# Army and Navy taking control over the helicopter squadrons??????



## acheo (12 Apr 2007)

I have heard numerous rumors about the Navy taking control of the maritime helicopters and the army taking control over TAC HEL squadrons. Would anyone know a little bit more about this or it is still at the rumour stage?

Thanks!


----------



## George Wallace (12 Apr 2007)

With all the speculation and screwing up of the facts on the Leo 2 Purchase, and now this; I have to ask:  Is there a special on SPECULATION today?

Where are you getting these rumours from?


----------



## Good2Golf (12 Apr 2007)

acheo said:
			
		

> I have heard numerous rumors about the Navy taking control of the maritime helicopters and the army taking control over TAC HEL squadrons. Would anyone know a little bit more about this or it is still at the rumour stage?
> 
> Thanks!



Let me know when that rumour comes back for the afternoon...


----------



## airiedd (13 Apr 2007)

That is a new one!  I am in the Air Force and have not heard anything about that.  Mind you I do work on fighters so we may be hearing it as quick as some in the Sea King and Griffon fleets....I cannot see those fleets going back to the Navy or Army as that would leave 1 Can Air Div with even less than they do now!


----------



## Bane (13 Apr 2007)

That makes great sense as the Army and Navy are experts at all aspects of aviation unlike the Air Force.  Is this happening before the Armoured Corps takes over driving everything from LAV's to motor scooters, or after?  We could have Airborne troops flying Herc's and generals driving their own cars about; provided they are Armoured Generals.  Cats and dogs living together....MASS HYSTERIA !!

I'm done  :threat:


----------



## FSTO (14 Apr 2007)

Bane said:
			
		

> That makes great sense as the Army and Navy are experts at all aspects of aviation unlike the Air Force.  Is this happening before the Armoured Corps takes over driving everything from LAV's to motor scooters, or after?  We could have Airborne troops flying Herc's and generals driving their own cars about; provided they are Armoured Generals.  Cats and dogs living together....MASS HYSTERIA !!
> 
> I'm done  :threat:


Just off the top of my head, Navy's that fly their own aircraft: USN, RN, RAN, RNZN, Brazil, Chile, Argentina, Neatherlands, Germany, France, Norway, Sweden.


----------



## Bane (14 Apr 2007)

That's an impressive list, but that does not change the fact that our Navy does not fly.  I was not saying that the Navy was in any way incapable of doing so, merely pointing out in a sarcastic fashion that perhaps the cost of making this change over would be potentially prohibative.  There has also been a giant wave of seemingly random speculation ever since the Leo II's were anounced; and we need less of it IMO.


----------



## HItorMiss (14 Apr 2007)

Fleet Air Arm anyone..Or may the Army Air Corps... Just few ideas...It's plausible anywayI think we need to keep an open mind to certain things


----------



## bison33 (15 Apr 2007)

Wonder where this rumor started.........you forgot the one about us getting Apaches, an 18% pay raise, Armani DEU's and 2 SSBN's.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (15 Apr 2007)

For Helicopters it makes sense that the services that are primary clients, are also in control of them. Otherwise you end up with policies that make sense from one arm, but without considering the needs of the end user. Now if interarm politics did not exist and commnications between the commands was perfect, transferring them would be pointless.

Once the Air force gets new transport aircraft, the top brass might be feeling less threatened by such possible changes.


----------



## Jc066 (15 Apr 2007)

Are you talking about how the helicopters are used in the _command_ struture w/ the AF supporting the Army and Navy, or  both services takeing phyisical posestion of the flying, flight trainning,maintence,maintence trainning and procurement? The First is already happening, the second point would just mean less money for beans, bullets, fuel and bombs.


----------



## acheo (15 Apr 2007)

I`m glad you bring up this ''nuance''. Initially I had in mind the operationnal apects more than the physical take over.

From the rumors I have heard both the Army & Navy would like to change some operationnal aspects of ours such as duty times and combat training to name a few. Now would you know to what extent these changes are taking/will take place?

Thanks for your inputs.

Acheo


----------



## gaspasser (15 Apr 2007)

Why Not?  We have the Aurora's aiding the Army in the field and possibly over in the sandbox.  
De-segregating air assets is a good idea {IMHO} Let the AF go back to SAR, Transport and Fighters. The Griffins come under army nets while in the field.  The Seakings are Navy controlled.  There's too much hoolabaloo going on when it comes to command and controll asking for services and beauracratic BS gets in the way.  [or am I talking out the wrong orifice?]
Maybe we'll get more of each and look like a real Defence Department?
My 0.02 worth.


----------



## gaspasser (15 Apr 2007)

IMHO, It seems to work well for the US and other countries.  But then again, they have lots of kit to play with.  IMSC, we couldn't field a Divsion of Infantry, or sail a Fleet of ships like the US {gee, I miss days of the Bonnie and Maggie} or a full wing of ANY aircraft.  The yanks have more of any thing on one base than we have in the entire CF.   :crybaby: and that's sad.
It's time we return to being a power again.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (15 Apr 2007)

Well........it's all rumour and conjecture. Until someone has an official message in they're hand, that they can post. This thread is dead.

 Normal caveats.

Army.ca Staff


----------

