Tac Hel
- Thread starter Scoobs
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
OK, to move in a slightly new direction,
1)Is there any reason that we MUST have officers piloting helos? Why could'nt we use the WO system like some of our allies?
2) What is the % of availabilty for the units that serve the army? I'm told that in private business, you cannot make money without 90% plus avail. of a/c. Does the CF meet this level, and if not, why not?
Cheers
1)Is there any reason that we MUST have officers piloting helos? Why could'nt we use the WO system like some of our allies?
2) What is the % of availabilty for the units that serve the army? I'm told that in private business, you cannot make money without 90% plus avail. of a/c. Does the CF meet this level, and if not, why not?
Cheers
Go!!
1) Not sure....maybe more experienced guys like Duey could fill us in on that one. My take on it is that every CF pilot has universal deployability ie: one day he's flying choppers, and then posted to a F18 sqn to fly hornets (after the appropriate training of course). This doesn't happen very often, but it does happen. Every pilot starts from the same place (moose jaw), and to know throw WO's in the mix would be quite the under taking. I'm sure there is much, much more to the story though (and I don't want to get into leadership ability of WO vs officers - we all know what that could turn into)
2) Civvie companies need serviceable airplanes to make money. We don't. We can have zero on the flight line and still have our jobs the next day. We definately don't meet the 90% mark - not on a daily, constant basis anyways (although I have seen it a few times). The big difference is this - In the military, if something breaks, the aircraft doesn't fly and it gets fixed(unless its very minor). In civvie land, if something is broken, they HAVE to fly it anyways or they loose money (of course unless flight safety is an issue). Now this is just hearsy from what folks from the "other side" have told me. At our sqn, we have 18 helos - and on a day to day basis, we'll see anywhere from 8-13 birds on the line, although sometimes we see as little as 1-2. There are always a few in for major inspections etc, then there's parts availability, temperature changes causes gremlins etc....
1) Not sure....maybe more experienced guys like Duey could fill us in on that one. My take on it is that every CF pilot has universal deployability ie: one day he's flying choppers, and then posted to a F18 sqn to fly hornets (after the appropriate training of course). This doesn't happen very often, but it does happen. Every pilot starts from the same place (moose jaw), and to know throw WO's in the mix would be quite the under taking. I'm sure there is much, much more to the story though (and I don't want to get into leadership ability of WO vs officers - we all know what that could turn into)
2) Civvie companies need serviceable airplanes to make money. We don't. We can have zero on the flight line and still have our jobs the next day. We definately don't meet the 90% mark - not on a daily, constant basis anyways (although I have seen it a few times). The big difference is this - In the military, if something breaks, the aircraft doesn't fly and it gets fixed(unless its very minor). In civvie land, if something is broken, they HAVE to fly it anyways or they loose money (of course unless flight safety is an issue). Now this is just hearsy from what folks from the "other side" have told me. At our sqn, we have 18 helos - and on a day to day basis, we'll see anywhere from 8-13 birds on the line, although sometimes we see as little as 1-2. There are always a few in for major inspections etc, then there's parts availability, temperature changes causes gremlins etc....
- Reaction score
- 23,309
- Points
- 1,360
1) Go, no....I would fly as a CW3 (roughly Maj-equiv in the US Army)...and these guys are Commissioned, so they're not NCMs...not Officer's either...it is a very interesting ranks structure. I know a Ret'd CW5 very well...he's a contemporary of GEN Cody, US Army VCSA, and he has many interesting stories but always has a hard time passing on to me in words the relationship of Warrant Officer aviators in the US Army...it's hard to describe, but I have a good "feeling" for their relationship with the CO, OCs, etc...
2) 75% is a number generally accepted with various fleets. Civvies actually have a dispatch rate often higher than even 90%...but there are some things they fly without that I wouldn't fly without in the military. I have my civilian commercial helicopter license and have flown a few times in that environment...I'd take 60-70% servicability before going into battle because I know the aircraft I'm in is servicable with all the mission essential kit required...
Cheers,
Duey
2) 75% is a number generally accepted with various fleets. Civvies actually have a dispatch rate often higher than even 90%...but there are some things they fly without that I wouldn't fly without in the military. I have my civilian commercial helicopter license and have flown a few times in that environment...I'd take 60-70% servicability before going into battle because I know the aircraft I'm in is servicable with all the mission essential kit required...
Cheers,
Duey
- Reaction score
- 22,530
- Points
- 1,260
The one issue I will add (w/o back handed sniping 
)
Is the point of while we do allow a 031 (or 00010 now :
) loose on a battlefield or PSO, whatever - we do so under the supervision of a experienced NCO. It is very unusual to have a Pte or young Cpl out by themselves (or a group of them).
The theory is the same.
Is it really required to have a pilot/crew/maint. individual be able to flip back and forth to keep the stuff new? I dont see any of the Cbt Arms guys getting swapped around - and no one seems worried if we get stale by 'watching paint dry...' ?
From an 031 point of view - I'd much rather have aircrew system that is dedicated to me - that trains with me day in and day out - inc weapons and ex's. Having seen 408 and 427 do weapons qual's and knowing buddies who are floating in the system as the "Mission Specialists" it would appear to me to be a better way of doing things to sharpen the point of the spear.
Just my $0.02
)Is the point of while we do allow a 031 (or 00010 now :
) loose on a battlefield or PSO, whatever - we do so under the supervision of a experienced NCO. It is very unusual to have a Pte or young Cpl out by themselves (or a group of them).The theory is the same.
Is it really required to have a pilot/crew/maint. individual be able to flip back and forth to keep the stuff new? I dont see any of the Cbt Arms guys getting swapped around - and no one seems worried if we get stale by 'watching paint dry...' ?
From an 031 point of view - I'd much rather have aircrew system that is dedicated to me - that trains with me day in and day out - inc weapons and ex's. Having seen 408 and 427 do weapons qual's and knowing buddies who are floating in the system as the "Mission Specialists" it would appear to me to be a better way of doing things to sharpen the point of the spear.
Just my $0.02
- Reaction score
- 23,309
- Points
- 1,360
Kevin, while some guys are addressing the "hard" duration of growning an apprentice tech into an independant tech, I fully agree with your point. One could say that the point that an Infanteer truly becomes independant (in the sense that he is more part of the C2 chain than a contributing private) is MCpl and that doesn't happen overnight. Fitness, understanding of the art of war, TTPs, battle drills...all go into a good soldier and that takes time.
As for the pilots flip/flop argument...personally I think that's a load of crap...except for a few onsies and twosies a year, you really see no reversion of a helo pilot back into the fixed wing world...some think it's some kind of carrot, reward, etc... I don't buy into that. If I were not an Aviator, I wouldn't be in the Air Force...wow, listen to me...some old school Tac Aviator must have got to me as a young, maleable type... :-\ Interestingly, the 972 Cbt Arms Specialist (the Msn spec you mentioned) started as 10 TAG's way to keep the some of the expertise of the observers (re: transfer of tactical knowledge) alive...it's been hit and miss at times, but the guys have done a pretty good job all things considered. Like you mentioni, having the aviators co-located (both physically AND mentally ) is something we should be striving for. Things did not make it as easy in the past. Tac Hel only having 3 maneouvre units made/makes it really hard to align operations with the associated Brigade units...especially when deployments doin't line up, etc... Maybe that will change to some degree, but we will have to send something a fair bit less than an 8-pack to either: a) have any hope of aligning with training and deployment of TFs, or b) be as sustainable as you guys are in the Army, vis a vis rotation of your 12 9 maneouvre units. Personally, I'd like to see even stronger ties built between aviation and the combat arms than exist today...coordinated with the rotation scehdules of the respective units. Dreaming? Perhaps, but not something that we should shy away from aiming towards.
What I enjoyed the most was seeing the faces of the guys I was supporting on a daily basis. Notwithstanding the taking the pi$$ out of each other on a near continuous basis (all in good fun) there was a level of connection that was understood by all..."we'll get you where you need to be, when you need to be, no questions asked..." Huah!
Cheers,
Duey
As for the pilots flip/flop argument...personally I think that's a load of crap...except for a few onsies and twosies a year, you really see no reversion of a helo pilot back into the fixed wing world...some think it's some kind of carrot, reward, etc... I don't buy into that. If I were not an Aviator, I wouldn't be in the Air Force...wow, listen to me...some old school Tac Aviator must have got to me as a young, maleable type... :-\ Interestingly, the 972 Cbt Arms Specialist (the Msn spec you mentioned) started as 10 TAG's way to keep the some of the expertise of the observers (re: transfer of tactical knowledge) alive...it's been hit and miss at times, but the guys have done a pretty good job all things considered. Like you mentioni, having the aviators co-located (both physically AND mentally
) is something we should be striving for. Things did not make it as easy in the past. Tac Hel only having 3 maneouvre units made/makes it really hard to align operations with the associated Brigade units...especially when deployments doin't line up, etc... Maybe that will change to some degree, but we will have to send something a fair bit less than an 8-pack to either: a) have any hope of aligning with training and deployment of TFs, or b) be as sustainable as you guys are in the Army, vis a vis rotation of your What I enjoyed the most was seeing the faces of the guys I was supporting on a daily basis. Notwithstanding the taking the pi$$ out of each other on a near continuous basis (all in good fun) there was a level of connection that was understood by all..."we'll get you where you need to be, when you need to be, no questions asked..." Huah!
Cheers,
Duey
Duey, I very much respect your response - but I'll pose this to you
I did moose jaw in 2001 - I would say 50% of the instructors there were ex-rotary. I may be totally wrong, but that was my perception. And I didn't mean going from TAC HEL to fighters specifically, but to other rotary communities as well - like base rescue, SAR, 3FTS....
I did moose jaw in 2001 - I would say 50% of the instructors there were ex-rotary. I may be totally wrong, but that was my perception. And I didn't mean going from TAC HEL to fighters specifically, but to other rotary communities as well - like base rescue, SAR, 3FTS....
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Short Final,
There were also numerous ex-helo types in MJ when I was there. Check out the history of the Snowbirds. I recall one year when more then half the team was rotary at one point in their career.
I know Sea King types that are going or have been Tac Hel. Guys go SAR. Fighter guys going rotary (both MH and Tac Hel), tac hel going to MJ, ets, etc.
Although it may not seem like alot, there is usually 1 or 2 people in our unit that will get posted to another aircraft each year. If we are the norm, then there is quite a bit of switching going on.
There were also numerous ex-helo types in MJ when I was there. Check out the history of the Snowbirds. I recall one year when more then half the team was rotary at one point in their career.
I know Sea King types that are going or have been Tac Hel. Guys go SAR. Fighter guys going rotary (both MH and Tac Hel), tac hel going to MJ, ets, etc.
Although it may not seem like alot, there is usually 1 or 2 people in our unit that will get posted to another aircraft each year. If we are the norm, then there is quite a bit of switching going on.
- Reaction score
- 23,309
- Points
- 1,360
short final said:
SF, I suppose I should have qualified it a bit...only about 2-3 guys are allowed to transfer out of Tac Hel per year. I know some of the guys there...on of the OC's (not sure if you were in his flight) is an A-1 guy whom I flew with in a previous life...good man! So yes, we do escape from time to time.
Personally, you couldn't pay me enought to go back to Moose Lips, Land of Big Hair that Time Forgot...unless there were MH-47G's stationed there....
Cheers,
Duey
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
GO!!! said:
The British Army has corporals flying helicopters, though these are mainly pilots still in training. The majority of their pilots are senior NCOs (sergeants, staff sergeants and WO2s), about 30% are officers. All Royal Navy and RAF pilots are officers.
- Reaction score
- 8,576
- Points
- 1,160
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/issues/2005/oct/helicopter_fleet.htm
Updates on US Army plans for AH64/UH60/CH47/ARH and also an LUH(Bell proposing 210 variant)
Passing reference to Joint Heavy Lift Cargo Helicopter as adjunct to, not replacement for the CH47.
Updates on US Army plans for AH64/UH60/CH47/ARH and also an LUH(Bell proposing 210 variant)
Passing reference to Joint Heavy Lift Cargo Helicopter as adjunct to, not replacement for the CH47.
interesting to note that the new ARH will be built in Canada and integrated in Texas. I would have expected the whole thing to be built in Texas. Wouldn't it be something if somehow the CDS found a way to 'add on' to this order, and get a few birds for recce, and some limited aerial fire support?
TR23
TR23
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Scoobs I think I know you... I am in 427 THS Sqn, and currently an AVN Technician (Formally Aero-Engine Technician) having served 26+years. I have read thorugh this full thread with great pleasure and look forward to some more serious debate, I am also having a good chuckle at the banter between a few members here... remember Scoobs... "you can lead a grunt to water...but you cannot make him bathe" No offense KevinB or MG34 ;D Different peronalities, different mindsets, and different perspectives on things.
Scoobs... I think I fixed your Ruck Sack before you were posted out... please correct me if I am wrong. I am the old Sarge who... Rucks 3 days a week, and also a RSO and small arms instructor. I also taking shooting seriously and send 20-30000 rounds downrange a year...out of my own pocket. I use to be the Captian of the MARLANT Combat Shooting Team (Pistol).
Yes I like TacHel, I like the field, and I liked being FARP Commander.
Scoobs... I think I fixed your Ruck Sack before you were posted out... please correct me if I am wrong. I am the old Sarge who... Rucks 3 days a week, and also a RSO and small arms instructor. I also taking shooting seriously and send 20-30000 rounds downrange a year...out of my own pocket. I use to be the Captian of the MARLANT Combat Shooting Team (Pistol).
Yes I like TacHel, I like the field, and I liked being FARP Commander.
