CH-124 Sea King Historical Thread

[SeaKingTacco]

Very possible just what I am hearing from peers on upcoming deployers.

Your peers are making shit up.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Your peers are making shit up.

Okie dokie.

 

[Baz]

Your mention of sustainment is an interesting from my stand point.

I watched and participated in this going from what we had with the SK to what we have now for the Cyclone. I'm not sure if your talking about the adoption of ISSC.

The ISS contract was insisted upon by the GOC; it’s not the only problem but it certainly isn’t helping.

The bigger problem was asking for the “best” without support (or funding) for it. Over and above the basics of unfunded spares, where does the support for tactics and training development come from, and without those you can’t build experience.

CRCN is pretty blunt in his assessment of the helo and its juice V squeeze metric.

The current CRCN, and indeed the RCN as a whole, has, in my opinion, demonstrated a lack of support to and education in Naval air operations for a long time.

 

[Halifax Tar]

The ISS contract was insisted upon by the GOC; it’s not the only problem but it certainly isn’t helping.

The bigger problem was asking for the “best” without support (or funding) for it. Over and above the basics of unfunded spares, where does the support for tactics and training development come from, and without those you can’t build experience.

Food for thought. Thank you.

The current CRCN, and indeed the RCN as a whole, has, in my opinion, demonstrated a lack of support to and education in Naval air operations for a long time.

Can I ask where this comes from ? Or what makes you say this ? At the deck plate level (tactical), the ship absolutely revolves on putting the helo airborne, supporting it and working with it.

The mechanical issues with the Cyclone are not with out substantiation.

 

[dapaterson]

Food for thought. Thank you.



Can I ask where this comes from ? Or what makes you say this ? At the deck plate level (tactical), the ship absolutely revolves on putting the helo airborne, supporting it and working with it.

The mechanical issues with the Cyclone are not with out substantiation.

Tactical crew work does not necessarily translate into professional development to fully understand and leverage naval air.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Tactical crew work does not necessarily translate into professional development to fully understand and leverage naval air.

Ok, so in your experience how has the RCN failed to understand and leverage Naval Air ?

Because I can tell you, underway with an embarked Helo, the ship really exists to employ and support that aircraft.

Having said that its hard to build that professional development when the bird is the barn so often and for so long.

Royal Canadian Navy Today and Yesterday

“Let Down by the Cyclone”: Commander of the RCN Sounds Alarm as RCN Looks to the Future of Naval Aviation As Fleet Week opened with fanfare on the Halifax waterfront, Canada’s top sailor delivered a...

www.facebook.com

 

[Baz]

Can I ask where this comes from ? Or what makes you say this ? At the deck plate level (tactical), the ship absolutely revolves on putting the helo airborne, supporting it and working with it.

I can show you staff work and reports from the 60s where the RCN developed the concepts to support the purchase and employment of the Sea King. I can also show you the work that was done by the RCAF because they thought (sort of) that rotary wing ASW should belong to them. That doesn’t exist now.

They also put ships (and task groups) to sea solely in order to develop naval air tactics. Not anymore.

Up until the ‘90s we had a standing committee reporting to both the Commanders of Maritime Command and Air Command to oversee Maritime Wardare development, with a Maritime Air committee reporting to it. Not anymore.

When I first joined the community we still had “Salty Dips,” dedicated sails to introduce MH trainees at the training squadron to ship board operations. Not anymore.

Exercises used be used as an opportunity to work up from individual through team and then force level training, with appropriate hot washes. Not anymore (everyone is just 102 bashing).

The CRCN should be clearly articulating what his aviation requirements are, his plan to support the requirements definition and acquisition, and how he intends to support the force generation of the resulting weapon systems, not moaning about the failure of all of us to deliver Cyclone.

The mechanical issues with the Cyclone are not with out substantiation.

Yes, but they are not all on Sikorsky. There is plenty of blame to go around, including on the RCN (the aforementioned failure to understand and clearly articulate their aviation needs, leaving MH to wither under RCAF “stewardship”). Everyone needs to roll up their sleeves and fix it… whatever that fix looks like.

And the first step should be for CRCN to understand and clearly articulate his aviation needs, as the (indirect) force employed. And yes, I deliberately repeated myself.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I can show you staff work and reports from the 60s where the RCN developed the concepts to support the purchase and employment of the Sea King. I can also show you the work that was done by the RCAF because they thought (sort of) that rotary wing ASW should belong to them. That doesn’t exist now.

They also put ships (and task groups) to sea solely in order to develop naval air tactics. Not anymore.

Up until the ‘90s we had a standing committee reporting to both the Commanders of Maritime Command and Air Command to oversee Maritime Wardare development, with a Maritime Air committee reporting to it. Not anymore.

When I first joined the community we still had “Salty Dips,” dedicated sails to introduce MH trainees at the training squadron to ship board operations. Not anymore.

Exercises used be used as an opportunity to work up from individual through team and then force level training, with appropriate hot washes. Not anymore (everyone is just 102 bashing).

You do realize each coast is lucky if they have 2 deployable CPFs right now right ? And if they aren't at sea they are in an SWP prepping to go to sea. The days of sailing for the sake of sailing are over probably until the RCDs are commissioned in volume. This isn't just causing issues in the MH community, our own sailors are struggling to keep up with their own at sea training and combating skill fade.

The years of 2 CPFs (or Caddys/Steamers) a 280 and Tanker TGs are gone and not coming back for some time.

This isn't some slight the RCN is putting on the MH community its a consequence of the GoC not investing in shipbuilding until its too late.

The CRCN should be clearly articulating what his aviation requirements are, his plan to support the requirements definition and acquisition, and how he intends to support the force generation of the resulting weapon systems, not moaning about the failure of all of us to deliver Cyclone.

Yes, but they are not all on Sikorsky. There is plenty of blame to go around, including on the RCN (the aforementioned to understand and clearly articulate their aviation needs, leaving MH to wither under RCAF “stewardship”). Everyone needs to roll up their sleeves and fix it… whatever that fix looks like.

And the first step sghiukd be for CRCN to understand and clearly articulate his aviation needs, as the (indirect) force employed. And yes, I deliberately repeated myself.

Are you insinuating that MH should be repositioned back under the RCN ?

CRCN is pretty clear here:

Royal Canadian Navy Today and Yesterday

“Let Down by the Cyclone”: Commander of the RCN Sounds Alarm as RCN Looks to the Future of Naval Aviation As Fleet Week opened with fanfare on the Halifax waterfront, Canada’s top sailor delivered a...

www.facebook.com

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

The current CRCN, and indeed the RCN as a whole, has, in my opinion, demonstrated a lack of support to and education in Naval air operations for a long time.

Correct. Which is why, IMHO, maritime air has to be brought back into the RCN so the officers from the "naval" air side can get back into being naval officers and developing in house air knowledge.

One of the best captain I ever had in Maritime Command was an Air Observer who had served in both Maggie and Bonnie, and then served as CO on Saint Laurent's type DDH. Obviously, he served in the Fleet Air Arm before unification and then continued as a surface CO at the time of unification so remained Navy.

There has to be a way to retain the Air Det Commanders into naval service after their tour so that we build air knowledge back into the fleet.

 

[Good2Golf]

Your peers are making shit up.

Maybe if you were called CycloneTacco they’d believe you?

 

[dapaterson]

Correct. Which is why, IMHO, maritime air has to be brought back into the RCN so the officers from the "naval" air side can get back into being naval officers and developing in house air knowledge.

One of the best captain I ever had in Maritime Command was an Air Observer who had served in both Maggie and Bonnie, and then served as CO on Saint Laurent's type DDH. Obviously, he served in the Fleet Air Arm before unification and then continued as a surface CO at the time of unification so remained Navy.

There has to be a way to retain the Air Det Commanders into naval service after their tour so that we build air knowledge back into the fleet.

Or... try teaching humility to NWOs so they listen to others.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Oh! You was serious about that.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Maybe if you were called CycloneTacco they’d believe you?

Probably not, no.

 

[Baz]

Correct. Which is why, IMHO, maritime air has to be brought back into the RCN so the officers from the "naval" air side can get back into being naval officers and developing in house air knowledge.

One of the best captain I ever had in Maritime Command was an Air Observer who had served in both Maggie and Bonnie, and then served as CO on Saint Laurent's type DDH. Obviously, he served in the Fleet Air Arm before unification and then continued as a surface CO at the time of unification so remained Navy.

There has to be a way to retain the Air Det Commanders into naval service after their tour so that we build air knowledge back into the fleet.

In general I agree with you. However, the devil is in the details, and there are a few important ones. The main thing that comes to mind is that Operational Airworthiness is important, and currently done by the RCAF. Which means they have all the corporate knowledge.

I’m sure if we recreated the situation you described that current NWOs would be less than impressed with losing at sea Command spots.

I have often wondered if TACCO should be open as an NWO option instead of warfare director, with the requirement to qualify to ACSO? Or, for that matter, any of the aircrew spots, with the same requirement? I know of more than one who remustered from the Navy, Why not stay in their original trade? And couldn’t the opposite apply… MH Crew Commander is considered the equivalent of a director level qual, and thus eligible for the ORO course, with the requirement to get BWK qualified?

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

I have often wondered if TACCO should be open as an NWO option instead of warfare director, with the requirement to qualify to ACSO? Or, for that matter, any of the aircrew spots, with the same requirement? I know of more than one who remustered from the Navy, Why not stay in their original trade? And couldn’t the opposite apply… MH Crew Commander is considered the equivalent of a director level qual, and thus eligible for the ORO course, with the requirement to get BWK qualified?

That is more or less how it worked in the old RCN. The Air Observers could qualify as such by coming from the Naval Air Branch or the Executive Branch side (that's what the NWO were known as in those days) and the Pilots/Air Observers could, at some point, diverge from flying and command of squadrons and naval air stations to go the Executive way, all the way to command of surface ships and, more importantly then, command of the carrier, then on from either "branch" to become admirals. Everyone from either branch had to qualify as BWK.

 

[Baz]

That is more or less how it worked in the old RCN. The Air Observers could qualify as such by coming from the Naval Air Branch or the Executive Branch side (that's what the NWO were known as in those days) and the Pilots/Air Observers could, at some point, diverge from flying and command of squadrons and naval air stations to go the Executive way, all the way to command of surface ships and, more importantly then, command of the carrier, then on from either "branch" to become admirals. Everyone from either branch had to qualify as BWK.

True, but the as described it could be made to fit into the current trade structure. As well, there is no requirement for everyone to be a BWK, only those who wish to get an ORO qual.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

True, but the as described it could be made to fit into the current trade structure. As well, there is no requirement for everyone to be a BWK, only those who wish to get an ORO qual.

Perversely, Baz, there are little requirement for the ORO to be a BWK. The OROs spend little, if any, of their time on the bridge. On the course, they are taught everything they need to know and is current in how to control the ship and advise command in all tactical situations, but they don't have to take charge.

That means that they could get their tour as ORO without a BWK and then, after such tour, decide if they want to qulify and go on the XO / CO route, or go back to RCAF, being considered as having done whatever level the RCAF considers to be the next one for pilots who served as Air Det Commanders. If anything happened to the CO and XO, command would then devolve to the most senior BWK, likely the NavO or the DeckO.