Disassociated tour for aviators on aircraft carriers/gators

[Uncle Fester]

To answer an earlier point, yes, nuke SWOs command conventional ships as part of their careers. Last ship I cruised on was a frigate with a nuke captain. Most of her career had been within the nuke world (i.e., Reactor divs, power school, etc).

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

To answer an earlier point, yes, nuke SWOs command conventional ships as part of their careers. Last ship I cruised on was a frigate with a nuke captain. Most of her career had been within the nuke world (i.e., Reactor divs, power school, etc).

Thank you. This is impossible in Russia. Nuke is nuke and his place is reactor control room up to LtCdr, then shore billets up to retirement, if we are speaking about SWO nuke. Bubblehead nuke (just about 10 officers on the Russian sub are nukes - all the rest are qualified as submariners but not nuclear powerplant guys) can make the ENG and Cdr, but no more - his further way lays ashore, too. By the way, why did you change community from shipdrivers to No Further Occupation?
Answer is desirable due to the fact that your way is one of those able in Russia, while unbelievebly hard: SWO with nav, communication, radar, sonar or ASW designators can beg for appointment in Naval Aviation as one of WSOs in Bear (Tu-95 or -142) crew, but he will be considered as totally mentally defective by his shipmates: Bear's WSO billet is 1st Lt (your Jig) at best while its naval equivalent, Senior Lt, is the initial rank at the ship (Capt-Lt, i.e. Lt in your parlance, is the minimal billet on the submarine).

 

[Flash]

Are you calling them rotorheads? Forgive me for the adherence to Royal Navy experience (as it is both archetype for any blue-water navy and the culture model for USN, while, for example, Russian Navy as well as German one is built around the general landmass military approaches), but the current First Sea Lord Admiral Sir George Zambellas is the naval helo pilot. Since the helo communities from all the military branches are tend to unite in both airplanes and tactics (and even is a single command - see GB and Netherlands, at least) and simultaneously they are seeing much more direct combat situations with high risk profile, it seems to me that the number of flag rank rotorhead officers will increase rapidly. Yet, both British Princes are helo guys, by the way. Maybe it's not a wonder that the naval helo community is in close relationships with the surface one as they are constantly maintain a detachments deployed on the surface ships. Like in business, in the pure military career the one of most important things is who you know and who is knowing you. Every-morning handshakes with the big amount of surface boys at the start and the first one-third of career can be very good for rotorhead's career, indeed.?

The foreign experience with rotorheads is much different than the US one for one big reason, size. All of our military branches, including the Coast Guard, have a significant number of helos and aren't anywhere near as 'joint' as other countries like the UK or the Netherlands where they have consolidated their helicopter forces under one command. Our Coast Guard alone has more helos (~140) than most country's militaries to include the Dutch.

The Navy experience with helos is also different than the other services, where helos in the Marines and Army are much more central to their aviation mission in the Navy they have long played more supporting role. That and they used to be a much smaller percentage of aviators in the Navy. While their missions and numbers have recently increased the number of helo flag officers have not caught up yet and that is something that the Navy is grappling with now.

NAVCAD you mean? I have read the book of one of them, Capt B.K. Bryans, USN Ret, titled "Flying Low". It seemed to me that at the main career points there was very little support that system provided to that guys, in comparison with routine AOCS/ROTC people, let alone Canoe U grads... By the way, what do you think about AOCS effectiveness?

NAVCAD was one of the programs I was referring to, there were several other programs as well. Often they only used those programs when they needed more folks like in WWII, Vietnam and in the 80's. With the draw down after the Cold War and reduced budgets they consolidated the commissioning sources and got rid of several smaller programs like NAVCAD and even AOCS. In the early 90's they combined regular OCS and AOCS so everyone goes through the same OCS now.

The logic that had been placed under the Army WO helo drivers existance, as it seems, can be traced to the Vietnam War via, for example, the "Chickenhawk" book and alike, and it is mostly about the numbers: even if the top brass could have grabbed all the West Point and Army ROTCs annual grads in 1965-66 and stuffed the Hueys' cockpits with them all, the sufficient amount of the Army helos could have still been grounded due to the shortage of the pilots. As far I as know, the Army Fort Rucker training pipeline for aviation doesn't include the light fixed wing indoctrination/training, i.e. their skills are pure "helicoptering" from the scratch. Are the Navy and Marines helo boys compelling to do the same or they have the general primarily training in the piston-engined fixed-wing aircraft and switch to helos just after that?

You are right that for the Army it is mostly about numbers, they have a lot of helos and need a lot of pilots for them. Aviation is not a core mission for them though like it is for the Navy, Air Force or even Marines, they view them more as just another tool to directly support the troops on the ground and less as a more strategic asset. As a result they don't plan for most aviators to be anything more than that while in the other services they expect you to be a leader on the path to a command position eventually, even though only a few get to command. So while the Army does have Generals that are pilots there aren't nearly as many as the other services.

All Naval Aviators, Marine and Coast Guard included, do their initial flight training in fixed-wing trainers (the T-6 Texan II nowadays). After the initial phase of flight training they then move onto jet, helo or large fixed-wing training before they get their wings.

 

[Flash]

Hypotheses:
1. Mad Max is an AirWarriors regular (or regular lurker) with a spoofed IP address just jerking us around for ships & giggles (99.98%)
2. Mad Max is an actual Russian who has spent a butthurt amount of time honing an astounding depth & breadth of U.S. military knowledge...

..Who knows.

This is not just for you and not just for this thread or even the forum:

1. This is a very well moderated site filled with professionals who have a considerable amount of experience in the subject matters this forum covers so you can expect us to handle unusual or unique questions and folks like Max on this site in an appropriate manner. Same in a squadron or on a ship, if you see something say something but at the same time it is a good idea to shut up, sit down and be a fly on the wall when you are the new guy.

2. Mad Max has been honest and up-front about who is and why he is asking these questions. He has also asked nicely and rates a response in kind. He has not asked for anything secret or sensitive but reasonable questions about the culture and processes unique to the US Navy. As someone who has worked with foreign militaries before and had many of the same questions I can see exactly where he is coming from. It is also obvious to me that he is not some snot-nosed cheetos-eating moron sitting in his Mom's basement whose only exposure to the US Navy has been watching Top Gun, NCIS and RT.

3. As I mentioned before, this site was specifically set up for folks to ask about Naval Aviation and that is exactly what Max is doing. He asked reasonable questions nicely and he rates a reasonable and respectful answers. As long as nothing sensitive is asked or answered then there are no real issues.

 

[MIDNJAC]

Welcome Ivan……we have been waiting for you to arrive for so long….

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_brigades

Merry Christmas Mad Max, this reply will certainly earn you a few rubles to burn over the holidays…..

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

That and they used to be a much smaller percentage of aviators in the Navy.

Yes Flash you are right in that and many other points. Aside of it, your Naval helo community seemingly contains the higher percentage of the Naval Aviators (1310/1315 Designator, as I can think) than the fixed-wings crowds except possibly VP one, since there are two single-anchored boys in every SH, HH, UH and AH, while the strike fighters (as most famous) in any case have just one Naval Aviator per cockpit. If so (for explainable reasons I cannot possess the definite numbers), then your rotorheads can carry within their subcommunity even more Naval Aviation ethos' features than even the Hornet boys.

Again, thanks for some support and while it can seem strange enough, for me the honest militaries from different countries are some closer to each other (despite even officially mutually adversary status) than to their domestic politicians to whom they report. Nothing new - Dr. Huntington wrote that in 1955. By the way, his most prominent book titled "Soldier And The State" is still untranslated into Russian, as far as I know - it is quite dangerous for the link between politics and military and for the military's commitment to the regime, no matter of the name (democracy, kingdom, dictatorship etc).



More follow,

Regards, Max

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

In the early 90's they combined regular OCS and AOCS so everyone goes through the same OCS now.

Some AOCS guys, relatively famous novellist Stephen Coonts for example (Vietnam era A-6 pilot), are not happy with this merger. Not so about the difference in the training environment (say Navy Chiefs at regular OCS instead of Marine drill Gunnies at old good AOCS), mostly about the substitution in the geography. Here in Russia there is the thought that some "stockpile of prayers" exists, i.e. old wooden church is better than new one of gold and jewelry, mostly because the former contains that centuries-old"stockpile of prayers" which really helps. The same about the elder Naval College in StPet (formally the only Naval Cadet Corps), which King Peter The Great personally started in 1701. Still there are more admirals in Russian Navy (even more were in Soviet time) who graduated from that old campus than from the others. Not purely a kind of Canoe U in USN, while resembling to some degree, rather the old traditions of education and training. A lot of professors there are not the active military officers and never been, and they share their academical time between that NavColl and, say, StPet University (we call that metro city of Saint Petersburg as simply "Peter"), that is why the educational scores of a midshipmen (cadets) in that NavColl are higher than in average. The dark side of that NavColl grads is an arrogance to Naval Aviation, as the City of Peter is mostly "old maritime" area and it contains and hosts a lot of military education and training installations (aside from the naval ones - there were six naval colleges in this city at the Soviet time - there are the infantry, communications and military engineering war colleges) with no aviation one among them. But the 1994-95 gov plans to eliminate that old NavColl (the old building was and still is very attractive real estate point) had created almost the next revolution in the city of the Great October Revolution. That is why it seems to me that I understand Mr. Coonts's sorrow for the relocation of AOCS from the heart of US Naval Aviation, the old warm nice Pensacola (yet the near the core of an old Dixie ethos roots) to the old Northern Rhode Island, the colder let alone Yankeesh;-)

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

As a result they don't plan for most aviators to be anything more than that while in the other services they expect you to be a leader on the path to a command position eventually, even though only a few get to command. So while the Army does have Generals that are pilots there aren't nearly as many as the other services.

Bingo, I think. This is the main defference in the military cultures. The true leader in Russia Navy is the surface - mostly cruiser one - officer. We had had only one naval CinC who was submariner in the past century, and it is unthinkable for Russian Naval Aviator to achieve that appointment (it is easier for him to make the interservice transfer to Air Force and blossom there). The Army CinC will be infantryman or tank driver, period. The Air Force head will be, first, a pilot (not WSO), and second - single-placed guy. Only one Air Force CinC was from strategic bombers, either pilot, all the others were pure fighters or fighter-bombers (either single-placed). Dragon of three heads. The main Russian military problem for decades - a liaison. "What? Li-a-i-son? I don't know such word. We'll do it by ourselves, no help needed!" - usual Russian Generals/Admirals' phrase when it comes to interservice mutual agreement.

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

... and Merry Christmas to all :-D

 

[BigRed389]

That is why it seems to me that I understand Mr. Coonts's sorrow for the relocation of AOCS from the heart of US Naval Aviation, the old warm nice Pensacola (yet the near the core of an old Dixie ethos roots) to the old Northern Rhode Island, the colder let alone Yankeesh;-)

They're not just Yankees...they're yacht club, sweater vest wearing, take your drinks with your pinky in the air Yankees.

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

They're not just Yankees...they're yacht club, sweater vest wearing, take your drinks with your pinky in the air Yankees.

Irony... always irony when it comes to SWO badge carrier;-) OK, I've been aware not to "joke openly" about Dixie\Yankee subject, maybe in vain, but just in case. But it is not my opinion - noted Dr. Samuel Huntington wrote that even during the Civil War the northern Generals were mostly from the southern states, as the US South have been more fluent in any warfare due to the three major factors:
1. A lot of free time of the youth noblity there;
2. Constant tensions on the Southern borders of the whole country;
3. More or less either constant stream of the fleeing slavery who formed the bands all around the borders and make some liaison to Indians.

All that, wrote Huntington, was not the case for the industrial North, a sort of. That is why, he'd like, all advance in the military sciences have been made by Dixies. I am not at all the good historian but still, five of the six so-called "senior military colleges" in USA are in the Dixie states. VMI, Citadel, VirTech, Texas AMU and UNG versus the sole northern Norwich.

OK then, in 1982 now-retired ADM Stavridis, who then was SWO LT, have been openly ready to resign his commission immediately after his tour in the steaming guts of USS Forrestal (some boiler divisional officer), and he wrote the article in Proceedings in which advocated the SWO-billet for CV\CVN XO. Now the XO of the amphib gator, say LHA, quite can be the SWO Cdr\Capt - in 1982 it was purely aviation billet. Things are changing. What do you think, can it get so far that this old 1982 recommendation will become the reality of CVN ship's company?

 

[HAL Pilot]

Is anyone else mentally adding a stereotypical Russian accent as they read Max's posts?

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

Easy to pretend the Russian, indeed. Spell ":re" in "are" and "were" loud and clear. Though some Sweden or Norway people around will think you're from Iceland. Yet there is something good in Russian "rrrrr". We are not Chinese who cannot say "R" at all...

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

A CVN CO's tour is still about 2 years, maybe a little longer.

Flash, what about your look at their "deep draft" tenure before that? I have read in ADM Holloway III's book (former CNO) that it can last about a year. Once, during so-called "Kiel Week" (annual maritime fest in Northern Germany, to which the Russian ships had been invited from 1991 to 2013) I had visited the USS Mount Whitney. As it turned out, the CO of the ship was aviator on his "deep draft". On this ship at least several crewmembers are not uniformed military, the young lady on the bridge, a Quartermaster, was civilian. And there have been a real seadog there, the CWO4 at his middle 40, qualified (amazingly to me - he's enlisted) as SWO, according to the badge of gold. He offered me a cup of Navy coffee. Not the best coffee I've ever sipped (for me it's middle France where the best coffee are preparing, not Italy and definitely not Germany), but given the huge cold raining (it's always the most sucking weather in Kiel during that Week - the local Germans joke that they once tried to shift the fest by a month into middle of summer, but the weather was inevitably shifting accordingly) it was very good and cordially. The man was very polite about the service and the crew but didn't avoid my question about the fact that his CO was not SWO. He said something like "It's me and my people who drive this ship, so whether it is important who issue the orders?" All in all, for me it became obvious then that "deep draft" practice is intended to give the aviation Capt who is screened for CVN command some big crew management experience rather than purely seamanship. If so, and I'm not kidding you, it's better to assign the prospective CVN skipper to command the CG or DDG, and (in lieu) give a chance for a proper SWO to hit the XO billet of CVN, or create a billet of "deputy XO" for this experiment. On some Royal Navy carriers, HMS Eagle (R05) for example, there were two XOs - one for ship's company and one for airwing, respectively (while both SWOs)...

 

[HAL Pilot]

CWO4 is a commissioned officer, not enlisted.