I think you misunderstand what C-power does. It just changes your TGT limiting. If you want it to kick in automatically, you can just fly around with the switch on all the time. It won't change anything (well you won't be able to turn on ECS).
ghost
-
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
First MH-60R squadron is established!
- Thread starter HeyJoe
- Start date
I think you misunderstand what C-power does. It just changes your TGT limiting. If you want it to kick in automatically, you can just fly around with the switch on all the time. It won't change anything (well you won't be able to turn on ECS).
ghost
No misunderstanding here... I just don't see why a switch has to enter into the equation when ECS automatically kicks off anyway. Basically I'm looking for something akin to having the switch on all the time, but having ECS stay on for TGT < 839 +/- 10.
Being a SWTI doesn't mean you know how to plan -- the class focus is on running the ACTC program and is more of an IUT.
I know a couple of your DHs that went through there. Some of them trained me, and I still didn't learn to plan properly until I got to my current squadron.
I know a couple of your DHs that went through there. Some of them trained me, and I still didn't learn to plan properly until I got to my current squadron.
He's got it right. That's how the Blackhawk works, minus the ECS. Bobbybrock, correct me if I'm wrong, my very limited Blackhawk knowledge is from the Wheeler sim.
Don't hate on SWTI's. They have big watches and erase from side to side.
Correction. Up and down.
Is it just me, or is your training going to be very much "jack-of-all-trades, master of none?" As a Marine assault guy, I know that insertion and extraction take a while to get good at, while the skid squadrons spend a lot of time getting proficient with weapons, such as Hellfire in particular. You guys throw in SAR on top, it seems like a good recipe for suceeding in interservice politics, but not necessarily the best to suceed in battle. Either you are getting a lot more flight time (possibly) or your guys are a lot sharper than most (and come on, I've worked with you guys...don't BS me). I'm not trying to throw crap here, just wondering how you accommodate the training demands.
You're exactly right, but it's not that we're "going to be" a jack-of-all trades, that's the way it's been for HSL (or whatever you want to call the community that the Romeo will inherit, ie HSM). The frustrating part of the whole thing is we get barely proficient on on all of those trades, but they never get utilized, w/ the exception of SAR and the occasional ASW exercise.
There's an occasional exception to the above, but it's not the norm. I've said it before, but I was part of a det that put more rounds down range in the Eastern Pacific than any of my buds in the Gulf during the war. That's embarrassing.
HS is just like gatordev described HSL. HS squadrons are in a very unique and odd position. The airwing is supposed to be a fully independent aviation strike force. In order for that to happen HS needs to provide rotary support for primarily CSAR (for the strike stuff) and SAR (for the day to day flight ops). Unfortunately, being the only helo squadron on the carrier we are called on for all other rotary wing tasks. Soooo, we train for NSW support and ASUW (with the Hellfire). Oh, and don't forget, our main 'primary' mission, our namesake, ASW. The flight regimes and tactics for all these missions can vary widely and many times have no similarities. HS and HSL really are the 'jack of all trades.'
I like to think that having 2 helo squadrons on board will allow more specialization. At first glance, we have the same number of RW missions/requirements and about the same number of helos, so it will be the same as before. However, having 2 squadrons with the same COC and able to communicate with each other at the CO to CO level, I hope will allow for a better delineation of responsibilities and the need for less overlap. So, I think it will help improve Navy RW.
This problem is only going to be exacerbated with the multi-mission helo concept. There are over 200 hours of courseware for OAMCM alone (culled from 400), along with whatever proficiency level they'll deem you need to have to actually tow and shoot mines. Not to mention the training and proficiency for Fire Scout...
Sqourch -- the CVW HSC squadrons will luck out and not do the OAMCM stuff due to room on the big deck. If we put that stuff on a flight deck, we would have to add a padded room and a personal shrink for the Handler as well.
Phrog, you are exactly on track. From what I have seen -- ASW tends to get dropped by most squadrons. That leaves SAR, CSAR, and NSW. You can get a ton of time to train in Starboard D for SAR -- you will just need your swimmers in the pool and SAR jumps from time to time. The problem that I see -- most squadrons allow cards to be signed off with "simulated" assets (e.g. someone in one of the planes plays the role of the AMC, RMC, or GFC, etc). This training might be ok for someone who is already trained up but is completely insufficient for ACTC signoffs. My take -- you need a CSAR card -- then you do a CSAR with everyone involved. The training dividends are amazing when you do that.
Phrog, you are exactly on track. From what I have seen -- ASW tends to get dropped by most squadrons. That leaves SAR, CSAR, and NSW. You can get a ton of time to train in Starboard D for SAR -- you will just need your swimmers in the pool and SAR jumps from time to time. The problem that I see -- most squadrons allow cards to be signed off with "simulated" assets (e.g. someone in one of the planes plays the role of the AMC, RMC, or GFC, etc). This training might be ok for someone who is already trained up but is completely insufficient for ACTC signoffs. My take -- you need a CSAR card -- then you do a CSAR with everyone involved. The training dividends are amazing when you do that.
I agree for the most part. If a squadron drops ASW or not really depends on the front office and the current ops environment, but even if it is not dropped something else has to give.
Training for SAR is great in Starboard D. Unfortunately, it really gets you ready for the rescue phase, you never get a lot of practice searching. Not a huge loss given the most likely locations of actual survivors.
As for training and mission planning for the more complex missions of CSAR and NSW. Everyone does the best they can, but more often than not we have to simulate the hardest parts of the mission like hscs said. Even consider an NSW infil/exfil. How often do we go to the same training areas and LZs? Quite often, which is really shortchanging the training. Keep in mind some of this is limited to the East Coast because we are really limited in the training ranges we can use for these types of training.
What really surprised me is a lack of familiarity with the available resources that would significantly help in mission planning. I didn't see this until I went to my shore duty. Sure, ideally you have an intel o providing support, but if you don't know where and what you can find, there is no way you can guide a 1st tour 1630 in giving you the support you really need.
gatordev,
The our TGT limiting in the L model is 866 +/- 6 unless you're at less than 50% torque on one engine. The it goes up to 891 +/- 5.
From the post here I think the one good thing that Army aviation does is concentrate on specific missions. In the big Army you are either air assault,General support or dustoff. A few regualr Army unit will do SPIES, FRIES, STABO Ops and the such, but in most cases that is left to the 160th boys .
The spec ops way of doing things is a totally different way of doing business. Plus the budget is opretty sweet.