> Military pilots get to choose their assignments? Is that how the military works?

We have a professional Air Force. It's not uncommon to see e.g. F-16 pilots "retire" into senior management roles. These are smart, ambitious people. If you want to keep it that way, you give them a say in the planes they fly.

Yes - it's supposed to be a volunteer military, not conscription. You ideally want people doing jobs that they want to be doing. (Can't always meet that ideal.)

The pilots get to submit a limited list of preferences, but there's a fixed list of slots, like "f22 => 2, f16 => 4, ... kc-135 => 3".

Then, your ranking in the class drives when it's your turn to pick. Along with some other criteria. For example, some aircraft have min/max pilot height criteria because of the ejection seat. So some pilots do end up flying aircraft they didn't really want to fly.

In the UK at least, RAF pilots who have gone through basic flight training have a broad choice between fast air, widebody and rotary wing (helicopters). Once you pick a particular type (and assuming you pass the relevant aptitude / selection tests), there is a complex career progression that includes type-specific training and then assignment to a squadron that operates a particular type of aircraft. Pilots who have trained on one type can't be randomly 'assigned' to a different aircraft without a lot of extra training.

Similarly, in the British Army, all soldiers go through basic training and then choose a particular military 'trade' (e.g. infantry, armour, artillery, etc). They receive trade-specific training before joining a relevant unit. Some regiments even have 'father and son' social events where an officer joined the same regiment that his father did.

The Royal Navy has similar career personal-choice progression routes for weapons officers, engineers, etc.