who has more fixed wings...navy or af?
08-16-2008, 02:38 PM
#1
On Reserve
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 21
who has more fixed wings...navy or af?
couldn't find any info on this but i was wondering who has more fixed wings the navy or the airforce. everyone says the navy but i think they mean more pilots, not fixed-wings.
08-16-2008, 03:03 PM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 880
The AF has a few support CSAR helos and such. The Navy has a lot of helos for SAR. I would venture to say that the AF give you more of a chance to fly fixed-wing than the Navy. Look at most pilots when they get their initial aircraft selection. Navy-Jets, Props, Helo are you choices. Most AF selections go jet and props with a small assortment of helos here and there. The AF is a pilot's service. The Navy is a Navy with some planes to boot. I could be wrong though???
08-16-2008, 03:47 PM
#3
Moderate Moderator
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Curator at Static Display
Posts: 5,681
Percentages
museic:
This has been discussed in this forum previously (within the last 8 weeks), but for the USAF, only about 5% of Air Force pilots are helo. When I was in pilot training, you had to volunteer to get a USAF helo, but that has changed--they can assign you one now.
Doing a rough add in my head, of places that I know have helos, and I don't think the Air Force has more than 150 helicopters, total.
In the Navy, it is closer to 50% of all pilots are helo.
This has been discussed in this forum previously (within the last 8 weeks), but for the USAF, only about 5% of Air Force pilots are helo. When I was in pilot training, you had to volunteer to get a USAF helo, but that has changed--they can assign you one now.
Doing a rough add in my head, of places that I know have helos, and I don't think the Air Force has more than 150 helicopters, total.
In the Navy, it is closer to 50% of all pilots are helo.
08-16-2008, 08:46 PM
#5
On Reserve
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: Hornet/Rhino Driver
Posts: 15
If your question is by percentage or pure number it is probably the Air Force by far.
Not including training commands, reserve units, or the RAG (FRS or RTU), the Navy has about 10 active airwings with six fixed wing squadrons and one helo squadron per. This equates to about a total of 55 fixed wing and 4 helo aircraft per airwing. Some airwings have Marine units, and the Prowler aircraft are hot-switched between deployed units, so there is some fudging. I am guessing, but the Navy probably has around 50 P-3s. Throw in some random E-3s (no idea on the number, not many). Adding in the HSL Helos that hang out on the back of the surface ships, probably another 100 or so. The ratio from a rough, but educated, guess is about 1 in 6 aircraft are helos in the Navy. So, not the crazy 50%, but probably still much higher than the Air Force. The one point that is not talked about is that the SH-60 is a two pilot aircraft. All of our pointy nose jets are single pilot, regardless of number of seats. So, your chances of getting a helo go up a little bit there.
From my experience in the Navy, I remember seeing about a 30% rate of dudes go helos. This changes all the time based on the needs of the Navy (read poor planning and over compensation for said poor planning).
As for total numbers of fixed wing aircraft, the Air Force has the Navy beat there.
Hope this helps.
Not including training commands, reserve units, or the RAG (FRS or RTU), the Navy has about 10 active airwings with six fixed wing squadrons and one helo squadron per. This equates to about a total of 55 fixed wing and 4 helo aircraft per airwing. Some airwings have Marine units, and the Prowler aircraft are hot-switched between deployed units, so there is some fudging. I am guessing, but the Navy probably has around 50 P-3s. Throw in some random E-3s (no idea on the number, not many). Adding in the HSL Helos that hang out on the back of the surface ships, probably another 100 or so. The ratio from a rough, but educated, guess is about 1 in 6 aircraft are helos in the Navy. So, not the crazy 50%, but probably still much higher than the Air Force. The one point that is not talked about is that the SH-60 is a two pilot aircraft. All of our pointy nose jets are single pilot, regardless of number of seats. So, your chances of getting a helo go up a little bit there.
From my experience in the Navy, I remember seeing about a 30% rate of dudes go helos. This changes all the time based on the needs of the Navy (read poor planning and over compensation for said poor planning).
As for total numbers of fixed wing aircraft, the Air Force has the Navy beat there.
Hope this helps.
08-16-2008, 10:19 PM
#6
China Visa Applicant
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Midfield downwind
Posts: 1,919
There is a popular myth that seems to make its way around the Navy that they have more actualy fixed wing aircraft than the Air Force.
In 2008, the USAF had about 4,000 aircraft in the active duty inventory, of which were about 160 helos.
The US Navy has about 4,000 aircraft total. I was not able to find breakdowns of what was fixed wing and what was rotary wing. I'm betting it's slightly more than the AF's total.
The USMC has about 1,500 aircraft, of which about 725 are helos.
So, until we know the total number of Navy helos, we can't tie up this one fore sure, but I'm leaning toward calling this myth busted.
In 2008, the USAF had about 4,000 aircraft in the active duty inventory, of which were about 160 helos.
The US Navy has about 4,000 aircraft total. I was not able to find breakdowns of what was fixed wing and what was rotary wing. I'm betting it's slightly more than the AF's total.
The USMC has about 1,500 aircraft, of which about 725 are helos.
So, until we know the total number of Navy helos, we can't tie up this one fore sure, but I'm leaning toward calling this myth busted.
08-17-2008, 09:55 AM
#7
Moderate Moderator
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Curator at Static Display
Posts: 5,681
Addenda
NavyBlue:
Good point that most of the aircraft in the Navy are multi-pilot. That stacks the odds of getting a fighter out of the USN even lower than the airframe ratio.
Trivia, for you: the F-4 was called "The Rhino" long before the Super Hornet was so-dubbed (or even existed), probably by a Mac-Air, nee Boeing, guy who wanted the legacy name to live on.
The explanation to me was (Comparison of F-4 and the actual Rhinoceros):
1. They both have thick, grey hides.
2. They can both run really fast.
3. They're both very big for their species.
4. They're both hard to bring down by enemies.
5. While fast, neither one can turn worth a crap.
Of course, number 5 is what everyone poked the most fun at.
Those of us who flew the legacy Rhino couldn't help but laugh when we saw the Super Hornet had a "sawtooth" leading edge---just like the Phantom.
The parallel runs deep.
Good point that most of the aircraft in the Navy are multi-pilot. That stacks the odds of getting a fighter out of the USN even lower than the airframe ratio.
Trivia, for you: the F-4 was called "The Rhino" long before the Super Hornet was so-dubbed (or even existed), probably by a Mac-Air, nee Boeing, guy who wanted the legacy name to live on.
The explanation to me was (Comparison of F-4 and the actual Rhinoceros):
1. They both have thick, grey hides.
2. They can both run really fast.
3. They're both very big for their species.
4. They're both hard to bring down by enemies.
5. While fast, neither one can turn worth a crap.
Of course, number 5 is what everyone poked the most fun at.
Those of us who flew the legacy Rhino couldn't help but laugh when we saw the Super Hornet had a "sawtooth" leading edge---just like the Phantom.
The parallel runs deep.
08-17-2008, 10:10 AM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,837
Originally Posted by UAL T38 Phlyer
NavyBlue:
Good point that most of the aircraft in the Navy are multi-pilot. That stacks the odds of getting a fighter out of the USN even lower than the airframe ratio.
Trivia, for you: the F-4 was called "The Rhino" long before the Super Hornet was so-dubbed (or even existed), probably by a Mac-Air, nee Boeing, guy who wanted the legacy name to live on.
The explanation to me was (Comparison of F-4 and the actual Rhinoceros):
1. They both have thick, grey hides.
2. They can both run really fast.
3. They're both very big for their species.
4. They're both hard to bring down by enemies.
5. While fast, neither on can turn worth a crap.
Of course, number 5 is what everyone poked the most fun at.
Those of us who flew the legacy Rhino couldn't help but laugh when we saw the Super Hornet had a "sawtooth" leading edge---just like the Phantom.
The parallel runs deep.
Good point that most of the aircraft in the Navy are multi-pilot. That stacks the odds of getting a fighter out of the USN even lower than the airframe ratio.
Trivia, for you: the F-4 was called "The Rhino" long before the Super Hornet was so-dubbed (or even existed), probably by a Mac-Air, nee Boeing, guy who wanted the legacy name to live on.
The explanation to me was (Comparison of F-4 and the actual Rhinoceros):
1. They both have thick, grey hides.
2. They can both run really fast.
3. They're both very big for their species.
4. They're both hard to bring down by enemies.
5. While fast, neither on can turn worth a crap.
Of course, number 5 is what everyone poked the most fun at.
Those of us who flew the legacy Rhino couldn't help but laugh when we saw the Super Hornet had a "sawtooth" leading edge---just like the Phantom.
The parallel runs deep.
The highlighted points above are not great likenesses held between the F-4 and the Super
Especially if compared to the Phantom - the Super is anything but fast; and I'd still have to give the edge to the Super for turning.USMCFLYR
08-17-2008, 03:30 PM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 744 CA
Posts: 4,772
okay... holy crap batman... i guess i have been living in a bubble....in doing some research for the above numbers..... I have come to realize that the "Lifter" was retired from service 6 May 2006..... crap.... being an old "little MAC" guy I still loved the "141".... heck some of those boys from CHS spent nearly as much time at Pope as I did and I was stationed there for nearly 5 years.... What a beautiful bird... ( as a side note my dad was in the AF and we went to Germany on a 141 MAC flight to Rhein Mein in 1969 )....
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
