It's finally happening . . . Big Navy is canning the stack rank FITREP/Eval

[RadicalDude]

Let me barney this for you again.
1. Single seat squadrons should have 4 DHs and 2 seat have something like 6. There are going to be lots of unfilled seats in the future because we aren't making as many DHs as we need to.
2. The jobs that those missing DHs should be doing aren't going to go away. The work will still need to be done. If there isn't a super JO stepping up then it will be the remaining DHs that will have to cover the slack.
3. I'm not saying we have 5-6 O-4s in a single seat squadron. What I am saying is that if a squadron is going to have 2 DHs, like happened to me, then we could fill that gap with a post DH O-4. I'm sure you could find plenty of O-4s that would rather just stay and fly then going off to joint land.
4. I'm sure you are applying all of your experience as a DH to this conversation and know absolutely the ins and outs of what it takes to do the DH job.



For DHs, there is a wide variety of tactical abilities when coming back to the fleet. You have guys that are coming from STRIKE, or just off their training O tours, that don't need any sort of work-up to DH. Then you have guys that are fresh out of their 3-4 years as a TPS instructor that are going to need a lot of time getting back up to speed. Yes, having them instruct SFWT flights gets them back into the books, but it can be at a detriment to the JOs they are instructing.

As an Ops O I knew who the strong instructors were, and they tended to get the majority of the SFWT flights. It is completely up to the individual DH on what level of tactical proficiency they want to attain. Depending on where they are coming from that may be easy or extremely difficult.

Thanks for breaking it down for me, bro. Outside of fairly land (CVW-5), most squadrons don't have enough hours to fly the guys they have. Still a problem. Also I'm pretty sure many DHs really don't want a bunch of random dudes senior to them but junior to the front office floating around the ready room and fucking with their DH chi, throwing out good ideas and whatnot. Super JOs are one thing, there's precedent for senior JO figures in the TO.

Sounds like a wet dream for post-DH patch wearers. Shit deal for everyone else.

But that's just me, bro.

 

[sevenhelmet]

For DHs, there is a wide variety of tactical abilities when coming back to the fleet. You have guys that are coming from STRIKE, or just off their training O tours, that don't need any sort of work-up to DH. Then you have guys that are fresh out of their 3-4 years as a TPS instructor that are going to need a lot of time getting back up to speed. Yes, having them instruct SFWT flights gets them back into the books, but it can be at a detriment to the JOs they are instructing.

As an Ops O I knew who the strong instructors were, and they tended to get the majority of the SFWT flights. It is completely up to the individual DH on what level of tactical proficiency they want to attain. Depending on where they are coming from that may be easy or extremely difficult.

Fair enough, not everyone makes the best instructor, just like not everyone chooses to maintain the same level of tactical proficiency. As long as the type of one's shoulder patch is seen as an asset, not a detriment, I'm fine with having to work harder than some out of the gate.

Just curious, but who did you know coming off a TPS IP tour to DH? That's really rare; TPS instructor is usually a post-DH job, due to timing reasons.

 

[pilot_man]

Radical douche, I yield to your vast expertise on life as a DH.

I really am done with you. You sound like a child.

 

[RadicalDude]

Radical douche, I yield to your vast expertise on life as a DH.

I really am done with you. You sound like a child.

Good talk.

 

[Farva01]

Honestly, I'm looking forward to the instructional aspect of being a DH (at least once I'm reasonably back up to speed, tactics-wise). IMO, there's value added in teaching- the instructor usually learns a lot too. I don't think that's something I'd want to dilute, even while needing to work 4I, strike lead, etc, and dealing with the admin demands of being a DH. No doubt it's stressful, but it forces DHs to stay relevant in the airplane, which is a good thing.

But that's just, like, my rosy pre-DH opinion, man. I'll give it my best shot and report back on my findings.

This is something I try to explain to the JO's I work with: I legitimately enjoyed my DH tour, it has been my best tour in the Navy. The main reason that it was great showing up to a squadron and being able to contribute on day one. Being able to instruct every mission as well as flying around the boat being a non-issue (i.e. merely admin). Focusing on that part of the job is what will make it a good DH tour. The ground job piece will happen in the background regardless.

 

[UInavy]

Flight hours/tactical flying is a zero sum game unless you increase funding.

This is patently false. I'm not sure if you mean this as a ratio as depicted (which wouldn't really make much sense) or within the context of the rest of your post, where having someone with more experience teaching and flying 'dilutes' the other DHs. Either way, know this- squadrons are never going to be overmanned. If you can skew the squadron's experience and training curves to the right by adding some experienced folks that want to stay in the Fleet and teach- that's good for the squadron and good for the Fleet. Flight hours aren't candy to be handed out as rewards, they're assets to be used to create combat-ready aircrew as efficiently as possible.

 

[RadicalDude]

This is patently false. I'm not sure if you mean this as a ratio as depicted (which wouldn't really make much sense) or within the context of the rest of your post, where having someone with more experience teaching and flying 'dilutes' the other DHs. Either way, know this- squadrons are never going to be overmanned. If you can skew the squadron's experience and training curves to the right by adding some experienced folks that want to stay in the Fleet and teach- that's good for the squadron and good for the Fleet. Flight hours aren't candy to be handed out as rewards, they're assets to be used to create combat-ready aircrew as efficiently as possible.

Every VFA squadron in my airwing had an average of 2 up aircraft for the majority of the time between deployment and the start of workups. Yes, we all got healthier as we headed into the workup cycle, but we were often resource-limited in getting quals and flight time. Sacrifices had to be made--we kept kicking the SFWT can down the road, ended up having to waive a decent amount of stuff, JOs left with 250 less hours than the guys had when they showed up. Some left without their Level IV. We were not evaluator limited, we were flight hour and maintenance-limited. I don't see how adding aircrew would help that situation.

Maybe my experience was a fluke, who knows. Maybe it could work. It would certainly add an interesting dynamic.

 

[UInavy]

Every VFA squadron in my airwing had an average of 2 up aircraft for the majority of the time between deployment and the start of workups. Yes, we all got healthier as we headed into the workup cycle, but we were often resource-limited in getting quals and flight time. Sacrifices had to be made--we kept kicking the SFWT can down the road, ended up having to waive a decent amount of stuff, JOs left with 250 less hours than the guys had when they showed up. Some left without their Level IV. We were not evaluator limited, we were flight hour and maintenance-limited. I don't see how adding aircrew would help that situation.

Maybe my experience was a fluke, who knows. Maybe it could work. It would certainly add an interesting dynamic.

Your RBA and the average previous experience of the flight leads/instructors are not coupled in any way. I'm not arguing for 2.5 aircrew per seat. I'm arguing for more efficient utilization of limited airframes (hours were low due to lack of FMC aircraft, not FHP allocation, right?) by putting more experienced folks in the seats on the other side of the formation. Better *average* instruction/experience leads to better training. Better training leads to more quals.

 

[RadicalDude]

Your RBA and the average previous experience of the flight leads/instructors are not coupled in any way. I'm not arguing for 2.5 aircrew per seat. I'm arguing for more efficient utilization of limited airframes (hours were low due to lack of FMC aircraft, not FHP allocation, right?) by putting more experienced folks in the seats on the other side of the formation. Better *average* instruction/experience leads to better training. Better training leads to more quals.

That tracks.

 

[Spekkio]

First of all, my "10% number" wasnt meant to be entirely factual. I was making a point. Which you missed. Secondly, there's a big difference between "making O-5" and screening for command and staying in the cockpit. Much like there's a big difference between "making O-4" and making Operational DH. Everybody knows that "they can make O-5" and they still walk. Newsflash: a lot of us don't give much of a shit about making O-5. The reason people walk and say "fuck this" is because being stuck as the O-5 CDC-O on the USS Whatever is a fucking dead-end, shitty job and not flying for 7-8 years makes them damn-near unemployable outside the Navy in any Aviation capacity so they might as well say "fuck it" and go do something worthwhile that might actually be fulfilling and not result in wanting to blow their brains out. Mind you, all for 50% of basic pay. Furthermore, you can quote all the percentages you want but until you put a set of wings on and spend 5+ years seeing (not to mention 10 or 20) how things are done in the Aviation community then maybe you should stay in your swim lane bud.

I hate to break it to you, but the people making decisions on promotions come from all different communities and they've all been successful within the current system that promotes, on average, the top 5/6ths of LTs to LCDR. And a lot of the big-picture requirements are written in statute. If you think policy and statute ought to change, you'll have to do better than emotional tirades. Your 'point' was lost - if you had one - because it was predicated on hyperbole and now you're going off on a tangent on community-specific gripes that has little to do with the statutory promotion timelines, the FITREP system, and the 'timing' issues that I was commenting on. Like BigRed alluded to earlier - don't blame the statutory promotion system for your community's inability to manage personnel within said system.

You don't think we need "technical experts"?

No, that's not at all what I said. I think you need to go drink a beer, chill, and then re-read what I actually wrote.

Having more Super JOs and O4s around is more than just a bitch and moan about getting pulled from the cockpit. We don't have the hours and money to constantly be training JOs who are only qualified and useful for their last 3-6 months in the squadron. If you had spent the last 5+ years of your time in the Navy in Aviation then you'd understand the M.O. of the training departments on the seawall and how their struggling to get JOs quals and flight hours, especially with a more robust SWTP and more mission sets getting piled on (helo specific) but you haven't and you don't and your experience is limited to lecturing people how blessed they are to have such great selection rates for O-5 which is exactly why we have this problem in the first place. Because guys like you look at stupid shit like that and then wonder why patch wearers and FRS instructors (you know, the ones who would definitely make O-5 on those boards you mentioned) are dropping their letters and saying "fuck this" despite your magical selection rates.

From someone outside your community, this sounds a lot like the 'waah, we don't fly enough, and everything else about being a Naval officer is totally lame' argument.

 

[dodge]

successful within the current system that promotes, on average, the top 5/6ths of LTs to LCDR.

Break the promotion rates out by designator and use real math versus the buperian alternative math and you get lower percentages, especially for aviation.

FY17's board where the 'pendelum swung back' for aviation. Eligible 1310's: 689. Promoted 1310's: 424. Promotion rate: 61%. It was 60% for 1320 so at least we're consistent.

 

[jtmedli]

I hate to break it to you, but the people making decisions on promotions come from all different communities and they've all been successful within the current system that promotes, on average, the top 5/6ths of LTs to LCDR. And a lot of the big-picture requirements are written in statute. If you think policy and statute ought to change, you'll have to do better than emotional tirades. Your 'point' was lost - if you had one - because it was predicated on hyperbole and now you're going off on a tangent on community-specific gripes that has little to do with the statutory promotion timelines, the FITREP system, and the 'timing' issues that I was commenting on. Like BigRed alluded to earlier - don't blame the statutory promotion system for your community's inability to manage personnel within said system.

No, that's not at all what I said. I think you need to go drink a beer, chill, and then re-read what I actually wrote.

From someone outside your community, this sounds a lot like the 'waah, we don't fly enough, and everything else about being a Naval officer is totally lame' argument.

And yet another post from a guy who clearly doesn't get it. There's a reason the guys agreeing with me and shitting on you are hornet guys and that's because it isn't limited to one community. But that's ok. Keep being a fucking know it all and lecturing people about how many people make O-5 and see how that plays when you can't fill seats with qualified DHs because everyone is walking at their MSR.

If you had known your ass from a hole in the ground then you would known the reason in said "community specific" was because the SWTP is the SEAHAWK WEAPONS AND TACTICS PROGRAM and mission sets getting added are firescout and AMCM but you don't know that because you're running your mouth about things you know nothing about and quoting bupers stats about getting promoted. Do us a favor. Let the guys with wings on their chest handle the pilot shit and figure out what's best for Aviation communities because we sure as hell aren't lecturing you about how to drive a boat or manage SWOs. But then again we don't really have to because you guys promote at damn near 100% because you make all your JOs so damn miserable. But I guess with O4 selection rates at 100% (that is your favorite metric after all) you probably think you're really knocking it out of the park then don't you?

 

[BACONATOR]

I hate to break it to you, but the people making decisions on promotions come from all different communities and they've all been successful within the current system that promotes, on average, the top 5/6ths of LTs to LCDR. And a lot of the big-picture requirements are written in statute. If you think policy and statute ought to change, you'll have to do better than emotional tirades. Your 'point' was lost - if you had one - because it was predicated on hyperbole and now you're going off on a tangent on community-specific gripes that has little to do with the statutory promotion timelines, the FITREP system, and the 'timing' issues that I was commenting on. Like BigRed alluded to earlier - don't blame the statutory promotion system for your community's inability to manage personnel within said system.

No, that's not at all what I said. I think you need to go drink a beer, chill, and then re-read what I actually wrote.

From someone outside your community, this sounds a lot like the 'waah, we don't fly enough, and everything else about being a Naval officer is totally lame' argument.

And yet another post from a guy who clearly doesn't get it. There's a reason the guys agreeing with me and shitting on you are hornet guys and that's because it isn't limited to one community. But that's ok. Keep being a fucking know it all and lecturing people about how many people make O-5 and see how that plays when you can't fill seats with qualified DHs because everyone is walking at their MSR.

If you had known your ass from a hole in the ground then you would known the reason in said "community specific" was because the SWTP is the SEAHAWK WEAPONS AND TACTICS PROGRAM and mission sets getting added are firescout and AMCM but you don't know that because you're running your mouth about things you know nothing about and quoting bupers stats about getting promoted. Do us a favor. Let the guys with wings on their chest handle the pilot shit and figure out what's best for Aviation communities because we sure as hell aren't lecturing you about how to drive a boat or manage SWOs. But then again we don't really have to because you guys promote at damn near 100% because you make all your JOs so damn miserable. But I guess with O4 selection rates at 100% (that is your favorite metric after all) you probably think you're really knocking it out of the park then don't you?

Sounds exactly like the arrogance of someone in a community which promotes anyone with a pulse and no future prospects on the outside. It's easy to say pilot's are whining about officership and need to get onboard with a system that works when SWOs promote virtually everyone and pilots are promoted at 50% some years.

To say that aircrew don't care about officership is bullshit, especially since we are expected to be technical experts in flying (of which the admin is an entire professional responsibility in the civilian world, and tactics isn't even a part) while also managing collaterals and other officer duties. We're not the Air Force. Navy aircrew not only fly, but we fill SWO billets that can't be filled by SWOs and do almost all the things that SWOs do (TAO, OOD, division officer, etc) on top of the flying which, to be proficient, SHOULD be taking 80% of our time.

So throw your stones. I'm sure your glass house is reinforced.

 

[Spekkio]

Break the promotion rates out by designator and use real math versus the buperian alternative math and you get lower percentages, especially for aviation.

FY17's board where the 'pendelum swung back' for aviation. Eligible 1310's: 689. Promoted 1310's: 424. Promotion rate: 61%. It was 60% for 1320 so at least we're consistent.

Using 'real math' means you account for all 3 looks. Using 'real math' the promotion rate for eligible 1310s IZ for FY 16 who were ultimately promoted was 76%. The lowest promotion rates ever dropped to recently for 1310s was ~66% (IZ from FY 14-15), still a far cry from 10%. Those numbers don't account for extraneous factirs like people who are resigning anyway or people who got a DUI.

I'm still not following the line from whatever number you and jtmedli find unacceptable and a system that supposedly relies too heavily on luck and timing.

 

[BigRed389]

And yet another post from a guy who clearly doesn't get it. There's a reason the guys agreeing with me and shitting on you are hornet guys and that's because it isn't limited to one community. But that's ok. Keep being a fucking know it all and lecturing people about how many people make O-5 and see how that plays when you can't fill seats with qualified DHs because everyone is walking at their MSR.

If you had known your ass from a hole in the ground then you would known the reason in said "community specific" was because the SWTP is the SEAHAWK WEAPONS AND TACTICS PROGRAM and mission sets getting added are firescout and AMCM but you don't know that because you're running your mouth about things you know nothing about and quoting bupers stats about getting promoted. Do us a favor. Let the guys with wings on their chest handle the pilot shit and figure out what's best for Aviation communities because we sure as hell aren't lecturing you about how to drive a boat or manage SWOs. But then again we don't really have to because you guys promote at damn near 100% because you make all your JOs so damn miserable. But I guess with O4 selection rates at 100% (that is your favorite metric after all) you probably think you're really knocking it out of the park then don't you?

The point I was trying to make earlier is that you shouldn't get all excited about changing the FITREP system. That is what this thread was about right?
Until we do away with the extended MSR keeping aviators in through the O-4 looks and the up & out system, changing how we write FITREPs will not "fix" your O4 selection rate.

For the record, Spekkio is a sub guy, and from what you guys are putting out, I'm not entirely sure you understand how ALL the other URL communities are promoting O4 at 90+% when aviation is not (EOD makes 100+% by PERS math, which I find to be a hilarious statistic).
Hint: What happens to a non-aviation URL who goes off track and doesn't do DH tours before going up for O4?

So I'm not sure why you're focused on high promotion rates for SWOs...everybody else in URL is doing better than aviation, and Subs and EOD have actually had damn near 100%. There are reasons for that, and miserable JOs have little to do with it.