I've been speaking with an Army recruiter with aspirations of being an aviator. He mentionned options of being either a Warrant Officer or a Commissioned Officer. I'm not too sure what the difference is other than the WOffs earn less and are promoted less often. But, there has to be more to it than that. Does anyone have any advice on which to choose?

Thank you!

[ 17. July 2005, 21:52: Message edited by: BUFF52 ]

I've heard in the Army, the WOs do the majority of the flying and pretty much their only job is to fly. Someone else might be able to give you some more accurate info.

I was going to say the same thing. Warrant officer is without a doubt the route to take if all you are interested in is flying. The commissioned guys get some flying done also, but on average they get no where near the time that the warrants do.

i've got a friend of mine that flies helos as a commissioned officer. he said he wishes he had gone to be a warrant officer b/c his flying career ends basically at capt.

BUFF52,

Yes, Warrants generally fly more than the branch guys. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. I'm a CW2 flying Blackhawks for the 25th ID right now so feel free to PM me and I'll give you as much info as I can. There are also other threads concerning this topic so do a search as well.

[ 18. July 2005, 03:33: Message edited by: hawkdriver29 ]

i know very little about army aviation. I know the army is hurting for people right now, is that officers of just enlisted? And if you could give any more info on the difference between WOffs and Com Off's it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

From what I understand (growing up next to Fort Rucker for 18 years), Warrant Officers are essentially technical experts in their respective fields. Commissioned officers go through their officer basic courses for their respective fields (ie, aviation, infantry, etc), but, in addition to their expertise, they also command troops. It is my understanding that warrant officers do not command, however, that is not to say that they do not offer their expert opinions based on their/training experience.

Also, it depends which branch of service you are talking about. In the Navy and Marine Corps, a lot of the WOs you see are former senior enlisted who were elevated to warrant officer. In the Army, you can have warrant officers with no enlisted experience that are less than twenty years old who came on board through the "High school to Flight school program"

[ 18. July 2005, 18:13: Message edited by: PhlashNU04 ]

Thank you all for your responses. I've done some more research which also goes along with what you've said - that the warrant officers do more flying than the commissioned and they are more of an expert in a specific field. I think that's the route I would like to go. I still have more research to do, but from what you all have said and what I've read, I have more to go with to make my decision. Next step is preparing for the AFAST. I just picked up "Learning to Fly Helicopters" by Padfield and ASVAB for Dummies.

Also, duece123, the army is hurting more for the enlisted. One of the recruiters at the office was trying to persuade me to enlist rather than be an officer - mentionned a bonus - I think he missed the part that I wanted to fly. Although, I don't think the Army is the only branch in need of enlisted. The Air Force surely didn't want to give me a chance for OCS (my communication degree wasn't competitive at this time), but they were certainly throwing paperwork at me to enlist with an option to apply for ocs - no thanks guys - too many variables.

If anyone is interested, I've included a couple links on warrant officers. The first is specific to the Army. The second is more in depth as to what the roles warrant officers have in each branch and what they might become in the future. Please see below:

https://www.usarec.army.mil/hq/warrant/

https://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=3287&sequence=0

Thanks again for your responses - I appreciate it!

Yea, Ive lived around Rucker for 6 years or so and dad is a W4. If you want to fly in the Army youre whole career, definitely go Warrant. Even though the pay is less, you dont have to put up with near as much crap. You still have office work and such but not to the extent as officers. That one guy was right when he said you hardly ever fly after you reach Captain. If you're more worried about pay, promotions, and after retirement, then go officer. Just depends on the person.

Buff,

To add to the comments already posted; you're in a good spot since you already have your degree. Don't sign anything unless it has "Warrant Officer Flight Training" printed on it. As for the difference between warrants, and Commisioned guys, I've seen 0-5s with less than 800 hrs total time. Plus, warrants are usually the IPs and flight leads. The commisioned guys have alot more responsibility in accountability and administration, but as a warrant, you only have one primary responsibility: FLY.

Lastly, commisioned guys get paid more/ retirement, etc. but only warrants get the aviation retention bonus. It softens the blow a little.

If you want to talk to some more Army aviators, try the forums on kiowawarrior.com and APTAP.org. They're both stuffed with great guys from the community.

Mike-

[ 18. July 2005, 21:06: Message edited by: Stearmann4 ]

ok fellas thank for all the info

now time to do some hard core reaserch!

I sent you a PM Stearmann

If Warrants are "officers" without the desk-driving work, then why do they have to go Basic Training?

As far as I know that's just how the Army does business. Anybody who knows otherwise, feel free to corrrect me, but even if you get picked up for OCS you still have to go to basic first. I can tell you how much fun it is going through basic in your late 20's with a bunch of high school kids

...it only makes you stronger eh? I think I'll go do some pushups now. Okay, done - 3 oughtta do it.