BigWorm said:
Well, it sounds like you’re already set on the Navy, but trying to justify why you shouldn’t talk with the Marine OSO.
Becoming a Marine is all about attitude and where your heart is at. You will do a lot of stupid stuff to get there that doesn’t make any sense, but once you get there - it’s worth it. The quality of life and benefits in the Marines are worse yet I choose them over the Navy and do so with pride. If your asking why, then I recommend my sister service.
Bigworm, is that in reference to me? I don’t know why you would think that, but jumping to conclusions is a dubious hobby. :icon_mi_1
Frankly I was surprised at the number of pilots who have time on the ground on the Navy side. Naturally, it isn’t the same type of combat as a Marine, as the Navy has a very different mission. But a pilot who goes with the Seabees often sees some action, albeit not the front page stuff. And again, a Marine pilot is much more likely to go to combat.
I guess I should have defined “combat”. I was unaware that would be a big issue…By the same nomenclature, though, one could easily draw the conclusion that almost NO navy billets are in fact combat (save SEALS and a few other exceptions). NOTE: This isn’t meant to be inflammatory at all. I can see a good case for saying exactly that, Phrogdriver. I probably should have used a term other than combat, especially around Marine personnel as it has different, um… interpretations depending on what service you are talking to. I think most active duty people understand what I mean by "different interpretations."
Since this reply has already gotten wordy, I might as well continue on the stream of consciousness and say that that article linked to was interesting, if not predictable (at least for me). It doesn’t really address the question I was trying to ask, but it is good nonetheless.
Perhaps surprisingly, the Air Force is a big researcher on this exact type of thing—they have to do SOMETHING with all that extra money, right?—and their conclusions are generally that the “fourth Air Force” is necessary with the current power structure.
OK, now I am really off topic….but…
On the same note, a lot of the trend for Naval Air Power is geared toward Marine objectives (i.e. close air support and ground ops) rather than fleet defense. For example, if you take a look at the “Naval Aviation Vision” book (which is beautiful, BTW) that came out in May you can read between the lines to see some interesting things indeed. The concept of “The Fighter Pilot” is almost completely absent in favor of “time critical attack” and integration.
Even training forecasts are looking at integrated air-wings as the ONLY air wings. Premature methinks, but we’ll see. It certainly seems to match Rummy’s Transformational plans. But, and there is always a but, abandoning the traditional concept has a lot of room for waste in many a situation…. but that is a topic for a whole different day.
So, back on topic…
I am most curious about the nitty gritty in the squadrons, and how trends are different from the “average” USMC to the “average” USN (I know “average” is a gray term).
I have worked with many Navy guys, but only a very few Marine aviation guys. And my time with both when they are actually with their wing is small.
I’m thinking capturing an answer in text (much less on a message board) is possibly impossible.
Onward…
-Darin
