John King will now be branded a heretic and his career will progress no further.
Iterater: "One of the ways that the CF tries to keep pilots in is by giving them the chance to change airframes. I'm not talking helo to helo only, but helo to multi, jet to helo, etc. The suggestion to have "Army" pilots would most likely completey eliminate the chance of such a pilot going back to Moose Jaw to teach, since they had never been there before. Or maybe get a posting up North to Yellowknife, since they never did that common fixed wing training in MJ."
The Army does not try to keep Infantrymen in by giving them the chance to change much, short of reclassification/remuster. The notion that variety of airframe is a good thing is a bad one. It is simple to train somebody to drive a different vehicle, but it takes time to teach him how to employ it effectively. How about starting an Army officer out as a logistician, switching him to Arty after four years, and then to Armoured etcetera?
In my early days in 10 TAG (forerunner of 1 Wing) we used to regularly get fighter pilots parachuted in, usually in senior positions. They frequently had little interest in doing Army support stuff and not much more in helicopters of any sort. On the other hand, we lost way too many people to other flying communities just at the point where they began to become really useful.
When I first came to realize that linking Tac Hel to the a** f**ce was a Very Bad Thing and let my views be known (and became a heretic) I suggested that Tac Hel pilots be recruited as Army pilots with the understanding that they would be Tac Hel for their entire career. I was told by one non-thinker that nobody would ever join to fly Army helicopters. Huh? We can recruit people as other Combat Arms officers/NCMs with little difficulty, even Infantry, and many other armies have been able to recruit pilots, so why wouldn't we?
One of the problems that we had with retention in the Tac Hel community back then was, I'm sure, due to the fact that we lied to people even before they walked through the door of the recruiting centre for the first time. The F18s were just coming into service, so that's what showed up in all of the TV, bus/subway/billboard poster, newspaper, and magazine recruiting ads. Recruiters would pump up prospective pilots with visions of supersonic-dogfighting-bogeys-at-twelve-o'clock adventure and admiring chicks hanging off of each elbow, neck, thigh, and whatever other body parts were accessible. During Portage (primary) and Moose Jaw (basic jet) we were constantly asked what we wanted to fly, and there was a very real bias towards fighters. I was the only guy that wanted Kiowas throughout the whole process. As the jet course in MJ progressed and more and more had problems with various aspects they tended to "lower" their expectations, but the vast majority still wanted seized-wing. And then came the rotary-wing selection point, and much wailing and gnashing of teeth as former fighter-wannabes got snared by the evil helicopter god. "But wait!!" they would hope, in order to console themselves, "I'll get SAR in Comox". The posting block would further shatter them when they found out that their helicopters would be grey or green rather than yellow.
Had we been honest from the start, however...
And we could have saved a bundle on jet fuel at the same time.
Interchangeability is an expensive, wasteful, illogical, and ineffective crock.
Iterater: "Just insert FE or tech for pilot from my response above, and include the applicable postings."
Yes. See _my_ response above.
Iterater: "As for the comment about pilots not needing to be officers, although this is working in other countries, the massive amount of work that would have to be done wrt Sqn organization, secondary duties, CoC, would be insane. The only way I could see a change such as this happening would be to slowly introduce this new rank structure as people signed on and to reorganize the units as the situations presented themselves."
What "Massive amount of work"? A warrant officer or sergeant pilot can be the Squadron Sports Guy or Fire Warden just as easily as one of the excess number of junior officer pilots, few of whom will ever get a true officer leadership position like their non-pilot officer buds. This is why French and OPDPs counted for far too much on one's PER - there was little else to judge. So many secondary duties were made up simply to give these people something to do/be assessed on outside of the cockpit, and that was when we were routinely doing two or three fights daily, every day. However do those Infantry battalions ever get by with only one officer per platoon of thirty-odd, plus a couple more per company, and another smattering in Bn HQ? Where on earth do they find enough Cadet Liaison Officers?
Nobody needs a commission or a university degree (at great public expense) to drive a helicopter any more than they do to drive any other vehicle.
And here's another stupid anomaly that arose from this: my crewman on Kiowas was a Combat Arms Sergeant or Warrant Officer (and a very, very good one). He had the map, the stab binos, and the two VHF-FM radios with which to talk to the supported unit and guns etcetera. He was in a much better position than I, his boss, to process all of the information coming in, make decisions, and give direction. Due to the rank difference, however, he could not; he had to give me options and suggestions for me to choose, then I had to brief him on my decision, and then carry it out while all of the time trying to avoid wires, trees, highway traffic, and cows and figure out where the hell my Number Two had buggered off to between that last bound and the one before, and all before his descriptive option/suggestion became outdated. The Army has a far better concept of crew commander and driver duties.
I would not force everybody into a green uniform, however, as that would not aid morale. Those that wanted to switch to green could, those that wanted to remain blue could, but anybody else being recruited into the new Army Aviation Corps trade structure would be issued green from the outset.
Iterater: "Right, don't mean to sound rude here, but when exaclty would these officers be required to take this course? We can't even find time to get on the compulsory ones that we already have to take. Sure, those who have training lags with their flying courses might be able to fit them in. But you can't plan your life around those."
Right at the beginning. BOTC, then second language (presuming that that's still a requirement), then Infantry Phase 2 (or whatever it's called now), then Portage for Primary and Basic Helicopter (no wasting time and fuel on the Harvard II) just like the Jamaicans that we train, then 403 Squadron for the Griffon course.
Iterater: "The fact the pilots would still have to take some Air Force related staff courses because of their close working relationship to the AF, on top of all their Army staff courses -- seems a little busy. Oh wait, Tac Hel does that already."
Completely unnecessary, except, now, for a** f**ce political reasons. The Army has enough career and other staff courses which would be far more relevent, and there would now be Tac Hel officers instructing on those just like they would occupy positions on Army staffs. Imagine an Aviator as Brigade Commander, or CLS. The British Army has been commanded by at least one Army Air Corps guy. What "close working relationship to the AF"? This is an unnecessary artificiality borne out of our current ridiculous situation. The closest real working relationship would be when FACing or co-operating in a joint HQ.
Iterater: "I guess my biggest issue is the amount of doors that would be closed to the aircrew and techs if such a structure were to be adopted. Sure, doors would open within the Army community, but they would be ground based, and what aviator wants to fly a desk?"
A staff position in 1 CAD HQ or other a** f**ce HQs involves just as much time behind a desk as any other staff position. An Army staff position would be far more relevant to an Army Aviation officer, however, than one in 1 CAD. There would be just as many instructional positions as before, including joint technical schools similar to the ones that existed pre-Unification (Rivers, Manitoba).
Iterater: "If training were to remain common, as it is now, with the ability for aircrew to change "suits" if a desired posting were to come up, I could see this happening. Otherwise, retention might become an issue."
It's not all that common. Additional training would still be required - ie multi-engine or fighter lead-in. As for retention, recruit people for the job and they'll be less inclined to want to leave it in the first place.
Tac Hel would benefit operationally, and so would the Army, if Tac Hel went back to the Army as it was before Unification, as is Right and Natural.
Iterater: "Air Ops are Air Ops, and all aircraft should be "Air Force". There is no need for an Amphibious Assault ship to be crewed by the Army or for the troops being landed to be Navy."
Tac Hel is not, however, "air power". That is fighter, bomber, reconaissance, and transport etcetera. It is not the means of mobility (rotor rather than track, wheel, or air cushion) that is crucial but what it does and who it does it for. Tac Hel exists for no other reason than to support Army ground formations and units. If there was no Army, the a** f**ce would never invent Tac Hel. On the battlefield a tactical helicopter is simply another vehicle. If "all aircraft should be 'Air Force'", then it follows that all wheeled/tracked vehicles should be Army and all boats should be Navy. I don't think that any reasonable person would agree that every bowser driver at Cold Lake should be wearing green, and I don't think that too many Combat Engineers would fancy themselves in dark blue. If "there is no need for an Amphibious Assault ship to be crewed by the Army or for the troops being landed to be Navy", then there is similarly no need, or logical reason, for a battlefield vehicle that serves the Army to be crewed by a** f**ce personnel.
Iterater: "And as for having Sgts and WOs as pilots... it would be a waste of a Combat Arms Senior NCO, especially for what little they could add to being a pilot trainee.
Why? Who said that NCM pilots would be Combat Arms NCOs? NCO pilots and techs would follow a career progression similar to Army Officer Pilots. After Basic Infantry Qualification (has the name changed again?) they would receive further training as drivers, rad ops, and other semi-skilled functions. They would take their turn with basic servicing functions as well - refuelling and windscreen washing. We don't need fully-qualified highly-paid techs do do those things, or stand sentry. After a year or two they would stream off as either air or ground crew, receive the appropriate training, and carry on at whatever rank was decided upon - Corporal? All career/leadership courses would be the standard Army ones again, and these fine Army Aviation NCOs - who would themselves be, in fact, Combat Arms NCOs - would instruct on them in turn.
