Navigator to NFO

[LostNav]

Have you thought about transitioning active USAF? That might be a lot easier than transitioning There are plenty of interesting C-130 versions that would give you a bigger challenge like AC/MC-130s.

The Air Force told me they haven't taken an IST since 2008. They would rather take someone off the street with no experience and put a few million dollars in them, then to just pull me from the ANG. I also have a buddy from Navigator Training who is Active Duty, and he was telling me that they are talking about doing a RIF board.

 

[Uncle Fester]

I think you probably have an uphill canoe to paddle here. Regardless of your background or skills, ultimately IST is just a way for a service to gain bodies if they need bodies. If they don't need bodies - and mostly Navy Air doesn't right now - there's no reason to pick more up.

Something you might look into is an IST into the Navy as an FTS (Full-Time Support) guy. I know the Air Guard has their 'full-timers'; this is roughly the same thing, except you're not going to stay with one unit for more than a tour (36 months-ish), and you're expected to jump through most of the same hoops as your AC counterparts. Basically, it's just like active duty but you're running Reserve units. If you're YG '00 or junior, I hear the P-3 house is shorthanded. It'd be a lot of new stuff to learn - new plane, new service, new mission, and the Reserve Navy is so different from the AC that it's a big transition even for Navy guys to make - but if you're interested in pursuing this path, it might be a way to go.

 

[robav8r]

The Navy and AF have parted ways in NAV & NFO training. Navy guys no longer go through AF Nav training. You did go through VT-4 or 10 prior to the 562nd, right? Our young aspiring NFO has not and this is why I made the statement above. Where do young P-3/P-8 Nav's get their training now? FRS?
-ea6bflyr

I believe after VT primary, all VP studs go to VP-30 for the UMFO program, get winged and then start the CAT I NFO pipeline. You can argue the benefits / value of the 562nd, but it did provide a good foundation of INS & GPS operation as well as basic navigator flight planning and execution. His attendance and graduation from 562nd makes him more, not less experienced for VP/VQ platforms.

 

[EM1toNFO]

Even if he didn't go through primary he still has plenty of training and experience as a 'panel' NAV to have a relatively smooth transition straight to to the RAG for P-3/8s or E-6s. He would likely be far ahead of his peers starting out as a NAV in VP or VQ since he would have had a lot more navigator training and experience, especially since it is a profession instead of a stepping stone in the USAF.

Transitioning to jets is a different story and then I think it is largely based on the individual rather than previous training. My primary training in VT-4 did almost nothing for me (12 flights for a little over 20 hours?) when I started training for jets four years later, by that time whatever 'air sense' I had developed in the T-34 was lost in the dark and windowless tube of the EP-3.

Ummm. No. I have used absolutely none of my navigation training in VQ-7 (E-6s). Everything I learned in primary was a waste. I do none of it now. So I doubt he'd have 'a leg up' on other NFOs at the FRs.

 

[Flash]

Ummm. No. I have used absolutely none of my navigation training in VQ-7 (E-6s). Everything I learned in primary was a waste. I do none of it now. So I doubt he'd have 'a leg up' on other NFOs at the FRs.

Okay, it may not help him in E-6s but it would in P-3/EP-3s since they still have the junior NFOs be Navigators for their first year or so.

 

[LostNav]

So, what I gather, it sounds like it really depends on which airframe I go to. My next question is: What airframes concentrate on what parts for being an NFO? Sounds like some NFO's do basic Navigation, some do Electronic Warefare/Countermeasures, etc. I am trying to determine which airframe would be a good fit for me. You have all been helpful and I'm very excited to make the transition.

 

[Brett327]

Unless you're talking about staying in some kind of reserve component, seems to me, if you got to the NFO pipeline, you'd be in the mix with everybody else as far as platform selection goes. So, what airframe might be a good fit for you might be the one the Navy picks for you. Of course, educate yourself about all the NFO platforms in case you do get to pick your platform - just know that a lot of factors go into that process.

 

[Flash]

So, what I gather, it sounds like it really depends on which airframe I go to. My next question is: What airframes concentrate on what parts for being an NFO? Sounds like some NFO's do basic Navigation, some do Electronic Warefare/Countermeasures, etc. I am trying to determine which airframe would be a good fit for me. You have all been helpful and I'm very excited to make the transition.

NFOs don't stay as 'basic' navigators for long unlike the USAF, part of the reason we aren't called navigators. In EP/P-3s you start out as a Nav then move up to run the mission after 12-18 months usually keeping your nav qual but not often using it, apparently in E-6s don't do nav at all anymore. For jets you do both, navigate and run the weapons systems though the 'navigating' is much different than you are used to, mainly using the boxes to make sure where you are and making sure get to where you need to be at the right time but sans nav table, dividers, straight edge and all those big charts. As for the mission, it depends on the plane and you will get trained on that when you get to the RAG and your fleet squadron.

 

[gotta_fly]

...apparently in E-6s don't do nav at all anymore.

True! Turns out us lazy pilots were capable of navigating for ourselves.

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2

 

[Flash]

True! Turns out us lazy pilots were capable of navigating for ourselves.

By 'navigating for ourselves' you actually mean that you go where the magic box tells you to go. Still a monkey, following a banana......

 

[ea6bflyr]

Still a monkey, following a banana......

 

[gotta_fly]

By 'navigating for ourselves' you actually mean that you go where the magic box tells you to go. Still a monkey, following a banana......

Just the way I like it. Now if I could only keep the former navigators back in their cave...

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2

 

[BusyBee604]

By 'navigating for ourselves' you actually mean that you go where the magic box tells you to go. Still a monkey, following a banana......

Yup, Skyhawk drivers did it for 30+years... alone!
BzB

 

[HAL Pilot]

Yup, Skyhawk drivers did it for 30+years... alone!
BzB

Yeah but by your own admission, it wasn't always that reliable......

http://www.airwarriors.com/community/index.php?threads/cross-countries.39448/page-3#post-710961

 

[BusyBee604]

Yeah but by your own admission, it wasn't always that reliable......

Reliability? Not sure what "it" is... if you're talking propulsion, I agree - having 2+ engines is always more reliable than... gasp, only ONE.

If you're citing Com/Nav equipment, our equipment was 'tacan & UHF only'. It was all we had available at that time, but it was pretty reliable.

If'n you mean Scooter drivers, I think we did OK (being aviators, navigators, & bombardiers all rolled up in one handsome package), orchestrating these functions from an office 1/3 the volume of a phone booth, sans lavatory, Mr. Coffee & crew rest 'magic fingers' bunk! So there....

All things considered, we did pretty good with what we had! Like our Avian friends the Bees, we could only give a moderate sting individually, but when attacking in swarms... deadly!

BzB