• 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

Future of NFO's in the Fleet

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

catpounce

Registered User
With the new plans for the F-35, falling apart P-3's, and the fact that NFO's don't go to Helos what airframes are expected to remain in the long run for NFO's? I had heard somewhere that a possible replacement for the P-3's would be built on the design of 747's. Has anyone else heard this or have any more info on it, or is it just bad gouge that I received? I've just heard allot about what FA's can expect in the future and am looking for an hint at what NFO's can expect for their careers
magnify_125.gif
. Thanks!
 
K

kimphil

Registered User
I don't think the future of the NFO is very bright. While I've no doubt that two sets (or more) of eyes in the cockpit are better than one, it isn't cost effective to build strike fighter aircraft that crew more than the pilot. With computers driving aviation technology now, compared to the opposite ten years ago, electronics are reducing crew sizes. The new version of the KC-130 doesn't have an NFO. The replacement for the EA-6B Prowler, the EF-18 "Growler" (assuming it is built) will have one NFO (or perhaps none). I wouldn't be suprised if EW aircraft are replaced with UAVs. I wouldn't count on knowing the crew complement of a future P-3 (or if the P-3 is replaced with a UAV).

However, my guess about a timeframe for this to happen is 20-30 years from now. You should have a future in the Navy now.
propeller_125.gif
Just hurry!

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mongol General: ...Conan, what is best in life?
Conan: To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of the women!
Mongol General: That is good.
 
C

catpounce

Registered User
That's the trend that's becomming apparent to me (although I didn't want to believe what I was seeing). I feel even luckier now since I'm getting my shot in September. Thanks for the info and a guess at the timeframe of all that is in the works.
 
wink

wink

War Hoover NFO.
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
NFOs disappearing from the fleet is so far out none of you guys have to worry about it. The E-2 and its replacement, not yet identified, will have NFOs. True, the EA-6B will be replaced by an aircraft with only one NFO. F-14 will be around a long time more and the two seat super bug will just about be a seat for seat replacement. P-3 absolutely will not be replaced with the B747. A Boeing proposal is the B757. My bet is on the new technology P-3. Still, lots of NFOs. And as to helos, there was a lot of serious talk about puting NFOs in the copilots seat of the SH60Bs when they came out. The Brits fly some helos with NFO types. I bet you will see that in your career. Why would you care if there was a net loss of NFO seats, as long as you have been selected?. You compete for promotion and most every other job in the navy as a Naval Officer, not just an NFO. In other cases you are lumped with other 13XX designators, ie all aviation officers. For those that think just the NFO is going extinct I refer you to comments by senior Navy program managers and admirals that the F-35 (JSF) will be the LAST manned tactical aircraft the navy EVER buys.
 
K

kimphil

Registered User
Originally posted by wink
NFOs disappearing from the fleet is so far out none of you guys have to worry about it. The E-2 and its replacement, not yet identified, will have NFOs. True, the EA-6B will be replaced by an aircraft with only one NFO. F-14 will be around a long time more and the two seat super bug will just about be a seat for seat replacement. P-3 absolutely will not be replaced with the B747. A Boeing proposal is the B757. My bet is on the new technology P-3. Still, lots of NFOs. And as to helos, there was a lot of serious talk about puting NFOs in the copilots seat of the SH60Bs when they came out. The Brits fly some helos with NFO types. I bet you will see that in your career. Why would you care if there was a net loss of NFO seats, as long as you have been selected?. You compete for promotion and most every other job in the navy as a Naval Officer, not just an NFO. In other cases you are lumped with other 13XX designators, ie all aviation officers. For those that think just the NFO is going extinct I refer you to comments by senior Navy program managers and admirals that the F-35 (JSF) will be the LAST manned tactical aircraft the navy EVER buys.
Click to expand...

I agree that current and new NFOs will have opportunities in the Navy and Marines for a long time. I think the big motivation for the military to switch to automation in the future is primarily driven by costs. UAVs are cheaper, and I anticipate future budget cuts forcing the military to adopt UAVs out of cost considerations. Computing technology will allow the military to do this quickly and cheaply (design platforms, avionics, build components, etc.) It took 66 years to go from a couple bicycle mechanics flying a plane a few hundred feet to landing a man on the moon. That's within a man's lifetime. Switching to UAVs will take much less time.

As far as the JSF being the last manned tactical aircraft the Navy buys, I wouldn't count on that. I say that because I think the military may be comfortable with UAVs doing recon, aerial refueling, electronic warfare, or transport, I think it will be quite a long time (30+ years) before it is comfortable with UCAVs making life or death decisions on its own. Those decisions could always be verified remotely, but in a future conflict with an advanced advesary (perhaps the French?) that link may be cut off, either by electronic warfare and/or kill vehicles that could take out satellites used to communicate with UCAVs. I think the military will need at least some manned tactical aircraft for quite a while.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mongol General: ...Conan, what is best in life?
Conan: To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of the women!
Mongol General: That is good.
 
wink

wink

War Hoover NFO.
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
kimphil,
You sound like an Air Farse officer. You ought to be ahamed of your self!! The Navy will lead the way on UAVs. Fact is the last missions the military will be comfortable with in UAVs is transport and AR. The key is combat losses. We can build UAVs cheaper and their loss, with out crew, is acceptable. We have been flying cruise missiles to targets hundreds of miles away for years and other data linked smart weapons with virtually no offensive disruption of command and control. Imagine a tactical aircraft that can pull 12 gs with almost immediate onset to avoid terrain or a missle. Human pilots can not do that. Not physically possible in terms of reaction times or g tolerance. I stand by those senior to me in a postion to know, the F-35 will probably be the last tactical aircraft the Navy buys. That said, we won't see them for several more years and their expected life cycle will be well into the 20 year time frame. That is a long time. More than enought time for UAV technology to go to the next generation, or two. Some of you guys will have the honor of sending them over the beach in revolutionary air combat. You should look forward to that.
 
H

Hudson

Registered User
I agree with wink. I don't know about the rest of you but it will be a long time before I get on a plane piloted only by computers. I don't care if deap blue is at the controles. Computers freeze. I also wouldn't get to upset about any changes that may or may not be coming down the tube. We are still talking about the military after all. I was a gunner on the Vulcan Gun system in the army. We heard rumors about the system being axed and we asked our senior enlisted people about it and they all said that the army had been talking about it for years and years. That said, when it was finaly replaced the avenger system took over and we were all retrained for it if we stayed in. The navy might get rid of a lot of things and replace them with uavs but some one has to run their systems and who better than a bunch of people already used to looking at computer screens. Seems like a likely cross over to me.
You should be wondering when and if they will go so far as to make them totaly automated. Can any one say Terminator or the Matrix. Seriously that stuff scares the crap out of me. When you program something to be protect itself can it really make the distinction between hostile intent and not?
 
theblakeness

theblakeness

Charlie dont surf!
pilot
@Wink,

Do you really think the F-14 will be around for that much longer? if so, thats awesome. I honestly cant think of another jet that has accomplished as much as the tomcat. I mean its been around for 30+ years and it still seems too be going pretty strong. honestly, (and this isnt a topgun junkie talking here) with the exception of maybe the f-22, I would have to say that the Topcat could possibly be the best jet ever built. You know that Grumman is just rolling in the filth from it.
 
K

kimphil

Registered User
I never said that we would never use UCAVs. That's ridiculous. We used Hellfire equipped UAVs in Afganistan and Yemen. In some conflict in the future, UCAVs will probably be preferable to sending in manned combat planes. What I said is, in a potential future conflict
I think it will be quite a long time (30+ years) before it [the military] is comfortable with UCAVs making life or death decisions on its own. Those decisions could always be verified remotely, but in a future conflict with an advanced advesary (perhaps the French?) that link may be cut off, either by electronic warfare and/or kill vehicles that could take out satellites used to communicate with UCAVs.
Click to expand...

Of course this is hypothetical. And yes, we haven't had our command and communications cut off. However, a future advesary may have that ability. Would we trust a UCAV, cut off from human control, to fly independently, identify and destroy enemy targets behind enemy lines? What if those targets were civilians? Or friendly troops? You've answered my statement by admitting you'd refuse to get on an automous UAV. Yet you'd trust it to identify and kill enemy targets? As long as we have control of the UCAV, it wouldn't be a problem, but ask it to make an independent judgement, that potentially could be a problem.

I agree with you, I would be uncomfortable getting on an automated transport. However, there are plenty of things that could be transported besides personnel--supplies, weapons, vehicles, etc. We already have UAVs that fly recon automously. Tranport and other mission profiles isn't a big stretch of the imagination.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mongol General: ...Conan, what is best in life?
Conan: To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of the women!
Mongol General: That is good.
 
phrogdriver

phrogdriver

More humble than you would understand
pilot
Super Moderator
C-130s never had NFOs, at least not in the USMC. We had an enlisted navigator, which is going away. The AF has officer navs. The Navy only had a couple 130s--don't know what they did.

Phrogs phorever
 
K

kimphil

Registered User
Originally posted by phrogdriver
C-130s never had NFOs, at least not in the USMC. We had an enlisted navigator, which is going away. The AF has officer navs. The Navy only had a couple 130s--don't know what they did.

Phrogs phorever
Click to expand...

Thanks. I knew somebody got replaced with electronics in the new version.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mongol General: ...Conan, what is best in life?
Conan: To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of the women!
Mongol General: That is good.
 
G

grouch

Registered User
kimphil, you do realize the lamentation of the women come from the Mongols raping there conquest. These sounds will become all too familiar to you when your job goes the way of the UAV. It will happen if for no other reason than politics. There is a lot of money to be made with any new military technology and a sizeable chunck of it will find it's way to the pockets of our elected officials. At that time you and the Mongol's conquest will see things in much the same light, "rape, if ya can't do anything about it, might as well just sit back and enjoy the ride."
 
V

vegita1220

User
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it really isn't that hard to fry a computer, especially the more sophisticated they are. Know how you're not supposed to bring magnets near computers? And certain forms of radiation will also fry computers(Goldeneye got something there).
The only currently feasible way to "fry" a pilot is to shoot at him with large pieces of fast moving metal. By doing so, you might as well just shoot the whole damn plane.

That said, what if our future opponents design weaponry specifically designed to F up computers? Then a heavily UCAV dependent force is screwed.

But if you wanna know what REALLY scares me...it's gotta be the ABL(Airborne Laser). It's designed to hit ballistic missiles rocketing up at over Mach 6. With a decent fire control system, killing planes will be like burning ants with a barbecue lighter. Zap, zap, zap.
 
P

privateer

Registered User
Yes you can fry computers but this doesn't leave a piloted plane out of the loop. Just how many are already on a modern fighter? Knock those out, you knock him out as well. Talk to a guy that seves on an AEGIS platform and let him tell you what they can do to planes, birds or anything else they feel like...it's is freaky stuff man. I say freaky.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top