Discussion in 'Naval Flight Officer (NFO)' started by Max the Mad Russian, Mar 4, 2017.
Nah I had to fly today. But soon.
This has been one of the unspoken assets to the air wing the last few years. Slowly, the Romeos are getting more control over their EW suite, as well, which is helping. As with everything, it's all about having the time to train.
I wouldn't say it's a cultural shift so much as that you may have still been interacting with some legacy carry-overs. And I say that as a total and complete legacy carry-over. 2-3 years ago (west coast), there was quite a bit of coordinated investigative tasking, specifically due to EW cuing, and I'm sure it's only getting better as the current COs finally have some fleet Romeo experience as DHs.
I mock the Sierra community regularly here (and elsewhere), but I also feel for them. The Romeo continues to earn street-cred throughout the fleet due to all of it's black boxes that it brings, while the Sierra guys want to play, but get held back by continued legacy thought-processes. That said, we still need the mail and retro moved about, and having another shooter flying around are all things that bring value to the overall operation.
You sound REAL butt hurt about this.
Integration during Air Wing Fallon! Alright!
I am sorry if I came of that way to you. I didn't need my ego stroked or anything, but come on dude, you know the type of guy I'm talking about, and I imagine even his NFO peers don't like him or her. We had one NFO on deployment give a BBC crew a full throwdown of how difficult it was to come back to the boat, making every trap sound heroic, without once mentioning she was an NFO. That's annoying. I am sure she was skewered within her ready room.
The Sierra community is now recognizing what a bad spot it's in. Most of the HC guys are gone, but there's still a good deal of resentment towards training for missions that are risky and have an extremely low probability of actual tasking for the community. This was a good article addressing the matter in a professional manner, and arguing that we should mostly give up on some of the overland stuff and just crush ASUW and MIO, and the need to get a radar and a HELLFIRE replacement if we want to be actual players in a fight.
I just still can't really get behind the idea of a torpedo truck. Just seems like a waste of money for all of the development and testing needed (as well as maintaining currency), and then you would need to have not one, but two ASW configured aircraft on the schedule, which would makes both of the platforms significantly limited in other things it can do. If implemented on LCS, that seems like a step back in flexibility.
Brits were there with similar approach in 1950s, preparing to attack Soviet cruisers which were supposed to break through the Baltic Straits. Two Seafires AS.5 with radars on both flanks of a line of a torpedo bombers, that time Wyverns, which were singleseaters and had no torpedo sights. Underlying idea was that killers could have no targeting and aiming equipment at all if hunters have it in redundat numbers. Did not work.
I don't know enough about the complexities of ASW to comment; but that article sums up what a lot of people have been saying for a long time in ready room conversations and it makes a reasonable and professional case on how to move forward.
I guess that's where the communities divide. It's nothing personal, but you can't advocate for something if you don't understand how it works. And the Torp Truck was actually introduced 2 years ago at the HSC NARG. But throttling back....so how would the attack happen? Most likely via L16 tracks. But L16 tracks lag like crazy, so if you're late to your drop point, the weapon system may not acquire (without getting into the specifics of the target). Can we tackle this with increased tactics and technology? Absolutely, and it's something HSL practiced back in the days of the Foxtrot, but really, at the end of the day, is it worth all of the time to train? Admittedly, a rhetorical question.
Honestly, at the end of the day, I think this is probably the biggest issue. If a community is trying to place itself for viability, they REALLY need to understand what they're asking for. I'm not sure the community has quite reached that point, overall (as it applies to ASW). But you can't COMPLETELY fault someone/community for not knowing what they don't know.
Ha, how grammar and wording matters. "Let's eat, grandpa" vs. "Let's eat grandpa!" is a little bit of what happened here. I meant two distinct thoughts there. 1. I can't really comment on the torp truck and,
2. The article sums up the following discussion that has been happening in various ready rooms along both coasts for a while now in some form: drop whatever fake proficiency we claim in PR/SOF in favor of actual ASUW proficiency.
The community, from those I've talked to, is split on the viability of the Torp-Truck idea. In the case of the article, they make a play for "let's pitch in" on the ASW front. Most of the legacy HS guys (who did ASW ) seem to understand that this idea is a tough sell and not one we should immediately buy off on.
Separate names with a comma.