NSW Standardizing on Glock 19

[BigRed389]

You just made my point. You can't "train to tactics" in a short time, there is a huge difference in being familiar with and being an expert. It is possible to be an expert in tactics even if you don't have a specific enemy to train against.

I'll use an example from my community. Experienced crews taking 15-20 minutes to get a Hellfire off the rail. That's completely unsat but it's commonplace.

I'm also not advocating overlooking required stuff such as maintenance, etc, but it is possible to be good at both.

Yeah, but that doesn't sound like "tactics" it sounds like "(lack of) proficiency in the basics."

Maybe it's getting in the weeds on semantics, but generally when a discussion turns to "tactics" I assume a certain basic weapons proficiency is a given, since "tactics" tend to be developed from an assumption of a baseline proficiency (and therefore Phit/Pkill/etc)...no?

 

[insanebikerboy]

You become 'familiar with' tactics during your initial training, you become more acquainted with them through continuing training and exercises. We're not talking about taking Joe Schmo off the street and sending him into battle here, we're talking about Sailors and Officers that have a baseline level of knowledge and training. When there is an enemy you can train to that specific force, which in many ways is simpler than training to be a being a jack-of-all trades in peacetime.

Those sailors and officers are who I'm talking about, not Joe Schmo. Here's are a few examples that I have seen for my community specifically that illustrates what I'm talking about.

- Only a single pilot plans the mission, instead of all pilots involved with mission planning.

- Admin phases of flight. I.e., "the flight will admin fly to point x, then enter scenario, then enter admin transit phase home". It should be "in scenario/mindset" from the start of mission planning till the debrief, to include all portions of the flight.

- Half an hour briefs on the hydraulic system, but only a 5 minute brief on CAS procedures.

My point is that developing the proper mindset takes time, and takes a culture in the squadron created by senior members and taught to the new guys. It's a mindset that cannot be created and trained to in the workup cycle because that would mean it would be forgotten post workup cycle. This doesn't take an exorbitant amount of flight time nor does it take people being dicks, but it does take a lot of work and proper training.

 

[BigRed389]

Those sailors and officers are who I'm talking about, not Joe Schmo. Here's are a few examples that I have seen for my community specifically that illustrates what I'm talking about.

- Only a single pilot plans the mission, instead of all pilots involved with mission planning.

- Admin phases of flight. I.e., "the flight will admin fly to point x, then enter scenario, then enter admin transit phase home". It should be "in scenario/mindset" from the start of mission planning till the debrief, to include all portions of the flight.

- Half an hour briefs on the hydraulic system, but only a 5 minute brief on CAS procedures.

My point is that developing the proper mindset takes time, and takes a culture in the squadron created by senior members and taught to the new guys. It's a mindset that cannot be created and trained to in the workup cycle because that would mean it would be forgotten post workup cycle. This doesn't take an exorbitant amount of flight time nor does it take people being dicks, but it does take a lot of work and proper training.

OK I get where you're coming from now.

And I agree, looking at it going the other way, culture rot sets in if standards aren't upheld.

 

[zippy]

I'm not saying there needs to be incessant training for missions that won't ever occur. I just see a pervasive mindset of too much time and energy spent dealing with the admin part of the Navy at the expense of actually being awesome at the tactics we need to know.

An unfortunate truth is you don't actually need to be awesome at tactics during workups and on deployment, you just have to be relatively safe and be decent at admin, because well, that's all anyone notices these days and that what will get you promoted or fired. Those who have taken the slow, steady, safe, sound admin path and gotten promoted perpetuate that because it's safe and proven. People crashing airplanes, getting DUIs, filing EO complaints etc. get bosses fired more than Dicking away tactical employment of their weapon systems in training.

If you want a community that prides itself on tactics over admin and NATOPS fluff VFA/VAQ is the place to look, but even they're not immune to the things you hold disdain for, and the Bravado as a JO morphes into something else as a hinge and something even further as a skipper.

 

[zippy]

No, it takes a few months tops if you make it a priority and have a good, rigorous training plan.

No, no one suggested we stopped maintaining aircraft. What are you talking about?

So you think that the characteristics, tactics, and capabilities of a Shang are the same as an Akula III which are the same as a Type 212? You think that an Udaloy is the same as a Luyang? Fighting against one is the same as taking on 3 is the same as taking on 10? All big hunks of metal that are approached the same way, right?

I think there's a couple different languages being spoken here creating confusion.

Inventing tactics and standardized operational procedures and being able to employ them across the board as a community takes more than months- you can't just invent something on the fly on your boat and expect the rest of the fleet to replicate it the following week. That's the argument being made. There's not a community wide focus on tactics.

Admin as in GMTs, NAVOSH, DENTAL hit lists, safety standdowns etc. Ships (and I'm going to go out on a limb and presume subs treat mx somewhat like ships do- I hope not for the safety of your crews) and squadrons look at MX differently. On the boat you maybe spend 4hours a day in port maintaining the ship after duty section turnover, sweepers, quarters, training, Lunch, meetings, quarters and sweepers with the heavy lifting taking place in the yards with contractors etc. where as in a squadron there are dedicated maintainers who maintain the aircraft on 3 shifts for 24hrs a day because if it doesn't work we can't fly, and it could kill us if it breaks in flight.

He's a Marine- I wouldn't expect him to know shit about submarines (or even that your named 3), other than they're bad, or shit about surface combatants other than they can become submarines... Once. I also wouldn't expect you to have any real idea about CAS, FAC(A) BFM, The capes and tactics of any air OOB or AAW threats.

 

[Gatordev]

I don't have one either, bad timing I suppose!

I'd argue quite good timing, as my deployments were probably much less painful than those that earned their 15 pieces of flair.

Humanitarian Service Medal?

Yes.

 

[Flash]

I'd argue quite good timing, as my deployments were probably much less painful than those that earned their 15 pieces of flair.

I got 5 ribbons for the worst, and most useless, deployment I had. So yeah.

 

[Spekkio]

I think there's a couple different languages being spoken here creating confusion...He's a Marine- I wouldn't expect him to know shit about submarines (or even that your named 3), other than they're bad, or shit about surface combatants other than they can become submarines... Once. I also wouldn't expect you to have any real idea about CAS, FAC(A) BFM, The capes and tactics of any air OOB or AAW threats.

Fair enough.

My main point is that we don't have to change our culture to be like the Marines to be effective in future engagements, and that was in response to the off-hand criticism that the Navy doesn't foster a 'warrior mentality.' We aren't the Marines. We aren't SOF. I think we're better off fostering pride in our own culture and what we do instead of trying to be like Marines and SOF. Joe Schmo Sailor probably joined the Navy because those things didn't appeal to him.

OTOH, yes, that means that Sailors need to be able to load a torpedo/TTL in 20 min, that they need to get a hose on a fire within 60 seconds, that they need to reload an aircraft in a certain amount of time, etc. But those would fall under the umbrella of 'the basics.'

Admin as in GMTs, NAVOSH, DENTAL hit lists, safety standdowns etc. Ships (and I'm going to go out on a limb and presume subs treat mx somewhat like ships do- I hope not for the safety of your crews) and squadrons look at MX differently. On the boat you maybe spend 4hours a day in port maintaining the ship after duty section turnover, sweepers, quarters, training, Lunch, meetings, quarters and sweepers with the heavy lifting taking place in the yards with contractors etc. where as in a squadron there are dedicated maintainers who maintain the aircraft on 3 shifts for 24hrs a day because if it doesn't work we can't fly, and it could kill us if it breaks in flight.

Perhaps this is different among communities. In our section of the Navy, the Engineer plans most of the major maintenance items before starting the pierside upkeep. Officers spend a lot of in-port periods standing duty, attending sim trainers, and attending meetings. The enlisted Sailors get the boat ready to go underway again. Forward has a lot more shoreside support and so they do more trainers, the nukes tend to be on their own to fix their gear. The nukes lose 1/2 a day to training, the forward guys lose nothing (mostly because they're not actually doing the maintenance).

All I was trying to say is that all that maintenance gets recorded somewhere, and that's the only thing that tells us the ship is safe to get underway. I assumed aircraft had similar (although maybe not as extensive) requirements. Now, if by 'admin' you were referring to doing sexual harassment training on a quarterly basis and suicide training on a semi-annual basis, then yes, I would agree that is a gigantic waste of man-hours.

 

[Treetop Flyer]

All I was trying to say is that all that maintenance gets recorded somewhere, and that's the only thing that tells us the ship is safe to get underway. I assumed aircraft had similar (although maybe not as extensive) requirements. Now, if by 'admin' you were referring to doing sexual harassment training on a quarterly basis and suicide training on a semi-annual basis, then yes, I would agree that is a gigantic waste of man-hours.

I will go out on a limb and guess that aircraft have much more extensive maintenance requirements. Maybe not compared to nukes. Just a random guess.

This exchange has shed some light on the disconnect between SWO's and aviation. The idea that we would focus on getting from point to point and admin most of the time is absolutely ridiculous. In my (former) community, destroying the enemy was the mission, and taking off, landing, and everything in between was expected to be mastered. All the mandatory training and personnel management is something that is done in addition to being tactically relevant, not something that is done prior to work ups.

 

[BigRed389]

I will go out on a limb and guess that aircraft have much more extensive maintenance requirements. Maybe not compared to nukes. Just a random guess.

This exchange has shed some light on the disconnect between SWO's and aviation. The idea that we would focus on getting from point to point and admin most of the time is absolutely ridiculous. In my (former) community, destroying the enemy was the mission, and taking off, landing, and everything in between was expected to be mastered. All the mandatory training and personnel management is something that is done in addition to being tactically relevant, not something that is done prior to work ups.

Huh? Who said we would focus just on navigating from A to B and admin? I sure as shit didn't, and I haven't seen any other (former) SWOs comment on this threadjack.

I said there's a difference between being proficient in tactics and being proficient in basic combat related skills.

 

[Treetop Flyer]

Huh? Who said we would focus just on navigating from A to B and admin? I sure as shit didn't, and I haven't seen any other (former) SWOs comment on this threadjack.

I said there's a difference between being proficient in tactics and being proficient in basic combat related skills.

Post #62 of this thread

 

[nittany03]

An unfortunate truth is you don't actually need to be awesome at tactics during workups and on deployment, you just have to be relatively safe and be decent at admin, because well, that's all anyone notices these days and that what will get you promoted or fired. Those who have taken the slow, steady, safe, sound admin path and gotten promoted perpetuate that because it's safe and proven. People crashing airplanes, getting DUIs, filing EO complaints etc. get bosses fired more than Dicking away tactical employment of their weapon systems in training.

If you want a community that prides itself on tactics over admin and NATOPS fluff VFA/VAQ is the place to look, but even they're not immune to the things you hold disdain for, and the Bravado as a JO morphes into something else as a hinge and something even further as a skipper.

Everyone needs to be safe and decent at admin. You can fly the most eye-watering upgrade flight ever. Hose up getting there or coming back, and you're still reflying it. Even in VFA or VAQ, no one gives a tin shit about your tactics unless they're built on a foundation of safe, competent admin and tac admin. Yes, TACAIR assumes a basic level of competency in senior, ACTC qualified aircrew. But kids coming out of the RAG damn sure need to prove that they know that of which they speak before allowing "standard" to creep into their admin briefs.

 

[BigRed389]

Post #62 of this thread

1) Spekkio is a sub guy.
2) He later agreed that focus on basics includes basic combat-related skills as well. And if you consider a sub guy's perspective, there's a hell of a lot of "tactical" shit that gets mixed into what looks like just going from Point A to Point B. Doing that remaining undetected while maintaining a contact picture running fire control tracks isn't that far removed from what they would actually do if they had to start shooting at things.

 

[ChuckMK23]

From today's news - the decomm of HCS-84/85 and replacing with "TSU".

Why do you guys let the leadership Ass Clowns at the O-6 and Flag level get away with these decisions prioritizing ASW bullshit over real world needed skills?

"In March, the Navy will shutter Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron 84 in Norfolk, which, along with HSC-85, has flown a decade of shadowy missions in war zones with aging helicopters. The active-duty and reserve aircrews that fly these HH-60H Rescue Hawks are the Navy's equivalent of the Army's renowned 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, known as the "Night Stalkers." In their decade of continuous deployments, HSC-84 aircrews have earned three Distinguished Flying Crosses, 13 Bronze Stars, 120 Air Medals with Valor, among other awards."

http://www.navytimes.com/story/mili...tested-spec-ops-helicopter-squadron/78028808/

 

[Brett327]

ASW, such bullshit.