Is the US Navy PMEL just as good as a US Air Force PMEL?

[John H Smith]

Ok this has been a discussion here in our facility for awhile now. Can any one give us opions and facts as to if one os better than the other?

[PMEL Whore]

The 2 programs are managed completely differently, as well they probably should be based on the difference of the mission.  Once upon a time the navy went to school, at least advanced schools, with the AF at Lowry.  I don't know how that works now.  As far as technicians go, and I have been around and seen a lot of them, I have known a lot of good and bad technicians from both sides, but I think overall the AF guys used to get better in depth training where the navy were a bit higher level.  Again, a product of how the navy mission shakes out, all that being on a ship stuff.  While it doesn't make the navy wrong, I prefer the AF system, which while it may be a bit of overkill in some areas , I think it is a more comprehensive program.  I have worked for both systems and I'll take the AF system everytime.

[darkness63]

I wouldn't put much into the answers you are going to receive. You are in inherently going to get biased answers. But for me the Navy, and  more specifically the Marines. Just sayin'.

[Lost in Place]

Having been trained and worked in the USN system (12 yrs) and later working in the USAF system (11 yrs), I think can objectively give you an answer. 
While the work of calibration is the same, the missions were different and how you arrived at calibration tech/metrologist differed.
In the USN (during the 1980's) you are trained in your rating.  Aviation or Electronics, then you specialized in calibration.  The calibration schools occurred near the end of your training, almost as an afterthought.  The idea is that you can cross over and help out on any system abroad ship or aircraft. As a calibration tech, I spent time working on SOAP, IFF, and Aircraft Instrumentation, along with my calibration work. There was only so much room on board a ship, so the techs had to be versatile.
As I understood the USAF system, the personnel were trained as metrologist from the very beginning.  So their focus was much more specialized, and there missions were more limited.
I remember walking into a PMEL the first time in Iceland and was amazed by the number of troops, and to discuss various equipment meant talking to the specialist in each area.  Come on, who would want to specialize in multimeters, when Radio Test Set were much more fun.
Now, to me (just an opinion), a blue suiter, early in their career makes a better metrologist.  The Navy folk make better troubleshooters.  However, after the 10 yr mark, this starts to even out.  At the 20 yr mark, there is little difference, years of experience should make you an expert your area of interest.
My answer is yes, in the initial "PMEL" schools, the USAF wins hands down, but later schooling the USN starts to shine.  Just my take on the issue.

[Armypmel]

I believe they are both top notch, its just that the US Army PMEL is better.

[MIRCS]

Having been trained and worked in the USN system (12 yrs) and later working in the USAF system (11 yrs), I think can objectively give you an answer. 
While the work of calibration is the same, the missions were different and how you arrived at calibration tech/metrologist differed.
In the USN (during the 1980's) you are trained in your rating.  Aviation or Electronics, then you specialized in calibration.  The calibration schools occurred near the end of your training, almost as an afterthought.  The idea is that you can cross over and help out on any system abroad ship or aircraft. As a calibration tech, I spent time working on SOAP, IFF, and Aircraft Instrumentation, along with my calibration work. There was only so much room on board a ship, so the techs had to be versatile.
As I understood the USAF system, the personnel were trained as metrologist from the very beginning.  So their focus was much more specialized, and there missions were more limited.
I remember walking into a PMEL the first time in Iceland and was amazed by the number of troops, and to discuss various equipment meant talking to the specialist in each area.  Come on, who would want to specialize in multimeters, when Radio Test Set were much more fun.
Now, to me (just an opinion), a blue suiter, early in their career makes a better metrologist.  The Navy folk make better troubleshooters.  However, after the 10 yr mark, this starts to even out.  At the 20 yr mark, there is little difference, years of experience should make you an expert your area of interest.
My answer is yes, in the initial "PMEL" schools, the USAF wins hands down, but later schooling the USN starts to shine.  Just my take on the issue.

Well as a former and current Navy person I tend to agree.  I also worked a few years in PMEL and still use K procedures, speak with the engineers on related issues and AFPSL to calibrate some of our stuff. 

I think they're all good.  The USAF seems to have a better support network and metrology function overall.  It however has a smaller footprint in overall need.  The Navy needs support from aircraft, ships, nuclear and so on and this is where the metrology support is lacking.  All they care about seems to be the end user in the fleet and expect everything to be done by the depots and warfare centers with fairy dust.

Where I disagree is with the school and training part.  I was an Instrumentman and from day one was taught metrology in A school, the ET's and AT's this was not the case.  We were the ones who taught Phys-d school along with the USAF until the rating was disbanded.

[measure]

As I understood the USAF system, the personnel were trained as metrologist from the very beginning.  So their focus was much more specialized, and there missions were more limited.
I remember walking into a PMEL the first time in Iceland and was amazed by the number of troops, and to discuss various equipment meant talking to the specialist in each area.  Come on, who would want to specialize in multimeters, when Radio Test Set were much more fun.

When I was in the USAF ('72-'76), it was not uncommon coming out of tech school to be assigned to K1 (low to mid accuracy multimeters, meggers, and the like). As your experience grew (or you griped a lot), the Lab Chief would move you to other areas to broaden your skill base. Sometimes, however, I was 'loaned' to other areas, e.g., NavAids (IFF, TACAN, etc.), when high or priority workload conditions occurred. In my case, I worked in K3 (signal generators), K4 (microwave), and again, K3 (this time, on oscilloscopes), with 'loan outs' to K3, K4 (NavAids), K3 (counters), K8 (Electrical Standards), and a very brief 'loan out' to K6 (Push, Pull, Suck and Blow).

As an indication of the shift in personnel (prior to 1968, only Airmen on their second or subsequent enlistment could cross train into PMEL from another electronic career field; no first termers were allowed), when I arrived at my first (and only) duty station following PME School, Master Sergeants (E-7) were actually working on the bench en masse, with Chief (E-9) and Senior (E-8) Master Sergeants as the Branch and Lab Chiefs, respectively. When I separated at the end of four years (largely due to the end of the Viet Nam war and the retirement of personnel who cross trained into the field prior to 1968), most of the troops on the bench were Staff (E-5) Sergeants or below and a Tech Sergeant (E-6) was the Branch Chief. Subsequently, a Senior Master Sergeant was 'imported' from the Instrument Shop to serve as Branch Chief until a regular PMEL troop of sufficient rank could be brought in to fill the slot.

[Bryan]

Armypmel nailed it.

[measure]

I believe they are both top notch, its just that the US Army PMEL is better.

If you live in a foxhole...

[jerricahas24]

Yeah right!

[Hawaii596]

As a Navy PMEL person, the simple answer is YES.  No need to justify it.  I'm Navy.

Oh, okay.....

MIRCS covered it quite well.  I am Navy PMEL and our senior tech is USAF PMEL.  We've discussed it recently, and the Navy just goes about it differently.  We compared notes a little about some of the minutia during the training, and I think we pretty much agreed that the Navy does have a very good troubleshoot and repair portion.  One of the other differences is that the electrical/electronic side is a different rating than the phys/D side (or was when I was in a LONG time ago - late 70s through mid 80s).  So we also split the PMEL world into two halves.  They work somewhat hand in hand, but two different sets of people covering the two sides.  So I never so much as cal'd a caliper until I was a civilian.

[measure]

One of the other differences is that the electrical/electronic side is a different rating than the phys/D side (or was when I was in a LONG time ago - late 70s through mid 80s).  So we also split the PMEL world into two halves.

In the USAF originally (prior to 1 Jul 72), PMEL troops were trained in all aspects, i.e., DC-LF, µW, Physical/Dimensional,... After that point in time, due to high training costs and the high turnover rate associated with first-termers (initially admitted to the program in 1968), training in µW and Phys/D was dropped at the basic course level (reducing the course length from 46 to 32 weeks) and repositioned as 'advanced courses' that one was sent back to later if a need arose at a particular organization.

In any event, PMEL troops were considered the ultimate 'fix-it' guys, including tasks such as repairing the radar guns owned by the Security Police that were brought to us to fix, even though it was outside of our stated mission.

[skidaddle skaduski]

You lie about your training and backround. You did not work in USAF that long.  Why you lie to make yourself look good is beyond me.  However, I'm going to tell you this.  Talking a good game can only get you so far.  When you get on the bench, and blow stuff up ( cause I have seen you do it, and warned others to hire you only when desperate for SSN's) you know nothing of this career field.  So, stop padding your resume and move on to something you can handle, like... cutting grass, or .. washing windows.  You are the prime example of what is wrong with this career field, and you need to stop now, before others think you know what you're talking about.  I will reveal you, and then oust you.  Your choice, you've been warned.

[USMCPMEL]

Who are you talking to skiddadle??

[griff61]

Who are you talking to skiddadle??

His imaginary foe?