MH-60S with a M197 20mm cannon!

[insanebikerboy]

Sure, you're technically correct. Let's shoot a ~$100K hellfire (all theoretical 8 of them) at each $5k small boat that is moving toward the strike group. Wait, you blew the better part of a million dollars on guided ordnance and there are still 100 more rust buckets floating toward the CSG with RPGs and C4? Damn, bro. Bad day.

You may be right about the UH-1N/Y. I don't fly it so I couldn't tell ya. But having seen the M240 and the GAU21, they aren't going to be very effective. Maybe the GAU, but it takes up so much damn room in the cabin, it is a mission package hog, and often times its really cool for the whole "CHUG CHUG JAM" of its effective life cycle.

But I don't know. I could be wrong. You tell me about my airframe. I'm sure you know better than all those folks who I've heard from about it from our deputy commodore up to CNAF.

Otto, I can appreciate the enthusiasm for the most shiny, brand new thing coming out, but training and experience trump brand new everyday. Now, if Big Navy gets it together and puts training and experience hand in hand with this weapon, it would be something truly fearsome to the enemy.

*soapbox commence*

The HF is an amazing weapon and if we, as a Navy helo community, trained with it like we should, we could put these damn things through the windows of a speeding truck. However, and I'm speaking purely for HSC here, the training I've seen is just enough to finish a syllabus card or just enough to figure out how to shoot the actual, live HF we get so few of. I have yet to see the helo community put guys in trainers once or twice a week, week in and week out, just to get good with pushing the buttons, and then actually go out and do no shit CATM-ex's till we get bored with "another CATM-ex". Yet, we still advertise that we can put HF downrange. It's such a damn rarity that guys actually shoot a live HF that there is hesitation and downright worry/fear that the live HF won't be shot properly. A HF shot should be second nature and take 30 seconds to acquire, range, and shoot the target, whether it be a sim, CATM, or live HF.

*soapbox dismount*

In the end, you need quality training and experience for a weapon system to be deadly, not the best and brand new thing to come out.

 

[Jim123]

The HF is an amazing weapon and if we, as a Navy helo community, trained with it like we should, we could put these damn things through the windows of a speeding truck. However, and I'm speaking purely for HSC here, the training I've seen is just enough to finish a syllabus card or just enough to figure out how to shoot the actual, live HF we get so few of. I have yet to see the helo community put guys in trainers once or twice a week, week in and week out, just to get good with pushing the buttons, and then actually go out and do no shit CATM-ex's till we get bored with "another CATM-ex". Yet, we still advertise that we can put HF downrange. It's such a damn rarity that guys actually shoot a live HF that there is hesitation and downright worry/fear that the live HF won't be shot properly. A HF shot should be second nature and take 30 seconds to acquire, range, and shoot the target, whether it be a sim, CATM, or live HF.

This is true, but "All crews fully trained" is way easier to fit on a SORTS report

 

[busdriver]

Lawman, the issue with HF isn't really cost (this is just stupid) or accuracy (this is a training problem). It's number of missiles in the air vs number of targets. Not saying M197 is a magic answer but there was a legitimate reason to look beyond HF as I understand it.

 

[xj220]

Otto, I can appreciate the enthusiasm for the most shiny, brand new thing coming out, but training and experience trump brand new everyday. Now, if Big Navy gets it together and puts training and experience hand in hand with this weapon, it would be something truly fearsome to the enemy.

*soapbox commence*

The HF is an amazing weapon and if we, as a Navy helo community, trained with it like we should, we could put these damn things through the windows of a speeding truck. However, and I'm speaking purely for HSC here, the training I've seen is just enough to finish a syllabus card or just enough to figure out how to shoot the actual, live HF we get so few of. I have yet to see the helo community put guys in trainers once or twice a week, week in and week out, just to get good with pushing the buttons, and then actually go out and do no shit CATM-ex's till we get bored with "another CATM-ex". Yet, we still advertise that we can put HF downrange. It's such a damn rarity that guys actually shoot a live HF that there is hesitation and downright worry/fear that the live HF won't be shot properly. A HF shot should be second nature and take 30 seconds to acquire, range, and shoot the target, whether it be a sim, CATM, or live HF.

*soapbox dismount*

In the end, you need quality training and experience for a weapon system to be deadly, not the best and brand new thing to come out.

This sounds eerily familiar to our AGMs.

 

[scoolbubba]

This sounds eerily familiar to our AGMs.

Yup.

 

[hscs]

It's amazing that the M240 and GAU-21 are so severly limited against a $5K "floating rust bucket". Funny. That's the same weapons that are strapped aboard a UH-1N/Y Huey for CAS missions (occasionally the GAU-17). And your comment about "CHUG CHUG JAM" = proves my point about training. Two words: Headspace & Timing. The GAU-21 is mechanically IDENTICAL to the M2 that the grunts use and the XM-218 that those of us in the assault support world use. It's been in service since 1933 and is ridiculously reliable. Provided the crew is trained.

It's the same lack of training that leads to negligent discharges of crew served weapons across the Elizabeth River in Norfolk. I don't think I'll live to see the fundamental shift in Navy mindset that would lead to an increased NCEA. So go ahead - blow your wad on a weapons system that looks cool, makes you feel like a bad ass, and shoot it twice in your career because of the limited NCEA. Then start saying that it's not the right system for the mission. OR change the mindset, spend the money on a realistic NCEA, get your crew proficient (proficiency = I've seen guys put first round center mass, on target and 75% of rounds on target), and all of a sudden your shitty crew served weapons will be probably much more lethal, and much more effective than you think.

Couldn't agree more - the weapons are effective.

A .50 cal mount for the 60S to match the 60G would be more helpful.

And we need to shift our mindset from shooting to qual to shooting to proficiency. As an example - we need a Level 3 checks where we have our HAGIs inducing jams on the weapon and expecting the Level 3 wanna-be to have the weapon cleared and ready to fire by the next turn in the pattern. Oh by the way, this needs to be done at night without a flashlight.

 

[Lawman]

Lawman, the issue with HF isn't really cost (this is just stupid) or accuracy (this is a training problem). It's number of missiles in the air vs number of targets. Not saying M197 is a magic answer but there was a legitimate reason to look beyond HF as I understand it.

Problem comes from effectiveness of the Fires. Even a well trained crew (160th DAC types) can only fly the helicopter and engage so many targets in a given time with whatever persitance of ammunition they have on board which isnt really that much. A couple of Seahawks that were lucky enough set up with ESSS and this Gun already loaded and outfitted are gonna have a hell of a time chasing down more than a couple of boats across the water. The Problem is a range and menuver issue with this type of weapon. You simply have to close the range too much and spend too much time making passes as a single moving target to say this will work against some sort of swarm boat attack. A single Aircraft with Hellfire or a like weapon system (DAGR would be a great place to start)and a decently trained crew can engage a multiple of targets in the same given span of time.

 

[HueyCobra8151]

Something that no one has mentioned is what your squadron culture "gives a shit" about. If you ask a skid guy about any weapon system we employ, you better grab a snickers bar, cuz you ain't going anywhere for awhile. On the other hand, I asked a guy from another Marine helo community about a ZSU-23-4 (jokingly...fuck that's sad that I joke like that...), and he responded "Oh, we don't have that weapon." His community doesn't emphasize guns, they emphasize other stuff.

I don't know how your community is, but if your boots can't spout off every nerd number about the differences between a K2, K2A, K2B, M, N, P, etc... Hellfire, then they probably aren't training at a high level either. Same goes for your guns and rockets. If your community gives a shit about guns, and starts training to high standards, and forcing the new guys to pick up those standards, you will probably be effective with most any kind of weapon system you get - commensurate with the task at hand.

BTW, since there was some comparison, Y's are flying almost all GAU-17/GAU-21. M240 isn't really used as much these days. Good gunners that have training and experience miraculously don't have their guns jam up too often, and when they do, I've seen them entirely disassemble a .50cal in the cabin while the aircraft was doing dynamic rocket attacks. NCEA comparison: at EMV several times we had more 7.62mm loaded in a single Huey for a 1-hr TOS than the assaults brought for the entirety of EMV for their squadron.

 

[squorch2]

One of these things supports the other.

 

[Scoob]

I don't know how your community is, but if your boots can't spout off every nerd number about the differences between a K2, K2A, K2B, M, N, P, etc... Hellfire, then they probably aren't training at a high level either. Same goes for your guns and rockets. If your community gives a shit about guns, and starts training to high standards, and forcing the new guys to pick up those standards, you will probably be effective with most any kind of weapon system you get - commensurate with the task at hand.

We much prefered to wow eachother with inane NATOPS systems knowledge concerning things you have no ability to effect from the cockpit.

 

[phrogpilot73]

On the other hand, I asked a guy from another Marine helo community about a ZSU-23-4 (jokingly...fuck that's sad that I joke like that...), and he responded "Oh, we don't have that weapon." His community doesn't emphasize guns, they emphasize other stuff.

Were you asking a boot 1stLt? Or were you asking the low-hanging fruit that was probably on his way out the door for a FAC tour? I don't know anyone in the assault support community that would think that a ZSU 23-4 was a FRIENDLY weapons system... Well, that is except for the afforementioned groups.

 

[MasterBates]

We much prefered to wow eachother with inane NATOPS systems knowledge concerning things you have no ability to effect from the cockpit.

K7 relays and cork. Two things that are taking up real estate in my brain.

Sent from my PH44100 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Harrier Dude]

On the other hand, I asked a guy from another Marine helo community about a ZSU-23-4 (jokingly...fuck that's sad that I joke like that...), and he responded "Oh, we don't have that weapon." His community doesn't emphasize guns, they emphasize other stuff.

I'm going to have stick up for our assault support brethren here. I'm betting that at least half of them, and probably 90% of their WTIs would know what a ZSU-23-4 is. Some of them could even tell you the characteristics and appropriate threat reaction.

It's not all map folding and dropping off pallets of MREs, you know.

 

[KBayDog]

I'm betting that at least half of them, and probably 90% of their WTIs would know what a ZSU-23-4 is. Some of them could even tell you the characteristics and appropriate threat reaction.

 

[phrogpilot73]

I'm going to have stick up for our assault support brethren here. I'm betting that at least half of them, and probably 90% of their WTIs would know what a ZSU-23-4 is. Some of them could even tell you the characteristics and appropriate threat reaction.

I'd actually put those numbers higher, probably 75% know what a ZSU 23-4 is, 99.9% of WTIs do, and I'd say 75% of WTIs could tell you characteristics/threat reactions. Actually being proficient at the threat reaction (GTR/EW and non EW)? Those are not as high. There's only so much training time...

Those numbers stay high for the highly proliferated weapons systems (ZPU, SA-7/14, etc), but start to drop off when you start talking about some of the more obsure/less applicable to helos (I would doubt many people would waste an SA-6 on a Phrog). Hell, mention that there's a 2S6 in a Phrog ready room and while most don't know the characteristics (or what makes it so lethal), probably 85% are smart enough to know the threat reaction (stay the FUCK away).

It's not all map folding and dropping off pallets of MREs, you know.

Of course it's not, if we aren't training to a standard, we can't miss our Charlie times with such proficiency.