So you want to be a CAG (but can't)...

Here's a new random stupid question I haven't found an answer for. (ie. my Google-fu is lacking in proficiency)

I know the CVNs are very fixed-wing centric, and rightfully-so. What's a vague ratio of fixed-wing -to - helicopter pilots becoming CVN CO's?

I would assume most sea command-oriented helicopter guys command the LHA/LHD types, but I have no basis for that assumption.

My info is a few years dated, but when the idea of a helo pilot becoming a CAG was brought up again (happens every 10 years or so) the word was that HS had the highest percentage of "nuke pipeline guys" of any community.

You have to be a carrier aviator to be the CO of the carrier. Since the TACAIR guys split their top folks between deep draft and CAG, the TACAIR folks had a smaller PERCENTAGE of carrier opportunity as compared to HS.
Now with HSC and HSM being on the carrier it is unknown I'd helo guys will:

A. Get a higher percentage than they already have. (you now have 3 (HS, HC & HSL) communities operating off the carrier as opposed to just HS)

B. if the helo pilot as CAG will rear it's head again. (Lots of passion on both sides of this argument)

Thanks Helolumpy. Don't know where else I'd find this random information, so I appreciate it.

Does that mean HS (now HSC/HSM) types get a "equal" shot at CAG as well? Or that they basically said "You guys have the Deep Drafts, let the TACAIR guys take CAG" ?

I'm always fascinated by the inner workings of the big machine, as odd as that may sound.

The decision a few years ago was that Helo bubbas would not be considered for CAG. They promotion opportunity for flag was available through the deep draft pipeline, so the Helo guys had suffient opportunity to make Flag, so the CAG job would continue to be fixed wing only.

Who made this decision and what was the justification? The CVN CO is harder and longer than the CAG route.

Interesting.

I would imagine the TACAIR guys that go CAG would be "brought up to speed" on the way rotary aviation works. Or at least have a senior rotary guy in that staff somewhere making sure the fixed-wing CAG knows how to properly utilize his helo assets right?

That's pretty funny.

I remember we were properly utilized to rush an "urgent" shipment of toilet seats to USS OUTHOUSE one day. We had to spend an hour in the D waiting for a break in the cycle...

BS. Do you need years of experience as an Infantry Officer to be an effective COCOM? Do you need years of experience as an Intelligence Officer to be an effective Director of the CIA? On a lower level, do you need years of experience as an Infantry Officer to be a Company Commander?

Leadership is leadership. A good leader can stand up in front of a group of people and lead them, and will likely also be able to see the big picture and make appropriate decisions.

Adm Fallon was an NFO, and was CENTCOM in the middle of two wars. How much experience did he have in land warfare? ZERO.
Gen Patreus is a career infantry officer, and is now the Director of the CIA. How much experience does he have in intelligence? ZERO.
I'm a pilot, and a forward air controller. Yet, I was the H&S Company Commander in an Infantry Battalion. Yup. ZERO experience.

My point being, good leaders lead. Doesn't matter what their background is, or how much experience they have. All that leads to is how steep their learning curve is. I'd bet the rest of my paychecks from now until the day I retire that there are RW aviators in the Navy that are MORE than capable of leading a carrier airwing.

The same thing happens in the Marine Corps. When has there EVER been an aviator that was Commandant? After all, you've got to have YEARS of experience as an Infantry/MAGTF officer in order to effectively lead a MEF, much less the Marine Corps. So, for 234 years - the USMC didn't have an aviator as Commandant. Now we have a broken time, former airline pilot, naval aviator as Commandant. And he was a former commander of II MEF as well.

Sorry, but I disagree. A MEF Commander has a lot more than just strike to think about, and II MEF didn't fail miserably with a non-traditional aviator at the helm. I don't think a CAG would either.

Who fills those jobs is a function of community fiefdoms, same-same as almost all other such billets in the Navy. Don't sweat it.

Personally, I believe it is a good idea to keep your ears open and mouth shut about detailing on the senior end of the Navy as a young guy. Watch your CO's and DH's to learn how it works, set achievable intermediate goals for the community you are in, and observe what billets you need to take on the way to get where you want to be. (Hint for first tour guys - being a RAG instructor will work 95%+ of the time). Other than that, you are way too junior to care.

Oh, and volunteer to be an assistant recorder on a board at the first chance you get; you will never learn more about your career any other way.

Saturday, Donny, is Shabbos, the Jewish day of rest. That means that I don't work, I don't drive a car, I don't fucking ride in a car, I don't handle money, I don't turn on the oven, and I sure as shit *don't fucking roll*!

I had a SWO CO when the P-3 community tried the "CMO" thing...didn't turn out so well. I know it wasn't exactly a squadron in the traditional sense, but it was blatantly obvious he was out of his element.

Who's that guy in charge of scheduling at the league office?

Burkhalter.
I told that kraut a fucking thousand times that I don't roll on Shabbos!

Yup.

Why not? Big Navy lets pilots drive ships, and from what I hear from people who actually drive ships for a living, not very well.

And this is where I stopped listening. You know why? Because it's the same tired, bullshit rhetoric from every TACAIR pilot in the Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force. That rotor trash can't comprehend/understand/learn what their job is. So with that, shipmate - you can kiss my ass.

Because the entirety of your argument is bullshit when the truth is spoken:

That's not exactly helping your argument.

Glad to hear that you know what I think now, and the motivation behind my post.

You have no idea what I know about, have experience with, or how I have formed my opinions. But keep thinking you know everything.

For what it's worth, I disagree with the way the Navy AND the Marine Corps do things. I'm not going to change it (for instance, why are VMM/HMM CO's ACE CO's? They screened for VMM/HMM command, not ACE command. But that's not going to change), but I can bitch about it.

I'm not sticking up for the little guy, just think that the argument about why a RW guy can't possibly see the big picture/make appropriate decisions is bullshit. Just like I think it's bullshit that a TACAIR guy in the USMC has about a snowball's chance in hell of being a MEU CO - no matter how the argument is made. It's fifedoms, plain and simple.

I think the CAG issue (as with all competitively selected positions) is that the people who were in those positions previously select up-and-coming guys who fit the mold the selectors envision.

Brett, I agree that there is a certain level of expertise that comes with being a pointy nose guy that helps when you are in the CAG role. The only counter I would have to that is why do they make E-2 pilots CAG? They wouldn't go anywhere near where the jets would, so they don't have the same level of "expertise", and I can remember talking to some E-2 pilot JO's that said all they did was fly circles and they didn't have a clue what went on in the tube. The point I'm making is that it boils down to what the person puts in to it and learns from it. I'm a helo guy and I know what a LFS/Alpha, etc are. I understand how the fuel ladder works and z-diagrams, and I haven't even flown in a jet. Sure, I've never dropped a bomb, the same as a jet guy hasn't ever shot a pirate. There is a lot of knowledge leaned from just operating in the airwing.

Sure, my opinion is probably a little biased, but I can say that a good majority of the guys who fly jets don't really understand what we as helos can do, but the opposite isn't true. I can say that on our last deployment where we flew off the carrier against pirates and in support of the Quest, which was 99% helo oriented, the jet guys got a good view of what we can do and it changed a lot of their stereotypes of the helicopter and it's capabilities.

The reality is that right now the Tailhook guys don't want to give up their hold on the CAG spot. If a helo bubba was selected it wouldn't be setting an Airwing up for failure because of the vetting needed to get that guy into the CAG role. I do think that as more mid-level officers get promoted there will be a shift mainly due in part to the older guys with their preconceived notions of helicopters only operating like the H-3 used to (pretty much ass and trash only) going away.

With all of that said, I doubt it will change anytime soon, and I'm ok with that. There are plenty of jet guys who can fill the role of CAG and it'll still get the job done. It is a bit frustrating that helo guys aren't selected but it doesn't make much difference, and I'll just fly my plane guard with my crayons and color while in the starboard-d.