Why are you Leaving?

[PhrogLoop]

I think he meant with regards to the act of shooting an airplane.

Exactly. I think that an Aviator has more "skin in the game" with regards to the shooter job for a couple of reasons. One, even if the shooter is a helo pilot, he/she has been through enough training to quickly grasp the combination of physics and aerodynamics in a changing environment to do the job correctly. But on top of that, there has got to be a subconscious (or even conscious) added imperative to get a fellow Aviator off the deck safely (i.e. "that could be me up there"). Finally, an Aviator has a bit more to lose by getting it wrong. I think that all these things together add up to an Aviator being the designator most likely to do this job (and a few others) correctly every time.

 

[Pags]

As do I.

Fair enough. I can't speak to shooting as "shooting" AV-8s is done differently but I think putting aviators in the Air Boss/Mini seats is more efficient than training a SWO to do it. Could a SWO run the flight deck as well as an Aviator? I'm sure they could if properly trained, but that would probably require a formal school. As it stands now, all the training for LHA/D air dept is OJT and there's a lot that's left out because of the assumption that the person in the seat understands how to fly helos off of boats already.

 

[azguy]

From the outsider perspective, it seems like the disassociated sea tour is really just the detailer's window to cram a LT in a non-flying job that PERS-43 owns. I know pilots that have done a year in Bahrain port ops to satisfy the disassociated requirement. There's no way scheduling tug boats and security patrols is going to prepare an officer to command a big deck some day.

Serious, but crazy, idea- instead of sending all of your flight attrities into the restricted line- stand up a little sub-community of those dudes to be shooters, plane movers, Bahrain port ops, etc. As has been stated above, let pilots fly. Just like all other URL LTs are working in their own community.

 

[wlawr005]

Well...is it really true that we NEED aviators in these ship billets, or do we just WANT to believe that we need them? I KNOW you could teach an LDO/WO to shoot, run a V-1/2/3/4 division, even work in AirOps. Especially if said LDO/WO was former Aircrew etc. Hell, we created the flying warrant position...why not create a permanent Shooter position? It makes a hell of a lot more sense than some other things we've tried. Of course the Air Boss and the Mini need to be aviators, that goes without saying.

Ships that require winged CO's? Carrier skippers spend a year in Nuke school and then do a deep draft tour...I would say that's a lot of time spent around ships. Most of those guys (VFA/VAQ) didn't even do a boat tour...if they did it was on some CAG staff where they probably kept flying anyway. I don't see a lot of helo/maritime/TACAMO shooters moving up to be a CVN skipper. Most of the guys running the cat have never been off the end of the cat, so I don't buy the "skin in the game" philosophy. Serious question...how many launches have been suspended by the Shooter because the plane was broken? Cat broken, sure. Unsafe flight deck, sure. It doesn't take an aviator to see that stuff going wrong.

As far as the leadership and professional development, I think we could do a better job of developing JO's earlier...especially in flight school. Seriously...there is a lot of down time in flight school, especially between phases. Marines do a better job of this, hands down.

Lastly, if we truly HAVE to keep these positions manned by aviators...stop making it a wicket to command. Stop sending #1 EPs there and keep those guys in the community. Keep them current, let them spend their energy developing junior aviators, and let's build a stronger aviation culture...something that seems to be going away. By the time a guy is ready to command a squadron, I'm sure he has seen enough of the boat to make it work. Air Boss is a post CO tour, I KNOW that guy has been around the boat enough to make it work.

I believe these things to be true all the way to O-4. If this perception that we need to work outside the aviation community to be better skippers, then send guys to some boat job or staff job once he's looking at making O-5...if not, keep him as an O-4 in the community. So guys stick around the community longer...fine, we don't have to access as many people or train as many studs. This would require those community changes to the stat board we've been talking about, but that wouldn't be hard to do.

 

[robav8r]

The TAO job on the CVN can easily be handled by the METOC weather boy.

Really? You think the RL METOC guy knows enough about ROE, Hostile Act/Intent, Weapons Release criteria, etc to earn the trust of the CO ???

 

[wlawr005]

Hostile intent? WX is supposed to be 0/0 all day with a 90% chance of heavy rain and fog...there's NO WAY anybody is attacking us today.

 

[BigRed389]

Really? You think the RL METOC guy knows enough about ROE, Hostile Act/Intent, Weapons Release criteria, etc to earn the trust of the CO ???

Without training? No.

With training...why not? Everybody starts somewhere, and controlling point defense on an HVU isn't the most nuanced thing in the world.

Ships that require winged CO's? Carrier skippers spend a year in Nuke school and then do a deep draft tour...I would say that's a lot of time spent around ships. Most of those guys (VFA/VAQ) didn't even do a boat tour...if they did it was on some CAG staff where they probably kept flying anyway.

Nuke school isn't "time around ships." The pipeline is already a less than optimal compromise all around. For the deep draft tours...with Navy going away from AD manning replenishment ships, that puts aviator O-6's on what were O-5 Amphib commands. Which kinda fucks Gator Navy, which is already the bastard child of the SWO Navy, even though they do a whole lot of real world contingency heavy lifting.

I believe these things to be true all the way to O-4. If this perception that we need to work outside the aviation community to be better skippers, then send guys to some boat job or staff job once he's looking at making O-5...if not, keep him as an O-4 in the community. So guys stick around the community longer...fine, we don't have to access as many people or train as many studs. This would require those community changes to the stat board we've been talking about, but that wouldn't be hard to do.

Not without fixing up or out you're not. No big deal though, just a small obstacle.

 

[bert]

I don't agree with the idea that the Navy sends aviators on disassociated tours to make them better officers or get them ready to command ships later on in their careers (yes, you ought to be able to learn something on those tours, but anything you do learn is a bonus). The Navy sends us there because they need people to fill those roles, aviators can do so with little to no training outside of on-the-job, sending aviators doesn't interfere with them filling required squadron roles, and now they don't have to maintain a separate community to fill those roles.

The problem with the "why not leave us in squadrons to become better tactical aviators" idea should be obvious. The Navy only wants you to fly just enough. Any flying above that is expensive in direct costs, and really expensive in indirect costs (think airframe lifetime). If they won't give you an extra 5/10 hours a month on your first tour when you are an idiot and really need that time, they certainly don't want to give you a whole extra tour after you already know enough to fill a seat at the DH level.

On a separate note, I've seen complaints from people about the idea that "#1" guys don't get enough special treatment compared to pack guys (earlier promotions, get to skip the disassociated so squadrons can bask in their awesomeness, or whatever). So here is a little food for thought on that subject. Looking at the stats from the last DH board (the easiest to get a hold of, see slide 7). 42% have an EP on all 3 tours. Less than 6% have only one EP tour. They don't offer the data on how many of those EPs are #1/#2s, but all you have to do is look at the average size of squadrons and you can figure out it is pretty high. At the post-DH level it gets even more clear: Over 50% of DHs leave as "#1s". Meaning you can be #1 and be below the median for your peer group at the same time. You could argue that the O-4 board screens out the pack and pack-minus types, but that contradicts the complaints that promotion boards aren't looking at the right things, or that the weak players get promoted at the same rate. (Not to mention all the people the last year or two who got passed over with very similar records to people that got picked up).

Now somebody could try to argue that all the pack guys left, so only the cream of the crop is left to compete. Except that will also completely contradict the argument that all the good guys are leaving because the Navy is so screwed up these days. I think the above makes the case that, while there are plenty of things wrong with the current system, not enough special treatment for "#1" guys isn't one of them.

 

[squorch2]

With training...why not? Everybody starts somewhere, and controlling point defense on an HVU isn't the most nuanced thing in the world.

CVN TAOs also have to be prepared to assume air defense commander responsibilities in case your shotgun's SPY goes down - being _C is no small feat. You also coordinate between the DESRON, CSG battle watch, airwing, onboard tenant commands, etc. SAR? Yup, you're the SC.

I've watched non-URL, non-aviation folks come through the CVN TAO pipeline. In two years, only one of them actually qualified TAO - and he was the FCO. All others crashed and burned.

 

[Beans]

Does anyone know if RAND or a similar outfit has done any sort of analysis on this issue? I feel like a lot of the solutions that have been tried and those thrown out here and elsewhere that haven't been tried are incremental. This is likely because everyone is speaking from within the system, or, somewhat literally, from inside the box. It seems to me that if you set out a few very basic and fundamental requirements and handed the problem to someone who didn't know how we were doing it currently, you might get a very different and very workable answer.

Or, we could waste a lot more money on the problem and go nowhere...

 

[BOMBSonHAWKEYES]

Really? You think the RL METOC guy knows enough about ROE, Hostile Act/Intent, Weapons Release criteria, etc to earn the trust of the CO ???

Do you think some bottom-feeder aviator that was unlucky enough to get stuck into that job is any better? When the missiles start flying, someone with greater knowledge, responsibility, and seniority will step in and take that job over. Until then, pretty much anyone can be trained to run the unsavory drills that consume the life of a TAO underway.

 

[wink]

Do you think some bottom-feeder aviator that was unlucky enough to get stuck into that job is any better?...

Really? Bottom feeders get TAO jobs? No matter what may happen "when the missiles start flying", I find it hard to believe that the TAO watch would be trusted to a sub caliber officer. It certainly wasn't the case in my day.

 

[BOMBSonHAWKEYES]

Really? Bottom feeders get TAO jobs? No matter what may happen "when the missiles start flying", I find it hard to believe that the TAO watch would be trusted to a sub caliber officer. It certainly wasn't the case in my day.

i just lol'd

 

[Recovering LSO]

The services won't, but the COCOMs sure will (and have been). Very interesting Tank happened here yesterday. Whether that amounts to anything in terms of resourcing remains to be seen.

Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century doesn't jive with OFRP?

 

[Recovering LSO]

You think the RL METOC guy knows enough about ROE, Hostile Act/Intent, Weapons Release criteria, etc to earn the trust of the CO ???

Least impressive group of individuals on the ship through several C2X's. "Now launch the alert.....Belay my last... Now launch the alert... Belay that as well... Now stand down the alert. uh, uh, uh, call the Captain..." <--- not exaggerated. Standing alerts through several alert-ish parts of the world went as expected.

CVN TAOs also have to be prepared to assume air defense commander responsibilities in case your shotgun's SPY goes down - being _C is no small feat. You also coordinate between the DESRON, CSG battle watch, airwing, onboard tenant commands, etc. SAR? Yup, you're the SC.

Shoot a couple of AESA jets off the bow and get out of the way. Ship controlled ADEX's = some of the biggest goat ropes I've ever participated in. A handful of the NSAWC/TOPGUN trained OS's are solid, a few.

Really? Bottom feeders get TAO jobs? No matter what may happen "when the missiles start flying", I find it hard to believe that the TAO watch would be trusted to a sub caliber officer. It certainly wasn't the case in my day.

see above comment about C2X's. Sad as it is, that's my experience. I'm sure other's have better experiences.