Navy or Air Farce?

Shaber- Gosh, that sounds fun for a while, but coming home to one's wife and
kids
nighly sounds even better than spending 6-9 months on a boat full of men.
BRBR

Guess you never deployed to Osan....not many wives there, 1 R/R trip per tour,
kinda like a 6 month deployment with a 10,000 ft runway.
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

roncachamp- No need to. BRBR

I guess that's the other thing I remember about 'some' USAF types, their lack
of a sense of humor.
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

What I remember: I pulled into many Navy and AF bases on XCs (the only
bachelor pilot in a Vigi squadron with three bachelor RANs). The duty
driver taking us to the BOQ: if an AF base, if you asked him a question,
you either got a short, succinct answer or "I don't know, sir"; if Navy,
you always got _some_ answer, maybe BS, but not short, and never "I don't
know, sir".

"Pechs1" wrote in message
...
roncachamp- No need to. BRBR

I guess that's the other thing I remember about 'some' USAF types, their
lack
of a sense of humor.
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye
Phlyer

"Pechs1" wrote in message
...

I guess that's the other thing I remember about 'some' USAF types,
their lack of a sense of humor.


Oh, they have it, it's just more sophisticated.

Ed,

A further thought concerning the emphasis placed upon the Greenie Board...

Since the boat is a pretty tight place from which to operate aircraft,
flight ops must be done efficiently and safely. Part of this need
translates into maximizing the boarding rate. This is done in at least two
ways:

* Minimizing the interval between successive approaches. (During my 1973
cruise aboard CORAL MARU, we strived for a 15 second trap-to-trap interval.)

* Maximizing the number of first-time arrestments.

An air wing with a highly-efficient boarding rate enables the ship to stay
within the Air Plan ("on-time" launch / land cycles more likely, greater
margin within which to deal with inevitable problems, etc.) and maximize the
number of sorties available.

Crews that predictably contribute to high boarding rates are valued
accordingly.

Also, the boat is the only place where crews can really hone this particular
skill. FCLPs are not - by themselves - adequate. Besides, time ashore is
better spent on honing warfighting skills so that - when you do finally
deploy - you do so ready to fight.

--
Mike Kanze

"The Project Uncertainty Principle says that if you understand a project,
you won't know its cost, and vice versa."

- Dilbert, August 6 2003


"Mike Kanze" wrote in message
...
Ed,

Now, OTOH, when I was there, we tapped an KA-6 after T/O. The nose-gunner
driving me around bragged later about his tanking ability--we took 1500
pounds to ease the cycle.

Being a fighter guy, he would have taken more had Tanker Control let him.
Having been - at times - the right-seat "gas passer" in the mighty K, I
heard ALL airborne whines and snivels of fighter guys begging for more. I
guess it's like being a whore or a traffic cop - in that position you hear
'em all. My stock answer (given when I was too bored or lazy to think of
anything else) was the equivalent of "tell it to the judge" (Tanker
Control).

Everything else (i.e. mission) seemed to be secondary to coming aboard.

I can't speak for the FITRON Ready Rooms, but in Attack there was always
CEP, Bulls-Eye patches and Top Stick / Top Scope competitions. BTW, if
you
can't get aboard, then you can't prosecute the mission. If you can get
aboard, you probably have the skills to do most anything.

BTW, I did get to taste a bit of warm scotch in a paper cup while hunched
in a cramped C-position on the edge of a lower bunk with six guys in a 8x5
foot stateroom without a window, beneath a cat and next to an ammo hoist.
Nice life!

Hey, they could've sent you to one of the JO bunkrooms. Imagine a
fraternity house shoehorned into a phone booth and you'll get the idea.
(I
understand that - in today's female JO bunkrooms - it's even more cramped.
"More stuff" is the reason I've heard. Women came aboard ship long after
my
time.)

--
Mike Kanze

"And why is radicalism so strong in California? Because the State is run
by
a dreadful combination of crooked politicians and grasping Babbitts."

- H. L. Mencken (1924)


"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
[rest snipped]

On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 12:11:29 -0800, "Mike Kanze"
wrote:

Ed,

A further thought concerning the emphasis placed upon the Greenie Board...

Since the boat is a pretty tight place from which to operate aircraft,
flight ops must be done efficiently and safely. Part of this need
translates into maximizing the boarding rate. This is done in at least two
ways:

* Minimizing the interval between successive approaches. (During my 1973
cruise aboard CORAL MARU, we strived for a 15 second trap-to-trap interval.)

* Maximizing the number of first-time arrestments.

An air wing with a highly-efficient boarding rate enables the ship to stay
within the Air Plan ("on-time" launch / land cycles more likely, greater
margin within which to deal with inevitable problems, etc.) and maximize the
number of sorties available.

Crews that predictably contribute to high boarding rates are valued
accordingly.

Also, the boat is the only place where crews can really hone this particular
skill. FCLPs are not - by themselves - adequate. Besides, time ashore is
better spent on honing warfighting skills so that - when you do finally
deploy - you do so ready to fight.

I realize the importance, but it was probably more a case of envy of
the "simple life." I, at the time, was an F-4 squadron Ops Officer. My
life revolved around getting all those front and back seaters to fill
all of those squares every six months. Contrasting the complexities of
home squadron life with a board that measured nothing but landing
grades was a confusing picture.

Of course that was also confused by the fact that I flew the very same
airplane (except for model number) as the host squadron on the boat,
not one single piece of my flight gear was compatible. My torso
harness was different. My G-suit zipped from top to bottom while yours
zipped from bottom to top. My Koch fittings were female to match with
male fittings on the seat, while the Navy harness held male fittings
and female on the M-B seat pack. Helmet was totally incompatible as
well.

Gotta say that it wasn't because one method was inherently superior to
the other.....


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

Only in Navy Air do you get a single last shot to come aboard a pitching,
rolling carrier by flying under a steel cable into a nylon net strung above
the deck. And survive to brag about it!

Only in the Air Force do you get to take on 120,000 pounds of JP-8 in one shot
at night, in the weather over the middle of the Pacific.....wait a
minute....that wasn't that fun....disregard everything after "only in the Air
Force"


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

On 3/8/04 6:45 PM, in article ,
"BUFDRVR" wrote:

Only in Navy Air do you get a single last shot to come aboard a pitching,
rolling carrier by flying under a steel cable into a nylon net strung above
the deck. And survive to brag about it!

Only in the Air Force do you get to take on 120,000 pounds of JP-8 in one shot
at night, in the weather over the middle of the Pacific.....wait a
minute....that wasn't that fun....disregard everything after "only in the Air
Force"


BUF,

Having watched the heavy v. heavy refueling evolution during the day, my
hat's off to you guys. That's NOT easy.

--Woody

Ed,

Gotta say that it wasn't because one method was inherently superior to the
other.....

Roger that. As this NG demonstrates daily, Blue Suit ways are often equally
mysterious to we Brownshoes.

--
Mike Kanze

"The Project Uncertainty Principle says that if you understand a project,
you won't know its cost, and vice versa."

- Dilbert, August 6 2003


"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 12:11:29 -0800, "Mike Kanze"
wrote:
[rest snipped]

I've seen greenie boards go through several mutations...

Some squadron's it's the center of the ready room. One squadron on my last
cruise had a rubber turd (placed on the ready room chair of the no-grade
ball-flyer of the night) and a large 3/4 inch bolt (hung above the ready
room chair of the last dude to bolter). Funny stuff.

I've seen squadrons (even this last cruise) try to eliminate the greenie
board. Some (VFA-146 circa 1996-1998) made it work very well (winning
nearly 6 line periods in a row). Some (VF-211 same time period) tried to
mimic that behavior with less than optimum results.

My last cruise, one squadron OPSO tried to eliminate the greenie board and
met with fierce resistance from his JO LSO's. The head LSO even wrote a
bogus "history of the greenie board" point paper to defend it.

Seems to me that the squadrons that won line periods had either (a) more
experience than most other squadrons (i.e. less nuggets), (b) better jets
(i.e. Hornets over Tomcats... Although not ALWAYS the case), or most
importantly, (c) actually covered pattern and ball flying technique daily as
a 3 minute portion of every admin brief.

Then, of course, there's just dumb luck and talent.

--Woody

In 3/8/04 2:11 PM, in article , "Mike
Kanze" wrote:

Ed,

A further thought concerning the emphasis placed upon the Greenie Board...

Since the boat is a pretty tight place from which to operate aircraft,
flight ops must be done efficiently and safely. Part of this need
translates into maximizing the boarding rate. This is done in at least two
ways:

* Minimizing the interval between successive approaches. (During my 1973
cruise aboard CORAL MARU, we strived for a 15 second trap-to-trap interval.)

* Maximizing the number of first-time arrestments.

An air wing with a highly-efficient boarding rate enables the ship to stay
within the Air Plan ("on-time" launch / land cycles more likely, greater
margin within which to deal with inevitable problems, etc.) and maximize the
number of sorties available.

Crews that predictably contribute to high boarding rates are valued
accordingly.

Also, the boat is the only place where crews can really hone this particular
skill. FCLPs are not - by themselves - adequate. Besides, time ashore is
better spent on honing warfighting skills so that - when you do finally
deploy - you do so ready to fight.