Hmm, helos are more involved in combat?

[lowflier03]

Settle down, Beavis. I'm talking about HS and HSL communities, per the quote.

Dont forget that not too long ago we had more than just those 2 communities. We had HAL in Vietnam, HCS 4 and 5 in the decades following... And while Navy helos haven't been putting a ton of ordnance downrange, (at least in ways you read about because we happen to be the worst service when it comes to our own Public relations/media), thats not to say it's not needed or hasn't happened. Just look at Gulf War 1. We had to have the Brits come in and provide SSC and security because we didn't deem it "necessary" at the time to properly arm our helos or defend ourselves. Now at least it's become obvious that there is a need, but that doesn't mean we are putting the money where it's needed or even treating it properly.

Just wait until suicide Joe is on a mission in his little boat full of explosives to die for his beliefs by killing a few US servicemembers on a big gray boat. (Cause it's sure never happened before right?) But unfortunately the powers that be dont think we really need to let the helos fly with rounds in the guns, or maybe they shouldn't fly with any ammo at all, because just having some guns hanging off the helo will be a deterrence. (Haven't heard that logic before right?) Pretty sure the fact that he's on a suicide mission means he doesn't care what the helo looks like, he's expecting to die anyway, except now we've just given him a free run at us. Or maybe its not 1 suicide Joe, it's him and his 30 friends. You think we're gonna have pointy nose aircraft airborne already? maybe launch them in time? or maybe recall them in time to stop the attack?

This kind of stupidity is still happening and logic like Brett's is part of the problem. Unfortunately it's obvious that some people dont care to listen or reexamine their beliefs and will continue on the same path...

 

[Scoob]

This kind of stupidity is still happening and logic like Brett's is part of the problem. Unfortunately it's obvious that some people dont care to listen or reexamine their beliefs and will continue on the same path...

Its not the one's OUTSIDE of the helo community that think like this who should bare the most blame for getting us where we are.

 

[BigRed389]

Just wait until suicide Joe is on a mission in his little boat full of explosives to die for his beliefs by killing a few US servicemembers on a big gray boat. (Cause it's sure never happened before right?) But unfortunately the powers that be dont think we really need to let the helos fly with rounds in the guns, or maybe they shouldn't fly with any ammo at all, because just having some guns hanging off the helo will be a deterrence. (Haven't heard that logic before right?) Pretty sure the fact that he's on a suicide mission means he doesn't care what the helo looks like, he's expecting to die anyway, except now we've just given him a free run at us. Or maybe its not 1 suicide Joe, it's him and his 30 friends. You think we're gonna have pointy nose aircraft airborne already? maybe launch them in time? or maybe recall them in time to stop the attack?

Good grief, tell me you're exaggerating.

 

[RadicalDude]

Dont forget that not too long ago we had more than just those 2 communities. We had HAL in Vietnam, HCS 4 and 5 in the decades following... And while Navy helos haven't been putting a ton of ordnance downrange, (at least in ways you read about because we happen to be the worst service when it comes to our own Public relations/media), thats not to say it's not needed or hasn't happened. Just look at Gulf War 1. We had to have the Brits come in and provide SSC and security because we didn't deem it "necessary" at the time to properly arm our helos or defend ourselves. Now at least it's become obvious that there is a need, but that doesn't mean we are putting the money where it's needed or even treating it properly.

Just wait until suicide Joe is on a mission in his little boat full of explosives to die for his beliefs by killing a few US servicemembers on a big gray boat. (Cause it's sure never happened before right?) But unfortunately the powers that be dont think we really need to let the helos fly with rounds in the guns, or maybe they shouldn't fly with any ammo at all, because just having some guns hanging off the helo will be a deterrence. (Haven't heard that logic before right?) Pretty sure the fact that he's on a suicide mission means he doesn't care what the helo looks like, he's expecting to die anyway, except now we've just given him a free run at us. Or maybe its not 1 suicide Joe, it's him and his 30 friends. You think we're gonna have pointy nose aircraft airborne already? maybe launch them in time? or maybe recall them in time to stop the attack?

This kind of stupidity is still happening and logic like Brett's is part of the problem. Unfortunately it's obvious that some people dont care to listen or reexamine their beliefs and will continue on the same path...

The FAC/FIAC threat has pretty high visibility. There may be areas where we're weak on CSG defense, but I don't think we'll get caught pants-down on this issue cause the helos don't have guns.

 

[Gatordev]

Just look at Gulf War 1. We had to have the Brits come in and provide SSC and security because we didn't deem it "necessary" at the time to properly arm our helos or defend ourselves.

In the interest of facts, Navy helos were armed and shot during GW1 and were part of the platform take downs. I've flown with one of the crewman that was part of that. But it furthers your point that there's very little press about such things.

To Brett's point, though, there's very little press to brag about on the Gray side other than -4/-5/-84.

 

[lowflier03]

Good grief, tell me you're exaggerating.

Not exaggerating at all. I have been told (on more than one occasion). "You can have the guns on for this ATFP / Straights Transit, etc but you can't actually put rounds in them without permission, its just for show." Or that we couldn't actually have any ammo in the helo "just in case". I've also been in a bird doing "stuff" off the coast of a less than friendly country who were being overtly aggressive towards us at the time and was told that I had to have the guns on the helo but they had to remain "inside the aircraft with the doors closed so they can't be seen" but then again not allowed to actually have ammo...

The FAC/FIAC threat has pretty high visibility. There may be areas where we're weak on CSG defense, but I don't think we'll get caught pants-down on this issue cause the helos don't have guns.

Honestly based on what I've seen, I'll believe that when we routinely see helos flying with the -197 loaded and ready to go.

In the interest of facts, Navy helos were armed and shot during GW1 and were part of the platform take downs. I've flown with one of the crewman that was part of that. But it furthers your point that there's very little press about such things.

To Brett's point, though, there's very little press to brag about on the Gray side other than -4/-5/-84.

True, but the fact also remains that we brought in British Lynx to do our SSC (and they took shots) and we used the Army for takedowns from their floating barges/bases because CSG helos lacked the equipment to do the job. And again, no positive press...

 

[Scoob]

To Brett's point, though, there's very little press to brag about on the Gray side other than -4/-5/-84.

Counter-Piracy.

 

[HAL Pilot]

In the interest of facts, Navy helos were armed and shot during GW1 and were part of the platform take downs. I've flown with one of the crewman that was part of that. But it furthers your point that there's very little press about such things.

I have a Strike/Flight AM citation that says "...as a Naval Flight Officer flying with Helicopter Antisubmarine Squadron FOUR".....

I was in TRs Weapons department. Being a former infantry type in my pre-Navy days I hung out with the G2 division guys and qualified on all the various small arms including the M60 machine gun. HS-4 was being run ragged and I would fly every 3 or 4 days as the second guy in back manning the door gun. I did a couple of oil platform takedowns with them. I got to hose the hell out of one platform that thought they would resist. About 30 seconds was all it took.

 

[Catmando]

During Vietnam, the South was saturated with an incredible number of helos... slicks, gunships, etc., mostly Army but the Navy's land based HAL-3 carried a big load too.
However North Vietnam never saw a helo, unless it was the most rare and incredibly dangerous combat SAR of HC-7.
Indeed, there was a reason for this dichotomy.

 

[insanebikerboy]

I have a Strike/Flight AM citation that says "...as a Naval Flight Officer flying with Helicopter Antisubmarine Squadron FOUR".....

I was in TRs Weapons department. Being a former infantry type in my pre-Navy days I hung out with the G2 division guys and qualified on all the various small arms including the M60 machine gun. HS-4 was being run ragged and I would fly every 3 or 4 days as the second guy in back manning the door gun. I did a couple of oil platform takedowns with them. I got to hose the hell out of one platform that thought they would resist. About 30 seconds was all it took.

Cool story, definitely don't see many NFO's getting a AM with a helo squadron, much less getting one while flying in back!

 

[Gatordev]

True, but the fact also remains that we brought in British Lynx to do our SSC (and they took shots) and we used the Army for takedowns from their floating barges/bases because CSG helos lacked the equipment to do the job. And again, no positive press...

Certainly a time when everyone had reduced capabilities. I'm not arguing that.

Counter-Piracy.

Which is just here and there. Guys in my first squadron would regularly engage guys during takedowns (well, the operator in the back would engage them). During my last tour, I've shot at people, as well. My last squadron has regularly engaged people in the last few years on deployments, but in the grand scheme of things, it's not much compared to what TACAIR (or -4/-5/-84) has done in the last 10-15+ years.

I'm not arguing that we don't need better stuff to keep us safe for the various missions we all do, I just understand Brett's comment and not get butt-hurt about it.

And trust me, I've probably been bitching about not being utilized longer than you have, so I feel your pain.

 

[insanebikerboy]

I'm not arguing that we don't need better stuff to keep us safe for the various missions we all do, I just understand Brett's comment and not get butt-hurt about it.

And the biggest takeaway of this thread isn't even that helos are or aren't shooting/getting shot at as much, but that the things that are killing us the most (brownout/cfit/etc) are things that we can mitigate without even worrying about combat conditions. Preaching to the choir I know, but there are things out there that could help mitigate those conditions if they'd allocate money for it.

 

[BigRed389]

Not exaggerating at all. I have been told (on more than one occasion). "You can have the guns on for this ATFP / Straights Transit, etc but you can't actually put rounds in them without permission, its just for show." Or that we couldn't actually have any ammo in the helo "just in case". I've also been in a bird doing "stuff" off the coast of a less than friendly country who were being overtly aggressive towards us at the time and was told that I had to have the guns on the helo but they had to remain "inside the aircraft with the doors closed so they can't be seen" but then again not allowed to actually have ammo...

Honestly based on what I've seen, I'll believe that when we routinely see helos flying with the -197 loaded and ready to go.

That's insane. SWO logic insane.

My last time there we had about as many crew served guns onboard as a WW2 bomber for each boat, and we were ready to rock as soon as we came off the pier: Cond III, guns uncovered and gunners on each gun.
I'm almost disappointed I never got my opportunity to start WW3. Almost.

 

[HAL Pilot]

Cool story, definitely don't see many NFO's getting a AM with a helo squadron, much less getting one while flying in back!

It was actually only about 1/3 of an AM. The other 2/3 was over Bosnia with my VP squadron. The citation continues "during Operation Desert Storm and with Patrol Squadron SIXTEEN during Operation...." (I forget what Bosnia was called, it changed names about 3 times during the time I flew there.)

When we were adding up the AM points at the end of deployment, I had more than enough from Bosnia alone. But I told them to use my HS-4 flights because I thought what I did with them was cool. Plus I'll admit to thinking it would be somewhat unique for a NFO to have an HS squadron in the citation.

 

[Gatordev]

And the biggest takeaway of this thread isn't even that helos are or aren't shooting/getting shot at as much, but that the things that are killing us the most (brownout/cfit/etc) are things that we can mitigate without even worrying about combat conditions. Preaching to the choir I know, but there are things out there that could help mitigate those conditions if they'd allocate money for it.

That's a much better way of saying it. Thank you.