Selection today

Lindsey · March 5, 2015

Personally, I'd take a 64E transition and I'm sure there's a bunch of 58 guys who'd take it in a heartbeat.

Why is that, if you don't mind? And is that a statement specific to the E model?

UH60L-IP · March 5, 2015

I agree. The bottom of the OML should not be depressed about anything. They should be thanking their lucky stars that they have a job flying. There are hundreds of people that wish they could be in their shoes.

I've had students that I know absolutely hated the fact that they got Blackhawks. At least they felt that on day one of the course. They changed their mind. Even if they didn't, they probably would at their unit. There is plenty to like about every airframe.

Apaches are cool. Chinooks are cool. Blackhawks are cool. Kiowas are history . If an Army aviator sits back and evaluates where they are in life, they don't have a heck of a lot to complain about.

brackac · March 5, 2015

I was going to hammer out a long winded reply about some of the misinformation in this thread about how Apache's are utilized on the battlefield, but then I realized it was once again just Blackhawk drivers beating their chest. It always seems to be the Blackhawk drivers who are the most opinionated on what the Apache is and isn't.

Joe_P148 · March 5, 2015

Why is that, if you don't mind? And is that a statement specific to the E model?

Well, I've got about 1,900 hrs and 7 years in 60s. I've done A/L and MH model 60s. I enjoy the 60 assault mission. But, why not try something else? Id like to shoot, I think I could contribute a different skill set and perspective to the community and I'm willing to give it a shot.

At the end of the day Lindsey, it's got nothing to do with the airframe, but the mission.

brackac · March 5, 2015

I dread the day a TF Commander comes up with the bright idea to launch an Attack team in IFR conditions to fly to a TIC or mission in an area that is VFR, and then have them punch back in IFR to return to the FOB.

Joe_P148 · March 5, 2015

I was going to hammer out a long winded reply about some of the misinformation in this thread about how Apache's are utilized on the battlefield, but then I realized it was once again just Blackhawk drivers beating their chest. It always seems to be the Blackhawk drivers who are the most opinionated on what the Apache is and isn't.

Nah, there's just more 60 people out there. I don't pretend to know anything about the 64. Hell, I wanna fly the thing. We could really say the same about all the airframes man.

akscott60 · March 5, 2015

Apaches kill sh*t. I do know that. They are fun doing pink teams with.

Lindsey · March 5, 2015

Well, I've got about 1,900 hrs and 7 years in 60s. I've done A/L and MH model 60s. I enjoy the 60 assault mission. But, why not try something else? Id like to shoot, I think I could contribute a different skill set and perspective to the community and I'm willing to give it a shot.

At the end of the day Lindsey, it's got nothing to do with the airframe, but the mission.

That's fair. I am torn because I liked the Scout mission. But lately I have been leaning towards 64s much more. It's a combination of things, but namely that the 64 presents more of the type of flying (fighting from the air) that I'd like to do. I am very interested to see how the 64/64E takes up the reconnaissance mission, if at all.

akscott60 · March 5, 2015

I dread the day a TF Commander comes up with the bright idea to launch an Attack team in IFR conditions to fly to a TIC or mission in an area that is VFR, and then have them punch back in IFR to return to the FOB.

Sounds like a great f*cking idea. Might as well use all your capabilities right?

brackac · March 5, 2015

That's fair. I am torn because I liked the Scout mission. But lately I have been leaning towards 64s much more. It's a combination of things, but namely that the 64 presents more of the type of flying (fighting from the air) that I'd like to do. I am very interested to see how the 64/64E takes up the reconnaissance mission, if at all.

You will spend your time staring at the screen and watching the UAV feed from the shadow you have in your flight, while you and another Apache are 20k away on another task.

Lindsey · March 5, 2015

I dread the day a TF Commander comes up with the bright idea to launch an Attack team in IFR conditions to fly to a TIC or mission in an area that is VFR, and then have them punch back in IFR to return to the FOB.

Why? Pardon my ignorance, if you please.

brackac · March 5, 2015

Why? Pardon my ignorance, if you please.

Punching in IFR, flying to a mission, coming out VFR; doing it while typically flying on system, staying on station for a few hours, and then punching back in IFR, all while flying in uncontrolled airspace.

You don't pick up an IFR clearance and fly from NAVAID to NAVAID in theater. No control, no VOR/NDB, and nothing but GPS approaches.

Lindsey · March 5, 2015

Punching in IFR, flying to a mission, coming out VFR; doing it while typically flying on system, staying on station for a few hours, and then punching back in IFR, all while flying in uncontrolled airspace.

Tracking.

Joe_P148 · March 5, 2015

That's fair. I am torn because I liked the Scout mission. But lately I have been leaning towards 64s much more. It's a combination of things, but namely that the 64 presents more of the type of flying (fighting from the air) that I'd like to do. I am very interested to see how the 64/64E takes up the reconnaissance mission, if at all.

Well, I understand. But, don't sell the 60 short. We fly doors off, low. We can interdiction vehicles, conduct recons and we have door gunners with confirmed kills. In a non linear battlefield we all take the fight to the enemy.

But truthfully all motivated pilots learn to grow into their advanced airframe. You're gonna like whatever you get.

Joepatriot · March 5, 2015

I agree. The bottom of the OML should not be depressed about anything. They should be thanking their lucky stars that they have a job flying. There are hundreds of people that wish they could be in their shoes.

Nailed it.

Lindsey · March 5, 2015

Well, I understand. But, don't sell the 60 short. We fly doors off, low. We can interdiction vehicles, conduct recons and we have door gunners with confirmed kills. In a non linear battlefield we all take the fight to the enemy.

But truthfully all motivated pilots learn to grow into their advanced airframe. You're gonna like whatever you get.

Understood. I'd just be bummed if I chose 60s and got sent to a VIP unit.

brackac · March 5, 2015

Well, I understand. But, don't sell the 60 short. We fly doors off, low. We can interdiction vehicles, conduct recons and we have door gunners with confirmed kills. In a non linear battlefield we all take the fight to the enemy.

But truthfully all motivated pilots learn to grow into their advanced airframe. You're gonna like whatever you get.

Dot

akscott60 · March 5, 2015

Understood. I'd just be incredibly bummed if I chose 60s and got sent to a VIP unit.

The ones here fly so much they are running out of pilots. However, I prefer to NOT fly around Generals for a living. At least you can go to different parts of the GSAB easily enough, esp on a PCS>

Joe_P148 · March 5, 2015

You guys are hating on the IFR, VFR, IFR thing but there are systems out there that seriously mitigate that risk. The F model Chinook has some awesome tools that can band terrain based off DTED. If there's a tool you can use to mitigate the risk and the mission is important enough, it's defenitly something id be willing to do.

brackac · March 5, 2015

You guys are hating on the IFR, VFR, IFR thing but there are systems out there that seriously mitigate that risk. The F model Chinook has some awesome tools that can band terrain based off DTED. If there's a tool you can use to mitigate the risk and the mission is important enough, it's defenitly something id be willing to do.

DTED was seriously flawed in RC East. I wouldn't trust my life on that information.

akscott60 · March 5, 2015

Oh we get all kinds of toys. I use terrain banding all the time. If not for actual terrain avoidance (which you cant legally use it for), but for three dimensional SA in a mountainous environment.

I f*cking love IFR flying. The chinook is an incredibly good instrument platform. ILS, TACAN, VOR, etc (soon to be RNAV with the next software upgrade.) Flight director, coupled autopilot, etc. Handfly the whole damn thing, or monitor systems.

Up to you.

And TEN thousand horsepower.

brackac · March 5, 2015

I fly IFR for a living now, and hate it. It is the most boring flying, in my opinion. Nothing less interesting than having someone telling you what to do every step of the way, and then flying an approach. Give me a grid and a freq, and leave it to me to get there.