-
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
Individual Augmentee (IA) info & questions
- Thread starter Pcola04/30
- Start date
There are some IA jobs that naval officers are qualified for. We lost some instructors who were prowler and viking guys due to there proficiencey and knowledge with counter electronics and jamming equipment. So there are jobs out there that Navy guys are qualified for and can do. Supposedly they are sending 10,000 Navy IAs over there to make the total 11,000. Remember we are Officers and Enlisted members of the united states military and also in the Navy.
I assume that there are a number of FAC spots being filled by the Navy also. Guys getting orders like "Report for 2 weeks of weapons training here, and then report to such and such a unit at Little Creek". Even the command doesn't know what they are actually going to do. Just makes sense they are going as FACs for some of the ground forces we have deployed.
I assume that there are a number of FAC spots being filled by the Navy also. Guys getting orders like "Report for 2 weeks of weapons training here, and then report to such and such a unit at Little Creek". Even the command doesn't know what they are actually going to do. Just makes sense they are going as FACs for some of the ground forces we have deployed.
Brett327 said:
What gets me going is two things.
1. They expect people to do a 1 year IA during their shore tour, have it counted as part of their shore tour, and then go back to sea duty tours. This means that your shore tour could in reality be as short as 12 to 18 months. Part of the 'deal' that I have always heard DH's, CO's, XO's, detailers etc. say was that the Navy will take your pound of flesh out of you on your sea tours and you can relax on your shore tours. Is 1 year spent in the sandpit of the Middle East a real 'shore' tour? What about the guys with families? The ones who are worn out from being away from home on their sea tour for 2/3's of the time? Where is the down time? Even the Army is ensuring their JO's are getting good 'non-operational' tours.
2. The Navy is doing a poor job of assigning a large number of people to some of the IA positions. I alluded to this in another thread when I mentioned the lack of PTI representation in the big IA draft that came out 2 months ago, but they are sending other people who have no experience in the threat area over there. Just because you have a degree does not qualify you to be an EW officer, no matter how simple it some may think it is. What value does that add to an Army or Marine unit other than a body? And yet they don't deploy arguably the some of the most qualified EW personnel in the Navy? And playing 'I have a secret' and deliberately not telling people that they might be on the list to go is just inexcusable in addition to being plain poor leadership.
I have no problem with going over to a war zone. I have spent plenty of time in that region of the world, including taking part in OIF, and would be more than willing to go again. I think what the VQ/VAQ personnel drafted in the big IA list are doing good work, though I think it is solving only part of a problem. The problem I have is the very poor way that the Navy is executing the IA program. Poor management of people will get you nothing but grief in the long term, did we learn nothing from the 90's?
well i guess Brett just dated himself
What i want to know is should we start calling you guys:
1. The Narmy (my fav)
2. The Navmy
3. The Arvy
On a realisitic note... sending navy 'seaman' to do IA billets during their "shore tour" is horsesh!t. Shore tour people, I mean come on. Give these guys the option to do a ground assigned billet while under-way if the army needs additional help/bodies. 2/c
What i want to know is should we start calling you guys:
1. The Narmy (my fav)
2. The Navmy
3. The Arvy
On a realisitic note... sending navy 'seaman' to do IA billets during their "shore tour" is horsesh!t. Shore tour people, I mean come on. Give these guys the option to do a ground assigned billet while under-way if the army needs additional help/bodies. 2/c
Yeah, I'll take a Canuck over a disgusting, bloated Seattlite any day. Nothing makes me more nauseous then a 240 lb woman proclaiming her infinite hotness while wiggling her ample rolls all over the bar - Jesus H. Christ! In the end, my solution was moving to SOCAL.Flash said:You did not like all the girls in flannel and jeans in Seattle? That is why I went north to Vancouver, those Canadian girls were a bit nicer......
Brett
CORPSviation said:
Ummmm we are at war and if you are underway chances are you are in support of the war.
It sucks Im sure, and it is hitting the green side as well but lets keep it in perspective, it is not horsesh!t, you took an oath to support and defend the Constitution and duly appointed authority has decided that is how you shall do so.
If the interuption of your shore tour saves the life of one LCpl or one Army Specialist then it is not horsesh!t, f@ck you and finally suck it up.
End rant.
skidkid said:
What I'm saying is instead of being under-way on ship, pull the guys in their deployment cycle to assist with those in the ground. It sounds like the need more people in support of the army than the do on ship anyway, so it seems pretty feasible.
In regards to your final, most inappropriate, and unprofessional comment, I am on the green side, and I am in full support of the lcpl on the ground. However, i was going to bat for those in the navy who are getting their shore tour cut short. Whether my solution is a good one to you or not, I think there is a better solution than pulling guys away from their shore tour.
Personnally, im all for hitting the ground and supporting whoever needs the help. I wouldnt be all that excited working outside my element (in the army, not MC) but i do keep in mind that the army isnt my boss, the president is, so i go/will go where im told
Does anyone know if the Air Force is sending people on IA duty? If not why are we, the Navy/MC, sucking up all the IA tours? In this time when the Navy is trying to downsize by XX-thousand people to save money why are we sending qualified career oriented sailors and MArines to the sandbox when we have, presumably, an amount of people on their way out of the service that could be sent "over there". I really wouldn't care if I got sent over to the sandbox,(you know get to act out some of my childhood army fantasies ), but i think that all services should be sharing equally in the IA action, if they're not already.
-"Easy"
), but i think that all services should be sharing equally in the IA action, if they're not already.-"Easy"
ElCidAv8tor05 said:
Yes.
The whole point of the Navy playing in the IA game is to share the load because the Navy wasn't taking the full load. Mind you this statement is just explaining why and not trying to validate or negate way the actual IAs are being handled.
Yeah, I love the idea that the Navy wasnt doing their fair share. I guess deployments and long periods at sea and away from home being part of the job doesnt count. Especially considering the real deployments for the Army and Air Force are a relatively recent thing.
Just wait till they start pulling people out of deployment billets to fill the IA's. Eventually this will get to the point where the Navy's combat readiness suffers.
Just wait till they start pulling people out of deployment billets to fill the IA's. Eventually this will get to the point where the Navy's combat readiness suffers.
skidkid said:
So what do you suggest, that we endlessly deploy people until they retire? I have no problem doing my time but there has to be a point where they give people some time to breathe. The Army is going to great lengths to try and ensure that this happens to their personnel now (they have not done so well in the past), especially the JO's who are starting to leave at higher numbers.
A sea tour in the Navy is usually very demanding and I expect no less than that, but shore tours have always been a time to recharge and refresh yourself. The Navy caould do a much better job of sending some of the people doing an IA tour (I am talking about a particualr group of IA's). Instead they are sending people who were getting out in a few months, people in the middle of their one shore tour out of 4 tours while not taking people who would be doing their disassociated sea tour.
There is a good way to do things, a bad way and really sh!tty way of doing things. The Navy is doing a perfect example of the last with some of its IA's.