SNIP

Doug Frankly, if I had a child that wanted to go USN
active duty aviation, I'd advise them against it, and suggest trying for
an
ANG unit too. Viet Nam or not. It's still a better deal. BRBR


Surprised at you. Why?

Two reasons:

1. Naval Aviation is dying on the vine. The USN's soon going from 12
airplanes in F/A-18 squadrons to 10. From 17 pilots to 15. That reduces
the number of pointy nosed aircraft on the ship from 48 to about 40 while
increasing pilot admin workload. A carrier that used to deploy with over
90
aircraft when I started now goes to sea with about 70. Reduce that by 8
more soon. It's harder, and there's less tooth to tail.

Long term, the fleet is going to have less jets. Of course, the commitment
will be unchanged. This has already come out through official channels,
roughly a 30% reduction in combat aircraft on the boat. A mix of F-18E/F
and F-35C. The solution is to keep op ready rates way up there with the
improved maintainability and emphasis on the maintenance/logistics effort.
I wonder if the geniuses who devised this plan realize the bean counters
won't take the increased utilization into account as far as the support end
or pilot manning is concerned.

Gee Woodie, 15 pilots for 10 jets? How did you manage? My last cruise we
had 11 1/2 crews for 10 jets. Borrowed CAG ops to get to 12 even. Made for
an interesting schedule when the CARGRU wanted 27-28 lines plus alert 5/15.

2. Conversely, you can get into the ANG as a guard-baby, fly tactical
aircraft (for longer than you can in the USN/USNR), never move, and live
the
good life for 8-10 years as a full-timer and then slide into a part time
position, still fly the same tactical aircraft, and make that move young
enough to pursue the career you'll hang your hat on for the rest of your
life.

Great deal for sure, and the reserves weren't half bad either. Of course,
they're paying the piper now. The one weekend a month and two weeks a year
thing have become a considerably greater commitment. Not too bad for the
aviators (tanker guys locally rotate in and out every month or so), but the
troops in support units that are sometimes on hiatus from a high-paying job
for a year and pulling E-5 pay in a combat zone are getting hammered pretty
good on the economic front. And the guard family-support structure (which
had no reason for being for 50-odd years) ain't exactly the same as USN
family services, and various other formal and informal organizations
designed to make deployments more manageable for those left behind.

e.g. the most successful airline pilots I know (IMHO) are the guard-babies
that left their full time ANG jobs at 26-30 years of age and snagged
airline
jobs while sliding into their part-time positions. They're check-airmen
and
chief pilots. I also know of at least two ANG F-16 pilots who are
physicians. Not to mention ANG units (despite having MORE bureaucracy
than
USN/USNR) still have less than the active duty USAF. All in all, it's a
better life.

Still, none of them have any CV landings...

I'll mail you five bucks and you can take it and your landings to Starbucks.

R / John