Combat Systems Officer (CSO) info; Nav, EWO, WSO

[Dubs]

To me it's all semantics really and anyone who really cares that much about their title should probably have bigger things on their mind.

"2"

We all wear the same wings.

[BONE WSO]

I get what you're saying though, buffs certainly drop as many if not more weapons than bones.

Really? I don't think this is very accurate.

[nsplayr]

Really? I don't think this is very accurate.

I'd caveat that to say I have no idea; not a bomber dude. The point was that there really isn't a reason other than heritage that Buff navs/radar navs aren't called WSOs since their mission clearly involves the direct employment of weapons. Any reason a bone guy would tend to think differently?

[magnetfreezer]

I'd caveat that to say I have no idea; not a bomber dude. The point was that there really isn't a reason other than heritage that Buff navs/radar navs aren't called WSOs since their mission clearly involves the direct employment of weapons. Any reason a bone guy would tend to think differently?

Originally the Bone had DSO (defensive systems officer) and OSOs that filled roles similar to Buff EWOs/navs respectively. When they started dual qualifying people it changed to WSO since you were now qualified to operate the entire weapons system, just as the F-15E/F-4/F-111 etc WSOs did everything (since they were the only nav on the jet).

[nsplayr]

Originally the Bone had DSO (defensive systems officer) and OSOs that filled roles similar to Buff EWOs/navs respectively. When they started dual qualifying people it changed to WSO since you were now qualified to operate the entire weapons system, just as the F-15E/F-4/F-111 etc WSOs did everything (since they were the only nav on the jet).

So you're saying WSO makes sense not because you employ kinetic weapons, but because you are qual'd to operate the entire "weapons system" in terms of 12XX duties? Wouldn't an AWACS nav fall under the same definition then since he's the only nav on board? Or a slick herk nav? Or a U-28 CSO?

I always figured you were a WSO if you employed actual explody-type weapons, but that buff radar navs were still called navs because that position existed before the term WSO existed. I guess gunship dudes are kind of in the same boat.

Anyways, not that one is better or even fundamentally different than the other, but interesting semantics I guess and it's good to know how other communities view the position.

[Dupe]

Here's what I tell guys: call yourself whatever has emerged as the title in your community, but don't allow those semantics to create blinders. What will we call C-130Hx Navs if we put weapons on that platform? Probably stil "Nav." What will we call the dude pushing the button on an ABL-type platform? There's a few RPA guys with bug-smash wings around...what's the most correct name for those dudes? They mostly do ISR, but there's some weapons employment in there. The world is changing rapidly...so rapidly that there isn't really any great term for what us non-pilot rated officers universally do. I can tell you one thing, though...the term "Navigator" is wholey inappropriate and antiquated.

This then begs the question: if our jobs are all rapidly changing, and very different when compared with all the other 12x jobs out there...how then can you effectively train everyone in one CSO course at Pensacola? My view is that you can't. The best you can do is teach guys the basics, hammer in the right attitude, educate them on all the MWS communities out there (to include the ones that don't have some flavor of CSO aboard), and make it crystal clear that nav-school skills are not likely to be any more than 10% of the required knowledge for follow-on platforms.

[nsplayr]

This then begs the question: if our jobs are all rapidly changing, and very different when compared with all the other 12x jobs out there...how then can you effectively train everyone in one CSO course at Pensacola? My view is that you can't. The best you can do is teach guys the basics, hammer in the right attitude, educate them on all the MWS communities out there (to include the ones that don't have some flavor of CSO aboard), and make it crystal clear that nav-school skills are not likely to be any more than 10% of the required knowledge for follow-on platforms.

Exactly. That's why I like that in my community we're called CSOs. I think based on the divergence in the 12XX career field CSO will be the thing that makes the most sense going forward when you have dudes transferring across platforms with vastly different mission sets. But really, whatever communities have historically used kinda makes sense too because it promotes a little heritage that the AF is sorely lacking...the dudes that get wrapped around the pole (sts) over the fact that they're a "WSO" or that think the new training is gonna make them more awesome are the ones who need the attitude check.

Edited January 18, 2011 by nsplayr

[Guest Morbi12]

Im in my final year of ROTC and my AFSC is 62EE (Developmental Electrical Engineering) and I was selected to go to Eglin AFB in the Electronic Warfare Squardron. Does this mean I am going to be an EWO? I have searched a ton of places trying to find out what I will be doing and everything seems different.

So if someone could please help me out that would be great. I just want to know what Im going to be doing haha

[lazlo]

Im in my final year of ROTC and my AFSC is 62EE (Developmental Electrical Engineering) and I was selected to go to Eglin AFB in the Electronic Warfare Squardron. Does this mean I am going to be an EWO? I have searched a ton of places trying to find out what I will be doing and everything seems different.

So if someone could please help me out that would be great. I just want to know what Im going to be doing haha

My guess is that you will work with the EWO's in a squadron with beeps and squeaks stuff, but that no, you won't be an EWO. That requires Nav school. I'm not an EWO though, perhaps someone else on here can elaborate.

[magnetfreezer]

Im in my final year of ROTC and my AFSC is 62EE (Developmental Electrical Engineering) and I was selected to go to Eglin AFB in the Electronic Warfare Squardron. Does this mean I am going to be an EWO? I have searched a ton of places trying to find out what I will be doing and everything seems different.

So if someone could please help me out that would be great. I just want to know what Im going to be doing haha

My guess is that you will work with the EWO's in a squadron with beeps and squeaks stuff, but that no, you won't be an EWO. That requires Nav school. I'm not an EWO though, perhaps someone else on here can elaborate.

That checks. In the EWS you will be a developmental engineer supporting the CAF crews with EWO stuff. There are EWOs that work there too. Beyond that wait till you get there.

[Guest Morbi12]

That checks. In the EWS you will be a developmental engineer supporting the CAF crews with EWO stuff. There are EWOs that work there too. Beyond that wait till you get there.

Ok cool. I was mianly just wondering if it was a flight job. Guess not but oh well, I am still excited.

[08Dawg]

Ok cool. I was mianly just wondering if it was a flight job. Guess not but oh well, I am still excited.

Don't wanna get your hopes up too much, but I know an EW who was a developmental engineer, and he flew quite a bit.

[magnetfreezer]

Don't wanna get your hopes up too much, but I know an EW who was a developmental engineer, and he flew quite a bit.

True. Depending on the unit they could give you rides (sts). Or go to Test Pilot School as an engineer and become a flight test engineer.

[08Dawg]

True. Depending on the unit they could give you rides (sts). Or go to Test Pilot School as an engineer and become a flight test engineer.

The guy I'm talking about worked on Vipers, and flew as part of his job.

[Dupe]

The Electronic Warfare Squadrons at Eglin update aircraft electronic warfare systems as new threat systems roll out and as new emitting systems get bolted on to US assets. Here's an example: In the F-15E, we're just now testing and developing a new AESA radar. That radar has a different waveform and frequency band as the currently fielded APG-70. As a result, our electronic warfare system has to change so that the radar doesn't blank out the warning reciever. Another example: Let's say the Ruskies just rolled out the new SA-69 missile. If we had the intell on that new threat's electronic waveforms and characteristics, we could then roll that into the threat libraries of all our aircraft. Finally, library space is finite on all our aircraft. There's no way that every threat could possibly fit on every aircraft. However, it'd be really smart to create a theater-based library and update those as threats change in particular theaters...that's one of the EWS roles.

There are EWS squadrons at Eglin for many different platforms. If you're in the squadron that does F-22 electronic warfare, I wouldn't expect to fly too much. If you're supporting the F-16, there's a chance you could fly. Even then, you won't fly much. There are many engineers on Eglin with flight orders and not so many aircraft with back seats.

If you really like your job and don't want to continue down the 62 career path (which will include a fun tour at a SPO and maybe some time as a lab manager), the skills you learn as an EW engineer would make you a highly prized Pilot/EWO/CSO in some platforms. I'd encourage you to apply to the flying board if that's where your heart lies.

As for Test Pilot School, I know one guy who came directly from an EWS at Eglin and went as an engineer. The current commander of the 36 EWS is a Buff EWO and a TPS grad. For engineers, a Master's is virtually required to be competitive for TPS, and there's certainly no guessing which form of flight test engineering you'd be doing following TPS graduation.

If you've got further questions about Eglin, being a 62, or any of the EWS work, feel free to PM me

[pawnman]

I'll call myself a CSO when the T.O. title becomes "Combat Systems Officer's Manual", not "Weapons Systems Officer's Manual".

[lazlo]

I'll call myself a CSO when the T.O. title becomes "Combat Systems Officer's Manual", not "Weapons Systems Officer's Manual".

2

[nsplayr]

I'll call myself a CSO when the T.O. title becomes "Combat Systems Officer's Manual", not "Weapons Systems Officer's Manual".

I bet one day it will. Heritage be damned, this is the Air Force after all...

[Skitzo]

Call them WSOs so when some a-hole pilot comes along that thinks he's better than the WSOs you can name him WHAM, WSO hating a$$ monkey... CHAM doesn't have the same flow.

Seriously all 11XXX's are pilots but we aren't all fighter, bomber or helicopter pilots. CSO is good umbrella term for all guys who went through that training but any 12XXX who has actually qualed and been signed off to drop high order explosives on the enemy deserves to call him/herself a WSO.

I also think their AFSC title is specifically WSO either way in the jet I believe they probably still respond with crew position, OSO / DSO.

[nsplayr]

Call them WSOs so when some a-hole pilot comes along that thinks he's better than the WSOs you can name him WHAM, WSO hating a$$ monkey... CHAM doesn't have the same flow.

Seriously all 11XXX's are pilots but we aren't all fighter, bomber or helicopter pilots. CSO is good umbrella term for all guys who went through that training but any 12XXX who has actually qualed and been signed off to drop high order explosives on the enemy deserves to call him/herself a WSO.

I also think their AFSC title is specifically WSO either way in the jet I believe they probably still respond with crew position, OSO / DSO.

I agree both with CSO being a good umbrella term and keeping WSO because it ain't broke so why are we trying to fix it. I'm actually surprised they didn't just changed the term for any 12XXer to WSO since we all fly in "weapons systems." Hell, the portal is now a "weapons system" so maybe the comm monkeys should be called WSOs too...

There's also this:

[pawnman]

Call them WSOs so when some a-hole pilot comes along that thinks he's better than the WSOs you can name him WHAM, WSO hating a$$ monkey... CHAM doesn't have the same flow.

Seriously all 11XXX's are pilots but we aren't all fighter, bomber or helicopter pilots. CSO is good umbrella term for all guys who went through that training but any 12XXX who has actually qualed and been signed off to drop high order explosives on the enemy deserves to call him/herself a WSO.

I also think their AFSC title is specifically WSO either way in the jet I believe they probably still respond with crew position, OSO / DSO.

You're correct that in the jet we respond with "O" or "D"...but we're all qualified to sit in either seat.

[skinny]

I honestly don't see the CSO nomenclature being used very much at all outside of the school house. Once we leave here we'll revert to more traditional titles of Nav, EWO or WSO depending on what assignment we drop. Could be confusing on an airframe with multiple CSOs all performing different duties. "CSO-Pilot", <confused look> "Which CSO is he talking to? The Nav, EWO, FCO, etc?"

[nsplayr]

I honestly don't see the CSO nomenclature being used very much at all outside of the school house. Once we leave here we'll revert to more traditional titles of Nav, EWO or WSO depending on what assignment we drop. Could be confusing on an airframe with multiple CSOs all performing different duties. "CSO-Pilot", <confused look> "Which CSO is he talking to? The Nav, EWO, FCO, etc?"

Yea, that's a good point; works easier when there's only one 12xx on board. That's kinda covers -15Es, slicks, U-28s, tankers, & AWACS though. Not sure about bigger crews but first names/call signs work well too on small crews, usually clears up confusion.

It'll be interesting to see how the products of P-cola see all this since they will have been calling themselves CSOs from the start. I'm sure that can be corrected in the various communities as necessary.

[theSituation]

Yea, that's a good point; works easier when there's only one 12xx on board. That's kinda covers -15Es, slicks, U-28s, tankers, & AWACS though. Not sure about bigger crews but first names/call signs work well too on small crews, usually clears up confusion.

It'll be interesting to see how the products of P-cola see all this since they will have been calling themselves CSOs from the start. I'm sure that can be corrected in the various communities as necessary.

Its kind of humorous actually. Many studs down here still say "nav" school. Instructors from the various platforms have to catch themselves from not saying, EWO, WSO or nav. I think they think its dumb, and most of the students down here do as well. We have an understanding that the training we're going through is a universal CSO program, but when we get out of here we will be called whatever 12xxxers have been called forever. I dont think anyone but higher leadership is getting butthurt over the situation (or lack thereof...) of who calls who what. It seems to me from an outside perspective that changing the name of a nav/EWO/WSO to a CSO is more about the ego of the leadership.

[lazlo]

Its kind of humorous actually. Many studs down here still say "nav" school. Instructors from the various platforms have to catch themselves from not saying, EWO, WSO or nav. I think they think its dumb, and most of the students down here do as well. We have an understanding that the training we're going through is a universal CSO program, but when we get out of here we will be called whatever 12xxxers have been called forever. I dont think anyone but higher leadership is getting butthurt over the situation (or lack thereof...) of who calls who what. It seems to me from an outside perspective that changing the name of a nav/EWO/WSO to a CSO is more about the ego of the leadership.

What was wrong with the universal term of Navigator??? You're right. Somebody got an OPR bullet from it... That's about it. I don't know if they've figured it out down there yet, but from what I heard from legacy P-Cola instructors before and after I left, standing up that new program was a sh*t show...