P3 Orion lifestyle

[smittyrunr]

Again, not sure what you're looking for as far as QOL, here's a general look at for your first few tours (each 2-3 years long) post-flight school:
1st sea tour (P-3 squadron, deploying), shore tour (flight instructor, ROTC, etc- could be flying, not necessarily flying a P-3/P-8), Sea tour (disassociated)- most likely on a carrier not flying)), Sea tour (P-3/P-8 Dept Head-back flying the P-3/P-8, deploying)... that's probably far enough for now.

P-3 sea tours you will deploy for 6 months at a time, but when you are home, you are home more than the carrier-based pilots.

 

[scoolbubba]

P-3 sea tours you will deploy for 6 months at a time, but when you are home, you are home more than the carrier-based pilots.

Possibly. The new deployment cycle is a 6 month deployment, 12 month home cycle IDRC right back into another 6 month deployment. We've been told to still expect plenty of dets and surges in the IDRC.

 

[PropAddict]

We've been told to still expect plenty of dets and surges in the IDRC.

Weird. I heard surges were going away. . .

 

[foleyswole85]

Those were extremely helpful posts explaining disassociated/shore tours, thank you. I feel like my questions have been answered and that I have a better understanding of the P3 aviator lifestyle. If any others would like to share their experiences or advice I'm certainly all ears.

I appreciate ya'lls input and patience,

Brad Foley

 

[webmaster]

Possibly. The new deployment cycle is a 6 month deployment, 12 month home cycle IDRC right back into another 6 month deployment. We've been told to still expect plenty of dets and surges in the IDRC.

Not yet it isn't. Our leadership endorsed the request to switch back to a 12 month IDRC, but it will be decided outside of our community if it will be approved. Last I have heard, it is favorable, but hasn't been approved yet. Specifically your squadron is still slated for an 18 month IDRC. Note, I am sure all this will change four or five more times, but that is the latest.

 

[scoolbubba]

Roge-o. The word from the Skippers mouth was we were the last of the 18 month bubbas, but that was a month ago.

 

[eas7888]

I must say, it took me by surprise when I saw Navy P3's sitting at COB Adder when I was deployed to Iraq with the Army. My hat's off to you gentlemen. How did you like the mission in Iraq v. the Maritime mission, was it a hard change for you guys?

 

[xj220]

We heard we'd be the last of the 18 month guys, too. But it never counts until it actually happens, anyways.

 

[zippy]

I must say, it took me by surprise when I saw Navy P3's sitting at COB Adder when I was deployed to Iraq with the Army. My hat's off to you gentlemen. How did you like the mission in Iraq v. the Maritime mission, was it a hard change for you guys?

Depends on who you talk to... the community kool-aid drinkers insist that ASW is our bread and butter and lament that our overland ISR mission funds come out of "hide" for the ASW mission and can't wait for that mission to be over. The vast majority of crews and realists of the community think the mission is very worthwhile and would rather do real world stuff then training flight centric deployments. Unfortunately there isn't an equal distribution of which squadrons go to the desert so the squadrons that deploy there 2-3 times during their their personnels' time in it are pretty burnt out while the squadrons that do multiple deployments to the lands of per-diem and alcohol are itching to get over to sand land to contribute more to the greater good.

 

[OnTopTime]

Depends on who you talk to... the community kool-aid drinkers insist that ASW is our bread and butter and lament that our overland ISR mission funds come out of "hide" for the ASW mission and can't wait for that mission to be over. The vast majority of crews and realists of the community think the mission is very worthwhile and would rather do real world stuff then training flight centric deployments. Unfortunately there isn't an equal distribution of which squadrons go to the desert so the squadrons that deploy there 2-3 times during their their personnels' time in it are pretty burnt out while the squadrons that do multiple deployments to the lands of per-diem and alcohol are itching to get over to sand land to contribute more to the greater good.

Airborne ASW is a highly perishable skill and also one that is difficult to master. You have to constantly practice it in order to remain proficient, and real world ASW (in my opinion) is 10X more beneficial to maintaining skills than anything you can do in the WST. I understand that it's exciting to be where the action is and to feel like you're making a contribution to current-day ops, and I don't begrudge anyone who wants to do this or makes the decision to employ MPA this way. However, there should be no dispute that more overland ISR time means less time doing ASW and therefore decreases the ASW capability of both the aircrew and the aircraft. I worry about the day when there's suddenly a no-shit sub-surface threat to US national security interests, and MPA has trouble answering the 911 call.

 

[eas7888]

Interesting replies, I wouldn't have considered the perishable skill aspect of the deployment. That's a very valid argument to make. Of course, I suppose the current mission dictates that the 'greater good' is on the over land missions. All of your input has been very helpful for me. If I ever get selected (the process seems to move so slowly), I think I'd enjoy being in the P3 more so than most other aircraft.

 

[KilroyUSN]

1st sea tour (P-3 squadron, deploying), shore tour (flight instructor, ROTC, etc- could be flying, not necessarily flying a P-3/P-8), Sea tour (disassociated)- most likely on a carrier not flying)), Sea tour (P-3/P-8 Dept Head-back flying the P-3/P-8, deploying)

So you go from Sea Tour Dissassociated, to Sea tour dept head? skip out on shore duty in between, or did you just miss it?

 

[zippy]

Airborne ASW is a highly perishable skill and also one that is difficult to master. You have to constantly practice it in order to remain proficient, and real world ASW (in my opinion) is 10X more beneficial to maintaining skills than anything you can do in the WST. I understand that it's exciting to be where the action is and to feel like you're making a contribution to current-day ops, and I don't begrudge anyone who wants to do this or makes the decision to employ MPA this way. However, there should be no dispute that more overland ISR time means less time doing ASW and therefore decreases the ASW capability of both the aircrew and the aircraft. I worry about the day when there's suddenly a no-shit sub-surface threat to US national security interests, and MPA has trouble answering the 911 call.

True, but re-emphasis on our ASW skills by Big Navy is only a recent trend. People tend to forget that the P-3 community survived its darkest hours, and gained funding for a follow-on aircraft, not because its crews competently provided a skill that no one was interested in at the time. It survived because the Marine Corps said the ISR products it provided were critical to their success during the early days of OEF and there has been continuous demand for those services since then.

The P-3 community's denial that they were kept around for anything other then ASW is incredibly short sighted.

The British MPRA community came to the MPRF reunion a year ago bragging how they were able to step up and tell their MOD that their Deployment ISO British Troops on the ground was detrimental to their Primary Mission (ASW) and that they needed to pull back to focus on that and that they were successful in that political battle. Fast forward a year later and their MPRA community has witnessed the early retirement of its fleet of aircraft before their replacement has come online in order to fund MOD units in direct support of OEF (or whatever they call it these days).

The P-3 community needs to continue to contribute to the fight in the overland ISR arena to maintain its relevance in the grand scheme of things. Our follow-on aircraft has only recently become something more then just a powerpoint presentation. If we allow ourself, as a community, to go back to being one dimensional and a irrelevant in the current war then we not only turn our backs on those who kept us alive by saying they needed us, but also risk our follow-on aircraft program which would effectively kill the community because the current aircraft has been on its last leg for a very very long time.

 

[smittyrunr]

1st sea tour (P-3 squadron, deploying), shore tour (flight instructor, ROTC, etc- could be flying, not necessarily flying a P-3/P-8), Sea tour (disassociated)- most likely on a carrier not flying)), Sea tour (P-3/P-8 Dept Head-back flying the P-3/P-8, deploying)

So you go from Sea Tour Dissassociated, to Sea tour dept head? skip out on shore duty in between, or did you just miss it?

If your timing works out, you may be able to fit in a short shore tour (18 mos-ish) between disassociated and DH, but many people roll from sea duty to sea duty there. I see you are an NFO selectee, since your flight school training pipeline is shorter, it is more likely you might be able to find that shore tour.


As far as ASW vs ISR, one argument I find interesting, don't necessarily disagree with, is essentially, it's easy to do ISR, if a crew is good at ASW, they can be good at ISR (without needing the hours to train on it.) ASW missions are certainly more challenging in many ways, but I don't think we try very hard to find a way to be THE BEST ISR platform or crew. We have all sorts of metrics for good ASW- in the end, does the torp hit the sub, but the community doesn't challenge the crews to find the best ways to use their sensors for ISR. Maybe not what the ASW-only group wants to hear, but I think we could be even better with ISR than we are.
I say, more of both! And more maritime patrol (rigging/querying ships) missions! More hours for all my friends!

 

[CommodoreMid]

I'm only in the RAG still, so I really don't have any perspective on this, but how do we balance maintaining our primary skill set in light of the burgeoning sub fleets of other nations while contributing to our current conflicts? I won't lie, one of the main reasons I went P-3s is because of the ISR stuff and how much the P-3 community is doing for the guys on the ground. Don't get me wrong, I've also always though ASW is pretty darn cool and the more I learn about it the cooler I think it is, but I fear if we ignore how we're contributing to conflicts now in favor of focusing solely on ASW we might end up like some people in the Army who before 9/11 were still thinking in terms of giant tank battles on the plains of Europe against the Russians. Besides, isn't naval air in part supposed to be creative in how we use our platforms? Take the Tomcat: how much air to air stuff did it really accomplish in its last days? It was still frickin useful in the beginning of OEF/OIF in a strike role, despite that not being its primary mission.