Lifestyle of Helicopter Pilots

[HeloDude]

Good points Helodude, big point on scamming for NVG time. A recent Huey re-tread in my squadron has close to 50% more hours than I do, with about a year less flying experience, but less than half my NVG time.

I'm curious how you think we've screwed ourselves, not that I disagree just curious what your take is.

When I referred to the 60 community screwing themselves, I wasn't speaking so much as to the operational concerns between the AF and the Army brought up by you and the other guys--though I agree a lot with the points you all make.

I was referring to how the 60 community has screwed themselves into their low manning situation--again, with help from AFPC. Back when I was brought into the helicopter world and was at Rucker 6 years ago, we were told the horror stories that if you didn't get a 60 or 53 out of Rucker that there was a strong chance you would never get one and would 'just' be a Huey guy. Shortly after beginning my tour at my first assignment, we were all told the same thing by AFPC and our leadership--that crossflows to a 60 (53 was then going away) was going to be extremely difficult and you better be one of the top Huey guys to get to crossflow to a 'tactical' aircraft. A lot of the first assignment guys just faced the fact that the timing was bad and that we would all just end up being Huey guys because 60 crossflows were so few--again, also being told we weren't going to be as good because we weren't in 'tactical' airframes.

Well towards the end of my first assignment, the pendulum had swung the other way, 60 manning was horrible, and I think the 60 leadership as well as AFPC truly realized that they were doing better with crossflows from Huey guys than from the majority of copilots they were getting straight out of Rucker. At that time, me and my Huey buddies were talking to our friends at the various 60 bases and for the most part were told "The deployments suck; Most of the time we don't get to fly that much; Our leadership isn't the best, etc" and that overall, and I quote, a lot of them said "It's not that great". So now before my deployment, I was told AFPC was begging for guys to go 60's from Hueys, but that a lot of guys were saying "Screw you! My buddies don't have too many good things to say about flying 60's!". Many of them just decided to stay Hueys or try and get one of the Osprey slots.

That's my whole take on how 60's screwed themselves--back in the day they made it seem like they only wanted the 'best of the best' Huey pilots and that if you didn't get a 60 that you weren't anything good to speak of. Now Huey guys see how it really is and are saying they'd rather stay Hueys. Don't get me wrong, there are still some first assignment Huey guys who still want to go CSAR, and more power to them, I hope they get one. But the whole "You'll be lucky to get a 60 out of your first Huey assignment" has gone away...most guys now just say you can have it.

[Victory103]

What's the interaction like between the AF and Army at Rucker?

Zero when I was going through at Rucker. Never really saw the AF guys, only walking to/from the Huey's at Lowe AHP.

Coming from a Navy CSAR background when I was an "E", very surprised the Army didnt have it's own ready for deployment CSAR unit, something besides SOAR. In the AO, we where told the AF will handle it, but as it was stated, most Army guys are going to just pick up their own, as the case of several AH-64/UH-60 rescues. As a current MEDEVAC guy, the last thing I want to do is try to be a hero and fly an unarmed helo over the shoot down site of my Dash-2.

Edited May 14, 2009 by Victory103

[Jimmy.The.Engineer]

Alright, so what is the straight skinny on the CSAR X? It's on. It's off. Yes. No. WTF mate?

[KingHerc]

They are waiting until they announce that CSAR is going back to AFSOC.

[60 driver]

Good writeup on the medevac guys by Michael Yon.

Great article, but long. If you're in a hurry, scroll about halfway down.

https://www.michaelyon-online.com/precision-voting.htm

Edited September 6, 2009 by 60 driver

[HeloDude]

They are waiting until they announce that CSAR is going back to AFSOC.

Wishful thinking man--not going to happen. 'If' the Air Force gets to keep their CSAR mission (ie it not going 'joint') ACC will not release the 60's. And if AFSOC wanted a spec ops helicopter so bad it should have found a way to keep the 53 alive. Just plain stupid.

[Guest JollyFlight21]

Good writeup on the medevac guys by Michael Yon.

Great article, but long. If you're in a hurry, scroll about halfway down.

https://www.michaelyon-online.com/precision-voting.htm

This guy wrote a bunch of really good articles on Rescue this summer while we were out there. He seems to be a true believer.

[usaf36031]

Is there any reason that AF rescue doesn't just pick up the Mike model 60? The army's got a few of them here at Mother Rucker and they look pretty sweet.

Edited September 10, 2009 by usaf36031

[Breckey]

Or for that matter the 53K's that Marines are currently testing. Seems like the AF wanted a bigger helo for high altitude ops and the -53 platform is a proven winner. Just call it the Pave Low V.

[busdriver]

The 53K is a massive aircraft, much bigger than the Pavelow or the Chinook. Quite frankly, it's a huge dose of overkill for our mission. Basically, the Hawk is a bit too small in cabin size once you put in the aux fuel tanks, but just about right in cabin space without the tanks. The 47 is probably a bit too big all considered, the after action reports of Vietnam era claim the 53 was too big as well. What we really need is either the 92 or 101, depending on how much cabin you really think we need (it'll depend based on who you ask). The problem is both those aircraft are gonna require a lot of R&D to make them work, the 47 is ready to go right now, but with compromises. The other option is a Mike model hawk with a stretched cabin, but even that comes with trade offs. In the end, it's a matter of picking your poison. Any way it ends up though, we're gonna have to learn how to soldier on with what we have for the foreseeable future, and for what the current fight is, the present Hawk will work with a bit of money invested, it just means we're gonna have to learn to live with a pretty grueling ops tempo. For those thinking about helos as a career, get ready to be gone a lot, and don't expect a predictable deployment pattern, shit seems to change every couple months. Although, while ops tempo seems to be on the up swing, I think we're getting more and more into the fight in a more direct way.

[stract]

there are 2 HH-60Ms in the 2010 Defense Budget for us. We'll see what that leads to...the report about the future of CSAR is due out this month, and then we'll go from there.

[StoleIt]

there are 2 HH-60Ms in the 2010 Defense Budget for us. We'll see what that leads to...the report about the future of CSAR is due out this month, and then we'll go from there.

Any idea where they are going?

[Guest Lockjaw25]

About that report...

Report Says CSAR Needs Dedicated Force

The future looks good, despite the "jointness" mentioned in the report. But it's true, if you look back in history, all branches have performed PR. However, this early word seems to justify the claims for a new aircraft and the support for AF CSAR forces. I'll be interested to see the full report when it is released.

[disgruntledemployee]

About that report...

The future looks good, despite the "jointness" mentioned in the report. But it's true, if you look back in history, all branches have performed PR. However, this early word seems to justify the claims for a new aircraft and the support for AF CSAR forces. I'll be interested to see the full report when it is released.

Here's the perceived arguement: why should DOD invest in a dedicated AF CSAR platform when in current operations, the AF has not been the service with the highest rate of isolated personnel? That is what I think the top leadership thinks. They are probably thinking, "why can't the AF use what it already has, or why can't SF do the job? So when you say the future looks good, I doubt it. While that report provides justification, its being done by those that are proponents of personnel recovery and thus, may be viewed as biased. That like me justifying the AMP, J, or C-27J.

Out

[usaf36031]

What puzzles me about the whole thing is that if you were to go to a "joint" or even a single service solution to this situation, why on earth would that NOT include the Air Force as the spearhead? As far as I know no other service is nearly as focused on the personnel recovery mission or have nearly as many assets devoted specifically to it (60's, Pararescuemen, HC-130)

[Guest JollyFlight21]

What puzzles me about the whole thing is that if you were to go to a "joint" or even a single service solution to this situation, why on earth would that NOT include the Air Force as the spearhead? As far as I know no other service is nearly as focused on the personnel recovery mission or have nearly as many assets devoted specifically to it (60's, Pararescuemen, HC-130)

I know this isn't your point, but when I think CSAR, I rarely,if ever, include a 130 in that thought. I still laugh when I hear one of them say, "Yeah, we're CSAR"

[Champ Kind]

I know this isn't your point, but when I think CSAR, I rarely,if ever, include a 130 in that thought. I still laugh when I hear one of them say, "Yeah, we're CSAR"

HC guys must truly be the red-headed step-children of the red-headed step-children - getting bagged on by your own community..... damn.

[Guest JollyFlight21]

HC guys must truly be the red-headed step-children of the red-headed step-children - getting bagged on by your own community..... damn.

Okay, maybe a little strong on my part, but come on...

[donkey]

Do you guys ever jokingly yell "GET TO DA CHOPPA!"?

[usaf36031]

Jokingly? No.

[busdriver]

Pedros

Pretty good article about the CASEVAC mission in Afghanistan

[Guest JollyFlight21]

Pedros

Pretty good article about the CASEVAC mission in Afghanistan

I like that dude's writing style, he just says it like he sees it. We had a blast out there the last 4 months!

Edited September 15, 2009 by JollyFlight21

[uhhello]

Just got picked up for FE on HH-60's out of the 41st at Moody. Anybody have any info or are from Moody?

[busdriver]

uhhello, nothing too specific about the unit as I left there a year ago, but I know the squadron has a metric shit ton of experience on the senior enlisted side, both in CSAR and ex SOF guys from 53 land.

If you're single, Valdosta gets old but if not, the cost of living is low and you can buy a great house for not much if you're a family guy.

In any event, you'll be spending plenty of time overseas, see you there.

[alwyn2d]

Does the 23d FTS have their full compliment of TH-1H at Ft Rucker for training? Or are they using a mix of UH-1H and TH-1H? I assume they are training on the TH-1H by now.

Have any recent grads been awarded UAS assignments out of Ft Rucker? If not, I assume their possible assignments are HH-1H, HH-60, CV-22, or FAIP.

How long is HH/UH-1N training at Kirtland AFB? Since students leave Ft Rucker with over 100hrs in the Huey, is it just a few months?

By the way, what is the difference between the UH-1H and the HH-1H models?

What is the mission of the CV-22 anyway? Will the 160th SOAR in the near future replace it? Seems like the Army wants to serve their own. They are upgrading their CH-47s and arming their Blackhawks.

Is there a possibility the USAF may loose the CSAR mission? If that's the case, will the AF be out of the helo business for the most part. Of course, the AF will still need their helos to fly Generals around Wash DC. Also, can't forget the silo missile crew members, don't want them to be late for roll call.

Edited February 16, 2010 by alwyn2d