• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Re-select E2/C2 out of primary again for FY13 studs?

nittany03

Recovering NFO. Herder of Programmers.
pilot
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
VFA RAGs can still attrite people if the TRACOM drops the ball.
IMO, the ideal is that the RAG should not have to do this. The further down the line you go, the harder it is for the command (FNAEB versus TRB), the more of a mindfuck it is for the individual, and the more harmful it is to someone's career (more NOBs in their record). Does it need to happen? Sometimes. But no one should be comfortable with a situation where someone gets that far. I know you guys introduce more complex stuff in VFA land than we did in Prowler VAQ, so perhaps I'm showing a bias here. The standard is the standard and needs to be upheld, but all things being equal, it's better to remediate/attrite earlier. I wouldn't wish a FNAEB on my worst enemy.
 

bunk22

Super *********
pilot
Super Moderator
Old thread but IMO, being a former COD pilot and student who selected E2/C2 out of primary, I believe it's the right thing to do. Of course at the time when I selected, I felt differently as I definitely wanted jets BUT after being a T-45 IP, it seems the community tended to get only the lower NSS types. I don't mean to offend anyone here but that's what I saw. When you select out of primary, you are going to get a better mix of quality, a better quality spread if you will.
 

Tycho_Brohe

Well-Known Member
pilot
Contributor
...being a former COD pilot...BUT after being a T-45 IP...
If you don't mind my asking, how did it come to pass that you selected COD and then started teaching jets at some point?

My on-wing was saying that it's pretty competitive for C-2, since they have a pretty good lifestyle, but it's a roll of the dice if you go E-2/C-2 because only like one in ten of those will get C-2 at the end. Apparently there's only two VRC squadrons, whereas obviously every carrier air wing needs to have some Hawkeyes. And as appealing as C-2 life is, it's just about the opposite for E-2, from what I hear.
 

bunk22

Super *********
pilot
Super Moderator
If you don't mind my asking, how did it come to pass that you selected COD and then started teaching jets at some point?

E2/C2 pilots can go back and be jet IP's as they go through intermediate jets. You will start out as an intermediate jet IP but can progress to teaching advanced jet.

My on-wing was saying that it's pretty competitive for C-2, since they have a pretty good lifestyle, but it's a roll of the dice if you go E-2/C-2 because only like one in ten of those will get C-2 at the end. Apparently there's only two VRC squadrons, whereas obviously every carrier air wing needs to have some Hawkeyes. And as appealing as C-2 life is, it's just about the opposite for E-2, from what I hear.

It's all timing, there may be plenty of slots and there may not be as well. For example, we had a class of 10 students, 6 E2 and 4 C2, only two of us wanted C2's.
 

wlawr005

Well-Known Member
pilot
Contributor
If you don't mind my asking, how did it come to pass that you selected COD and then started teaching jets at some point?

My on-wing was saying that it's pretty competitive for C-2, since they have a pretty good lifestyle, but it's a roll of the dice if you go E-2/C-2 because only like one in ten of those will get C-2 at the end. Apparently there's only two VRC squadrons, whereas obviously every carrier air wing needs to have some Hawkeyes. And as appealing as C-2 life is, it's just about the opposite for E-2, from what I hear.
I would say at least a third, maybe even half of our squadron, were Hummer or COD pilots.
 

zippy

Freedom!
pilot
Contributor
IMO, the ideal is that the RAG should not have to do this. The further down the line you go, the harder it is for the command (FNAEB versus TRB), the more of a mindfuck it is for the individual, and the more harmful it is to someone's career (more NOBs in their record). Does it need to happen? Sometimes. But no one should be comfortable with a situation where someone gets that far. I know you guys introduce more complex stuff in VFA land than we did in Prowler VAQ, so perhaps I'm showing a bias here. The standard is the standard and needs to be upheld, but all things being equal, it's better to remediate/attrite earlier. I wouldn't wish a FNAEB on my worst enemy.

I know that the VFA's hand out FNAEB's often, so it's not too hard- it takes time, paperwork, and the will to get rid of pilots who pose a danger to themselves and their peers. It's unfortunate that it needs to be done, but in many of the cases I've heard of it's well deserved. I wish the VP community took this route to get rid of individuals who are unsafe in the aircraft instead of marginalizing them and passing on the trash to the next command. As far as I understand it, the VAQ could be a little more aggressive in FNAEBs for safety of flight trends as well.
 

bunk22

Super *********
pilot
Super Moderator
The VT's are about production while the FRS is more about putting a quality product through (within reason). The Hornet FRS's had a higher attrition rate than any of the other FRS's, from what I recall from a few briefs. VAW-120 had almost no pilot attrition but for obvious reasons.
 

MIDNJAC

is clara ship
pilot
The VT's are about production while the FRS is more about putting a quality product through (within reason). The Hornet FRS's had a higher attrition rate than any of the other FRS's, from what I recall from a few briefs. VAW-120 had almost no pilot attrition but for obvious reasons.

I don't know anything else than VFA FRS, but when I went through VMFAT-101, there were probably 6-7 FNAEBS while I was there. Similar number for VFA-122 in that timeframe, rumor being that they attrited an entire class (I think it was something less than that, but still a notable portion of them)
 

zippy

Freedom!
pilot
Contributor
The VT's are about production while the FRS is more about putting a quality product through (within reason). The Hornet FRS's had a higher attrition rate than any of the other FRS's, from what I recall from a few briefs. VAW-120 had almost no pilot attrition but for obvious reasons.

The VTs should be about quality production not just production. Weak leadership in CNATRA allows the VTs to continue to pass the trash on through stages and then to the fleet, especially if they're of a protected class. This gets people killed.

The T-6 has started naturally weed more of the bottom feeders through more difficult handling in the pattern. Recently the trend has been to send completers with very low NSS's to redes to NFO from the primary VTs, so that's a start.
 

zippy

Freedom!
pilot
Contributor
I don't know anything else than VFA FRS, but when I went through VMFAT-101, there were probably 6-7 FNAEBS while I was there. Similar number for VFA-122 in that timeframe, rumor being that they attrited an entire class (I think it was something less than that, but still a notable portion of them)

If I remember correctly it was they FNAEB'd the entire class because Kingsville was behind in production and accelerated them through by waiving some types of form flights to make up for it. They got to 122 and couldn't fly forms safely. After the FNAEB, where it was decided they shouldn't fly big grey jets anymore, CNATRA changed the rules so they couldn't waive those types of flights anymore.
 

wlawr005

Well-Known Member
pilot
Contributor
That would be weird. Flying form in AJET becomes an admin function...you do it almost every flight.
 

bunk22

Super *********
pilot
Super Moderator
Kingsville fell behind production and waived things, doing a disservice to the navy and those pilots.
 
Top