Letters - Air Force Community - Air Force Times

Letters

The case for UAV WOs

After reading several articles and letters on unmanned aerial vehicle pilots, I wanted to put in my 2 cents based on 12 years of experience in both the Air Force and Army.

One can imagine that in the next decade or two, there will be more UAVs than manned aircraft in the U.S. fleet. Future wars will require senior leaders who are well-versed in unmanned systems operations. Undoubtedly there will be some inclusion of UAV operations in Intermediate Level Professional Military Education and at the War College.

However, we cannot expect a senior leader to have been a UAV operator his entire career. Senior leaders have to take career-broadening assignments to get the big picture, although this makes it difficult for them to keep current on the latest technologies, techniques and procedures. A certain tradeoff is required.

But there is too much involved in UAV operations to not have someone completely dedicated to their use. This knowledge cannot be gained from a single school or by rotating into an assignment for a few years. It has to be a dedicated career field.

So far, the implementation of UAV operators has been ad hoc across the services and the levels of warfare. I have seen young soldiers flying Ravens at the tactical level with just a day or two of orientation and noncommissioned officers flying Shadows at the operational level. I know rated Air Force pilots sent on rotations to fly Predators at the strategic level.

UAV technology and its place in warfare have grown to a point where we must clearly delineate the roles, the actors and the parameters. And we would be remiss if we did not standardize these across the services.

I recommend a return to the flight officer ranks — the Air Force warrant officers. A single paygrade, rank and skill progression should be set up to include UAV operators from all services in a single system, with the Air Force as host service.

Flight officers would be trained as the technical and tactical experts and spend their entire careers operating UAVs. Commissioned officers could rotate in on assignment to retain proficiency and earn stick time, but will never become the subject-matter expert that the flight officer would be.

Flight officers could also be trained in other closely related areas to maximize their knowledge of UAV operations.

First, they could receive training in 10- and 20-level maintenance of UAV systems and serve as built-in experts in keeping the systems flying. Second, they could receive training on aircraft ordnance, capabilities and close-air support procedures to serve as a supplement to the limited number of joint terminal attack control airmen. Third, they could necessarily have some training in airspace management and deconfliction. This would be a vital skill in the increasingly crowded airspace.

The creation of a dedicated flight officer corps would also help retain UAV operators. First, making UAV operators warrant officers would greatly improve the pay scale for enlisted UAV operators. Second, an active-duty service obligation could be built into the selection process; eight years would seem reasonable to begin with. Third, perks such as monthly flight pay could be added to encourage retention.

An Air Force flight officer corps would solve many of the issues that integration of UAVs in the military is creating. It is a bold move but an important one that will pay huge dividends. I urge our leaders to take this proposal seriously and act now.

-- Army Capt. Benjamin V. Lentz, Fort Sill, Okla.

Priority perspective

Where is our treasure?

A nation’s priorities follow where its money goes. I found it interesting that the average age of Air Force aircraft is now over 24 years, but the average age of professional baseball, basketball, football and hockey stadiums is less than 19 years. It appears that our nation is more interested in its comfort during entertainment than it is in national defense.

-- Col. Christopher J. Lisanti (ret.), Schertz, Texas

DADT dismissal is fair

I do not agree that Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach is being discharged from the Air Force unfairly because he is gay [“Gay lt. col. fights to make retirement,” June 1].

He surely must have understood he was living in a “don’t ask, don’t tell” environment. Every time he was involved in a gay encounter, he knew he was taking a risk that some partner would expose him. Eventually that’s what happened to him. He knew the rules, and decided to take the risk. Now he must pay the piper.

-- Col. Herbert D. Wright (ret.), Reynoldsburg, Ohio

Don’t rule out nuke UAVs

Robert F. Dorr’s method for arguing for a new manned bomber is highly suspect [“Don’t use UAVs to deliver nukes,” Opening Shots, June 8].

We already use UAVs to deliver nuclear weapons — they are called intercontinental ballistic missiles.

I agree that the service needs a new manned bomber in the near future, but we also need to continue to upgrade our UAV capability. While the thought of having Predators or Reapers flying around with nukes is not something I am comfortable with either, I don’t rule out the possibility of placing nuclear munitions on more capable unmanned systems in the future after a number of issues regarding control and guidance are addressed.

Additionally, citing a recent opinion piece that said UAVs lack the precision for the nuclear mission is laughable in light of the recent disclosures that the manned aircraft he praises are also guilty of dropping ordnance that has killed many more civilians than intended.

Yes, UAVs have a limited capability now, but so did World War I bombers. Only through concerted effort and use did the technology continue to advance enough to create the capable bombers of World War II.

While nukes on flying UAVs may be a step too far right now, we need to continue to employ and improve these assets and not pigeonhole them into the reconnaissance and intelligence missions that Dorr advocates. These platforms have significant advantages and disadvantages, just like their manned counterparts. We need to continue using them to improve their advantages.

-- Lt. Col. John G. Terino Jr. (ret.), Montgomery, Ala.