You’re missing his point. Non-citizens cannot obtain a security clearance. Citizenship is a prerequisite.
Eh, happens every time the airlines start hiring again.
Any data on how much each category of pilot costs to train? For fighter pilots, I understand it’s 2-3M$. This (News, Politics, Sports, Mail & Latest Headlines - AOL.com ) mentions an annual salary of 90K$ and a signing bonus of 225K$ for a 9-year contract. It’s 114K$ for civilian airlines. That about equals out. It may be worth it to increase the resigning bonus so that fighter pilots get more for all the disadvantages of the job. Paying 1M$ for resigning is cheaper than recruiting and training a new one.
What’s the most money someone can make as US military personnel, including bonuses, hazard pay etc (not including mercenaries like Black Water)?
Why does the military seem to insist on having a flat-ish pay structure? Looking at this (United States Military Montly Pay (2025) ) the multiple between an E-1 with less than 2 years and an 0-10 with more than 38 years is about 12.6. This overestimates the pay difference because much of military pay comes in the form of benefits (health insurance, housing allowances) which don’t scale with pay.
If one takes into account the value of the benefits, approximately how much does the average E-3 to E-5 get paid?
How do the entry requirements for drone pilots compare to those for other piloting jobs?
Are drone pilots considered fungible or do they have specialties?
Fighter jocks & acrobatic pilots have some of the same problems. High “G” loads day after day.
The fighter guys are usually under higher loads longer for each turn. They have the “G” suits & all but… still… Also “G” suit do not do much for negitive “G”.
Acrobatic pilots who are the ‘jocks & jockettes’ of that grfoup do daily intense workouts specifally for all that “G” stuff.
The average fighter jock does very little besides running and sit ups.
So, fighter jocks can’t do 20 years as fighter jocks on average.
Got a cousin who did 20 years of C-130 USAF time. He could do that without ripping his body apart. Still took a while to get a good civi job herding metal around the sky.
Their are exceptions to all this and anything else we want to trot out.
For selection it’s exactly the same except you can be up to 34 instead of 28.
I’m not sure what you’re asking with your second question.
I’m thinking he’s asking what civilian employment opportunities are crying for experienced USAF drone pilots.
CIA, I’m assuming Border Patrol, Homeland Security. I’m sure more will pop up as the technology gets cheaper.
The Base Pay scale of course sets aside the flight/combat/hardship pay supplements and the in-demand-specialty signing bonuses, so that part gets hidden for the likes of pilots, nukes, cryptonerds, SpecOps and the like.
But yes, here you start getting into matters of military mentality/philosophy. Historically it has always been pretty much understood that if you are motivated by financial gain and social standing, active duty military service is not something to make a life out of. (Hell, that if you’re motivated by financial gain and social standing, the Civil Service (GS scale) is not something to make a life out of either!) A flattish pay scale keeps the Colonels and Generals humble, and it lifts up the morale of the lower grades to know that the CO is not living like a Wall Street exec while they’re ass deep in the mud in some ditch (again). It also serves the up-or-out policy, that’s supposed to make room for more motivated junior officers to have a space to be promoted into by preventing people from just sitting there contentedly as captains or majors for 20+ years. By all means leave for better pay and shorter hours in civvy street, let some hot young lieutenant who wants to rock the world and do great things as a military officer take the billet.
ISTM with fighter pilots you have the problem that in this day and age due to the sophistication and expense of the training and hardware you can no longer count WW2-style on 90-day-wonder new fliers nor on cranking up the factories to cough up a couple thousand fighters in that time frame for them. Today you pretty much have to have all the fighter planes and pilots you can reasonably expect to need if the balloon goes up already accounted for, between active component, Reserve, and National Guard. And that’s where you run into the earlier mentioned issues of the Congress saying* “Oh, but WE want more F-35s. But we also want to cut budgets. You boys and girls just want to serve because of how much you love America, right, don’t you?” *
Sure but Australia, UK, etc all have their own form of security clearances and allies do share classified data with each other. Anyway there is obviously a solution since at this very moment Australian, Norwegian, Italian and soon Japanese and Israeli pilots are being trained on F-35’s at Luke AFB.
https://www.f35.com/news/detail/f-35-training-at-luke-afb-gathers-pace-with-34-jets
So, you have to take several Gs in the pukey machine to be a drone pilot?
Fungible & specialties: I mean that pilots are often put in categories like fighter, bomber, attack. Is that the case with drones?
Anything else you can tell us about drones and drone piloting without having to kill us?
That 90k is after 11 years for the military while the 114k is a median for ALL co-pilots, pilots, and flight engineers (I’m surprised there are any flight engineers left). The pay for a captain at a major airline is far in excess of 114k. According to this website, a first year B777 captain would get about 250k plus allowances plus any additional flying above the 70 hour guarantee. A first year first officer would get about 70k plus allowances etc but by year 2 they’ve easily outstripped the military pay and are getting about 140k.
As the Llama pointed out, the pay in the regionals can be bad but in the majors it is still good and the military couldn’t hope to match it.
Another point against the military is that, in Australia at least, you eventually get promoted into a desk. If all you want to do is fly, then you are forced to look elsewhere.
This is not a new situation. I remember it being mentioned in An Officer and a Gentleman back in 1982.
Even ignoring the security clearance issue, and the fact that these foreigners do not meet the prerequisites for a commission, it still isn’t an obvious solution. You propose that instead of training Americans free of charge and then losing those Americans to the private sector in 6 years or so, we should train foreigners for free and lose those foreigners to the private sector. That’s ridiculous. The problem is not finding people who can be trained. The problem is training them at the same rate, or faster rate, than we are losing them.
Taking in foreigners to train is not going to change that.
Very often that’s a matter of who you are comparing yourself against. Many of my Spanish colleagues whine and cry about the “low Spanish rates” compared with those of “Europe”, then they quote a rate which corresponds either to UK-minus-London or to London. Quickest way to shut them up: ask how do they feel about Budapest rates? Krakow rates? Those are “Europe” rates too, but they’re a lot lower than Spanish ones.
I don’t know if it’s the case or not, but it is perfectly possible that big airlines pay better than secondary ones (they are also more likely to send you on 14h flights to the other end of the world, which at least might involve some beaches) and secondary ones better than the military (which does like to send you on 6 month tours to the other end of the world, and usually to locations with few beaches in sight).
No actually the point would be to hire pilots from allies who have already been trained up, offer them deals after they finish their 8 year commitment in their home country air force. Lots of countries have a foreign legion, theres nothing stopping the US doing that if the appropriate laws were made to allow it.
Anyway I’m not really suggesting this as a solution, I’m just pointing out the security clearance thing is not a 100 percent barrier. The actual obvious solution is to cut the budget from somewhere else to train more pilots per year and offer bigger re-signing bonuses. But then politics won’t let them reduce orders for new planes, because that effects employment in lots of politicians districts. As far as I can see, the real issue is that congress is demanding the military fight a never ending war, but doesn’t want to pay for it.
RandMcnally You can’t get medically cleared because of one tooth? I find this almost impossible to believe. I was in basic and AIT with a guy that clearly had meth mouth and must have had many thousands of dollars of free dental work done while I was in AIT with him and he was far from the only person like that.
Wouldn’t those pilots have the same opportunities for high-paying civilian careers, though? I am sure that a UK or Australian or Japanese pilot can make a decent amount flying civilian planes, just like our pilots can. I don’t see what the USAF is going to offer them, that they couldn’t just offer our own pilots to stay in. Unless you think the Green Card itself is enough incentive.
Unless massive changes to current law and policy are enacted, then yes, it is a 100% barrier. It’s not just the security clearance, its the commission. Officers must be citizens to get a commission. Military personnel must be citizens to get a security clearance.
Pilots must be officers and have a security clearance. There is a lot that would have to change to make it happen. As of now, it’s a 100% barrier. Unless you think the public would approve of Congress allowing foreigners to become officers. That is not going to go over well. Whichever side proposes it, the other side will make it look like it would allow terrorists and Mexicans and illegal aliens to be officers in our military. It’s just not something that’s going to pass.
The obvious solution is to train more drone pilots, which would free up dozens and dozens of actual fighter pilots who have been involuntarily re-purposed to fly drones. Drone pilot training is cheaper, shorter, and can be given given to enlisted personnel. That saves millions, increases pilot morale and retention rates, and frees up tons of already trained pilots! No need to cut any budgets or make drastic changes.
Nope, there is such a thing as an “exchange officer” and some Canadian officers actually fought in Iraq while under exchange to the US armed forces.
Note the article explicitly mentions officers, so there is already some mechanism by which the security clearance for allied foreign officers serving temporarily in the US armed forces can be waived.
The number of fighter aircraft in service in the American armed services is not increasing. If anything, it’s probably smaller than it used to be; recent models of airplane were made in much smaller quantities than previous ones.
Correct. As I said before, the issue is not recruitment but retention. I don’t get why people have such a hard time understanding the difference.