Jump to content

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, snake36bravo said:

It was JUN 1972 when Callaway awarded Bell and Hughes competitive awards for what would become the Apache. Three months later AUG 1972 he killed the Cheyenne. 

That is pretty sad, considering all the information that I have found as a result of this thread. I started chasing down all the options on the table back then, and to me, the Cheyenne appeared to be a pretty capable machine. Their were glitches, like the P-hop flop, but nothing that could not be overcome. Also, the fact that the helicopter was able to cruise at speeds greater than the Apache has as its top speed, made it a nice asset to have in the area. When you need CAS, it is never "in twenty minutes", it right that very second, and minutes is usually too late.

 

And I thought the Army had too many politicians when I was on active duty. The stupid game of egos and back door contracts, which almost never favor the men and women fighting, but some politicians re-election campaign. Sad.

 

Oh well, I have learned more about these helicopters and the weapons they carry, because I asked a simple "what if" question.

 

Thanks again to everyone for their incredible knowledge regarding the 40mm, and a huge thanks to Brian for all the incredible pictures and details, same goes to snake36bravo, and others, for your amazing contributions.

 

I am hoping this thread continues on, maybe with some more modern airframe. Gino has a review that states the Mk19 (not the M75 shorty) was used by SOAR on their little birds. He told me he had no further info, but he based it on the literature he received regarding the little birds while doing a review of the Spec Ops resin conversion. His knowledge is impeccable, so I have no doubts about the accuracy of the literature he used for the review. I also emailed the member Whiskey offered up for even more information, and I really hope he joins in the fun!

 

Thanks everyone, sincerely,

 

Anthony

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, snake36bravo said:

The Cheyenne was killed 9 August 1972 not in 1969. 

While being "technically correct" its still not quite accurate.  Interesting you missed a couple of fairly critical dates.  In April of 69 the Army told Lockheed to fix the technical issues or they were going to kill the program. 

And about a month later they gave up.  The production contract for the Cheyenne was cancelled on 19 May 1969.  Done finished, not happening. 

 

R&D continued in the hopes of "fixing" the various problems, but likely the primary reason was developing new technologies and use it as a testbed for follow-on platforms.  So in reality the program was killed in 69, and the 56 was on life support and they pulled the plug in August of '72.  So your timing is a bit off.

 

When Carter killed the B-1A it was for all practical purposes dead, until Reagan resurrected it.  There was no champion for the 56.  In 1972 we did not need a 200 Kt attack helicopter that would spend most of its time hovering in the trees.

 

But in reality, the 56 had lots of problems, and in a briefing I got in 73 while in flight school at Rucker, a primary reason they killed it, was it was simply too complex for the wrench turners to keep flying.  That’s one of the reasons they went to LRU, Line Replicable Units, in the later aircraft.  Another problem they had was the front seat gunner.  He sat on a rotating platform, and would rotate as the bird overflew the target.  So lets see, head down, in a turn, pulling G's, spinning...

 

Yeah the gunners would throw up because their inner ears just played hell with the proprioceptive organs, AKA Seat OF the pants.  Plays a big part in vertigo.  I was shooting an ILS approach going into Austin one night and as soon as I punched into the clouds at 3000' I thought I was on my side.  One of the only times I got vertigo while flying.  It was all I could do to keep the bird upright until I broke out at 400'.

 

Another big issue was the rigid rotor, and the vibrations that took place, destroying 2 aircraft, on in flight one in a wind tunnel.

 

The Apache mafia were the LTC's to Generals that backed the "Advance Attack Helicopter" platform, later the AH-64 to replace the AH-1 Series gunships.  They had tested Hellfire’s on the AH-1 in addition to 30 mm's studies but they simply did not want the AH-1 to "compete" with the AH-64.  Like the General that was the program manager of the AH-64, that briefed us in Taegu, he was adamant that the AH-64 would ONLY carry Hellfire’s, and no other Army platform would EVER mount them.  How did that work out?

 

Like in USAF the "Fighter Mafia" is always trying to kill the A-10, or any thing that can't go M1.

 

 In reality, the 56 was too much.  Too complex, too expensive, too heavy.  A 195 Knot cruse speed would have been nice, at least they could have kept up with the CH-47D's that showed up later.  Lord knows we would always walk away from our "escorts" in Iraq.  But again, you don't need a 200 Kt platform when you're going to spend most of your time hovering in the trees in a fire line against a division of tanks. 

 

And OK, you have a 200 Kt attack platform, and a 90 Kt scout? 

 

How is that going to work?

 

Bryan

Edited by BWDenver
CR
Link to post
Share on other sites

Good details Bryan in all your posts which I appreciate. Also immensely appreciate your insights and images which are rare as hens teeth from someone on these programs and who has the goods on the saucy bits. I realize I just have a different outlook on certain points based on my own experiences.  Not intentionally leaving out dates for any purpose just the official dead date matters because it means no future funding.  Dead is dead. Pack it up and Bye bye team which sucks from experience. I actually forget more than I remember, TBI & mini-stroke, if it's not written down. .

 

"In 1972 we did not need a 200 Kt attack helicopter that would spend most of its time hovering in the trees."

 

One of the major outcomes of Lam Son 719, Feb 8, 1971 – Mar 25, 1971, was the AH-1Gs ability to get in fast and low and the Cobra as a result fared better than the Charlie model gunships which suffered more losses. The Snake pilots modified their standard roll in from high altitude to defeat the radar tracked AA guns by coming in low and FAST so it was speed that saved them.  Your point makes sense only if the doctrine developed is the game of cat and mouse; pinpoint targets with the Scout using MMS (my avatar), have the attack helicopter unmask and fire AT against those targets, then go back to hiding but little sense in other scenarios where speed is a factor in survivability.  I wouldn't hedge my bets on Hover and Hide doctrine which has its roots in the Cold War Soviet Fulda Gap scenarios.

 

 

Speaking of speed,  Lockeed/Sikorsky's newest offering in the latest Army Aviation program, FARA (Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft), S-97 Raider has reached a top speed of 220 knots.  Either Lockheed didn't learn anything from Cheyenne or there is a reason for the 'Need for Speed'. Lockheed/Sikorsky are the likely candidate for the awarding even if they once again lost a prototype only this time in a hard landing and with the coaxial rotor system are trying to solve vibration issues, again.

raider.jpg?itok=T6pepqZL&timestamp=15386

 

Like Stalker6 said Im sure the Cheyenne program would've worked had the development team been given the chance to do so but they were dead before they were officially dead and Apache was the latest wet dream. Just like OH-58F kept going and what we did sits on a pole now at AMRDEC on Redstone instead of bagging flight hours Cheyenne was also only going through the motions. 

 

OH-58F+AMRDEC.jpg

 

Good points, and POV.

Edited by snake36bravo
I lost my wallet in El Segundo
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm setting the Way Back (WABAC) Machine for December 1986 to check out the Marine Corps AH-1W Super Cobra. Sherman and Peabody were in the Army National Guard so all they had were APH-1 and APH-5A helmets. They are also not wearing their Nomex but beg you to show mercy on them and not give them a bad OER or NCOER. As stated they are Army National Guard which means they routinely fly naked. Sorry about that!

 

WABAC+Machine.jpg

 

This article first appeared in 'Combat War & Weapons' published by Modern Day Periodical, Inc. in December 1986. Click for a 150 dpi version that will open in another tab at a more readable version. I like what Col. M.F. Pixton III had to say about the Apache on Page 4. I can only image what the 'M.F.' stood for in Col Pixton's name. =)

 

Also, sorry for the wrinkly last few pages which were the result of a damp basement. I promise I was not gesticulating to helicopter pictures again although my wife has actually said these words to me, "I'm dead serious. It's the Huey or me! Take your pick!" =)

 

AH-W+SuperCobra+1.jpg

 

AH-W+SuperCobra+2.jpg

 

AH-W+SuperCobra+3.jpg

 

AH-W+SuperCobra+4.jpg

 

AH-W+SuperCobra+5.jpg

 

Edited by snake36bravo
Improper HELLFIRE missile quantity shown on MFD (Task 2-5-7)
Link to post
Share on other sites

I will be a die hard Cobra fan until the day I go the way of the dodo's as I grew up with them. My dad and uncle we're both Cobra pilots so I wanna say it's in my blood. However I think that no matter what it is important to note that from the onset the Marine Cobra and the Army Apache had two different mission sets which dictated it's characteristics, performance, weapon systems, and finally looks😎.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, snake36bravo said:

S-97 Raider has reached a top speed of 220 knots.

Seems they took the good from the Cheyenne, hopefully they learned enough to get closer to being right before they get sunk by some pencil pushers in the Pentagon.

 

Is it me, or does it seem like the Marine Corp, which by recollection is the smallest of America's armed forces, which is why they have such a proud history and membership is considered in such high regard.

 

Being that small, they have been forced to think about problems from a different perspective. Where the army and airforce have just thrown money at issues, the Marines have chosen to make sure every tax dollar counts. More over, they are coward thinking, by not dumping the AH-1 in favor of the Apache, they have saved themselves the nightmare of taking all their personnel from the Cobra program and either forced retired them, or made them start over with an entirely new aircraft type.

 

So they save us money AND do so without compromise to their ability to kick fool.

 

Doesn't get much better than that!

 

Anthony

Link to post
Share on other sites

It comes down to roles and missions.

 

After spending 32 years on active duty and the reserves I have seen “a bit” of aviation history.  I’ve also seen the Army screw up a one man procurement parade with the LHX.

 

An aircraft is designed on the outset with a specific role and mission, at least initially.  The AH-1G was built for the Viet Nam jungle war.  A low to mid intensity conflict with little armor opposition.  It was an anti-personal platform.  And it did its job quite well.  I'm not sure they knew what they were designing the AH-56 for.  The AH-1G would do around 200, in a dive.  The success of the AH-1 platform was it's still flying so long after it was "adapted" from a UH-1.  You could almost call it the B-52 of the helicopter world.

 

But the DoD and Army always had its eye on the two front war.  All-out conflict in the East, with hoards of Russian tanks coming through the Fulda Gap.  And a holding campaign in Korea, until the Russians could be sorted out.  To some degree it was built on wishful thinking, as the Russians were going to incinerate the WARSAW Pac and turn it into a radioactive wasteland.

 

Late in Viet Nam we were introduced to the SA-7, and it was a nasty surprise.  The ‘73 war hammered home an even more unpleasant realization.  Altitude will kill you, in Viet Nam it was your friend, initially.  The AH-56 was a creature of medium level flight and contour flying at speed.  In 1974 the Army decided NOE was the thing.  In C 227th in ’74 we as a unit deployed into the waist lands of Texas and qualified on NOE.  Altitude kills, speed kills.

 

The AH-64 was envisioned for the tree tops, carrying 16 Hellfire missiles with scouts, and facing divisions of just good enough Russian tanks.  When the threat evaporated, they reordered the AH-64, with other combat loads. And put Hellfire’s on OH-58D’s.  An aircraft the Apache mafia really hated.

 

When we crossed the Iraqi border we dropped down to 50 feet or below and accelerated as fast as the Chinooks would go.  And now the current crop of MANPADS have incredibly low engagement envelopes.

Look at page 5.

 

https://dfat.gov.au/international-relations/security/non-proliferation-disarmament-arms-control/conventional-weapons-missiles/Documents/MANPADS_countering_terrorist_threat.pdf

 

The problem with speed is you can’t fly at 200Kts and 50 feet - for long.  150 Kts in the western Iraqi desert is one thing, in Korea or Iran, it’s a lot different.  Speed is not necessarily the answer.  Get to 150’ to 200’ and 200 Kts and you get missiles, lots of missiles. 

 

The USMC has a distinctly different mission than the Army.  Their air assets are padlocked to support the ground Marines.  That’s one of the reasons they are so effective, and they don’t have to rely on the USAF…

 

Bryan

Edited by BWDenver
CR
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BWDenver said:

It comes down to roles and missions.

 

After spending 32 years on active duty and the reserves I have seen “a bit” of aviation history.  I’ve also seen the Army screw up a one man procurement parade with the LHX.

 

An aircraft is designed on the outset with a specific role and mission, at least initially.  The AH-1G was built for the Viet Nam jungle war.  A low to mid intensity conflict with little armor opposition.  It was an anti-personal platform.  And it did its job quite well.  I'm not sure they knew what they were designing the AH-56 for.  The AH-1G would do around 200, in a dive.  The success of the AH-1 platform was it's still flying so long after it was "adapted" from a UH-1.  You could almost call it the B-52 of the helicopter world.

 

But the DoD and Army always had its eye on the two front war.  All-out conflict in the East, with hoards of Russian tanks coming through the Fulda Gap.  And a holding campaign in Korea, until the Russians could be sorted out.  To some degree it was built on wishful thinking, as the Russians were going to incinerate the WARSAW Pac and turn it into a radioactive wasteland.

 

Late in Viet Nam we were introduced to the SA-7, and it was a nasty surprise.  The ‘73 war hammered home an even more unpleasant realization.  Altitude will kill you, in Viet Nam it was your friend, initially.  The AH-56 was a creature of medium level flight and contour flying at speed.  In 1974 the Army decided NOE was the thing.  In C 227th in ’74 we as a unit deployed into the waist lands of Texas and qualified on NOE.  Altitude kills, speed kills.

 

The AH-64 was envisioned for the tree tops, carrying 16 Hellfire missiles with scouts, and facing divisions of just good enough Russian tanks.  When the threat evaporated, they reordered the AH-64, with other combat loads. And put Hellfire’s on OH-58D’s.  An aircraft the Apache mafia really hated.

 

When we crossed the Iraqi border we dropped down to 50 feet or below and accelerated as fast as the Chinooks would go.  And now the current crop of MANPADS have incredibly low engagement envelopes.

Look at page 5.

 

https://dfat.gov.au/international-relations/security/non-proliferation-disarmament-arms-control/conventional-weapons-missiles/Documents/MANPADS_countering_terrorist_threat.pdf

 

The problem with speed is you can’t fly at 200Kts and 50 feet - for long.  150 Kts in the western Iraqi desert is one thing, in Korea or Iran, it’s a lot different.  Speed is not necessarily the answer.  Get to 150’ to 200’ and 200 Kts and you get missiles, lots of missiles. 

 

The USMC has a distinctly different mission than the Army.  Their air assets are padlocked to support the ground Marines.  That’s one of the reasons they are so effective, and they don’t have to rely on the USAF…

 

Bryan

 

My point exactly, thank you for adding and clarifying it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, BWDenver said:

The USMC has a distinctly different mission than the Army. 

That is something that makes the Marines special, they look after their own, and they appear to be the only branch, as I mentioned before, that uses their funds wisely. Two things I have learned over the years regarding history, and there is so much more I need to learn. First, no conflict is low intensity when you are the one being shot at, and the second thing I learned, every since the DoD was created, we have not fully won a war. We backed out of Korea with the war, still unresolved. We won the battles of Vietnam, but politicians and planners technically lost the war. Desert Storm was ended incomplete, mainly due to pressure after videos of "the highway of death" made Powell go weak in the knees, and the concern of "what happens after we win" destabilization of Iraq, a lesson hard learned in the latest debacle that is Iraq. Even Afghanistan, we were able to beat the taliban in less than three months, something the Russians could not do in almost a decade, but once again, there was no plan for a quick turnover to the new government. Now nearly two decades later, we are STILL sending our kids there, and for what? I have no clue what that finish line is supposed to be anymore.

 

We have learned to fight, and have the best military in the world, but the leadership in uniform is way too political, and our civilian oversight is clueless to a point of being dangerous. When the military is allowed to fight the battles our way, we have no adversary that can beat us. When we are micromanaged by people in Washington, we end up with unnecessary losses that could have been avoided.

 

Once again Brian, you bring so much color to this thread, I can't thank you enough. Nor can I thank you enough for all you have done for this country, your service, this goes to everyone that served, is definitely appreciated more than you know.

 

Anthony

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/6/2019 at 11:57 AM, snake36bravo said:

 

One of the major outcomes of Lam Son 719, Feb 8, 1971 – Mar 25, 1971, was the AH-1Gs ability to get in fast and low and the Cobra as a result fared better than the Charlie model gunships which suffered more losses. The Snake pilots modified their standard roll in from high altitude to defeat the radar tracked AA guns by coming in low and FAST so it was speed that saved them. 

 

What kind of radar directed AAA was used during Lam Son 719?  I didn't think the NVA had any (at least deployed outside of North Vietnam) until very late in the war.    Are you referring to ZSU-23-4's or larger caliber fixed guns?   

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Stalker6recon said:

Is it me, or does it seem like the Marine Corp, which by recollection is the smallest of America's armed forces, which is why they have such a proud history and membership is considered in such high regard.

 

Being that small, they have been forced to think about problems from a different perspective. Where the army and airforce have just thrown money at issues, the Marines have chosen to make sure every tax dollar counts.

 

So they save us money AND do so without compromise to their ability to kick fool.

 

Not sure I'd agree.   Marine aviation has had some pretty significant problems, many of which were self-inflicted. Their tactical jet readiness numbers were horrible for the last 5-10 years, the worst of all the flying services.   At times, some Marine squadrons didn't have a single combat ready F/A-18.  CH-53E readiness rates weren't much better.

 

Couple that with the ongoing problems with the CH-53K program and the protracted (and costly) saga of the MV-22 and I'd say that the Marines struggle with the same issues as the other services, just on a smaller scale.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 11bee said:

 

What kind of radar directed AAA was used during Lam Son 719?  I didn't think the NVA had any (at least deployed outside of North Vietnam) until very late in the war.    Are you referring to ZSU-23-4's or larger caliber fixed guns?   

 

 

From Combat After Action Report - Airmobile Operations in Support of Operation Lam Son 719 (101st Airborne Division February 1971 thru 6 April 1971 dated 26 July 1971

 

"Throughout the operational area the NVA deployed an extensive, well-integrated, highly mobile air defense system which included large numbers of antiaircraft weapons of several calibers, the basic weapon being the 12.7mm machine gun.  (Figure 1-7) Some antiaircraft weapons were apparently radar-controlled. "

 

From 101st Airborne Division (Airmbole) Final Report Airmobile Operations in Support of Operation Lam Son 719 8 Feb - 6 Apr 1971 dated 1 May 1971 Camp Eagle, RVN

Antiaircraft Engagements

"In all cases where antiaircraft weapons were encountered, the 2/17 Cav requested TAC air, since the USAF has the standoff range and the fire power to engage AA weapons at a more acceptable risk level than does the Cav with organic gunships. When the Air Force had higher priority missions and was not available for such support 'organic aircraft on occasion engaged and destroyed AA weapons as large as 37mm. However, 23mm and larger were usually not engaged but marked for a FAC. AA engagements tactics varied from troop to troop, but generally the concept was to us as many gunships as possible, attacking simultaneously from different directions. If, as in the first month, OH-6A's were with the team, they were put in orbit out of effective range until the gun was destroyed. The most difficult aspect of engaging NVA AA weapons was to pinpoint the exact location of the weapon. The NVA had excellent fire discipline and used mutually supporting positions. Once a weapon was pinpointed, the AH-1G had a range standoff advantage over the 12.7mm and 14.5mm. Flechettes, HE and WP rockets and the XM-35 20mm gun if available were all used in engagement. The most significant AA threat faced by the Cav was the 12.7mm heavy machine gun. The NVA employed large numbers of these weapons, and located them so as to be mutually supporting along the helicopter approach routes. As far as can be determined the Cav lost no aircraft to weapons larger than 12.7mm, although several hits were recorded from 37mm airbursts. To counter the 12.7mm threat and still not become unacceptably vulnerable to larger caliber fire, most Cav teams operated at 3500 feet AGL to 5000 feet AGL, except for one AH-1G operating low and fast to detect targets."

 

Also add 57mm and SA-7 missiles.

 

Edited by snake36bravo
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, snake36bravo said:

 

To counter the 12.7mm threat and still not become unacceptably vulnerable to larger caliber fire, most Cav teams operated at 3500 feet AGL to 5000 feet AGL, except for one AH-1G operating low and fast to detect targets."

 

So it sounds like they were using Cobra's in the low level scouting role?   Bet that AH-1G crew down low, looking for AAA had an exciting (and hopefully long) life! 

 

LS 719 graphically demonstrated how vulnerable helos were to AAA.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 11bee said:

Marine aviation has had some pretty significant problems, 

You probably have more knowledge in your little finger, than I have in my entire body. That said, what little I do know, many of the issues of not being combat ready stem from the heavy rotation that pilots and their gear have endured, forcing the Corp and the rest of the military aviation sectors to increase the flight hours allowed before retirement of an airframe. The upgrades have extended some F-18s from numbers like 7,000 hours to 10,000 hours, before the frame needs to be mothballed. Those numbers are probably off, but not by much.

 

Then you had the budget cuts, aimed squarely at the military, further effecting combat readiness. If you don't have money to buy parts and fix planes, you can't fly. It has been well known that the Marines have been cannibalizing aircraft, just to have part of their inventory flight ready.

 

Their continued use of Hughes aircraft has definitely saved money over the last fifty years, that I am certain of. Are they perfect? Probably not. Maybe they have the issues you state, and my image of them is completely wrong, but I sure hope that's not the case.

 

Thanks for letting me know the truth, even if heartbreaking a bit.

 

 

Anthony

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the guys I flew with in C 227 had been in Viet Nam.  I missed being sent by about 6 months.  I had an idiot USAF flt Doc flunk me on my eyes, and it took 6 months to get that overturned.  I started Basic during the '72 Christmas Bombing campaigns via Nixon.

 

That was before any RAW warning gear in most Army AC, or at least the Helos.  They encountered RADAR controlled guns on more than one occasion.  In one case the pilot, Jim Carlozi, heard two beeps over the FM radio, he broke in a decnding right turn, and as he looked over his shoulder he saw several bursts of AA fire.  He passed that story along to all the new pilots, just to let us know.

 

A number of years later I was flying a CH-47D down to the Cherry Point NC on a coordination meeting for a follow-on GunEx and ASE Ex I was overseeing on the USMC ranges.  We were cruising at about 3000 near Washington NC, and they lit up the SA-2 Fan Song Radar.  It was the first time I'd seen the RAW gear light up with a "real" signal. 

 

It was impressive. 

 

The emitters were located on MCOLF Atlantic, a bit over 60 miles from our position.

 

It was very impressive!

 

Bryan

Link to post
Share on other sites

During the Clinton years we had issues with some of the gears in the aft transmissions of the CH-47D.  The Army didn't have the money to let a contract to rebuild them.  So we were restricted from flying in the clouds, over water or higher than above 2 minutes above the ground.

 

In the mid 90-'s I managed the pubs for the unit.  For about a 6 month period the Army cut off all publications change deliveries to USAR and ANG units.  They never told anyone they were restricting deliveries, I noticed it when the number of changes drastically dropped off.  My account was about 2400 titles. 

 

When I call the Pinpoint Distribution people they just said "Yeah we cut you off, we don't have the money to print and distribute all the pubs."  It created a hell of a mess, and endangered lives.  

 

But that was the Clinton Administration and the Military.

 

Bryan

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Stalker6recon said:

You probably have more knowledge in your little finger, than I have in my entire body  

Heck no.   I’m just a lowly ex-grunt who’s big into aviation.

 

One thing I really like about this forum are the number of guys who really are the experts and who take the time to share their knowledge and experiences with us peasants.  Makes this place pretty special.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 11bee said:

Heck no.   I’m just a lowly ex-grunt who’s big into aviation.  

 

You and me both bro!

 

Another fun story I remember from my dad was during his Korea tour in '81. I believe this was the only time in his career that he was regularly assigned a AH-1G with the 30mm configuration. Anyway from what I remember is he and his wingman were in a valley near the DMZ cruising along with him in trail. Apparently they got to close to actually crossing into the DMZ and they actually received incoming fire from a friendly position to keep them from entering it. Scared the poopoo outta him. Following that I do recall him sharing a another story similar to this that happened later on where a Kiowa did it and rounds hit the aircraft.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, BWDenver said:

 

14 hours ago, 11bee said:

share their knowledge and experiences with us peasants.

You got that right! I stumbled upon this site by chance via scalemates, I would have eventually found it on my own searching for tips, but I am shocked and stunned by the level of information available here, and more so, the quality of the people that make this site what it is. I am one of those peasants as well, I have only been on a couple rides in the Blackhawk, outside of that, I have zero experience with helicopters. Did have a couple 64's sneak up behind us at 20 feet, did not hear them until they were less than 300 meters to our rear, and probably because they were getting ready to land. They are scary quiet.

 

It's nice being able to talk with lifers, officers and enlisted, but on here, we are treated the same, that's pretty cool. The amount of information people share, probably pushes the line in regards to classified information, I just hope nobody gets into trouble or inadvertently crosses it while trying to help us out.

 

Really cool stuff, the learning opportunities are endless, for those willing to ask, listen and read. I am guessing that you are like me, craving information to become a better, more accurate modeler and honor those who fought in these incredible machines.

 

11 hours ago, Whiskey said:

You and me both bro! 

Now that surprises me, I was certain you were a driver, or at the very least, worked directly with these machines. To both of you, thanks for your service, probably said that already, but I will say it again anyways. Even though I was a 19 Delta, we are all brothers!

 

15 hours ago, BWDenver said:

mid 90-'s I managed the pubs for the unit.

That is messed up, but I am not surprised they made those cuts, especially when the pubs could save lives. When I was in, '03 to '05, I had to help burn pubs by the thousands, when I read what I was burning, I was pissed that they had never been distributed to our platoons. Most were available via pdf though, but if you didn't know they existed, you couldn't download and distribute them. In the famous words of donald rumsfeld (a horrible SoD IMHO) "we don't know what we don't know"

 

A lot of it had to do with MOUT and other FM's of value at the time. Such a shame that so much went to waste without anyone ever benefitting from them

15 hours ago, BWDenver said:

flying a CH-47D down to the Cherry Point NC

Funny that you say that. Back in '05, on my very last day on active duty, I was at the beach in Emerald Isle, NC. Anyway, we had just arrived and were preparing the house a few days before when once again, my lower back blew out. The first two days, I was unable to walk at all, and spent the time crawling on my elbows and using what ever was available to help dull the pain. So I had a lot of beer in me, plus a little THC. Anyway, that last day, I was finally able to climb into my fiends truck and head to Cherry Point for some treatment. When we got there, I explained to the doctor my injuries and surgeries while in Germany, and he gave me a large shot of morphine to take away the pain. Before that happened though, I had to supply a blood and urine sample, which I asked what they needed it for, obviously worried with reason. They said the tests were for medical reasons. Anyway, the doctor had been very nice and helpful, but when the urine sample came back positive for THC, he was less than pleased. I first tried to play it off as being in the room when it was smoked, he wasn't buying it.

 

So on my last day as a soldier, with a spotless record of zero disciplinary actions, not even extra duty, I pissed hot! Talk about scared, I actually thought the MP's were coming to lock me up on my final day. My roommate was in the room as the warm morphine washed over me, and as a former Marine, he acted shocked by the results!

 

At the time, it was a bit scary, days later, we all had a nice laugh at my expense. For all I know, that ruined my perfect record, even though I have all my medical records, I have refused to even look at that tiny part of my file, don't know if the test is included.

 

Even though that happened more than a decade ago, it still feels like yesterday.

 

Anthony

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/7/2019 at 4:56 PM, Stalker6recon said:

You probably have more knowledge in your little finger, than I have in my entire body. That said, what little I do know, many of the issues of not being combat ready stem from the heavy rotation that pilots and their gear have endured, forcing the Corp and the rest of the military aviation sectors to increase the flight hours allowed before retirement of an airframe. The upgrades have extended some F-18s from numbers like 7,000 hours to 10,000 hours, before the frame needs to be mothballed. Those numbers are probably off, but not by much.

 

Then you had the budget cuts, aimed squarely at the military, further effecting combat readiness. If you don't have money to buy parts and fix planes, you can't fly. It has been well known that the Marines have been cannibalizing aircraft, just to have part of their inventory flight ready.

 

Their continued use of Hughes aircraft has definitely saved money over the last fifty years, that I am certain of. Are they perfect? Probably not. Maybe they have the issues you state, and my image of them is completely wrong, but I sure hope that's not the case.

 

Thanks for letting me know the truth, even if heartbreaking a bit.

  

 

Anthony

 

It's a combo of all of the above.  But 11bee is right, Marine aviation (and NAVAIR in general) isn't in the greatest of places right now.  It's getting better, hopefully, but it's not 100% yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sarathi S. said:

It's getting better, hopefully, but it's not 100% yet. 

From what I learned in my time on active duty, two things can cause decay in the military. First, lack of funds, which we had no control over. Second, bad leadership. Apparently, I was part of a badly run battalion, which had lots of problems with personnel and equipment, but I thought at the time, that was just how things were in the Army. Once of my friends that transfered from an Airborne division, informed me that our battalion was NOT how the army was everywhere, just poorly run. I never knew how true that was, until speaking to others about their experience, and sadly, they confirmed the same information as my friend. There are "high speed" units, basically well run, disciplined unit with proper funding, then there are units like mine, under funded and a mixed bag of good and bad, with little discipline all around. Made me sad that this was the only experience I knew, and I wondered how life might have been in a different battalion/BCT.

 

Oh well, as bad as it might have been, I still loved it. Now that funding has been restored, I hope that the aviation sectors are getting wiped back into shape.

 

Anthony

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 5/7/2019 at 4:17 AM, Stalker6recon said:

That is something that makes the Marines special, they look after their own, and they appear to be the only branch, as I mentioned before, that uses their funds wisely.

 

*cough* F-35B *cough*

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...