Should I stay or should I go? Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying And Love HSC.

[Hair Warrior]

We do the same thing with the 47 and 72 guys here. The Apache guys??? Noone wants to talk to them...beside, you can't get a word in with them anyway.

What are the -6 and -58 guys like?

 

[RobLyman]

What are the -6 and -58 guys like?

Who? LOL

The 58 guys all went to the 72 in our unit. The 58 is pretty much gone from the Army inventory. We do have one that is getting put on a stick outside the facility...eventually. I don't think anyone has -6s except 160th and I only know -60 guys and a few -47 guys in the 160th. 47 guys are like -46 guys, except WAY WAY WAY weirder. Everything is about how much they can lift. T-shirts and stickers abound depicting a CH-47 lifting a Blackhawk. Irony...I just flew parts out to Destin last week to fix a broken 47. That happens hundreds of times for every time a Chinook actually sling loads ANYTHING.

 

[RobLyman]

I can appreciate his dig if it weren't for two things. 1) If you and I were chatting and I make a comment about how HSC guys can't stop hitting thins with their blades, you'd chuckle and acknowledge that there's some truth to the dig. But this was an unsolicited tweet by "the public" after Jack made himself an unofficial PAO by doing the AFG article. I get it, I would joke around with people at air shows too, but it's different when all that's posted 147 (or whatever) characters.

2) When you do make a tongue-in-cheek tweet about how awesome your community is because you do "PR" and "SOF" (which can mean literally anything) but then also state in your interview that you didn't have much experience landing in the dirt, there's a little bit of a credibility problem and yeah, I'm going to mock you a bit. You know, just like busting your balls about trees/light poles and rotor blades.

As you say, one should be able to bust another's balls, but when you put yourself out there in the public view (in this case social media), it's a two-way street.



Maybe I misread, but I think Brett was very specifically agreeing with the whole point of your post.

I guess I missed that part of the tweet(s). Little or no landing in the dirt? WTF? That IS a lack of credibility.

 

[Pags]

I guess I missed that part of the tweet(s). Little or no landing in the dirt? WTF? That IS a lack of credibility.

As you know there's not a lot of dirt in the middle of the Pacific. He was a Guam guy and then had a non-flying shore tour so prior to AFG I doubt he had much opportunity to land in a lot of moon dust.

 

[DanMa1156]

Maybe I misread, but I think Brett was very specifically agreeing with the whole point of your post.

That's how I interpreted it. And for any heartburn jet guys might give us about PR, HSC leadership is on equal footing as they make it a second rate mission compared to ASUW or maybe even Fire Scout.

 

[squorch2]

Again, look to COCOM/Fleet priorities.

Putting it another way - people are very interested in what interests their boss.

 

[red_stang65]

Starboard D. For some reason, we’ve lost sight of the fact that being there to rescue someone whose life hangs in the balance somehow isn’t cool enough to be proud of.

There’s a lot more to SAR (maritime, overland, civil, military) than spinning circles in Starboard D. And yet, when HSC/HSM ask for support to improve those capabilities (better SAR gear, a reliable SAR radio, better fuel capacity/HAAR) or even to get terf currency while on the ship, or gasp stage overland, those requests are met with surprising opposition from the acquisition world and operational leadership. So, if hitching our wagon to the SAR/CSAR/PR star hasn’t resulted in much support, then maybe we can package those requests differently.

That's how I interpreted it. And for any heartburn jet guys might give us about PR, HSC leadership is on equal footing as they make it a second rate mission compared to ASUW or maybe even Fire Scout.

Again, look to COCOM/Fleet priorities.

Putting it another way - people are very interested in what interests their boss.

Which is interesting, especially considering Brett327’s comment and HSC’s experience. Apparently SAR isn’t a priority to the COCOMs. At least, certainly not long range or overland capability. “Anytime, anywhere”, is really more “so long as it’s only during a cycle and within 20 miles of Mom. We’ve got pax and cargo for you to move, you know”.

 

[squorch2]

Apparently SAR isn’t a priority to the COCOMs.

it really, really isn't.

 

[Hotdogs]

At least, certainly not long range or overland capability.

It’s almost as if there’s other assets that are more capable of doing that mission or something.

 

[croakerfish]

It’s almost as if there’s other assets that are more capable of doing that mission or something.

You could say the same thing for the entire CVW.

 

[lowflier03]

It’s almost as if there’s other assets that are more capable of doing that mission or something.

You could say the same thing for the entire CVW.

Croaker nailed it. The other assets argument only works for long range SAR/CSAR/PR if the AF is already established in the area. Every AWF CSAR brief is an unrealistic joke considering the nature of real world ops.

 

[Hotdogs]

You could say the same thing for the entire CVW.

Croaker nailed it. The other assets argument only works for long range SAR/CSAR/PR if the AF is already established in the area. Every AWF CSAR brief is an unrealistic joke considering the nature of real world ops.

No, you can’t. A Navy -60 who does a jack of all trades and an USAF -60 who exclusively does PR extremely well are not the same thing.

I can’t think of an AOR that doesn’t have a RQS, MEU TRAP, SPMAGTF, or organic coalition PR asset that can do the same thing or better than CVW CSAR.

Given my and many people’s observation on the ability of HSC to do CAS, I can only imagine what a USAF RQS thinks of your ability to do CSAR.

 

[lowflier03]

No, you can’t. A Navy -60 who does a jack of all trades and an USAF -60 who exclusively does PR extremely well are not the same thing.

I can’t think of an AOR that doesn’t have a RQS, MEU TRAP, SPMAGTF, or organic coalition PR asset that can do the same thing or better than CVW CSAR.

Given my and many people’s observation on the ability of HSC to do CAS, I can only imagine what a USAF RQS thinks of your ability to do CSAR.

I never said they were the same thing. I'm saying that the Navy cannot count on other services to meet our SAR needs, even those SAR needs that extend more than 20 miles from mom.

There was a reason that we got tapped to do the det to Erbil, despite an RQS squadron being "in the AOR." There is a reason that HS had to det out to Pakistan. If we were to go to war in Asia, where is the RQS det getting stationed? Navy helos doing CAS is bullshit and everyone knows that. Per DoD mandate however, the Navy is required to have self CSAR capability. I'm sure you can ask all kinds of specialized units what they think about other service's general units. But I do know what our RQS and PJ team said about us when we worked with them, and it wasn't full of the vitriol alluded to in your post.

 

[RobLyman]

@Hotdogs, there was that C-12 CSAR outside of Erbil in 2016-2017.

 

[lowflier03]

@Hotdogs, there was that C-12 CSAR outside of Erbil in 2016-2017.

Funny, no one who was actually there calls it a CSAR, only people either wishing or trolling on the internet.