Are these USS Kitty Hawk uniforms worth buying off eBay?

[UUMe]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2206398881&category=36068

[Larry]

I guess, if you want to play "Corpsman".

I bet that's your auction there "UUMe" and your trying to get a little
traffic?

You sneaky, sly one you. Have a great holiday!

Don't forget to check mine:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2575969462&ssPageName=ADME:B:LC:US:1


Larry
AECS (AW/SW/MTS)
Disabled Combat Veteran
USN Retired

20 years of Navy in my rear view mirror
and getting further away every day ;-)

"UUMe" > wrote in message
m...
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2206398881&category=36068

[John Miller]

Larry wrote:

> I bet that's your auction there "UUMe" and your trying to get a little
> traffic?

It looked a little suspicious even before a quick check showed that the eBay
seller and Usenet poster were both in Houston.

--
John Miller
My email address: domain, n4vu.com; username, jsm

We're all in this alone.
-Lily Tomlin

[Michael Wise]

In article >,
(UUMe) wrote:

> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2206398881&category=36068


Four idiot stripes and still an E-6. How many watches did you fall
asleep on?

--Mike

[user]

Hey Mike,
Nahhh,,,all the way to CWO5 and never got caught!!!
Thats one of the funniest things I ever saw anyway!!! Selling your
uniforms on Ebay!!! Just when you think you seen it all,,,,

On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 07:35:11 GMT, Michael Wise > wrote:

>In article >,
> (UUMe) wrote:
>
>> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2206398881&category=36068
>
>
>Four idiot stripes and still an E-6. How many watches did you fall
>asleep on?
>
>--Mike

[Pechs1]

uume-<<
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2206398881&category=36068
>><BR><BR>

16 years in and still a PO1??

Wonder who he ****ed off....
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

[Ogden Johnson III]

John Miller > wrote:

>Larry wrote:
>
>> I bet that's your auction there "UUMe" and your trying to get a little
>> traffic?

>It looked a little suspicious even before a quick check showed that the eBay
>seller and Usenet poster were both in Houston.

I didn't see any mention of the Kitty Hawk in a cursory check of the
link, so add to the suspicion list "How did UUMe know they were worn
by a Kitty Hawk sailor?"
--
OJ III
[Email sent to Yahoo addy is burned before reading.
Lower and crunch the sig and you'll net me at comcast]

[Dave in San Diego]

Michael Wise > wrote in
:

> In article >,
> (UUMe) wrote:
>
>> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2206398881&category
>> =36068
>
>
> Four idiot stripes and still an E-6. How many watches did you fall
> asleep on?
>
> --Mike
>

Begging your pardon, SIR...

A sixteen year corpsman in today's Navy is not unusual, as it wasn't when
I retired some years ago. Not everyone can make Chief, and in the current
competitive environment, it's not what you know, it's who gets the best
suck-up points. When the eval system becomes objective, and the brass who
write and approve them become competent, then maybe the promotion system
will work like it's supposed to.

Having said that, HM1 X could have been "entirely competent" at that
level, but still "lacking critical leadership skills mnecessary to
advance to Chief Petty Officer".

Not all you folks make Captain; not all of us make Chief.

Dave Bowles
AT1 USN Ret
quoted from my own evals
--
-
"For once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes
turned skyward;
For there you have been, and there you long to return."
Leonardo da Vinci

[Larry]

> Having said that, HM1 X could have been "entirely competent" at that
> level, but still "lacking critical leadership skills necessary to
> advance to Chief Petty Officer".
Well put Dave. I agree. Or maybe it was something beyond his control.

I had LPO's working for me that were more than ready for Chief, but were
"victims of the rate". Just not enough billets to promote them all. All I
could tell them was "hang in there, keep up the great job and your time will
come".


Larry
AECS (AW/SW/MTS)
Disabled Combat Veteran
USN Retired

20 years of Navy in my rear view mirror
and getting further away every day ;-)



"Dave in San Diego" > wrote in message
...
> Michael Wise > wrote in
> :
>
> > In article >,
> > (UUMe) wrote:
> >
> >> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2206398881&category
> >> =36068
> >
> >
> > Four idiot stripes and still an E-6. How many watches did you fall
> > asleep on?
> >
> > --Mike
> >
>
> Begging your pardon, SIR...
>
> A sixteen year corpsman in today's Navy is not unusual, as it wasn't when
> I retired some years ago. Not everyone can make Chief, and in the current
> competitive environment, it's not what you know, it's who gets the best
> suck-up points. When the eval system becomes objective, and the brass who
> write and approve them become competent, then maybe the promotion system
> will work like it's supposed to.
>
> Having said that, HM1 X could have been "entirely competent" at that
> level, but still "lacking critical leadership skills mnecessary to
> advance to Chief Petty Officer".
>
> Not all you folks make Captain; not all of us make Chief.
>
> Dave Bowles
> AT1 USN Ret
> quoted from my own evals
> --
> -
> "For once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes
> turned skyward;
> For there you have been, and there you long to return."
> Leonardo da Vinci

[Charlie Wolf]

Undoubtedly had some stupid-ass Commander writing his evals instead of
his Division Chief...
Regards,
(CPO, Ret.)

On 28 Nov 2003 15:53:20 GMT, (Pechs1) wrote:

>uume-<<
>http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2206398881&category=36068
>>><BR><BR>
>
>16 years in and still a PO1??
>
>Wonder who he ****ed off....
>P. C. Chisholm
>CDR, USN(ret.)
>Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

[Larry]

> Undoubtedly had some stupid-ass Commander writing his evals instead of
> his Division Chief...
OUCH!!

:-)


Larry
AECS (AW/SW/MTS)
Disabled Combat Veteran
USN Retired

20 years of Navy in my rear view mirror
and getting further away every day ;-)




"Charlie Wolf" > wrote in message
...
> Undoubtedly had some stupid-ass Commander writing his evals instead of
> his Division Chief...
> Regards,
> (CPO, Ret.)
>
> On 28 Nov 2003 15:53:20 GMT, (Pechs1) wrote:
>
> >uume-<<
>
>http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2206398881&category=3606
8
> >>><BR><BR>
> >
> >16 years in and still a PO1??
> >
> >Wonder who he ****ed off....
> >P. C. Chisholm
> >CDR, USN(ret.)
> >Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye
Phlyer
>

[user]

Absolutely Right Dave, thanks for clarifying and expounding on that.
Not everyone can make Chief. We don't all possess those desired
leadership qualities we look for in advancing a sailor to Chief. Being
just technically competent won't get you selected. If you don't
possess those needed leadership skills, the only other way to make it
is to "suck up" as you stated and slip through the cracks, and wind up
as an E-7, kinda like the other services. You never did get the fact
that the "brass" that writes your evals are the Chiefs? (whom in your
words are incompetent) I suppose if you woulda made it you would have
been the only competent one? See, they all sit around in the mess,
recognize who has those needed leadership skills, then proceed to
groom and write the future leaders the good evals and rankings. They
don't want an E7 technician in thier mess that can't lead. They want a
Chief in their mess. OBTW all of us CWO's/LDO's (thousands) all
"sucked up" to promote from E1 to where we are now. Glad you
enlightened us all. Thanks ;)

On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 01:08:41 GMT, Dave in San Diego
> wrote:

>Michael Wise > wrote in
:
>
>> In article >,
>> (UUMe) wrote:
>>
>>> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2206398881&category
>>> =36068
>>
>>
>> Four idiot stripes and still an E-6. How many watches did you fall
>> asleep on?
>>
>> --Mike
>>
>
>Begging your pardon, SIR...
>
>A sixteen year corpsman in today's Navy is not unusual, as it wasn't when
>I retired some years ago. Not everyone can make Chief, and in the current
>competitive environment, it's not what you know, it's who gets the best
>suck-up points. When the eval system becomes objective, and the brass who
>write and approve them become competent, then maybe the promotion system
>will work like it's supposed to.
>
>Having said that, HM1 X could have been "entirely competent" at that
>level, but still "lacking critical leadership skills mnecessary to
>advance to Chief Petty Officer".
>
>Not all you folks make Captain; not all of us make Chief.
>
>Dave Bowles
>AT1 USN Ret
>quoted from my own evals

[user]

That coming from a retired Chief, Charlie Wolf. I guess retiring as a
Chief is pretty ambitious, probably never thought you would make E6
and everything after that was gravy right??? The jokes on you Pal, how
do you know that "Commander" isn't an LDO and was also a Chief, but
had a little more ambition? OBTW the division Chief you were referring
to is more of a stupid ass for letting the Commander write the E6's
eval!!!
was On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 20:13:57 -0800, "Larry"
> wrote:

>> Undoubtedly had some stupid-ass Commander writing his evals instead of
>> his Division Chief...
>OUCH!!
>
>:-)
>
>
>Larry
>AECS (AW/SW/MTS)
>Disabled Combat Veteran
>USN Retired
>
>20 years of Navy in my rear view mirror
>and getting further away every day ;-)
>
>
>
>
>"Charlie Wolf" > wrote in message
...
>> Undoubtedly had some stupid-ass Commander writing his evals instead of
>> his Division Chief...
>> Regards,
>> (CPO, Ret.)
>>
>> On 28 Nov 2003 15:53:20 GMT, (Pechs1) wrote:
>>
>> >uume-<<
>>
>>http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2206398881&category=3606
>8
>> >>><BR><BR>
>> >
>> >16 years in and still a PO1??
>> >
>> >Wonder who he ****ed off....
>> >P. C. Chisholm
>> >CDR, USN(ret.)
>> >Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye
>Phlyer
>>
>
>

[Pechs1]

cwolf-<< Undoubtedly had some stupid-ass Commander writing his evals instead of
his Division Chief...
Regards,
(CPO, Ret.) >><BR><BR>

c'mon Chief, that's a little harsh, don ya think??

I wrote lots 'o evals but always looked for a rough from the Div CPO or branch
PO1...But to massage these things to get the deserving selected was a skill tht
took years to hone..Some COs had, some didn't..
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

[Pechs1]

dave-<< Not all you folks make Captain; not all of us make Chief. >><BR><BR>

The epitomy of rank in the USN officer corps is O-5, where you can get your
first command and where you can retire at 20 years...and where you can
generally still fly. O-6 is not, not many guys I knew made O-6 before 20
years...
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

[Charlie Wolf]

On 29 Nov 2003 15:13:41 GMT, (Pechs1) wrote:

>cwolf-<< Undoubtedly had some stupid-ass Commander writing his evals instead of
>his Division Chief...
>Regards,
>(CPO, Ret.) >><BR><BR>
>
>c'mon Chief, that's a little harsh, don ya think??
Yea - a bit.... but ya walked right into it Cmdr.
Regards,


>
>I wrote lots 'o evals but always looked for a rough from the Div CPO or branch
>PO1...But to massage these things to get the deserving selected was a skill tht
>took years to hone..Some COs had, some didn't..
>P. C. Chisholm
>CDR, USN(ret.)
>Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

[Dave in San Diego]

user > wrote in
:

> Absolutely Right Dave, thanks for clarifying and expounding on that.
> Not everyone can make Chief. We don't all possess those desired
> leadership qualities we look for in advancing a sailor to Chief. Being
> just technically competent won't get you selected. If you don't
> possess those needed leadership skills, the only other way to make it
> is to "suck up" as you stated and slip through the cracks, and wind up
> as an E-7, kinda like the other services. You never did get the fact
> that the "brass" that writes your evals are the Chiefs? (whom in your
> words are incompetent)

Nope, never said that. Many of my evals were modified by officers who
couldn't write, and refused to change them because they thought they were
legends in their own minds. There were also those who were wired into
believing that all the marks had to be within a bracket, say 3.4 to 3.8,
or 3.6 to 4.0, or even more extreme, only one mark apart - 3.6 or 3.8,
and nothing outside. I worked for more than one DO who thought you
absolutely couldn't give someone a 4.0 and a 3.2 on the same eval. (The
guy I did that for had a poster-grade uniform and a short-timers
attitude, and fully deserved both marks.) Those evals that were written
by Chiefs and sent thru the system as written usually came out pretty
well.

> I suppose if you woulda made it you would have
> been the only competent one?

Nope, never said that either. But I did give basic writing classes at a
couple of commands, as a first class.

> See, they all sit around in the mess,
> recognize who has those needed leadership skills, then proceed to
> groom and write the future leaders the good evals and rankings. They
> don't want an E7 technician in thier mess that can't lead. They want a
> Chief in their mess.

Agree 100%! That's why i didn't get there, but my wife did. I'm a better
technician, but she's a better leader. There were those whose
"friendliness" could do a lot for them, though.

> OBTW all of us CWO's/LDO's (thousands) all
> "sucked up" to promote from E1 to where we are now. Glad you
> enlightened us all. Thanks ;)

Well, the suck-up thing might have been a bit harsh, now that I've had an
opportunity to back off for a bit. "Aw ****s" seem to count a lot worse
now than they used to, and even one can be the kiss of death these days,
instead of being the learning opportunity it could be made into 20 yrs
ago. Getting beyond those "aw ****s" can be an area where that
friendliness I spoke of above could give an unfair advantage for some.

I retired in 1989, so my personal participation in the great eval game
ended then. I saw what happened in my wife's various divisions until
2000, when she retired. I got to see the system from an outsider's
viewpoint during those 11 years, and noticed a significant change between
my retirement and hers. Some changes were good, some not so good. I still
think the system is flawed despite all the changes I've seen in 30+
years, and will continue to hamper some folks who deserve promotion but
can't get it because they don't fit someone's mold.

I do accept that at least part of your response may have been tongue-in-
cheek, but I thought the original comment about the 16-year first class
was out of line and felt compelled to reply.

Dave in San Diego
--
-
"For once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes
turned skyward;
For there you have been, and there you long to return."
Leonardo da Vinci

[John Keeney]

"Ogden Johnson III" > wrote in message
...
> John Miller > wrote:
>
> >Larry wrote:
> >
> >> I bet that's your auction there "UUMe" and your trying to get a little
> >> traffic?
>
> >It looked a little suspicious even before a quick check showed that the
eBay
> >seller and Usenet poster were both in Houston.
>
> I didn't see any mention of the Kitty Hawk in a cursory check of the
> link, so add to the suspicion list "How did UUMe know they were worn
> by a Kitty Hawk sailor?"

Must have been real cursory: "Kitty Hawk" is in at least two places
in the eBay ad.

[Longtailedlizard]

>"victims of the rate". Just not enough billets to promote them all. All I
>could tell them was "hang in there, keep up the great job and your time will
>come".
>
>
>Larry
>AECS (AW/SW/MTS)
>Disabled Combat Veteran
>USN Retired


"Victims of rate", this is or was the case with AT's, I encountered this going
from E-3 to E-4, then again from E-4 to E-5. As a four year guy, I started out
life as an AR, graduated from A school as a ATAA, mean while the 6 year guys
were graduating as AT3's.
Then after doing my TIR, and finally making AT3, I once again encountered the
"victim of rate" the AT3's (rent-a-crows) were graduating from AFTA (advanced
first term avionics school) or AFTA-births as we called them, getting ready to
take AT2, while I was installing tracking gear on rotor blades, paralleling
generators, changing the "greenhouse" window after the Q/A chief stepped
through it, etc, etc.
But I really can't complain, I did my 4, and got out, and thanks to my
"nothing but a black box puller" "O" level career, spent the past 16 years
doing it on the civilian side for a much better pay and no sea duty. ;)
So being a "victim of rate" work out great for me.
So I can see how in some rates it would not be uncommon for a hard charg'in,
4.0 sailor to retire an E-6.

J

BTW, as for those who say, the numbers are figured out before hand, and the
Navy takes only so many AFTA guys and regular guys its BS. I like many others
who make there required time to graduate, we were ask if we were to extend for
2 years, you can walk out of school as a E-4 instead of an E-2. Fortunitly for
me 1989 sounded like forever in 1983, I passed, many other did'nt.

[user]

Dave,

That last posting by you actually had some class! You know it's
different on both sides of the fence. Of course I've seen the changes
myself after 22 years active. Today's eval/fitrep system still needs
work but is helluva lot better than 10 years ago. I was in a NAMTRA as
an E6 with 38 other PO1's, all 4.0!!! The closest friend I have here
now is a retired E6, best AT you ever seen as a technician. He was the
library of knowledge for the EP3. But it wasn't just one persons mold
he didn't fit, it was the Navy's mold he didn't fit for making Chief.
I tried to point out that it just isn't an advancement in rank, the
rank of Chief is a whole new realm. Nowadays its all about the
"ranking". In aviation, (this is an aviation newsgroup), all the
commands I've been in let the Chiefs rank the E6 and below. Of course
it's the Skippers perogative to change that, but if he does, he has
some 'splainin to o to the Chiefs Mess.

On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 04:27:03 GMT, Dave in San Diego
> wrote:

>user > wrote in
:
>
>> Absolutely Right Dave, thanks for clarifying and expounding on that.
>> Not everyone can make Chief. We don't all possess those desired
>> leadership qualities we look for in advancing a sailor to Chief. Being
>> just technically competent won't get you selected. If you don't
>> possess those needed leadership skills, the only other way to make it
>> is to "suck up" as you stated and slip through the cracks, and wind up
>> as an E-7, kinda like the other services. You never did get the fact
>> that the "brass" that writes your evals are the Chiefs? (whom in your
>> words are incompetent)
>
>Nope, never said that. Many of my evals were modified by officers who
>couldn't write, and refused to change them because they thought they were
>legends in their own minds. There were also those who were wired into
>believing that all the marks had to be within a bracket, say 3.4 to 3.8,
>or 3.6 to 4.0, or even more extreme, only one mark apart - 3.6 or 3.8,
>and nothing outside. I worked for more than one DO who thought you
>absolutely couldn't give someone a 4.0 and a 3.2 on the same eval. (The
>guy I did that for had a poster-grade uniform and a short-timers
>attitude, and fully deserved both marks.) Those evals that were written
>by Chiefs and sent thru the system as written usually came out pretty
>well.
>
>> I suppose if you woulda made it you would have
>> been the only competent one?
>
>Nope, never said that either. But I did give basic writing classes at a
>couple of commands, as a first class.
>
>> See, they all sit around in the mess,
>> recognize who has those needed leadership skills, then proceed to
>> groom and write the future leaders the good evals and rankings. They
>> don't want an E7 technician in thier mess that can't lead. They want a
>> Chief in their mess.
>
>Agree 100%! That's why i didn't get there, but my wife did. I'm a better
>technician, but she's a better leader. There were those whose
>"friendliness" could do a lot for them, though.
>
>> OBTW all of us CWO's/LDO's (thousands) all
>> "sucked up" to promote from E1 to where we are now. Glad you
>> enlightened us all. Thanks ;)
>
>Well, the suck-up thing might have been a bit harsh, now that I've had an
>opportunity to back off for a bit. "Aw ****s" seem to count a lot worse
>now than they used to, and even one can be the kiss of death these days,
>instead of being the learning opportunity it could be made into 20 yrs
>ago. Getting beyond those "aw ****s" can be an area where that
>friendliness I spoke of above could give an unfair advantage for some.
>
>I retired in 1989, so my personal participation in the great eval game
>ended then. I saw what happened in my wife's various divisions until
>2000, when she retired. I got to see the system from an outsider's
>viewpoint during those 11 years, and noticed a significant change between
>my retirement and hers. Some changes were good, some not so good. I still
>think the system is flawed despite all the changes I've seen in 30+
>years, and will continue to hamper some folks who deserve promotion but
>can't get it because they don't fit someone's mold.
>
>I do accept that at least part of your response may have been tongue-in-
>cheek, but I thought the original comment about the 16-year first class
>was out of line and felt compelled to reply.
>
>Dave in San Diego

[Larry]

> So I can see how in some rates it would not be uncommon for a hard
charg'in,
>4.0 sailor to retire an E-6.
I remember the AZ's and AME's had it pretty tough (due to very limited
number of billets to advance into).

Larry




"Longtailedlizard" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> >"victims of the rate". Just not enough billets to promote them all. All I
> >could tell them was "hang in there, keep up the great job and your time
will
> >come".
> >
> >
> >Larry
> >AECS (AW/SW/MTS)
> >Disabled Combat Veteran
> >USN Retired
>
>
> "Victims of rate", this is or was the case with AT's, I encountered this
going
> from E-3 to E-4, then again from E-4 to E-5. As a four year guy, I started
out
> life as an AR, graduated from A school as a ATAA, mean while the 6 year
guys
> were graduating as AT3's.
> Then after doing my TIR, and finally making AT3, I once again
encountered the
> "victim of rate" the AT3's (rent-a-crows) were graduating from AFTA
(advanced
> first term avionics school) or AFTA-births as we called them, getting
ready to
> take AT2, while I was installing tracking gear on rotor blades,
paralleling
> generators, changing the "greenhouse" window after the Q/A chief stepped
> through it, etc, etc.
> But I really can't complain, I did my 4, and got out, and thanks to my
> "nothing but a black box puller" "O" level career, spent the past 16 years
> doing it on the civilian side for a much better pay and no sea duty. ;)
> So being a "victim of rate" work out great for me.
> So I can see how in some rates it would not be uncommon for a hard
charg'in,
> 4.0 sailor to retire an E-6.
>
> J
>
> BTW, as for those who say, the numbers are figured out before hand, and
the
> Navy takes only so many AFTA guys and regular guys its BS. I like many
others
> who make there required time to graduate, we were ask if we were to extend
for
> 2 years, you can walk out of school as a E-4 instead of an E-2. Fortunitly
for
> me 1989 sounded like forever in 1983, I passed, many other did'nt.
>
>

[Chuck]

Forgive me but I can't resist my story of promotion in the enlisted
ranks.

I was a slickarm AQ1 (automatically changed from AT (9980), then
automatically changed to PT1 when PT was established in 1958. A year
after I had reenlisted for six years I decided not to make the Navy a
career, turned down a commission, and simply did not take the CPO exams
later. I had a fantastic job and didn't want to take a slot from a
lifer.

Until my CO in VQ-2, for reasons of his own, gave me a direct order to
take the Chief's exam - which I did.

I thought he was going to have an apoplectic fit when he stormed into
the Green Room with the detailed test results, waving the papers in
front of my face.

Screwing up in a topic area I knew nothing about I had actually gotten
ONE QUESTION CORRECT! Most effort I ever put into a test in my entire
life!

Chuck Huber - VC-8, VAH-1, FAITCLANT, VQ-2 - 1953 to 1963





HEAVY ATTACK COMPOSITE (VC-5,6,7,8,9) WEBSITE
http://community.webtv.net/charles379/USNComposite

FAIRECONRON ONE AND TWO (VQ-1/2) CASUALTIES
http://www.anzwers.org/free/navyscpo4/Chuck_Huber_AirCrew.html

[Larry]

> I was a slickarm AQ1 (automatically changed from AT (9980), then
> automatically changed to PT1 when PT was established in 1958.
Chuck, What is a "PT"?

Larry
AECS (AW/SW/MTS)
Disabled Combat Veteran
USN Retired

20 years of Navy in my rear view mirror
and getting further away every day ;-)




"Chuck" > wrote in message
...
> Forgive me but I can't resist my story of promotion in the enlisted
> ranks.
>
> I was a slickarm AQ1 (automatically changed from AT (9980), then
> automatically changed to PT1 when PT was established in 1958. A year
> after I had reenlisted for six years I decided not to make the Navy a
> career, turned down a commission, and simply did not take the CPO exams
> later. I had a fantastic job and didn't want to take a slot from a
> lifer.
>
> Until my CO in VQ-2, for reasons of his own, gave me a direct order to
> take the Chief's exam - which I did.
>
> I thought he was going to have an apoplectic fit when he stormed into
> the Green Room with the detailed test results, waving the papers in
> front of my face.
>
> Screwing up in a topic area I knew nothing about I had actually gotten
> ONE QUESTION CORRECT! Most effort I ever put into a test in my entire
> life!
>
> Chuck Huber - VC-8, VAH-1, FAITCLANT, VQ-2 - 1953 to 1963
>
>
>
>
>
> HEAVY ATTACK COMPOSITE (VC-5,6,7,8,9) WEBSITE
> http://community.webtv.net/charles379/USNComposite
>
> FAIRECONRON ONE AND TWO (VQ-1/2) CASUALTIES
> http://www.anzwers.org/free/navyscpo4/Chuck_Huber_AirCrew.html
>

[Chuck]

Larry, a PT was a Photographic Intelligenceman - from 1957 to 1974/5
when PT and YN (2505) were combined into IS Intelligence Specialist.

My own billets as PT were in Fleet Air Intelligence Training Center
Norfolk (FAITCLANT) instructing AIOs (and others) in visual and radar
photo interpretation and targeting, and in VQ-2 as mission planner and
intel analyst.

USN Heavy Attack (VC, then VAH - P2V-3C, AJ-1/2, A3D-1/2 aircraft) was
initially tasked with carrier-launched nuclear missions on the Soviet
Union and Bloc countries, and obviously there was very little actual
"radar return" data available for specific target folders.

Simulated radar returns for target folders were created from visual
photographs, and other analyses, and PTs assisted AIOs in this target
packet creation. When SAC got going and the Navy nuke role went to
submarines, PTs went on to other things.

My website (below) covers the 1948-1955 Navy Heavy Attack period of VC
squadrons.

Chuck



HEAVY ATTACK COMPOSITE (VC-5,6,7,8,9) WEBSITE
http://community.webtv.net/charles379/USNComposite

FAIRECONRON ONE AND TWO (VQ-1/2) CASUALTIES
http://www.anzwers.org/free/navyscpo4/Chuck_Huber_AirCrew.html

[Larry]

> Larry, a PT was a Photographic Intelligenceman - from 1957 to 1974/5
> when PT and YN (2505) were combined into IS Intelligence Specialist.
Aaaahhhh! I understand now.

Thanks Chuck- I had no clue. My experience was from 78 to 98 and am used to
working with IS's. Just never heard of a "PT".

> USN Heavy Attack (VC, then VAH - P2V-3C, AJ-1/2, A3D-1/2 aircraft) was
> initially tasked with carrier-launched nuclear missions on the Soviet
> Union and Bloc countries,
I was on a "Nuc Loading Team" in VA-165 in the early 80's and remember that
drill well. It's kinda scary now when I look back and realize the potential
destruction of those weapons. I'm glad they are a little more controlled
now.


Larry
AECS (AW/SW/MTS)
Disabled Combat Veteran
USN Retired

20 years of Navy in my rear view mirror
and getting further away every day ;-)


"Chuck" > wrote in message
...
> Larry, a PT was a Photographic Intelligenceman - from 1957 to 1974/5
> when PT and YN (2505) were combined into IS Intelligence Specialist.
>
> My own billets as PT were in Fleet Air Intelligence Training Center
> Norfolk (FAITCLANT) instructing AIOs (and others) in visual and radar
> photo interpretation and targeting, and in VQ-2 as mission planner and
> intel analyst.
>
> USN Heavy Attack (VC, then VAH - P2V-3C, AJ-1/2, A3D-1/2 aircraft) was
> initially tasked with carrier-launched nuclear missions on the Soviet
> Union and Bloc countries, and obviously there was very little actual
> "radar return" data available for specific target folders.
>
> Simulated radar returns for target folders were created from visual
> photographs, and other analyses, and PTs assisted AIOs in this target
> packet creation. When SAC got going and the Navy nuke role went to
> submarines, PTs went on to other things.
>
> My website (below) covers the 1948-1955 Navy Heavy Attack period of VC
> squadrons.
>
> Chuck
>
>
>
> HEAVY ATTACK COMPOSITE (VC-5,6,7,8,9) WEBSITE
> http://community.webtv.net/charles379/USNComposite
>
> FAIRECONRON ONE AND TWO (VQ-1/2) CASUALTIES
> http://www.anzwers.org/free/navyscpo4/Chuck_Huber_AirCrew.html
>