Combat Systems Officer (CSO) info; Nav, EWO, WSO

[Guest cody6766]

Honestly, I know next to nothing about the different 130's out there aside from the AC130 (which I'm sure is gone quite often). I guess I know a little about the 2-3 variants mentioned earlier in the thread as well as the one they use for signals intel gathering. I konw nothing about their average mission pace and deployment.

As of now, my top 3 are: F-15 (imagine that! I'm thinking it is more of a hope than a viable option though), B-1, and E-3. I have the E-3 on there basically for location. I figure, I'll try to go fast first but if I have to ride a bus, I might as well ride a bus that will eventually put me back home. I grew up around Tinker AFB since my dad was an enlisted AWACS crewmember and wouldn't mind returning here eventually. My family is from here, my wife's family is from here, it's a good location, etc. etc. BUT! we would end up requesting an over-seas slot or an Alaska slot just to see some of the world before kids and all that.

I haven't given much thought to the other options mostly out of ignorance. I don't mind searching around, but could you give me some key points to look for? I know what has a nav and what doesn't for the most part, I guess it's the 130's I'm most ignorant about.

[08Dawg]

My piece of advice, for all that's worth, is to pick based on aircraft and mission. Being close to home is nice, but you're going to deploy, go TDY, and do all kinds of other stuff that will take you away. Once you're used to that, being far from home isn't too big a deal. Besides that, the mission of the B-1 compared to the mission of the E-3 is words apart.

I'll give you a quick and dirty (sts) on the Hercs. Others here can fill in more if they want.

C-130, a slick- trash hauler, gets dudes and equipment from A to B. Lots of options for bases, but navs are slowly going the way of the dodo with the advent of the J model.

AC-130- Spectre, Spooky, gunship. Flies in left handle circles all day, and rains lots of hurt on the bad guys with a 25mm, 40mm, and 105mm weaponry.

MC-130-there's an H, P, and W model, the Talon and T2, Shadow and the Spear (Wombat). With subtle variations, all do spec ops low level insertion and exfil of snake eaters, or they refuel helos that insert snake eaters.

HC-130- combat search and rescue, refuels helos as well.

That's the different Hercs at a very brief glance. Hope it helps.

[BQZip01]

Honestly, I know next to nothing about the different 130's out there aside from the AC130 (which I'm sure is gone quite often). I guess I know a little about the 2-3 variants mentioned earlier in the thread as well as the one they use for signals intel gathering. I konw nothing about their average mission pace and deployment.

As of now, my top 3 are: F-15 (imagine that! I'm thinking it is more of a hope than a viable option though), B-1, and E-3. I have the E-3 on there basically for location. I figure, I'll try to go fast first but if I have to ride a bus, I might as well ride a bus that will eventually put me back home. I grew up around Tinker AFB since my dad was an enlisted AWACS crewmember and wouldn't mind returning here eventually. My family is from here, my wife's family is from here, it's a good location, etc. etc. BUT! we would end up requesting an over-seas slot or an Alaska slot just to see some of the world before kids and all that.

I haven't given much thought to the other options mostly out of ignorance. I don't mind searching around, but could you give me some key points to look for? I know what has a nav and what doesn't for the most part, I guess it's the 130's I'm most ignorant about.

Question 1: Are you a nav-select?

Question 2a: Are you going to Randolph or Pensacola?

Question 2b: If you are going to P-cola, when?

Comment 1: I'd look at the mission before you look at location. EVERY base is what you make of it. I'm currently at Minot and, to quote my squadron commander, "Minot isn't that bad." I know people who LOVED Eielson. I know people who hated Hurlburt Field and Hickam. If you make the best of it and stay involved in the base and community, you'll probably have a pretty good time.

Comment 2: Don't set your goals before you know your options. There are a LOT of other aircraft out there for a Nav/EWO with some pretty unique and interesting missions (B-52, RC-135 [3 variants], KC-135, U-28, MC-12, OC-135, etc.)

C-130s:

slicks (your basic -130): does lots of "trash hauling", lots of drops, lots of low level, one of the few birds that the Nav actually has a decent view.

AC-130: has 3 rated navs onboard: nav, ewo, and the fire control officer. Lots of travel, lots of training, lots of destruction

MC-130: has 2 navs onboard (depending on the variant...there's the MC-130E, MC-130H, MC-130P, and MC-130W). EXTREME low level flying at its finest; dangerous Spec Ops stuff (high risk & high reward) with spec ops teams (one mission in OIF had them flying 4+ hours at less than 50 feet...full power). They also do helicopter refueling, package drops, HALO, etc.

EC-130: Electronic broadcast airplane and electronic jamming platform (depending on the variant)

LC-130: Arctic trash hauler; lands on skis (reserve only)

HC-130: Helicopter refueler for rescue choppers

KC-130: Navy/Marine helicopter refueler variant...you ain't getting it unless you're NAVY (Never Again Volunteer Yourself) or in USMC (Uncle Sam's Marijuana Club)

WC-130: Hurricane Hunters (only reserves)

I don't recommend Wikipedia for everything, but they have a lot of information that's pretty accurate on this topic. Realize that not all of the listed variants are in current use: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-130_Hercules

Then there's the F-130...

Edited November 10, 2009 by BQZip01

[magnetfreezer]

As of now, my top 3 are: F-15 (imagine that! I'm thinking it is more of a hope than a viable option though), B-1, and E-3.

If you're going to Pcola don't sell yourself short on the fast movers - typical drops when I went through were about 6-9 AF dudes a month with 2/3 F-15E so given a class of 30 (combined Randolph and Navy-Pcola avg class sizes) you'd have a decent chance. Another thing to consider is by the time the AF program starts pumping out WSOs (sts) the VT-86 pipeline will have been shut down for a few months so they will likely need WSOs to ensure FTU spots stay filled.

(disclaimer: all numbers WAG and subject to change by AFPC or phases of the moon)

[skinny]

I know the U-28 program is still held pretty closely but can someone in-the-know give me an idea to the in-flight duties of a Nav on a U-28? Is it true they sit right seat? Tempo wise probably best for a single guy right?

[backseatdriver]

I know the U-28 program is still held pretty closely but can someone in-the-know give me an idea to the in-flight duties of a Nav on a U-28? Is it true they sit right seat? Tempo wise probably best for a single guy right?

1. No

2. No

3. Yes

[nsplayr]

I know the U-28 program is still held pretty closely but can someone in-the-know give me an idea to the in-flight duties of a Nav on a U-28? Is it true they sit right seat? Tempo wise probably best for a single guy right?

Go to command day and ask the people that brief you. Anyone who knows anything in detail will not tell you here.

[pawnman]

Once the schoolhouse starts pumping people through again, there will probably be alot of B-1 slots...we're getting shorted on WSOs currently and in the near future. Personally, I love my job as a B-1 WSO. You've got 36,000 pounds of hate available on call. The Sniper pod is a pretty awesome toy. You've got a toilet. The ops tempo isn't too bad for family life, and it's fairly predictable (at least at a squadron level). You'll be gone six months, home for a year. There are always other circumstances where people swap out half-way, but unless there's a really good reason for it, plan on the full six months for every rotation.

I can't speak for how other platforms roll, but the distinction between pilots and WSOs when it comes to everyday squadron duties is miniscule. I've had squadron commanders, DOs, and group commanders that were WSOs. There's plenty of room for leadership opportunities in and out of the jet for both pilots and WSOs. Without the WSOs, the pilots are flying an airliner. Without the pilots, we're sitting in a static display. It's a very teamwork-oriented jet.

If you've got any other questions about B-1s, feel free to PM (or post your questions if you think others can benefit from the answers).

[BQZip01]

Once the schoolhouse starts pumping people through again, there will probably be alot of B-1 slots...we're getting shorted on WSOs currently and in the near future. Personally, I love my job as a B-1 WSO. You've got 36,000 pounds of hate available on call. The Sniper pod is a pretty awesome toy. You've got a toilet. The ops tempo isn't too bad for family life, and it's fairly predictable (at least at a squadron level). You'll be gone six months, home for a year. There are always other circumstances where people swap out half-way, but unless there's a really good reason for it, plan on the full six months for every rotation.

I can't speak for how other platforms roll, but the distinction between pilots and WSOs when it comes to everyday squadron duties is miniscule. I've had squadron commanders, DOs, and group commanders that were WSOs. There's plenty of room for leadership opportunities in and out of the jet for both pilots and WSOs. Without the WSOs, the pilots are flying an airliner. Without the pilots, we're sitting in a static display. It's a very teamwork-oriented jet.

If you've got any other questions about B-1s, feel free to PM (or post your questions if you think others can benefit from the answers).

I'll second that, but from a different perspective. With the standup of a new squadron and a new MAJCOM, we're in dire need of Navs/CSOs/EWOs in the B-52 community.

I love my job as a BUFF E-Dub too. To paraphrase the above:

You've got 67,000 pounds of hate available on call (potentially some with a Megaton-class yield!). We also have the sniper LITENING pod toys. We have both a toilet AND a urinal. The ops tempo isn't too bad for family life, and it's fairly predictable (at least at a squadron level). You'll be gone six months, home for a year and a half.

There are leadership opportunities all around in this community as well. Our current and previous wing kings didn't have wings with a radiator.

Edited November 16, 2009 by BQZip01

[Guest Justshootme]

I'll second that, but from a different perspective. With the standup of a new squadron and a new MAJCOM, we're in dire need of Navs/CSOs/EWOs in the B-52 community.

I love my job as a BUFF E-Dub too. To paraphrase the above:

You've got 67,000 pounds of hate available on call (potentially some with a Megaton-class yield!). We also have the sniper pod toys. We have both a toilet AND a urinal. The ops tempo isn't too bad for family life, and it's fairly predictable (at least at a squadron level). You'll be gone six months, home for a year and a half.

There are leadership opportunities all around in this community as well. Our current and previous wing kings didn't have wings with a radiator.

Dude, stop drinking the cool-aide...you're a Minot dude, right? I don't know who you are, but give these kids a fair picture.

-Right now there are 0-6's and above lining up to kick us in the junk. If you don't love the BUFF enough to put up with the ass-pain that is nuclear ops, you WILL be miserable. Sure we have a ton of capes, but we aren't using ANY of them to make a difference right now.

-That being said, bombers are hands down the most rewarding CSO opportunity out there aside from SpecOps airframes. If you are the type that needs to be challenged and engaged in your primary crew duties, go buffs or bones. If you want to see combat, go bones (at least for now), and if you want to see the world, stay the hell away from bombers.

[Guest JDScott10]

I'm probably gonna get shwacked for this for not searching, but for all the folks out there as gunship navs, fco's, etc. I know training is new as of May, but how many drops are there for gunships/AFSOC folks/class?

[magnetfreezer]

I'm probably gonna get shwacked for this for not searching, but for all the folks out there as gunship navs, fco's, etc. I know training is new as of May, but how many drops are there for gunships/AFSOC folks/class?

Probably: not a lot.

Depends on FTU pipelines, AFSOC requirements, AFPC computers, and what the AFPC AFSOC functionals had for breakfast that morning. If you search the old nav school threads a while back someone posted a spreadsheet with the historical drops going back a few years. Bottom line, if you really want it (sts) same advice as any other program, work your ass off and let the FLT CC know what you want. Or sign on with a Guard/reserve unit (Duke, HCs out of ??, etc).

[Jon - Trident Home Loans]

I'm probably gonna get shwacked for this for not searching, but for all the folks out there as gunship navs, fco's, etc. I know training is new as of May, but how many drops are there for gunships/AFSOC folks/class?

Around 20 pipeline slots an FY if you count both H & U model EWOs and Navs. FCO isn't really an option for pipeline guys anymore because of their washout rate. Most FCOs come from other platforms or X-Flow from the Nav or EWO seat.

[Mark1]

Around 20 pipeline slots an FY if you count both H & U model EWOs and Navs. FCO isn't really an option for pipeline guys anymore because of their washout rate. Most FCOs come from other platforms or X-Flow from the Nav or EWO seat.

The pipeline to FCO route was tested on an extremely limited basis recently. What drove the decision at AFPC I have no idea. AFPC chose to disregard the historical data and as a result the units were forced to 'learn' the lesson over again that it just doesn't work. The results were not good.

Whether the pipeline was closed off as a result I don't know, but as recently as about 7 months ago it was not impossible to see a FCO drop to a UNT class. It is certainly very rare regardless (i.e. far less than 1 drop per year).

[08Dawg]

I think I saw one, at the very, very most two FCO drops while I was at nav school. If that's what you really want to do, work your butt off, get an AC as a nav, and then after a few years, make the lateral move. As to your odds of dropping something spec ops, it's hit or miss, really. The class in front of mine on the nav side dropped an AC, an MC, and a U-28 or two, along with Hercs, Buffs, and AWACS. My class got four Buffs, two tankers, two RJs and a Joint Stars. Class behind us got a drop similar to the one in front of us. As with many things in life, it's all about timing. You might be the top guy in your class, but then you get a drop like we had. Lucky for me, Buffs were my first choice.

[nsplayr]

My class had a FCO drop and I heard from the rumor mill that the person who filled that slot (sts) didn't work out so well. Not that most of us couldn't have predicted that just from knowing the guy, but that's water under the bridge. Good guy, good heart, but I guess he didn't have what they were looking for.

If you want AFSOC then be a good nav/ewo student, have a positive attitude, be professional without being a douche, and let your flight commander know what you want. My class had 6 AFSOC drops so just cross your fingers for the correct timing b/c we were good and had a great flt/cc but weren't that special, it just worked out right.

[Guest jram210]

Does anyone know if there will be EWO training available in the future for those CSO students who choose not to go EWO or for those current NAVs who are not EWO qualified? It seems like there would need to be in order for current NAVs to go to the new school house in P-cola, but I've also heard someone say that this would not happen. I realize the pros/cons of the need for seperate schools and seperate positions, but it seems it would still be a good school to have under the belt and would ultimately make you more desireable, especially in the direction the Air Force is taking the NAV/EWO/WSO training. Any thoughts? Thanks.

[08Dawg]

DO NOT drink the koolaid the 563rd is trying to peddle down there. There will be a need for none-EWO types to fill instructor slots once P-Cola is up and running. Also keep in mind the terms EWO, Nav, and WSO are basically going away with the CSO thing.

Otherwise, UTFSF. http://www.flyingsquadron.com/forums/index.php?/topic/2820-combat-systems-officer-cso-info%3B-nav-ewo-wso/

[schokie]

While it's true that many of the training pipelines are combining in Pcola, much of the training will be non-EW related. I don't see an EWO background ever being a prereq to be an instructor at the new schoolhouse at NASP.

I wouldn't go so far as to say the terms WSO, Nav, and EWO are going away. While some people's aeronautical orders may say CSO, mine don't. I don't see a mass re-writing of -1s, -2s, and 11-2X-XX going on.

The goal is that everyone with the bug-splat wings that graduates from NASP will have EW training. So in theory, everyone's an EWO. Everyone's also a WSO and Nav. What you actually call yourself and what skill set you specialize in will depend on what aircraft you get and what they want to do with you.

While it might be koolaid, I do think having an EWO background makes you more marketable, particularly with the current emphasis on non-kinetics in the CENTCOM theater. However, as 08Dawg said, it's going to soon be a moot point once the Randolph Nav/EWO schoolhouse closes down.

Edited April 21, 2010 by schokie

[magnetfreezer]

I don't see an EWO background ever being a prereq to be an instructor at the new schoolhouse at NASP.

As of several months ago MWS navs/E-Model WSOS had to go through EWO Bridge @ Randolph to be qualified to go to Pensacola and become universally qualified CSO instructors - are they letting people go direct now?

[schokie]

As of several months ago MWS navs/E-Model WSOS had to go through EWO Bridge @ Randolph to be qualified to go to Pensacola and become universally qualified CSO instructors - are they letting people go direct now?

It's a mix of both. Some traditional Navs were required to go through the EWO bridge course prior to becoming instructors at Pcola. However, not all of them were. Several F-15E WSOs currently teaching at the old schoolhouse are just PCAing over without any additional EW training.

Since there isn't a large population of traditional EWOs there now, the idea is to increase the EW knowledge throughout the instructor cadre. I get the impression that it's a nice to have, but due to manning issues it isn't being required. I believe the key to what you said was 'universally qualified'. Someone without the EWO top-off won't be teaching academics or some of the advanced sims, but they'd be full-up to teach basic nav and visual low levels.

[drewpey]

http://www.camber.com/?news=35

Camber Corporation announces first flight of the modified T-1A Combat Systems Officer (CSO) Aircraft

April 9, 2010

Huntsville, AL (April 9, 2010) - Camber Corporation announced today that the T-1A aircraft with the modification to support CSO training had its first flight today, April 9, 2010. The aircraft took off at 11:16 Eastern Standard Time from Dayton International Airport and flew for 1 hour and 55 minutes. The purpose of the flight was to confirm operation of basic aircraft systems in preparation for future test flights which will concentrate on the newly added CSO training systems.

"I want to congratulate the Camber Team on a job well done! Camber, Stevens Aviation and Government personnel have worked well together. After a fast-paced year of system design, design reviews, and aircraft modifications, the first T-1A CSO aircraft completed its first flight today. We are excited about the first flight and look forward to the installation of the completed CSO software onto the aircraft so that we can test the CSO Training System." said Albert Ojeda, USAF Program Manager.

The T-1A CSO Modification contract was awarded to Camber on March 31, 2009 and the aircraft have been upgraded with a suite of simulated sensors (Radar, Radar Warning Receiver, Electronic Support Measures), countermeasures (flares, chaff), and weapon systems for two students in order to support CSO training. Provisions for two instructors are also provided, allowing them to oversee the student actions, and insert tactical and weather scenarios into the simulated environment. A debrief capability is also included and allow instructors to review the flight with the student in a classroom or office environment.

The modified T-1A aircraft with the CSO training station is part of the USAF’s Air Education and Training Command (AETC) redesign of the current Navigator, Electronic Warfare Officer, and Weapon System Officer training pipeline in order to produce aviator’s skilled in advance navigation systems, electronic warfare, weapons deployment, and able to operate the complex systems critical to the Air Force mission.

“The successful, on schedule, initial flight paves the way for formal testing and the installation of the training system at Naval Air Station Pensacola” said Mike Pafford, Camber T-1A Program Manager.

Camber is teamed with Stevens Aviation, a leading aviation services company, who modified the T-1A aircraft at their facility in Dayton, OH, from where the modified T-1A aircraft was launched last week.

According to Ron Tennyson, Stevens Aviation Program Manager, the aircraft has been fitted with an Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast system that provides the training system with air traffic information and aircraft to aircraft data that can be used for air to air training missions.

Camber Corporation has its corporate headquarters in Huntsville, Alabama, U.S.A. Camber is a pioneer in the development of innovative training and simulation solutions for military and civil flight simulation and mission trainers. The Sensor Systems Division that is based in Dallas, Texas has been providing simulated sensor systems since 1985 and supports over 200 radar simulation systems worldwide. Their market leading Commercial-Off-the-Shelf Radar Toolkit® product serves as the basis for their reliable and cost efficient radar simulations.

will have to let us know what it's like...it'll take quite a bit to fill the T-43's shoes!

[SuperWSO]

http://www.camber.com/?news=35

will have to let us know what it's like...it'll take quite a bit to fill the T-43's shoes!

A T-1 with a simulated radar seems like a step back from a T-39 with an actual radar. When you look at the cost of a T-1, does throwing a radar on the front jack up the price that much?

[ol-IEWO]

If it is simulated, why is an aircraft being used?

[magnetfreezer]

A T-1 with a simulated radar seems like a step back from a T-39 with an actual radar. When you look at the cost of a T-1, does throwing a radar on the front jack up the price that much?

If it is simulated, why is an aircraft being used?

AF considers it too expensive to pay radar techs/maintain a radar shop (air-to-air intercepts will be done using TCAS data in addition to the simulated A-G radar). In addition, the AF specified in the RFPs, etc that any modifications made to the T-1 would have to be removeable to return them to pilot training service within a specific timeframe. I'm guessing that all the work required to put a radar in the nose would violate that.