This html article is produced from an uncorrected text file through optical character recognition. Prior to 1940 articles all text has been corrected, but from 1940 to the present most still remain uncorrected. Artifacts of the scans are misspellings, out-of-context footnotes and sidebars, and other inconsistencies. Adjacent to each text file is a PDF of the article, which accurately and fully conveys the content as it appeared in the issue. The uncorrected text files have been included to enhance the searchability of our content, on our site and in search engines, for our membership, the research community and media organizations. We are working now to provide clean text files for the entire collection.
• 2J-.1 * ^VIVUI, VSVSIAIO UIUVVIO ivzi 1UIU1V
P’Peline , subsequent staff assignments. The operational bute?iPs Pilots in flying billets for most of their ca- ae squadr«-^ Prorn°ri°n potential is limited, usually to
ron command level.
S. Navy does not want to make such a radical
senior ^0l^mun^ty • This format would allow the evaluating cal sc 1° kfeak out” his better aviators through a numeri- foema? C Pr°ficiency—one to ten, for example. The
the DWou^ also enable the commanding officer to avoid B0rn^esent; strictly subjective evaluation on airmanship. NatqJI accuracy averages, carrier landing grades, Stancja J- ^aval Air Training and Operating Procedures dures(r IZat'onTcheck flight results, emergency proce- be citPHSt scores’ and similar types of objective data could The l° ■*USt'^ a high score, ation SUPP*emental form should also have a safety evalu- gr0UnjCct'on- Did the pilot have any flight violations, he had'n^S’ °r acc‘c*ents during the evaluation period? If safety 3n acc^ent> was pilot factor assigned? Positive dent-frPerformance would also be recognized in an “acci- This^ ^°Urs fi°wn” section.
Selecti revis'on to the fitness report format would provide b°ards°n ^0ar^s’ promotion boards, command screen cials ’.aevv commanding officers, and other senior offi- his V'ta* information about an aviator’s ability and readilv ^ recorri over the years. It would also give them a This infVlS*^e. breakout of the strong and weak aviators, staffing T^t'on could be used for promotion analysis, f°r in? enianding flight billets, or within the squadron W^i/^ing weak areas of a pilot’s performance. It °perati^1Ve sentor officers a valuable tool for improving Aftefna readiness, safety, and even pilot training, identif, 3 P’tness report format has been developed that reevahw 8°0(i aviators, their career patterns should be every ^ CtP The basic Navy philosophy seems to be that Chief ofSagn wb° walks into Pensacola is going to be the 3cc°rdj ,ava* Operations someday. Thus, he is groomed to obta; * ^ 3nc* 8'ven a variety of assignments necessary any jnta Averse background—whether or not he has 'n the MCSt °r 'ntenti°n of making admiral or even staying divert avT Until retirement. The cost of obtaining this aviator j ° ass’gnment and background is paid when an *®g ari(js Pulled out of flying positions. While it is flatter- P'P^line1]1 SOme ways a good system to put everyone in a only aeacling to admiral, is it realistic? Statistically, C°mihand Perccnta8e °f officers ever attain squadron ^an half Pewer yet are selected to be admirals. More Service Wr,n0t even cb°ose t0 stay beyond their obligated sarne ' by, then, does the Navy assign everybody the The prCCr Patb regardless of their desires or talents? ans\yer .°yal Navy has a system that could provide the rected to "as tWo different career pipelines. One is di- Saily o ar(^ sen'or command, while the other is operate Cl- S°rfnted- The senior command pipeline, similar to 'band an',, avy’s system, grooms officers for future com-
If
S-ny’iH c°uld at least review billet requirements for .at Can °.J°bs, to ensure that an aviator is the only one 'dots fro1 ibat position. Does the Navy have to pull H 0fbj,T1 c°ckpits to fill billets as hangar deck officer or Cer on board a carrier? Thumbing through the
The
Aviation
Duty
Officer
On 30 April 1986, the Navy started a program that is similar to one of the recommendations made in this article. The aviation duty officer (ADO) program gives aviation officers the option of selecting a career pipeline designed to keep them in flying billets to the maximum extent possible. The ADO will not be subject to the normal “up or out” promotion system, but instead will be retained on active duty based on a one-time continuation board decision. Once he has satisfactorily passed this board, the ADO will be retained “subject to sustained satisfactory performance.” Lieutenant commanders are eligible to be retained on active duty through 24 years of commissioned service. Promotion potential is realistically limited to the grade of commander, although a few captain’s billets will exist. Selection to flag rank is not possible, nor is assignment to any command.
This is a step in the right direction. The program offers an opportunity for naval aviators to pursue a flying career, to contribute to the Navy, and to stay on active duty without the need to demonstrate administrative excellence. This program should go a long way toward improving pilot retention, meeting manning levels, and building up the overall experience/proficiency level of the naval air force.
The program is not without shortcomings, however. That most onerous of all non-flying billets—ship’s company tours—could still be assigned to the ADOs. Also, it appears that the ADO aviators will be assigned to a large percentage of “non-front-line” flying billets, such as Force Support and Training Command. This could lessen the program’s appeal if ADO aviators perceive this as spending their careers in the minor leagues of naval air.
To fine-tune this program, a thorough evaluation should be completed, to identify which “flying- related” billets actually require aviators to fill them. Every ship’s company billet, for example, that can be filled by a qualified limited duty officer makes the ADO program that much more attractive and viable. Also, detailers need to apportion prime flying billets so that the ADO community will not be perceived as the second string of naval aviation.
On balance, though, the program is an exciting, intelligent, and innovative move which should go a long way to help current problems—particularly retention and manning. R. Shipman
87