V-22 Chosen to be the new COD

[ea6bflyr]

It will be interesting to see how they implement "tactics" into the COD community, especially wrt the enlisted guys. Let face it, the COD aircrew aren't very "tactical"...they didn't even go to SAR school.

In addition to the pilot side, this transition has some far reaching implications regarding the enlisted aircrew manning and training.

SAR ≠ CSAR. Rescue Swimmer school is not required to do CSAR. Did you know C-130's are considered a CSAR asset?

While COD guys may not currently be what you consider "tactical", it's not a long road to teach them. You can teach a monkey to do just about anything....ever heard of a Combat Rubber Raiding Craft (CRRC) launch from a COD at 500 feet? That's pretty tactical. As a former COD guy, we did it and trained to it. I don't think it's as far of a stretch as you think.

^So I know that the CSAR and tanking may be listed as a capability and the platform may be more capable than current platforms, the question of capacity will come up. Can you handle a CSAR vul and the supply requirements for the CSG @ the same time with 3 X a/c? My guess is you can have one or the other.

I agree with hscs; while the capability exists, in reality, the capability may not be called upon frequently.

 

[wlawr005]

RS school is not required to do CSAR, however CSAR is a lot more than throwing a CRRC out of the ass end.

More specific to CSAR training is AWS/R A-school where specific emphasis is placed on fitness, weapons, and tactics. Right now, swimmer school and A-school are closely intertwined.

It's a real problem if the Navy ever plans on using the V-22 as a CSAR asset. Are they merely going to replace the COD? Easy fix...keep things the same. Are they gonna throw the word CSAR in the ROC/POE? Big difference.

 

[ea6bflyr]

It's a real problem if the Navy ever plans on using the V-22 as a CSAR asset. Are they merely going to replace the COD? Easy fix...keep things the same. Are they gonna throw the word CSAR in the ROC/POE? Big difference.

By just changing the platform from a C-2A to a CV-22, nothing will be easy and things like training and capability will change....

 

[wlawr005]

In addition to the pilot side, this transition has some far reaching implications regarding the enlisted aircrew manning and training.

By just changing the platform from a C-2A to a CV-22, nothing will be easy and things like training and capability will change....

Ya think?

 

[zippy]

Capabilities listed just adds selling points to support that the transition is a good idea.

Look at all of the "capability" that the Navy helo community has and how much of it is actually allowed to be used. Why do the HSC guys fly with the pylons on while deployed? Because their CO thinks it looks cool, not because anyone outside of their ready room actually expects them to be tactical outside of straits transits.

I'm not going to shit on the idea of a MV-22 COD. Why? Because plenty of people in my community shit on the idea of a turbofan aircraft performing ASW, and pronounced the sky was falling, the community would experience great sacrifices in capability etc in exchange for a 737 type rating from the P-8. Guess what- there have been some growing pains, but the mission is still getting done, and in some ways the replacement is more capable then the aircraft it's replacing. Either way, pretty much every P-3 I've flown (or preflighed for 12hrs then canx'd) would have been taken out back and shot if it was a horse. Same thing with the CODs I've flown on.

 

[Uncle Fester]

 

[Randy Daytona]

Capabilities listed just adds selling points to support that the transition is a good idea.

Look at all of the "capability" that the Navy helo community has and how much of it is actually allowed to be used. Why do the HSC guys fly with the pylons on while deployed? Because their CO thinks it looks cool, not because anyone outside of their ready room actually expects them to be tactical outside of straits transits.

And that in a nutshell is the problem. Leadership, or lack thereof. Look at the capability of the V-22 in the hands of the USMC/USAF. The machinery and personnel are there - all that is lacking is to let go of the leash. That is why the Navy needs some rotary wing flags - or the horsepower of an Army, Air Force or Marine Combatant Commander - to force the issue.

As a car guy, the parallel between the Navy and GM seems appropriate. GM corporate policy would not let any other division design a car to threaten the supremacy of the haloed Corvette - but every now and then, the other engineers could sneak one in. I miss my old GN.

 

[Flash]

And that in a nutshell is the problem. Leadership, or lack thereof. Look at the capability of the V-22 in the hands of the USMC/USAF...

That is because they have the mission for those capabilities, the Navy generally doesn't.

 

[insanebikerboy]

The more important question...

Now that the COD will be doing tactics, when will a COD bubba pick up CAG?

 

[xj220]

Some Hornet pilot's head just exploded at the thought of a COD CAG.

 

[zippy]

And that in a nutshell is the problem. Leadership, or lack thereof. Look at the capability of the V-22 in the hands of the USMC/USAF. The machinery and personnel are there - all that is lacking is to let go of the leash. That is why the Navy needs some rotary wing flags - or the horsepower of an Army, Air Force or Marine Combatant Commander - to force the issue.

As previously mentioned those needs are being filled by other communities with even greater capabilities and experience, so the need isn't there to let Navy helos play just to let them feel good as a community. Services tend to be very territorial about mission sets because work= money and "no bucks, no Buck Rogers"...

Marine helos could do VERTREP and eliminate the HSC requirement on ESGs/ARGs. Will the Navy help community ever let that happen? No way because that means less funding, billets etc. and less money flowing to the community.

A P-3C can fire a maverick and trains to it, but they really shouldn't be lobbing them overland at ISIS even though they could in theory. Even though we go through the training and quals for several weapons, that could be used against surface and land targets, we've proven time and again that as a community, proficiency employing weapons that aren't torpedoes really isn't our thing. Many other communities can do that job better than us because, it's their mission, they're better at it, and do it more often. That and the community knows ASW is its bread and butter to get funding. Why do you think the P-8s deployed to 7th fleet first even though ISIS makes front page news more often? To prove its worth. Even though we spent years doing missions in support of OIF and OEF the community loathed it because "any idiot can take pictures, ASW takes skill".

HSC only recently broke into capabilities (forward firing gun) that the 160th fielded during the original Persian Gulf War. Take a step back and think about why.

HSC exists in order to fly plane guard, do log runs and VERTREP- all of which are critical to strike group operations. No way is anyone going to go without the asset that fill a very real need just because the community filling that need doesn't feel it's sexy enough, or a deserving enough use for its new toys.

 

[Randy Daytona]

I am not saying the helicopter det aboard the CSG needs additional missions - I agree, ASW protection for the CSG has to be its primary mission. However, the COD replacement is a tilt-rotor. If you have to do a NEO, reinforce an embassy, send a SEAL team ashore, or any other similar mission and the ARG or SOCOM is not available but the carrier is - imagine explaining to the CCDR that we have tilt-rotors but simply don't train for it. The Marines train to a Special Operations Capable standard MEU(SOC) and I don't see why that is not reasonable for the V-22's taking over as COD. I simply can not imagine having a tilt-rotor available and not utilizing its capability. With declining budgets and multiplying threats (both asymmetrical and near peer competitors), people need to quit worrying about rice bowls and instead actually do more with less.

As for helicopters, the Navy helo community already has contracted out some of its vertrep - I know - I did it in the Puma.

 

[Gatordev]

I am not saying the helicopter det aboard the CSG needs additional missions - I agree, ASW protection for the CSG has to be its primary mission. However, the COD replacement is a tilt-rotor. If you have to do a NEO, reinforce an embassy, send a SEAL team ashore, or any other similar mission and the ARG or SOCOM is not available but the carrier is - imagine explaining to the CCDR that we have tilt-rotors but simply don't train for it. The Marines train to a Special Operations Capable standard MEU(SOC) and I don't see why that is not reasonable for the V-22's taking over as COD. I simply can not imagine having a tilt-rotor available and not utilizing its capability. With declining budgets and multiplying threats (both asymmetrical and near peer competitors), people need to quit worrying about rice bowls and instead actually do more with less.

But none of that is "CSAR." CODs have been putting SEALs in specific geographic locations for years (decades). A Navy V-22 can still do that, regardless of of what the enlisted rating is. The whole CSAR/SOC label has always been silly to me. HSL (and now HSM) has trained to provide SEAL support for decades, and has actually done it operationally countless times (yes, rounds expended), but no one one called it HSL(SOC). The same can be said for HC and (non-CSAR) HS.

But at the end of the day, "Combat," "SEALs," "SOC," etc, all sell today, so why not throw it in your press release...

 

[insanebikerboy]

I am not saying the helicopter det aboard the CSG needs additional missions - I agree, ASW protection for the CSG has to be its primary mission. However, the COD replacement is a tilt-rotor. If you have to do a NEO, reinforce an embassy, send a SEAL team ashore, or any other similar mission and the ARG or SOCOM is not available but the carrier is - imagine explaining to the CCDR that we have tilt-rotors but simply don't train for it. The Marines train to a Special Operations Capable standard MEU(SOC) and I don't see why that is not reasonable for the V-22's taking over as COD. I simply can not imagine having a tilt-rotor available and not utilizing its capability. With declining budgets and multiplying threats (both asymmetrical and near peer competitors), people need to quit worrying about rice bowls and instead actually do more with less.

As for helicopters, the Navy helo community already has contracted out some of its vertrep - I know - I did it in the Puma.

It'll take a shift of mindset in how the COD is used, not in tactics, but in keeping them on board. I've never seen a V-22 on a flight deck but I have to imagine it clobbers the hell out of it. Plus, only having 2-3 on a det that would more than likely have all of the aircraft on the beach waiting for the next log run vice sitting on the boat.

It's definitely doable, but it would take a significant paradigm shift in the business rules of the COD. That, and a significant supply of replacement heads for the handler because Lord knows his head will explode multiple times trying to stuff them somewhere on the boat.

 

[Flash]

While it is fun to dream that the V-22 is going to take the SEALs over the beach on their next Bin Laden raid they will almost certainly be too tied up bringing all those spares and care packages from the beach to the boat since that is what CODs do.