Navigator and Weapon System Officer (WSO) info

[BQZip01]

If this is the same FACT we took in UPT,

I only ever saw one person fail this, and it was a guard chick that knew she didnt have to pass, so she didnt try. I maxed it with almost no preperation, and I am definitely not the lifter type... I think most of the guys in my class maxed it.

When I took it, we had three failures and 6 marginal passes. No one was out of shape, they just didn't do much lifting and were the runner types. We had a few "Clydesdales" (as opposed to "thoroughbreds"), but they passed pretty easily because they did a lot of lifting.

Why don't we water it down a little bit: Evaluate your own fitness and at least try to do the test top to bottom in one sitting some time well before you take it so you can improve in certain areas if need be.

[magnetfreezer]

When I took it, we had three failures and 6 marginal passes. No one was out of shape, they just didn't do much lifting and were the runner types. We had a few "Clydesdales" (as opposed to "thoroughbreds"), but they passed pretty easily because they did a lot of lifting.

Why don't we water it down a little bit: Evaluate your own fitness and at least try to do the test top to bottom in one sitting some time well before you take it so you can improve in certain areas if need be.

'2'

Some of the trouble with it seems to be the slower exercises (6 count reps) which can be different from normal workouts. When I was in A-pool they had all AF take the FACT for personal reference (scores not recorded but the stashed LTs would go through all the proper form and reps, etc). For those getting down here now it should be even more convenient to practice since AF A-pool is now at wing 6 instead of NASC with the navy, so practicing in the actual machines/setting consists of

A.F LIASON OFFICE - EXIT

HALL - WALK DOWN (50 FT)

VT-86 GYM - ENTER

BQ - what was a marginal pass? Now it's either pass/fail (10 reps on the lifting and 20 on the calisthenics); they want it taken before selection in VT86 but it doesn't technically have to be passed until the fuge (obviously would look bad if trying to select Strike Eagles though).

[pawnman]

WSOs go to training in Pensacola. Navs and EWOs come out of Randolph. It isn't based on your performance in training, it's based on your assignment.

If you get picked up for WSO, realize you're going to have to pass the FACT. I've seen a bunch of guys who can run a 9-minute mile & a half not be able to pass this. Make sure you start sooner rather than later. I don't care who you are, it requires a bit of practice to make sure you can do it.

You only need to pass the FACT to go F-15's. IF you're going B-1's (or the occassional AC-130), you don't have to pass it.

Definitely practice on the actual machines you'll be using. I don't think they move quite as smoothly as the new stuff at the gym.

[BQZip01]

'2'

Some of the trouble with it seems to be the slower exercises (6 count reps) which can be different from normal workouts. When I was in A-pool they had all AF take the FACT for personal reference (scores not recorded but the stashed LTs would go through all the proper form and reps, etc). For those getting down here now it should be even more convenient to practice since AF A-pool is now at wing 6 instead of NASC with the navy, so practicing in the actual machines/setting consists of

A.F LIASON OFFICE - EXIT

HALL - WALK DOWN (50 FT)

VT-86 GYM - ENTER

BQ - what was a marginal pass? Now it's either pass/fail (10 reps on the lifting and 20 on the calisthenics); they want it taken before selection in VT86 but it doesn't technically have to be passed until the fuge (obviously would look bad if trying to select Strike Eagles though).

when I said marginal pass I mean they got the absolute minimum score.

[Guest w002exp]

DISCLAIMER: Yes, I searched for similar threads, and yes I found them. But I was not satisfied with where the discussion ended, so I wanted to rehash this and resurrecting a dead thread did not seem like a way to do it. Also, I admit upfront, I am young, ignorant and stupid, so no one needs to remind me in this thread, thanks :). Lastly, I am not bashing anyone in this thread, I will try to be as civil as possible. I merely want to expose my plight.

=======================================================================

As a request, I would like information about what Navigators do in their career verified by people who are navigators themselves. I say this because of the tremendous lack of information available about being a Navigator in the USAF. This is truly a disappointment. I think that because many pilots aspire to be such for a long time, and use only tools such as baseops or wantscheck in their quest for success, they feel a compulsion to give back to the community when their career goal is met and this has created a wealth of information available for people going to UPT or wanting to go to UPT. In fact, a google search for UPT leads probably 100 hits while UNT will point you to many non AF related acronyms. It is my belief, based off information of the FY09 rated allocation board, that most people who end up as navigators do not set out to be navigators, they set out to be pilots and for whatever reason are rejected. (Medical, lackluster performance, etc...) For this reason many Navigators once AD declare defeat on career ambitions and do not have the compulsion to return the community that pilots do. In addition, people who do seek to be Navigators likely didn't have on line resources available to them, and therefore also have no compulsion to return to the community.

I was rejected for pilot last year and then slotted for Nav. My Col informed me this was a real honor but since I have found this to not be true. At first I was very excited. Excitement wore off though when my own realizations about how I felt about navigators who didn't pilot in previous years set in. “Poor bastards.” I wasn't going to let this get by me though until I lost many people who I thought were good friends after they were selected for pilot and the reeking attitude associated with it followed with them. I found this funny since they have not even passed UPT yet. But none the less, it cut me to the bone, that this superiority complex already existed. This is a pilots Air Force and truth be told, right now, I would rather have my boots on the ground next to a Soldier or Marine. The problem was made worse when I went to see my O-6 (former pilot) about trying to slot into a different career. He made it clear he was not going to make this easy for me. Although he used much more polite and professional words, the general tone was that I should be honored to be a pilots “back seat b****”. (Term I've heard a lot over the last 6 mo) To this date, I have not worn my issued flight suit to a single ROTC event out of shame of wearing the associated navigator wings on the patch. BDUs will suffice for now, and to some extent I'm relieved that this subtle behavior has prevented underclassman about finding out my future career. Internet forums, blogs and air shows, when pilots make jokes Navs are very often the butt of them. And I am not accusing all pilots of this but you guys know very well that this happens.

I apologize for seeming to have a negative attitude, but that is exactly why I'm posting here, I want to have a positive attitude. It is my belief that I am not the only Navigator who feels this way. In fact, I know for certain three others. I want to raise awareness that the fact is, Navigators entering the Air Force TODAY, feel like the bastard children of the Air Force. They dont like us, but they can't get rid of us. Entering the Air Force as a Navigator feels like entering the Air Force as a second class citizen. Again, I will plead ignorance. I don't know if this is how it is on AD. I am trying to point out that this is how many Navigators entering the Air Force today feel. And to be honest, I don't think anyone can blame me. Simply look at the information available about being a Navigator out there.

In addition to this, the Air Force shrines pilots, but very rarely recognizes Navigators. This based off general consensus of articles in AF times, AFA Magazine and other publications but also one very important resource. On a recent visit to WPAFB I made it a point to stop by the Museum of the United States Air Force. For such an enormous structure, and how large the Air Force is, it is unbelievable to me that only ONE Navigator is mentioned by name for an act of heroism or valor. In addition to this, out of the one hundred or so members of the aviation hall of fame, not one is a navigator as well. Alas, the place is a temple to pilots.

So, in closing, I'm going to post several things I've heard from various people, some of this AD officers, some other Cadets. I don't know if any of them are true, but I want them to spur discussion. I would also like to request complete honesty. If you are a pilot and one of the remarks at the bottom of this post is how you really feel, please say so! And I know many of you post here knowing you peers also review this forum quite often. So if you don't want something read about your peers, e-mail it to me. <tengu_flyer@hotmail.com> However, the sad truth is I have to come here because today's Air Force has this methodology of “pat your friends back and tell him he did a good job even if he's unimportant just to make him feel good.” Although, some jobs in the Air Force are more equally important than others... so it seems.

I find it problematic I am even posting this here. Why do navigators not have their own resources out their. Why must we backseat a pilots forum as well? I am not trying to be bitter about this whole situation. I have an idea where I'm going with this. I just want to know what the oppinions of the community out there on AD thinks.

In closing are a list of remarks an rumors about being a navigator. Please note not all of them are negative. These are issues, concerns, rumors or things that myself and a few other navigator candidates would like to know more information about or would like to know if this attitude really persist. I am truly sorry about the enormous length of this post however I believed everything was necessaryto convey the full meaning of what I was after.

Thank you.

=======================================================================

*Navigators are being phased out of the Air Force thanks to the handy dandy GPS. Especially retroactive programs updating old air frames that did not have GPS to have them, and (especially on heavies) going to more of a C-5 setup with two pilots.

*By definition, every pilot could do a navigators job, proven by the existence of single seat Air Frames like the F-16. However, a navigator cannot in fact do a pilots job. The argument I usually hear to this is that if the pilot has a heart attack on a plane the crew ejects. If the navigator has a heart attack on the place, the pilot can still attempt to complete the mission.

*Navigators and heavy pilots are basically the morons of the Air Force. Neither one is capable of operating an airframe by himself, so the air force had to pair them together in hopes that with their powers combined, they could make something fly.

*Around the office the only thing a navigator really navigates is himself to the coffee pot for all of the pilots.

*Pilots sit on the head of the plane because they are the brains of the operation but also that pilots sit on the a** end of the plane because they are s****.

*Pilot wears a flight suit it's a uniform of battle, when a navigator wears a flight suit, it's a janitor's outfit. In short, flight suits are for pilots only.

*A navigator by definition of his occupation can never reach an O-6 because they can never command an air frame. Because of this, they cannot reach O-6 in the capacity of a navigator and must go somewhere else like acquisitions to reach O-6 as a commander. Even so, a Navigator will never be commander of an operations wing.

*Navigators can serve a tour as a FAC.

*Navigators have better shots at becoming pilots than non rated officers.

*During FY10 all Navigator training will be moved to NAS Pensacola and the training pipelines will converge. People slated to begin UNT in FY10 at Randolf will receive orders to go to Pensacola instead.

*Navigators have lower expectations than pilots. (IFT, UNT, training on air frame, etc...)

*Navigators can do tours in Antarctica if they have research degrees.

*Navigators who SIE from UNT, or who fail UNT, will not be pipelined into another commissioned career. They will instead enjoy civilian life or forced enlistment.

*Navigators can serve in capacities outside of actually being a navigator on an airplane. (In other words, they finish UNT then go do something else in the AF)

*Navigators can fly UAVs.

*Navigators must finish a PCS before they can apply for pilot, therefore because of the length of their training period, it takes them longer to be able to reapply for pilot than any other commissioned officer.

Edited January 30, 2009 by w002exp

[MD]

The AF has never given Nav's and associated fields (WSO, EWO, etc) the credit they're due. The USN/USMC on the other hand, treat their Naval Flight Officers as equal crewmembers, with many NFOs having operational command opportunities that AF Nav-rated officers wouldn't have, or very few would have. Why the difference in culture? Someone with more in-depth knowledge than me would have to answer that one.

[JarheadBoom]

The problem isn't with navs, the problem is that you're a whiny bitch who doesn't know how good he has it.

Quoted for truth.

[Guest w002exp]

Quoted for truth.

I think there is a misconception about the intention behind this post. I couldn't be more thrilled being an Officer. The intention behind this post is to point out that many people join the Air Force to do something they feel proud about but then because of the intense competition in commissioning sources are made to feel ashamed amongst their peers. This due in large part because a certain occupation has not garnered the fellowship of another occupation. This certain occupation having a very noble history that has gone unrecognized by the Air Force for a long time. However, this information is so few and far between to come by it makes it difficult for navigator candidates to know what to expect when entering their career.

Edit: Also since this was combined with another thread, I feel inclined to cite this thread to instill balance.

https://www.flyingsquadron.com/forums/index...mp;hl=navigator

Edited January 30, 2009 by w002exp

[Toro]

I am not a nav, and while I do not fly with Navs, I fly with WSOs. As an F-15E pilot with 1500+ hours and former FTU flight commander, I have a little experience with some of these issues. Most of my experience is with WSOs and while they are not the same, I am primarily referring to WSOs when I say Navs.

"I wasn't going to let this get by me though until I lost many people who I thought were good friends after they were selected for pilot and the reeking attitude associated with it followed with them."

Douchebags. They’ll get straightened out by phase 2 of UPT. Don’t worry about them.

"However, the sad truth is I have to come here because today's Air Force has this methodology of “pat your friends back and tell him he did a good job even if he's unimportant just to make him feel good.” Although, some jobs in the Air Force are more equally important than others... so it seems."

Don’t bring Navs down to the level of the sad-sack non-rated puds in the AF who need to have their egos stroked to feel like warriors and part of the fight. The dude handing out towels at the Deid is not a warrior – the Nav who does his job on a combat mission is.

"I find it problematic I am even posting this here. Why do navigators not have their own resources out their. Why must we backseat a pilots forum as well?"

Wrong.

This isn’t a pilot forum – it’s a military aviation forum. Nowhere on this forum is anything other than individual threads titled with “pilot”

Now, on to your posts. About half of them are idiotic ignorant ramblings of the uninformed, and I’m not going to even dignify them with a response. I will address some of the legitimate ones:

"*By definition, every pilot could do a navigators job, proven by the existence of single seat Air Frames like the F-16. However, a navigator cannot in fact do a pilots job."

Can a fighter pilot do a Navs job? Sure – Viper pilots do it all the time. Can he time share between Nav and pilot duties and do them as efficiently as two individuals doing them on their own? Hell no.

"The argument I usually hear to this is that if the pilot has a heart attack on a plane the crew ejects. If the navigator has a heart attack on the place, the pilot can still attempt to complete the mission."

If my Nav has a heart attack, I think I might just abort my mission. Any WSO I know would try to land before ejecting. The pilot can still "attempt" to finish the mission, but the only thing that he can positively accomplish without his WSO is safely landing the aircraft. Big difference there.

"*Around the office the only thing a navigator really navigates is himself to the coffee pot for all of the pilots."

A Nav’s rated responsibilities may be different from the pilot, but this has absolutely no reflection on his abilities with the queep.

"*A navigator by definition of his occupation can never reach an O-6 because they can never command an air frame. Because of this, they cannot reach O-6 in the capacity of a navigator and must go somewhere else like acquisitions to reach O-6 as a commander. Even so, a Navigator will never be commander of an operations wing."

Wrong wrong wrong wrong. I have had WSO DOs, Sq/CCs, OG/CCs, and a WG/CC. And I have seen a metric shit-ton of Nav O-6s at the staff.

"*Navigators have lower expectations than pilots. (IFT, UNT, training on air frame, etc...)"

Total and absolute horseshit. Anybody who shows up with that attitude gets pummeled into achievement or is FEB’d.

"*Navigators can serve in capacities outside of actually being a navigator on an airplane. (In other words, they finish UNT then go do something else in the AF)"

Yeah….everybody does this.

*Navigators can fly UAVs.

With a PPL, yes. I know two WSOs who have done it.

*Navigators must finish a PCS before they can apply for pilot, therefore because of the length of their training period, it takes them longer to be able to reapply for pilot than any other commissioned officer.

Wrong. I would have to take of my shoes to count up the number of WSOs in their first Ops tour who applied for, and received a pilot slot. We have even submitted pilot slot applications for WSOs in the FTU.

The long and short of it is that you’re letting a bunch of people who either don’t truly know about this subject, or feel the need to speak negatively of it, get you down. The job is what you make of it and I can tell you that if you come to the Strike Eagle you most certainly will not be a second class citizen.

[RASH]

The long and short of it is that you’re letting a bunch of people who either don’t truly know about this subject, or feel the need to speak negatively of it, get you down. The job is what you make of it and I can tell you that if you come to the Strike Eagle you most certainly will not be a second class citizen.

Unless you show up with this whiny bitch attitude...

[Vertigo]

LOL this is the type of kid who gets a Mercedes for a graduation present and bitches that it's not a Porsche.

[afthunderchief16]

I think there is a misconception about the intention behind this post. I couldn't be more thrilled being an Officer. The intention behind this post is to point out that many people join the Air Force to do something they feel proud about but then because of the intense competition in commissioning sources are made to feel ashamed amongst their peers. This due in large part because a certain occupation has not garnered the fellowship of another occupation. This certain occupation having a very noble history that has gone unrecognized by the Air Force for a long time. However, this information is so few and far between to come by it makes it difficult for navigator candidates to know what to expect when entering their career.

Hey dude, go ahead and believe whatever blows your skirt up.

Just about every perception you posted about the Nav career field was arrogant as well as false. You might as well have just gone and asked somebody at the MPF what they thought of the career field and what it's like to be an operational nav. There are plenty of navs/EWOs/WSOs on this forum that would take a great deal of offense to what you said. True, on some airframes a Nav may not be an integral part as they used to be due to advances in GPS, etc (see: -135 variants, AWACS, etc) but there are other variants where a good nav will be worth his weight in gold for low level drops and others.

The career choice is going to be what you decide to make of it for yourself. If you wanna go in to PCola with a piss poor attitude and feel like a second class citizen and let your peers know that you are going to get eaten alive. There is always going to be rivalries between AFSCs and even airframes. $hit dude, ask half of the pilots on this forum and they will tell you that there are "second class pilots" in the aviation community. Ask those "second class pilots" of their perception and they will tell you it's a bunch of bull$hit.

Moral of the story - do some research before you come and bash the career field before you talk to dudes that actually do the job. I got my nav slot and was a little bitter for a while but when I pin my wings on here in a couple months and my sentiments will be different.

Oh - and at least you aren't an ABM.... no offense to them but ask some of those dudes what their perceptions are...

[Duck]

I have Nav friend at Randolph right now and he is EXTREMELY excited about the U-28 mission and his role as a Nav. I think everyone has already said it, but talk to some people who are doing the job, not some bitter O-6 Detachment Commander.

[Guest Monte]

Major Props to Toro. I'm a student at Pensacola right now and its nice to hear such a refreshing attitude from a Pilot to the WSO career field. I know from experience how pervasive the bad attitudes about "being a nav" is in the student community. Morale here is good, but all those misconceptions seem to start in ROTC from people who don't know that their talking about.

Thanks for the awesome post!

[Guest w002exp]

Hey dude, go ahead and believe whatever blows your skirt up.

Just about every perception you posted about the Nav career field was arrogant as well as false. You might as well have just gone and asked somebody at the MPF what they thought of the career field and what it's like to be an operational nav. There are plenty of navs/EWOs/WSOs on this forum that would take a great deal of offense to what you said. True, on some airframes a Nav may not be an integral part as they used to be due to advances in GPS, etc (see: -135 variants, AWACS, etc) but there are other variants where a good nav will be worth his weight in gold for low level drops and others.

The career choice is going to be what you decide to make of it for yourself. If you wanna go in to PCola with a piss poor attitude and feel like a second class citizen and let your peers know that you are going to get eaten alive. There is always going to be rivalries between AFSCs and even airframes. $hit dude, ask half of the pilots on this forum and they will tell you that there are "second class pilots" in the aviation community. Ask those "second class pilots" of their perception and they will tell you it's a bunch of bull$hit.

Moral of the story - do some research before you come and bash the career field before you talk to dudes that actually do the job. I got my nav slot and was a little bitter for a while but when I pin my wings on here in a couple months and my sentiments will be different.

Oh - and at least you aren't an ABM.... no offense to them but ask some of those dudes what their perceptions are...

EDIT: I apologize, I realise the entireity of this post did not get posted the first time.

Your reply is well appreciated but please note "I" am not bashing the Nav career field. I only told you what I heard from other people. The only opinions of my own I made clear in my arguments are that I believe there is a lack of viable information about Navs available and the attitude of ROTC cadets towards the Navigator field is abysmal mostly stemmed from Cadets not going into that Nav field. Now you may be right and these people don't know what they are talking about, but why are nav candidates getting information from people that don’t know what their talking about to begin with? I think this is an important issue to address.

Also, I don't think its necessary to belittle or inflame a college student who is merely scared that control of his life is now out of his hands. 8-10 years is a long time to commit to anything. Its natural that some people upon being kicked out of the perfect world college has to offer and enter the real world could very easily get frightened.

Edited January 31, 2009 by w002exp

[drewpey]

Take 20 minutes and watch this, and listen!

[daynightindicator]

I'm a fairly new poster but I hope I can add some helpful and credible info to this thread.

I am an experienced (per the Vol 1) B-1 WSO currently going through SML (Single Ship Mission Lead) and FIC (Flight Instructor Course) upgrade, and have deployed twice to support Iraqi/Enduring Freedom. Thus, I can only speak from the perspective of a Pensacola-trained dude who then went through EWO and the B-1 FTU before my current ops assignment (bottom line, I'm a pipeline guy, not prior-E, etc), and my knowledge base is obviously limited to the Bone community.

Regarding the treatment/hierarchy of WSOs in the Bone: I have never felt like I was treated as a second class citizen or a "back-seat b!tch". In the Bone, every crewmember contributes to the success of the mission in a concrete manner - meaning, the pilots cannot accomplish the mission without us, and vice versa. That's not a feel-good statement, that's simply the way it is. Our aircraft is amazingly complex, and because of that complexity/robust capabilities/vintage (read: old) design, it requires a crew of four to operate in combat. The pilots cannot "do the WSOs job", simply because they don't have the time to train to our systems, and physically they can't sit in multiple seats at once and actuate controls/switches, etc. Obviously, I am not trained to fly the aircraft either. The pilot/wso relationship is very friendly and those who come to the Bone with attitude problems usually either shape up quickly or are removed from the community in one way or another.

Regarding career advancement: My last SQ/CC was a WSO and just made O-6 (will most likely be eventually returning to the Bone as a OG/CC or CD). You will determine your career development, not your wings. I realize that's only true to a point, but the bottom line is WSOs do not have some O-4/5 glass ceiling like some people think. I'd say USAFWS attendance plays a larger part in achieving an ops leadership role than the wings on your chest, and pilots and wsos can both be patches.

The bottom line for me is that I am luckly enough to be able to contribute directly to the broader mission every time I take off from a deployed location. I am fortunate enough to have more combat sorties/hours, bomb drops, and real-world employement experience than many CAF pilots. That's not a braggy statement, but simply a fact to show how the air force really works. Today the Bone (among other airframes) is relied on heavily by combatant commanders to meet their intent. In five years Raptor or C-model pilots might be blowing MiGs and Sukhois out of the sky while I talk to kids at an airshow. I have no control over that and can only perform the mission I'm assigned.

Toro hit all the major points and did a great job as usual debunking some really heinous rumors/false info - hopefully hearing it straight from the source helps to drive those points home. If anyone wants to know more about life as a Bone WSO let me know (I'm sure the other Bonemen on the board would be more than happy to answer questions as well).

[nav-a-ho]

I'm an instructor at nav school and I can tell you that you will be a second class citizen if you believe that you are. If you have a positive attitude and do your job well, you will get the respect of everyone in your operational squadron. Will there be some b!tch @ss pilots that consider you second class? Maybe a couple. But f*ck them. You're going to come across @ssholes no matter what career field you go into, military or civilian. If you weren't a valuable member of the crew, then you wouldn't be there. Make sure you drop this whiny @ss attitude before you come down to Randolph, though. Your concerns speak more about how you view yourself as opposed to how most others view the nav. I don't want to waste my time on someone who doesn't want to be here. I'll make time to help someone that does.

Edited January 31, 2009 by nav-a-ho

[Guest w002exp]

Take 20 minutes and watch this, and listen!

That was actually really good. Public irony though that they mention Jim Wright (former Nav). Probably not one of his best public indulgences.

I'm a fairly new poster but I hope I can add some helpful and credible info to this thread.

I am an experienced (per the Vol 1) B-1 WSO currently going through SML (Single Ship Mission Lead) and FIC (Flight Instructor Course) upgrade, and have deployed twice to support Iraqi/Enduring Freedom. Thus, I can only speak from the perspective of a Pensacola-trained dude who then went through EWO and the B-1 FTU before my current ops assignment (bottom line, I'm a pipeline guy, not prior-E, etc), and my knowledge base is obviously limited to the Bone community.

Regarding the treatment/hierarchy of WSOs in the Bone: I have never felt like I was treated as a second class citizen or a "back-seat b!tch". In the Bone, every crewmember contributes to the success of the mission in a concrete manner - meaning, the pilots cannot accomplish the mission without us, and vice versa. That's not a feel-good statement, that's simply the way it is. Our aircraft is amazingly complex, and because of that complexity/robust capabilities/vintage (read: old) design, it requires a crew of four to operate in combat. The pilots cannot "do the WSOs job", simply because they don't have the time to train to our systems, and physically they can't sit in multiple seats at once and actuate controls/switches, etc. Obviously, I am not trained to fly the aircraft either. The pilot/wso relationship is very friendly and those who come to the Bone with attitude problems usually either shape up quickly or are removed from the community in one way or another.

Regarding career advancement: My last SQ/CC was a WSO and just made O-6 (will most likely be eventually returning to the Bone as a OG/CC or CD). You will determine your career development, not your wings. I realize that's only true to a point, but the bottom line is WSOs do not have some O-4/5 glass ceiling like some people think. I'd say USAFWS attendance plays a larger part in achieving an ops leadership role than the wings on your chest, and pilots and wsos can both be patches.

The bottom line for me is that I am luckly enough to be able to contribute directly to the broader mission every time I take off from a deployed location. I am fortunate enough to have more combat sorties/hours, bomb drops, and real-world employement experience than many CAF pilots. That's not a braggy statement, but simply a fact to show how the air force really works. Today the Bone (among other airframes) is relied on heavily by combatant commanders to meet their intent. In five years Raptor or C-model pilots might be blowing MiGs and Sukhois out of the sky while I talk to kids at an airshow. I have no control over that and can only perform the mission I'm assigned.

Toro hit all the major points and did a great job as usual debunking some really heinous rumors/false info - hopefully hearing it straight from the source helps to drive those points home. If anyone wants to know more about life as a Bone WSO let me know (I'm sure the other Bonemen on the board would be more than happy to answer questions as well).

This was a kind response, and very informative, thank you.

I'm an instructor at nav school and I can tell you that you will be a second class citizen if you believe that you are. If you have a positive attitude and do your job well, you will get the respect of everyone in your operational squadron. Will there be some b!tch @ss pilots that consider you second class? Maybe a couple. But f*ck them. You're going to come across @ssholes no matter what career field you go into, military or civilian. If you weren't a valuable member of the crew, then you wouldn't be there. Make sure you drop this whiny @ss attitude before you come down to Randolph, though. Your concerns speak more about how you view yourself as opposed to how most others view the nav. I don't want to waste my time on someone who doesn't want to be here. I'll make time to help someone that does.

Uh... Less kind response but I understand what you're getting at. Believe me I'm not trying to be a Debbie Downer, I just finally got to the point that I was overwhelmingly frustrated with not being able to find this stuff out. Surely at one point in your guys lives you had to look back and say "am I going the right direction?" They say more than anything humanity fears the unknown and I was merely trying to point out the lack of knowledge available out there on being navigators.

If I could get these questions answered, Toro missed addressing them or bypassed them for some reason... As I hinted at before though I'm posting on here for a few others too.

*Can Navs become Forward Air Controllers like pilots?

*Can Navs get released from their unit to do a research tour (like Antarctica, space shuttle programs or something like that im guessing).

*Will Nav training all move to PCola and when?

*This one is new, what are the requirements for attending IFS being mandatory?

*This one wanted clarification: Exactly what is the reg on when you can reapply for pilot and what kind of waivers affect this?

*This one is new too, how mathematically technical is being a Navigator? Are we going to be trig junkies by the time we are done?

*This one is new: Navs who become pilots later one, are their careers stunted because they are doing Lt duties in the plane when they are actually in Capt. (Things like, having enough expereince to lead a two-ship, four-ship? etc...) Also, are their careers stunted due the lack of hours/expereince they have compared to other Captains in their unit?

Thanks...

Edited January 31, 2009 by w002exp

[nav-a-ho]

That was actually really good. Public irony though that they mention Jim Wright (former Nav). Probably not one of his best public indulgences.

This was a kind response, and very informative, thank you.

Uh... Less kind response but I understand what you're getting at. Believe me I'm not trying to be a Debbie Downer, I just finally got to the point that I was overwhelmingly frustrated with not being able to find this stuff out. Surely at one point in your guys lives you had to look back and say "am I going the right direction?" They say more than anything humanity fears the unknown and I was merely trying to point out the lack of knowledge available out there on being navigators.

If I could get these questions answered, Toro missed addressing them or bypassed them for some reason... As I hinted at before though I'm posting on here for a few others too.

*Can Navs become Forward Air Controllers like pilots?

*Can Navs get released from their unit to do a research tour (like Antarctica, space shuttle programs or something like that im guessing).

*Will Nav training all move to PCola and when?

*This one is new, what are the requirements for attending IFS being mandatory?

*This one wanted clarification: Exactly what is the reg on when you can reapply for pilot and what kind of waivers affect this?

*This one is new too, how mathematically technical is being a Navigator? Are we going to be trig junkies by the time we are done?

*This one is new: Navs who become pilots later one, are their careers stunted because they are doing Lt duties in the plane when they are actually in Capt. (Things like, having enough expereince to lead a two-ship, four-ship? etc...) Also, are their careers stunted due the lack of hours/expereince they have compared to other Captains in their unit?

Thanks...

Navs will not be Forward Air Controllers.

Navs will be training at PCola in 2010. Last class at Randolph in Jan 10.

If you don't have your PPL, you'll go to IFS in Pueblo.

You can apply for pilot after 2 years of getting your nav wings.

If you can handle 6th grade math, you can handle nav school math.

Not stunted at all. 19th AF commander is a nav turned pilot. 2 star general. Pretty sure that means career will not be stunted.

[Toro]

*This one is new: Navs who become pilots later one, are their careers stunted because they are doing Lt duties in the plane when they are actually in Capt. (Things like, having enough expereince to lead a two-ship, four-ship? etc...) Also, are their careers stunted due the lack of hours/expereince they have compared to other Captains in their unit?

No.

What you are doing in the plane does not (unfortunately) have as much to do with your career progression as what you do outside of the plane. The primary things that will affect career progression (i.e. go on to an OPR) in the plane are things like making wingman/flight lead/instructor of the quarter/year, or how WELL you did in your upgrade (finished first, fastest, best seen, etc.). Not only does that not have anything to do with your rank, but as a prior nav, I would expect you to have the SA and airmanship to be at the top of the pack for this kind of stuff. Your OPR does not care what your rank is when you make FL.

Ditto to the hours and experience - none of that goes on an OPR unless you've got a bullet about flying combat sorties or flying the most hours in the squadron (sortie hog).

[pawnman]

I'm not sure I'm adding much new stuff, but...

In the BONE, WSOs do very little actual navigating. Yes, it is still part of the Offensive Systems Officer's duties, but it's not the primary one, especially in a CAS environment. We're too busy talking to JTACs, punching coordinates into the weapons, running the radar and the targeting pod...well, you get the idea. And the defensive systems officer is just as involved...in an unopposed environment, he could be taking the other radio, backing the OSO on the coords being entered, plotting positions on the laptop...all this while the pilot flying is handling all the navigation. In an opposed environment (i.e., threat heavy), the DSO has his hands full running the defensive avionics, the chaff, flares, painting a picture for the rest of the crew, calling out threats to the rest of the package.

In short, WSOs are not human GPS interfaces to the pilot...we have a unique job. I don't know about F-15E's, but in the BONE, the pilots CANNOT complete the mission without us. We have the control over the bombs, the radar, the inertial navigation system...But equally, without the pilots, all I have is a $300 million static display. I've seen nothing beyond friendly pilot/WSO rivalry, and for every disparaging remark, I've probably heard 10 "I need a pilot/WSO to answer this question for me".

I'd also like to add to the list of O-6's with nav wings, including the OG/CC at Dyess when I went through the FTU, my current squadron commander, one of our O-5 ADOs, and the O-5 acting commander of our sister squadron. While a WSO may never be the "Aircraft Commander", they will very often by the "Mission Lead" (in charge of mission execution for their plane or formation) or even "Mission Commander" (in charge of the entire mission, including other platforms).

[MD]

*Can Navs become Forward Air Controllers like pilots?

Thanks...

AF Navs don't. NFOs in the F/A-18D community can when they perform their FAC/TAC-A duties at the VMFA(AW) units. Again, just the difference in how the services view and utilize their respective "backseater" personnel.

[sirjrod00]

I guess I'll add the slick C-130 nav perspective...

Can the pilots do my job while we are deployed? Depends on the mission and it depends on the pilot. Do the pilots need a nav to do the regular trash-hauling missions? Probably not, but it always nice to have an extra set of eyes on the flight deck. However, will the pilots need a nav to do JPADS or other airdrops? Yes, and sometimes even 2 are needed. As far as local tac missions...I'm sure there are some pilots out there that could definitely do the job without a nav, but the airplane is set up to utilize a nav, therefore there are some things that a nav is needed for.

Do I feel like a second-class citizen in the C-130 world? Absolutely not. There are a few guys who tend to fly the F-130 and ask the nav for minimal imputs, but for the most part it's pretty equal unless you have the attitude that it's not.

As far as leadership...my current DO is a nav and my last commander was a nav. Our wing commander is a nav, as well as the reserve wing commander at our base. The vice group commander is a nav as well. The leadership opportunities are definitely out there to quality guys that work hard.

AFSOC is a whole different story and depending on what type of plane you are flying, the nav basically runs the show.

[Guest Monte]

If you don't have your PPL, you'll go to IFS in Pueblo.

I don't think this is true. My IFS class had a guy from Randolph with his PPL, Commercial, and a shit ton of hours. Granted he was done in 3 weeks, but my flight alone had 4 PPL guys.

I think everyone has to go.

As far as when they are going to change the syllabus for Nav and Pilot, who knows...