-
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
Stupid Questions about Naval Aviation (Part 3)
- Thread starter Top_Gun_1_0_1
- Start date
It was litening
No f'n way...Brett got something wrong!!
(kidding Brett)Regarding question #4 "Can WSOs drop bombs in an F/A-18?" - WSOs can't shoot or drop any ordnance from an F/A-18D.
S/F
We're similar. Straight out of flight school a pilot is not considered mission ready, he is RL3. We have readiness levels for pilots, 3 is the lowest, 1 the highest. The first 40-100 hours out of flight school will be flown with a unit IP, the new pilot will progress from RL3 (basic flight operations and maneuvers) to RL2 (mission maneuvers and tasks) to RL1 (fully mission qualified pilot able to fly with any aircraft commander.) Typically at that point the new pilot will be teamed with a senior pilot (senior CW2 or CW3.) For a mission we usually have a lead aircraft with two mid-grade to senior CW2s and a CW3/CW4 or O-3/O-4/O-5 with a junior pilot in the trail aircraft. In combat there were usually 6-10 pilots on any flight shift, of those 6-10 pilots, 4-6 would be staff officers that flew intermittently, the rest belonged to my unit so I flew with the same guys regularly on a more or less rotating basis but, not exclusively. Stateside flight crews depend mostly on the training objective.
What's funny is our senior pilots are not our XOs and COs, it's our Warrants, Even the O-4s and O-5s have fewer hours than many CW3s because of the way Army Aviation is organized. My unit XO only got his wings about a year ago, my CO has fewer hours in the aircraft than I do. Of course my XO is only an O-2 and my CO an O-3.
Unless you go to VP land, where you have to have 2/4 TACNUC and 3/7 (4/8 in P-8s) TAC CORE of those who completed ARP with that crew or are ACTC fleet up into their fully qualified position to be considered a "crew" and earn quals for readiness purposes. And yes it makes being Skeds-O's job AWESOME.
And this is why I hate my life sometimes....
I have no clue what you just said, so I imagine plenty of others reading the stupid questions thread will be equally lost.
It's simply an example of how we in VP have to make everything as unnecessarily complicated as possible.
It's a reference to the "tactical experts" required (as defined by community leadership) to be able to successfully prosecute a submarine. Back in the Cold War, this was a huge deal. The Tactical Nucleus (TAC/NUC) consisted of the Patrol Plane Commander (PPC - Senior Pilot)), Tactical Coordinator (TACCO - Senior NFO), the Non-Acoustic Sensor Operator (RADAR, ESM, FLIR, MAD - Petty Officer or Chief) and the Senior Acoustic Operator ( Sensor 1 or "JEZ" in reference to the old Jezebel acoustic system - Senior Petty Officer or Chief). This core group of four operators were considered "must haves" for an ASW mission becasue they were so familiar and proficient with one another. The concept applies to other mission areas and of course the P-8A as well.
Still applies today as a scheduling and readiness rule. Acting as an instructor both in the squadron and at the wing, I will say there is definitely benefit to flying with the same people day in and day out as far as comfort factor and in an ASW flap allows consistency of scheduling (assuming no one goes med down or something), but ultimately if each person is competent and proficient then it shouldn't and doesn't matter. I believe it's a fundamental problem in the VP community where we view on station success as a function of the individual CAC, whereas a successful ASW prosecution (or even SUW or ISR mission) is really a teamwork effort of an entire CTG. ASW is not done in a vacuum and we fail when we think of it as the job of an individual aircrew to succeed. Yes, a single CAC can fuck it away, but a single CAC's skill will not solve the problem. An air wing wouldn't place the success of an LFE on a single section, so why do we focus on the CAC in VP over the squadron? If you have an ACTC level 3 in each TACNUC seat that has currency in the mission set then you should be able to accomplish the mission.
The individual CAC is always the weakest link in the chain, regardless of the strength of the CTG. Many times you only have a few minutes to capitalize on contact - a weak CAC can be responsible for the squadron/CTG/Task Force never regaining contact again. But I know you know that.
Very true, but the problem we have is we rely on each CAC for overall success and aren't very good at doing the planning over multiple events.
Yep, and supposedly it displayed on the USQ-113 screen.
Attachments
I just read somewhere that all carriers post CVN-76 only have 3 arresting wires instead of 4. Any reason for the change? What wire do pilots aim for now?
Pilots don't aim for a wire, they fly the ball. It's all pretty transparent for the pilot, but there are some minor differences in the LSO side. Generally they wave to the two wire on a three wire boat. Even on four wire boats it's common for one or more wires to be missing at any given time for numerous reasons.
I'll let Paddles fill in the details.
I'll let Paddles fill in the details.