Where is the position of the pilot in relation to whether it is a lead or support role in today's military?

A1C Ian Williams — Tue, 13 Mar 2018 07:43:50 -0400

Putting the classifications of the different airframes aside, I am curious to the feedback on what the consensus of the function of pilot is. It is true that the pilot education track does indeed mold someone into a leader. Considering the use of aircraft to strategically enforce foreign policy, would it also be considered a position of air support due to its rapid mobility and aerospace superiority?

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 13 at 2018 8:17 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 13 Mar 2018 08:17:42 -0400

As an infantryman, I'll say that everything and everybody supports the infantry. I don't say it to be boastful. It's just that wars can't be won without boots on the ground. However, I don't see how a pilot is any different from any other job in the military as far as needing good leadership. And when you combine the complexity of aircraft and airspace with speed, I don't think mediocre leadership in the air would get you very far.

Response by Col Joseph Lenertz made Mar 13 at 2018 9:37 AM

Col Joseph Lenertz — Tue, 13 Mar 2018 09:37:12 -0400

Pilots are the leaders of the Air Force. Before the hate comes, let me just say, there are leaders in every AFSC, and some have risen to 4 -stars (Gen Hyten comes to mind). But let's be real. From Spaatz to Goldfein, every USAF Chief of Staff has worn the radiator wings of a pilot. Things may change in the future, but still today, pilots run the AF. Not saying it's good or bad, just reality. As to pilots' warfighting role, I would make the case that no modern war can be won without airpower, and that every Joint Force Commander recognizes the truth of it. Wars can't be won without boots on the ground. I think that saying is still true today, because I don't think anyone "wins" a nuclear war. But, today, "wars can't be won without planes in the sky" is also true. It is no longer a support role, and many JFC's will identify the Air Component as the supported component, especially in the early stages of an A2AD conflict.

Response by SGM Bill Frazer made Mar 13 at 2018 10:37 AM

SGM Bill Frazer — Tue, 13 Mar 2018 10:37:50 -0400

And from which point of view are you looking at- USAF- which pilots reign supreme , or the other branches which for the most part pilots are part of air support.
-

Response by Lt Col Jim Coe made Mar 13 at 2018 12:04 PM

Lt Col Jim Coe — Tue, 13 Mar 2018 12:04:43 -0400

I'm coming at this as a retired Air Force pilot with a diverse background of operational assignments. I'm writing in generalities, so the details of any pilot's duties or career will differ from what I'm saying.

The Air Force inherited it workforce from the Army Air Forces in 1947 including pilots, both officer and enlisted, warrant officers, and enlisted personnel. In 1959 the Air Force decided to do away with warrant officers and declared officers were expected to be generalist-leaders and NCOs would supervise and manage the technical (hands-on) work of the Air Force. Out of the Army tradition came the idea that all pilots should be officers. Today all Air Force pilots of manned aircraft are officers while pilots of unmanned aircraft may be officers or enlisted.

Air Force pilots execute most of the Air Force mission. They are the combat forces, with due respect to combat controllers, PJs, and security forces. Combat missions include air defense, air superiority, interdiction, strategic weapons employment, close air support, special ops. Combat Support missions include air refueling, transport, command and control, electronic warfare, psychological warfare, reconnaissance, and aeromedical evacuation. Combat Service Support missions include pilot training, executive airlift, and Presidential airlift. Unmanned aircraft perform some of these missions and may be piloted by enlisted personnel.

Air Force manned aircraft pilot training is not a leadership or management course. The personnel entering pilot training are all officers. The output is people with the basic knowledge, skills, and abilities to operate modern aircraft safely and effectively. The current dual-track pilot training channels pilot students into either the fighter-attack-bomber track or the tanker-transport track after primary T-6 training. This direction based on the pilot student's performance and Air Force needs generally shapes their entire Air Force career. Some leadership abilities are developed as a result of the student pilot learning how to lead (under supervision) flights of multiple aircraft or aircraft crews. Important skills of planning, communication, coordination, and evaluation are taught and developed. After pilot training, most pilots attend advanced aircraft-specific training for a few weeks to about a year depending on type and mission. Neither course spends much time on leadership, management, or "officership."

After assignment to a flying squadron, new pilots start their on-the-job education as an Air Force officer. Based on the current paradigm, they are expected to be both officers and pilots. The officer evaluation system requires them to demonstrate management and leadership capabilities. This is often best shown through duties outside of flying. Consequently, pilots wanting to advance quickly (below-the-zone promotions) take on ever increasing levels of responsibility for Squadron support functions such as training officer, standardization officer, scheduler, snack bar officer, and volunteer to handle special projects such as a change of command ceremony and Combined Federal Campaign. Concurrently they must continue to hone their flying capabilities and technical knowledge passing a regular regime of written tests, oral examinations, and flight checks. If they do well, they will get considerable credit on their OERs. Most company grade pilots seldom lead more than a handful of people. Their responsibility for millions of dollars worth of equipment and weapons, sometimes including weapons of mass destruction, is difficult to explain in an OER based on management and sometimes goes as just doing the job.

Majors and above often fill headquarters assignments. They gain important experience shaping and implementing policy, planning large operations, managing resources, and relating to members of other Services. Some will be adept at these assignments and their careers will be accelerated. Others may find a HQ job to be the end of their pathway. A select few will get the highly coveted job of Squadron Operations Officer. Others will start on a path through resident professional military education with stops at Service or Unified Command headquarters in between school assignments. A very few have the privilege of being a flying Squadron Commander. For those few Lt Cols, it will probably be the first time they have led over 50 people. If they do well, then the pathway to O-6 is wide open and they have legitimate hope of becoming a General Officer. The rest of the O-5s will complete their time in staff jobs with scant hope of making Colonel.

Pilots have little more responsibility for implementing US foreign policy than any other Service Member. They execute missions in CONUS and overseas at the orders of their superior officers. On rare occasions one might go rogue and violate rules of engagement in a combat zone or make a thoughtless offhand remark in a meeting with representatives from Allied nations. They seldom shape military policy until later in their careers as Lt Col or above working at Service or Unified Command Headquarters; however, the same can be said for non-pilots in similar jobs.

Response by LtCol Robert Quinter made Mar 13 at 2018 8:02 PM

LtCol Robert Quinter — Tue, 13 Mar 2018 20:02:35 -0400

Marine Corps aviation exists to support the infantry and other support units (artillery, intelligence etc). That said, a Marine Corps aviator fulfills his responsibilities with a different skill set than an Air Force or Navy pilot. Before I became an aviator, I held a basic infantry officer designator in that I had completed the same basic infantry officer's course as my infantry compatriots. Don't get me wrong, I was not as qualified as an infantry officer as those who had gone to the fleet and were assigned to infantry officer billets, but I had been exposed to the same training on infantry equipment, platoon level tactics, and was well aware of the capabilities of their integral and supporting arms. Most aviators never got to directly utilize that training, but it did make us more familiar with what the infantry needed from us beyond merely transporting or supplying them. More than once I accomplished a mission for a unit commander on the ground who I knew from the infantry course and was able to materially contribute to his decision making because of our shared training; but I was in support of his mission. Additionally, while I was in support, he had no command authority over how I utilized my aircraft.
Also, because of the composition of the Aviation units, in addition to aviation billets, aviators often had the opportunity to be the commanding officer of ground oriented support units. I was once the CO of a 1600 Marine unit that included combat engineers, motor transport and communications personnel. During that tour, I was assigned to a Cobra Squadron where I maintained my flight qualifications.
While not the norm, there were many instances of helicopter pilots who were shot down and assumed command of infantry platoons, or even reconnaissance teams where their leaders had been rendered incapable.
So, the simple answer is an aviator seldom has the opportunity to lead Marines other than being in charge of 5-100 men within the squadron department, or the other 15 pilots and 24 crewmen in an assault flight, the opportunities are there and you have the training to effectively handle the challenge should it come to the front