Nycfuturepilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 791 posts, RR: 0 Posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 5286 times:
I was wondering which naval aircraft are not stationed on carriers? Are all fighters assigned to one or could you fly one and be stationed on a base? How much of a choice do you get as to your base and aircraft?
Ftrguy From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 358 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 5279 times:
The E-6, P-3, C-9, C-40, C-130, C-12, are the ones that I can think of that don't go to the CVN.
There are a couple of Hornet squadrons (VFA-86 in Beaufort and one Lemoore squadron) that aren't currently stationed with a CAG. They're doing stuff with the Marines and a few Marine squadrons are in various CAGs with the Navy. Its the whole Navy/Marine Corps team thing.
As far as getting your choice of base and aircraft. Basically the Navy owns you and they will send you wherever they need you and tell you what they want you to fly. As long as you have the grades to get jets that could be an option. However, if the week that you select they don't have any jet slots, say hello to the world of helos. Its all about luck and timing my friend...
Nbgskygod From United States of America, joined May 2004, 595 posts, RR: 1 Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 5266 times:
Navy has some F16Ns that were not ship based, also the Marines have F5s that aren't carrier based.
"I use multi-billion dollar military satellite systems to find tupperware in the woods."
Maiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 52 Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 5220 times:
The navy has just taken on some more F-16's. and they also have F-5's. You are correct, they are not carrier based.
Woodreau From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 890 posts, RR: 7 Reply 4, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 5142 times:
All fighter squadrons are based at a shore air station.
When your fighter squadron gets assigned to a carrier air wing, and when that air wing embarks, your squadron goes out on the carrier when the carrier gets underway, when the carrier comes back into port (in the US), you "fly off" back to your shore base.
You can always submit a dream sheet - basically a preference list (like bidding in the airlines) saying this is what you want. You list your base, your platform (aircraft) and your desired job description. Based on that and where you rank among your peers and what's available at the time, your detailer will try to meet your preferences, but as someone said above, it's what's available and what the Navy needs.
Once you're tracked into a particular airframe, it's a difficult to transition to another platform, but you can always ask though. It doesn't mean you'd get it though.
Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from surviving bad judgement.
LMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 5058 times:
If you want to be in the navy and not step foot on a ship you could go the P-3 route. If you become a P-3 pilot or FE you could spend an entire career in the Navy and only fly over ships.
Maiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 52 Reply 6, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 5045 times:
Quoting LMP737 (Reply 5): P-3 pilot or FE you could spend an entire career in the Navy and only fly over ships.
Not true.
P-3 pilots have to go to sea also. They are arresting gear and catapult officers during their stint at sea, usually 2-3 yrs.
P-3 pilots have to go to sea also. They are arresting gear and catapult officers during their stint at sea, usually 2-3 yrs.
Most P-3/E-6 folks do go to sea for their third tour, but not all. There are a few ways to get out of disassociated sea tours (FTS, super JO, TPS...) I know plenty of folks who did 20 years with a sea time counter of 0.
Your chances of avoiding the boat are directly proportional to retention trends for your year group; i.e. the fewer folks they have the worse they want you on the boat.
As for the original question, all trainers are also land based (T-34, T-6, T-44, TC-12, T-45, T H-57)
LMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 5007 times:
Quoting Maiznblu_757 (Reply 6): P-3 pilots have to go to sea also. They are arresting gear and catapult officers during their stint at sea, usually 2-3 yrs.
Only the Navy would make someone who has never had any carrier time a catapult and arresting gear officer.
Stimpy From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 10 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 4997 times:
Quoting Ftrguy (Reply 1): There are a couple of Hornet squadrons (VFA-86 in Beaufort and one Lemoore squadron) that aren't currently stationed with a CAG. They're doing stuff with the Marines and a few Marine squadrons are in various CAGs with the Navy. Its the whole Navy/Marine Corps team thing
At least the last time I was in Lemoore, the only squadrons that weren't attached to a CAG were VFA-122 and VFA-125, both of which are RAG squadrons. I'm pretty sure everyone else has a CAG, with the exception of the squadrons that just got there to transistion to the Super Hornet. Even those squadrons are attached, but technically aren't since they haven't been declared "Safe For Flight".
JeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 53 Reply 10, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 4802 times:
Quoting LMP737 (Reply 8): Only the Navy would make someone who has never had any carrier time a catapult and arresting gear officer.
It's no biggie, compared to actually flying on and off the boat. They should be glad they are even allowed on board. They are just a notch above any Air Force "O".
Dash8tech From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 732 posts, RR: 7 Reply 11, posted (8 years 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4638 times:
There are also a number of EA-6B squadrons out of Whidbey Island that do not deploy aboard ship, instead going to Aviano, Misawa, etc. These are called 'Expeditionary Squadrons' and are filling the void left from the EF-111's the air force used to deploy in similar roles. In fact, many of these squadrons have USAF aircrew members, although I think that is slowly being phased out now.
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11705 posts, RR: 52 Reply 12, posted (8 years 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4615 times:
Doesn't the USN have a few C-20s (G-IV), too. Those don't go to the CVNs.
Quoting JeffM (Reply 10): It's no biggie, compared to actually flying on and off the boat. They should be glad they are even allowed on board. They are just a notch above any Air Force "O".
Only those few USAF "O"s who feel the need to go live on a big boat, with 5,000 other guys for 9 months at sea (without seeing land or women). Most USAF Crew Dogs don't see the need to spend "time in the barrel". If that is a notch below the P-3 guys, they can have it.
LMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (8 years 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4599 times:
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 12): Only those few USAF "O"s who feel the need to go live on a big boat, with 5,000 other guys for 9 months at sea (without seeing land or women). Most USAF Crew Dogs don't see the need to spend "time in the barrel". If that is a notch below the P-3 guys, they can have it.
Actaully there are women on board aircraft carriers now.
Nbgskygod From United States of America, joined May 2004, 595 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4579 times:
KC-135, yes we have some G-V and G-IV squadrons that do not deploy on CVs...A bit more info, a Carriers designation is CV...the N stands for Nuclear. Ships like the Kitty Hawk and Kennedy are only designated as CV because they are conventionally powered, where as the Enterprise and Nimitz class carriers are nuclear powered so they carry the desigination of CVN.
"I use multi-billion dollar military satellite systems to find tupperware in the woods."
DeltaGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (8 years 12 hours ago) and read 4503 times:
Last time I checked, VFA-86 was asigned to CVW-1, but last time I heard this was probably a year and a half ago, it may have changed since. (friend's dad was skipper at the time).
I'll tell ya what, the E-6 route is a perfect match for those who are looking for quick, high quality airline resume time. Hell, even the recruiters will tell you "If you're looking for airline time, go fly E-6's".
SWAbubba From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 154 posts, RR: 1 Reply 17, posted (8 years 2 hours ago) and read 4449 times:
Quoting Garnetpalmetto (Reply 16): I'll tell ya what, the E-6 route is a perfect match for those who are looking for quick, high quality airline resume time. Hell, even the recruiters will tell you "If you're looking for airline time, go fly E-6's". Smile
I wouldn't consider eight years after wings "quick", but that's just me. And I wouldn't pay too much attention to what recruiters have to say about flying, talk to folks in the squadrons if you want to find out what's really going on.
That said, it was an easy transition from the E-6A to the 737.
KBFIspotter From United States of America, joined May 2005, 729 posts, RR: 1 Reply 19, posted (7 years 12 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4355 times:
Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 15): I'll tell ya what, the E-6 route is a perfect match for those who are looking for quick, high quality airline resume time. Hell, even the recruiters will tell you "If you're looking for airline time, go fly E-6's".
Daveflys0509 From Italy, joined Apr 2005, 87 posts, RR: 4 Reply 20, posted (7 years 12 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4347 times:
You go from Primary flight training to fly the T-1A at Vance AFB, then on to the E-6 at Tinker, which is a modified 707, and fly all around the world.. I think there's some 737 time thrown in there somewhere too.
KBFIspotter From United States of America, joined May 2005, 729 posts, RR: 1 Reply 21, posted (7 years 12 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 4318 times:
Thanks........ But I should have known the answer to that if it were not for a moment of sheer stupidity. I was reading E-6 as EA-6..... My bad!
Pope From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 23, posted (7 years 12 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 4267 times:
Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 15): I'll tell ya what, the E-6 route is a perfect match for those who are looking for quick, high quality airline resume time.
Woodreau From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 890 posts, RR: 7 Reply 24, posted (7 years 12 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4266 times:
An E-6 is a modified 707, so the time you acquire in an E-6 would translate very well into an air carrier pilot career. Whereas an EA-6, or other tactical jet, the time would be good, just have to remove the centerline thrust limiation on the pilot certificate that the FAA would issue.
Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from surviving bad judgement.
25 Daveflys0509: E2/C2's aren't bad either, multiengine turboprop time plus the fun of landing on the boat
26 Flynavy: The two USN F/A-18 squadrons based at MCAS Beaufort (82/86) have received orders to be deactivated; VFA-136 will take their place in CVW-1. The aircra
27 Columba: Sadly the days of German Navy jets are over. The Tornados will be transfered to the air force which now takes over the navy´s tasks. Too bad because
28 Bully707: WHAT????? The Tornado is one great aircraft...even as a fighter!!!! Especially at low-level...I doubt there is one fighter that can match it's perfor
29 Venus6971: The best way for a Navy Pilot to avoid sea time was to join the USAF to begin with and learn how to flair instead of a AOA approach.
30 Daveflys0509: No way.. landing on the boat is way cooler than landing on a 10000 ft runway, unless it's a night
31 KevinSmith: Them be fightin words Chief. Does the Navy still have the A models or are they all Bs now? The E-6 does some rather long missions which translates in
32 Usnseallt82: Way to bump an old one... All B's now. Yeah, and lots of boredom.
33 DeltaGuy: 2005 called....they want their thread back. There are many ways to avoid being stuck out in the blue water Navy. The P-3 guys are good at this. And ho
34 KevinSmith: Dude come on. You do that everytime an old thread gets bumped!!! If you're gonna aggervate at least come up with some new material. All in fun I know
35 Mike89406: You know its funny you say that we had some AF pilots ride with Navy pilots fly on the ship that were deployed to Saudi Arabia in like 1997 and they
36 Usnseallt82: You never saw it after the hurricane.
37 DeltaGuy: Yes, alas, it is a universal slam Long and sordid affair really. Those of us in Jacksonville who have some association with Cecil Field feel rather b
38 Usnseallt82: Pathetic, really. Especially when he was the guy who started all the talks with the Navy again and tried to pitch it to the city.....then turning his
39 DeltaGuy: You saw it too huh? Piece of shit he is....."it's just not safe to have the jets here"....lies lies. He has proven time and time again that he's no f
40 Usnseallt82: I know....it was retarded. Nothing more than backpeddling to keep his military supporters out there. He's nothing but a squirrelly little puss who eb
41 KevinSmith: True. It wasn't open for the first 4 months that I was here. They did a hell of job restoring it. You'd never know that place was water logged.
42 Usnseallt82: So I've heard. That's good, because it was a damn good place before the storm came through. I'm glad to hear its all up and running again.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 791 posts, 
From Italy, joined Apr 2005, 87 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
