NFOs out of the Marines after 2015?

[Intruder Driver]

Hal Pilot,

I won't disagree with your S-3 comments. I will offer, though, that the sentiment being articulated (correct or erroneous) in the late '70's was that strong measures needed to be taken to move NFO's out of a second class citizen status. At that time, we still didn't have a flag officer, CAG, carrier CO (though we had carrier XO's), Naval Academy commandant, or other prestigious positions filled by someone wearing two anchors, so I can see why displacing a pilot was viewed as an NFO upgrade move, even if it really was an urban legend.

 

[Flash]

Negative. it is widely ASSUMED that Prowlers are a national asset. That is false. The Prowler is a MAGTF asset. Period. The reason they support Reg Flag and other ops, is because they are a high demand low density platform...........If a MAGTF requires the use of them, they will get them. They ARE NOT a national asset. That's an entirely different class of (very spooky stuff) aircraft. I'm not going to get into what exactly a national asset is/does because I'm fuzzy as to what I know that is classified, but trust me on this one.

Well, I would hate to contradict you on this one Phrog but you are only right to a certain degree. They are not in the same category of RC-135's, E-8's and U-2's but they are definitely not at the beck and call of the USMC anymore. There are a limited number of Prowlers and they are critically needed to do missions overseas, regardless if there are Marines there or not. The Marine Prowler squadrons that are deployed are not just supporting the MAGTF, but all forces in theater.

And I can think of a glaring example of where a MAG does not have a VMAQ or VAQ squadron sometimes, because they are needed elsewhere. The reality is a little bit different in this case than the normal practice........

 

[HAL Pilot]

....I will offer, though, that the sentiment being articulated (correct or erroneous) in the late '70's was that strong measures needed to be taken to move NFO's out of a second class citizen status....

This I agree with. Some of that sentiment was still around in the VP world when I joined it in 1984. Of the eight COs & XOs I had during my first squadron tour, only one was a NFO. It was about the same ratio in the other Moffett squadrons. During my DH tour, it was 50-50.

 

[Flash]

Placing NFOs in the H-60 was looked at for similar reasons. It was rejected because it was determined that the second pilot in a helo was needed for safety. The onstation flying was determined to be more "manual" and "fatiguing" then that of the S-3 and therefore required a copilot able to periodically relieve the pilot.

I have always wondered why the Brits put Observers in the front seat of thier helos and we don't. They do it it even with their SH-3's and brand new Merlins.

http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/server/show/conWebDoc.2431

 

[squorch2]

Other services don't operate helicopters at night over water. We do, and cross-cockpit landings to a smallboy at night... eesh. Much safer to have two pilots.

 

[Flash]

Other services don't operate helicopters at night over water. We do, and cross-cockpit landings to a smallboy at night... eesh. Much safer to have two pilots.

That would be the Royal Navy, who do operate at night......and over water.......

 

[Gatordev]

That would be the Royal Navy, who do operate at night......and over water.......

I don't have a good answer for you, as I'm sure we could make do if we needed to. However, if you look at availability in theater (whatever the theater is), you'll usually find that U.S. helos have damn near a 20-24 hour availablility while the other countries don't. Yes, the RN flies at night over water, but I don't think they can do it to the extent we do. I wonder if the two have to do w/ one another.

 

[Flash]

I don't have a good answer for you, as I'm sure we could make do if we needed to. However, if you look at availability in theater (whatever the theater is), you'll usually find that U.S. helos have damn near a 20-24 hour availablility while the other countries don't. Yes, the RN flies at night over water, but I don't think they can do it to the extent we do. I wonder if the two have to do w/ one another.

I would argue that RN helos and crews are just as capable as ours,day and night (that is, if they are as professional and competent as the Brit aircrew I have dealt). As for availability, maybe that is because there are a lot fewer of them........

 

[Brett327]

Negative. it is widely ASSUMED that Prowlers are a national asset.

I applaud your bravado, but Marine Prowlers are just like any other Prowlers - National Assets. We do what we're told, or we get the hose. The use and deployments of Prowler assets gets decided upon WAY above the paygrade of the MAGTF and that particular CG couldn't stand in the way of a particular tasking order or deployment even if he was crazy enough to do such a thing. It's no different than a Strike Group Commander losing his Airwing's Prowlers to higher priority tasking. Happens all the time.

Brett

 

[Gatordev]

I would argue that RN helos and crews are just as capable as ours,day and night (that is, if they are as professional and competent as the Brit aircrew I have dealt). As for availability, maybe that is because there are a lot fewer of them........

We may not be disagreeing here and it could be just the internet, but... Not sure you're understanding what I'm saying. I'm not saying they're not capable (never mentioned that in my post). As for availability, I'm not talking about number of assests, I'm talking about Ops availability of one unit (det on a ship). When you look at those Ops messages (and I can't remember what they're called), usually the U.S. helos say they're mission available a lot more than any other country's asset per day.

I'd guess none of this is news to you, but just clarifying.

 

[Steve Wilkins]

Let me sum all this up. My question above was serious: "What do they (Marine Corps) need them for?"

Answer: They don't.

This isn't to say that we don't need EA-6B Prowlers at all. It only means that the MC doesn't HAVE to have them. We can transfer the assets to the Navy for distribution to the Prowler squadrons and/or create additional ones.

 

[Brett327]

Let me sum all this up. My question above was serious: "What do they (Marine Corps) need them for?"

Answer: They don't.

This isn't to say that we don't need EA-6B Prowlers at all. It only means that the MC doesn't HAVE to have them. We can transfer the assets to the Navy for distribution to the Prowler squadrons and/or create additional ones.

You're probably right. The need for the Marines to have absolute OPCON over their Prowlers isn't really justified. Bottom line, Prowlers go where they're needed the most - end of story.

Back to the original issue, does anyone seriously think the Marines will buy any variant of the SH? With the JSF coming down the pipe, that just doesn't seem like a very plausable thing to me.

Brett

 

[phrogpilot73]

I applaud your bravado, but Marine Prowlers are just like any other Prowlers - National Assets. We do what we're told, or we get the hose. The use and deployments of Prowler assets gets decided upon WAY above the paygrade of the MAGTF and that particular CG couldn't stand in the way of a particular tasking order or deployment even if he was crazy enough to do such a thing. It's no different than a Strike Group Commander losing his Airwing's Prowlers to higher priority tasking. Happens all the time.

Brett

I'm just repeating what the Prowler instructor kept saying over, and over, and over at MAWTS-1 when I was going through WTI. "We're a MAGTF asset, not a national asset." I agree that any MAGTF commander that tries to stop their use is gonna get canned...

 

[phrogpilot73]

I don't have a good answer for you, as I'm sure we could make do if we needed to. However, if you look at availability in theater (whatever the theater is), you'll usually find that U.S. helos have damn near a 20-24 hour availablility while the other countries don't. Yes, the RN flies at night over water, but I don't think they can do it to the extent we do. I wonder if the two have to do w/ one another.

I'm going to preface this with "I don't know anything, other than what the two Brit Exchange Officers we had in my squadron told me." They were both Sea King pilots in the RN, and they were both from a Junglie squadron (the ones that support the Royal Marines). I can say that they had comparable goggle hours compared to us, and their deployments were comparable to ours as well. In the Junglie community, they do not fly with "qualified observers" but copilots. The aircraft is, however single piloted. They told me that it's very common for the HAC to be receiving updated information on a mission while the copilot and crewman reposition the aircraft.

When it comes to instruments/weather, they train to a much different standard (clear of clouds, in sight of ground are there special VFR rules and they train to fly UNDER powerlines). A neccessary standard based on the weather in the UK. After flying with both guys, I'd say that their training/experience/abilities are almost identical to ours.

 

[Gatordev]

I'm going to preface this with "I don't know anything, other than what the two Brit Exchange Officers we had in my squadron told me." They were both Sea King pilots in the RN, and they were both from a Junglie squadron (the ones that support the Royal Marines). I can say that they had comparable goggle hours compared to us, and their deployments were comparable to ours as well. In the Junglie community, they do not fly with "qualified observers" but copilots. The aircraft is, however single piloted. They told me that it's very common for the HAC to be receiving updated information on a mission while the copilot and crewman reposition the aircraft.

When it comes to instruments/weather, they train to a much different standard (clear of clouds, in sight of ground are there special VFR rules and they train to fly UNDER powerlines). A neccessary standard based on the weather in the UK. After flying with both guys, I'd say that their training/experience/abilities are almost identical to ours.

<Sigh>

People, I'm not doubting their ability. I'm merely talking about an Ops availability (as in what's reported to the admiral in charge of the assets). I know sometimes they'll be more available than others and sometimes no matter what the community, all our birds will be broke. But generally the Ops Summary will show the U.S. birds to have more availability. That's all I'm saying.