Subdeacon Joe Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 Would that be a rating? Obviously I'm not clear on were Warrants fit in the Navy hierarchy. U.S. Navy has announced that its Boeing MQ-25 Stingray unmanned aerial vehicles, which will provide aerial refueling from its aircraft carriers, will be operated by warrant officer with a new specialty designation — the Aerial Vehicle Operator. Quote “AVOs will start out operating the MQ-25 Stingray, the Navy’s first carrier-based unmanned aerial vehicle, which is expected to join the fleet with an initial operating capability in 2024,” explained Captain Christopher Wood, aviation officer community manager at the Bureau of Naval Personnel in Millington, Tennessee, in a Navy press release. “Unlike traditional Navy Chief Warrant Officers, the majority of these officers will be accessed much younger and trained along the lines of current Naval Aviators and Naval Flight Officers in the unrestricted designators,” Wood continued. “However, Naval Aviators and Naval Flight Officers require assignments that progress in tactical and leadership scope to be competitive for promotion, while warrant officer AVOs will be technical specialists and spend their careers as operators." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perro Del Diablo Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 So does that mean they will rarely be around and when they are holding cup of coffee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sedalia Dave Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 That is going to totally redefine what it means to be a CWO in the US Navy Quote Navy Chief Warrant Officers (CWOs) are technical specialists who perform knowledge and skills of a specific occupational field at a level beyond what is normally expected a Master Chief Petty Officer (E-9). The Chief Warrant Officer Program provides commissioning opportunities to qualified senior enlisted personnel. Chief Petty Officers (E-7 through E-9), and E-6 personnel who are selection board eligible for E-7 may qualify for this program. On average a person will have 12 to 13 years time in service before they make Chief (E-7). To make CWO you really have to have your stuff together. Now they want to put someone with a 4 year college degree through a short leadership school then flight school and them make them a CWO. The current CWOs are not going to take this very well and I doubt that few in the officer ranks are going to like it either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abilene Slim SASS 81783 Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 Probably, but they’ll get over it in time as others have thru the centuries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Riot Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 Makes sense...they just went through probably 16 years of intense training on video games.... Judging by some of the news coming out of the Navy and those hideous nonfunctional uniforms that appear to be only for making fat lesbians happy that no one’s looking at the butts this is about on par for the Navy these days. I can hear it now...the moral building slogans for this group of crack go-juicers... ”Juice from above” “Get a drink before hitting the drink” ”JP5 to keep you alive” Seriously, SD is right. Why are they creating this silly rating when CWOs have always been an experienced and technical rating? This should be an enlisted rating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Harley, #14153 Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 It’s going to create a gap like exists in the Army between non-flying CWOs who are highly trained and experienced specialists, and the high-school-to-flight-school warrants who fly helicopters. At day’s end, the Army made it work. The “walking warrants” had their culture and level of respect for their extensive experience. The WO1s and WO2s with aviator wings had their niche as pilots. And the aviation CW3/4/5s fulfilled the role of masters of their technical craft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 The MQ 25 is a drone tanker? I guess the next step would be drones to take out high value targets like is currently done by the AF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utah Bob #35998 Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 7 hours ago, Pat Riot, SASS #13748 said: Seriously, SD is right. Why are they creating this silly rating when CWOs have always been an experienced and technical rating? This should be an enlisted rating. The Air Force uses enlisted ranks to fly these. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 18 minutes ago, Utah Bob #35998 said: The Air Force uses enlisted ranks to fly these. Those drones take out targets. The Navy’s drones refuel fighters and take off and land on carriers. Big difference in missions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Riot Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 1 hour ago, Utah Bob #35998 said: The Air Force uses enlisted ranks to fly these. That’s what I thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Riot Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 1 hour ago, Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 said: Those drones take out targets. The Navy’s drones refuel fighters and take off and land on carriers. Big difference in missions. And a CWO can do that and enlisted can’t? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 18 minutes ago, Pat Riot, SASS #13748 said: And a CWO can do that and enlisted can’t? AF ENLISTED CAN, 18 minutes ago, Pat Riot, SASS #13748 said: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Riot Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 Yeah...okay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utah Bob #35998 Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 2 hours ago, Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 said: Those drones take out targets. The Navy’s drones refuel fighters and take off and land on carriers. Big difference in missions. No. That is a Grumman RQ-4. Unarmed. Flown by Sgts. Strictly ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, and Recon) The Reaper and Predator are weapons carrying attack USVs and still piloted by Officers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619 Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 When I first saw a modern drone in operation only 2 or 3 years back, I was amazed by the skill of the operator to bring it so smoothly back to a landing at the exact spot it departed from. Only took me a minute to realize that wasn't what had happened.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sedalia Dave Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 4 hours ago, Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 said: Those drones take out targets. The Navy’s drones refuel fighters and take off and land on carriers. Big difference in missions. Drone landings on Carriers will use the Automated Carrier Landing System (ACLS) with minimal if any remote operator input. ACLS has been in use on carriers for fully automated landings since at least the late 70s. It was good enough in the 80s that it could put the tail hook of a jet within a 2 square foot box every time. In fact it was so good that a random error had to be put into the system so that the flight deck would wear more evenly. MQ-25 operators will monitor systems and engage the auto-pilot / ACLS a lot more than they will do any actual flying. I remember testing ACLS Modes 1, 2, and 3 on F-4s in the early 80s. You can read about ACLS here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watab kid Posted December 13, 2020 Share Posted December 13, 2020 "..In fact it was so good that a random error had to be put into the system so that the flight deck would wear more evenly...." now there is something i had not considered , constantly hitting that same point and that wear , i guess had i taken a different path in life i might have , wear patterns and stress points have been important but only in static conditions , i love this site for what i learn so late in life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Sloe Posted December 13, 2020 Share Posted December 13, 2020 So they're going to pull these candidates at a much younger age?? One of the other requirements when I went for CWO was minimum 12 years service. Are they going to put a waiver in to get these younger personnel for this specialty? It seems like it would be better to do one of two things. 1) make a new enlisted rating. 2) make it a special officer linage similar to supply and medical officers. Pick up the techies right out of college and put them in a training program. Glad I'm retired. BS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdeacon Joe Posted December 13, 2020 Author Share Posted December 13, 2020 1 hour ago, watab kid said: , i love this site for what i learn so late in life Same here. The vast range of job experience of the people in The Saloon is astounding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.