To answer your question though, I am 183 cm tall.

MaccaM

Re: Navy Pilots

Posted: Thu Apr 4 2013, 12:10
by FatBoy1971
Macca,

PM sent.

FatBoy

Re: Navy Pilots

Posted: Fri Apr 5 2013, 01:16
by pavlov's dog
MaccaM wrote:Hi PD,

I believe the seating height requirement for the Army is based around fitting into the Kiowa with a helmet on. I was told at the time that no such restriction was in place for the Navy . About 1 month after I withdrew my application, I was informed that the height restriction had been changed and I would now just squeek in. To answer your question though, I am 183 cm tall.

MaccaM




Hi Macca,

No restriction would've existed for Navy as they don't train on Kiowa (with the exception of some Navy pilots doing their instructor course later in their careers). Queestce has provided some data for PC9 restrictions so hopefully you fit within those if you are keen on Navy. When I was instructing at Oakey the sitting height thing raised its head with some tall trainees, but I'm not sure how formally implemented it was. I can recall some quite tall trainees going through (taller than you). I think we switched from Alpha to Gentex helmets about the same time, which I think were lower(?) This would've been back in 2007/2008(?) Were you rejected in writing due to height? I ask that as some times people get verbal advice and it's incorrect. If you are really keen on Army I would try again and see if the height thing is a formal restriction or a passing phase that is no longer a requirement.

PD

Re: Navy Pilots

Posted: Fri Apr 5 2013, 04:55
by MaccaM
Thanks for all the information Queestce. It's good to have all thant in hand before I start the process this time.

PD

My application was never actually rejected. Its a bit of a long story, but when I withdrew my application I had passed all my aptitude tests and interviews and was waiting for a possition at flight screening. I had my medical done at RAAF Williamstown and approved class 1, but later found out that I didn't have the right one and at this stage was informed about the seating height restriction. The plan was to get a new medical done (the right one this time) and get remesured (after all, whats 1 cm?). While this was going on, I hit a few bureaucratic walls with my application (which had been going on for over 18 months by this stage) which, to put it politely, didn't sit to well with me, and I withdrew the application.

It seems a bit funny after all that I went through with my transfer (and believe me what I just mentioned was only they very last bit), I'm keen to give it another go. But I now know, without a shadow of a doubt that I want to fly, my circumstances at home and work are now a very different story, and at the end of the day I'm keen to get back into the ADF.

And a quick thanks for the replies and PM's that have been sent so far, It's been a big help.

MaccaM

Re: Navy Pilots

Posted: Fri Apr 5 2013, 09:07
by haroldthehelicopter
Howdy All,

The 95cm seated height is a firm restriction for Army whilst Kiowa is in play or the foreseeable future of disappointing Army decisions and ill derived bureaucratic restrictions. Only those who are already in the system under 'cadetships' at ADFA/RMC are given waivers. Those who come close to the height in testing generally get checked out by AVMED.

Did know an Army pilot who trained with Navy on Squirrel due height, then came across. Was a one off I think.

Here's hoping HATS produces some common sense.

HtH

Re: Navy Pilots

Posted: Sat Apr 6 2013, 00:40
by rocketman
The Kiowas are getting a seat mod, first one has been done and is being evaluated. along with removing the stretcher capability, ie a permanent B post on L/h side rather than the removable post...ultimately the height of the seat is lower and meets all energy absorbing requirements....stay tuned

Re: Navy Pilots

Posted: Sat Apr 6 2013, 03:56
by haroldthehelicopter
8 years ago the army was also getting an attack helicopter that's functional/deployable and black hawk replacement that didn't go U/S at the first sight if gravel, grass, boots, sky.....I chose to tune out. :wink:

Stick with your navy plan Macca.

Re: Navy Pilots

Posted: Sat Apr 6 2013, 04:17
by pavlov's dog
haroldthehelicopter wrote:8 years ago the army was also getting an attack helicopter that's functional/deployable and black hawk replacement that didn't go U/S at the first sight if gravel, grass, boots, sky.....I chose to tune out. :wink:

Stick with your navy plan Macca.



8 years ago? The project was originally called "Air 87"... :D

Maybe it meant 2087? Might still get there... In any event it's meeting its real purpose of creating jobs and keeping people in jobs as we try to make that particular square wheel work.

Re: Navy Pilots

Posted: Sat Apr 6 2013, 10:44
by Big Green Arrow
Macca, check your PMs.

As for whether Navy pilots are all "GSOs", think more along Air Force lines as Navy Sqn and pers structures are modelled more closely to those. Army structure seems to be an aberration within the aviation community in that regard.

Re: Navy Pilots

Posted: Mon Apr 29 2013, 01:36
by Amac179
MaccaM, check your PMs