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

[BigRed389]

Before talking about making serious changes, I'd suggest that we keep in mind the current system was developed to fix other perceived problems, and also evolved into what it has become for other reasons.
So as an example, if you're not happy with the fact the system forces up and out to groom future COs and XOs, remember that it wasn't always that way, and there were problems with that approach too.

Bottom line, I'm leery of any personnel management approaches that look to completely reinvent the wheel. Incremental, evolutionary approaches make more sense, and are less likely to be a complete fuck up.

Another problem is the "timing" issue.

Removal of AZ/BZ/IZ stamps should mitigate that in the long run. It's actually smoothed BZ selection in communities with YGs that were undermanned, without forcing promotion of the bottom of the pack in the IZ YG, and it's also allowed other communities to recover AZs who weren't shitbags.
Small change, but in the long run, it SHOULD also smooth out the "timing" issue, as it allows a second shot to recover from a "timing" issue.

And I'd also ask how prevalent the timing issue is. In SWO-land, it's really a non-issue, because everybody hits their at-sea milestone tours at almost the same time.
In my lat transfer community, which doesn't have a rigid career path, I've seen it become a problem, because you'll get a senior LT having to run up against a junior LT who's been at the command longer.
Point being, is it because a community can't manage manpower/detailing timing within the current system...or is the system just broken to begin with?

 

[RedFive]

And I'd also ask how prevalent the timing issue is. In SWO-land, it's really a non-issue.

Working with SWOs now, unfortunately, and I'd agree with you that it's a non-issue. From my anecdotally informed perspective, it seems that the attrition of SWO LTs is so high that they'll make anyone willing to stay a DH. Not taking a pot shot, but there's no way to beat around the bush with the fact that LT SWOs leave in large numbers.

For us, however, yes....timing is a fucking issue. It's a terrible waste of highly-trained manpower for arbitrary reasons. "Oh, you're level 3 across the board and have a qual from our sister community? Sweet. Oh wait...wait...that dude over there checked in ahead of you. Sorry man, here's a desk." Not exaggerating, not bitter (seriously), but this shit really happens.

 

[jtmedli]

Before talking about making serious changes, I'd suggest that we keep in mind the current system was developed to fix other perceived problems, and also evolved into what it has become for other reasons.
So as an example, if you're not happy with the fact the system forces up and out to groom future COs and XOs, remember that it wasn't always that way, and there were problems with that approach too.

Bottom line, I'm leery of any personnel management approaches that look to completely reinvent the wheel. Incremental, evolutionary approaches make more sense, and are less likely to be a complete fuck up.

Another problem is the "timing" issue.

Removal of AZ/BZ/IZ stamps should mitigate that in the long run. It's actually smoothed BZ selection in communities with YGs that were undermanned, without forcing promotion of the bottom of the pack in the IZ YG, and it's also allowed other communities to recover AZs who weren't shitbags.
Small change, but in the long run, it SHOULD also smooth out the "timing" issue, as it allows a second shot to recover from a "timing" issue.

And I'd also ask how prevalent the timing issue is. In SWO-land, it's really a non-issue, because everybody hits their at-sea milestone tours at almost the same time.
In my lat transfer community, which doesn't have a rigid career path, I've seen it become a problem, because you'll get a senior LT having to run up against a junior LT who's been at the command longer.
Point being, is it because a community can't manage manpower/detailing timing within the current system...or is the system just broken to begin with?

Timing is incredibly important. Another major problem is that we have in the helo community, on average, 30+ JOs (more in exped than CVW squadrons) to make 5-7 DHs. We're overmanned at the JO level by quite a bit and, while no one is suggesting a polar shift in anything, a few bodies here and a few bodies there would make a huge difference. But there are other problems too. Admirals are asking for reports on JO flight hours because we aren't flying enough which is just another indication that the Mayo is spread too thin on the bun. Could that with a SWTP (tactics program) that has hour minimums to get quals and things are going to be interesting.

 

[Spekkio]

Isn't this exact opposite of what our current system does though? If there's value on knowing the MRC that well then it's there not value in having pilots that know the A/C that well? Our current system is rather wasteful and expensive and it's pretty much all in the name of taking a very large swath of people and training them all to be XOs and COs and then throwing away the other 90% who don't screen. Has it ever occurred to this group of officers that maybe we should be coming up with a more economical way to approach Pers management/Manning because money isn't exactly what used to be?

First, I think that your "10%" number is grossly exaggerated, if it's even accurate at all, since most of the people who 'attrite' before O-5/CO leave the service voluntarily. In recent history, combined promotion for O-3 up through O-5 has been around 40-60%. Selection rates for O-4 averaged 85% for FY17 and aviation designators were very close to that average. For O-5 the selection rate overall was 70%, with 1310s at 77% and 1320s at 66%. So any given LT who plans to stick around has a ~60% chance of making O-5 with those promotion rates, knowing nothing about the level of performance of that LT. I get it - a few years ago, the boards were a lot less favorable to aviation and that stung for a lot of people. But it has since bounced back, and if you're failing to select O-4 with the historical average promotion rates then there's more amiss than just 'timing.'

Second, the Navy does not need officers to be career technical experts. It needs officers to develop into tactical and ultimately operational leaders, and each community has a pipeline to serve as X years as DH, Y years as XO, etc. with 'off-ramps' along the way for people who aren't due course. There may be merits to developing a cadre of "super JOs," but the only arguments for that revolve around personal desires to stay in the cockpit and not any tangible benefits to the Navy. I'm willing to bet that somewhere in the Pentagon is an analysis on whether it would be beneficial to do this, and ultimately the answer arrived at was 'no.'

 

[jtmedli]

First, I think that your "10%" number is grossly exaggerated, if it's even accurate at all, since most of the people who 'attrite' before O-5/CO leave the service voluntarily. In recent history, combined promotion for O-3 up through O-5 has been around 40-60%. Selection rates for O-4 averaged 85% for FY17 and aviation designators were very close to that average. For O-5 the selection rate overall was 70%, with 1310s at 77% and 1320s at 66%. So any given LT who plans to stick around has a ~60% chance of making O-5 with those promotion rates, knowing nothing about the level of performance of that LT. I get it - a few years ago, the boards were a lot less favorable to aviation and that stung for a lot of people. But it has since bounced back, and if you're failing to select O-4 with the historical average promotion rates then there's more amiss than just 'timing.'

Second, the Navy does not need officers to be career technical experts. It needs officers to develop into tactical and ultimately operational leaders, and each community has a pipeline to serve as X years as DH, Y years as XO, etc. with 'off-ramps' along the way for people who aren't due course. There may be merits to developing a cadre of "super JOs," but the only arguments for that revolve around personal desires to stay in the cockpit and not any tangible benefits to the Navy. I'm willing to bet that somewhere in the Pentagon is an analysis on whether it would be beneficial to do this, and ultimately the answer arrived at was 'no.'

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.

You don't think we need "technical experts"? Have you ever been a section lead on a night CSAR or seen what goes into training an aviator and getting them fully qualified in a community with more mission sets than aircraft? Maybe we should send you up to that aforementioned Pentagon to lecture those Army guys about how their 5000 hour Flying Warrants really aren't doing anything for them and how they should cut them loose in the name having more Lieutenants around to do their bidding. I'm sure they'll agree with you that those "technical experts" are just wasted billets that could be filled with perfectly good, unqualified Boot Lieutenants. Or maybe you should go tell the CWOs on your boat that they're just overpaid assholes who are filling jobs a perfectly good JG could be doing.

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.

 

[Python]

First, I think that your "10%" number is grossly exaggerated, if it's even accurate at all, since most of the people who 'attrite' before O-5/CO leave the service voluntarily. In recent history, combined promotion for O-3 up through O-5 has been around 40-60%. Selection rates for O-4 averaged 85% for FY17 and aviation designators were very close to that average. For O-5 the selection rate overall was 70%, with 1310s at 77% and 1320s at 66%. So any given LT who plans to stick around has a ~60% chance of making O-5 with those promotion rates, knowing nothing about the level of performance of that LT. I get it - a few years ago, the boards were a lot less favorable to aviation and that stung for a lot of people. But it has since bounced back, and if you're failing to select O-4 with the historical average promotion rates then there's more amiss than just 'timing.'

Second, the Navy does not need officers to be career technical experts. It needs officers to develop into tactical and ultimately operational leaders, and each community has a pipeline to serve as X years as DH, Y years as XO, etc. with 'off-ramps' along the way for people who aren't due course. There may be merits to developing a cadre of "super JOs," but the only arguments for that revolve around personal desires to stay in the cockpit and not any tangible benefits to the Navy. I'm willing to bet that somewhere in the Pentagon is an analysis on whether it would be beneficial to do this, and ultimately the answer arrived at was 'no.'

Um yes, you do need officers to be technical experts. I don't care what you say, flying (especially tactically flying) is easily the most perishable skill in the Navy (save for a couple of small communities like SPECWAR). It's not even close.

Staying in the cockpit has numerous tangible benefits for the Navy. Namely, competence in execution of our missions. It is very hard to remain proficient at the different difficult mission sets. Last I checked, those mission sets such as the ones supporting power projection are used frequently and are pretty damn important. Take people out of the cockpit and very quickly they will start to suck at it.

 

[Recovering LSO]

@Python1287 @jtmedli I get what you guys are saying, but let's not forget who's really supposed to be the "technical" (tactical) experts in a squadron: the JOs. When we can get to a point where there's enough flight time/range time/bandits/traps to get senior LTs back to being what they're supposed to be, then I think we'd be in a much healthier place. Of course the DHs and front office have the experience, but are also juggling a few dozen flaming chainsaws. We're short changing the first tour JOs, and in the long run, short change the entire organization.

 

[jtmedli]

@Python1287 @jtmedli I get what you guys are saying, but let's not forget who's really supposed to be the "technical" (tactical) experts in a squadron: the JOs. When we can get to a point where there's enough flight time/range time/bandits/traps to get senior LTs back to being what they're supposed to be, then I think we'd be in a much healthier place. Of course the DHs and front office have the experience, but are also juggling a few dozen flaming chainsaws. We're short changing the first tour JOs, and in the long run, short change the entire organization.

Very much agreed. Which is what my message here has been and why I advocate for more Super JOs and O4s to handle things like firescout and AMCM so the hopefully smaller group of first tour JOs can focus on flying and learning and getting qualified as fast as possible.

 

[Recovering LSO]

firescout and AMCM

Dude, we already split the Air Force / Helo palooza thread, now you're trying to drift this one that way too.... We should just start a jtmedli thread for you to blog

 

[pilot_man]

@Python1287 @jtmedli I get what you guys are saying, but let's not forget who's really supposed to be the "technical" (tactical) experts in a squadron: the JOs. When we can get to a point where there's enough flight time/range time/bandits/traps to get senior LTs back to being what they're supposed to be, then I think we'd be in a much healthier place. Of course the DHs and front office have the experience, but are also juggling a few dozen flaming chainsaws. We're short changing the first tour JOs, and in the long run, short change the entire organization.

Ummm, while I expect JOs to work towards being the tactical experts I don't expect them to be THE tactical experts. Except for the Training O and they are usually in between JO and O-4. I love the idea of having super DHs. Especially when we have a thread talking about how short we are on DHs right now. Let some guys that don't want to move up just hang around squadrons and be tactical squadron pilots. They can do all of the level 3/4 flights and spend the time needed in the debrief while the MO is off stabbing his eyes out with E-5 evals.

 

[RadicalDude]

Ummm, while I expect JOs to work towards being the tactical experts I don't expect them to be THE tactical experts. Except for the Training O and they are usually in between JO and O-4. I love the idea of having super DHs. Especially when we have a thread talking about how short we are on DHs right now. Let some guys that don't want to move up just hang around squadrons and be tactical squadron pilots. They can do all of the level 3/4 flights and spend the time needed in the debrief while the MO is off stabbing his eyes out with E-5 evals.

Bro, that seems like. recipe for the "real" DHs to not be taken seriously by anyone else in the squadron... Less tactical flying is the opposite of what most DHs need. Also seems like you're gonna further dilute the talent that screens for CO.

We already have enough COs that can admin the shit out of stuff, but aren't taken seriously in the cockpit (unless it's behind the boat,) bro.

 

[pilot_man]

Bro, that seems like. recipe for the "real" DHs to not be taken seriously by anyone else in the squadron... Less tactical flying is the opposite of what most DHs need. Also seems like you're gonna further dilute the talent that screens for CO.

We already have enough COs that can admin the shit out of stuff, but aren't taken seriously in the cockpit (unless it's behind the boat,) bro.

No one said the real DHs would get less tactical flying, just the opposite. There would be more time for their own training if someone else was doing the level 2/3/4 flights. A super O-4 wouldn't dilute the talent either since they wouldn't be competing with the real DHs.

If a guy finishes a DH tour, but knows he doesn't want to go down the path of skipper, then he could go be a super O-4 instead of wasting his tactical talent at some joint job. It's a win for the squadron because they are getting a highly qualified dude for DRRS, that doesn't need events wasted getting him up to speed, who can spend his time teaching the JOs how to be tactical killers, at a time when the squadron would be at 75% DH manning anyways. That relieves the pressure on the real DHs who can do their ground jobs and spend more time on their own tactical skills.

A CO who chooses Admin over tactics does so on their own accord.

 

[RadicalDude]

No one said the real DHs would get less tactical flying, just the opposite. There would be more time for their own training if someone else was doing the level 2/3/4 flights. A super O-4 wouldn't dilute the talent either since they wouldn't be competing with the real DHs.

If a guy finishes a DH tour, but knows he doesn't want to go down the path of skipper, then he could go be a super O-4 instead of wasting his tactical talent at some joint job. It's a win for the squadron because they are getting a highly qualified dude for DRRS, that doesn't need events wasted getting him up to speed, who can spend his time teaching the JOs how to be tactical killers, at a time when the squadron would be at 75% DH manning anyways. That relieves the pressure on the real DHs who can do their ground jobs and spend more time on their own tactical skills.

A CO who chooses Admin over tactics does so on their own accord.

Unless you increase flight hours, I fail to see how more DH pilots doing all the teaching and tactical flying wouldn't dilute both flight hours and tactical ability of the "golden path" O-4s in your example.

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

 

[sevenhelmet]

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.

 

[pilot_man]

Unless you increase flight hours, I fail to see how more DH pilots doing all the teaching and tactical flying wouldn't dilute both flight hours and tactical ability of the "golden path" O-4s in your example.

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

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.

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.

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.