JSChmed

Is that really just perception? Sqd/CCs need to ask permission from an O-6 for almost everything. Flying sched - Ops/mx grp/cc approve, TDYs. - Same, budget - Grp/cc, deployment spinup - grp/cc approval. 2407 because the sched changed - grp/cc approval. Christ, a sqd/cc can't even approve a static display for some JROTC cadets without grp/cc approval. The sqd/cc basically babysits and completes PRFs and OPRs. USAF did throw them a bone and let them decide what color morale shirts their unit would wear though....... Sorry, I'm not going to spend 20 years in the military to work my way up to that. It could and should be much more, but this is an O-6's service.

Does the USAF safety system have some kind of process where members of the affected community can give some feedback to the safety board telling them the community thinks their findings are off base and need to be reexamined? If not, do we just have to live with the causal factors and recommendations however ridiculous and "uncausal" they may be?

As I line pilot, my impression is that ACC's support has been pretty good. They don't understand helos, but don't need to. They understand the "air war" and what each player brings. They value CSAR for obvious reasons. I was there under AFSOC. It was a bunch of -130 guys who thought they understood helos and liked to get in everyone's shit. The "USAF" hates that we have helicopters? I dunno, but I do know they stood down multiple fighter squadrons and cut flying hours for numerous other units. Helos haven't been touched yet. Not saying that it won't happen, but it hasn't yet. You guys look like a couple of sissies in a slap fight when you go back and forth about how unsupported and unappreciated we are.

They're running out of money operating the CV and are scrambling to find more. To someone unfamiliar with CSAR, a 'SOF aircraft that can infil/exfil a team can certainly exfil an isolated person....so this is an easy decision.....just look at Libya.' I heard they're looking at 10 flight hours between engine replacements in the desert, 100 hours otherwise. Osprey guys, correct me if that's wrong, but that seems unsustainable.

This was what I was trying to say, just said differently / better. You can find threats that are effective against all players (flanker). I was trying to say that just because a particular threat pushes the risk level high for one doesn't automatically mean it has pushed the risk level high for all. Why don't you agree with that Rainman?

How so?

High threat to whom? High threat for a fighter is not necessarily high threat for a helo. Things that would drive a high threat for a helo wouldn't even make it onto the map for some fighters. We have crossed borders unescorted to recover people. If the capability exists, the cfacc has a range of options.

It's nice to see that we have our head on straight and are developing a sound tactical gameplan for the future of the community . . . . Christ Almighty.

That's what I'm saying. Sandy is RMC plus OSC plus FAC(A) plus Rescort. An RMC needs to get those things but doesn't need to be those things.

Jesus dude. H-60 EP? Congrats.... Seems like you could add something more useful based on your background, but I guess this is better than nothing. I went to the WIC too. Maybe I fell asleep during the CSAR part of the H-60 course which is why my point of view is so effed, I dunno.

Wow. Not sure why it's a personal affront to you to suggest that an H-60 flight lead would be able to accomplish the mission. I'm not taking anything away from you. I'm just saying there's another way of doing it. So much for "Teach, Lead, Follow." I actually thought we might get something out of this conversation. By the way sir, please don't think for a minute that your flying around the missile fields in a Huey somehow constitutes a "perspective from both platforms." That's like me claiming I have perspective of what it's like to fly an A-10 because I went cross country in a tweet.

My reading comprehension is just fine. I'm not saying I can do the mission just because I think it needs to be done. I'm saying I can do the mission because it's my mission to do and it's completely possible using established TTPs. I'm not making crap up here. A rescue mission commander doesn't need to personally accomplish all of the tasks you outlined earlier. It would be ideal, but as you pointed out, it's not always possible. The RMC needs to make sure the appropriate tasks are accomplished. So you take a look at the available assets and develop a gameplan based on METT-TC. If you have the chance to do some premission planning, you can develop contracts with the available players and build redundancy into your comm plan to mitigate the LoS issues. There are a lot of ways to communicate, authenticate, locate and protect the survivor without having Sandy 1 overhead. An H-60 RMC should be familiar with them and use them to get the information they need. The AF has assets that can recce a route if Sandy 3 is a no show. The H-60 has equipment to get information from those assets. It's completely possible that the H-60 could know the location of the threats and the objective before any other player. I'd even argue that depending on threat, that way might even be more effective / tactically sound. With a FAC(A) over the objective and a couple of Apaches as rescort, the mission would go fine. I think we think of each other in a similar light: "nice to have them if they're there because they train to this mission and it will go a lot smoother, but this thing is kicking off regardless so we'll make do with what we have." You guys would prefer Jolly (I hope), but any "RV" will be fine. I'd prefer a Sandy, but I'll make it work with the available players.

Busdriver, I agree with you. As for the rest, I like the implication that because I'm suggesting rescue pilots act as RMC, that I must not have read the 3-1. Any rescue pilot who does not prepare themselves to act as the RMC and would rather hide behind the BS idea that we're too low to do it properly is a friggin disgrace. Go transfer to a non- tactical aircraft and quit wasting our flight hours.

I realized the last part of my post was over the top and I shouldn't have posted it because I'm not looking to insult anyone or lessen anyone's contributions to the mission. So I deleted it. I just get a little pissed when I hear people completely overlook a community that does CSAR as it's only mission when the're considering who should fulfill the RMC role. On that mission, you had dudes that probably have over 500 rescue missions between the two of them, and someone asks if the F-15s were the RMC.

Didn't want to derail the previous thread about Chris, Marcus and Chuck, so here's a new one. I think a Jolly flight lead would be a much better choice for RMC than looking to the next available fighter asset.

Chided, haha! Ok ok everyone, you've made your point. I was wrong. With BQZip01's guidance, I've printed out some really nice power point slides/signs and pasted them on the Nellis gate. The legend lives on!

I guess I'll lump myself in with those new-age SNAPS, but you guys realize that Nellis has non-fighter units that actually deploy right? In fact, in the 5 years that I spent at Nellis, I can't remember one fighter unit that did deploy. Home of the Fighter Pilot? I guess, but meanwhile I (helo pilot) spent 5 years there working, deploying, sweating and bleeding (watching friends bleeding) getting the job done. I don't care for the PC culture of the Air Force; I don't think everyone is a warrior, and I do think Robin Olds is a bad-ass, but I think Nellis AFB is more than the "Home of the Fighter Pilot." As I was.

I've been a member for a while, but never posted until now. I find the comments in this thread funny considering an experience I had a few weeks ago when I attended AIS. It started when I asked a question about computing single engine climb gradients, the Lt Col instructor (C-5 pilot) asked me what I flew. When I said helicopters, he said "No, it doesn't apply." "Ok, can you tell me why so when I get back to my squadron I can let them know?" "Well, helicopters aren't aircraft." "So what's an aircraft?" said I. "Well, anything that's not a helicopter," was his reply. Well he just self-identified as an idiot I thought to myself. An hour later I was talking with another student, KC-135 IP. When I said I flew H-60s he said "Oh that's cool, so do you guys deploy?" REALLY?!!! I thought I was doing some pretty serious stuff during my 7 deployments flying through Baghdad and the Helmand Valley, and this guy doesn't even know I exist. Then I talked with a C-21 IP, when she asked what I flew, I said "H-60s", and she said "So what's your mission?" Why doesn't another IP in the Air Force know what CSAR is and who does it? Later that day, I met the Lt Col who writes the 11-202 v3. I asked him that question about climb gradients since I didn't get an answer from the first guy. When I said I flew H-60s, he said "What's that?" "It's a helicopter sir." Why do two Capt IPs not know what CSAR is and who does it? I know what a KC-135 and C-21 are. I know their missions, and I even have an idea about where they deploy. Why would the guy that writes the general flying rules for the Air Force ask me what an H-60 is? (No, he wasn't kidding.) I came to the realization that a bunch of non-tactical pilots can do their job just fine without knowing information about other airframes, and they're OK with that. Personally, I'd be embarrassed. For me, my ability to do my job well is directly related to my knowledge of other aircraft and how to integrate with them. From reading this thread, it sounds like those guys are anomalies, but I really doubt it. We can slam the "shoes," all we want, but I'd be willing to bet the majority of AMC pilots have a serious lack of understanding and knowledge of other USAF assets. Don't want to ruffle anyone's feathers, but those two weeks made a real impression on me.