-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Updates on new production aircraft
- Thread starter bert
- Start date
Agree -- I have seen it from both sides of the aisle and it is nothing more than children bickering on the playground over a toy dump truck. Fact of the matter, assets should be allocated by who is doing the work -- not based on who we may need to fight 10 years from now.
Part of the problem is that HCS never really had a "home" in Naval Aviation. That put them in a position where it was too easy for other communities to cherry pick what they wanted from the HCS missions. And fair or not, HS "owns" the CSAR and special ops-type missions.
(Not trying to start a debate of whether or not they have/will ever truly performed it, or whether or not they are any good at it - just giving my view of the politics of it).
(Not trying to start a debate of whether or not they have/will ever truly performed it, or whether or not they are any good at it - just giving my view of the politics of it).
Of course, it will be easy soon to know who does what when we are down to just HSC and HSM. Figuring out who is qualed for what and distinguishing the tactical haves from the have-nots will be another matter since there just won't be any way to get every pilot every qual.
phrogpilot73
Well-Known Member
I saw something on it not too long ago (it was during a CG monitoring discussion), I'll try and find it because I don't remember off the top of my head. There are some other things that I find interesting with this program, like the auto-jettison of an external load when it's out of CG limits...
How so? I am not familiar with the squadron structures of HSC and HSM when the dust settles. How many pilots per squadron?
In my experience some squadrons make it a priority to get everyone their quals (assuming they are up to the task), and others have tactical crews and non-tactical crews, and some even have PG only crews.
HH60 -- I have seen both, but I would venture to guess that more squadrons have the tac and non-tac guys. Even if a squadron gets everyone their quals, there will be those that will never fly any of the big events or missions -- just plane guard. Their qual won't be worth the paper that it is written on.
As for structure -- HSC CVW will have 8 a/c, HSC EXP will have around 8-10.
As for getting pilots their quals -- I think that everyone can get their quals. The squadron just has to focus on maximizing every training opportunity. I don't agree with how HSC EXP has been simulating (not using actual troops, CRRCs), but still believe that there are enough training opportunities to get everyone their quals properly. Skeds guys need to make sure that not a single opportunity passes.
As for structure -- HSC CVW will have 8 a/c, HSC EXP will have around 8-10.
As for getting pilots their quals -- I think that everyone can get their quals. The squadron just has to focus on maximizing every training opportunity. I don't agree with how HSC EXP has been simulating (not using actual troops, CRRCs), but still believe that there are enough training opportunities to get everyone their quals properly. Skeds guys need to make sure that not a single opportunity passes.
Flame on! Concur about training opportunities. Squadrons in Norfolk could easily fill their schedules with actual support. Sometimes it's not their fault, but they don't make it a priority either. HS bubbas are guilty of that too. When half your events in a weekly schedule are FAM flights, don't cry about not getting people qualed.
My guess is that the vertrep/Amphib SAR guys will fall behind the CV guys - not saying it is right, but budgets will be tight and they are going to have to make some choices.
You are right, but.... What good is a 2P who can quote the tactics but is going to kill you on the boat at night? I understand your point about FAMs, but who wants to be flying around the boat with a 2P and a HAC that haven't done FAM work since their last NATOPS check? There is a happy medium in there somewhere.
Sorry Bert, but if you can do a night LL CAL you can do a night landing on spot 4. that argument falls on deaf ears. BTW, how often do guys do steep no hover landings or running takeoffs? Once a year, on a natops check.
I know you don't advocate throwing the kids straight into the deep end, and we all know that LL CAL can mean flying on -9's into a parking lot on a clear night as much as it can mean getting into a shoebox through dust and sand.
Having said that, I think we really just have a philosophical difference here. I'm not disagreeing that some squadrons or even whole communities may not be getting the most bang for their training buck, I am just saying that it is important not to neglect the basics. While our overland mishaps are increasing, we still have an unfortunate history of losing crews at the boat. We have proven too many times that basic airwork cannot be taken for granted.