Great question. My guess has to do with the immense amount of documentation required to kick someone out that far down the road.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Coast Guard pilot involved in crash to be charged with homicide
- Thread starter HercDriver
- Start date
C'mon, Brett. You already knew the answer before you asked the question; I suspect you were really asking a different question.
There is more than one way to skin a cat, but designating a guy an "AC/HAC/section lead/etc., but" is the path of least resistance. (Usage: "Yeah, he's a HAC, but he can only fly during the day/with _____/etc.")
Harrier Dude
Living the dream
Maybe he inherited the guy with the qual? If a CO takes command and he has a qualified/designated pilot that sucks, but he doesn't know that yet, I can see him letting him keep it until incompetence is proven.
Giving somebody a qual as a path of least resistance is just cowardice, pure and simple.
This is a bullshit argument because you suppose this:
Allegedly poor CRM is not breaking a shit ton of rules. Flathatting, willful disregard for safety and thumbing your nose at the rules? Sure. But unless you know more than the rest of us, this wasn't the case.
I had the distinct "pleasure" of explaining to VADM Zortman why I should be permitted to continue flying after my class alpha (primary causal factor being material failure - but some judgement calls that could have / should have gone the other way). "Sir, this will only serve to make me a better instructor pilot and Naval Officer / Aviator going forward as I'll have this experience to share with students and future squadron mates..." "Good answer lieutenant. That is all."
Yeah, concur. I've seen it in all the aforementioned ways.
@ Pickle: Dunno how the VP guys do it, but in my community a first tour JO can finish their tour without their "expected" quals (PPC or MC equivalent) and not have to go through a FNAEB which would require the documentation you speak of. It's completely at the CO's discretion. That person will essentially never fly again, so it's kind of a soft kill. The flipside to that is the "kiss goodbye" qual, thinking that they'll never make it back as a DH. That practice has resulted in people with no business in an aircraft coming back as a DH, and then they're a lot more painful to shoot in the head at that point. I had one of those in my last squadron - not fun.
only one?
If the soft-kill doesn't work, then you have to go for the hard-kill...if you have the testicular fortitude and the stomach for it. Some COs don't have either.
-ea6bflyr
Only one DH.only one?
Hell my first fleet skipper was that guy. He openly bragged that everyone else quit or was killed and that's how he got command. It was sure a lesson for me.
In helos I've seen a few "HAC buts...". The peron is a HAC, but they can 't fly at night... Or must have an H2P as copilot... Or can only fly Plane Guard.
It came down to the CO not wanting to torpedo a person by FNAEB'ing them. (if you don't make HAC in 24 months 3710 calls for a FNAEB). I've sat a few FNAEB and the immediate hole it causes is painful, butit is better for the long term health of the Navy. Unfortunately, I've has a couple of Skippers who decided to take the short-term easy route and selectivly schedule some folks rather than use the system appropriately.
So, I guess it's not just a fixed wing thing, it happens in helos too.
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
I've seen HACs who never flew as one. Not once.
Yeah, our community went through a period of a few years where we thought we were going to FNAEB everyone who didn't make MC in a certain timeframe, but it was just a bad way to manage the program from a practical standpoint and took the final judgement out of the rightful preview of the CO. I dont think it was an OPNAV directed (IE 3710) requirement, ours was a type wing instruction that was much easier to change. IMO, the 24 month limit is a good benchmark, but there are too many real world variables which make those kinds of hard requirements impractical.
That is how things are run in VAW. You have a certain number of months (I'm blanking on whether it was 18 or 24) to make CAPC/CICO, otherwise you got a FNAEB. Skipper had the discretion to extend that for extenuating circumstances (where the squadron was in the workup cycle, a/c status, etc), but not to waive it.
There was no such thing as "CAPC/CICO, but..." None of the three skippers I worked for would allow it. It would come up during PRBs occasionally, "Fred's ready for CAPC, as long as he's got someone more senior with him for a while." That always got squashed in a hurry. "Either he's ready to sign for the plane/sit center seat with our dumbest new guy and the chaplain along, or he isn't. Period."
As for this poor Coastie bastard...I don't know whose lawn he shit on, but he really pissed off someone. They're doing everything but ripping his buttons off and breaking his sword in half, for what still sounds to me like nothing more than a bad day in the airplane.
If there's some aggravating factor involved that no one's mentioning, it needs to be published; otherwise, this looks like "Fuck the dog in the plane, and we won't rest until you're in Leavenworth or broken professionally, preferably both." Which is hardly what you want your pilots believing.
If there isn't such an aggravating factor...I'm mystified as to all the hate dropping on this dude's head.
There was no such thing as "CAPC/CICO, but..." None of the three skippers I worked for would allow it. It would come up during PRBs occasionally, "Fred's ready for CAPC, as long as he's got someone more senior with him for a while." That always got squashed in a hurry. "Either he's ready to sign for the plane/sit center seat with our dumbest new guy and the chaplain along, or he isn't. Period."
As for this poor Coastie bastard...I don't know whose lawn he shit on, but he really pissed off someone. They're doing everything but ripping his buttons off and breaking his sword in half, for what still sounds to me like nothing more than a bad day in the airplane.
If there's some aggravating factor involved that no one's mentioning, it needs to be published; otherwise, this looks like "Fuck the dog in the plane, and we won't rest until you're in Leavenworth or broken professionally, preferably both." Which is hardly what you want your pilots believing.
If there isn't such an aggravating factor...I'm mystified as to all the hate dropping on this dude's head.
In VP, if you don't leave with an EP as an MC/IP/ITC, you are effectively "soft killed" for DH and O5. Yes, there are exceptions. I think some CO's feel that while an individual didn't/couldn't get it done as a PPC/TC, there was no need to throw out the baby with the water wrt to that individuals Naval Career. I have seen many that redesignated after their VP JO tour and gone on to be very successful Officers. Ultimately, I think the CO should have the ability to decide either way. In VP, it's a bit easier for the CO to justify giving someone a soft qual because we can let him fly at home on a pilot/nav trainer in the local area versus an SRO flight in 7th Fleet. Two completely different levels of responsibility and required technical skill.