Adversary Squadrons

[Brett327]

I guess I'm not the only idiot.

I suppose that it's a matter of degree.

Brett

 

[Kolja]

But then I liked Bagram better than Florida too...

 

[Schnugg]

Actually

You're fighting this ... not sure why, however. The subject is U.S. Navy Adversary Squadrons .... and the answer is Aviators, not NFO's. (smiles, no hate for Navy NFO's :icon_mi_1 :sleep_125 )

Actually (yes, the dreaded actually)....not always true.

I was in VF-43 in 1985. We had two F-14 NFOs in the squadron that flew a lot and provided ground training during FFARP on F-14 systems, etc.

I also remember an NFO in VFC-13 at Miramar in the late 80's early 90's. NOT a desirable job as he got treated like crap, but he was there.

r/
G

 

[Brett327]

as he got treated like crap, but he was there.

Doesn't your community kind of have a rep for treating their FOs like 2nd class citizens (a la "sh!t me a lock, radar boy")? You should give Prowlers a try - it's the other way around. 3v1, enough said.

Brett

 

[Kolja]

Staff NFOs at NSAWC get to fly Red Air in -16Bs and -18Bs, but are not "formally trained" adversaries (unless some the RIOs are, not too sure about that). Not a bad gig - keep your flight pay and get to play in F-16s...

 

[Schnugg]

Doesn't your community kind of have a rep for treating their FOs like 2nd class citizens (a la "sh!t me a lock, radar boy")? You should give Prowlers a try - it's the other way around. 3v1, enough said.

Brett

Not so much any more as it is now becoming the F/A-18F community.

When it was all ACM and dogfighting it was sometimes that way, depended on the squadron...but the mentality really changed with the addition of longer range BVR missiles, less chance of a 1v1s, TARPS, Inflight digital imagery transfer, LANTIRN targeting pods, Link 16, GPS, Fac (A), etc...lots for the GIB to do....

Here's 2 v 1....

Cheers,
G

 

[A4sForever]

Actually (yes, the dreaded actually)....not always true.

I was in VF-43 in 1985. We had two F-14 NFOs in the squadron.....

*AHEM* (*cough*) *AHEM* ..... "ACTUALLY" ..... I think what young and hard to convince T&B55 was getting at was:
are there any "REAL" NFO jobs in Adversary Squadrons (or "Squads" for those of you who remain organizationally challenged).

And of course, the answer ..... actually ....... remains "NO" ....... as in NO "F'(unny)" Way !!! Why??? ...... Because NFO's are bad ??? No ---- just because the Adversary squadron mission does not lend itself to a traditional 2-seat TO&E in the aircraft department. Any Adversary Squadron NFO spot is not going to be a "career enhancing" billet and will probably deteriorate into a well trained go-fer .....

To wit: a flight demonstration from VF-43 in the "Glory Days" .... no NFO opportunities depicted here ....

VF-43 IN THE BREAK ...... HOOOOAH !!!

PLUS, and actually, as well ...... We just can't have NFO's running amuck, unchecked. Look at what happened in the A-6 community ..... when they "morphed" into the EA6B squadrons --- a sane, workable 1-to-1 NA/NFO ratio that was twisted into a disfigured cancer and the once beautiful, 1-to-1 working partnership was ground underfoot and masticated into something ugly and horrific, i.e., 3 NFO's for every Aviator.

Now that's just not American ..... ..... actually.

 

[DanMa1156]

Not so much any more as it is now becoming the F/A-18F community.

When it was all ACM and dogfighting it was sometimes that way, depended on the squadron...but the mentality really changed with the addition of longer range BVR missiles, less chance of a 1v1s, TARPS, Inflight digital imagery transfer, LANTIRN targeting pods, Link 16, GPS, Fac (A), etc...lots for the GIB to do....

Here's 2 v 1....

Cheers,
G

Ok, I know being a newb and all is going to get me flamed here, but either that's edited or there's a story behind that. Do tell?

 

[Brett327]

[We just can't have NFO's running amuck, unchecked. Look at what happened in the A-6 community ..... when they "morphed" into the EA6B squadrons --- a sane, workable 1-to-1 NA/NFO ratio that was twisted into a disfigured cancer and the once beautiful, 1-to-1 working partnership was ground underfoot and masticated into something ugly and horrific, i.e., 3 NFO's for every Aviator. [/b]

Now that's just not American ..... ..... actually.

Ahhh, a veritable airborne Utopia! Seriously though, take note, young SNFOs. The Prowler community is the place to be for FOs and that mentality/way of doing business will likely carry over to the G model.

Brett

 

[skidkid]

Is that a photoshop or did it actually exist?

And you lose two "salty" points.

 

[A4sForever]

Aren't you guys going to be slitting each other's throats when there is one spot for every three of you?

It will be a sight to behold. Bring a picnic lunch ... popcorn will just not do it.

The HORROR .... THE HUMANITY !!!!

 

[Brett327]

Aren't you guys going to be slitting each other's throats when there is one spot for every three of you?

There's definitely going to be more for the pilots to do when the G comes online. A/A radar comes to mind in addition to whatever other tasks the ECMOs need to shed to deal with doing the work of three as one.

We've all been reassured that they have a "plan" for the transition. Seriously though, they looked at the A-6 disestablishment as a model of how not to do the transition. From what I saw last, when you factor in all the variables like aircraft to ECMO ratio, slow transition period and typical retention rates, the numbers seem to work out OK. As for the aircraft duties, you're right. The division of duties will be much more equitable. There are some Prowler pilots who are content to show up to the brief and basically act as a voice actuated autopilot for the whole flight and not really get into the tactics or EW side of things. That will definitely change w/ the G. Also, the new systems will make the ECMOs job alot easier because of the interface and capabilities. A couple of the Prowler squadrons are getting the ICAP-III mod within a matter of months as a kind of test bed for the G model systems.

Good times,

Brett

 

[Brett327]

And you lose two "salty" points.

Ditto

Brett

 

[Schnugg]

Actually.....Bwahahahaha.....

It's a real three seat variant developed for overseas FMS sales to Iran....and I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona for sale, too.

Two more "Salty" points gone....

Yes Virginia, NFOs were in adversary squadrons.

 

[TurnandBurn55]

You're fighting this ... not sure why, however. The subject is U.S. Navy Adversary Squadrons .... and the answer is Aviators, not NFO's. (smiles, no hate for Navy NFO's :icon_mi_1 :sleep_125 )

Hey dude, no worries... not fighting it, merely curious... my goal is first to stop puking in the T-2, second to take over the world Just was wondering if there was a fit-in to the VFC types, but if not.. hey, it's all good...

that's how the air force used to utilize their F-4s... put the junior pilot in the back... till they realized it was a waste of talent

And then the Air Force realized that their mentality of training backseaters in the F-15E was back-a$$wards, and decided to have the Navy train them from start to finish.

I hate to do this T&B, you seem like a great guy, but..... The Indians actually fly the two seat models with two pilots. No WSOs over there,...... yet

Point still being valid... two heads better than one. But an even number of anchors in a plane can't be a good thing Can it?

BTW-- looks like I'm headed to -106 and not -122 after all... heard any gouge?