CWO's flying for the Navy again.

[Spyguy]

I got some of that info from some of the guys in on the planning for it. May not be the intent of what the actual message says. My experience is more from the VP/VQ community. I heard a lenthy discussion today concerning the helicopter side of the house. In our community, VP/VQ the senior ranking QUALIFIED individual is the one signing for the aircraft. Period. So, unless the guy/gal is the only a/c on a crew then they will never sign for a plane. I don't have a problem with CWO's flying, I just see it as the JO's getting the crap end of the stick from this anyway you look at it. I just don't understand why they won't use officers. There are more than enough college grads that want to fly. The navy already has a system set up to take well qualified E's out of the enlisted ranks, sends them to college (not if they already have been), go to OCS, then to flight school. A lot do great in the program. Also, just because someone has a private pilot's license, does not mean that they will make it in Mil training. We have some that wash out now. I just don't see the benefits of CWO's instead of O's. Except that it gets rid of a lot of the responsibilities for the CWO's. Most of my time at work was not flying, it was the ground job. I know the navy is not going to increase the number of pilots per squadron, so that means a ton more work that the JO's are going to have to make up. I figured it out once, while I was on det. JO's average 100-115 hours a week during a normal work week on detachment. The navy is going to have 30 CWO's to start out with, but if the program catches on then there is ABSOLUTELY no reason for someone officer candidate to join the navy instead of the air force. NONE. They are going to make life so miserable for JO's that no one will want to join, and my family is all navy. CWO's will not be going TACAIR, but helicopters make up 65% of naval aviation. If you include VT's, VR, VP, and VQ then roughly 80% or so is accounted for. This will greatly influence the community as a whole.

 

[transpac]

Spyguy, thanks for the info. Didn't use to work that way. The Ops Officer decided who the AC was going to be and relative rank didn't enter into the decision.

I've been out for a long time, but still have a few active duty contacts. I'm hearing rumors that in the near future a college degree will be required for promotion to the senior enlisted ranks and that those folks will be doing many of the traditional JO ground jobs. If true, this should ease the workload.

 

[VVJM265]

Two things:

What Spyguy says about who signs for the plane is pretty much true in VP/VQ, but in some helo squadrons, ops will balance the A time, so whoever is first on the schedule will sign the A sheet. We did that when I flew 26s. As long as the CO is on board, it works out OK. Not sure if this will pan out with the CWOs

The explanation I got was that it will increase the DH and command opportunities for the the URL pilots in the targeted communities. (ie X DH slots per Y URLs vs. X DH slots per (Y-30) URLs.) May make some sense, but that said, I think that Spyguy is right, especially if they ramp this up; in the end the URL JOs will get even more of the ground duties, QOL will go down the tube and guys won't want to hang around. Those two or three that hang on may have a really good chance at command, but it will be h311 getting there.

My 2c

 

[sandman2122]

So no fighters or tactical aircraft? Just crew type a/c?

 

[Spyguy]

correct sandman,P-3, helos, and not sure if VR is included C-40, C-9, c-130

 

[sandman2122]

Great opportunity. I'll bet they get overwhelmed with applicants.

They can go fly civilan like everyone else after their tour is complete - if they elect to seperate.

 

[zab1001]

So, unless the guy/gal is the only a/c on a crew then they will never sign for a plane.

Eh, I have a sneaking suspicion they'll qual these guys as PPCs and pair them up with URL TACCOs, probably O-4s. I'd bet against them making Mission Commander.

 

[Pistlpetet]

No Military has ever trained pilots to be "Just Co-Pilots". Sure there are some that are not worthy, and some that might never make AC, PIC, but they always have the opportunity. A copilot is only one bullet away from being the man in charge, and training someone with the with the mindset of "Well you are only going to be a co-pilot all your career" would be negligent. I doubt that will happen.

 

[sardaddy]

Pistlpetet,

You are right, no service wants to make a copilot and keep them as a copilot but in the Coast Guard and the Navy for the most part, there is a potential that you could be an aircraft commander yet not be able to sign for an aircraft if the pilots you continually fly with are senior in rank to you.

That is the potential problem of a CWO going to be a pilot in the Navy. They can get you trained an eventually give you an aircraft commander designation but if you fly with anyone senior to you they will be the AC unless you happen to be an IP and are conducting an IP flight.

Now at least in CG regs, and it seems Navy regs as well, the OPS boss can designate a junior AC to be the AC over a senior pilot for a flight, but it isn't the norm. Since only 30 warrants are supposed to be made then the majority of the time, they will be flying with someone more senior. This is the crux of what I meant in my original post. In order for this to work there will have to be an institutional change on how an AC is chosen.

Heck, the problem is inherent now with just commissioned pilots. Many don't actually sign for an aircraft for quite sometime after being designated as an AC. But they eventually become more senior and sign for more and more missions. A warrant officer won't have that opportunity.

 

[zab1001]

Eventually the CWOs will qual as ACs and be paired with unquall'ed URL guys (still in the syllabus for PPC) as their 2Ps and 3Ps.

I've had plenty of hops as PPC with guys senior to me (in rank) as my 2P, since they were still in the process of getting quall'ed (prior SWOs) or re-quall'ed (new O-4 DHs just checking in to the squadron).