flight positions

Specialties Flight

Published

Specializes in emergency.

I'm curious. Where do you search for flight nurse positions? There are 3 services in my area but none are hiring for RN's at this time. Is there a web site with positions advertised? I have almost all the certifications i've been told I would need. Now I need a job. Thanks

Try http://www.flightweb.com, it has pretty good classifieds and a lively forum. Sometimes it helps to scan the websites of individual companies.

Good Luck,

Pete Fitzpatrick

RN, CFRN, EMT-P

Writing from the Ninth Circle

Specializes in HEMS 6 years.

http://www.astna.org

http://www.airmethods.com

Specializes in ER, CM.
I'm curious. Where do you search for flight nurse positions? There are 3 services in my area but none are hiring for RN's at this time. Is there a web site with positions advertised? I have almost all the certifications i've been told I would need. Now I need a job. Thanks

What are the requirements or certifications that you need to become a flight nurse?

Specializes in CCRN, CNRN, Flight Nurse.

Most services require 3-5 years of ER or ICU experience. Also required are ACLS, PALS, NRP, and TNCC/PHTLS. EMT-P is highly, highly preferred - occasionally required.

Specializes in none.

I have heard many people talking about the dangers of flight nursing, terrain, crashes, dangerous situations? Does any one have a few more stories or some info?

Most services require 3-5 years of ER or ICU experience. Also required are ACLS, PALS, NRP, and TNCC/PHTLS. EMT-P is highly, highly preferred - occasionally required.

Because of the nature of the work, you must be in top physical condition as well.

I have heard many people talking about the dangers of flight nursing, terrain, crashes, dangerous situations? Does any one have a few more stories or some info?

I can't say from a nursing standpoint, but I can give you good information from a PILOT standpoint :) I flew helicopters in the army and have been a fixed wing (airplane) pilot since high school.

Flying is dangerous business. Most of the time nothing out of the usual happens, but a dangerous situation WILL come about at some point if you fly long enough. If you are a flight nurse in helicopters.. you can raise the danger factor up many more notches. Tail rotor strikes, tail rotor gearbox failure(s), are probably the number 1 reasons for downed helicopters, and put that on top of landing in unusual areas to pick up a patient, and you've just raised the risk factor 10 fold.

To be honest.. I think the ideal flight nurse position is in the military.. specifically the Air Force (definately not army... don't say I didn't warn you!). You'd get the experience, and you'd get paid the same base pay as your counterparts + danger pay, 30 days per year vacation that rolls over to the next year (maxes out at 70 days on the books), etc., etc., etc.

The only benefit I see of being a flight nurse, is so I wouldn't have to worry about the typical "yuk" part of nursing that most experience on the hospital floor.

Good luck!

Specializes in Rotor EMS, Ped's ICU, CT-ICU,.

I recently resigned from flying after 7 years, and I'd have to say the most dangerous part of your job is driving to work.

Actually flying as an RN is probably less dangerous than being a truck driver.

The company I worked for has completed over 100,000 missions...which means a lot more flights than that when you include SAR and PR stuff, and has never experienced a tail-rotor strike or gear box failure. In fact, they have never experienced a mechanical failure which even resulted in an injury.

Like I said...the drive in and the drive home are the most dangerous parts.

As far as the Military...military flight nurse jobs are temporary. It's a slot that you can apply for and perform for a couple years, and then you are moved on to the next big military adventure. There are no career Air Force flight nurses, except the reserves.

I recently resigned from flying after 7 years, and I'd have to say the most dangerous part of your job is driving to work.

Actually flying as an RN is probably less dangerous than being a truck driver.

The company I worked for has completed over 100,000 missions...which means a lot more flights than that when you include SAR and PR stuff, and has never experienced a tail-rotor strike or gear box failure. In fact, they have never experienced a mechanical failure which even resulted in an injury.

Like I said...the drive in and the drive home are the most dangerous parts.

As far as the Military...military flight nurse jobs are temporary. It's a slot that you can apply for and perform for a couple years, and then you are moved on to the next big military adventure. There are no career Air Force flight nurses, except the reserves.

Thats a classic statistics example :) I wasn't comparing the dangers of flying to automobiles. There are more automobiles on the road at any given time in the U.S. as opposed to aircraft in the air. Subtract fixed wing aircraft from that and you're left with relatively very few helicopters buzzing around. I understand and agree with your statement, however my point was simply about the dangers as they relate to aviation.

1. fly long enough (any pilot will tell you) something will happen.. and usually before a pilot reaches 5,000 hours flight time. Remember, I said from a pilot's point of view. And as a pilot of both fixed and rotary wing, and having been through emergencies in both, I assure you that any seasoned pilot will tell you the same.. the dangers associated with flying 'choppers is a lot higher than flying fixed. The flight profile environment is also much more dangerous. Engrave that in granite ;) I think the FAA and NTSB Accident/incident reports will back me up on that one.

2. Most pilots don't rack up even 15,000 hrs. flight time in 10 years, but you're talking about 100,000 "missions" ?? Take 100,000 missions that probably aren't typically over an hour (I'm guessing), and divide them by several aircraft and crews, then throw in the mean-time-before-component-failure, and 100,000 "missions" spread over the years the company has operated and... well, I'm sure you see where I'm headed statistically. apples to apples? ;)

3. You're correct about the military, and such rotations apply to virtually every field in the military, as its common to work various parts of the office or your respective field. Attornies, nurses, engineers, pilots (depending on aircraft and unit, different units have different emphasis. ie. night vision goggle flights, medac, tactical, etc.. even though you might be a blackhawk pilot).

For many, flight nurse is coveted in the Army.. for others, they run like hell from it and pray they don't get it.

4. Oh! I bet you're talkinga bout the old "nightengale" (sp?) crews on the C-9A in the AF Reserve? I was refering to the AF flight nurses (active duty) that were stationed with us in Korea back in '92. There were also AF nurses (non reserve) attached to our special forces unit in the area.

One thing I've learned from being an AF brat and Army flier... nothing is ever engraved in granite in the military..

Respectfully..

Specializes in Rotor EMS, Ped's ICU, CT-ICU,.

I wasn't making a aviation-to-auto comparison either. You said it was dangerous. I said the most dangerous part of the job was driving to work, so I'm actually only considering the driving of flight crews in relation to their job, not everyone else. Doesn't matter how many auto's are on the road; there are still only as many flight crew driving to their jobs as will be flying that day. Additionally, my reference is in relation to numbers of workers, meaning that there are many other occupations that experience a much higher fatality rate per hundred thousand workers.

And, I'm correct. The most dangerous part is the drive.

How do the FAA/NTSB reports support your claim when there are exponentially far more fixed-wing accidents on file than rotor? Additionally, how do they support you when the number of EMS rotor accidents resulting in injury is even smaller yet? Quite frankly, I haven't seen a good position to support the claim that anyone who flies long enough will encounter an accident.

The majority of missions at the program incurred at least an hour of flight time per mission. Maybe the patient wasn't on board for an hour, but you have to fly to the patient, deliver them to the hospital, and return to base...sometimes stopping for fuel at another location. Flying is flying; the mere presence of a patient does not change whether or not time is counted.

I just think it's disingenius to say that being a flight nurse is dangerous and say that the danger factor is raised by the mere fact someone is a flight nurse. It's speculation.

As far as military flight nurses, the Army doesn't have a flight nurse program anymore, and the Air Force Reserve program uses C-17's (although I'm sure a few C-9's are being used to tote patients).

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I just think it's silly to present helicopter EMS jobs as "dangerous." It is only as inherently dangerous as the participants are inherently stupid...that is not meant as an insult, but an aware crew will not be in any more danger than the commuter helo pilot who flies the same route every day from Teeterboro to Manhattan.

The meat of my initial post:

"Flying is dangerous business. Most of the time nothing out of the usual happens, but a dangerous situation WILL come about at some point if you fly long enough."

Generally speaking, if you ask 100 pilots (not nurses), that have more than 5,000hrs flight time, who fly both airplanes and helicopters, I'm pretty sure that most *pilots* would quickly agree.

I also said:

"If you are a flight nurse in helicopters.. you can raise the danger factor up many more notches. Tail rotor strikes, tail rotor gearbox failure(s), are probably the number 1 reasons for downed helicopters, and put that on top of landing in unusual areas to pick up a patient, and you've just raised the risk factor 10 fold."

Fact: Whether you're a flight nurse, patient, pilot, or fly on the ceiling of a helicopter, such IS more dangerous than being the same in a fixed wing aircraft. Its not being a "flight nurse" that defines the danger.. its the fact that you're in a helicopter as opposed to a fixed wing aircraft.

I wrote:

"The flight profile environment is also much more dangerous. Engrave that in granite I think the FAA and NTSB Accident/incident reports will back me up on that one."

I think if you spent time chatting with the FAA, NTSB, and perused accident reports, I think you'll find that helicopter accidents/incidents are far more "aggravated" (mechanically/aerodynamically dramatic in nature) when compared to fixed wing counterparts. Furthermore, if you want additional data, contact any of the insurance companies (getting rate quotes for pilots/aircraft are a bit different than getting quotes for a car, best to write the insurance company(ies) for statistical data on what they consider dangerous and a heightened liability, etc., etc.. I think your eyebrow will raise..

Fact: The general flight profile(s), complex aerodynamics and harmonics, and transitioning aerodynamics (ie. transitioning from slow flight to hover/Effective Translational Lift (ETL), makes flying (and or riding in) helicopters more complex and dangerous simply by those virtues alone when compared to fixed wing aircraft. I would be very surprised to hear an actual pilot who flys both, to state or believe otherwise. Helicopters generally are so much more complex (and inefficient I'll add). * These heightened dangers are present whether the helicopter is shuttling execs, or patients.

From a pilot's viewpoint, there is SO much more going on, mechnically and aerodynamically with a helicopter compared to an airplane.

As I said in my initial post, I say this from a pilot's view, and from my experiences in both fixed and helicopters (civilian & military). I assume (based on your post) that you're speaking from a nurse/passenger perspective which is cool, but I think from that perspective, you may not be aware of the many technical differences (and dangers) that differ between fixed and rotary wing aircraft.

If you ARE a pilot... then your post just became 100x more confusing :)

I yield to you the last word..

Respectfully

Teila

Post: Most common topics when dealing with whirlybirds if you're interested in the aerodynamics.

Dynamic Helicopter Aerodynamics !

+ Add a Comment