In a disappointing but utterly predictable twist, we are again trading barbs about RAAF vs Army Aviation.
Service is irrelevant. The same AW regs apply to all three services; the same basic training, the same underpinning skills and knowledge, the same document management system, the same sustainment organisation, and the same HQ when deployed. CAF is the AW authority, and CA (and CN) answers to him a minimum of once a year for each type at an AW Board. DMO manages sustainment for all three services.
There is no doubt that 5, 9 and 35 Sqn did great things with their RW assets. We should be able to accept that A, B, C, 161, 162 , and 171 Sqn are similarly professional and do a job of which we can be similarly proud. Likewise 816, 817, 808 and 723 Sqns.
Accusing Army of maintaining and flying helos 'like trucks' is baseless and inaccurate. Likewise, accusing RAAF crews of staying in hotels and not caring about tactical outcomes is childish and inaccurate.
A bit of mutual respect might be in order.