Future of OH-58 program

[UH60L-IP]

For those that currently fly the Kiowa, you may already know this. For those that are considering it, it is food for thought.

 

I was privy in these last couple of days to a brief by a key leadership aviation officer. It is public information, simply an expansion of General Odierno's open and public comments.

 

"It is a horrible time to be a Kiowa pilot. There is simply no future in it."

 

The brief made it very clear that there are no future prospects for replacement of the Kiowa. While there have been many attempts in the past, and the fleeting possibility of an ongoing search, the decision "has been made" that there are simply no plans at all to replace the aging platform.

 

Why? Because it's already been replaced - by the AH-64E.

 

Kiowa units in FORSCOM will simply go away and not be replaced.

 

"The Kiowa, entering service in 1971, has reached the end of it's service. We cannot justify a replacement for this platform when we have so many brand new 64 Echoes entering service. The 64 Echoes will take up the mission for the aging 58s as they are removed from service."

 

Further, as there will be fewer dollars (in general) for Army Aviation, aircraft in active duty service will be replaced as needed in large part by taking them from National Guard and Reserve component units - that concerns all platforms.

[Ardo09203]

Ouch, not that I plan to go 58's but sucks for those that do.

[akscott60]

f*cking horseshit. The apache cannot replace us. Period. They cannot see. If someone says they can, they are lying. The apache cannot fly 8 of 8 day in and day out. We have the highest combat flight time for a reason. We do the most with the least.

 

That being said, I see the writing on the wall.

[Velocity173]

I know what the buerocrats are thinking. Add a few more 64Es and some more UAVs and that will solve the problem. They'll never learn that you can't replace being there physically with eyes on target in a flexible airframe.

 

What we'll have is a version of what happened recently in the Persian Gulf. F-22s escorting Predators because the Predators can't adequately defend themselves. Now we'll have 64s doing the job.

 

We've been lucky so far in that we've been up against an enemy who couldn't defend against a drone. If I'm some 2S6 or ZSU guy in some future conflict, I'm gonna eat that Predator for breakfast.

[SBuzzkill]

Whatever. None of us were holding out a lot of hope that we'd see a replacement anyway. We will continue to fly a great airplane and a great mission until they tell us to stop.

[Yamer]

the last part worries me a little... how can the active army "take" state purchased aircraft from national guard units to replace its active duty fleet.... sounds confusing... im all for a scout platform but my limited knowledge tells me the apache can do anything the kiowa can do plus more... theoretically, experiences may vary of course... new times are gonna be interesting for sure

[SBuzzkill]

There's no way an Apache can do what we do not matter how many sensors they pack onto it. What they are talking about getting rid of is not the airframe but the mission itself.

[UH60L-IP]

the last part worries me a little... how can the active army "take" state purchased aircraft from national guard units to replace its active duty fleet.... sounds confusing...

 

Just a semi-educated guess here but I do not think that the individual states buy all of their own aircraft. Many of the aircraft most likely but I doubt all of them. I know that the active duty Army has given (or loaned) a number of aircraft to guard units.

 

I'm active duty and have flown a number of aircraft with NG markings on them. I'm not sure if they were active duty, given to national guard, and then taken back or what but I have seen it happen. I somewhat doubt that states like Texas really had a line item for purchasing Apaches - I mean why would a state buy Apaches?

 

I could be wrong on how it works but I don't think big Army would have much of a roadblock reaching down to states to take their aircraft.

[Hotdogs]

There's no way an Apache can do what we do not matter how many sensors they pack onto it. What they are talking about getting rid of is not the airframe but the mission itself.

 

While the Apache doesn't probably have the aircraft availability rates that a small single engine scout platform with relatively simple fire control systems - helicopter reconnaissance is not the first choice of recon if you have other platforms that are better at it. Be it satellites, UAS, large aircraft with ground mapping radars, or a fast mover with a targeting pod, or in your case another attack helicopter with much better (and more) sensors.

 

I really can't imagine being fragged out to go do just recce, I don't think it's a good use of resources, but everyone has their opinion. If the Kiowa were so valuable, then why has the Army decide to shed the mission? Well, because it hasn't shed the mission, it's just decide to devote more money into something else that is more versatile and can do the same thing. Kiowa's are notoriously inaccurate (no offense, but the 58 body wasn't designed for accuracy) slow, and have a lost a lot of pilots due to hostile fire because of a lack of armor among other things. I'm not sure what Vne is on a Kiowa with stores, but I'd imagine you guys exceed it pretty fast and are outside of your rocket envelope when flying at higher altitudes and then that also makes your sensors useless with a mast mounted site built for the Fulda gap. Too many negatives to correct with a mission that is easier to replace with something more cheap and has less exposure to the enemy. Makes sense, in today's budget environment, I wouldn't want to be in that position. Skid pilots are at risk of falling into that gap eventually too, we're the only USMC aircraft that can't air to air refuel, and can't escort the Osprey on longer range missions, so the Harriers picked it up. Unless something changes we could eventually end up in the same boat. Albeit, after the Yankee and Zulu are past their service life.

[I3uller]

What is the time frame on this sort of thing? The F model OH-58 was approved and being put into service soon correct? Doesn't seem like they would want to upgrade the 58 just to trash it right away but I'm just arm chairing this.

[Justine]

replace for this?

 

 

http://www.armytimes.com/article/20130923/NEWS04/309230020?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[UH60L-IP]

What is the time frame on this sort of thing? The F model OH-58 was approved and being put into service soon correct? Doesn't seem like they would want to upgrade the 58 just to trash it right away but I'm just arm chairing this.

 

How long it takes the Army to do anything is always a guess. The comments I heard seemed very present tense but that is my perception based upon things being said such as the clear statement, "It is a horrible time to be a Kiowa pilot."

 

However, one must always be thinking down the road. Let's say it does take 3-5 years for some sort of phase out. A new pilot goes through flight school and gets to their unit. It takes a year or two to make PC and say by year 3 or 4 they are looking to track. Problem is they are right in the middle of a phase out (or significant reduction) and the Army doesn't need more Kiowa instructors, maintenance pilots, etc. Your flight hours are significantly dropping.

 

About this time you are thinking another year or two ahead and another promotion. All your buddies flying other platforms have a definitive future, track producing schools, and perhaps increased hours (at least in comparison to yours). You might be in a position where you are forced to another aircraft (new qual course). Your original flight school stick buddy is now your instructor while you are sitting at RL3 with no track. Who gets the promotion?

 

Obviously this is a hypothetical and one of many possibilities. I am not a Kiowa basher. I simply got some reliable scoop and thought to pass it along. The 58 probably would have been my second choice and I think the mission is cool as heck. It is simply food for thought and if you are not looking ahead in your career you are being left behind.

 

As far as it not making sense to upgrade OH-58s to the F model only to trash the program, two things. 1) The Army has done much worse 2) The F model "...is not a service life extension program, or a replacement for an Armed Aerial Scout or a full service life extension program." That is a quote, made just 6 months ago, from the product manager for the Kiowa Warrior at Redstone.

[I3uller]

I would argue that while number 2 is valid, it wouldn't make sense to trash it after spending all the money to upgrade it, but then that argument is nullified by point number 1 haha I'm probably a good year and a half from airframe selection if I ever even get to Rucker so I will be paying close attention to how things continue with this. Sad to hear of the impending death of my by far number one airframe choice.

[Lindsey]

I would argue that while number 2 is valid, it wouldn't make sense to trash it after spending all the money to upgrade it, but then that argument is nullified by point number 1 haha I'm probably a good year and a half from airframe selection if I ever even get to Rucker so I will be paying close attention to how things continue with this. Sad to hear of the impending death of my by far number one airframe choice.

 

We live in dark times, my friend.

[d10]

There's no way an Apache can do what we do not matter how many sensors they pack onto it. What they are talking about getting rid of is not the airframe but the mission itself.

Yeah you can't shoot your M4 out the door.

[akscott60]

There is so much more to it. CAV dudes just embrace the mission and go balls out. I am at JRTC right now doing Gods work.

[SBuzzkill]

Yeah you can't shoot your M4 out the door.

 

I wasn't referring to something as stupid as shooting an M4 out of a door.

Edited September 24, 2013 by SBuzzkill

[akscott60]

Well it is fun :-)

[Velocity173]

We spent far more money on the Commanche before we cancelled it. Spent more money on the Arapaho before we cancelled it. It wouldn't be a big deal to cancel the F either.

 

Like I said, they're going to try and replace it with other ISR platforms. The Apache alone isn't going to do it. No way we've got the money to replace hundreds of 58s with more Apaches either. It's like three times the cost. UAVs are the future. Just ask the Air Force.

[akscott60]

Well I am proud to fly it even if its days are numbered. It's an invaluable tool to the battle space owner.

[Ardo09203]

Edited

[SBuzzkill]

 

While the Apache doesn't probably have the aircraft availability rates that a small single engine scout platform with relatively simple fire control systems - helicopter reconnaissance is not the first choice of recon if you have other platforms that are better at it. Be it satellites, UAS, large aircraft with ground mapping radars, or a fast mover with a targeting pod, or in your case another attack helicopter with much better (and more) sensors.

 

I really can't imagine being fragged out to go do just recce, I don't think it's a good use of resources, but everyone has their opinion. If the Kiowa were so valuable, then why has the Army decide to shed the mission? Well, because it hasn't shed the mission, it's just decide to devote more money into something else that is more versatile and can do the same thing. Kiowa's are notoriously inaccurate (no offense, but the 58 body wasn't designed for accuracy) slow, and have a lost a lot of pilots due to hostile fire because of a lack of armor among other things. I'm not sure what Vne is on a Kiowa with stores, but I'd imagine you guys exceed it pretty fast and are outside of your rocket envelope when flying at higher altitudes and then that also makes your sensors useless with a mast mounted site built for the Fulda gap. Too many negatives to correct with a mission that is easier to replace with something more cheap and has less exposure to the enemy. Makes sense, in today's budget environment, I wouldn't want to be in that position. Skid pilots are at risk of falling into that gap eventually too, we're the only USMC aircraft that can't air to air refuel, and can't escort the Osprey on longer range missions, so the Harriers picked it up. Unless something changes we could eventually end up in the same boat. Albeit, after the Yankee and Zulu are past their service life.

 

I'll put my rocket shots up against an Apache any day... 50 cal not so much. That said, you make some great points. The Kiowa has never been everything we want, but after working with Apaches on many of the same missions I have confidence saying there are a lot of benefits to having us on station that an Apache cannot match. If they would build a helicopter that scouts are asking for...

Edited September 24, 2013 by SBuzzkill

[Velocity173]

 

I'll put my rocket shots up against an Apache any day... 50 cal not so much. That said, you make some great points. The Kiowa has never been everything we want, but after working with Apaches on many of the same missions I have confidence saying there are a lot of benefits to having us on station that an Apache cannot match. If they would build a helicopter that scouts are asking for...

It sure seemed like KWs were the CAS weapon of choice when I was in Afghanistan. I witnessed a pair of 58s expend more ordnance over an 8 hr period in Op Strong Eagle than an entire F-16 squadron does in a month! I could feel .50 cal and rockets vibrating my butt 2,000 ft above them. Almost made me wish that I went scout...almost.

[akscott60]

Hell yea!

[Hotdogs]

 

I have confidence saying there are a lot of benefits to having us on station that an Apache cannot match.

 

Genuinely curious as to what those benefits are...