Flight Training

[Waveoff]

If the underlying cause of the Navy's pilot shortage actually is that the VTs where MPRA pilots can instruct are backed up due to a shortage of pilots (not a shortage of planes, or insufficient maintenance, or OBOGS problems, etc) and the Navy is pulling pilots from already undermanned VTs to go be a TAO, then you're right. That's crazy.

I maintain that for me, the disassociated tour was not just pencil-whipped "career broadening," but it also helped me understand the way a CSG thinks and operates much better than I had understood as a JO. And that, in turn, helped me understand where MPRA fits into CSG operations. And THAT, in turn, would have helped make me much more tactically effective had I got back to the squadron for a DH tour (to recap, I lateral transferred). Not saying it's true for everyone.

Whether Big Navy values it? about 1/3 of the shooters on my boat became operational COs. I see that the AOPS on my boat just got picked up for Major Command at Sea. Both recently retired 4-star MPRA admirals, one of whom was PACOM, the other of whom was nominated and confirmed as CNO (oof), did disassociated tours.

Ducks make ducks. Seems like cyclical logic: "oh well John Doe did the same things I did and look at the success I've had, I'll choose him over Jane who did other stuff." Would love to know how many people from other backgrounds actually made it, or, were extended an opportunity. They claim there's no golden path, but we all know that if you take X job over Y (eg silver path) then you are seen as lesser (and the commodores never seem to support people who shoot for those billets). I do think its starting to change though. VP COs having SMTI/FSU backgrounds, VPU/VUP, etc. Now that MISR is a thing that might open up some opportunities as well. But to have people in the production roles at the peak of their tactical proficiency go spend 2 years on a boat doesn't help the community thats already in dire need of help AND maintaining people. I know a lot of pilots that are getting out because they cant stay flying or at least in a job related to what they've poured their heart and time into. If the navy is so eager to get boat experience to non-tacair people, then they need to open up more LNO or IA opportunities.

 

[FLGUY]

Ducks make ducks. Seems like cyclical logic: "oh well John Doe did the same things I did and look at the success I've had, I'll choose him over Jane who did other stuff." Would love to know how many people from other backgrounds actually made it, or, were extended an opportunity. They claim there's no golden path, but we all know that if you take X job over Y (eg silver path) then you are seen as lesser (and the commodores never seem to support people who shoot for those billets). I do think its starting to change though. VP COs having SMTI/FSU backgrounds, VPU/VUP, etc. Now that MISR is a thing that might open up some opportunities as well. But to have people in the production roles at the peak of their tactical proficiency go spend 2 years on a boat doesn't help the community thats already in dire need of help AND maintaining people. I know a lot of pilots that are getting out because they cant stay flying or at least in a job related to what they've poured their heart and time into. If the navy is so eager to get boat experience to non-tacair people, then they need to open up more LNO or IA opportunities.

I have friends at -30 (where I believe you are as well?) and they tell me that if you tell the current front office that you are interested in doing VPU/Dallas or anything non-disassociated, then you are immediately a second class citizen in the FITREP 500.

The obvious reason that we continue to fill these jobs is because the NAE chose these communities to fill the jobs, not because of any inherent “it’s good for you” selling point.

You know who’d love to be a shooter? A highly qualified deck-handling E-6/Chief or Warrant Officer. Or a SWO who would probably have an increased QOL over normal SWO duties.

 

[SteveHolt!!!]

The Navy has thrown around the idea that they are open to radical ideas and change. Maybe they should look into radical ways of changing personnel and career management. Finding other individuals to man those CVN billets, allowing people to do a longer JO Sea tour into a longer Shore tour then go right to DH and bypassing the boat would keep talent around and help production immensely.

If we’re being radical, I’d take it a step forward and offer a path for high performing production fliers to volunteer to go direct to dh early (with some version of pay/bonus, whatever to make sure they’re compensated properly). I’ve had plenty of super jos who were stronger than many of the dhs. Keep them flying, let them see the pros/cons of dh before msr, and have breathing space on the backside for broadening tours before command boards. I am aware of the many ways this is pretty unworkable.

As to the original articles, I honestly am curious as to the accuracy of the characterization of automation in vfa. In 60s, everything can fail to a manual mode (you can just turn the afcc off, for example), so we should be spending lots of energy on basic flight skills and degraded systems. Cutting out time training on automated things that can’t fail to a degraded mode makes a lot of sense to me, but I just don’t know what that reality is.

 

[sevenhelmet]

As to the original articles, I honestly am curious as to the accuracy of the characterization of automation in vfa. In 60s, everything can fail to a manual mode (you can just turn the afcc off, for example), so we should be spending lots of energy on basic flight skills and degraded systems. Cutting out time training on automated things that can’t fail to a degraded mode makes a lot of sense to me, but I just don’t know what that reality is.

When I flew PLM a few years ago, it was very new, so we still trained and maintained currency on “manual” non-augmented passes.

Today, the redundancy of precision landing modes in the F/A-18EFG and F-35 is sufficient that if the airplane is so degraded that PLM won’t work, you’re highly likely to be diverting or ejecting. There are degrades such as single engine and display failures that pilots train to handle, but a full manual reversion at the Boat is no longer a necessity, as far as I know.

 

[SynixMan]

A couple different dynamics at play here.

1. T-45 replacement and the future of TCQ. The writing is on the wall with this one. No way the engineering needed to Carrier-ize a training jet to replace the T-45 is worth the cost. PLM seems "good enough", the Hawkeye piece needs to be fleshed out, but otherwise this is a done deal. Considering the T-45 replacement will also cover the cat and dog missions done by the F-5/F-16/F-18C/T-34, this will do more to make our pilots ready for the high end fight earlier.

2. World War Three Pilot Manning. Any discussion of what pilot production will look like if WW3 happens that doesn't mention the reserves is silly. There's a couple thousand 1315s in the VTU/IRR with active FAA Class I medical's and prior instructor experience. Sorry, but the T-6 Primary syllabus hasn't changed that much that I couldn't get spun up in an abbreviated 3 month syllabus and start flying Xs. Aircraft availability would be the biggest issue, but you *should* be able to throw money at that if you wanted. The desire doesn't seem to be there.

3. "Peter Pan the Pilot Forever" or "Let's do what the UK does". The Flags still have a strong hate for the Flying LDOs of the 80s/90s, although it's aging out of the system. Whatever you think of the PFI program or a "sea/shore pilot only no ground job unicorn life", the last time it was tried with Flying LDOs, the belief was they became ungovernable. A CO couldn't really hard or soft discipline them since they were separate designators. It was partially why the Flying Warrants program of the early 2010s was killed in its crib. If you have uber senior pilots in the squadron with arguably more experience/hours than the head shed, it undermines the front office's credibility. Think of the worst MMCPO you met and make them a pilot. PFI at least they're siloed into TRACOM, so LT Nugget isn't having to listen to CDR Salty reminisce about the Tomcat.

3.a Front office being weak sticks or NFO/NFO is also a recipe for disaster IMO

3.b Comparions of the Royal Navy don't work. They are ~35k active end strength and can't afford to NOT specialize. I worked with them too, awesome folks, but they were also amazed at the shear money and bodies the USN could throw at a problem.

4. Disassociated manning. Wings + 8 was a decision to force 1310s to the boat. The Flags won't admit it in public, but I don't think Helo/VP pilots going to the boat impacted DH manning until very recently when the airline floodgates really opened up. Some of the stuff being mentioned here is already taking place with AvOps warrants recently (although they did kill the AvOps LDO program in the process). Usually AW E-6/E-7 types going to TOCRONs now, but I'm told they're expanding into some boat jobs.

4.a Do I wish the detailers were honest with JOPA about ANAV and Shooter not being the same? Yes. But they don't have to play by the rules.

5. The parochial, insular, ignorant, and silly nature of VP Navy. Seeing it from TOCRON as a Reservist, it's mind boggling at times. So in some respects the boat is the penance for not knowing fuck-all about what the other 90% of the Navy does. ??‍♂️?

 

[Waveoff]

I have friends at -30 (where I believe you are as well?) and they tell me that if you tell the current front office that you are interested in doing VPU/Dallas or anything non-disassociated, then you are immediately a second class citizen in the FITREP 500.

The obvious reason that we continue to fill these jobs is because the NAE chose these communities to fill the jobs, not because of any inherent “it’s good for you” selling point.

You know who’d love to be a shooter? A highly qualified deck-handling E-6/Chief or Warrant Officer. Or a SWO who would probably have an increased QOL over normal SWO duties.

Not 30, a wing guy. Never once in my shore tour did a DH with shooter time actually convey any critical pieces of knowledge about carrier ops that helped me complete and exercise or better track a sub. The catch 22 of the silver path jobs is that Big Navy wants their top people to be “well rounded” and get boat time, but the speciality jobs do require some of the best tacticians and adaptable learners since they provide force generation in a different way.

I hate the idea that if someone wants to do a community sea tour vice disassociated, that they hate the Navy and are selfish.

 

[Mos]

I agree with the school of thought that the disassociated tour is kind of a waste, but on the other hand, I'm pretty sure the number of super JOs that are getting out or going reserve is not an insignificant number, so the solution is probably more than just keeping more JOs in the community.

 

[IRfly]

Not 30, a wing guy. Never once in my shore tour did a DH with shooter time actually convey any critical pieces of knowledge about carrier ops that helped me complete and exercise or better track a sub. The catch 22 of the silver path jobs is that Big Navy wants their top people to be “well rounded” and get boat time, but the speciality jobs do require some of the best tacticians and adaptable learners since they provide force generation in a different way.

I hate the idea that if someone wants to do a community sea tour vice disassociated, that they hate the Navy and are selfish.

It's okay to hate the Navy. And to be selfish.

I'm missing something here...You're talking about disassociated tours as the "silver path." What's the golden path, then--these specialty jobs?

 

[TyKing]

It's okay to hate the Navy. And to be selfish.

I'm missing something here...You're talking about disassociated tours as the "silver path." What's the golden path, then--these specialty jobs?

The golden path is patch wearers. If you look at any squadron XO and CO, the overwhelming majority of them are patch wearers who did a training officer tour instead of a non flying disassociated tour.

This is especially true in TACAIR but I’ve notice other communities are moving this way too. You may see a few here and there that did something different but the reality is that most squadron skippers and XOs went to some type of weapon school.

 

[CommodoreMid]

The golden path is patch wearers. Go look at any squadron XO and CO, the overwhelming majority of them are patch wearers who did a training officer tour instead of a non flying disassociated tour.

This is especially true in TACAIR but I’ve notice other communities are moving this way too. You may see a few here and there that did something different but the reality is that most squadron skippers and XOs went to some type of weapon school.

Not true in VP unfortunately. SMTI generally a good thing for skipper nowadays, VPU/NDD guys have had some but limited success and require significant help to make it over the hump, and FSU is the kiss of death for skipper. Only one FSU guy has ever made skipper and he’s a retired O-6, now GS-15 type, and is a unicorn. Safe way to skipper in VP is the boat, with some increasing SMTI love.

 

[Meyerkord]

Back in my day, CAGs and CAG LSOs flew during their sea tours. I knew a winged flight surgeon (single anchor) that flew and heard that some CV skippers flew on cruise. Yet Shooters, Handlers, and Hangar Deck Officers did not. Is this still the case?

Still true, at least for my last cruise. CAG and CVN CO both flew probably 3x/week

 

[IRfly]

Not true in VP unfortunately. SMTI generally a good thing for skipper nowadays, VPU/NDD guys have had some but limited success and require significant help to make it over the hump, and FSU is the kiss of death for skipper. Only one FSU guy has ever made skipper and he’s a retired O-6, now GS-15 type, and is a unicorn. Safe way to skipper in VP is the boat, with some increasing SMTI love.

So it's about the same as a 10-12 years ago when my peer group was starting our shore tours, with a little more emphasis on the WTI.

The golden path is patch wearers. If you look at any squadron XO and CO, the overwhelming majority of them are patch wearers who did a training officer tour instead of a non flying disassociated tour.

This is especially true in TACAIR but I’ve notice other communities are moving this way too. You may see a few here and there that did something different but the reality is that most squadron skippers and XOs went to some type of weapon school.

I just looked at the bios of all the COs and XOs in the former Wing 2 (VP4, VP9, and VP47). One did Dallas. The other five all did disassociated tours (two of the five were flag aides). Zero did training officer tours. Hardly an overwhelming majority. Sure, they were all "patch wearers," but every wing guy and RAG guy should be a WTI.

Here's the thing that I don't get--earlier in the thread you (or maybe the other guy) said that they should give the flying jobs to the guys who don't want to make command, climb the ladder, etc. But why in the world would they give the "best" jobs to the people who have already made it known that they want out? It's not punitive--I made it known that I wanted out, so I didn't get to go get my WTI patch while I was in the squadron. Fair enough. The TRARON question is a better one--again, if they're chucking pilots while simultaneously needing pilots, well, that's an (unsurprising) level of insanity.

Also, guys, please stop comparing VP to VFA. I'm not commenting on the value, professionalism, or "coolness" of either community--but I will tell you, from mission to structure to training to deployment: They are not. at. all. the same.

I know this because I did a disassociated sea tour

Edit: Fun fact, VP-46's CO was my classmate in shooter school. Also, there are only 6 active VP squadrons now??

 

[TyKing]

So it's about the same as a 10-12 years ago when my peer group was starting our shore tours, with a little more emphasis on the WTI.

I just looked at the bios of all the COs and XOs in the former Wing 2 (VP4, VP9, and VP47). One did Dallas. The other five all did disassociated tours (two of the five were flag aides). Zero did training officer tours. Hardly an overwhelming majority. Sure, they were all "patch wearers," but every wing guy and RAG guy should be a WTI.

Here's the thing that I don't get--earlier in the thread you (or maybe the other guy) said that they should give the flying jobs to the guys who don't want to make command, climb the ladder, etc. But why in the world would they give the "best" jobs to the people who have already made it known that they want out? It's not punitive--I made it known that I wanted out, so I didn't get to go get my WTI patch while I was in the squadron. Fair enough. The TRARON question is a better one--again, if they're chucking pilots while simultaneously needing pilots, well, that's an (unsurprising) level of insanity.

Also, guys, please stop comparing VP to VFA. I'm not commenting on the value, professionalism, or "coolness" of either community--but I will tell you, from mission to structure to training to deployment: They are not. at. all. the same.

I know this because I did a disassociated sea tour

Edit: Fun fact, VP-46's CO was my classmate in shooter school. Also, there are only 6 active VP squadrons now??

Noted, my comments are more aligned for TACAIR and sea going squadrons. From what you and Commodore have stated, VP values very different things from the other communities.

I don’t think you have to give the best jobs to the guys getting out, best jobs being Weapons school, TPS, etc. However, I think it be best served to just have guys finished they’re commitment out as instructors and help with production or send them to a flying tour like super JO or CAG staff where they can use their experience that the Navy has invested so much resources and money in; and I will say this applies more so to TACAIR and sea going squadrons, since as you said VP is very different and it may not work for them.

 

[FLGUY]

So it's about the same as a 10-12 years ago when my peer group was starting our shore tours, with a little more emphasis on the WTI.

I just looked at the bios of all the COs and XOs in the former Wing 2 (VP4, VP9, and VP47). One did Dallas. The other five all did disassociated tours (two of the five were flag aides). Zero did training officer tours. Hardly an overwhelming majority. Sure, they were all "patch wearers," but every wing guy and RAG guy should be a WTI.

Here's the thing that I don't get--earlier in the thread you (or maybe the other guy) said that they should give the flying jobs to the guys who don't want to make command, climb the ladder, etc. But why in the world would they give the "best" jobs to the people who have already made it known that they want out? It's not punitive--I made it known that I wanted out, so I didn't get to go get my WTI patch while I was in the squadron. Fair enough. The TRARON question is a better one--again, if they're chucking pilots while simultaneously needing pilots, well, that's an (unsurprising) level of insanity.

Also, guys, please stop comparing VP to VFA. I'm not commenting on the value, professionalism, or "coolness" of either community--but I will tell you, from mission to structure to training to deployment: They are not. at. all. the same.

I know this because I did a disassociated sea tour

Edit: Fun fact, VP-46's CO was my classmate in shooter school. Also, there are only 6 active VP squadrons now??

Not sure if you were directly replying to me, but if so: I dont think it makes sense to give out WTI Patches to people who make it known that they’re getting out, and giving away the Community’s best billets obviously does not make sense for someone who’s just gonna bounce to Delta. But if someone were able to (for example) stay an extra year in their fleet tour, and then (assuming they go
production) were able to aid production for another year, hit MSR and either bounce out of the Navy or bounce to DH I think the Navy would benefit far more.

As I stated before, with the seriously high number of SNAs backed up in the pipeline, and fleet squadrons having to turn over their most qualified individuals earlier now, wouldn’t that make more sense? We are sacrificing pilot experience and the potential effectiveness of our pilot cadre(s) in order to fill boat billets. Is “Career Management” and CVN staffing really more important than that? PERS seems to think so.

Would it mess with career timing and “milestones”? Sure. But what if the individual is willing to accept that risk?

And sure, VP and VFA are two entirely different beasts. I’m no VP koolaid drinker, trust me. But that doesnt mean that we can’t adapt good practices from other communities. Just because we -have- done things a certain way for a long time, doesn’t mean we -need- to do things like that forever. Adaptability/flexibility, right?

 

[tcham28]

Edit: Fun fact, VP-46's CO was my classmate in shooter school. Also, there are only 6 active VP squadrons now??

12