from: peaches on Yesterday at 23:28:39
Firstly I have seen plenty of helos disassembled and loaded onto airlifters. I spend time in Tinker AFB OK on AWACS, saw that happen plenty of times there. C17, C5, C130's would come in and load up Apaches, Chinooks, Blackhawks & support equip from OK NG, as well I have seen Cobras loaded up as well. If you can send an armoured division to the other side of planet earth, you can send helos. The Americans sent the whole 101st to Irag, twice, I think we could send a tac hel sqn, or flight. In future we could perhaps even operate them of the new JSS ships. Time will tell.
We have rarely moved helicopters by air. We used to fly Kiowas to Norway and back, either three with tailbooms removed or two with them on, in a Herc. I went to Norway twice in 1983 that way. On the second trip, we went with three Twins as well - with one of those getting banged up by the MAMS crew in Trenton while they were cramming it in. 400 Squadron moved a Griffon to Alert last summer that way as well - building it back up outside was apparently not particularly pleasant. 10 TAG moved nine Twins to the Sinai in or about 1985 as well, but they went in a single C5A with all personnel and other kit. All of the hels that went to Norway for Brave Lion in 1985 went by ship, though, as air movement was not practical for the numbers involved. My specific comment was in regard to your comment about "easily fitting into a C130". While a Cobra's width can be reduced to improve side clearance compared to a Twin Huey/Griffon (and there isn't much at all in their case), it's still long and tall and requires partial dismantling/re-assembly and test flying, and risks damage in the whole lengthy process. It becomes a vastly simpler undertaking with C17. We need to get out of the Herc-transportability-criterion mindset for every piece of kit that we consider buying. With C17, air transportability ceases to be a significant factor in choosing either AH64 or AH1Z over the other. With the size, condition, and tasking level of our Herc fleet we're not sending any part of a Tac Hel Squadron anywhere that way, and what the Yanks do is irrelevant to us - they've got much more to play with.. With C17, yes, it becomes feasible. As for the ship, yes, albeit slowly, and we've done that once already.
Another point, if we were to aquire Aphaches for example, why should we train the pilots here in GTown. Singapore sends their Apache pilots to train with the Arizona NG, their Chinook pilots to Ft Worth to train with TX NG. Ft Rucker, set up, a Canadian contingent there (just like Altus AFB OK for C17 training) to train Chinook crews & support pers. I believe the US Army tarins it's Apache crews with the 21st Cav in Ft Hood these days, set up a training program there. The Dutch & Brits send their pilots to train in the US, why not us. Whom better to learn army avaiation tactis from than the US Army or USMC if we bought Corbras.
Some combination of that may be feasible, and will have to be done initially anyway. The first Griffon guys got their conversion training done in Dallas-Fort Worth as part of the contract. We do not operate exactly the same way as the Americans do, and we train differently. Having seen the products of both systems, I prefer ours. We could have the US train all of our Infantry guys in Fort Benning, too, but I don't think that you'd find too many Canadian Infanteers who'd think too highly of that.
Twin Heuys in A-tan, the USMC is using them for convoy escort & various utility duties.
Thanks. I wasn't aware. That sounds rather benign, though - I bet that they're in roles that do not require carrying much weight or operating in mountainous regions. We could use Griffon for casevac, but the cabin configuration is less than ideal and I don't think that this would be a significant contribution to the overall effort anyway. Addition of a decent sensor package would allow for a viable role, and would be better than TUAV for recce and surveillance although more labour-intensive.
As for Chinooks slinging Cobra, just joking
However, I Vietnam the H47 was used extensivly to recovery downed helos, flying tow truck
Good about the joke - and I did see the smiley things. The Yanks lost a very slightly damaged Black Hawk in Grenada when a Marine CH53 pilot pickled it, and the first Griffon that we wrote off died in a plunge from a Skycrane into a Labrador fjord. If it's already smashed up or shot to bits, fine, but like I said don't plan on ever flying it again if you elect to move it that way.
I am not saying purchase items to look good at an airshow.
I know, I know - but the last CDS did when he was "running" the CFLH (Kiowa replacement) programme.
When I was with 400 Sqn in Downsview
When was that? I was posted in in 1992.
As for eating up bodies with TUAV, I understand fully. Perhaps the answer for now is having others in the AF help with there ops, AESOPS, AEC, ANAV types. Do we still have Air Observers like we did in Lahr when I was there, I am not sure.
The pilots are there, as I understand, for mission planning and although I've never worked with AESOPs and Navs etcetera, I don't see how they'd help out. It's not just any pilot, either, it's Tac Hel pilots as we have some knowledge (although it may vary widely) of how the Army operates. The Tech bill is just as much of a problem too, as stripping them from maintenance flights and packing them off to the UAV mob in Afghanistan leaves the Squadrons unable to operate all of their aircraft anyway. Being as everybody's short of techs, bringing them in from other communities hurts them. Plus in a small group, we'd rather have most, if not all, personnel coming from one unit as we know each other.
The Observers disappeared when we lost the Kiowa. There has been a half-hearted push for Mission Specialists on the Griffon, but without a recce package there is no need. There would be no need if the recce package was anything other than a bolt-on with no proper aircraft mods and our pilots were properly trained and motivated either. Observers and Mission Specialists are more of an indicator that we are not mature as a community and that the a** f**ce methods are failures; after forty-three years of Tac Hel, we still need to bring in outside help to run our ranges, explain ground tactics to driver-officers, etcetera.
I am only proposing that we get a vision of what AF we want, an end state, and build towards it. I fully understand we cannot to it this very minute. It is great to talk with people who are passonate about the AF as I am...........
My "passion" as it relates to the a** f**ce is purely of the negative variety, as the a** f**ce's handling of Tac Hel has been a clusterfork. Battlefield aviation is an Army function. That aside, yes, some logic and thought needs to be put into what we need to do and what we need in order to do it with. We used to have doctrine (based upon combat-proven US doctrine) that laid that out nicely, but it got chucked and/or watered down/made politically correct after Griffon arrived.
Basically, it said that at Brigade level, there was a continual need for light hels for reconnaissance and fire direction (Air OP, FAC, and AH co-ord) and an occasional need for utility and attack. The latter became continual at Div level, and an occasional need for transport came in there. That became continual at Corps level. The Brigade LOH squadron had 16 Kiowas, and, in the case of a Brigade Group, four utility hels for air ambulance. The Div wing had another LOH squadron for itself, plus an Attack squadron based upon a US Army Attack Battalion (21 AH1F at the time, plus a couple of UH60 and OH58), and a Utility squadron of 24 Twin Hueys.
These were all perfectly valid organizations, and we could tailor them for specific ops like Norway (CAST Composite Hel Squadron) as needed.
In my perfect world, we'd have one mech brigade, one wheeled brigade, and one airmobile brigade. Each would have a squadron of RH70 for the ARMED recce/fire direction role. The latter would have a utility squadron, an attack squadron, and a transport flight as well. A second each attack and utility squadron, fourth recce/fire direction squadron, and transport flight would provide the Div-level assets. That would total about 64 RH70, 48 UH60/UH1Y, 30-42 AH64/AH1Z, and 16 CH47 plus possibly a couple of extra utility and recce machines in the AH squadrons. Some additional examples of each would be required in the OTUs (Operational Training Units) and to cover attrition. A TUAV organization may have a place in there somewhere as well. All personnel in this structure would be Army, and would have at least DP1 Infantry for NCMs and whatever Phase 2 Infantry is now called for officers before doing any tech or aircrew training. There would also be NCO pilots.
In my more perfect world, there'd be more than three regular brigades, and the reserve brigades would be bigger and trained and equipped to a higher level, and provided with their own aviation resources...
