clarification of JTAC role

[johnnymac]

My understanding is that all Army JTACs are SF-qualified, but that the other branches only treat it more like an additional qualification/identifier...and, given this, a JTAC from one of the other branches may or may not also be qualified for their respective special operations units/groups/etc. Is this accurate?

Asking in order to properly assess the qualifications of a potential job applicant.

Thanks

[SATCOM]

The US Army Special Warfare Center (SWC) manages the Special Operations Terminal Attack Controller Course (SOTACC) at Yuma, AZ. As far as I know, only SOCOM personnel are authorized to attend that course. Do you need to know if an applicant is SF? Or do you need to know more reference JTAC? The statement regarding the other branches treating JTAC as an additional qualification is wrong, as the United States Air Force has a MOS dedicated solely to JTAC, they are called Tactical Air Control Party (TACP).

Hope this helps.....

[johnnymac]

I have read elsewhere that not all TACPs are JTAC-qualified (apparently, TACP is the USAF MOS, while JTAC is the qualification that they may or may not have). If you are absolutely certain that you are correct, let me know.

My original question came after someone was referred to me and was described as JTAC; the guy giving the referral described JTAC to be like "Air Force SF" (which I immediately recognized as incorrect). So...I'm trying to see just where Air Force JTACs fit with regard to Special Operations.

(edit: If only SOCOM guys can attend the Army-administered course, that would support my belief that all Army JTACs are SF...but I need to know about the AF side, and I believe they have their own school. Not certain about this though...)

[82Redleg]

I don't think ALL Army JTACs are SF, but AFAIK, they all come from SOCOM. I've heard that some of the 75th RGR RGT 13Fs have gone, and some of the 13s (As and Fs) in the 7th Group Joint Fires Element also attended. http://sill-www.army.mil/firesbullet...N_FEB_2010.pdf

Regarding your original question, AF JTACs are not necessarily AFSOC, although there are JTACs in AFSOC.

[SATCOM]

I see what you seek. In the USAF, there are only two MOS/AFSC that can be JTAC certified: Combat Control Team (CCT) and Tactical Air Control Party (TACP). All, repeat all, CCT fall under SOCOM. There is only one TACP unit that falls under SOCOM, period. That unit is the 17th Air Support Operations Squadron (ASOS).

JTAC is a certification/qualification, and NOT all CCT or TACP gain this qualification. The TACP MOS/AFSC deals solely with Close Air Support, while the CCT handles Air Traffic Control (ATC), Helicopter Landing Zone (HLZ), and Drop Zone (DZ) Control as well as surveys.

Does that answer your question?

[johnnymac]

That is perfect. Thanks to both of you for your help

[Skidder]

johnnymac,

STACOM is mostly on the money...but, since I teach this stuff, let me see if I can help. In the USAF, the AFSC, same thing as an Army MOS, which get JTAC qualified is 1C4. 1C4's career path is a lifetime inside of the Close Air Support world, working in the TACP, Tactical Air Control Party. A TACP is made up of ALOs (who do the CAS planning), JTACs and ROMADs (who do the execution of the CAS) and at certain levels (Division and higher) there can be support guys in the TACP. Below Division, the TACP is ALOs, JTACs, and ROMADs. TACP is what they do, the Air Force Command structure they are part of is either the Air Support Operations Squadron (ASOS), the Air Support Operations Group (ASOG), or the Air Ground Operations Wing (AGOW). When you take an ASOS or an ASOG, add about 50 comm and support guys/with a bunch of comm crap, the ASOS/G becomes an Air Support Operations Center (ASOC). Doctrinally, ASOCs are found at Corps level, but starting in FY11, they are moving to the Division level.

Now, back on topic. In the AFSC of 1C4, once you are JTAC qualified, you get the Additonal Skill Identifier (ASI) of 914, so the AFSC/ASI combination would read, 1C4914.

Combat Controllers, in AFSOC like was already said, are 1C2 AFSCs. Some percentage of 1C2s are also 914 ASI carrying individuals, but not all. When OEF kicked off, AFSOC sent a bunch of 1C2s through JTAC qualification to make up for shortages of 1C4914 guys.

If you are looking to check out a guy, just ask what his AFSC was, and what ASI's he may have earned. If he balks at rattling off what I've just told you, he is making it up.

[johnnymac]

Originally Posted by Skidder

If you are looking to check out a guy, just ask what his AFSC was, and what ASI's he may have earned. If he balks at rattling off what I've just told you, he is making it up.

No worries, I'm not trying to vet the guy; just trying to see if he qualifies for certain positions which require Special Operations experience and/or a SF qualification. In any case, the additional info is greatly appreciated.

[Hotmike]

Originally Posted by Skidder

johnnymac,

Now, back on topic. In the AFSC of 1C4, once you are JTAC qualified, you get the Additonal Skill Identifier (ASI) of 914, so the AFSC/ASI combination would read, 1C4914.

Not Quite Skidder -

The AFS is 1C4X0 (with the "X" being the variable for 3, 5 or 7 Level)

the SEI (Special Experience Identifier) is 914

The AFS for a 7 Level (TSgt/MSgt) would still be 1C470, with an SEI of 914.

At least that's the way it was when I was an ETAC/JTAC

HK

[Skidder]

Hotmike,

Yup. One of the things I try to do when I teach is know how much of "the truth" my students need to digest. The limfac usually being that too much, and their eyeballs will roll back in their heads. When I start talking to the Army about JTACs, JFOs, TACPs, 1C4s, 1C2s, etc., it doesn't take long to start the eyeballs rolling. "So, your telling us that a JTAC is really 1/3 of the parts that make up the TACP, and that a current/qualified JTAC is really a 1C4 AFSC (which is like an MOS) that has an SEI of 914, but could also be a SOF guy with a 1C2 AFSC that has been to the JTAC school? Even so, if the 1C4 doesn't keep up with his required numbers of controls, he will still be a 1C4, but not a JTAC??!?!!?!! ARGGGHHHHHHH!"

That being said, I don't know how long it has been since you set your ruck down for the last time, but for your knowledge...your data is very nearly still exactly correct. The only tweak I would make to what you said is in regards to the AFSC's last digit. For whatever reason, what you knew as 1C4X0 is now 1C4X1...maybe zero was seen to mean nothing and 1 is something, so someone made the change???

[Hotmike]

I retired in 2004... I don't know if I ever held a 1C4X1 AFS or not, but for most of my career (23 years) we were X0s... Any idea when it changed to X1? (and what does the 1 delineate?)

I also left out 1 and 9 levels as Student and "CEM" are rarely current JTACs.

To simplify with your students, I would just tell them that NOBODY is a JTAC without and SEI of 914 in the AF.

Hk

[Skidder]

Hotmike,

Here is the skinny, straight from my sources at the Pentagon...If you see a 1C4X0, that means the guy is a Chief. Everyone else is a 1C4X1.

This, of course, means that my smart-a'd comment about 0 meaning nothing, so they changed it to 1 wasn't a good guess. In fact, if you are somebody(a Chief) then you are a 0, everyone else gets a 1...which means nothing.

[stanpunjabTrini]

Here is a link I came aross at Bagram PAO about JTACs. Based on location and theatre, some get to go to Air Assault School, others Airborne, etc based on mission requirements:

http://www.bagram.afcent.af.mil/news...p?id=123250033

[JasonA]

Not sure if this helps but I've known marines from ANGLICO that went to the SOTACC in Arizona. And went I went through the EWTGPAC (JTAC) course on Coronado Island we had an Air Force CCT student there.

[Skidder]

Sorry, we got a bit off track in answering the initial query...

Original question was..."My understanding is that all Army JTACs are SF-qualified, but that the other branches only treat it more like an additional qualification/identifier...and, given this, a JTAC from one of the other branches may or may not also be qualified for their respective special operations units/groups/etc. Is this accurate?"

Johnnymac, here is the scoop. First, all Army JTACs are USASOC guys, but not for the reasons you might think. JTACs are very expensive pieces of equipment to build, and even more costly to maintain. Army JTACs come from the SF world, not because that is the only place where you can find an Army guy who can cut the mustard, but rather because SOCOM then pays the bill for sustainment. And by the way, the numbers of USASOC JTACs is a VERY small number, basically, the Army (both USASOC and GPF) get the JTACs they need from the other services...mostly the Air Force. The conventional Army, although they want GPF JTACs, has always balked at the the sustainment cost. So, since the Army won't pay for the sustainment, the GPF Army has never been able to build JTACs according to the JTAC MOA. There is a lot more to the issue regarding the Army and JTACs, but that is the quick version.

Second, and maybe even harder to explain quickly, there are JTACs that are built to be in SOF units, and there are those built to be in GPF units. The Navy is pretty easy, most their guys are NSW, because they are the Navy on the ground...thus the Navy that will need to call in CAS. The Air Force has JTACs that work with the Army, JTACs that work with AFSOC and with USASOC...the streams do not often cross between GPF and SOF JTACs. These AF SOF JTACs will live their careers inside of AFSOC, generally managed by 'Big AF', but managed in detail by AFSOC. The Marines are, well, the Marines...so they are a variation on everyone else's themes for who their JTACs are and who they work for.

Third, JTAC isn't just another skill identifier to a JTAC...it is THE skill identifier. In my other postings, I mentioned that the Air Force takes a specific AFSC and adds the JTAC identifier to their qualified guys. I did not mean this makes the JTAC identifier a secondary thing, it is, in fact THE primary thing that the Air Force tracks on these guys. "How many do we have, where are they, who have we had to allow their qualifications to lapse in order to fill jobs around the world, etc.?"

Again, sorry for the delay, and I hope this helps with your original question.