Skip to main content
HonestMOS
●InvestigationsHow EUCOM shelved a tax break for 9,000 troops in Poland — for five years.→
←Back to FT Fire Control Technician — overview, pay, training, civilian translation, reviews
FTE5

Fire Control Technician

E-5 (Sergeant) · Navy

E1–E3E-4E-5E-6E-7E8–E9
HEADS UP

FT2 is the rank where the submarine fire control community formally looks at you as a senior technician and emerging leader. The fire control section's technical quality is measured partly against your signature on the maintenance log. The eEVAL trait average against your peer FT2s starts to determine the next advancement slate — not the NWAE alone, but the whole record the chief builds over your FT2 tour. If you have not started the Chief packet conversation with your LCPO by the twelve-month mark of your FT2 tour, you are behind.

The Honest MOS Read
Second Class Petty Officer is the rank the submarine force knows as the working senior FT — the petty officer who owns a section of the fire control division, whose corrective maintenance entries close clean at QA, and who the FT3s bring the hard technical question to before going to the chief. The gap between FT3 and FT2 is larger than the pay grade suggests. Your operational role at FT2 has two layers running simultaneously. In the control room, you stand the senior fire control watchstander position during exercises and real-world operations — you maintain the boat's tactical picture, manage the fire control solution across the watch, and brief the watch officer with the accuracy and completeness that the officer needs to make time-critical decisions. The senior watchstander is not just a more qualified version of the FT3 position; it is a role that requires situational awareness of the entire fire control picture, not just your own panel. When the FT3 on watch has an issue — a solution that has drifted, a contact that is ambiguous, a tube status discrepancy — you are the first call. On the maintenance bench, the expectation shifts from 'executes directed maintenance' to 'owns complex fault isolation and corrective maintenance.' The FT3 escalates a fault to you because the initial fault-isolation procedure has been run and the root cause is not obvious. You pull the applicable technical manual, follow the second-level diagnostic procedure, trace the fault to the component, execute the repair, and document the corrective action clearly enough that the next technician reading the entry could reconstruct what you found and what you did without asking you. Zero QA writebacks on your signed entries is not a coincidence — it is the result of logging the actual finding and the actual action, not the optimistic summary. The division leadership responsibilities that begin at FT2 are often underestimated on entry. You write the section's input to the weapons readiness brief that the chief presents to the weapons officer and the XO. You own the weapons-handling certification currency for your team members — not as a tracking convenience but as the person responsible for knowing which FT3s are current and which are not before an evolution is scheduled. You run torpedo load/offload evolutions as a certified team leader, which means you are the one briefing the safety requirements to the team before the evolution begins and the one who calls a hold if a procedure step is being bypassed. The advancement trajectory at FT2 is more complex than it was at FT3. The NWAE for FT1 is still the exam-based component, but the Chief board conversation has started appearing at the edges of the evaluation season. The eEVAL trait average and relative ranking among your peer FT2s at the command is the competitive variable the chief controls — the sailor the chief can write an EP for is the one whose work has been exceptional and whose record is documented to prove it. If you are not having the frank conversation with your LCPO about where your record sits relative to your peers and what it needs to be competitive for FT1 advancement and eventually the Chief board, you are letting the career manage you rather than managing the career.
Career Arc
  • 01Pin FT2; receive the senior fire control watchstander assignment from the LPO; own the section's weapons-handling certification currency from day one.
  • 02Begin NWAE study cycle for FT1 — pull current BIB, build structured study plan, complete Electronic Advancement Workbook on the LCPO's timeline.
  • 03Own at least one complex fire control system fault isolation from write-up through corrective action through 3-M closeout without QA writeback.
  • 04Run a torpedo load/offload evolution as certified team leader — brief the safety requirements, lead the team, hold the standard on procedure compliance.
  • 05Write the section's weapons-system readiness input at the level the chief can brief at the daily weapons readiness review without reconstruction.
  • 06Build the eEVAL record — EP or MP recommendation from the senior rater — that positions for the FT1 advancement slate.
  • 07Begin the Chief packet conversation with the LCPO: what qualifications, what leadership outcomes, what commissioning or advanced-pipeline production needs to be on the record at FT1 to be competitive for the Chief board.
Common Screwups
  • ×Countersigning an FT3's maintenance log entry without actually reading the corrective action. Your initials say the work was reviewed and acceptable; when the QA rep finds the missed step in a closed MRC, it is the FT2 who signed it who owns the finding — not the FT3 who wrote it.
  • ×Troubleshooting a fire control system fault with component substitution rather than the fault-isolation procedure. A hardware swap that clears the symptom without finding the root cause leaves a latent fault in a tactical weapons system; the symptom is not the same as the fault, and the SIB does not accept 'it seemed to work after I swapped the card' as a corrective action.
  • ×Allowing an FT3 to stand a watch qualification evolution without conducting a proper debrief afterward. The qualification board exists to verify understanding; a petty officer who rubber-stamps a qual sign-off because the boat is busy owns every mistake that FT3 makes at that station during a real operation.
  • ×Going around the LPO to the weapons officer or the division officer on a personnel or readiness issue. The chain runs through the chief; the goat locker hears about it in the same watch rotation, and the FT2's evaluation reflects the pattern.
  • ×Treating the NWAE BIB as something to study 'when things slow down.' Things do not slow down on a submarine in a workup cycle. The FT2 who advances to FT1 on the first eligible cycle built the study habit at FT3 and maintained it at FT2; the one who waits for a convenient time sits the exam behind on preparation and the results reflect it.

A Day in the Life

  • 0530Wake; if duty section, the overnight watch rotation has replaced normal sleep rhythm — transition from duty status to the maintenance day. If not on duty, normal morning routine.
  • 0600–0630Morning quarters: receive plan of the day, announce maintenance priorities to FT3s and FTSNs in the section, and verify that all open 3-M entries from the previous day are documented before new work begins.
  • 0630–0800Physical training. FT2 is expected to maintain PRT Good or better; section leadership notices who shows up to PT and who does not.
  • 0800–0900Division production meeting: LCPO reviews the maintenance board. FT2 reports section status — open discrepancies, parts pipeline, certification currency, qualification milestones. Own the brief for your section completely.
  • 0900–1130Morning maintenance block: complex fault isolation on an escalated discrepancy, countersigning FT3 maintenance entries, or running a torpedo tube PM evolution as team leader. The FT2 is not standing next to the FT3 the entire time — tasks are assigned and supervised, not done for them.
  • 1130–1300Lunch. If the daily weapons readiness input is due at 1300, the FT2's section summary needs to be complete before the break — not written at 1250.
  • 1300–1500Weapons-handling certification evolution, advanced fire control qualification progression, or FT3 task-demonstrator sign-offs. These evolutions require full attention — the FT2 team leader does not multi-task a torpedo load/offload.
  • 1500–1630NWAE study — structured, documented, on the LCPO's milestone calendar. This block is the FT2's professional development time; the LPO who sees it used consistently is the LPO who writes the advancement-supporting evaluation language.
  • 1630–1700End of day: weapons readiness brief input final, all 3-M entries for the day closed, deferred discrepancies logged with status, FT3 qualification sign-offs documented. Brief the section chief on anything open.
  • 1700–2000Personal time or duty section. If duty, the FT2 is the first call for any fire control or torpedo tube discrepancy that arises overnight on the boat.
  • 2000–2200Chief packet documentation review, advanced qualification study, or mentoring conversation with an FT3 pursuing a commissioning program or advanced NEC. The FT2 who treats evenings as professional development time builds the record that the chief references in the evaluation.

Weekly Cadence

A typical week in upkeep has the fire control section running maintenance production Monday through Thursday with a lighter admin and cleanup day on Friday. The LCPO's maintenance board drives the week: what preventive maintenance is due, what corrective actions are open and what their parts pipeline looks like, what qualification milestones are expected to close this week. The FT2's job is to know that board as well as the LCPO and to proactively brief status rather than waiting to be asked. The week before a weapons readiness assessment or a tactical readiness evaluation compresses the normal rhythm significantly. Certification currency checks, maintenance log reviews, and qualification-currency verifications all run simultaneously. The FT2 who has been maintaining the section's readiness picture accurately through the normal weeks is the one whose section shows up to the assessment without emergency action items; the one who has been coasting finds out what 'weapons-system readiness brief caveat' looks like in the weapons officer's email to the department head. Underway, the week is the watch bill. The FT2 who is standing the senior fire control watchstander position is in the control room for eight-hour blocks at a frequency determined by the boat's three-section or port-and-starboard rotation. Maintenance, training, and NWAE study happen in the off-watch time — there is no separate maintenance day and study period underway. The FT2 who manages the off-watch time as a structured schedule arrives home with the career metrics moving; the one who spends the off-watch time recovering from watch exhaustion is the one who has not built sustainable watch habits.

Key Skills — How to Drill Each

  1. 01
    Own a complex fire control system fault from write-up through fault isolation through corrective action using the applicable technical manual, with the 3-M entry closing clean at QA review.
    When an FT3 escalates a fault to you, your first move is the technical manual — not the instinct to swap the most likely component. Pull the fault-isolation section for the symptom reported, run the diagnostic procedure in order, and document each step you take and what you find. The 3-M corrective-action entry should read like a technical narrative: fault as reported, diagnostic steps performed and findings at each step, root cause identified, corrective action taken, acceptance test performed, results. That entry level is the standard the QA reviewer applies when signing off; if your entries are already written at that standard, the QA review is a ten-second read.
  2. 02
    Stand the senior fire control watchstander position during exercises and operations — maintain the boat's tactical picture, manage the fire control solution, and brief the watch officer accurately throughout the watch.
    The senior watchstander brief to the watch officer at the beginning and end of each watch is where your value is visible. Structure the brief: current contact picture and solution confidence, any anomalies or ambiguities in the picture, pending actions from the previous watch, and the specific parameters the watch officer has asked you to track. When the picture changes during the watch — new contact, maneuver, degraded solution confidence — brief it immediately, not at the next natural communication point. The watch officer expects to be in front of the information, not catching up to it.
  3. 03
    Train FT3s through advanced fire control and torpedo tube qualifications as a qualified task demonstrator; own the PQS sign-offs and qualification documentation.
    The standard for a task demonstrator at FT2 is higher than at FT3 because the qualifications you are signing off are more advanced and more consequential. Before conducting a qualification demonstration, review the standard for the specific PQS line item — know what the correct answer looks like and what an acceptable demonstration includes. Do not sign a line item because the FT3 got most of it right; sign when the demonstration meets the standard, and document what was demonstrated.
  4. 04
    Write the section's weapons system readiness input — system status, in-work discrepancies, parts pipeline — that the chief can brief at the weapons readiness review without reconstructing your data.
    The chief's brief at the daily weapons readiness review is only as accurate as the FT2's input. Build a daily readiness summary habit — a working document that tracks the current status of every system in your section, the age of every open discrepancy, the parts required and their pipeline status, and the certification currency of every FT in your section. When the chief asks for the readiness input, hand him the document, not a verbal summary he has to write down.
  5. 05
    Participate in torpedo load/offload evolutions as a certified team leader, leading FT3s and FTSNs through the weapons-handling procedure safely and in accordance with the applicable NAVSEA ordnance safety instruction.
    The team leader's safety brief before the evolution is not a formality — it is the moment when every team member hears the procedure, the hazards, and the hold conditions. Deliver it from knowledge, not from reading it aloud cold. During the evolution, position yourself where you can see the critical steps being executed. Call holds without hesitation when a step is being bypassed or when a team member looks uncertain. The FT2 team leader who has never called a hold on a weapons evolution has either been very lucky or has not been watching carefully enough.

Manuals & References — What Chapters Matter

  • Fire control system technical manuals (MK 117 or current-generation FCS) — fault-isolation and corrective maintenance sections
    At FT2, you own complex fault isolation. The fault-isolation section of the FCS technical manual is the document your diagnostic procedure follows; the corrective maintenance section is the document your repair follows. Knowing both well enough to navigate them quickly under operational time pressure is the FT2 technical standard.
  • MK 48 ADCAP torpedo technical manuals — handling, maintenance, and safety sections
    You run handling evolutions and certify the FT3s who participate in them. The applicable handling and safety sections of the MK 48 documentation are the procedures your team leaders execute against; knowing them well enough to catch a deviation during the evolution is the standard.
  • NAVSEA OD 45845 (or current equivalent) — Submarine Weapons and Ordnance System Safety Manual
    At FT2, you brief the safety requirements to FT3s before every weapons evolution. The governance for those safety requirements lives here. Brief from knowledge, not from reading it out loud the first time; if you are unfamiliar with a section, review it before the evolution brief, not during.
  • NWAE Bibliography for FT1 — pull from MyNavyHR/NETC for the current cycle
    The BIB covers the material that drives the NWAE score, and at FT2 the NWAE is still the primary advancement gate for the E-5 to E-6 step. The chief tracks which FT2s are progressing on the BIB and which are not; the EAW completion date and the study-hour log are the evidence.
  • MILPERSMAN articles governing enlisted personnel actions visible at FT2 level — advancement, retention, NJP procedures
    At FT2, you are in the room for conversations about FT3s' performance, advancement eligibility, and administrative actions. Knowing the MILPERSMAN framework for these processes means you can support the chain of command's decisions accurately rather than learning the rules after the conversation has happened.

Standards — How to Hit Each

  • NWAE for FT1 prep documented on the LCPO's timeline; EAW clean and study log defensible.
    Build the study plan in the first thirty days of the FT2 tour, not in the sixty days before the exam. The BIB subject areas should be divided into a weekly coverage schedule that completes the material with thirty days remaining before the NWAE window — use those thirty days for review and practice rather than first-time coverage. The chief who asks 'how is FT1 prep going?' should receive a specific answer about where you are in the BIB, not 'studying hard.'
  • Senior fire control watchstander qualification earned or in milestone progress — the FT2 still on the basic watchstander position is not performing at rate.
    Identify the senior fire control watchstander qualification requirements with the LPO at the beginning of the FT2 tour and build a milestone plan. Schedule the required evolutions, simulator sessions, or board appearances with the weapons officer or division officer. The FT2 who earns the senior watchstander qualification in the first twelve months of the tour builds the operational credibility the chief references in the eEVAL.
  • Section QA writeback rate at or below the boat average — your initials on the countersigned maintenance log mean something.
    Track your own QA writeback history. After any writeback, conduct a personal debrief: what specifically was missing from the entry, what was the QA reviewer's finding, and what change to your logging practice prevents the same finding next time. The FT2 with a QA writeback history that is trending down is demonstrating improvement; the one with a flat or rising rate is not adjusting.

Technical Mistakes — Concrete Consequences

  • Countersigning an FT3's maintenance log without reading the corrective action.
    When the QA rep reviews a closed MRC and finds a step that was required but not documented — or an acceptance test that was not run — the countersigning FT2's name is the one associated with the finding. At the weapons readiness review, the LCPO explains the gap; at the command inspection, the finding goes into the report under the FT2's name.
  • Troubleshooting a fire control system fault with substitution instead of the fault-isolation procedure.
    A component swap that clears the symptom but leaves the root cause unidentified creates a latent fault in a tactical weapons system. When the fault reappears during an exercise or an operation — possibly in a form that is different from the original symptom because the latent cause has progressed — the troubleshooting log shows that the FT2 who worked it first did not run the procedure.
  • Allowing an FT3 to stand a watch qualification evolution without a proper debrief.
    The debrief is not optional — it is the mechanism that converts performance into documented competency. A qualification signed off without a debrief is not a qualification; it is a signature. The weapons officer who discovers that an FT3 standing a watch qualification position cannot explain what they are doing asks who signed the qual card.
  • Going around the LPO to the weapons officer or XO on a personnel or readiness issue.
    The goat locker is a small institution on a submarine. The chief hears about it before the end of the watch rotation; the next eEVAL cycle reflects the pattern in the leadership trait block; and the FT2's name circulates in the Chief's mess in a way that follows the record for the rest of the tour.

Career Decisions at This Rank

  • Build toward the Chief board at FT1 or accept the plateau of a strong FT2 career without the Chief pursuit.
    Making Chief in the FT rate is the career milestone that defines the senior enlisted submarine fire control community. The Chief board is a centralized selection process under MILPERSMAN — the package reviewed includes the entire evaluated record, the endorsement chain from the CO, and the chief's nomination. FT2s who want to be competitive for the FT1 slate and eventually the Chief board need to start building the Chief-competitive record at FT2: leading weapons-handling evolutions, producing commissioning and advanced-qualification candidates, and writing evaluations that the senior rater can defend at a board. If the Chief path is genuinely not what you want — not everyone does, and the Navy needs highly competent senior technicians at every grade — make that decision consciously and tell your career counselor, because the career management decisions that follow are different.
  • Pursue an LDO or CWO commissioning program packet at the FT2-to-FT1 transition window.
    The Limited Duty Officer and Chief Warrant Officer programs provide commissioning pathways for enlisted submarine warfare specialists, including those focused on fire control and weapons systems. The application window, the package requirements, and the selection rates vary by cycle; pull the current NAVADMIN for LDO/CWO accession before the career counselor conversation. The FT2 who wants to apply needs a strong evaluation record, Dolphins, advanced qualifications, and ideally a commissioning-board endorsement from the CO — most of which are built during the FT2 tour. If this path is a consideration, tell the LCPO now so the evaluation language and billet choices support the application.
  • Pursue STA-21 officer commissioning program (college degree to commission).
    STA-21 is the Navy's enlisted-to-officer commissioning program that funds a bachelor's degree at a participating university and commissions the graduate as an ensign. The submarine officer community has STA-21 selections each cycle; the requirements include the current NAVADMIN for the STA-21 program, a competitive academic record, strong evaluations, and endorsements from the command. FT2s who have demonstrated exceptional performance and who have an academic foundation to succeed in the degree program are competitive. The trade-off is leaving the submarine force as an enlisted sailor and returning as an ensign — the culture shift is significant, and the candid conversation with an LDO or a submarine warfare officer who went through STA-21 is worth having before the application goes in.
  • Remain at FT2 in a technical specialist role and build toward senior NEC assignments rather than the Chief path.
    Not every FT2 is pursuing the Chief board, and that choice is not a failure — the submarine force needs technically excellent petty officers at every grade. The FT2 who builds a deep NEC portfolio, maintains a strong PRT and PQS record, and re-enlists into competitive technical billets can have a highly respected career through FT1 without the pressures of the Chief packet race. The honest conversation with the career counselor about this path includes the financial implications (SRB, zone pay, re-enlistment bonuses) and the billet landscape for senior FT1 technical assignments.

How the Seat Varies by Unit Type

  • Fast-attack submarine (SSN)
    The FT2 on a fast-attack is the working technical lead in a small, visible division. The weapons officer calls you by name. The FCS maintenance quality and weapons-handling readiness are visible daily. High operational tempo means the maintenance schedule is always compressed against patrol requirements — the FT2 who manages the deferred-maintenance tracker and the parts pipeline proactively is the one who avoids the emergency-action-items list before the inspection.
  • Ballistic missile submarine (SSBN)
    The FT2 on a boomer has a more predictable rotation schedule than a fast-attack FT2, which creates a different kind of professional pressure: the blue/gold crew comparison. Your counterpart on the other crew has access to the same boat and the same systems; the quality of the maintenance records, the qualification currency, and the readiness posture that you hand off at crew exchange is what the gold crew FT2 inherits and evaluates. The blue/gold comparison is informal but it is real in the Chief's mess.
  • Submarine weapons system schoolhouse or training command billet
    An FT2 assigned to a formal schoolhouse or a submarine training command billet teaches fire control system curricula to students in the pipeline. The technical breadth required is different from a boat billet — you need to know the system well enough to teach it from first principles, not just to operate it on your specific hull. Schoolhouse billets produce strong evaluation language around 'technical instructor' and 'trainer production,' which the Chief board values differently than operational billet language. Neither is inherently better; the choice shapes the evaluation narrative for the next promotion.

What Good Looks Like at This Rank

The good FT2 is the petty officer the division officer names for the senior fire control watch position on an exercise because the solution stays current, the brief to the watch officer is accurate, and the after-action maintenance log closes clean. This is not a reputation built on a single impressive performance — it is a reputation built on a consistent standard over a patrol and then another patrol, until the weapons officer does not have to think about whether the FT2 on watch has the picture. In the torpedo room, the good FT2 team leader is the one who called a hold on the last weapons evolution because a team member's hand was in the wrong position relative to the interlock — not because a casualty was about to happen, but because the procedure existed for a reason and the standard applies whether the inspector is present or not. The team members who work for that FT2 watch the standard being enforced and apply it themselves. His FT3s are qualifying on an accelerated schedule because the task demonstrator sign-offs are real — the FT3 who gets a qual line item signed by this FT2 knows the material, not just the answer to the specific question that was asked during the demonstration. His section's QA writebacks are flat over the patrol cycle. His NWAE study log shows completion across the BIB, and the EAW is done thirty days before the exam window, not two days before. The LCPO is already mentioning his name in conversations about the next FT1 advancement slate and the advanced qualification track that builds the Chief packet.

Preview — The Next Rank

FT1 (E-6) is the LPO billet. The job stops being primarily about your own technical performance and starts being about the performance of the division as a whole. The LCPO runs eight to eighteen FTs through you; you write the eEVALs for FT2s and FT3s that determine who advances; you defend the fire control and torpedo tube readiness posture at the weapons readiness board. The shift from FT2 to FT1 is the shift from 'doing the technical work well' to 'ensuring the division does the technical work well' — and those are not the same skill. The FT2 who has been running evolutions, countersigning maintenance entries, and training FT3s through qualifications has been building the foundational version of those LPO skills. The FT1 who was not doing that work at FT2 will spend the first patrol as LPO discovering that the division's readiness picture is not as clean as the 3-M board suggested, because no one had been looking past the surface-level metrics. The Chief packet conversation also becomes concrete at FT1. The LCPO is editing your record; the weapons officer is forming an opinion about whether to endorse the packet. The FT1 who builds the Chief packet from the first day of the tour — who produces commissioning program candidates, who earns advanced qualifications, who writes eEVAL blocks the senior rater does not rewrite — sits the Chief board with a record that reads itself. The one who discovers the Chief packet requirements at the eighteen-month mark of the FT1 tour has run out of time to build what the board expects.
FAQ

FT E5 — Frequently Asked Questions

Q01What does a E5 FT (Fire Control Technician) actually do?
You run a section of the fire control division — the fire control system maintenance cell, the torpedo tube and weapons-handling section, or the tactical fire control watch qualification program — on your boat.
Q02What's the most important thing to know as a E5 FT?
FT2 is the rank where the submarine fire control community formally looks at you as a senior technician and emerging leader.
Q03What does a typical day look like for a E5 FT?
Time-blocked day at the E5 FT rank tier: 0530 Wake; if duty section, the overnight watch rotation has replaced normal sleep rhythm — transition from duty status to the maintenance day. If not on duty, normal morning routine, 0600–0630 Morning quarters: receive plan of the day, announce maintenance priorities to FT3s and FTSNs in the section, and verify that all open 3-M entries from the previous day are documented before new work begins, 0630–0800 Physical training. FT2 is expected to maintain PRT Good or better; section leadership notices who shows up to PT and who does not,…
Q04What mistakes get E5 FT soldiers fired or relieved?
Countersigning an FT3's maintenance log entry without actually reading the corrective action. Your initials say the work was reviewed and acceptable; when the QA rep finds the missed step in a closed MRC, it is the FT2 who signed it who owns the finding — not the FT3 who wrote it; Troubleshooting a fire control system fault with component substitution rather than the fault-isolation procedure.…
Q05What career decisions matter most at the E5 FT rank tier?
Build toward the Chief board at FT1 or accept the plateau of a strong FT2 career without the Chief pursuit — Making Chief in the FT rate is the career milestone that defines the senior enlisted submarine fire control community. The Chief board is a centralized selection process under MILPERSMAN — the package reviewed includes the entire evaluated record, the endorsement chain from the CO, and the chief's nomination. FT2s who want to be competitive for the FT1 slate and eventually the Chief board need to start building the Chief-competitive record at FT2: leading weapons-handling evolutions,…
Q06What's next after E5 for a FT (Fire Control Technician) in the Navy?
FT1 (E-6) is the LPO billet.
Q07What manuals and regulations does a E5 FT need to know cold?
Fire control system technical manuals (MK 117 or current-generation FCS): at FT2 you own the fault-isolation architecture and the system-level troubleshooting that the FT3 escalates to you.; MK 48 ADCAP torpedo technical manuals (handling, maintenance, and safety sections): you run handling evolutions and certify the FT3s who participate in them.;…

This playbook has no tips yet. Be the first to share what you know.

Published by the Honest MOS Editorial DeskVerified against DoD/.gov sourcesUpdated May 2026Editorial standards