Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
thedude07

Thinking about dropping a WO packet w/ Army, any advice?

Recommended Posts

As for assessing as a WO1, don't make career plans on it. The "top 5%" rumor only applies if there are training resources available to absorb the inexperience. More often than not depending on OPTEPO there aren't. We just had a stud LT #1 in everything he touched, have his assessment request declined because the assault companies can only take a very limited amount of inexperienced pilots.

Also, I went straight to the Regiment out of flight school. If you think you've ever experienced a fire hose treatment anywhere in the Army, it has no comparison to being a newly winged WO1 with 120 hours sitting in a classroom full of IP/SPs peers with multiple combat deployments and a couple thousand hours. You're behind the curve in everything you do for at least two years. You're also behind professionally for several years. It took 3 years just for me to make PC in the MH-47. Meanwhile guys I graduated flight school with were already company IPs and SPs. We have a far more extensive progression criteria.

 

Sounds really cool, but in hindsight, I usually recommend aviators spend a couple years in the Army making PC and get the stupid out of your system because Green Platoon and your follow on assignment is a graduate level course. Once you graduate green Platoon you are designated D/N RL1, and it's not uncommon to in process your company and find yourself overseas flying a direct action assault. Only then do you realize what you don't know. The only reason I wasn't shown the door, was that my enlisted background made the special operations environment familiar, and I had several hundred hours of relevant flying experience prior to flight school.

 

Mike-

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My WOBC class is greater than 50% 64 hopefuls, and a good mix of the other platforms after that. I definitely think it varies, and will change throughout flight school prior to selection.

 

But as a former shooter myself, I say go Warrant. I'm very, VERY early in my journey but it has already been worth it. And dirtyfoot is right, there are plenty of us around B Co. right now.

 

Any questions feel free to shoot me a PM.

 

So, I feel like there's only about two or three people that actually want attack. The rest probably just think it looks cool, but don't actively give a damn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So, I feel like there's only about two or three people that actually want attack. The rest probably just think it looks cool, but don't actively give a damn.

This actually seems like a huge problem for the 64 community. I know one student who can't go a day or two without posting on social media about what a badass he is and how 60 and 47 pilots don't begin to stack up. Even went so far as to post about how he was specifically chosen to lead an active duty funeral detail because he's such a "quiet professional". The guy hasn't even started his advanced course. It's all about his ego, and not supporting the ground maneuver, but I guess he saw Firebirds a couple times too many. I wouldn't trust him with a kite and unfortunately the 64 seems to draw these types.

 

The other side of the spectrum seems problematic as well: those who never wanted attack and would likely find any reason they could not to pull the trigger even after establishing positive identification of enemy combatants. A couple selections ago some selectees visibly cried after being assigned Apaches. I can't imagine how they'd handle stress in the air, much less the stress of taking lives.

 

I really think HRC would do well to allow WOFT applicants to apply directly for their intended airframe in the initial accession process and maybe even throw a psych test or two in the 1W flight physical.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh please tell me that dude's name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This actually seems like a huge problem for the 64 community. I know one student who can't go a day or two without posting on social media about what a badass he is and how 60 and 47 pilots don't begin to stack up. Even went so far as to post about how he was specifically chosen to lead an active duty funeral detail because he's such a "quiet professional". The guy hasn't even started his advanced course. It's all about his ego, and not supporting the ground maneuver, but I guess he saw Firebirds a couple times too many. I wouldn't trust him with a kite and unfortunately the 64 seems to draw these types.

 

The other side of the spectrum seems problematic as well: those who never wanted attack and would likely find any reason they could not to pull the trigger even after establishing positive identification of enemy combatants. A couple selections ago some selectees visibly cried after being assigned Apaches. I can't imagine how they'd handle stress in the air, much less the stress of taking lives.

 

I really think HRC would do well to allow WOFT applicants to apply directly for their intended airframe in the initial accession process and maybe even throw a psych test or two in the 1W flight physical.

I was always curious why the active duty Army never tried having applicants apply for specific aircraft. It seems to work out for the Guard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love AH-64s, I think they're the coolest helicopter in the inventory. However, there's only two personality types that select them, and rarely any in between; those A types that have the confidence and situational awareness to pull triggers that can mean life and death for the ground force and adjacent civilians. And there are the lunch money victims who are using the Apache to fix their daddy issues or feed their egos. Fortunately, it's usually readily apparent which category a particular pilot fits in.

Mike-

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love AH-64s, I think they're the coolest helicopter in the inventory. However, there's only two personality types that select them, and rarely any in between; those A types that have the confidence and situational awareness to pulling triggers that can mean life and death for the ground force and adjacent civilians. And there are the lunch money victims who are using the Apache to fix their daddy issues or feed their egos. Fortunately, it's usually readily apparent which category a particular pilot fits on.

 

Mike-

I've been very fortunate to have only met the first type thus far.

 

There was a guy I know who fits the second type to a T. Had an Apache license plate on his vette in BOLC and all kinds of top gun retarded. He fortunately was forced into 60s, failed two contact check rides and is now re-branching back to his previous enlisted branch. (Thank god) but he's the only one I've ever met that's like that so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This actually seems like a huge problem for the 64 community. I know one student who can't go a day or two without posting on social media about what a badass he is and how 60 and 47 pilots don't begin to stack up. Even went so far as to post about how he was specifically chosen to lead an active duty funeral detail because he's such a "quiet professional". The guy hasn't even started his advanced course. It's all about his ego, and not supporting the ground maneuver, but I guess he saw Firebirds a couple times too many. I wouldn't trust him with a kite and unfortunately the 64 seems to draw these types.

 

I really think HRC would do well to allow WOFT applicants to apply directly for their intended airframe in the initial accession process and maybe even throw a psych test or two in the 1W flight physical.

 

Most of this stuff gets squashed at the unit. In most units, the loud mouth PIs get noticed quickly, not in a good way. It's easy to be loud amongst WO1s and LTs but in the unit, it is very different.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe all the services flight schools operate the same way, exception is the guard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I correct you even if you're right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This actually seems like a huge problem for the 64 community. I know one student who can't go a day or two without posting on social media about what a badass he is and how 60 and 47 pilots don't begin to stack up. Even went so far as to post about how he was specifically chosen to lead an active duty funeral detail because he's such a "quiet professional". The guy hasn't even started his advanced course. It's all about his ego, and not supporting the ground maneuver, but I guess he saw Firebirds a couple times too many. I wouldn't trust him with a kite and unfortunately the 64 seems to draw these types.

 

The other side of the spectrum seems problematic as well: those who never wanted attack and would likely find any reason they could not to pull the trigger even after establishing positive identification of enemy combatants. A couple selections ago some selectees visibly cried after being assigned Apaches. I can't imagine how they'd handle stress in the air, much less the stress of taking lives.

 

I really think HRC would do well to allow WOFT applicants to apply directly for their intended airframe in the initial accession process and maybe even throw a psych test or two in the 1W flight physical.

I've only been at my first unit going on 6 months now but from my experience so far I think this stereotype is exaggerated. I haven't met one fellow 64 pilot who fits the stereotype that I heard about throughout Flight School. I know those types are out there, however I don't think it's as common as everybody at Rucker makes it out to be.

 

I have respect for every airframe and pilot, however it's funny hearing throughout Flight School how 64 guys are the ones who are full of themselves and talking smack, however I'm always getting flack from from 60 guys trying to put 64s down and work up their airframe. So in short. So in short these type of guys are in every community.

 

I also got tired of hearing fellow students talking serious smack on other airframes after they have a whole year and a half in the army, or 4.5 hours flight time. I don't have a problem with the good fun stuff, just got annoyed with the ones being serious.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I have respect for every airframe and pilot, however it's funny hearing throughout Flight School how 64 guys are the ones who are full of themselves and talking smack, however I'm always getting flack from from 60 guys trying to put 64s down and work up their airframe."

 

 

 

Yeah that's normal. My favorite are the lift guys who strap a gun to their aircraft and think that makes them Killers. I wish I had a dime for every 60 pilot who told me that the Blackhawk was a 'more stable weapons platform than the 64' LOL. Stable or not, without a sight and a fire control computer you ain't gonna hit much. Even the vaunted DAPP and AH-6 can't come close to hitting what an Apache can hit day or night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah that's normal. My favorite are the lift guys who strap a gun to their aircraft and think that makes them Killers. I wish I had a dime for every 60 pilot who told me that the Blackhawk was a 'more stable weapons platform than the 64' LOL. Stable or not, without a sight and a fire control computer you ain't gonna hit much. Even the vaunted DAPP and AH-6 can't come close to hitting what an Apache can hit day or night.

 

But you can't say the "Guns A Go Go weren't some of the coolest aircraft to take flight. Haha
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name="apacheguy" post="172940" timestamp="1447730215 Stable or not, without a sight and a fire control computer you ain't gonna hit much. Even the vaunted DAPP and AH-6 can't come close to hitting what an Apache can hit day or night.



I know you think you're talking from experience, but the AH-6 and DAPs don't need fire control computers because they're using running fire and pulling off the target at 50 and 100 meters respectively. We use them for very close in support, not a stand off weapon system. I'm very familiar with how Apaches work, I've used them as my nightly AWT for close to a decade now. The DAPs are also carrying two of the same chain guns the 64 is carting one of, and almost double the ammo load DA dependent.

My comments on Apache pilots are not necessarily indicative of the guys in the units, but more of the personality types that reveal themselves during the selection process.

It's apples to oranges, but if you really want to talk about Apache vs DAPs, the 64's limitations is in its leadership. I can put a laser on a target and the DAPs and AH-6s make them go away immediately. An Apache crew has to have approval from the JCS relayed before they can pull a trigger.

Mike-
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really is apples to oranges Mike. Most folks don't understand that though which is why I made my comment - I probably should've expounded on what I was trying to say. Your gun guys do make close up shots, and they don't require a FCC or a radar or TADS bucket for that reason. Hell it looks like a lot of fun. But that only works in a very 'friendly' air defense environment where nobody's hosing the sky with a radar controlled ZSU or 2S6 or any of the other ADA the threat possesses. The AH-64 can sit behind a hill and slave the gun to a GPS coordinate and fire on a target without ever exposing the aircraft. Same with rockets and hellfire missiles.

Or use the radar to find a target and shoot through smoke/fog/etc that would keep your guys out of the fight. That makes it a much better aircraft for non-permissive ADA fights. It's also pretty fun but not as much 'in ur face' type of flying.

 

I can't do much about the weapons release approval process, that's just good old army micro-management rearing it's ugly head.

 

I don't just 'think I'm talking from experience' either. When I was in USASOC I worked with your guys a lot and have an in depth knowledge and appreciation of the 160th. I wouldn't task the 160th to destroy a Russian armored unit for the reasons I mentioned above. But to engage 3 guys on a hill with AK's the AH-6 is probably a better option - the 64 is notorious for making you lose situational awareness of close in targets due to the horrible visibility from the cockpit. Smack talking other aircraft is not my intent, I flew a lot of different army airframes and they all had missions they were best suited to, shooting is just what the Apache does better than anything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you can't say the "Guns A Go Go weren't some of the coolest aircraft to take flight. Haha

I agree just a really cool idea. Not to get into how practical and everything debate, but I love watching the few videos and of them out there. Aweful they had such a horrible fate, well most of them anyways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...