Navy vs Air Force

[HackerF15E]

@Hacker and vick, thanks for your input. Its great to have a discussion about Navy vs. AF, especially with bubbas like you who have experience. Good to know this guy rubs you the wrong way too.

It's tough enough to "keep it real" discussing the USAF on a US Navy board without people chaffing up the discussion by "helping out" like that guy.

 

[HackerF15E]

I just learned something. I always heard it had awesome range and loiter capabilities, I guess that's what I get for getting all of my information from the Military Channel and teh intarwebs.

That's probably a thought derived from the whole idea the supercruise allows them to use less afterburner and still go fast. Less burner use should mean longer loiter times and more range.

Unfortuantely, that's not how the Raptor employs. I don't want to get into any specific Raptor tactics, but it's sufficient to say that any references to range and loiter that exceed any other current-day fighters is, uhm, not accurate.

 

[bunk22]

This idiot is just a wannabe or never has been who likes to pretend, behind his computer screen, he has the knowledge to be something he's not. Good ban on this tool.

 

[zoomie08]

Not sure if you've made your choice yet, but I think I can provide some advice. I went through four years of Air Force life at the Air Force Academy and then commissioned in the Navy. For those who have said that the Navy allows their officers to act more independently and think for themselves more than the Air Force, they are exactly right. The Air Force does not trust its officers to the same level as the Navy. As an Air Force officer (especially a junior officer and pilot) you will will be responsible for yourself and your aircraft and have no leadership duties that should come with being an officer. In the Navy as an aviator, you will have an additional job aside from your flying duties aboard ship. Naval officers, in my experience, are leaders while Air Force officers are paper-pushing managers. The Air Force attitude is very corporate, IMO. Furthermore, the Air Force is having a hard time accepting that their role in modern warfare is more of airlift and tanker support and is not the traditional air-to-air combat role. Yet, they continue to act as if it is. This is part of the reason why they have a bad reputation among the other services.

If you don't mind having a book of regulations that dictate every course of action to you without allowing you to/making you think, go Air Force. If you like thinking for yourself and being a leader as well as aviator, go Navy.

Don't get me wrong, the Air Force is a great organization with very capable and professional people. I just think they have quite a few doctrinal, leadership, and organizational problems which leads to the most capable people not being promoted to upper leadership.

 

[cgoetz]

All I gotta say is Go Navy, and I'm sick and tired of people asking my why I haven't looked into the Air Force. I mean everytime I tell somebody I'm shooting for the Navy they say your going to be on a ship for 6 months or longer, and that seems to be their only pet peeve about it. They all seem to want to live one place and thats home. Hey I have no problem living on a ship and I want to travel because I do not wanna be in my 30s and still livin with my folks after colleges, not that I don't love my parents mind you. I will give the Air Force one thing though they do have good looking chicks, not that the navy doesn't have its share.

 

[LazersGoPEWPEW]

On a more serious note, and this may belong in the Stupid Questions thread, has the Navy ever considered implementing some of the features of the Raptor in any of its future prototypes/daydreams? I would imagine that supercruise and the range/loiter capabilities, not to mention thrust vectoring, would be a nice thing to have, especially if you're launching from the Persian Gulf and have to fly to a land-locked country like Afghanistan.

I apologize beforehand if this is tip-toeing into the area of OpSec.

Isn't thrust-vectoring a main aspect of the JSF?

 

[HackerF15E]

If you don't mind having a book of regulations that dictate every course of action to you without allowing you to/making you think, go Air Force. If you like thinking for yourself and being a leader as well as aviator, go Navy.

You know all this from having spent four years at the Zoo? And having been on active duty as an Ensign less than one year?

Choke yourself, dude.

 

[picklesuit]

Isn't thrust-vectoring a main aspect of the JSF?

Thrust vectoring is a main aspect of me getting from one side of the hot-tub to the other...

 

[zoomie08]

You know all this from having spent four years at the Zoo? And having been on active duty as an Ensign less than one year?

Just my humble opinion from my (admittedly limited) experience.

 

[HackerF15E]

Just my humble opinion from my (admittedly limited) experience.

Well your opinion didn't come off as humble or based on limited experience in any way whatsoever.

Unfortunately, it isn't all that accurate of an opinion, either. Read the post on the previous page from Vick that pretty much contradicts the widely-held myth that seems the Navy likes to throw around to bag on the USAF:

The number one myth I would contest is that flying in the AF is more restrictive, that what you are allowed to do is spelled out in the regs and anything not explicitly addressed is prohibited. Yeah the AF has a lot of regs, but so far I have found flying in the AF to be no more and no less restrictive than flying in the MC.

So, while you certainly have a unique perspective having gone to one service's academy and now being commissioned on another service, don't pervert that to mean you have enough experience to have a clue yet. Nothing at the Zoo remotely resembles the actual USAF. Just as the time you've spent in API and flight school in no way actually represents what flying in the operational world is like.

The bad news is that your only experience with the USAF is from the Academy! Apologies for what your college experience must have been like.

 

[FMRAM]

Snake...paging Snake.

 

[bunk22]

Too many wannabe's and nobody's posting in this thread...translation, if you don't know WTF you're talking about, don't post.

 

[FMRAM]

1 OSW + Prowler Iraqi Freedom Det (PSAB)
I ONW
4 Red Flags
1 Cope Thunder

On the plus side I rather appreciated the AF base amenities. The chow was usually awesome (surf and turf ect.), good gym, eye candy ect. The downside was having to deal with all the extremely anal rules that we had no idea existed.

 

[HeyJoe]

Just my humble opinion from my (admittedly limited) experience.

Well, that trumps:

From MY limited experience in the CAP

...but only by a little....

 

[Flash]

The number one myth I would contest is that flying in the AF is more restrictive, that what you are allowed to do is spelled out in the regs and anything not explicitly addressed is prohibited. Yeah the AF has a lot of regs, but so far I have found flying in the AF to be no more and no less restrictive than flying in the MC. There were plenty of rules governing MC flying as well, the deviation from which would get you a chat with the old man. As a couple of other posts above noted, it's more a function of the personalities of the people leading you. I spent all my Harrier time on the east coast, which meant that the MAG and the wing were right across the street. It was not unheard of to get a call from the Group CO critiquing the division that just hit the break - - because he was sitting at the end of runway with binos watching. If you work for micromanagers that's how life is and the MC had their fair share.

Could part of the reason that you have not seen much of a difference in flying with the USAF is that you are in a community that is 1: Very unique in the service and prides itself on being unique 2: Has, as you point out, have a disproportionate representation from other services?

You were also within in 'choke-con' from the brass and on the 'wrong' coast.

P.S. Worked with your Group Commander, good guy who liked wearing both wings too.