Weird. In the Navy, Aviation Ordnance is all the same. You could be stationed aboard ship or station building bombs, working on weapon racks 20mm or launchers at AIMD or assigned to a squadron loading ordnance. There is no rivalry. That Mk-82 only needs 4 guys to pick it up using the HLU-256. No need for a SATS loader. IYAOYAS
Prior Navy here: I said the same thing, but the big difference is the multiple types of fighters and bombers the Air Force has and having to learn those airframes and systems vs just having to know F-18s, 35s, and helos I guess. In addition, the Navy has less space and less people onboard a carrier to accomplish their mission vs a base. They are moving more into a cross-training concept a tech school now though.
Ammo are glorified truck drivers. Weapons are Aircraft mechanics that also load munitions. AMMO training is like 6 weeks. Weapons depending on the airframe is 6 months. There is no real comparison. That’s why weapons work with crew chiefs, avionics, hydraulic, engine troops. Ammo drops munitions trailers off and leave. And yet weapons still tow their own trailers in the bomber air frames world. It’s honestly embarrassing this “rivalry”.
Always waiting on ammo. Also, a good 3 man can scoop that bomb right off the trailer and can set it in the hooks of ejector rack without assistance.
There’s a lot more to being an Ammo Troop, building and delivery are just a small part of what they do. IYAAYAS
How long they had upgraded mj 1? I used the mj a1 in 1989 old ass thing
Uhaul!! Ha! Pretty sure he meant UALS. Freaking AMMO 😂
As a former Weapons Loading 2 man and Crew Chief I've seen many a 4 man that could drive rings around any Ammo troop! 😀
Heyo Sgt Williams, Represent!
Weird. In the Navy, Aviation Ordnance is all the same. You could be stationed aboard ship or station building bombs, working on weapon racks 20mm or launchers at AIMD or assigned to a squadron loading ordnance. There is no rivalry.
That Mk-82 only needs 4 guys to pick it up using the HLU-256. No need for a SATS loader. IYAOYAS
Prior Navy here: I said the same thing, but the big difference is the multiple types of fighters and bombers the Air Force has and having to learn those airframes and systems vs just having to know F-18s, 35s, and helos I guess. In addition, the Navy has less space and less people onboard a carrier to accomplish their mission vs a base. They are moving more into a cross-training concept a tech school now though.
Exactly @@nochinben7216
Never understood the competition, but hey without load toads its just air no force, no ammo no boom
You can say that about any job. Lol.
As a 2 man I could out drive most of the BB stickers and the few I couldn't my 3 man Troy could beat easily.
Ammo are glorified truck drivers. Weapons are Aircraft mechanics that also load munitions. AMMO training is like 6 weeks. Weapons depending on the airframe is 6 months. There is no real comparison. That’s why weapons work with crew chiefs, avionics, hydraulic, engine troops. Ammo drops munitions trailers off and leave. And yet weapons still tow their own trailers in the bomber air frames world. It’s honestly embarrassing this “rivalry”.
IYAAYWOT. 🤣