Andrew Swallow wrote:
Dan wrote:
{snip}

Do try to read for comprehension. If he had been accepted for
pathfinder navigation he would have been promoted to sergeant. If he
had then been sent back to ground ops as a corporal he must have been
washed out of school.

As to why you'd want a sergeant rather than corporal for debriefing
let me give you a modern analogy in the USAF. Debriefing air crews,
while supposed to be done by checklist, required experience on the
part of the debrief personnel. The USAF prefers 7 levels (think
technician) which requires the rank of staff sergeant (E-5). There's
no such thing as an E-4 7 level. Does this mean they don't use 5
levels to debrief? No, but they aren't about to assign those with
limited experience.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

If basically you are debriefed by someone of your own rank, what rank
were the tail gunners?

Andrew Swallow

I never said one was debriefed by someone of the same rank. Debrief
has to be done by someone who knows the systems, in the case of
maintenance, and someone who knows the mission, in the case of
operations. Even with checklists there may be questions that need to be
asked. In your tail gunner case wouldn't it be nice to have someone who
understands the equipment get the word straight from the man who
discovered a problem? If not, why not simply have a paper pusher do debrief?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired