Joe_P148 Posted December 13, 2013 Report Share Posted December 13, 2013 Hotdogs It's clear that the Marines do things different than the Army. That being said do you really have to challenger everything he says about the 58? Have you ever worked with 58's? Or do you just look this stuff up on the Internet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hotdogs Posted December 13, 2013 Report Share Posted December 13, 2013 Hotdogs It's clear that the Marines do things different than the Army. That being said do you really have to challenger everything he says about the 58? Have you ever worked with 58's? Or do you just look this stuff up on the Internet? Fair enough. I present rational logic about why things are happening they way they are, and it seems people have a hard time accepting that. He mentioned me by name, so I felt oblige to reply. Everything he stated isn't wrong, it's just his opinion. Every time I make a comment about how the Army does business, all of the sudden I'm singled out. Because I work for a different branch? How many people here have made assumptions and comments about Apaches, Ospreys, UASs, Kiowas? etc....and never worked with or have flown them? I have enough experience with Army JFOs and JTACs to know the Kiowas capabilities. I'll stop the commenting if I'm starting to hurt people's feelings. You guys need to stop taking things as a general affront and be a little more open to discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob1237051 Posted December 13, 2013 Report Share Posted December 13, 2013 Could we possibly turn this thread into another Osprey love-hate thing? It's been weeks... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeroscout Posted December 13, 2013 Report Share Posted December 13, 2013 Could we possibly turn this thread into another Osprey love-hate thing? It's been weeks...I would love to fly any civilian version of the osprey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jester2138 Posted December 13, 2013 Report Share Posted December 13, 2013 Fair enough. I present rational logic about why things are happening they way they are, and it seems people have a hard time accepting that. He mentioned me by name, so I felt oblige to reply. Everything he stated isn't wrong, it's just his opinion. Every time I make a comment about how the Army does business, all of the sudden I'm singled out. Because I work for a different branch? How many people here have made assumptions and comments about Apaches, Ospreys, UASs, Kiowas? etc....and never worked with or have flown them? I have enough experience with Army JFOs and JTACs to know the Kiowas capabilities. I'll stop the commenting if I'm starting to hurt people's feelings. You guys need to stop taking things as a general affront and be a little more open to discussion. As ignorant as I am it does seem to me that the writing has been on the wall for a number of years now. There are four Army airframes and the Army would like to cut one to save money. Which one would you cut? The Apache? Can't possibly replace it. Blackhawk? No way. Chinook? Nope. Kiowa? Well... UAS's are getting better every year... I think it's also useful to remember that the US Army, without the Kiowa, is still by far the most capable helicopter force in the world. But perhaps the role of the helicopter is changing. I do cinematography right now and even here we're slowly replacing the traditional manned helicopter system with a remote-control UAS. In 2015 when the FAA formalizes this you'll see it explode into the mainstream. Movie pilots won't like it but that's the way it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UH60L-IP Posted December 13, 2013 Author Report Share Posted December 13, 2013 As ignorant as I am it does seem to me that the writing has been on the wall for a number of years now. There are four Army airframes and the Army would like to cut one to save money. Which one would you cut? The Apache? Can't possibly replace it. Blackhawk? No way. Chinook? Nope. Kiowa? Well... UAS's are getting better every year... In my estimation this is one of the most intelligent responses given. A replacement for the Kiowa has been in the works for years. Nothing came to fruition. All the while, unmanned systems have become more and more capable. With tighter budgets, it's the only thing that makes "sense" even though I'd rather not see it go. Truly, helicopter pilots in both the military and civilian world must work to remain relevant. News organizations are consolidating their helicopters and going with a single shared feed, movies are relying more and more on unmanned, etc. I wouldn't be surprised to see powerline/pipeline patrol go to unmanned at some point. It's for those reasons that I chose the Blackhawk in selection years ago. Twin engine, over 12,500lbs, sling loads, and missions that have a lot of civilian equivalency combined with a platform that ensures hours by flying not just in wartime but peacetime as well. When/if jobs are spread thin when I'm looking for a civilian job I want to be the guy with the most hours and most relevant experience. Unfortunately, a light single may not make one stand out. I wish it weren't so but I think the Kiowa going away is more than just talk this time. And I hate Ospreys! I won't fly an aircraft with a gender identity complex. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brackac Posted December 14, 2013 Report Share Posted December 14, 2013 The real tragedy here is how much this hurts the ground guys. An Apache from a 3km standoff simply cannot properly surveil an active battlefield and engage without coordinated instructions from ISR or ground troops marking targets. As was mentioned above, they just can't see. It is not an aircraft designed to attack and kill dismounted enemy in urban/dense environments. You really are showing your lack of understanding in regards to airframe capabilities here. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brackac Posted December 14, 2013 Report Share Posted December 14, 2013 If we had lost Kiowas mid deployment, and had to rely on Shadow, Blimp, Predator and Apache ISR/Recon, and solely Apache air support, we would have had a serious issue on exfil from objectives or securing MEDEVAC LZ's. Disregard. Edited because this really is personal opinion and experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brackac Posted December 14, 2013 Report Share Posted December 14, 2013 Can UAV and 64 sensors see what kind of shoes potential fighters are wearing? Can they determine that a person with a leather jacket and a gold watch with slicked back hair doesn't belong in the Pech Valley? Do they know that enemy fighters often squat over their PKM with a blanket over themselves until aircraft pass theM? Do UAV's or 64's see the DsHK underneath a tarp that happened to lift in the rotor wash of a 58 flying by? Can UAV's provide troops on the ground the 15-30 seconds of breathing room to manuever rapidly through a danger area, suppressing the enemy just long enough for troops to make cover? LOL, you act like Apache guys just randomly shoot at spots on the earth without developing the situation, or identify targets only because they are painted orange.Typical 58 bravado here. I've identified and engaged targets under every situation you mentioned, except it was two AK's and a PKM the IED emplacers were sitting on while hiding in the wadi and it wasn't in the Pech but just south of Clark, I identified a weapon in a courtyard by the unnatural shape of the tarp caused by the weapon system under it, and the Mercedes pulled halfway into a grape hut at 10K feet on the side of a mountain didn't quite fit the area. I'm guessing you are a Bragg or Savannah 58 driver. The 101st 58's and Apaches work as teams, and seem to have a much better understanding of what each other is capable of. And before you start on a rant, this is what I posted about pink and heavy teams in the other thread on this topic. I don't think there isn't anything better on the battlefield than a 58/Apache team or 2 58's and 1 Apache, but it's not what the ground force wants or sees as most effective on the battlefield. In today's world of instance information and access, the video feed is king. The video capability provided due to the link between the UAVs/Apaches/Fixed Wing/Ground Forces is hard to beat recon wise. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SBuzzkill Posted December 14, 2013 Report Share Posted December 14, 2013 (edited) As a community we have done some great things to overcome the limitations of our aircraft and I think those limitations have actually strengthened our community because it forces us outside the box. What's frustrating to us is that we are never going to get the chance to show what we could do in a similar airframe with better capabilities. Apaches do a great job and some of the things that aircraft can do are incredible but I really don't think a one size fits all aircraft is benefiting anyone other than bean counters and politicians. Edited December 14, 2013 by SBuzzkill 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janenichols Posted February 13, 2015 Report Share Posted February 13, 2015 The latest version OH-58D Kiowa Warrior is a single engine, double-bladed armed reconnaissance helicopter, Also its main rotor blades and the horizontal stabiliser are folded, and the mast mounted sight, the IFF antenna and the lower wire cutter are removed. The landing gear can kneel to decrease the height. So Comparatively Many developments could be done in future! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apacheguy Posted February 13, 2015 Report Share Posted February 13, 2015 Wrong Jane. It's 4 bladed.... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.