Air Force vs Navy

[Guest WannaFly4Life]

Hey, I was just wondering what you all think about the pilot selection between Air Force and the Navy. I know the Navy has more planes then the air force, and they Navy gives "extra points" to people with technical degrees. I also know that the air force acceptance rate is around 55%. What are all of your thoughts on which branch it is easier to fly for?

[Guest Xtndr50boom]

Keep in mind, both services offer outstanding opportunities for some really exotic poontang. But the AF strat-lifters seem to have the best deal; they're not stuck in tents for months on end like the other communities, and by the time the girls in any one spot realize they've all been banged by a guy who has 15 different names but all look alike you'll be gear up/feet up going to Hawaii for 18 hours of drunken debauchery with some off-work stripper you meet at the red lion.

Your choice....

[Guest kirkhac]

Wanna,

I don't think anyone here will really be able to answer your question very well about which is easier to get a pilot slot through. There was a Navy guy in my class at Corpus that cross-commissioned from the Air Force to get a Navy pilot slot but that was a medical issue. I think the requirements and competition will be similar whichever route you take. To rephrase what some others have already said so eloquintly, you should decide what type of flying you want to do and make your choice from there. The easiest route isn't always the best so that shouldn't really factor too much into your decision. If you have questions about Navy vs. Air Force training there are plenty of guys here that can answer any question you have. Good luck.

[Zippy]

As for which branch is easier to fly for... depends on what you mean "easier" I guess. As I understand it, both fly differently.

In the Navy we have NATOPS- a thick book that tells us the things we are not allowed to do in the aircraft.

Appearently the Air Force has -1 which is a thicker book which tells of everything a pilot is allowed to do in the aircraft.

There are pros and cons with each service but, like someone said earlier, apply to both and jump on the first offer you get. Nothing wrong with going with whoever gives you the better deal (You really won't know what your missing out on either way). Flying for either one would be an honor.

Heres is opinion of someone who has done both:

https://www.tailhook.org/USN%20USAF.html

[ 11. August 2005, 23:36: Message edited by: Zippy ]

[LockheedFix]

Originally posted by Zippy:

As for which branch is easier to fly for... depends on what you mean "easier" I guess. As I understand it, both fly differently.

In the Navy we have NATOPS- a thick book that tells us the things we are not allowed to do in the aircraft.

Appearently the Air Force has -1 which is a thicker book which tells of everything a pilot is allowed to do in the aircraft.

There are pros and cons with each service but, like someone said earlier, apply to both and jump on the first offer you get. Nothing wrong with going with whoever gives you the better deal (You really won't know what your missing out on either way). Flying for either one would be an honor.

Heres is opinion of someone who has done both:

https://www.tailhook.org/USN%20USAF.html

The NATOPS and the -1 are not regulations that tell you what you can or can not do. They are the flight manuals that tell about the systems of the plane, etc. The Navy's regulations about what they can and cannot do come from the FAR/AIM and the Air Force has the 11-217 vols 1 and 2, 11-202 vol 3, 11X-###, etc and many, many more regulations.

It may seem cool to have less regulations and less people looking over your shoulder when you go fly until you have any IP who wants to go fly a low level VFR beneath 500' ceilings and then continue said low level in the weather at 500' out of reception of any NAVAIDs or any controlling agency and without a map.

[Guest HH-60H]

Wow, I am not sure where to chime in.

First off, I am in the Navy, but I did Phase 1 and 2 of JSUPT at Vance, so I am about as close as you can get to having done both, without having done all of both.

Second, to answer wanna's questions, I would say that the AF gives you a better chance to fly. In my UPT class, there were many officers who started in other AFOSCs (is that right?) who then went on to become pilots. In my mind that gives me the impression that overall there is a better chance to fly that the Navy. However, I know several people in the Navy who started as other things and became pilots. In fact the CO of my last sqdn did that. Now if you are looking to fly FW, then AF is overall the better shot, IMO.

Third, the Navy does not treat aviators as 3rd class citizens, far far from it. I am not sure where you had that experience FourFans. If it was in flight school, then yes, SNA's do get treated like major crap, even worse than SP's in the AF. Once you get your wings and hit the fleet it's a whole other story.

Fourth, the NATOPS does in fact contain regulations regarding how to operate the aircraft, in addition to being flight manuals. The Navy's primary flight reg is OPNAV 3710 (NATOPS), which in a few cases supercedes the FAR/AIM, and obviously totally does when we are sea.

Fifth, when I first looked at my -1 it sure was hard to find things, because I didn't know where to look, but once I learned how it was setup, it was easy.... just like the NATOPS.

If anyone would like to clear up the misconceptions of the Navy, feel free to PM me anytime.

[FourFans]

HH-60: Yes, I was talking from the experience I had at Corpus as a student, but also from what the IPs told me as well. Obviously, I'm not in the Navy so I don't have a good vantage point to speak from.

What really looked bad to me was the career progression. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounded like after your first tour as an aviator in the fleet, you are required to do a surface (non-flying) tour, then an instructor tour, then if you're lucky, you get to go back to the fleet to fly operationally. If that's right, it that just does seem like a good development track to get experienced aviators, IMHO.

Please fill in all the blanks I left open (sts).

[Guest HH-60H]

The career track you mentioned is close. After your first fleet tour, you have shore tour (which is what I am on now), it may or may not be a flying tour. Following this I would go to a non flying (most likely) ship/sea tour. After that I would go fly again in a sqdn. While that does not make the best pilot, we are shooting for developing a naval officer, and like it or not the navy is not all about aviation, so it is important that we learn the other stuff. Whereas warfighting in the AF is all about aviation.

However, this has nothing to do with us being 2nd/3rd class citizens. I can't count how many times I have a fellow 0-1/2/3 mention how they wanted to fly but.... While I am not qualified to say it, I would say alot of other officers in other warfare communities wish they could run things like we do in aviation, not just the flying, but unit morale and atmosphere among other things.

It's hard to explain. It's not like the pilot/nav relationship I observed at Vance. It's more like we are equal BUT...

[Guest silvereagle]

I want to fly jets period. I know that I may sound egocentric but that is my dream and I have been pursuing for it for the past 4 years of my life. So here is my question; which branch has more percentage of getting a fighter slot? I have always thought that it would be cool to fly in the navy because of the carrier landings. In addition, a naval chopper is not a bad alternative compare to heavy (cargos) in the AF. I have to decide this pretty soon because I have to choose either the AFROTC or NROTC since I was accepted to attend Embry Riddle Aeronautical University. Any thoughts will be appreciated. By the way, I'm still 17.

[Guest SuperStallionIP]

Air Force for jets, due to higher numbers of suck-and-blow aircraft. If you might want to fly "choppers" as an alternative you don't want to fly them in the Navy. Suggest Marine Corps, Coast Guard, or Army Warrant Officer for anything with rotors. The missions across the helo T/M/S are better overall in those service branches. At 17 though, I promise you will change your mind many times between now and then. Just roll with it and be damned glad to be there. It's a whole lot more fun that way.

[ 02. January 2007, 00:12: Message edited by: BigIron ]

[FlyAF]

FWIW, I knew that I wanted to fly military since the fourth grade... and went back and forth between the Navy and AF zillions of times. Most everyone here will tell you to go AF (Save HD's sarcasm), beacuse we're biased. If you go ask the same question over at www.airwarriors.com they'll tell you to avoid the AF like the plague. Either way, both services train the best pilots in the world and you'll get to serve your country doing something you'll hopefully love.

I chose the Air Force beacuse flying is its primary mission, they have the best aircraft (or at least the most to choose from), and you don't have to live on a boat regularly. I'm sure carrier operations are cool, but so is an unrestricted climb to 20,000ft from a 10,000ft runway.

Good luck! PM me if you have any further questions.

[ 02. January 2007, 00:21: Message edited by: FlyAF ]

[FallingOsh]

In my personal experience, navy scholorships were easier to get. They practically shoved them down our throats. Maybe that has changed or maybe that has absolutely no bearing on your decision. Just something to think about if you need someone else to pick up the tab at ERAU.

Also in my personal experience, the people in navy ROTC going to flight school were definitely not in the top of their class. I don't know how their cadidiates are selected, but it seemed a lot easier than the AF. I hear navy flight school is more fun, though.

I say 'in my personal experience' for that exact reason... this is just what I saw. Research as much as you can. There are lots of things to think about besides which pretty airplane is best. Good luck with your decision.

[HerkDerka]

Originally posted by FlyAF:

I chose the Air Force beacuse flying is its primary mission

Right on. That's the best way to look at it.

Air Force-

-The AF is a flying service. Our job is to fly.

-Pilot slots are a little tougher to get in the AF than the Navy. AF UPT is regimented and tough.

-As a young pilot right out of FTU, you can expect to fly for three assignments before being assigned to a non-flying staff gig. That's basically eight to ten years of flying.

-The AF has more airplanes than the Navy. That includes fighters.

Navy-

-The Navy is just that, a maritme service.

-A pilot slot in the Navy is a little easier to get.

-Navy flight school is easier in that it runs on the big boy program and you don't have a set graduation date.

-Flexible grad dates are also a bad thing. Navy guys in the jet track train almost two years before they get their wings and a good portion of that time is spent sitting on your butt (reference movable grad date).

-In the Navy, you won't be a pilot, you'll be a naval aviator.

-You will have to rotate ship and ground tours every assignment.

-You can expect to pull non-flying gigs aboard boats since you are a naval officer.

-The Navy has a small percentage of guys that go jets. Around 60-70% of Navy pilots fly helos.

-There are some fun missions in Navy helos like ASW and SAR. But you can expect to spend plenty of time hauling trash between boats.

HD

[Guest Rainman A-10]

I'm not going to tellyou what to do. I'll just give you the facts and let you decide.

Navy gives out 93% fighter assignments. That's pretty damn good if you want to fly a fighter.

The Navy treats their pilots better and gives larger aviation career incentive bonuses. A Navy pilot earns approx 41% more per year than their USAF counterparts.

Navy pilots are generally much more skilled than USAF pilots. This has been proven in several scientific studies and further solidified in combat performance comparisons.

Navy pilots get promoted faster and at a greater rate than USAF pilots.

Navy pilots get hired by the airlines at a rate five times higher than USAF pilots.

You decide.

[brabus]

Totally true man. And if you have your private license before starting w/ the Navy, they'll guarantee you fighters (because they don't have to waste time with teaching you easy stuff like how to manipulate flight controls and what it means to fly without running out of gas...that sort of stuff). Of course you can still choose to fly helos, but anyone with a license before Navy flight training would just be wasting their skillz.

[ 03. January 2007, 20:16: Message edited by: brabus ]

[daynightindicator]

went through P-Cola (as a WSO) but had plenty of Navy pilot friends. the Navy is more ruthless with their slots. When my class went through API (Navy version of Slackademics, and very much a weed-out program), it was announced that they were pilot-heavy and anyone with less than a 55 NSS (Naval Standard Score) in API would be removed from trianing. A 55 was a really good score (35 was the min to graduate and anything over 60 usually allowed you your pick of aircraft). Since your NSS is, in a way, partially based on the performance of your peers, this led to lots of competition and stress. Lots of good dudes washed out. Later, as I was getting ready to PCS, the word was they were once again pilot-heavy and were flat out dumping dudes right and left (first offering no-strings-attached separation, but what Ensign/LT wants to get out when they've been in less than 3 months to begin with?)

As far as Navy flying goes...personally I liked it much better. Less restrictive, less queepy, and more of an emphasis on tactics. Training was nice too - the Navy doesn't spoon-feed you or force you to study. They provide you with the instruction you need, clear expectations for every sortie, and leave it up to you to sink or swim (no pun intended) on your own.

From talking to my Navy AD friends though, it catches up with you in the fleet. Quality of life is definitively worse than the AF. Talking to a Tomcat RIO right before they were decomissioned, I asked him how he enjoyed his recent cruise. He said, "I sleep in a room that's over 100 degrees at night (his bunk was a foot or two away from a steam or hot water pipe or something), and I spend 14-16 hours a day working/flying while we're underway. I hardly ever see my family. Still, I wouldn't even dream of doing anything else." Of course, he was relatively young (late 20s), but I could imagine how that lifestyle could get old fairly quick.

Edited May 12, 2009 by daynightindicator

[BQZip01]

I know the Navy has more planes than the Air Force

Let's all take a breather and analyze this a little bit.

Of the U.S. Air Force, the Navy and the Army, who has the largest number of personnel?

The Army (they need bodies more than quality/expertise)

Of the U.S. Air Force, the Navy and the Army, who has the largest number of boats?

Also the Army (realize most of these are not ocean-going vessels)

Of the U.S. Air Force, the Navy and the Army, who has the largest number of airplanes?

Also the Army (helicopters are indeed airplanes)

Guess who is number two on all those lists? The Navy...and for all the same reasons (except the boats), but you have to realize the Marine Corps is a sizable chunk of their airpower.

On a related side note, the Marine Corps is just a department of the Navy...

...the men's department...

...leaving the rest as "lingerie and sporting goods", I suppose...

Anyway, if you phrase the questions differently, you get different results:

Of the U.S. Air Force, the Navy and the Army, who is the most selective of their personnel?

The Air Force

Of the U.S. Air Force, the Navy and the Army, who has the largest number of large airplanes (not counting helicopters)?

The Air Force

etc.

[Spoo]

You know the Navy flies off of ships for like 6 months at a time, right? F THAT. Of course, you could get a P-3/P-8 I suppose...but then there's the Disassociated Sea Tour. Ever heard of that gem? 3 Years on the boat - not flying. F THAT. I'm feeling sick just thinking about it...

[JarheadBoom]

(poster's real experience) When I got to fly on an MH-53, I remember the noise, the shakiness, and the absolute blast I had. I also remember as I was sitting on a makeshift bunk looking up and seeing hydraulic fluid leaking out. I tapped the shoulder of one of the gunners and pointed out the leak. He yelled back in my ear, "It always does that! The only time we're concerned is when it isn't leaking. That means we're out of hydraulic fluid!"

Quoted for truth.

We had a saying in the Corps about the -53:

"If it ain't leaking, it ain't flying!"

Even the grunts knew that one. I once had a Marine infantry company 1st Sgt (that's a rank in the Corps (E-8) as well as a billet, for those of you who didn't know) waving frantically at me in-flight to get my attention. When I got to him, he was really upset that there were no leaks in the cabin while we were flying. I had to explain to him that the aircraft was nearly brand-new - we had just picked it up from Sikorsky a couple months prior, and it had less than 50hrs on it.

[yerfer]

You know the Navy flies off of ships for like 6 months at a time, right? F THAT. Of course, you could get a P-3/P-8 I suppose...but then there's the Disassociated Sea Tour. Ever heard of that gem? 3 Years on the boat - not flying. F THAT. I'm feeling sick just thinking about it...

That's why the Navy isn't for everyone. My uncle flew P3's and had to do numerous disassociated sea tours towards the end of his career and said it's not always fun. What he did say was, The Navy gave him more flying hours than he expected. Not a bad gig in a world where many AD pilots are going stir crazy behind a desk because flt hours are being knocked back.

I know Navy pilots to this day that are flying more hours than they can handle. Boats suck, but imagine getting to leave to go out flying regularly? I could handle that.

[Guest Beavis]

Ahhh, the age old debate. The question any aspiring aviator needs to ask himself is this; Do I have the balls to land a tactical jet aircraft on a moving ship, at night? Throw in there a couple emergencies, low fuel state, poor weather, a pitching flight deck, no divert option and things can get sporty and no one's going to bring that sucker down for you, it's all in your hands. The most that AF dudes have to worry about is a CROSSWIND! Or oh my god, ILS isn't working, ahhhh!

Bottom line is if you want to fly jets bad enough, you'll get them. If you are looking for quality of life, do NOT join the navy, fly tankers or heavies for the USAF and you'll be very happy you did. If you want to be part of a team that can respond instantly to any crisis around the world, join the USN. If you want to be part of a culture that believes you can do what you want to with your airfcraft, join the USN, we have way more autonomy than the USAF. Oh yeah, and there are ways to avoid the non-flying jobs, i.e. a typical dept head in a fighter squadron has flown for 11 years straight, with maybe 50 percent of them having a year off somewhere in there for war college or something. Being a Naval Aviator (BTW I think Aviator is synonomous with 'Pilot') is demanding and not for everyone, but there is something magical about the precision, pride, teamwork and professionalism about flight ops at sea. I felt I had to throw my $.02 into this AF centric forum. Let the sh!t storm begin.

-B

I will admit that after 6 months at sea some of the "magic" wears off...... ha

[Buddy Spike]

Ahhh, the age old debate. The question any aspiring aviator needs to ask himself is this; Do I have the balls to land a tactical jet aircraft on a moving ship, at night? Throw in there a couple emergencies, low fuel state, poor weather, a pitching flight deck, no divert option and things can get sporty and no one's going to bring that sucker down for you, it's all in your hands. The most that AF dudes have to worry about is a CROSSWIND! Or oh my god, ILS isn't working, ahhhh!

So you're saying the most difficult part is the motherhood? Very tactical.

It's nice being able to go out, practice the actual mission and go home with enough gas to come up tac initial, pitch out, and land... vice going out, flying barely enough sets to be proficient, then coming home carrying enough gas just in case that BO-AT landing doesn't work out so well.

Of course, I'm not complaining, it sure makes it fun to do DBFM against a super hornet bubba. Who wouldn't want to go two circle uphill against a clean block 30 big mouth?

[Chuck17]

If you want to be part of a team that can respond instantly to any crisis around the world...

Since you didnt qualify that with anything about a permissive environment...

Done, Done and Done... USN was still enroute... Right back at ya Beavis! :)

Chuck

1. C-17 delivers U.S. relief supplies to China by U.S. Air Force Tech. Sgt. Chris Vadnais, Armed Forces Network-Hawaii

CHENGDU SHUANGLIU INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, People’s Republic of China (May 18, 2008) – Two U.S. Air Force C-17 Globemaster IIIs landed here today carrying

nearly 200,000 pounds of relief supplies in the wake of the devastating earthquake that struck the region on May 12.

The C-17s were assigned to U.S. Pacific Air Forces. Before 2005, C-17s were stationed exclusively in the continental U.S. C-17 squadrons are now operational at Hickam Air

Force Base, Hawaii, and at Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska’s 3rd Wing.

2. 7/26/2006 - MANAS AIR BASE, Kyrgyzstan (AFPN) -- The C-17 Globemaster III detachment here recently had a name change and change of scenery.

The 817th Expeditionary Airlift Squadron's detachment used to be Detachment 4, but due to a reorganization of the theater's airlift placement, is now Detachment 1.

Det.1's primary mission is flying passengers and cargo into Operation Enduring Freedom's area of operations. Though usually flying folks downrange, they proved they are just as capable of flying people out of harm's way.

Two crews from Det.1 joined the assisted departure of Americans from Lebanon in Cyprus. One crew, led by aircraft commander Capt. Lauren Palagi, flew from Manas to Cyprus to pick up the Americans from Lebanon July 23. The other crew went to supplement the 817 EAS fleet at Incirlik Air Base, Turkey.

3. Dover Aircrew flies first C-17 into Georgia

8/15/2008 - DOVER AIR FORCE BASE, Del. -- Seven Airmen from Dover's 3rd Airlift Squadron flew the first C-17 Globemaster III carrying humanitarian supplies into the Republic of Georgia Aug. 13.

Earlier this week, Air Force airlifters returned approximately 2,000 Georgian troops from their deployed location in Iraq. The U.S. previously committed to transportation of the troops when Georgia offered their participation in Operation Iraqi Freedom.

"Our airlift capability also allowed our nation to keep its promise to Georgia," said General Lichte. "When Georgia needed its troops at home, we were able to quickly provide the lift to get them there."

AMC C-17s deployed with the 4th and the 14th Airlift Squadrons flew missions redeploying Georgian troops from Iraq to the Georgia's capital, Tbilisi, on Sunday and Monday after the Georgian government asked the U.S. for assistance. The redeployment operation spanned slightly more than 24 hours, he said.

Command and control and coordination of the airlift effort is provided by the 618th Tanker Airlift Control Center at Scott Air Force Base. The 618th TACC coordinates an average of 900 airlift and air refueling missions each day, and can seamlessly redirect aircraft to support requirements for contingency or humanitarian relief operations.

During Hurricanes Katrina and Rita the 618th TACC tasked nearly 900 sorties to support relief efforts, and mobility forces moved more than 14,600 passengers, nearly 3,000 patients, and hauled the equivalent of 686 semi-truckloads of supplies to and from the Gulf Coast region.

During Pakistan earthquake relief operations in 2005, the 621st Contingency Response Wing supported 273 U.S. missions, and provided 15,294,000 pounds of relief supplies, including more than 93,000 sleeping bags and 292,000 blankets. The wing also loaded 587 trucks and processed 4,481 pallets.

Edited May 24, 2009 by Chuck17

[Guest Beavis]

This letter sums the issue at hand up quite well. I'm sure most of you have seen it, and the moderator nazi will probably delete this for being too long but here it goes anyway.

------------

Bob Norris is a former Naval aviator who also did a 3 year exchange tour flying the F-15 Eagle. He is now an accomplished author of entertaining books about US Naval Aviation including "Check Six" and "Fly-Off". Check out his web site at <https://www.bobnorris.com/> In response to a letter from an aspiring fighter pilot on which military academy to attend, Bob replied with the following.

Young Man,

Congratulations on your selection to both the Naval and Air Force Academies. Your goal of becoming a fighter pilot is impressive and a fine way to serve your country. As you requested, I'd be happy to share some insight into which service would be the best choice.

Each service has a distinctly different culture. You need to ask yourself "Which one am I more likely to thrive in?"

USAF Snapshot: The USAF is exceptionally well organized and well run. Their training programs are terrific. All pilots are groomed to meet high standards for knowledge and professionalism. Their aircraft are top-notch and extremely well maintained. Their facilities are excellent. Their enlisted personnel are the brightest and the best trained. The USAF is homogenous and macro. No matter where you go, you'll know what to expect, what is expected of you, and you'll be given the training & tools you need to meet those expectations. You will never be put in a situation over your head. Over a 20-year career, you will be home for most important family events. Your Mom would want you to be an Air Force pilot...so would your wife. Your Dad would want your sister to marry one.

Navy Snapshot: Aviators are part of the Navy, but so are Black shoes (surface warfare) and bubble heads (submariners). Furthermore, the Navy is split into two distinctly different Fleets (West and East Coast). The Navy is heterogeneous and micro. Your squadron is your home; it may be great, average, or awful. A squadron can go from one extreme to the other before you know it. You will spend months preparing for cruise and months on cruise. The quality of the aircraft varies directly with the availability of parts. Senior Navy enlisted are salt of the earth; you'll be proud if you earn their respect. Junior enlisted vary from terrific to the troubled kid the judge made join the service. You will be given the opportunity to lead these people during your career; you will be humbled and get your hands dirty. The quality of your training will vary and sometimes you will be over your head. You will miss many important family events. There will be long stretches of tedious duty aboard ship. You will fly in very bad weather and/or at night and you will be scared many times. You will fly with legends in the Navy and they will kick your ass until you become a lethal force. And some days - when the scheduling Gods have smiled upon you - your jet will catapult into a glorious morning over a far-away sea and you will be drop-jawed that someone would pay you to do it. The hottest girl in the bar wants to meet the Naval Aviator. That bar is in Singapore.

Bottom line, son, if you gotta ask...pack warm & good luck in Colorado.

Banzai

PS Air Force pilots wear scarves and iron their flight suits.

-----------

By the way, I guess I'm the only navy dude in this whole forum. Damn, the other USN guys must be doing all the flying and fighting out there. God Bless 'Em!! Continue the sh!t storm!!

[Guest Scamahmrd]

In the spirit of the debate... Do you want GOLD wings or led wings??? Seriously though, if you want to be a pilot, don't join the Navy. You will be a Naval Officer first and an aviator second. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but its the truth. Flying in the Navy is your collateral duty. Of course, this is just my experience, and the gouge you get will change from person to person, so take it for what its worth.