Why are you Leaving?

[RHINOWSO]

Fair enough - I didn't walk as a JO, so I've got more than a cruise of exp. under my belt and have seen this happen at both CAG and the XO/CO level with the good deal VS transitions to VFA, both pilot and WSO.

But I guess you can still technically lead in BUPERS eyes when you mistakenly bomb a friendly Hummer in combat (thankfully no friendlies were in it), miss an enemy target due to stupidity, or negligently discharge a firearm on the ship (oops, my bad...).

Or how about then your entire squadron won't even mention you by name as the CO after you leave? Overtly act like you never existed? Thats solid leadership there I tell ya.

 

[jtmedli]

Look at WW2, when divisions launched and half of them didn't come back. When the CO was a LT because the CO and XO were dead.

Thats what I'm talking about.

This sole sentence says a LOT. Your sentiments are well placed and are not VFA/VAQ/Pointy-nosed specific. The helo community has some MAJOR (and I do mean MAJOR) problems of it's own.

Generally speaking, you are very correct with your assertions. Tactical prowess/actually flying the damn aircraft barely matters anymore. We, as a Navy, have become about 'The Golden Path' and 'our career' more than flying, fighting and killing the bad guys. A JO's sea tour (read: first tour and, for some, only flying tour) has become a whole lotta kissing the DHs, XO, and CO's asses and "playing the game" in order to hit the next set of wickets in order to make it to the next step or get flying orders or 'Golden Path' job that will get them to the next step. Most of what my JO tour has taught me is that the old adage, "it aint about what you know, it's about who you know (and who you're willing to stab in the back and shit-talk)" is the way of success in today's Navy.

That's not to say good people don't make it. I have good DH's and have had good XO/CO front office but I've also seen some pretty terrible/inept people in those positions as well as terrible/inept JOs who are on their way to DH and maybe XO/CO one day.

 

[Recovering LSO]

non-tactical CAGs.

they aren't tactical

tactical CAGs

non-tactical CAGs

non-tactical type CAG

For those keeping score...Those all came from one post...

It's a lot different than what you read about in your NWC classes doing JPME...

Maybe this "tactical" CAG will be able to help folks out...?

After reading your various posts, I'm left wondering how you define "tactical"? If it's tied closely with VF/VFA background, that's not by itself a problem. But, are you willing to accept the bad with the good? Or even the possibility that not all VF/VFA CAGs were awesome, or even competent? If you're interested in a few specific examples I can send names via PM.

 

[RHINOWSO]

Or even the possibility that not all VF/VFA CAGs were awesome, or even competent? If you're interested in a few specific examples I can send names via PM.

I don't think I ever meant to imply that all VF/VFA CAGs were great - to the contrary, the higher echelon leadership in general is out of touch with what the grunts are doing, regardless of their background.

I just emphasize that the problem can get WORSE when you have people who have zero background in what VF/VFA squadrons do, trying to lead a group made up of mostly VF/VFA. At least the two examples I had close contact with.

I guess we might have different opinions of your example and I know I'm not alone, but I'm not going to air specific dirty laundry here, just my general opinion. And I realize that people might not agree with me and my opinion, but I have thick skin and can take it.

And I'll add that all communities are valuable and necessary in the Navy of today - HS/HSL/VP/VQ all have their role and excelling in being a warfighter (if my general word tactical strikes a cord with some).

But in the end, some people just suck...

 

[wink]

If you are finding, or have found, that someone at the senior O-6 and O-7 + level are not being effective or are counterproductive because of a lack of "tactical" prowess, then they have a leadership problem, not a tactical war fighting problem. At that level your head does not belong in the tactical game. I don't even know how a senior O-6 Commodore type or flag officer can come close to maintaining real tactical proficiency these days, regardless of reforms to the golden path.

 

[MIDNJAC]

I would submit that anyone without a fixed-wing tankable background would be well behind the power curve, at least while in CAG's case III at sea cabin (CATCC). I won't speak to tactical know how, or expertise, or understanding from other communities, but most of the big calls I ever saw CAG make real time were related to bringing some broken jet back aboard vs diverting, or launching the alert tanker etc etc.....all things where you would need a solid understanding of fixed wing carrier ops as well as organic tanking to make a sound decision that nobody in their right mind is going to disobey (regardless of how many SIR's place blame on the 500 hr LT who didn't "speak up" to CAG). Maybe with a DCAG with a strong background it could be just fine, but I think that basic leadership around the boat when things go wrong is still a very major part of the job. Sure you have the ADM (if an aviator type) who probably flew F7U's or something, and all the skippers/DH's, but it is ultimately CAG's call (maybe a little bit the big Skipper and Boss) and he/she needs to have the experience to make that decision. Just IMO, I'm sure others will vary

 

[jtmedli]

I would submit that anyone without a fixed-wing tankable background would be well behind the power curve, at least while in CAG's case III at sea cabin (CATCC). I won't speak to tactical know how, or expertise, or understanding from other communities, but most of the big calls I ever saw CAG make real time were related to bringing some broken jet back aboard vs diverting, or launching the alert tanker etc etc.....all things where you would need a solid understanding of fixed wing carrier ops as well as organic tanking to make a sound decision that nobody in their right mind is going to disobey (regardless of how many SIR's place blame on the 500 hr LT who didn't "speak up" to CAG). Maybe with a DCAG with a strong background it could be just fine, but I think that basic leadership around the boat when things go wrong is still a very major part of the job. Sure you have the ADM (if an aviator type) who probably flew F7U's or something, and all the skippers/DH's, but it is ultimately CAG's call (maybe a little bit the big Skipper and Boss) and he/she needs to have the experience to make that decision. Just IMO, I'm sure others will vary

Maybe I missed something but I don't think anyone was arguing for a 'Helo (or otherwise) CAG' were they? Just wondering what spurred this discussion?

 

[RHINOWSO]

Maybe I missed something but I don't think anyone was arguing for a 'Helo (or otherwise) CAG' were they? Just wondering what spurred this discussion?

What, exactly, do you think the job of the CAG entails?
Are they there to plan, brief, fly, and execute a strike? Or to provide their subordinate commands with the ability to do just that?
I think you are getting too buried in the tactics to appreciate the operational level of fighting. VS, VAW, VFA, HSL, heck, even VP and VUP, all have their respective tactics to be experts at executing. Just because their platform doesn't involve "warheads on foreheads" (actually an erroneous assumption) doesn't mean they can't lead and fight their weapon, whether that weapon is an aircraft, a squadron, a wing of squadrons, or even a pen.

Your best TopGun, patch wearing, ACM, missile slinging god isn't worth a bit if they have neither parts, planes, maintainers, nor the support structure/organization to get them off the deck.

I think your view is a bit myopic Sir.
Pickle

Edit: I'm not arguing for CAG to be VP, just to make that clear...

 

[MIDNJAC]

Maybe I missed something but I don't think anyone was arguing for a 'Helo (or otherwise) CAG' were they? Just wondering what spurred this discussion?

I think HSM was mentioned earlier, maybe I'm wrong. VAW is maybe a little better, given that they interact with us pretty closely, but I think a VAW background guy would still perhaps lack some of the CV ops stuff.....maybe not, depending on the person I suppose

 

[picklesuit]

Took the question to work today, got a much better understanding of what CAG does.

So, I guess the question is, why not E-2/Prowler/Growler CAG? They get in the fight, understand carrier ops, and will be involved in missions "over there"...
I can see the argument against helo CAG, and COD-CAG, but otherwise I don't understand the reticence...

Again: I'm way out of my element, so be patient with the former tube-slug...
Pickle

 

[SynixMan]

But in the end, some people just suck...

So you worked for some shitty bosses over the years? That's it? Or is it folks who aren't VF/VFA who suck? And your solution is to further decrease the available population of folks that could possibly be a CAG? That's the same myopic self-selection that got you the shitty bosses you hated.

Naval Aviation certainly has its share of leadership issues, but you come across like a pouting dinosaur with a serious lack of appreciation for anyone who isn't in a two seat jet (Tomcat or Rhino).

 

[EODDave]

Or how about then your entire squadron won't even mention you by name as the CO after you leave? Overtly act like you never existed? Thats solid leadership there I tell ya.

Are you referring to a squadron that starts with swords and ends with men?

 

[Pags]

I think HSM was mentioned earlier, maybe I'm wrong. VAW is maybe a little better, given that they interact with us pretty closely, but I think a VAW background guy would still perhaps lack some of the CV ops stuff.....maybe not, depending on the person I suppose

Non-CV question: Where is the Boss in all of this if CAG is running flight ops? Maybe apples to oranges but on the LHD the MEU CO generally let the Air Dept run the air plan and deal with adjusting the plan as required for operational needs. The CO would be read in, but it was largely informational vice decisional.

 

[wlawr005]

Boss runs flight ops. CAG makes the decisions...wx is shitty, launch. Jet is broken, divert. Cougar is shitty behind the boat, ground him.

CAG is not a Commodore like some of the Helo/VP guys may think of a wing commander. Each coast has an administrative wing, with a Commodore, designed to take care of the training, SOP, manning, etc.

CAG is supposed to be the guy that you don't mind "banging off the front at 0030 to break men and machines" in shitty weather because you know he knows EXACTLY what that means. Because he's done it.

 

[jtmedli]

So you worked for some shitty bosses over the years? That's it? Or is it folks who aren't VF/VFA who suck? And your solution is to further decrease the available population of folks that could possibly be a CAG? That's the same myopic self-selection that got you the shitty bosses you hated.

Naval Aviation certainly has its share of leadership issues, but you come across like a pouting dinosaur with a serious lack of appreciation for anyone who isn't in a two seat jet (Tomcat or Rhino).

I'm gonna have to disagree with you. We're overmanned and underfunded and underflown as it is. Yet, somehow, we're also overworked. Funny how that works, isn't it? When I can't focus on flying because "..there is paperwork to be done (or whatever)" then that's a problem. I'm all about being a professional naval officer and all of that good stuff. But what RHINOSWO is talking about is how we have let that professional naval officer thing become more important than being an aviator or warfighter.

Also, shitty bosses are a result of 2 things:
1) Most importantly, being a shitty person. Miserable people make people miserable and around here the pressure is on to make it to 20 and that usually means making XO or CO which is, honestly, not what most people really want to do which results in a front office that doesn't 'really' want to be there.
2) A Navy with EXTREMELY misplaced priorities. And I do mean: EXTREMELY MISPLACED PRIORITIES. We're not combat hardened aviators, ship drivers, bubbleheads, etc... anymore. We're paper-pushers who have to find time away from the desk every now and then in order to go fly or study or get our quals. That misplaced focus has some pretty serious repercussions from the JO all the way up to the XO and CO and beyond.

CAG is supposed to be the guy that you don't mind "banging off the front at 0030 to break men and machines" in shitty weather because you know he knows EXACTLY what that means. Because he's done it.

"....because he's done it in a JET." FIFY. Sadly, being CAG, DCAG, Boat Skipper, etc... usually doesn't mean they have much of a clue or appreciation for what the helos are doing which is part of the problem that RHINOSWO is advocating. That general lack of appreciation for the missions or capabilities of the helos which has led to the HSC and HSM communities' mindset being all fucked up.