WSO or OBSERVERS?? A heads up....

[jordanpolonijo]

I just wondered if there are any current RN Observers or RAF WSO's who use this website?

If not does any one have a friend of a friend who is one and in particular a FJ GR4/F3 WSO?

Hope everyone is well and merry xmas and all the best for the new year.

:ok:

[The B Word]

Why? What's on your mind? :confused:

[Pontius Navigator]

He's trying to make his mind up whether to join the RAF or the RN.

IMNSHO he would be better off joining BA.

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Do BA have any WSO's :confused:

[Chris Kebab]

...oh I dunno, they certainly have lots of guys who mince about down the back:ok::)

[BBadanov]

...and plenty of guys who sit up the front and don't get to touch the stick!!

[getsometimein]

By the time he joins and goes through training, there probably wont be any direct entrants going to F3's or GR4's imo... We'll be in single seat jets only by that time as it'll be pointless training people to go on a jet thats going out of service...

Oh hang on... Thats exactly what the RAF does...

[jordanpolonijo]

thanks for the animated responses.

As for BA if you want to start a collection for me, feel free. It could aid me in my pursuit of 75k to fund an integrated ATPL course (:zzz::zzz::zzz::zzz::zzz::zzz::zzz: zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!) Perhaps if I had that I may have a shot at the commercial side.

Banter aside I was interesting in talking first to a current WSO or Observer to gauge their opinion on the career, training for that trade from a first hand perspective etc etc.

Obviously the F3 will be out of service but as of December 12th 2009 the RAF are still streaming 20 FJ WSO's per year. Surely the GR4 will not be retired before 2016-2017 and with it also making up the mainstay of the forces combat aircraft there may still be a couple of years left of WSO FJ.

[newbie20]

Youre right in that the GR4 will not be retired for ages yet, theres no money for them to be replaced, the main bulk of RAF spending is going to be channeled into helos for Afghan. Plus the fact theyre used for CAS a hell of a lot (GR4).

[The B Word]

After GR4 there will be plenty of these to keep you occupied - there's even talk about cross-training FJ WSOs to be pilots for them:

http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafcms/mediafiles/E4BC04DA_1143_EC82_2E817FA3F97708A6.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/06/06/article-0-01833C3D00000578-967_468x371.jpg

Also, by about 2025 there should be these as well:

http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTypen/Fotos/bae/Taranis/TaranAr.jpg

The prototype should be flying as early as next year.

Finally, the MRA4 has 2x WSOs, I believe, if that kind of thing is your bag (and you fancy smelling of fish!).

So there are still plenty of options for the RAF WSO for the time being.

The B Word :ok:

[vecvechookattack]

Youre right in that the GR4 will not be retired for ages yet, theres no money for them to be replaced

I suppose you could always try and replace them with the FGR4.... or maybe not..?

[malr]

The prototype should be flying as early as next year.Great picture; thanks! Actually, I'm thinking this (http://www.sphere.com/article/photo-captures-mystery-drone-operating-over-afghanistan/19262335)might be the same UAV you mentioned? It was unofficially spotted flying over the sand in 2008...see the attached link.

[frodo_monkey]

Feel free to drop me a PM, I'm a backseater (RAF FJ). I'll do my best to answer or at least bull*hit you like a good 'un ;)

(a seasonally benevolent) Frodo

[jordanpolonijo]

ok will do

[Pontius Navigator]

Jordan, you don't need either a crystal ball or a current FJ WSO to tell you that your options woul dbe strictly limited.

Your current FJ mate is likely to get a 'full' career, at least to 38 with a prospect of retention to 55. You, OTOH, will be 29 before you get operational, say 2014 with a projected OSD of 2025 you would get 2-3 tours and finis.

Your 20 per year being accepted into training is near 0% of those applying for aircrew and about 12% of those selected for pilot training. A number of those slots will be taken by chopped pilots.

You will need to be very very good and highly dedicated to even get considered.

[Lima Juliet]

malr

Your link shows a picture of POLECAT although I believe that the text is describing RQ-170. These are US programs.

B Word's picture is of BAeS TARANIS - a joint UK MoD/BAeS program that is ready to fly very soon. The technology was developed from their RAVEN program that flew in 2003. When they're so close to flying this, goodness knows why they are bothering with MANTIS and HERTi.

Here is RAVEN flying in Australia:

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/tanaris/images/8s-raven-aircraft.jpg

Hopefully, this has cured any incorrect notions.

Regards

LJ :ok:

[Tourist]

Just a quick point Jordan.
You should be aware that WSO and Observer are two very different jobs.
I think I would find WSO possibly more fun in a fast jet etc, but Observer comes with a lot more responsibility.

[jordanpolonijo]

but surely by 2025 with 3 tours behind me that would allow for the opportunity to compete for command progression?

Move away from flying into other areas?

OR

At least have a shot at making it onto the professional aviators spine?

Dedicated? Well I do have aspiration to be in it for the long hall + to deploy front line in theatre to get stuck in and help out.

Thanks for the reply. Although im not sure if you are actually saying "dont bother applying to be a WSO in the RAF" :hmm::hmm:

[Biggus]

I'm old enough to be well away from current recruiting policy - but I thought WSOs were only being recruited under whatever words they use to describe a short service commission these days?

If this is the case you will only have an 8-12 year career, including training time, and will have to do very well to be considered for a more extensive career.

However, as I said, my information may be out of date.....

[jordanpolonijo]

I believe that is correct but it is also the case for Pilot. Short service with a view to at least being able to apply (albeit competing) for an extension on your service.

(Obviously having not been chopped at any point)

[Pontius Navigator]

jordan, afaik pilots are being recruite dto age 38 whereas WSO only for 12 years. Assimilation is a remote possibility bearing in mind you would be in a minority compared with pilots and all other branches. As for PA Spine, why? There would be virutally no WSO slots.

I would hazard a guess that there will be some positions where the intellectual disciplines of a WSO are in demand but very few as pure WSO.

[jordanpolonijo]

Such information is hard to acquire from the outside looking in with limited contacts.

My personal opinion is that Pilot, WSO and even WSOp are strong careers for the foreseeable future as well as Observer in the RN.

At worst one could argue that a 12 years commission as (in a perfect world) a FJ GR4 WSO with 2-3 frontline tours will be a good (but shortish) career.
I believe it would put a person in a strong position to move into another branch, command, QWSI or even off into the civil aviation sector.

At present 38 (Pilot) for me is only 1 year more than the WSO commission and buy the time I could potentially enter they will equal out.

Surely there are many more negatives that positives still for these profession?

[vee en]

Redesignating the Navigator as WSO was not a good idea - it conveyed a narrowing of the professional/ operational scope of the job. The Navigator (WSO) is a full participant in the combat role; and must be given his due in operational command posts. The Observer in the RN does not seem to suffer from such discrimination.

[jordanpolonijo]

Is the role of Navigator now dead in the RAF?

Are all aircraft by two or three pilots where as before they would have been crewed by one or two pilots plus a nav.

For example VC10, Tristar, Chinook and the Merlin HC3. The Benson website tells of the crew being 1 pilot and 1 nav.

[Tourist]

To be fair, the scope of the roles of both navigator and observer have narrowed.
Warrent Officer Garmin is really more than capable of the navigational side of things

[The B Word]

Right! Here are the latest out-of-service dates (OSDs) of RAF aicraft with WSO(N)s on them all of which from open-source internet:

Tornado GR4/4a 2025
E-3D Sentry 2025
MR2 2010
REAPER (UOR) 2014 - assuming "5yr rolling campaign plan"
VC-10 2013

New Capabililty's with WSO(N)s In-Service-Dates (ISDs)
Nimrod MRA4 2010 - there are 2x WSOs required!
RC-135 RJ 2012/3 (TBC) - sometimes with 2x WSOs
Future "Reaper Replacement" 2015-17+
TARANIS/UCAS 2025+

Therefore, I disagree with the end of "the end of the WSO is nigh" banter from some of the posters on this thread.

Sadly, the WSO(N) is no longer used on Rotary Wing RAF aircraft apart from a few left over from the previous policy. There are a few on SAR helos, but, unless there is a change in policy then the RW avenue is closed (for now! We have been around this buoy once before!).

So, I would say go for it - if you're 25 then there should still be something for you to fly well past your 18/40 pension point.

All the very best of luck with your application.

The B Word

PS - BTW, the MRA4 ain't all that bad a job!

http://www.pcfltd.co.uk/images/mra4.jpg

[DaveyBoy]

The B Word: you missed out the Sentinel R1 with 1 x WSO!

[getsometimein]

And Shadow R1... They have a short term posting for WSO's I believe..

I think the point to make is that come a few years time (5-7 imo) there will be little to no FJ WSO's...

And, since I'm a better man, I could see Sentry's going out of service either after 2012 Olympics or 2014 Commonwealths...

[jordanpolonijo]

So this leads me to the one of the main points I have.

Will the RN crew the Merlin HC3 of the new CHF with 2 pilots (like they do in the RAF) or will they crew them with 1 Pilot and 1 Observer like they RN currently do with their Merlin Fleet?

Also what is the likely hood that the crossover Merlins will have any upgraded avionics, defensive suites or weaponry.

[Tourist]

Mk 3 Merlins under the RN will not be carrying Observers.
Observers are all about weapon systems and radars and tactical control.
The Mk 3 does not have these things for obvious reasons.
The Mk3s would be flown by the Junglies probably twin pilot plus aircrewman or I suppose single pilot plus aircrewman.

"upgraded avionics, defensive suites or weaponry"
Not sure what you mean.
Nothing wrong with what it has for its role.

[The B Word]

getsometimein & DaveyBoy,

My apologies...although one of those is a UOR with a short OSD at present (depending on how AFG goes!!). However, it strengthens the argument about the future of WSO(N)s and WSO(AEO)s.

All,

As for WSO(N)s back on CH-47s...I'd never say never!

So, in answer to the original Q; a couple of tours on GR4 followed by an air ISTAR tour, maybe promotion followed by a Flt Cdr tour on an ISTAR platform or the up and coming Unmanned Systems. In the Staff College "melting pot" and, hey, what do you know? "jordanpolonijo" is a Sqn Cdr in 2025 with at least 5-6 options available (MRA4, ASTOR, TARANIS, REAPER+, SHADOW+ or even a RW sqn?).

There appears to be lots of opportunity left for WSOs in the next 20yrs (who knows what we'll be flying in 40yrs time when the oil starts to get scarce?!!).

The B Word :ok:

[jordanpolonijo]

Platforms fueled by Algae Bio Compounds?

WSO(N) on the Chinook would be interesting. Then one could really be involved in the "mixer" in theatre.

[minigundiplomat]

WSO(N) on the Chinook would be interesting.


Only for you. Other than that, they are excess baggage.

[camelspyyder]

Like on the Puma...

years of service with a crew of 2... until a load of FJ WSO needed jobs that was...

CS

[Lima Juliet]

years of service with a crew of 2... until a load of FJ WSO needed jobs that was...


That'll be a crew of 3 then... (Pilot, Pilot/Nav and Air Load Master/Crewman). Your omission tells the story, you need at least one Pilot to fly a helicopter, but you need at least 3 aircrew (including a pilot) to operate. In my opinion, if a mix of Nav/ALM (WSO/WSOp) are used then both should have some instruction in basic hand-eye flying skills - you never know when Biggles is going to "cop it" (a lesson learned in WW2 when Navs/Flt Engs were taught to fly Lancasters for this eventuality).

Why would you want to use WSO/WSOps? We don't have the trg system in place to train enough Pilots. Otherwise, at the extreme of the preceding argument, you may as well crew the Puma with 3 Pilots and get rid of the crewman!

Here is a picture of one of the first RW Navs (from the early 90s at Finningley) accepting command of 78 Sqn at Benson - it just goes to show that the route is possible, and that Navs can hack it within the RW world.

http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafcms/mediafiles/A64BFDAE_1143_EC82_2E982F3976D25E73.jpg

LJ

[minigundiplomat]

Hi Leon,

long time no see :)

Navs add nothing to a RW crew. I flew with one and had to explain how to update the GPS. 2 pilots is a better bet incase 'biggles gets it' and just as capable of finding a field, as are the two monkeys in the back.

That said, ex-navs that made the cut for cross overs have come back as decent pilots, with good CRM and an often wise head when it all goes wrong.

Stay safe fella.

MGD

[OKOC]

MinigunD responds to "WSO(N) on the Chinook would be interesting".

With his charming wit(less) comment' "Only for you. Other than that, they are excess baggage".

Perhaps MGD you should do a bit a research and find out just what Air Commodore Martin Sharp during Gulf War 1. Without him as a Nav IN THE FRONT SEAT things could have turned out a lot differently.

Oh and ps He was OC 18 (B) Sqn a bit later on AS A NAV.

[Tourist]

OKOC
Why not spare us the boring search and tell us what he did?
Was it something that a 2nd pilot could not have done?

[minigundiplomat]

Was it something that a 2nd pilot could not have done?


No, and not anything a non-handling pilot (often under fire) does every day in Afg.

OKOC-

He was actually OC(*****) Sqn, before becoming a staish somewhere else. Perhaps you could do a bit of research instead of going off half cocked. Have fun in la la land.

MGD

[Lima Juliet]

Wotcher MGD

Yes, I have been a bit busy of late!

I flew with one and had to explain how to update the GPS.

...I guess this comes down to the fact that you can have "talentless tw@ts" in all branches. I'm pretty sure that OC78 in the picture didn't fall into this category. To further illustrate this, last year in AFG I saw some excellent mini-gun work from a couple of RAF ALMs and then from another one (who was relegated to the GPMG) an inability to "hit a cat's arse with a banjo". All of them were excellent aircrew SNCO/WOs. I've also seen some Navs that have given some Pilots on "staff workup" a damn good "learning" in air-combat-manoeuvring in both the Hawk and the Tornado - I've also seen a Nav overstress a Hawk within 5 secs of being given control (talentless tw@t? Nope, he turned out to be an excellent radar weapons sys operator and QWI).

I've seen some truly excellent aviators (Pilot/Nav/Flt Eng/AEO/ALM/S) in my 20+ yrs in the Service - many of them would have turned their hand to almost any combat aircraft and done a fine job. Then I have also seen some prize pillocks, some of whom have been promoted(!), some of whom I would not trust in my Grandfather's Heinkel Bubble Car!

What, I am trying to say, longwindedly, is that we should consider "best person for the job" and not "best branch" - that, IMHO, is why there have been some fine RW Navs.

All the very best for 2010.

LJ:ok:

[minigundiplomat]

Agreed there are deadweights in every branch.

Take care and have a safe 2010.

MGD

[15thManofTain]

I totally agree. Have you visited XV recently? It would seem they are trying to pool all the worst ones in the hope of a moray firth tsunami.

[Tourist]

"What, I am trying to say, longwindedly, is that we should consider "best person for the job" and not "best branch" - that, IMHO, is why there have been some fine RW Navs"

I'm sorry.
Have you gone mad or have I.

[vee en]

Tourist has a point when he says:
"To be fair, the scope of the roles of both navigator and observer have narrowed."
But this is a rather superficial view. The operational scope of the navigstor's job has - if we let it - actually widened as he is relieved of his almost full-time preoccupation with position-finding. Now he can have better situational awarenes and grasp of the tactical scene.

[The B Word]

USAF's Gen Jumper recognised the Nav/WSO role in future Air Power and renamed their branch to Combat Systems Officer (CSO) - see link http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Documents/2007/August%202007/0807cso.pdf


I guess the RAF is always behind the USAF these days so we'll have to wait for the "dummies" making the policy to catch up with the times! That means ensuring that we take quality candidates and offer them full careers on 18/40 terms.

Here is a quote on the USAF CSO branch from their website.


Combat Systems Officer (CSO)

A career as an Air Force CSO requires tremendous efficiency, attention to detail and strong leadership skills. You're the eyes of your fellow Airmen and Aviators, using high-tech equipment to ensure mission completion. You're also responsible for training Airmen in your particular area of expertise. To learn more about career opportunities as a Combat Systems Officer, browse through the job descriptions below.

Bomber CSO:Performs Electronic Warfare Officer (EWO) and/or Weapon Systems Officer (WSO) duties to accomplish joint combat missions, training and other assigned missions.

Test CSO:Plans, conducts, directs and reports on flight test programs associated with the design, development and modification of aircraft, aerospace vehicles, flight simulators and related systems.

Fighter CSO:Performs Weapon Systems Officer (WSO) and/or Electronic Warfare Officer (EWO) duties to accomplish joint combat missions, training and other assigned missions.

Generalist CSO:Develops plans and policies, monitors and evaluates operations, coordinates staff activities and advises commanders.

Trainer CSO:Performs duties to accomplish primary, intermediate and advanced CSO training and other assigned missions.

Mobility CSO:Performs duties to accomplish joint mobility operations, training and other assigned missions.

Reconnaissance/Surveillance/Electronic Warfare CSO:Performs duties of Reconnaissance/Surveillance/Electronic Warfare CSO or Electronic Warfare Officer (EWO) to accomplish reconnaissance, surveillance, search and rescue, electronic combat, training and other assigned missions.

Special Operations CSO:Performs duties of CSO, Fire Control Officer (FCO), or Electronic Warfare Officer (EWO) to accomplish joint special operations missions, training and other assigned missions.

Tanker CSO:Performs duties to accomplish air refueling, training and other assigned missions.

Remotely Operated Aircraft (ROA):An ROA CSO operates specialized mission aircraft and commands flight crews to accomplish joint reconnaissance, surveillance, combat, training and other missions. PAY CHART (http://www.pprune.org/opportunities/officer/pay-chart/)
All Air Force career fields are based on qualifications and job availability

[Tourist]

Vee en
"Now he can have better situational awarenes and grasp of the tactical scene. "
I totally agree with what you say there, but would disagree that this is a widening of scope.
This is a narrowing and focusing in on the war fighting. As you say, he is relieved of one of his jobs, allowing him to devote his attention entirely to what was previously one of many tasks. A good thing, I would contend.

[vee en]

Tourist.
I agree with you. Maybe there is a semantic issue between scope and focus. It is a good thing that the navigator can now focus more sharply on the tactical situation - and may even have a better grasp of it in certain situations where the demands of aircraft-handling become critical.