Selection through the end of the Fiscal Year

[OPR11]

Any new numbers from recent selections?

[Joepatriot]

1 64, 10+ 60's for WO's.

[Lindsey]

1 64, 10+ 60's for WO's.

Now that's what I'm talking about!

[akscott60]

Hiss. Boo.

[Cantankerously]

1 64, 10+ 60's for WO's.

Not bad!

[SBuzzkill]

That sucks.

Edited October 25, 2014 by SBuzzkill

[Yamer]

Last one I heard about had 3 64s and the rest 60s. No 47s

[akscott60]

The schoolhouse makes about 12-16 47F WO pilots a YEAR. Its a tiny amount for a small community.

[OPR11]

Seems like you have to be lucky, in addition to being high on the OML to get 47s

[SBuzzkill]

Most of the untracked guys who are getting transitions are going to 47s. It's a huge number, so I'm not surprised they're not pulling much from flight school.

[akscott60]

Seems like you have to be lucky, in addition to being high on the OML to get 47s

 

Yes to both.

[akscott60]

Most of the untracked guys who are getting transitions are going to 47s. It's a huge number, so I'm not surprised they're not pulling much from flight school.

 

FSXXI is incapable at its current production to keep up with attrition in the WO 47F community. The NETT was providing the difference, but everyone AD is flying 47Fs now.

 

AQT is going to have to ramp up to get those 58D guys transitions. Id actually like to do that after IPC (fingers crossed).

[USCav19D]

How many of the 58 guys are transitioning to 64s? With Apaches being shoehorned into the aerial scout role, you'd think there'd be a lot of Kiowa drivers making the jump to attack. Or are they trying to source the new Apache crews straight out of Rucker?

[akscott60]

The majority of the Scout guys who are getting helicopter transitions are getting 47s. None for 60s. A chunk, like 20% or so, are getting Apaches.

[SBuzzkill]

They're killing our mission pure and simple. Attack and UAVs is the wave of the future.

Edited October 27, 2014 by SBuzzkill

[Joe_P148]

They're killing our mission pure and simple. Attack and UAVs is the wave of the future.

Until we are fighting in triple canopy jungle

 

*ahem South Pacific!

 

We will go to a conflict in a highly vegitated environment and there will be a knee jerk fielding of light observation helicopters again, probably at twice the price of the ARH. We are fielding our force for the past conflict, not the future one.

[Jester2138]

Until we are fighting in triple canopy jungle

 

*ahem South Pacific!

 

We will go to a conflict in a highly vegitated environment and there will be a knee jerk fielding of light observation helicopters again, probably at twice the price of the ARH. We are fielding our force for the past conflict, not the future one.

 

I'm curious: why doesn't the military have light observation / attack props like the OV10 anymore? Is it because of loiter time or something along those lines? Seems like a Super Tucano with 30mm and/or rockets would be a hugely cheaper alternative to the Kiowa with somewhat similar observation/attack capabilities.

[A-aron]

 

I'm curious: why doesn't the military have light observation / attack props like the OV10 anymore? Is it because of loiter time or something along those lines?

I think different companies/countries have played around with that idea again but I don't think anything has come of it.

[Jester2138]

I think different companies/countries have played around with that idea again but I don't think anything has come of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_EMB_314_Super_Tucano#Colombia

 

Seems like something the US would also get a lot of use out of in the asymmetrical warfare typical of the last fifty years.

[A-aron]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_EMB_314_Super_Tucano#Colombia

 

Seems like something the US would also get a lot of use out of in the asymmetrical warfare typical of the last fifty years.

Isn't that why we have the F-35?

[SBuzzkill]

 

I'm curious: why doesn't the military have light observation / attack props like the OV10 anymore? Is it because of loiter time or something along those lines? Seems like a Super Tucano with 30mm and/or rockets would be a hugely cheaper alternative to the Kiowa with somewhat similar observation/attack capabilities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_Attack/Armed_Reconnaissance

 

I'm not sure how you would think a Super Tucano would be cheaper to operate than a Kiowa though.

[Jester2138]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_Attack/Armed_Reconnaissance

 

I'm not sure how you would think a Super Tucano would be cheaper to operate than a Kiowa though.

The USAF is buying a few so they can train other countries to use them, not so we can use them ourselves, though I think we should. Compared to the Kiowa, the Super Tucano's hourly flight cost is lower and it carries a larger armament 3x faster over a 5x greater range and with a 4x greater flight duration. Obviously the Kiowa can do all the cool helicopter stuff like hover and fly extremely low and slow for more flexible observation capabilities. But I think some Super Tucano's would be an excellent addition to the Army's fleet, possibly replacing some Apaches and Kiowas (obviously not all or most of them). In Vietnam we had Kiowas and fixed-wing props on the same battlefield. The props were not useful against the USSR after the war so we got rid of them. But what we do today is a lot more similar to Vietnam than WWIII so why not bring the props back?

 

Anyway I'm derailing the thread so sound the alarm and I'll wander off.

[d10]

Seems like you have to be lucky, in addition to being high on the OML to get 47s

 

And a big fan of picking stuff up and putting it back down.

[akscott60]

Key West. Google it. The USAF has essentially a law saying the US Army cannot operate armed fixed wing.

[OPR11]

Bump