FY'07 Flying Warrant Officer Program

[Pitchlock]

Being a dedicated p-3 PPC would be a great job...I guess the downside is that you would be a dedicated ready one pilot as well. Although your video game skills would improve dramatically.

The next program the Navy needs is for 'traditional' pilots who have become disillusioned from the whole career path thing, but then who would ever become the CO??????

 

[Pitchlock]

The more I think about this topic, the more I think its a bad idea. 99% of us became naval aviators because we wanted to fly and become combat leaders. We deal with the ground jobs because they have to be done. If the flying responsibilities are shifted to Warrant Officers then the commissioned officers become desk jockeys.

Why would I go through the Academy if I knew I was going to be doing the paperwork for those doing the fighting? I'm talking about JOs here.

I don't think the naval academy is a prereq for combat leadership, but it is where you want those who aspire to become combat leaders to cut their teeth. If not we should do away with the place.

JOs should be flying, and leading aircrews. They should be the IPs and Natops officers.

I am definitely not a fan of P-3 work environment - it could be dramatically improved. Its dysfunctional (Its a bunch of land based guys trying to pretend they are on a ship) But 'losing' flight hours to WO's does not seem to be a good answer.

 

[robav8r]

I am definitely not a fan of P-3 work environment - it could be dramatically improved. Its dysfunctional (Its a bunch of land based guys trying to pretend they are on a ship) But 'losing' flight hours to WO's does not seem to be a good answer.

Good point. We definitely go "overboard" at times in the P-3 community, hence the joke "Black Shoes of Naval Aviation." I have never been in a community where you couldn't call someone by their callsign up to the rank of LCDR. A JO calling a Dept Head by his first name? Never happen. I've also never been in a community where it was "frowned upon" (to put it lightly) to call and talk to your detailer about orders. I did my "JO" tour in an east coast VP squadron and heard more nautical terms in the course of a day than I did on my shooter tour on the boat. Funny stuff!
:icon_carn

 

[webmaster]

I am definitely not a fan of P-3 work environment - it could be dramatically improved. Its dysfunctional (Its a bunch of land based guys trying to pretend they are on a ship)

Maybe the squadrons you were in, but not in the ones I have had the pleasure of being stationed at. I know the P3 community as a whole has a lot of faults, but I also know from direct experience serving tours in two other communities that the grass is definitely "greener" in a P3 squadron. My worst day in a P3 squadron, was by far better than any in black shoe land.

 

[Pitchlock]

My worst day in a P3 squadron, was by far better than any in black shoe land.

You are 100% right. The problem is the p-3 navy invents ways to make itself miserable because of some unnecessary guilt trip. P-3 lifestyle is a good deal, don't be ashamed of it. Work on the mission, not on trying to suffer...

 

[webmaster]

Pitchlock, sigh, its crazy how we as a community make things more difficult for ourselves. So much "hinges" on the quality of the leadership, and the direction the organization is going in.

 

[Flash]

The more I think about this topic, the more I think its a bad idea. 99% of us became naval aviators because we wanted to fly and become combat leaders. We deal with the ground jobs because they have to be done. If the flying responsibilities are shifted to Warrant Officers then the commissioned officers become desk jockeys.

Why would I go through the Academy if I knew I was going to be doing the paperwork for those doing the fighting? I'm talking about JOs here.

I don't think the naval academy is a prereq for combat leadership, but it is where you want those who aspire to become combat leaders to cut their teeth. If not we should do away with the place.

JOs should be flying, and leading aircrews. They should be the IPs and Natops officers.

I am definitely not a fan of P-3 work environment - it could be dramatically improved. Its dysfunctional (Its a bunch of land based guys trying to pretend they are on a ship) But 'losing' flight hours to WO's does not seem to be a good answer.

Agree with all of the above. I think it will create inequalities in Naval Aviation that do not exist today and will cause more problems than it is worth. This takes nothing away from the men and women who are doing it, but I think it will can have far reaching effects on Naval Aviation that are are not being taken in to consideration. This to a community that is not a supporting branch to the primary combat arms like it is in the Army, but to one of the core missions of the US Navy. All for the sake of saving some money.......

 

[Pitchlock]

Ok, here is my solution. Lets put WO's into P3 squadrons to maintain the 'corporate knowledge' of the mission and airframes. The commissioned officers will be carrier and helo pilots on their 'shore tour' or disassociated sea tour.

AND LETS GO BACK TO CQ for everbody in primary. Of course we will have to bring back the t-28s and lady lex.

 

[MasterBates]

One of my self-serving thoughts when this was announced (and I was still in HSL) was that the ratio of Ground Job Time to Flight Time was going to change in a bad way.

IIRC, the brief we got, the "Big Ticket" JO Jobs were still going to be done by O's vice W's (NATOPS, QAO, Det Mo, AOPS, ASO). So we have just as much work to do on the big end..

I am sure that the W's would pick up some of the ground jobs, but their primary job is to fly.

 

[MasterBates]

AND LETS GO BACK TO CQ for everbody in primary. Of course we will have to bring back the t-28s and lady lex.

I wish that could still be done.. I felt "cheated" since helo bubbas (and P2/3s) back in the day got to CQ.

 

[zab1001]

Or you could offer a CWO transition to guys already qualified in these airframes. I know plenty of people who'd take the pay cut to stay in a flying gig. Already winged, proven, and experienced.

"But what about the cost for ACIP and flight pay?" - Fine, no ACCP and cap flight pay.

Yeah, I know, never gonna happen.

 

[thull]

I know I'm in over my head here, but hasn't this warrant officer program (with it's specialty in flying) been around in the Army for a while? IT does seem strange to have different categories of officers who "specialize" in flying only and commissioned officers have to deal with more bs on the ground. Is this an accurate perception?

 

[Flash]

I know I'm in over my head here, but hasn't this warrant officer program (with it's specialty in flying) been around in the Army for a while? IT does seem strange to have different categories of officers who "specialize" in flying only and commissioned officers have to deal with more bs on the ground. Is this an accurate perception?

It has been around the Army for a long time, and for the most part it works for them. It is not the greatest deal for the O's though, they get less flight time than the WO's and the career opportunities seem to stop post battalion CO tour (squadron CO).

I think it works okay for the Army because their aviation assets are all support to their primary combat arms, like infantry and armor. In the Navy, aviation is one of the three primary combat arms. That makes for a much bigger difference than most people realize.

 

[robav8r]

he problem is the p-3 navy invents ways to make itself miserable because of some unnecessary guilt trip.

"Nail on the Head."

 

[thull]

It has been around the Army for a long time, and for the most part it works for them. It is not the greatest deal for the O's though, they get less flight time than the WO's and the career opportunities seem to stop post battalion CO tour (squadron CO).

I think it works okay for the Army because their aviation assets are all support to their primary combat arms, like infantry and armor. In the Navy, aviation is one of the three primary combat arms. That makes for a much bigger difference than most people realize.

Interesting, thanks for the info. On that second part, I'm not too clear... Are you saying that the Army gets more flight time in general than Navy, so there's more room for the WO program?