Is the purpose of having an AVO Warrant (and not a URL) to allow them to get really, really good at flying a specific unmanned platform and not waste time or brainpower with unnecessary training (e.g. SERE, water egress, etc.) or unrelated collateral duties often assigned to O1-O4s?
-
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
AVO Warrant Officer (Aerial Vehicle Operator) MQ-25
- Thread starter johnboyA6E
- Start date
I don't know what Navy you're in but the Navy I'm in will absolutely make those guys go to water survival training.
Definitely going to need a NATOPs qualified ODO as well.
And probably have crew rest limits too ??
I'll bite. I'd be interested to know what it is you think he kinda fucked up?
Cuz I was about 25 miles away while the whole thing played out and I don't recollect him noticeably fucking anything up.
We watched tape together the next day, employment seemed to go as any employment in that kind of scenario would go.
You may be right, VFA may be all fucked up but at least we know when to appropriately use "striking the head of the snake".
Every time I wonder why Naval Aviation can't do something more like the Army or Air Force, I remember that we deploy on ships. While the other services can just add another C-5 or passenger fight to their deployment plans at an incremental cost, we can only fit so many sailors on a ship. It's why our pilots are DIVOs and DHs and most enlisted folks take a stint in the galley.
The Navy I’m in thinks that 2 weeks of training is ? to be a naval officer, and if there’s ever a shipboard fire that needs fighting, or an occasion to use a firearm, they are just going to throw me st the flames/enemy and hope my carcass doesn’t make it worse.
Leadership as a warrant in Army Aviation depends on the platform, the mission and the deployment. Oh yeah...and the individual MOS and assignment. We'll leave the whole ship driving part for another discussion somewhere else on the forums (it's been done).
Assault and attack units tend to deploy at the battalion level...and occasionally at the company level. Individual autonomy is limited and leadership is very top-down. Warrants don't lead in this situation, they perform and advise. Medevac deploys as a forward support medical platoon/team with a footprint very similar to an HSL/HSM/HSC small ship det. The OIC is an O-3, but the maintenance officer and standardization officers, who acts as operations, are warrants. They get some leadership experience, but tend to not write NCOERs or have 'command' responsibilities.
Then you have the odd things that happen on deployments...mostly combat. Units get fragmented and small 'dets' form in just about any shithole they are needed. Still, there is almost always an O there for command.
Staff jobs usually reserved for Os in the Navy are often filled with warrants up to and including the brigade level. As a CW3 at the brigade, my counterparts in the Navy I worked with were O-4s. However in my case I was much more successful than my CW4 predecessor and successor because of my previous experience as a Navy O-4.
Then, the national guard has additional special cases. Companies are sometimes broken out across several states. I am a det OIC as a CW4 with 96 people authorized. I have only 55 assigned right now due to the unit being new. On deployment my command status goes away and the company is commanded by an O-4. CONUS I administratively report to an O-5, the battalion commander of the local state GSAB.
TLDR; Army aviation warrants usually are not placed in leadership positions, but there are exceptions.
Assault and attack units tend to deploy at the battalion level...and occasionally at the company level. Individual autonomy is limited and leadership is very top-down. Warrants don't lead in this situation, they perform and advise. Medevac deploys as a forward support medical platoon/team with a footprint very similar to an HSL/HSM/HSC small ship det. The OIC is an O-3, but the maintenance officer and standardization officers, who acts as operations, are warrants. They get some leadership experience, but tend to not write NCOERs or have 'command' responsibilities.
Then you have the odd things that happen on deployments...mostly combat. Units get fragmented and small 'dets' form in just about any shithole they are needed. Still, there is almost always an O there for command.
Staff jobs usually reserved for Os in the Navy are often filled with warrants up to and including the brigade level. As a CW3 at the brigade, my counterparts in the Navy I worked with were O-4s. However in my case I was much more successful than my CW4 predecessor and successor because of my previous experience as a Navy O-4.
Then, the national guard has additional special cases. Companies are sometimes broken out across several states. I am a det OIC as a CW4 with 96 people authorized. I have only 55 assigned right now due to the unit being new. On deployment my command status goes away and the company is commanded by an O-4. CONUS I administratively report to an O-5, the battalion commander of the local state GSAB.
TLDR; Army aviation warrants usually are not placed in leadership positions, but there are exceptions.
Fair enough. I was definitely speaking from ignorance about the particulars of the other services. Let me ask this in the hopes of at least comparing Galas to Granny Smiths:
How many people (OIC down to junior most grunt) would the Army use to deploy 2× H-60s for 6 months ISO of another unit with no other aviation support around (other than fuel and parts/logistics)?
Closest I can come is a comparison to a medevac deployment for 9-12 months. The company deploys with 4-5 FSMTs to an area, where each FSMT is located approximately 50-100 nm away from each other. The HHC FSMT is slightly heavy, with a few extra back shop mechanics, a 1SG, etc...They will do the more complex mantenance..ie greater than a 40 hr PMS inspection on an H-60. The other FSMTs (DETs) look like this:
OIC: CPT
Platoon Ldr: 1/2LT
Ops/Stanz: CW2-CW4
Maint: CW2-CW4
TACOPS/AMSO: CW2-CW4
Medevac Pilots: +3 (Total of 6 or 7)
Medics: 3-4
Crew Chief/Mechanics: 3-4
Ops NCO: 1 or 2 E4-E5
Optional Supply NCO: E4-E5
There are always variations and the FSMTs are more often short vs having extra people. The FSMT FOB size can range from anything as big as Taji, all the way down to an old abandoned cement factory with minimal personnel for security. I have been deployed to FOBs on medevac with a footprint of less than 100 people TOTAL, including refuelers, infantry guarding the fences, etc... These are scary.
So, in some ways the Army is significantly more autonomous. In other ways they are less (ie a company head quarters 50-100 nm away). Sometimes medevac deploys with an entire GSAB and brigade. This is the equivalent of a CVN based deployment. There is no shortage of 'leadership' to interfere (cough cough) or help out in this case. There are some sharp young O-3s out there that prove their worth, and there are those that fail spectacularly. The great thing is that they sometimes have VERY experienced warrants to advise them. Those that fail are almost always the same ones who ignore advice from warrants and senior NCOs.
I never liked half-lieutenants. It wasn't until they made whole-lieutenant that they had some knowledges. ?
Just kidding..excellent description @RobLyman
Thanks, that's paints a nice picture. I don't think it helps compare sizes (a common AW pastime), because Navy detachments are capable of phase maintenance (200-h, used to be 175-h on legacy birds). I think my DDG Det was typical with 6 pilots, 3 aircrew, and 20 maintainers led by 1 CPO to operate 2 60Rs for 7 months. I was going to guess the Navy footprint was smaller, but didn't think about differences in level of maintenance.
That's probably enough of a threadjack.
You're old