Originally Posted by
trip
Sounds like the MIL needs to make more officers/managers then and stop saying there's a "pilot" shortage, or can only winged officers do the war planning and managing billet?
No they don't need to do that, it would be very bad. The US military has very few "professional staff officers", for very good reason.
All warfare specialties need to be well-presented at higher HQ's. That's why our military is the premier joint combat force in the world... we don't stovepipe warfighters in peace and then expect (hope) they can work together in war. And those are hard lessons learned. This is all fundamental Joint Warfare 101 stuff.
Also each community needs upper managers/combat leaders who have the experience and credibility to lead in war.
Originally Posted by
trip
Maybe the pilot slot is the carrot to keep mid-level officers around to do the managing?
It has always served that function, although not by design. Exception is the army where aviation is a supporting function, not the primary means of power-projection.
The first 10-15 years of your career is primarily operational, with some staff tours to educate you for later on.
The last 10-15 years of your career is primarily staff with a few top leadership jobs if you're lucky/motivated/talented.
After 25-30 years of that you're eligible for possible promotion to flag or general rank.
Anyone who thinks warfighters should be lead by career staff officers deserves to fight a war under their command
If you want to join the military without doing any of the real world big-picture military stuff, join the guard. You can maybe get to 20 without doing a HQ staff tour.