The Perfect Pilot Job Candidate? By Randy Rowles

A few months ago, a company advertised for a wildlife helicopter pilot to fly in support of wildlife research operations. In addition to having extensive helicopter pilot experience within the utility segment, they were equally searching for an applicant with a love for the outdoors including fishing, hunting, etc. For the right applicant, this would be a fantastic opportunity.

They found what they believed to be the perfect applicant. This individual had all the right helicopter skill sets: game capture, long-line…you name it; this applicant had done it. The outdoor experience this applicant had was not too short of amazing as well. Not only was the applicant an avid big game hunter, these experiences had taken them all around the globe in search of unique trophy game.

Without hesitation, the company’s program director reached out to their human resources department to get this applicant in for an interview. A week later, the applicant arrived at the flight operations building with résumé and logbook in hand. The morning schedule would provide for a tour of the company’s facility by the chief pilot, and eventually lead out to the hangar for a look at their fleet of helicopters. One by one, the applicant was able to describe in detail each aircraft in the hangar to a level that would make even a seasoned check pilot comfortable with this individual’s knowledge and experience.

Randy Rowles has been an FAA pilot examiner for 20 years for all helicopter certificates and ratings. He holds an FAA Gold Seal Flight Instructor Certificate, NAFI Master Flight Instructor designation, and was the 2013 recipient of the HAI Flight Instructor of the Year Award. Rowles is currently the Lead Instructor with, and Director of Training at Epic Helicopters located in Ft. Worth, Texas. He can be reached at

After the tour, the applicant and chief pilot joined additional company staff members for the formal interview process. The conversation quickly turned toward the applicant’s experience outdoors. The group was eager to hear of the global escapades with hunting big game. The applicant proceeded to describe each animal that was hunted in such detail, it was apparent that years had been spent in the outdoors. This applicant would be quite comfortable with the conditions required of the position. Additionally, the applicant’s knowledge and experience of weaponry utilized to hunt game was as detailed as the knowledge of the aircraft described while in the hangar.

As the interview was ending, the chief pilot was providing the applicant a short briefing of the local flying area prior to their interview flight. The applicant quickly spoke up and said “I have flown around this area quite a few hours this week. I’m pretty comfortable.” This surprised the chief pilot as the applicant had just arrived earlier that day and had been working elsewhere that week. The applicant then stated, “I knocked down a few large bucks around here this week too.” This too was of great concern as hunting season hadn’t started and this statement was heard by all in the group.

Further inquiry on this issue brought forth a reality not known by those in attendance other than the applicant. Much of the hunting experience described by the applicant had been gained in the world of simulation. This applicant was an avid gamer that viewed virtual hunting and other experiences, including flight simulation, as worthy of inclusion on a résumé.

The applicant’s belief that experience in a simulated world would be credible in the workplace is not a new idea. We do it all the time in aviation. In today’s world of digital realities, there is a belief that virtual versus dynamic experience provides little difference to the end goal. When the end goal is to live the life of an actual pilot of an aircraft, too much dependence upon virtual experience in a dynamic environment may lead to a very realistic death!

If you have any comments or questions, please let me know at

86 July/Aug 2018

Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90