The Great Growler Gallery

[Brett327]

I wrote a lengthy, informative and humorous post which was apparently destroyed by my hotel's lame internet connection...so I'll summarize:

1. Despite the conjecture on this thread, the USAF will never get Growlers - ever, period.

2. There is no plan to have USAF NAVs sick around after the Navy stops flying the Growler. The General saying that would be swell in what amounts to a press release doesn't mean squat.

3. Expeditionary Prowlers have been extended indefinitely and will likely now be replaced with additional Growlers.

4. The first Growler squadron is going to assume the expeditionary role of one of the Prowler squadrons and that Exped Prowler squadron is going to join a Carrier Airwing (for the first time in about 14+ years.

5. Finally, there will be an AEA version of the F-35. It's already in the works. What gets bought remains to be seen, but those who say it's a pipe dream are using out of date information.

Brett

 

[HeyJoe]

Eh... politicians not so much as elected officials but as a couple of 4 stars saying, " i have this, you want that, let's help each other out." However I'd really like to see the AF pull any tanker support from where it's really needed. I'm sure that's a quick way for USTRANSCOM to lose an asset.

That's what I thought, but you did say that. No worries. Elected or appointed "Politicians" are a certain breed and play in the process from POTUS at the top to SECDEF and his front office of appointees to the service secretaries who are appointed "politicians" as well as their Under and Deputies ("the Secretariat"). You need to specify when you mean a Flag/General Officer acting like a politician, that's decidedly NOT what occurs. Annually, the four stars from each service as well as many others wearing stars attended by their "horse-holders" meet and talk about these things rather than get dictated results foisted upon them by JCS or OSD.

This year, the ramp-up began in Jan-Feb leading up to CNO-CMC sit down in March followed by sit-down with USAF in April so that services all talked about what they were doing and hoped to do (under Title 10 mandate/Goldwater Nichols that established our current Force Provider/Combatant Commander "construct"). Then the service chiefs met with SOCOM himself in June where dialogue occured on what the services were willing to provide on their dime and what SOCOM was asking them to provide for his worldwide mission. SOCOM is unique among the 10 Unified Commands as they have worldwide responsibility and components embedded in the geographical commands (T-SOCs) and they are funded to act as their own Requirements and Acquisition organization reporting directly to and funded directly (MFP-11 "purple" dollars) by ASD SO/LIC.

So, this isn't "politics" per se, it's how leaders address the coordination needed in programming dollars and planning to operate together under "the construct". It's just reality and as you are exposed to more JPME type training, you'll see TRANSCOM and its aerial tankers have parallels in MSC and its seagoing ships hauling bombs to where they need to go. The subs are also in similar setup with stateside Submarine Lead TYCOM reporting to STRATCOM, but excising control over subs wherever they may be even if it's a SSN operating in conjunction with CSG or SSBN on patrol.

AMC really runs the air show for TRANSCOM the same way a JFACC runs the air for a Combatant Commander. Ultimately TRANSCOM owns the assets but AMC is who makes it happen.

Most of us know that as we live with it. JFCOM was created out of Atlantic Command in 1999 moving beyond its traditional role as a unified geographical command to take on functional responsibilites as lead for transformation and the command that talks (and listens) to the other Unified Combatant to not only respond to Request for Forces (RFF) staffing them for JCS and SECDEF to ultimately sign the DEPORDs, but consolidate inputs into the annual programming process based on the Universal Joint Task List (UJTL) and their Priority List. Note: This ultimately resulted in CINCLANTFLT to become USFFC (Fleet Forces Command) mirroring its sister service's component Air Combat Command and establishing the Lead TYCOM relationships. IMO, it was golden opportunity for Marine Corps to gain another 4 star command by transforming MARFORLANT that was moving to Lejeune, but saw handwriting on the wall and dashed back to Norfolk and "the compound" where allt he action was going down related to transformation under JFCOM. They did get a shot at heading JFCOM, but I still think Marines need a 4 star component to sit alongside the Air Force, Army and Navy 4 stars who "own" the CONUS components of JFCOM. Just my 2 cents on that missed opportunity. Regardless, Marines have done all right in breaking into Geographical COCOM assignments since then and even NORTHCOM.

Once JFCOM worked with the other Combatant Commands to develop a UJTL, they had a common lexicon to describe their Joint Mission Essential Task Lists (JMETL) so they could talk a common language to the Pentagon and band together to get the services to provide the capabilities they needed in their their Areas of Responsibility (AOR). This is akin the Clausewitz's "Fog of War" in the Pentagon PPBES process because traditionally each CinC (before they had that title stripped and they reverted to COCOMs) submitted its priority list directly to "the building" and since they never quite lined up and used different terms to describe same thing, the folks in the building said "Thanks" and did whatever they thought was best. Are there service "Politics"? You betcha!

From what I understand the SECDEF signs the DEPORD but when they deploy they don't go under the command of the Combatant Commander (confused yet?)

I never was because I not only have been teaching this subject since 1995, I live it almost daily as I'm working 2 RFFs currently and awaiting SECDEF's signature on one any day.

So the JFACC tells AMC that he needs tanker support in a certain place at a certain time and AMC tells him whether or not an asset will be available. But the JFACC can't tell AMC to have a tanker at a certain place and time.

I hope they didn't tell you the JFACC is personally telling AMC himself he needs a tanker. There are comm paths already set up for the staffs on both sides to work out these requests. Similarly, there are coordination meetings quarterly stateside for components to meet and plan for exercises (that need tankers or whatever or other training needs) that involve the action officers from all the components.

Unless the SecDef specifically signs over OPCON to the Theater Commander. (Or Combatant Commander, or Joint Forces Commander, or... why must we have 8 names for the same dude?!)

I'm study this stuff right now (ebooks are cool), and a lot of it is swimming in my head, but this is how I have come to understand it.

When you drink some more JPME Kool-aid, you'll understand the titles and responsibilties. You're doing pretty good so far as I never understood or knew this stuff was going on even as a senior O-3. Just worry about getting your wings and this convoluted world will wait for you.

 

[puck_11]

2. There is no plan to have USAF NAVs sick around after the Navy stops flying the Growler. The General saying that would be swell in what amounts to a press release doesn't mean squat.

Brett

We were told that if the expeds do get the Growler, the USAF will most likely be contributing money. As so, they will want to continue sending guys over, but at that point it will only be F-15 WSO's.

 

[helolumpy]

To pile on to the discussion, the Request for Forces (RFF) / Request for Capabilities (RFC) process flows like this:
If a JTF Commander (GEN Odierno for example) needs a force/capability, he sends an RFF to the Geographic Combatant Commander (GCC) requesting that capability.

First, allow me to put on my Joint Doctrine Weenie hat and say that COCOM is a level of command, like OPCON or TACON, NOT a person. The Combatant Commanders are the Geographic Combatant Commanders (abbreviated doctrinally as GCC or CCDR) and the Functional Combatant Commanders (JFCOM, STRATCOM, TRANSCOM and SOCOM).

Second, an RFF is kind of a misnomer, you don't request a Navy EOD Mobile Unit, you request a capability. For example, you need the capability to conduct C-IED operations and explosive handling as well as a command element to control such operations. This could be sourced with a USN Mobile Unit or maybe a USA Engineering Company.

The RFF goes to CENTCOM in this case. If CENTCOM has the capability, then he provides it. If he doesn't (which is usually the case since CENTCOM has almost no Assigned forces) the RFF goes to JCS.

Here it is 'validated' by the Joint Staff as something that is important and then it goes to the 'Force Provider'. For conventional forces it goes to JFCOM. For SOF, SOCOM. For Tankers and Strat Lift, TRANSCOM. For Space, ISR or things that leave a mushroom cloud, STRATCOM.

In JFCOMs case, he will look to the Service Components to provide these forces. The Service Components are Fleet Forces Command (USN), Air Combat Command (USAF), MARFORCOM (USMC) and FORCECOM (USA).

The Force Provider uses DRRS to determine what unit has sufficient readiness to deploy and makes the recommendation to the Global Force Management Board at the JCS.

The GFMB looks at what the Force Provider recommends as the sourcing solution from the Force Provider and allows the other GCCs and the services to object to that unit being recommended for deployment.

The GFMB takes all the considerations into play and makes the recommendation to SECDEF who will sign the Deployment Order (DEPORD) and now the unit deploys and is 'Attatched' to CENTCOM.

CENTCOM will get OPCON of forces that flow into that theater. For a force to change COCOM, requires SECDEF approval and a change to the "Forces For" document.

Since the Tankers are a TRANSCOM asset, TRANSCOM will be tasked by the GFMB to provide tanker aircraft to wherever they are needed. The GFMB is the decider of who gets priority over whom.

Once the Tankers role into theater, they are OPCON to CENTCOM, so GEN Patreus can task them to do what needs to be done. GEN Patreus will then provide the capability to the JTF Commander (GEN Odierno in this case), who in turn hands them off to the JFACC to run.

The pass off from Patreus to Odierno to JFACC is transparent but that is how the chain of command works there, so ownership must flow down the chain.

Now GEN Patreus will pass OPCON down to GEN Odierno who in turn will pass it to the JFCACC. One big difference between OPCON and TACON is that OPCON allows you to ‘organize’ personnel, which means you can fire the CO. If you only have TACON of a force, you can’t relieve the CO; you can recommend it to whoever has OPCON, but you can’t do it yourself.

Clear as mud?

 

[Swanee]

To pile on to the discussion, the Request for Forces (RFF) / Request for Capabilities (RFC) process flows like this:
If a JTF Commander (GEN Odierno for example) needs a force/capability, he sends an RFF to the Geographic Combatant Commander (GCC) requesting that capability.

First, allow me to put on my Joint Doctrine Weenie hat and say that COCOM is a level of command, like OPCON or TACON, NOT a person. The Combatant Commanders are the Geographic Combatant Commanders (abbreviated doctrinally as GCC or CCDR) and the Functional Combatant Commanders (JFCOM, STRATCOM, TRANSCOM and SOCOM).

Second, an RFF is kind of a misnomer, you don't request a Navy EOD Mobile Unit, you request a capability. For example, you need the capability to conduct C-IED operations and explosive handling as well as a command element to control such operations. This could be sourced with a USN Mobile Unit or maybe a USA Engineering Company.

The RFF goes to CENTCOM in this case. If CENTCOM has the capability, then he provides it. If he doesn't (which is usually the case since CENTCOM has almost no Assigned forces) the RFF goes to JCS.

Here it is 'validated' by the Joint Staff as something that is important and then it goes to the 'Force Provider'. For conventional forces it goes to JFCOM. For SOF, SOCOM. For Tankers and Strat Lift, TRANSCOM. For Space, ISR or things that leave a mushroom cloud, STRATCOM.

In JFCOMs case, he will look to the Service Components to provide these forces. The Service Components are Fleet Forces Command (USN), Air Combat Command (USAF), MARFORCOM (USMC) and FORCECOM (USA).

The Force Provider uses DRRS to determine what unit has sufficient readiness to deploy and makes the recommendation to the Global Force Management Board at the JCS.

The GFMB looks at what the Force Provider recommends as the sourcing solution from the Force Provider and allows the other GCCs and the services to object to that unit being recommended for deployment.

The GFMB takes all the considerations into play and makes the recommendation to SECDEF who will sign the Deployment Order (DEPORD) and now the unit deploys and is 'Attatched' to CENTCOM.

CENTCOM will get OPCON of forces that flow into that theater. For a force to change COCOM, requires SECDEF approval and a change to the "Forces For" document.

Since the Tankers are a TRANSCOM asset, TRANSCOM will be tasked by the GFMB to provide tanker aircraft to wherever they are needed. The GFMB is the decider of who gets priority over whom.

Once the Tankers role into theater, they are OPCON to CENTCOM, so GEN Patreus can task them to do what needs to be done. GEN Patreus will then provide the capability to the JTF Commander (GEN Odierno in this case), who in turn hands them off to the JFACC to run.

The pass off from Patreus to Odierno to JFACC is transparent but that is how the chain of command works there, so ownership must flow down the chain.

Now GEN Patreus will pass OPCON down to GEN Odierno who in turn will pass it to the JFCACC. One big difference between OPCON and TACON is that OPCON allows you to ‘organize’ personnel, which means you can fire the CO. If you only have TACON of a force, you can’t relieve the CO; you can recommend it to whoever has OPCON, but you can’t do it yourself.

Clear as mud?

Yeah, that's pretty much what they are teaching us. For 8 hours a day, with powerpoint, but it goes further into the nitty gritty of how they talk to eachother, and who can't talk to who but who can and who has a liaison where.

 

[Swanee]

lots of stuff

Heh, the one thing that I have learned is that everyone has a liaison, and everyone kind of thinks everyone else is all screwed up in how they do things.

But it's not too bad, the DCA wants us here to get a grasp on what the real world is like, seeing as how everything will be Joint or even Coalition (gone are the days of 1 service 1 theater) it makes sense.


Can't wait to start working on those wings though! 1 month of waiting to start down!

 

[HeyJoe]

Heh, the one thing that I have learned is that everyone has a liaison, and everyone kind of thinks everyone else is all screwed up in how they do things.

Can't wait to start working on those wings though! 1 month of waiting to start down! :icon_mi_1

Whoa there. Don't start falling prey to an instructor's views in a classroom. You aren't out there in the LNO/liaison world as they do their day-to-day duties. There's lots of other situations, perspectives and goodness/others at play to make a generalization like that. One of our LNOs liked it so much away from Army in an elite unit that he opted to retire and go native while another (a Marine) when the other way.

 

[Swanee]

Whoa there. Don't start falling prey to an instructor's views in a classroom. You aren't out there in the LNO/liaison world as they do their day-to-day duties. There's lots of other situations, perspectives and goodness/others at play to make a generalization like that. One of our LNOs liked it so much away from Army in an elite unit that he opted to retire and go native while another (a Marine) when the other way.

I guess not so much derogatory, but different. It's roundabout. But what I'm saying/typing and what I'm meaning aren't syncing up so it's time it shut up and color.


So about them Growlers...

 

[helolumpy]

One of the rules of good staff work and planning is to send out and request LNOs. In addition to bringing expertise and a different perspective to the world, they answer the the 'who the hell do I call' question when stuff arrives.
One of the biggest hassles with staff work is knowing who you should be talking to; with an LNO, you go to him/her and let them reach back to their parent command.

When you get to the Combatant Commander level a lot of times the LNO is a permanently assigned person to another command; so you could be the JFCOM LNO to CENTCOM and be PCS'd to Tampa. Other than some training and occasional meetings in Norfolk, you're in Tampa full-time.

To echo HeyJoe's comments, I was the DOD LNO to the FEMA Team in Jefferson Parrish (LA) during JTF Katrina. It was probably the most personally rewarding deployment I ever did. One reason was that I was almost alone and unafraid. My CO gave me the latitude to do what I think needed to be done and let him know if I needed help.
When you're an LNO, sometimes you get to be making those command decisions because an answer is needed right now and you're the only one with any experience in that mission area.

Plus it's a very good PME opportunity to see how other folks do stuff. My experiences interacting with other services is that they do things differently; not better, not worse, just different. Sometimes you'll think the Navy system is better (IMO, our FITREP system and promotion system is FAR more logical than the Army or Air Force, but that's another discussion) and other times you'll wonder why the Navy refuses to change things.

 

[Brett327]

We were told that if the expeds do get the Growler, the USAF will most likely be contributing money. As so, they will want to continue sending guys over, but at that point it will only be F-15 WSO's.

That's all scuttlebutt at this point. Nothing down on paper and USAF is not part of the current plan. Anything could happen, but I'd be very surprised if the current USAF expeditionary augment survives when the Prowlers are gone.

Brett

 

[cfam]

NFO Selection: Prowler or Growler

Gents, I'll be selecting sometime in the next month and I was just looking for opinions from the VAQ side of the house. I've been asking instructors and looking around here, but since it really is a fairly new issue, I just wanted to see what everyone here thought the pros/cons of each were. Appreciate the help!

 

[nittany03]

Snag me at work if I haven't jawed your ear off about it enough already.

 

[cfam]

will do, don't think im scheduled tomorrow, so ill stop by. what office are you stashed in?

 

[MIDNJAC]

Oh this sexy beast? Can you guess what I'll be putting on my dream sheet?

090117-N-8157C-118 PACIFIC OCEAN (Jan. 17, 2009) Seaman Chris Cardenas, left, from Ft. Worth, Texas, and Boatswain's Mate Seaman Guillermo Mercado, from Reading, Pa., stand aft lookout watch on the fantail of the aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74) as an EA-6B Prowler from the "Yellowjackets" of Electronic Warfare Squadron (VAQ) 138 comes in for an arrested landing. John C. Stennis and Carrier Air Wing (CVW) 9 are on a scheduled six-month deployment to the western Pacific Ocean. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Denny Cantrell/Released)

 

[Pags]

A chance to get in on the ground floor of a new platform? How can you turn that down?