AVO Warrant Officer (Aerial Vehicle Operator) MQ-25

[johnboyA6E]

Not sure if this is new to the folks here. New AVO WO program announced to train MQ-25 operators. They will go to OCS then complete Primary before designating as a drone operator.
Nice to know that Pilots won't have to worry about getting assigned to drones after primary like they do in the Air Force

However looks like some current aviators will still be doing that for the first few years, and long term 1310/1320s will still have DH and command tours in drone squadrons....

"Commanding and executive officers, as well as department heads of MQ-25 squadrons, will be filled by aviators and flight officers administratively screened for those commands.
During the first 4-5 years of the program, some MQ-25 AVOs will come from other Type/Model/Series as we build up the knowledge base, with the first 3-4 deployments having a mix of existing unrestricted line and new warrants making up the ready room."

Navy creates program for specialists to operate MQ-25 Stingray drone - UPI.com

A U.S. Navy warrant officer specialty for Aerial Vehicle Operators was announced this week, with plans to train about 450 personnel for the designation.

www.upi.com

Navy Announces Aerial Vehicle Operator Warrant Officer Specialty

The Navy announced a new warrant officer specialty designator whose job will be to operate carrier-based MQ-25 Stingray unmanned aerial vehicles, which are expected to start appearing in fleet carrier

www.navy.mil

 

[OscarMyers]

Any idea if these will be OP-T billets? I've pretty much shot myself in the foot for OP-DH, but wouldn't be totally against an OP-T billet standing up MQ-25...

 

[Uncle Fester]

Interesting. Really wasn’t expecting Big Navy to go with a WO route for Stingray AVO manning. Curious to see if this model is expanded to Fire Scout and Triton too. The NAVADMIN at least leaves that as a possibility.

The Navy really needs to create some sort of UAS career specialty track for the Group 4/5 communities, whether it’s this or something else. As it is, nobody’s getting enough time in the platforms to build up a critical mass of experience. Big UAS don’t need stick and rudder skills but there’s no substitute for knowing your airplane...big reason we’ve crashed way more of the damn things than we should’ve.

 

[IKE]

IMO, we need a new designator: 1330.

• Medical requirements are different.
• Training track is different.
• But you're still going to want DHs, COs, etc.
• Fire Scout is showing the error of manned+unmanned squadron composition, from both the maintenance and pilot perspectives.

 

[Ektar]

The Navy really needs to create some sort of UAS career specialty track for the Group 4/5 communities, whether it’s this or something else. As it is, nobody’s getting enough time in the platforms to build up a critical mass of experience. Big UAS don’t need stick and rudder skills but there’s no substitute for knowing your airplane...big reason we’ve crashed way more of the damn things than we should’ve.

This!

I'm a Triton AVO on the reserve side and I see these problems from the outside/reserve point of view. The JO's I fly with know their plane, hands down no question. The problem lies in that we don't know what the "robot" will do from time to time. They know the systems and what is documented in NATPOS, but there is so much that is outside of NATOPs it's amazing.

The Navy didn't help the situation by fielding an airframe that was half tested as well. The idea of save money and send it to the squadron isn't working that well. I can share more detail, but we'd be here a while and I'm not sure this is the right forum.

If the Navy were to use straight stick AVOs during this part of its UAV programs, the incident rate would be much higher. The implicit knowledge and experience a fleet aviator brings to the UAS world as an AVO is invaluable and has prevented many mishaps. The Navy will have a challenge teaching that decision making to WO AVOs.

 

[HeartofTexas]

Navy Announces Aerial Vehicle Operator Warrant Officer Specialty

The Navy announced a new warrant officer specialty designator whose job will be to operate carrier-based MQ-25 Stingray unmanned aerial vehicles, which are expected to start appearing in fleet carrier

www.navy.mil

"The Navy announced a new warrant officer specialty designator whose job will be to operate carrier-based MQ-25 Stingray unmanned aerial vehicles, which are expected to start appearing in fleet carrier air wings sometime in 2024."

 

[Dontcallmegump]

"...these officers will earn their own distinctive Navy "wings of gold" warfare device and be assigned the 737X designator."

You heard it first here folks, half wings are making a comeback!

 

[Notanaviator]

"...these officers will earn their own distinctive Navy "wings of gold" warfare device and be assigned the 737X designator."

You heard it first here folks, half wings are making a comeback!

StingWings™️?

 

[hscs]

This!

I'm a Triton AVO on the reserve side and I see these problems from the outside/reserve point of view. The JO's I fly with know their plane, hands down no question. The problem lies in that we don't know what the "robot" will do from time to time. They know the systems and what is documented in NATPOS, but there is so much that is outside of NATOPs it's amazing.

The Navy didn't help the situation by fielding an airframe that was half tested as well. The idea of save money and send it to the squadron isn't working that well. I can share more detail, but we'd be here a while and I'm not sure this is the right forum.

If the Navy were to use straight stick AVOs during this part of its UAV programs, the incident rate would be much higher. The implicit knowledge and experience a fleet aviator brings to the UAS world as an AVO is invaluable and has prevented many mishaps. The Navy will have a challenge teaching that decision making to WO AVOs.

Wonder if they will use the AWs turned CWOs - many of them end up on CVNs as TAOs.

 

[Dontcallmegump]

StingWings™️?

That could work, until these new warrants end up driving the tritons and whatever other UAVs they come up with.

 

[SynixMan]

Honestly dirigible wings have a storied history, bring em back!

 

[ChuckMK23]

This!

I'm a Triton AVO on the reserve side and I see these problems from the outside/reserve point of view. The JO's I fly with know their plane, hands down no question. The problem lies in that we don't know what the "robot" will do from time to time. They know the systems and what is documented in NATPOS, but there is so much that is outside of NATOPs it's amazing.

The Navy didn't help the situation by fielding an airframe that was half tested as well. The idea of save money and send it to the squadron isn't working that well. I can share more detail, but we'd be here a while and I'm not sure this is the right forum.

If the Navy were to use straight stick AVOs during this part of its UAV programs, the incident rate would be much higher. The implicit knowledge and experience a fleet aviator brings to the UAS world as an AVO is invaluable and has prevented many mishaps. The Navy will have a challenge teaching that decision making to WO AVOs.

You could take this and apply it to 737MAX....

 

[Hair Warrior]

Very cool. Maybe they will expand it to other platforms, e.g. MQ-8B/C, MQ-4C.

 

[NevarYalnal]

i assume large as carriers are, space is still at a premium on ships. will drones be taking up some of the manned craft spots?

 

[Swanee]

Nice to know that Pilots won't have to worry about getting assigned to drones after primary like they do in the Air Force

The 18X community has been strong enough that this hasn't happened in 5-10 years, and it peaked around 2005, when the MQ-1 and MQ-9 transition started.

Interesting. Really wasn’t expecting Big Navy to go with a WO route for Stingray AVO manning. Curious to see if this model is expanded to Fire Scout and Triton too. The NAVADMIN at least leaves that as a possibility.

The Navy really needs to create some sort of UAS career specialty track for the Group 4/5 communities, whether it’s this or something else. As it is, nobody’s getting enough time in the platforms to build up a critical mass of experience. Big UAS don’t need stick and rudder skills but there’s no substitute for knowing your airplane...big reason we’ve crashed way more of the damn things than we should’ve.

I've always found it interesting that the Navy lags well behind the Marine Corps in this regard.


I find it laughable that they want to fill the AVO job with Warrant Officers. There is no future in that, and it won't professionalize the community because a Warrant Officer isn't a DH, XO, or CO. They don't fill staff billets anywhere like other aviators do.

This will only continue the bad attitudes in the Navy that drones are "beneath" manned airplane pilots (see the first response to johnboy above).