Navy Flight Officer ??

[poadeleted20]

About 10 hrs of T-37 time, high alt navigation, intro to acro.

That's USAF Navigators, not US Navy NFO's, although I thought they also did some low-levels in Tweets at Mather.

 

[BillTIZ]

That's USAF Navigators, not US Navy NFO's, although I thought they also did some low-levels in Tweets at Mather.

Yes we did, but no stick time on those flights were part of the syllabus.

 

[Threefingeredjack]

You forgot the best one...'No Future Opportunities'


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

yes, the list is as long as a NFO's ummmm errrr (you fill in the blank) is short!!!

 

[35 AoA]

The NFOs started out in the same track as the pilots if flight school. Somewhere along the way, they couldn't hack the rigors, or they just didn't have the stick to make it through flight school. Rather than wash them out completely, the Navy - in it's infinite wisdom keeps them in non-pilot flying roles as has been stated. Most NFOs can take control of an aircraft and get it back to the boat, and maybe, possibly get it on the deck, or more likely they will set up a bail out and ditch the hardware.

They may have thousands of 'flight' hours in the planes mentioned, but they are navigation and ordinance specialists, not pilots.

Mainly incorrect info above. NFOs typically do not start out as student pilots....they begin flight school as SNFOs, go to API with their SNA friends, and then do an entirely different training pipeline. They have their own primary, intermediate, and advanced flight training squadrons and don't train for the rest of flight school with student pilots. There are on some rare occasions, guys who failed out pretty far along in flight school, or more typically beyond that, that are given the opportunity to go back and try again as NFOs. That is extremely rare, as in I know one. Historically, there have been a lot of guys who got picked up for pilot slots, but after failing the vision test of the initial flight physical, were offered SNFO gigs. That is more common, but those guys certainly didn't fail out of flight training in any way. There is typically a big stigma attached to failing out of any portion of flight school, and more often than not, you are simply shown the door and told to go look for a civilian job at that point.

Most NFOs can't take control of the aircraft.....they have no training in it (aside from very basic stuff on a few flights in the T-6 during primary), and even if they did have the skills (which some prob have I don't doubt), there are generally not another set of controls anymore. There are no operational Hornets or Super Hornets, or even Prowlers with a second set of controls....though there is a nub in the Hornet that can be very crudely manipulated from the back. There is no way that they could land on the boat, and even if they had a set of controls, that is something that takes many hours of experience to get the hang of to the point of being safe behind the ramp. I'm sure they could set up or initiate an ejection, but in reality, if the pilot is incapacitated, they are just going to get out of the jet.

Correct that they are nav and weapons systems operators. They also do a few other things that aren't specific to USN pilots....ie FAC(A) specifically. Beyond that, they pret much just share the load with the pilot in terms of cockpit admin stuff.

Also, they are not referred to as Naval Aviators at least as far as I have ever heard. Naval Flight Officer, or a community specific term like WSO, EWO, ECMO, etc. This isn't a slam on them, just saying that this is what they are called in the business.

 

[maddog52]

They did when I went through, in T-34's, T-39's, and TF-9's.

They replaced the TF-9's with TA-4's back in the 70's, so yes, that would be likely. In addition, many S-3 NFO's were designated as "CO-TAC's" and replaced pilots in the right front seat. They got a lot of stick time which was FAA-loggable if they had a pilot certificate with AMEL rating.

Back in the late 90's the USN, USMC, and USAF NFOs and NAVs all got 8 flights of stick time in the front seat of the T-34. Almost up to solo. They're all starting out in the T-6 now.

 

[Witmo]

Not every WSO is a failed pilot. The needs of the Air Force is always paramount and sometimes there's a glut of pilots and a shortage of WSOs. Many Air Force two seat aircraft started out with two pilots crewing together. Air Force F-111s and F-4s initially had pilots designated P-WSOs working the right seat/back seat systems.

It's been my experience that pilots and WSOs always worked as a team to accomplish the mission. Those derogatory terms for WSOs/NFOs were most probably thought up by jocks brought up from training into single seat communities. Even amongst single seat aircraft, there's a pecking order. The single mission Air-to-Air community has always thought they sit alone on top of the food chain. Unfortunately they have always failed to realize that the war is lost if the enemy tank commander is parked outside your base ops regardless of how many air-to-air kills are painted below your canopy rail.

In two seat squadrons, you didn't have pilots hanging out with just pilots and WSOs hanging with just WSOs after duty hours. If anything, the pilot/WSO crew bond was stronger than the flavor wings on your name tag. Some WSOs had more stick time and better hands than young pilots coming straight out of training and the squadrons I served in usually crewed a new pilot with an experienced WSO to keep him out of trouble. The right seaters/back seaters get the same aircraft systems, weapons and instrument training that the pilots get plus a whole lot more training in navigation, radar, and electronic warfare. Both pilots and WSOs can get selected to attend the Fighter Weapons Instructor Course and become an exalted "patchwearer."

I've worked with Naval Aviators and generally, both pilots and NFOs wore brown shoes back then (as opposed to the black shoe Navy). Whether they were pilots or NFOs wasn't even an issue and rarely even came up. I helped bed down an EP-3 supporting an operation I was assigned to and the mission commander was an NFO with the pilots up front strictly driving the bus. All mission/crew decisions were made by the senior NFO both in the air and on the ground.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Also, they are not referred to as Naval Aviators at least as far as I have ever heard.

That is interesting, because I have run into a few that referred of themselves collectively as Naval Aviators and we black shoes refer to you both as Naval Aviators.....FWIW



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[roncachamp]

What is the weight of an elephant? Equally relevant question.

Male African elephants can reach 15,000 lb.

Or perhaps what is the combat record of the Minuteman Missile if you prefer.

Perfect.

 

[35 AoA]

That is interesting, because I have run into a few that referred of themselves collectively as Naval Aviators and we black shoes refer to you both as Naval Aviators.....FWIW



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I wouldn't doubt this, but it just isn't something I have heard personally. I have no problem with it, as obviously both types aviate Naval aircraft; I've just not heard an NFO refer to themselves as such, nor have I heard other folks do so.

 

[35 AoA]

Back in the late 90's the USN, USMC, and USAF NFOs and NAVs all got 8 flights of stick time in the front seat of the T-34. Almost up to solo. They're all starting out in the T-6 now.

Last I heard, which was a while ago, they still have the SNFO's log a few hours up front in the T-6. For the general PoA knowledge around here, this is more of a familiarization experience, than it is really teaching someone to fly given the amount of limited hours involved and the scope of what they go do.

As for GIBs getting stick time, I knew a Hornet WSO (USMC type) that had previously been a Strike Eagle WSO, and he claimed to have more hours of stick time in the Mudhen than most new pilots coming through the Hornet FRS had in airplanes. I can't vouch for the accuracy of this statement, but he was at least a cool guy

 

[JimNtexas]

I was a USAF WSO/EWO for 20 years.

It is of course nonsense to say that WSOs/EWOs/Navs/NFOs were pilot training washouts. The only pilot washouts who could even get in to nav school were those that hand 'hands' problems, but not mental problems. There were very few of these.

I flew the F-4 for right at 1000 hours, and the F-111 for about 600. I did not 'ride' these airplanes. There's a lot more to flying than just stick actuation.

I got all the stick time I wanted in the F-4 and bomber model F-111, the regs allowed this. I was different from some backseaters in that I never, ever, asked for the stick except to practice formation flying and practice instrument approaches.

The reason I wanted formation practice that was because every WSO/EWO in F-4s and F-111s was expected to be able to handle basic formation flying so as to give the pilot a break on cross countries. I wanted to practice approches to be ready for the rare event that my pilot became incapacitated.

Most of my F-4 time was in the F-4G, which had no forward visibility from the rear seat. Most of my Vark time was in the EF-111, which had no stick at all for the EWO.

I did take take the stick briefly for operational reasons exactly once on a night tanker when my pilot got vertigo.

I also had the habit when in the hard wing F-4s of bracketing the stick with my legs at during high AoA maneuvering, since significant aileron input in that situation would result in loss of control. That wasn't a problem with the F-4E/G, which had slatted leading edges.

Every squadron had one or two navs who were frustrated pilots and would beg for every second of stick time they could get. I always found this a little embarrassing. Especially in the EF-111, which required the EWO to put his hand closer to the pilots lap than I ever wanted my hand to be.

I flew a lot with an EF-111 pilot who came to us from the Marine EA-6 world. He several times wanted me to 'take his stick'. I always politely declined. I'm always polite to former Marines.

On the other hand, during the tactical part of the missions the F-4G EWO was literally calling the shots and using the pilot as a voice actuated autopilot. In the F-111 the WSO/EWO is calling the shots for pretty much the whole mission. The pilot is flying the heading and altitude bugs set by the right seater.

I didn't get much time in the bomber versions of the F-111, but did find that airplane pretty easy to hand fly, except that you had to use voice commands to sweep the wings. It was nice being able to select AB, which I couldn't do in the F-4.

Most of my Vark time was in EF-111s, which had no stick for the EWO.

The odd thing about the SparkVark was that I was much more of co-pilot in the EF-111 than I ever was in the F-4, which had a stick in the back.

In the F-4 I could usually relax a bit during the RTB, especially since almost all of my F-4 time was in the Pacific or desert southwest. I had very few flights in really serious IMC in the F-4. On RTB the F-4 is always fuel critical, so going home was generally a straight minimum energy path to the pattern. The F-111 I was busy even during RTB.

Most of my EF-111 time was flown in Europe, where IMC was a reality most of the year. We routinely flew missions in IMC in the F/EF-111. Not only do you have to fly IMC to fly in Europe, the F-111 (unlike the F-4) had enough gas to fly an actual real mission of significant lenght and still have legal IFR reserves at landing.

The F-111 was really designed from the ground up to be a two-pilot airplane, as opposed to the F-4, which was designed for a pilot and a radar operator.

The F-111 was an order of magnitude more complicated just to fly around than then F-4. Also, the missions in the F-111 were themselves very much more complex than those flown by the F-4 Weasels. They were typically two to three times as long, and involved much more elaborate and detailed flight planning.

And all fighter missions of every sort are far more complicated than any airline flight.

General Dynamics favored complicated cockpits, just compare the cockpits of the MacAir F-15 with the GD F-16 to see what I mean.

Not to mention the whole night and IMC low level flying mission done only by the F-111.

Flying night and/or IMC at low altitude and high speed required 110% concentration by both pilot and nav, neither could do it alone.

I don't think any single seat airplane exists that can routinely fly the kind of night/IMC low levels that the Varks could.

In the F/EF-111 I was busy from the time we started mission planning to the time we walked out of the debriefing. Mission planning was much more elaborate in the F-111 compared to the F-4.

Especially in the Wild Weasel mission that were mostly what I flew, F-4 mission planning was mostly done at about the same level that Hell's Angels uses when they plan to visit a bar frequented by the Mongols.

F-111 mission planning is more like that used for a NASA lunar mission.

To be fair to the double-ugly fans out there, the F-4 was WAY more physically taxing to fly than the F-111.

The F-4 missions were shorter by a factor of about 2 to 2.5, but once clear of the traffic pattern the F-4 was pulling six g's or zero for pretty much the whole time. The F-4 design incorporated no provisions for crew comfort of any kind. An 1860's steam locomotive was an ergonomic masterpiece compared to the F-4, especially to the F-4 back seat.

The F-111, on the other hand, was designed from the ground up to minimize crew fatique and discomfort. It was really a very pleasant place to work, even after 3, 4, or 12 hours. The F-111 was air conditioned.

And while the F-4 and F-111 had the same g limits, the F-4 was at or near the limits most of the time, while the F-111 was a lot more gentlemanly about pulling g's.

I enjoyed flying the F-111 more than I did the F-4. The 'Vark was just great fun from beginning to end, every flight was an adventure.

Some F-4 missions were more like just hard physical work, such as '12 practice bombs and straff on a controlled range'. In the Mojave desert.

I have to be honest and say I liked the general squadron culture better in the F-4 community compared to the Vark community. Although in the end we in the military are all cut from the same cloth, there are big differences in the various subspecies one encounters in the course of 20 years.

The F-4 Wild Weasel culture was straight out of Top Gun.

The F-4 thought pattern was:

"Lets go kick some a**!!!!"

"Badges, to ##### with badges! We have no badges. In fact, we don't need badges. I don't have to show you any stinking badges, you #######"!!!!"

"You've gotta ask yourself a question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya, punk? "

Flying regulations of all kinds were viewed in Weasels as sort of general guidelines, and considering binding mostly as an inverse function of the distance from an authority figure who might care about them.

The F-111 community attitudes, were, let's say, somewhat more conservative.

The general thought pattern was along of the lines of 'woud Mom be embarrassed if she knew I was doing this'.

In every F-111 planning session there was a contest to see who could find a rule that would prohbit us from doing what we wanted to do.

Even when the black letter rules allowed an activity, there were a lot of F-111 guys who would burn the midnight oil looking for the equivalent of FAA Chief Counsel Letters to find a way to poop on the party.

Every enemy pilot was assumed by a lot of F-111 guys to be Steve Canyon flying Wonder Woman's invisible airplane.

In the F-4C (objectively broken down POS's by the time I flew them) our pilots fangs would go through the floor at the mere thought of seeing the latest and greatest MIG flown by the Russian Ace of the Base.

To the Weasel, every SAM was a juicy target.

To the F-111, every SAM was a death machine that would effortlessly swat down airplanes day or night with the flick of a switch.

It took me a few years to understand at an intellectual level why the F-111 community was so much more conservatie than the F-4 community.

It was because the F-111 had so many more clever and different ways to kill you.

The F-4 would only try to kill you in a few straight forward ways. I mentioned inputing aileron at high AoA in a hard wing F-4 as an example.

The F-4 didn't like that, and would punish you in a straight forward if you tried it. Try it close to the ground and you got the death penalty. No muss, no fuss, just a smoking hole.

The F-4 would rarely just blow up. The F-4 had only one really bad flight control failure mode (dual hydrallic failure), and as long as the crew recognized it when it happened they'd be fine.

The F-4 used dual hydraulic failure as a way to weed out the weak. Nothing personal.

The F-111 had perfect computer-controlled flight controls that were a joy to fly. Until HAL decided to refuse to open the pod bay doors. Or the Vark just decided that it was tired of flying straight and level in the flight levels on a cross country and decided to dive straight down. Or the Vark came up with some new and exciting combination of wing sweep, stabilator postion, leading edge device, and flap position. Just for the heck of it.

With its all singing all dancing wings and flight control system, the F-111 had an almost infinite number of interesting flight control failure modes.

I never, ever, had an uncommanded flight control input from the F-4. I can't recall even hearing of such thing in the F-4.

I had two uncommanded roll incidents in my relatively short time in the F-111.

The F-111 was happy to fly into the side of a mountain if the crew slipped up even a little bit on a TFR low level.

The huge TF-30 turbo fans (same as in the F-14) would and did compressor stall if mistreated. Just ask Goose. Oh never mind, you can't ask Goose because Maverick killed him by hamfisting the yaw axis at high high AoA.

The F-111 had little metal pencil shaped part called (IIRC) a 'stab actuator' that controlled the pitch angle of the two stabilators. If it 'galled', then the F-111 could and did sometimes just pitch full nose down in a microsecond.

The F-111 could kill you by melting the windshield.

And all this was the state when I got the Vark, fairly late in the game when it was a proven, mostly safe airplane.

The early F-111s were real widow makers. The F-111 was a huge leap in the state of the art when it first came in to the inventory.

All my time in the F-4 and F-111 was flying time. Maybe not for the FAA, but in reality.

I was super lucky to had the chance to fly these two incredible airplanes. I didn't fully appreciate how lucky I was until it was all over.

Jobs and Woz started about the same time as I did. They made more money than me. But they never flew Double-Ugly or the Vark.

In today's military, the only nav/EWO/WSO/CSO seats that are left are those that absolutely have to be there.

It's better in the long run to be a military pilot rather than a military nav/EWO/WSO/NFO. The miltary likes pilots better, and pilots do learn a civilian vocation.

But if you are the sort who reads books and flunks the eye test, it's a lot better to be flying as a Nav/NFO/WSO/CSO etc than not flying at all.

 

[35 AoA]

Jim, thanks for that awesome response....cool to hear about the F-111 as you don't tend to hear too many folks speak of flying it!

 

[X3 Skier]

Jim, as a very junior engineer in the F-111 Program Office during the early days of the production program, you are right to be glad your Aardvark time was later in its life. I spent a lot of long hours helping PWA sort out the TF30 for both the F-111 and F-14. It was the first of a kind and very temperamental until the end of its life.

Cheers

 

[35 AoA]

And I guess I didn't write this above, but I'd love to hear any other F-4 or F-111 stories. Biggest let down of my flying career thus far has been getting wx cancelled for my backseat ride in a QF-4E. Guy i briefed it up with laid out a really awesome sounding performance comparison fam ride with me on the controls......him an eagle guy, me a hornet guy so he wanted to show me some old school macair. He talked a lot about how great the slats were down low, and how it would outrate my face off in a hornet on the deck. Don't know about that, but my XO who did get a ride said the thrust and brute force was pretty unreal. I've also always loved the F-111.....such a cool airplane......and the FB-111 seems like such a cool random relic of the late Cold War, not a whole lot of info out there about it. I understand it was significantly different from the vanilla -11A/D etc. True?

 

[poadeleted20]

I've also always loved the F-111.....such a cool airplane......and the FB-111 seems like such a cool random relic of the late Cold War, not a whole lot of info out there about it. I understand it was significantly different from the vanilla -11A/D etc. True?

The FB-111 is most similar to the F-111F in instrumentation and avionics (plus the celestial tracker and, I think, satnav) plus the rotary SRAM launcher in the weapons bay but with the P-7 engines most similar to the F-111D's P-9's (about 20K lb thrust). In addition, it has heavy-duty brakes to handle aborts with a higher max gross (more fuel for the SAC mission).

Also, for SALT/START reasons involving satellite surveillance to count the number of "strategic" bombers vs the "tactical" types, the extended wing tips with additional fuel capacity (4000 lb, IIRC) installed installed on the FB's were never installed on any other US 'Varks. That's the reason we were not allowed to put those tips on the F-111's in England for the Libya raid (and some other missions which were never executed).

Finally, the F-111C's we originally sent the Aussies were essentially F-111A's with the FB wheels and wingtips for more fuel/weight to do long range maritime surveillance. Later on we sent them the old FB-111A's with updated avionics as F-111G's.

 

[Henning]

I saw the retirement flight the RAAF did up the coast a couple years back, pair of 111s chased by a pair of F-18s. Might still be somebody operating a Vaark? Does Iran have any? Wouldn't that be a hoot to get a nuke on DC with a run in with a Vaark...

 

[poadeleted20]

Might still be somebody operating a Vaark?

No.

Does Iran have any?

No.

 

[roncachamp]

I saw the retirement flight the RAAF did up the coast a couple years back, pair of 111s chased by a pair of F-18s. Might still be somebody operating a Vaark? Does Iran have any?

No F-111s remain in service, the USAF and RAAF were the only users. The RAF pulled out before receiving any aircraft. Seven F-111Bs were completed for the USN before production was halted.

 

[RotorAndWing]

In every F-111 planning session there was a contest to see who could find a rule that would prohibit us from doing what we wanted to do.

Even when the black letter rules allowed an activity, there were a lot of F-111 guys who would burn the midnight oil looking for the equivalent of FAA Chief Counsel Letters to find a way to poop on the party.
.

Hmmmmmm.......Now this explains a lot.............

 

[poadeleted20]

Hmmmmmm.......Now this explains a lot.............

When you plan nuclear strike missions (the primary mission for the F-111E/F when I was there), you plan exactly by the book or you get your lunch eaten on HHQ review (TACEVAL, ORI, etc). There is no room for the slightest error or deviation from the coordinated plan when dealing with mushroom generators. The inspection teams took all the time they needed to check every i for dotting and t for crossing, and just one error could fail the whole inspection for the wing. So yeah, those of us in the mission planning business were pretty anal about things, and the commanders rewarded us for being so.

 

[RotorAndWing]

So yeah, those of us in the mission planning business were pretty anal about things, and the commanders rewarded us for being so.

Wow, another letter of commendation in the file............impressive!

 

[poadeleted20]

Wow, another letter of commendation in the file............impressive!

Beats the hell out of being fired, and I saw that happen to folks who got their wing busted in an inspection.

 

[Witmo]

Doesn't the FAA recognize some proportion of WSO time for an ATP? Does SIC time count for anything?

 

[Anthony]

The NFO is the one who became slightly more obsolete, a bit more quickly, due to technology, than the actual pilot. There also the ones that close their eyes first upon carrier landings.

 

[roncachamp]

The NFO is the one who became slightly more obsolete, a bit more quickly, due to technology, than the actual pilot.

They're not obsolete, they've just been relocated.

 

[JimNtexas]

When you plan nuclear strike missions (the primary mission for the F-111E/F when I was there), ....

Ron's correct, and it took me a couple of years to figure this out.

Between the very poor safety record the F-111 had in the early years and the very necessarily strict set of rules the bomber guys had to live under it was understandable that this environment bred a very cautious group of guys.

It's not that this conservative culture was a bad thing, it's just that it was so very different from the, hmmm, shall we say, more colorful Weasel community that I'd come from. I suffered pretty strong cultural shock for a while. That was my problem, not the old Vark guys.

On the Raven side we couldn't blow up even a small city. Or even a Smart Car. The best we could do was interfere with their TV viewing or cause an uncommanded garage door opening.

The good thing about being in the Raven was that most F-111 pilots didn't want to fly it. For an F-111 pilot it was kind of a let down from dropping huge bombs to driving an EWO to work in the EF-111.

The result was that a lot of the experienced F-111 pilots we had came to us as a result of moral or political crimes that they had committed in the bombers. We also had several guys from F-106's and F-5's who came to us because their former rides were going away.

While we never got close to the Wild Weasel insanity level we did develop a looser culture than that of our brothers in the green jets.

 

[JimNtexas]

Doesn't the FAA recognize some proportion of WSO time for an ATP? Does SIC time count for anything?

If a WSO/EWO has a multiengine license he or she can log 'sole manipulator' stick time in the F-4, F-111, F-15E and T-38 because even thought these are jets there exist no type ratings for them.

Other than that, Navigator time counts for nothing with the FAA.

 

[Gerhardt]

Best thread I've read here in a long time. Thanks Jim.

 

[Velocity173]

I just finished "Strike Eagle" and "The Raid on Quadaffi." both excellent books that detail the problems in planning and logistics of the Gulf War and the Libyan Raid.

Two things from each book I found noteworthy. In Stike Eagle I didn't realize the F-15E has a stick in the back. A lot of times as soon as the wheels hit the well the pilots gave the controls to the WSO. Like Jim said, on refuel one WSO was prepared to take the controls because his pilot had Spatial D. I also found it amusing how after the war they beat the hell out of that place with "buzz jobs." outside of the wild west that took place in OIF I, "the man" has come Down on all that nonsense with hard deck restrictions these days.

The Raid on Quadaffi was interesting just in how detailed the planning was, and how that can go to crap with just a miss of a checkpoint or glitch in a weapon system. I wonder what kind of BDA they would have had if the aircraft had GPS.
It was also astonishing how bad the awards process was after the raid. How the single lost crew went from a DFC, downgraded to an Air Medal was disgusting. I saw plenty of Army Aviators get the DFC in OEF or OIF that didn't encounter the danger or exhibit the skill that the crews did during the Libyan Raid. Both books highlight what a poor commander and bureaucracy can do to readiness and morale.

 

[Bill Watson]

Best thread I've read here in a long time. Thanks Jim.

Yes, Thanks!

 

[poadeleted20]

Doesn't the FAA recognize some proportion of WSO time for an ATP?

If you have the proper ratings on your pilot certificate (e.g., AMEL for the F-111's you and I flew), you get all the hands-on-stick time as PIC time. Asked and answered by the Chief Counsel.

Does SIC time count for anything?

Never been asked of the Chief Counsel.

 

[poadeleted20]

The Raid on Quadaffi was interesting just in how detailed the planning was, and how that can go to crap with just a miss of a checkpoint or glitch in a weapon system. I wonder what kind of BDA they would have had if the aircraft had GPS.

There were a lot of other issues that remain classified today. All I can say is that immediately after the raid, the commander of 3rd Air Force (covering both F-111 wings in England) announced in an open meeting at RAF Upper Heyford that if a second strike was ordered, it would be flown by the 20th out of Heyford rather than the 48th out of Lakenheath. Lots of cheers for MGen McInerney over that one.

It was also astonishing how bad the awards process was after the raid. How the single lost crew went from a DFC, downgraded to an Air Medal was disgusting.

Fernando and I were pretty close in the 522nd at Cannon before we both went to England (even crewmates for six months), as were our wives, and our sons had adjacent cribs in day care. Nevertheless, you don't get a DFC just for getting killed.

 

[OrangeOkie]

What is a Navy Flight Officer?


Thanks,
J

A passenger who sits in the cockpit . . ..

 

[OrangeOkie]

It is officially Naval Flight Officer, and while they are not full fledged pilots, they are generally referred to as Naval Aviators within the Navy. . .

In my 27 years in the Marine Corps and Navy combined I never heard of an NFO being called an "aviator," at least not in the presence of a Naval Aviator.

 

[OrangeOkie]

. . . And while they may not be the Pilot (the one with the BIGGEST ego) that pilot would probably die on his first mission without qualified NFOs. . .

This is true!

 

[OrangeOkie]

The NFOs started out in the same track as the pilots if flight school. Somewhere along the way, they couldn't hack the rigors, or they just didn't have the stick to make it through flight school. Rather than wash them out completely, the Navy - in it's infinite wisdom keeps them in non-pilot flying roles as has been stated. Most NFOs can take control of an aircraft and get it back to the boat, and maybe, possibly get it on the deck, or more likely they will set up a bail out and ditch the hardware. . . .

There is no objective evidence of truth in any of the above statements.

 

[OrangeOkie]

Maybe I'm missing something, but where does the ego come from? . . .

The ego comes from the officer club bar when an NFO is trying to pick up a cute chick looking to marry an aviator!

 

[Alexb2000]

The ego comes from the officer club bar when an NFO is trying to pick up a cute chick looking to marry an aviator!

Goose, she's lost that lovin' feeling.

 

[Velocity173]

There were a lot of other issues that remain classified today. All I can say is that immediately after the raid, the commander of 3rd Air Force (covering both F-111 wings in England) announced in an open meeting at RAF Upper Heyford that if a second strike was ordered, it would be flown by the 20th out of Heyford rather than the 48th out of Lakenheath. Lots of cheers for MGen McInerney over that one.
Fernando and I were pretty close in the 522nd at Cannon before we both went to England (even crewmates for six months), as were our wives, and our sons had adjacent cribs in day care. Nevertheless, you don't get a DFC just for getting killed.

No, I don't believe "getting killed" deserves a DFC but it seems like a big disparity for flight lead to get a DFC and Fernando and his WSO got an Air Medal. Heck, I have two Air Medals and there's no way my actions even come close to what those gentlemen went through that night.

Actually I just read they didn't even get an Air Medal??? Posthumous Purple Heart.

 

[poadeleted20]

In my 27 years in the Marine Corps and Navy combined I never heard of an NFO being called an "aviator," at least not in the presence of a Naval Aviator.

Nor in the presence of a Naval Flight Officer.