Good point
-
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
Larger 60 Det on Amphib
- Thread starter Flying Low
- Start date
I agree about the training; however the 60 is a very capable platform as evidenced by the DAP 60's that TF-160 uses. It always struck me as odd that fixed wing seemed to operate interchangeably yet the rotary Navy and Marine sides were completely separate; however that may simply be my perception. Also Big Navy seems to not want to use rotary assets in anything other than support; to the extent of possibly decommissioning its 2 most capable rotary wing squadrons (84 and 85).
As for split-ARG, we seemed to do a lot of that back in the Stone Age (the 90's) due to real world contingencies as well as other hurdles (Montreaux treaty not allowing big decks into the Black Sea.) I also saw cases where the big deck was so crowded that the Snakes were all sent over to the LPD. Lot of flexibility in the MEU-ARG.
As for split-ARG, we seemed to do a lot of that back in the Stone Age (the 90's) due to real world contingencies as well as other hurdles (Montreaux treaty not allowing big decks into the Black Sea.) I also saw cases where the big deck was so crowded that the Snakes were all sent over to the LPD. Lot of flexibility in the MEU-ARG.
I wouldn't equate a DAP with a Navy anything for the same reason that the Navy and Marines are kept separately, and that's just due to training. The Navy doesn't have the NCEA to go practice like the Marines and certainly TF 160 does. It's a shame, but it's the reality.
Big Navy was far more concerned about paying the bill than about who was flying what mission.
Concur, the MEU does offer a LOT of flexibility and capability. But it seems to me that a lot of discretion is left up to the MEU CO as to how he apportions his forces. We had all of our skids on the LPD during my float. Other ARG's have put the 53's on the LPD. It really comes down to how the MEU CO & CATF want to be positioned for crisis response while dissagregated. But I have seen different MEU's do things differently based on the warfare specialty of the CO and standardization from one MEU to another seems to be lacking.
I have to admit, I've never encountered the word "disaggregated" before.
All true, hence the view that maybe a couple more Hawks on the deck would enable them some extra time for themselves on deployment.
This is an evolution. Gator SAR used to be done by ships company Hueys, then HC Phrogs, then HSC Block I -60S, now Block IIIb -60S. The things a IIIb brings (more gas, L16, offensive weapons) compared to its predecessors is huge, but only if you change the way you think about using it. It's the same thing as treating a plopter the same as a phrog. People will try to do that, but it will necessarily change.
Keeping them in the Gator Starboard D and the occasional PMC run is a waste. Three aircraft buys these guys some flexibility to meet the SAR requirements and also do other stuff. Smart people are trying to give the decision makers more capabilities with the toys they bought. Good on em.
Keeping them in the Gator Starboard D and the occasional PMC run is a waste. Three aircraft buys these guys some flexibility to meet the SAR requirements and also do other stuff. Smart people are trying to give the decision makers more capabilities with the toys they bought. Good on em.
Perhaps the ACE should have all air assets when in the ARG. Would think the ACE CO could find a way to better utilize the newest 60's than doing vertrep - besides, you got Pumas for that. And yes, I know, Pumas are just on the USNS ships...
Do any Navy pilots and H-60's attend WTI?
Do any Navy pilots and H-60's attend WTI?
I wish I could dislike this post. There are/were ways the Navy could have saved the money but didn't want to do it. I'd argue it was more about the mission not being core competencies of the Navy rather than cost alone.
Yes, there is SWTI course in Fallon.
Navy pilots do go up to SWTI run by the Navy.
I've sent guys through the ground school portion of WTI but since no WTI instructors are qualed in the 60, we haven't been able to get dudes through the whole course, and the Marines require we bring a helo for them to fly the course in with the student. So, call it WTI-light.
I can say that the feedback is that the WTI course run by the Marines hands down blows away the Navy course in application and relevance.
Previously, the Corps would not go anywhere near an H-60 due to the fear of impacting the V-22 and UH-1Y programs. Now that the Osprey and Yankee are nearly complete, it might be time for both the Marines and Navy rotary wing elements to re-think this. The WTI bubbas down in Yuma are some wicked smart people and good to have on your side if you want to fight for funding, roles and missions. A good start would certainly be getting some 60's down to Yuma and going through the course. Perhaps some of the Marines got qualed in the 60 at HMX or exchange tours and are now at WTI? I would also think that there might be Army Blackhawk guys doing a tour in Yuma as well.
