Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!sun-barr!rutgers!att!cbnews!military From: terryr@ogicse.ogc.edu (Terry Rooker) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: Naval Aviators and Surface Warfare Officers Message-ID: <1990Jul18.040751.14044@cbnews.att.com> Date: 18 Jul 90 04:07:51 GMT References: <1990Jul8.053350.7681@cbnews.att.com> <1990Jul10.024753.9969@cbnews.att.com> <1990Jul16.030845.5404@cbnews.att.com> <1990Jul17.032016.22957@cbnews.att.com> Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker) Organization: Oregon Graduate Institute (formerly OGC), Beaverton, OR Lines: 75 Approved: military@att.att.com From: terryr@ogicse.ogc.edu (Terry Rooker) In article <1990Jul17.032016.22957@cbnews.att.com> mlfisher@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu writes: > > >As a sidebar to the above, anyone else out there besides me feel that the CO of >a carrier should be surface type? > As a former blackshoe I admit I may be biased, but I want to offer some background. The policy of requiring aviation qualified carrier CO's started back in the days when aviation qualification was what would now be called a subspecialty. That means the aviators went through much of the same training as other naval officers (including driving ships), they just learned how to fly a plane along the way. In addition at this time (around WWII and shortly after) ship captains had much more tactical responsibility than now. In many cases it was the senior officer of the ships present that was OTC (officer in tactical command). In this environment, requiring aviation qualifications of carrier captains made sense. Since they might serve as OTC, and the OTC needed to have knowledge of aviation operations, this requirement ensured that the carrier captain would have that knowledge. Fastforward. Today we still have the same requirement. Things are very different. Aviaiton is a separate warfare specialty. Unles you aspire to command of a carrier, then a fledging aviator will probably never have a ship's company billet. The carriers almost always deploy with a battle group staff on board, so the carrier captain is usually not the OTC. Yes many aviators are surface warfar qualified. They pick up this qualification along the way by serving in various ship's company billets. For a surface warfare officer (SWO) to get this qualification, he/she must go through 4 months of schooling, and then live and breath ship operations for 18-36 months. Even then he is not considerably skilled at ship operations, he does know his way around a ship, can do useful work, and probably won't get anybody hurt. It is the next round of experience that truly prepares the SWO for command at sea. She/he goes back to a year or more of advanced surface warfare schooling, and then goes to sea as a shipboard department head. So the dual qualified aviation officers aren't in the same league, and only the most arrogant aviator would even try to make that claim. We are left with an anachronistic requirement that remains because it suits certain bureacratic purposes. If a surface warfare officer picked up his aviation qualification the same way an aviator picked up his SWO qualification, he wouldn't be let near a plane. Why do we still have it? It serves as a filter for those who want to be admirals. To be an admiral as an aviator, you almost have to have a carrier command. By requiring the SWO qual, it just makes it more difficult to get the billet. It used to be that command of a nuclear carrier also required nuclear power qualifications (it may still be required). Bearing in mind that 55% (the last figure I heard) of the admirals are aviation qualified you can see that it is an important achievement to get the dual qualification. In defense of the policy I should admit a few things. First, it is possible to successfully command a ship without detailed knowledge of ship operations. You have to have good people that you can trust. Unfortunately, on a carrier many of the billets were you should have the good people, are filled with aviators learning about ships, not the experienced ship people you would like. Those SWO's who are present generally are well regarded because they are the ones who have the experience, and who do the qualification. The policy does put an aviation qualified individual in charge of carriers (although this may not be as important since the navy started using Super-CAGS [commander air group] that are commensurate with the carrier CO in air operations). The policy does force some aviators to learn about surface operations, just as battle group operations forces SWOs to learn about aviation operations (remember that the main striking force of the USN is aircraft). -- Terry Rooker terryr@cse.ogi.edu