Romeos Vs. Sierras

[Gatordev]

@SynixMan I just felt like I came off the top rope with a douchy people's elbow of self righteousness after re-reading my post. You're totally right about the need for some type of maritime asset to be ready to handle the alert initially in an emergent type situation. Whether that's the Navy or Marines I haven't the knowledge to touch the topic. Enough about CSAR.....

I think the historical bit that should piss off Navy helo guys is the tanker war of the 80's. Mainly that somehow the need arose for Army helos to base off floating things.

Do you guys have a document that your combatant commanders list what missions they want you guys to be good at in priority order? Yes, that's a serious question, I have no fucking clue how the Navy works.

Most of the issues from the tanker wars are no addressed by organic assets. Rs and/or R/S teams can move about and work low threat targets, if needed, and if not, the Rs (and to some extent, the S) can send in fast movers to go after larger/higher threat targets. The R also provides some pretty substantial ISR/SSC capability over and above an E-2 that's overhead, so keeping track of who and what has been greatly improved.

There are documents for various theaters that spell out even more specific tactics in the maritime environment. Those then drive (among other things) what a squadron trains to and their readiness.

By the way, what is EWS? Your APR?

 

[busdriver]

By the way, what is EWS? Your APR?

No idea what he was talking about. Does the R have a significantly better setup than the B?

 

[Pags]

Most of the issues from the tanker wars are no addressed by organic assets. Rs and/or R/S teams can move about and work low threat targets, if needed, and if not, the Rs (and to some extent, the S) can send in fast movers to go after larger/higher threat targets. The R also provides some pretty substantial ISR/SSC capability over and above an E-2 that's overhead, so keeping track of who and what has been greatly improved.

There are documents for various theaters that spell out even more specific tactics in the maritime environment. Those then drive (among other things) what a squadron trains to and their readiness.

By the way, what is EWS? Your APR?

External Weapons Station. The wings on the 60S.

 

[Gatordev]

No idea what he was talking about. Does the R have a significantly better setup than the B?

Define setup. Caveat: I have not deployed with a R, just boomed around two coasts in it trying to figure out which key is the ENTER key and which one is the CANCEL key...

It's radar, ESM, FLIR (with the exception of AVT) are all much better than the B. The dipper is, for the most part, better than the F. The radios are significantly better (in clarity and capability). But it's heavy, cramped with the dipper, and they're only looking at adding more stuff.

Ergonomically, the R is a goat rope. The UI is pretty poor, though you learn to work through it. I find the Flight Display to be a mess of information that could have been at least helped by drawing some boxes around the different data sets (Nav, Fuel, etc). This is a personal preference, but I occassionally hop back and forth between the B and the R, and I find I just like the 3D steam guage AI better than than the 2D glass representation. Then again, the R nav system is light years better with an EGI vs a gerbil in a hamster wheel powering an iPhone gyro (even though we can't actually shoot an approach).

That said, the new guys only know what they know and they become very proficient in it and it brings a lot to the fight, especially when it controls other assets to poke the bad guy in the eye.

 

[Pags]

@SynixMan

I think the historical bit that should piss off Navy helo guys is the tanker war of the 80's. Mainly that somehow the need arose for Army helos to base off floating things.

Do you guys have a document that your combatant commanders list what missions they want you guys to be good at in priority order? Yes, that's a serious question, I have no fucking clue how the Navy works.

Also, what do you guys do when you're stuck doing the starboard D thing? Serious question, how much latitude do you have to wander around/ accomplish other training?

80s naval helos were pretty much designed for ASW so there wasn't a lot of SUW capability in the fleet to conduct the missions the tanker wars required. Eventually, we got where we are today with poor mans' gunships.

maybe the Required Operating Capabilities/projected operating environment document for the second point?

What you can do in the D? Depends . I'll talk LHD because that's what I know. Standard LHD sets are 2 to make 1. Which means you MAY have two working helos. One is fragged for Marine SAR support during the entire air plan. the SAR bird lifts first and lands last. LHD NATOPS requires that the SAR bird be within 10mi of mom at all times. CV NATOPS allows the SAR bird to be within 20mi during the day, 10 at night. We'd occasionally allow SAR to go beyond 10 if it was a light day, no troopers over water, etc. so, if the other bird is up they can form up and train within 10mi of mom. The configuration of the SAR bird is limited by its need to be SAR capable. We generally said they could only carry four pax or have the GAU on the left side only. If there's only one SAR bird they can run through some hellfire sim mode if the bird is properly configured or do practice SAR scenarios or instrument prof. If there's a big launch/recovery or FW ops in process SAR was confined to the actual STBD delta.

This is all from my experiences on one boat. There's plenty of wiggle room in LHD NATOPS that each boat can do its own thing and it largely comes down to what the Captain or Airboss want.

 

[busdriver]

Good gouge, thanks. Pags got at what I was thinking about with respect to R v B stuff. ASW vs SUW, I had to look both of those up...

Can USS BOAT carry little boats in any capacity? Sorry if this seems like a stream of random ass questions, I'm day dreaming a bit. But I'm wondering about the ability to drop a couple boats in the water to act as opfor/moving targets for the helos but also double down as rescue boats if needed. Or are there enough "targets" in most of the world's oceans to make this a moot point?

 

[SynixMan]

CVN Ops are a bit more flexible than the LHD. Generally we have one plane guard helo that's confined to 20nm day/10nm night. As long as you stay out out of the published avoid areas (think approach or departure ends of the boat), you can do pretty much whatever you want. We would do GUNNEX, investigate surface contacts, or other stuff as we had time. We also launched our own sections of aircraft for ULT events.

We get moving boat high fidelity training in work ups. On deployment, not as much. There are opportunities to do training, but catering to the helo dudes isn't a top priority for a Carrier Strike Group.

The EWS turns the Sierra into a light gunship along the lines of the Army DAP birds. 20mm, hydra rockets, & hellfire. As folks have alluded to, it's one of many missions as well as a new capability, so we're not Apaches or Cobras, nor do we have the resources to be. That being said, there's lots of room to grow with it.

 

[Flying Low]

At what point do we start discussing separating CVN and EXP back to HS and HSC? We train differently, we deploy differently, workups, etc.

Maybe start a Facebook petition?

 

[lowflier03]

At what point do we start discussing separating CVN and EXP back to HS and HSC? We train differently, we deploy differently, workups, etc.

Maybe start a Facebook petition?

Actually I think there is more merit to merging HSC and HSM into a master helo community and then dividing the combined squadrons into CVN and EXP. That actually fits closer to the model for how we operate and would provide a lot more flexibility for pilot training, MX, det manning, etc.

 

[nittany03]

Actually I think there is more merit to merging HSC and HSM into a master helo community and then dividing the combined squadrons into CVN and EXP. That actually fits closer to the model for how we operate and would provide a lot more flexibility for pilot training, MX, det manning, etc.

Great idea. Then you only rate one ready room, and they can't stuff VAQ into a broom closet . . . I mean Ready 3.

 

[Gatordev]

Good gouge, thanks. Pags got at what I was thinking about with respect to R v B stuff. ASW vs SUW, I had to look both of those up...

I may be misreading, and if so, disregard, but... Don't equate the R to just ASW. It does that well (within it's own limitations), but it's also a very capable SUW platform. It might not be the first asset you'd want to send in to actually shoot, but it's a pretty potent controlling asset that can also lob something at someone if needed. Eventually it will probably get HIRS (I think that's planned, but I've lost track), which will certainly help.

 

[Pags]

Actually I think there is more merit to merging HSC and HSM into a master helo community and then dividing the combined squadrons into CVN and EXP. That actually fits closer to the model for how we operate and would provide a lot more flexibility for pilot training, MX, det manning, etc.

This goes in line with what I was saying earlier in the thread about one Navy-wide helo effort; have one big blob of helos that you can draw composite units from sized to your needs. Want to send three birds to the LHD and have one be a 60R? No problem. Headed to an area with an ASW threat? Maybe bring more 60Rs to the CV. A more a-la carte approach than has been done.

I haven't had a chance to respond to my other idea about Joint, DOD/DHS wide 60 program. I didn't have a specific scope in mind for it, but I think was imagining starting with one PEO similar to JSF for all services. And from there similar EPs, basic procedures, maintenance procedures, engineering, etc. i don't know if a service-wide hawk advanced-advanced/FRS would be a good idea. Everyone flies 60Ls and then goes off to service specific schools to learn your specific hawk, which could be compressed, think cat other, and basic tactics.

 

[Pags]

Good gouge, thanks. Pags got at what I was thinking about with respect to R v B stuff. ASW vs SUW, I had to look both of those up...

Can USS BOAT carry little boats in any capacity? Sorry if this seems like a stream of random ass questions, I'm day dreaming a bit. But I'm wondering about the ability to drop a couple boats in the water to act as opfor/moving targets for the helos but also double down as rescue boats if needed. Or are there enough "targets" in most of the world's oceans to make this a moot point?

Most boats have 1-2 RHIBs. LHDs have 2. My ship would occasionally do some integrated training with the ship and SAR but this was infrequent. The ship doesn't have guys who only drive boats, so you can't just have the boat out all day to play with. Plus, there's sea state limitations for the boats. Finally, the sailors who drive the boats don't know any tactics. The RHIBs are not tactical assets and the operators don't have the training to accurately simulate a real threat.

The RHIBs are also backups to help SAR. Boat has to be manned during SAR's launch but can stand down once SAR is ops normal. If both SAR birds are broken than you can use the RHIBs, but you start to restrict what you can do.

 

[AllYourBass]

Just jutting into the conversation inappropriately to remark that this thread is incredibly informative for a budding TH-57C warrior hungrily eyeing a 60 slot. Thanks, and carry on!

 

[jtmedli]

Also, I'd like to add that no community is perfect. I'm sure HSM has its problems too. They are just more visibly (notice I did NOT say 'better integrated') integrated into the CV/DESRON team whereas HSC plays with the hornets more. During workups, our HSM squadron came out to Fallon and, with the exception of ASUW flights basically sat on their hands while we, the HSC guys, were out doing CSAR and SOF events with the hornets and E-2s overhead which is the really fun stuff for us. From my experiences on deployment, my squadron (HSC) worked with the airwing (read: CAG and hornet guys) much more than the HSM guys did and the HSM guys worked with the SWOS much more than we did. HSC and HSM worked together on numerous briefs, straits transits, and gun shoots while we were deployed.

I hope that clarifies my previous post a little bit and helps.