• 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

What Are You Listening To?

Brett327 said:
Navy doesn't own the acquisitions process, nor is it of the DoD's making. It's also not likely to change, so there's not much sense in wringing our hands about it. Call your Congressman if you have ideas on changes to applicable law.
Click to expand...
That’s why I said the DoD and not the DoN.

Your response is exactly the problem. Everyone just says oh our hands are tied we can’t do anything etc etc.

Maybe the service chiefs should highlight their challenges so Congress could see why it might be smart for it to be changed. Most folks educated on the matter who are NOT employed by defense contractors would seem to agree that it’s broken. Hearing it from those folks might be a tad more effective than one more dude from TX-2.
 
SlickAg said:
That’s why I said the DoD and not the DoN.

Your response is exactly the problem. Everyone just says oh our hands are tied we can’t do anything etc etc.

Maybe the service chiefs should highlight their challenges so Congress could see why it might be smart for it to be changed. Most folks educated on the matter who are NOT employed by defense contractors would seem to agree that it’s broken. Hearing it from those folks might be a tad more effective than one more dude from TX-2.
Click to expand...
I'm all for making Defense acquisitions work better. It's also not my problem to fix. One presumes the same applies to you.
 
Brett327 said:
I don't know that I agree with that. During the tenure for CNAFs Miller and Shoemaker, their repeated guidance to COs and CDREs was if there were show-stoppers in their readiness, to report that via DRRS-N so it gets highlighted and CNAF can step in to direct resources appropriately. I know of two instances within my own community where this was actually used to get results on manning for deploying squadrons. Now, I fully realize that this doesn't solve every problem, but my experience was that CNAF was absolutely engaged and having those conversations with his O5 and O6 leadership.

There are clearly a lot of challenges right now within the NAE and I understand/share your frustrations. If you pay attention, you'll hear senior leadership talking about solutions they're applying. Some will be more effective than others, and some will take a decade to see real results.
Click to expand...

You're right, and I caveated an earlier statement by saying as much about VADM Miller. I'm less convinced that its an accepted practice Navy wide and the cynical part of me believes that most of the "we're listening" campaigns came about because their predecessors ignored the writing on the wall for a long time and now they're scrambling. Not suggesting these guys don't honestly give a shit, just a thought.

I know you are senior leadership and, as an aside, comments like "FWIW, JOs are getting out in general, not just the rockstars" and "If you pay attention, you'll hear senior leadership talking about solutions they're applying." come off as condescending. Some folks just want to bitch, but I think most people here genuinely give a shit. We're paying attention. This patronizing bullshit is part of the problem in our discourse.
 
SlickAg said:
Ask and ye shall receive...
Click to expand...
I have zero expertise in defense acquisitions. Sorry shipmate. Perhaps if we stick with problems in Naval Aviation instead of the giant red herring you deployed, we might have a more fruitful conversation, though I will admit @Pags knows his shit and I learned a few things from his posts.
 
Brett327 said:
I have zero expertise in defense acquisitions. Sorry shipmate. Perhaps if we stick with problems in Naval Aviation instead of the giant red herring you deployed, we might have a more fruitful conversation
Click to expand...
Brett327 said:
Give me a specific example and I’ll try to address it. One that comes to mind is deferred maintenance for our ships.
Click to expand...
My bad shipmate. Didn’t realize that only aircraft carriers were on topic here.

Here’s one for you: any thoughts on the current and continuing shortage of tacair pilots being produced due to T-45 engine issues?
 
SlickAg said:
My bad shipmate. Didn’t realize that only aircraft carriers were on topic here.

Here’s one for you: any thoughts on the current and continuing shortage of tacair pilots being produced due to T-45 engine issues?
Click to expand...
There's more going on now on top of the F405's finickiness in general?
 
hooflys said:
I know you are senior leadership and, as an aside, comments like "FWIW, JOs are getting out in general, not just the rockstars" and "If you pay attention, you'll hear senior leadership talking about solutions they're applying." come off as condescending. Some folks just want to bitch, but I think most people here genuinely give a shit. We're paying attention. This patronizing bullshit is part of the problem in our discourse.
Click to expand...
Those are two sides of the same blade. JOs like to bitch - I get it, I did it too. JOs also think they know more than they do and sometimes don't pause to consider the possibility that they might not have the full picture. If you guys want to have a license to bitch, then I get a license to snap you back into reality with a pointed word when you've left the reservation. Seems like a fair trade.

One of the reasons I continue to spend time here is that Naval Aviation does a shitty job of mentoring and teaching JOs about the institutional aspects of this organization. Toward that end, I'm here to pass along what little I've learned over 30 years in this gig. Folks may not always like what they hear, but I want people to understand how our leadership looks at problems, what they can or cannot do to fix them, along with some of the inside baseball that I've had the opportunity to experience.

I also acknowledge that there's benefit for some of you to vent to a senior guy in an environment free of rank. I have never asked that any of you factor that into these discussions, and frankly, I've absorbed a pretty ridiculous amount of personal attacks and vitriol over the years from some people on this site. I don't think a lot of my peers would tolerate that. Nevertheless, I enjoy the banter and know that it will hopefully make a lot of you more savvy in navigating your own careers. That is always my goal here.
 
SlickAg said:
Here’s one for you: any thoughts on the current and continuing shortage of tacair pilots being produced due to T-45 engine issues?
Click to expand...
I'm with Gonzo. It's going to have some serious impacts in the short term for Pilot production that are already affecting things like the expansion of the VAQ community. They'll figure it out and move forward. What other option is there?
 
nittany03 said:
There's more going on now on top of the F405's finickiness in general?
Click to expand...
There was already a pretty big hole dug by the OBOGS debacle, and now the engines are very hours limited and not a lot of them are up, exacerbating an already-existing production and therefore fleet manning problem. Combine that with an instructor shortage. Major syllabus cuts with potentially more to come. Several years at a minimum before it’s all fixed.
 
SlickAg said:
There was already a pretty big hole dug by the OBOGS debacle, and now the engines are very hours limited and not a lot of them are up, exacerbating an already-existing production and therefore fleet manning problem. Combine that with an instructor shortage. Major syllabus cuts with potentially more to come. Several years at a minimum before it’s all fixed.
Click to expand...
You have any bright ideas you'd like me to float up the chain?
 
Brett327 said:
You have any bright ideas you'd like me to float up the chain?
Click to expand...
They’ve already come up with some pretty brilliant ones on their own.

BLAB: I don’t know how y’all feel already about the folks in the front seat, but I’d be sort of worried with the product coming out of the VTs these days. The FRS syllabi are based upon a certain skillset and they’re not getting it from the orange and white anymore. Painting with a very broad brush, the students need more time in the seat, not less. Time will tell, but I think it’s going to get worse before it gets better. Sorry.
 
Last edited:
SlickAg said:
They’ve already come up with some pretty brilliant ones on their own.

BLAB: I don’t know how y’all feel already about the folks in the front seat, but I’d be sort of worried with the product coming out of the VTs these days. The FRS syllabi are based upon a certain skillset and they’re not getting it from the orange and white anymore. Painting with a very broad brush, the students need more time in the seat, not less. Time will tell, but I think it’s going to get worse before it gets better. Sorry.
Click to expand...
I speak with the Growler FRS CO every week. He would not agree with your assessment, and he has data to support his position. Have the VTs modified the length of their syllabi due to the T-45 compressor issue?
 
Brett327 said:
I speak with the Growler FRS CO every week. He would not agree with your assessment, and he has data to support his position. Have the VTs modified the length of their syllabi due to the T-45 compressor issue?
Click to expand...
Yes, some of the most dynamic/SA enhancing/challenging flights have been removed from the syllabus
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top