• 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

FY-20 active O-5 results

Treetop Flyer

Well-Known Member
pilot
Yup. Again, point is that even someone that achieves "the highest level of celebrity a Navy pilot can" (in your opinion) is still being ranked by SWOs, Submariners, SEALs, EOD, and every flavor of aviator. I'm a SWO, I know very little about air-to-air combat (and I think that air-air combat is cool), but I don't think that the talent required of a Super Hornet pilot to shoot down a 70's era jet flown by a Syrian is impressive. Sorry.
Agreed. The question I would ask is how much of the recognition he received was because of the actual achievement involved versus being the first navy kill in a long time. I obviously don’t know the guy who might be a total rock star, but would a different competent pilot have done the exact same thing if he had happened to be in that situation?
 

Flash

SEVAL/ECMO
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Perhaps a Silver Star got downgraded to the DFC?
He was awarded a DFC.
IIRC, for most Navy kills since the end of Vietnam (7 enemy fighter/attack aircraft) the aviators (11) have received DFC's though some (2) have gotten Silver Stars. I would not be surprised if he was put in for a Silver Star and it got downgraded by big Navy.
 

SlickAg

Registered User
pilot
Just did some LinkedIn stalking and the #2 guy on the CDR board is a JSOC EOD officer, Oxford Grad, and White House Fellow. #1 looks like a Joint Staff/TOPGUN/Harvard guy. Looks like the system works. Been talking about this at work recently (merit ranking) -- pretty sure it takes more than a "fleet EP" to make that top 15% cut.

@SlickAg WRT posts about the guy that scored the Su-22 kill. I think that specific communities values don't matter so much in the admin boards. To wit, every single 1130 on the board likely has many more kills than the aviator in question.

White House Fellow, Harvard, Oxford, Joint Staff, JSOC... these are bullets that are very well understood and valued by all URL board members.
We asked the question about what criteria were being used to define “merit.” Apparently they were addressed in community briefs to the board.
Again, to beat the dead horse, I don't doubt the impressive accomplishments of the merit selects.

Aviation leadership had the chance to stand up in front of the board members and say what matters to them in terms of merit selections. If people who constantly pontificate "Fly, Fight, Win" or some version thereof said that they value Harvard MPAs and Rhodes Scholarships (which are based on undergraduate achievement) over successful and proven combat leadership then I think the Navy has lost its way.
 

SlickAg

Registered User
pilot
IIRC, for most Navy kills since the end of Vietnam (7 enemy fighter/attack aircraft) the aviators (11) have received DFC's though some (2) have gotten Silver Stars. I would not be surprised if he was put in for a Silver Star and it got downgraded by big Navy.
The Desert Storm crews (2 x F-18 and 1 F-14) got Silver Stars.

The Gulf of Sidra crews (4 x F-14) got DFCs.
 

Flash

SEVAL/ECMO
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
The Desert Storm crews (2 x F-18 and 1 F-14) got Silver Stars.

The Gulf of Sidra crews (4 x F-14) got DFCs.
I forgot about the F-14 killing the helo, didn't know they got Silver Stars for it.
 

Hair Warrior

JO 1835
Contributor
How much of the award is due to merit of the act, versus the amount of danger the service member was in while performing the act?
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Aviation leadership had the chance to stand up in front of the board members and say what matters to them in terms of merit selections. If people who constantly pontificate "Fly, Fight, Win" or some version thereof said that they value Harvard MPAs and Rhodes Scholarships (which are based on undergraduate achievement) over successful and proven combat leadership then I think the Navy has lost its way.
I absolutely agree with that sentiment, but let me frame it in another way. If the community leadership stands up to highlight something that specific that applies to exactly one person, then that becomes problematic from a fairness standpoint. Now, if it's framed in more broad terms, I.E. "We highly value combat effectiveness, lethality, etc," then the person briefing his record highlights that specific accompishment appropriately, then the board members will be able to connect the dots.

Bottom line, we don't know what was said, what was briefed, or what else in his record may or may not have influenced board member's decisions. Maybe he didn't have JPME. Maybe he didn't have CDO/UW. We don't know, so I don't see the utility in fixating on this one aspect of his record.
 

SlickAg

Registered User
pilot
I absolutely agree with that sentiment, but let me frame it in another way. If the community leadership stands up to highlight something that specific that applies to exactly one person, then that becomes problematic from a fairness standpoint. Now, if it's framed in more broad terms, I.E. "We highly value combat effectiveness, lethality, etc," then the person briefing his record highlights that specific accompishment appropriately, then the board members will be able to connect the dots.

Bottom line, we don't know what was said, what was briefed, or what else in his record may or may not have influenced board member's decisions. Maybe he didn't have JPME. Maybe he didn't have CDO/UW. We don't know, so I don't see the utility in fixating on this one aspect of his record.
I agree with you that it's implausible and tacky to stand up and say "promote the MiG killer!". But I'm using his record as an example to drive my point home of why I think Aviation sort of dropped the ball on this one.

Special Warfare's slide included this line to help the board identify a "record of particular merit": Awards for combat or national mission actions. Not every SEAL officer has had the opportunity to engage in some sort of meaningful combat action. However, I don't think that using combat awards makes it unfair to everyone else. In fact, I'd love to see Aviation follow suit mainly just to piss off CAG 5 people. Just kidding, they're already mad enough at the world for having to eat the garbage that American restaurants refer to as "sushi".

I also found it interesting from that apparently maritime communities don't discriminate based on ticket length. I realize that they have a lot of O-4s but that just struck me as odd. What does the ACSB think of the guy who got the 2 month CoC #1 EP in December, e.g. if he was that good wouldn't he have been the #1 during the periodic and detached the day before the CoC...?
 

CommodoreMid

Whateva! I do what I want!
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
It’s because of how we structure changes of command. Our CO tours are only a year and COC happens in May/June. Makes the timing for O4s basically irrelevant as everyone has almost the same ticket length.
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
But I'm using his record as an example to drive my point home of why I think Aviation sort of dropped the ball on this one.
I get it, but without knowing the totality of what's in his record, neither of us are really in a position to do that. He could have a spotless record, and your point would be completely valid... or, he could have something that raised an eyebrow and the only reason he screened was because of his award and kill. Either scenario is possible.

So, yes, by all means, we should focus more on warfighting and community leaders should emphasize that during their board briefs. MOB's board results probably aren't a good barometer of how well we're doing on that.
 

DanMa1156

Land of the Milk and Honey.
pilot
Contributor
It’s because of how we structure changes of command. Our CO tours are only a year and COC happens in May/June. Makes the timing for O4s basically irrelevant as everyone has almost the same ticket length.
Just curious - why only 1 year tours? Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but most of the CVW deviates from 18 months right? Even in CNATRA it is typically an 18 month CO tour.
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Just curious - why only 1 year tours? Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but most of the CVW deviates from 18 months right? Even in CNATRA it is typically an 18 month CO tour.
15 months is standard in TACAIR. VP and TACAIR were 18 months ~20 years ago. Not sure exactly what drove the change.
 

Flash

SEVAL/ECMO
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
15 months is standard in TACAIR. VP and TACAIR were 18 months ~20 years ago. Not sure exactly what drove the change.
VQ CO's had 12 month command tours ~20 years ago, I thought VP was similar. The reason for the change is pretty simple, more CO's can be cycled through.
 

CommodoreMid

Whateva! I do what I want!
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Main reason I heard from one of my skippers awhile ago was to ensure all of our OP DHs made O5 and so ticket length wasn’t a thing for CO selection. How true that is, no idea, but sounds plausible.
 
Top