• 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

Fun Meter no longer pegged

S.O.B.

Registered User
pilot
If the IA tours are going to be as widespread as predicted you are going to see retention take an immediate hit. I’m talking about LTs approaching their obligation over the next year or so. The Navy has been going on deployments for ever, now the army has to go a few years in a row and we have to pick up the slack. That’s B.S. If there’s a need for pilots, by all means send us but if the need is for warm bodies F### that.



Less flying more work, post tail hook politically correctness, IA jobs, JPME, Masters on shore duty, it seems to me that the fun is slowly being zapped out of our profession.

Any thoughts?
 

Bevo16

Registered User
pilot
I agree. It seems that a lot of focus is going to things other than fighting and winning wars. Career management and getting the right checks in the box seems more important.

The IA tours are BS if you ask me. If we are going to send pilots over to Iraq to do army work, lets strap on a Blackhawk and get after it. If it is manning a desk, they should be able to do that themself. The more I deal with army folks, the less impressed I am with them.
 

zab1001

Well-Known Member
pilot
Super Moderator
Contributor
If retention does take a hit stand by for a round of stop loss.
 

squeeze

Retired Harrier Dude
pilot
Super Moderator
Contributor
zab1001 said:
If retention does take a hit stand by for a round of stop loss.

"Hey, our retention sucks, what can we do to fix it?"
"Better pay, benefits, improve quality of life, fix deployment cycles, fund you, etc.."
"Nah... something cheaper"
"We could just not let people leave"
"Brilliant!"

And leaders wonder why troops are leaving the military in droves when their committments are up.
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
S.O.B. said:
If the IA tours are going to be as widespread as predicted you are going to see retention take an immediate hit. I’m talking about LTs approaching their obligation over the next year or so. The Navy has been going on deployments for ever, now the army has to go a few years in a row and we have to pick up the slack. That’s B.S. If there’s a need for pilots, by all means send us but if the need is for warm bodies F### that.



Less flying more work, post tail hook politically correctness, IA jobs, JPME, Masters on shore duty, it seems to me that the fun is slowly being zapped out of our profession.

Any thoughts?
My thoughts are, if that's too much for people to handle, then they should get out. If a 6 month IA tour is going to ruin your day, then get out. If you can't handle graduate level education and JPME, get out. Let's face it, we're not in this business because we thought, or wanted things to be easy. Sure deployments during OIF and especially OEF were long and homecycles were short - that's pretty much over. If there's a need for IA billets to be filled in the war zone, how about being a team player and sign yourself up. IMHO, people ought to be in this game for one primary reason - service. So if your "fun" quotient isn't being met, I urge you to get out ASAP. That just leaves more command slots for me. :D

Brett
 

bobbybrock

Registered User
None
I'm just curious as to what billets the navy officers are filling for army bubbas? I just did a tour in Iraq for a year. At least on the aviation side I saw no navy types holding any Brigade or lower billets.
I don't think to many army aviators would have a problem with these guys flying with us. The thing is they aren't operating at the operator level meaning brigade( wing) and lower. Our own guys who above brigade level don't even fly.
As for the army only being deployed for the last few years. I think not. Ask any Army aviator who has been in more then ten years and I'll assure you that he has been to Bosnia, Kosovo or Kuwait a few times. That is all pre 911. As for the present we have guys in my unit who have been to Iraq going on three times. And that is a year long tour.
I'm not saying that we don't appreciate your guys contribution becaue we do in spades. You guys even have a unit flying Dust Off down in Kuwait. That has freed up some of our over stressed dust off units.
And Bevo I concur I'm not to impressed with our staff guys either.
 

Bevo16

Registered User
pilot
I just want to clarify that it was not the Army warfighters that I was not impressed with. It was all the red tape that they require to do anything. If you want to exchange an issued jacket for a different size, it takes a memo from an O-5 or higher.

All of the Blackhawk pilots that I met and their ground pouders were first rate. I think the Army would be well served to delegate some actual authority down to lower ranking positions. If they would just trust some of their own people to do jobs, we would not have to ship Navy LT's all over the place to do jobs when there are soldiers capable of getting it done. IMHO the Army is just way to top-heavy. Not enough authority to "get it done" where the rubber meets the road. The Navy and Marines have the right blueprint for that.

BobbyBrock,

I hear that it is "flying a desk" and nothing more. Being a security officer is one thing that I heard, transportation officer was another. Not fun stuff.
 

Schnugg

It's gettin' a bit dramatic 'round here...
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Plenty of IAs here at NAVCENT and know several who went to Iraq.

You serve where they send you, or you don't raise your hand and take the oath.
 

saltpeter

Registered User
I love it, when people are applying for a commission or any job for that matter, they are soooo gung ho. After their first deployment or several months doing repetitive tasks their B&Ming begins. It's work, a job, your not supposed to like it all the time. If you want to love you job all the time, become a rock star.
 

KBayDog

Well-Known Member
saltpeter said:
I love it, when people are applying for a commission or any job for that matter, they are soooo gung ho. After their first deployment or several months doing repetitive tasks their B&Ming begins. It's work, a job, your not supposed to like it all the time. If you want to love you job all the time, become a rock star.

To quote a famous Marine:

"Oh, you hate your job? Why didn't you say so? There's a support group for that. It's called EVERYBODY, and they meet at the bar."
--Drew Carey
 

Pags

N/A
pilot
Brett327 said:
My thoughts are, if that's too much for people to handle, then they should get out. If a 6 month IA tour is going to ruin your day, then get out. If you can't handle graduate level education and JPME, get out. Let's face it, we're not in this business because we thought, or wanted things to be easy. Sure deployments during OIF and especially OEF were long and homecycles were short - that's pretty much over. If there's a need for IA billets to be filled in the war zone, how about being a team player and sign yourself up. IMHO, people ought to be in this game for one primary reason - service. So if your "fun" quotient isn't being met, I urge you to get out ASAP. That just leaves more command slots for me. :D

Brett

While I may just be a wet behind the ears JO, I'm pretty sure they commissioned me to be an officer first and an aviator second.
 

lowflier03

So no $hit there I was
pilot
When the Navy spends 2+ years, then the RAG and however much money to train an officer to be a pilot, it seems like a waste to send them off with the army for 18 or more months to do a ground job. I still dont see the point of the program other than that the Army cant cut it. Why would there be a need to send a Nuc Submariner to 3 months of Army training, then to Afghanistan to train ground troops there??? Poor use of resources, and more time away from the job you actually trained to do.
 

webmaster

The Grass is Greener!
pilot
Site Admin
Contributor
lowflier03 said:
When the Navy spends 2+ years, then the RAG and however much money to train an officer to be a pilot, it seems like a waste to send them off with the army for 18 or more months to do a ground job. I still dont see the point of the program other than that the Army cant cut it. Why would there be a need to send a Nuc Submariner to 3 months of Army training, then to Afghanistan to train ground troops there??? Poor use of resources, and more time away from the job you actually trained to do.
Because the nuke submariner took the bonus, decided NOT to go back as a Deptarment Head (SOAC), and wanted to do their Super JO sea tour and get out instead. The detailers add up the bodies, they have extra, who don't they need? The extra, no career nuke JOs, and wham... they are off to the IAs. Quite a few of my nuke peers at work are faced with that. The Navy is grabbing any extra warm bodies to fill jobs that are critical. Alot of the draw also comes from the respective ticket or clearances you hold (and Nukes and Aviators fit that bill).

On a side note, a number of my peer group (VP) are VOLUNTEERING to do IA instead of the traditional Disassociated Sea Tour.
I agree with Schnugg and Brett, you go where the man says to, and shut your pie hole. The *****ing and moaning is saved for at the bar when of course (god forbid) you don't get the reach around, or any luck on good orders out of there. :)
 
Top