Should Each Component Have Its Own AH?

[There She Goes]

RN = 1 Squadron for the booties.
RAF = 1 Squadron to assist the Air Campaign/COMAOs.
DSF = Sssh!
Army have the remaining aircraft to support the Land Component.

No more substantial tank battle on the North West German Plain, therefore more likely to be smaller detachments, specialisation will allow the customer intimate knowledge of the capability (and save the inevitable training bill).

Will Jointery prevail and best practice win or is the idea a load of old tosh?



:confused:

[BlueEagle]

Back in the 1960s I was a member on an Air Troop, we were part of a military unit, (a Divisional Engineer Regiment in my case), two helicopters, one FFR Landrover and a bedford 3 ton truck, G1098 stores and all the usual stuff. For aviation purposes we were overseen by the Divisional AAC Flight and HQ AAC Detmold but all our tasking was done from within the regiment. There were many small packets like ours around, not attached to but a part of the regiment. They were deemed to be inefficient and all were eventually, (late 1960s), merged into AAC squadrons.

The USA had tried the unit flight concept but found it unworkable. When the British Army requested finance to form more squadrons it was turned down so they went for the unit flight option and hey presto! finance was approved.

Once the aircraft had been delivered the flights were disbanded and squadrons formed!

Have things changed sufficiently in forty years to make the unit flight viable again?

[BlueWolf]

The requirements of structure, make up, purpose, equipment, and personnel components, of any deployed unit, may vary according to prevailing circumstances.

Marine Corps came about because Navies recognised that they required a land deployable capability.

Air Forces came about because a new technology brought with it new opportunities and new threats.

IMHO, defence force structures which make allowance for the fluid nature of political, economic, technological, strategic or tactical environments, are inherently better capable of delivering success or victory than are those which rely on the dogma, mindsets, bureacracies and predjudices of bygone eras, or those which may lack foresight or flexibility.

I don't think it's a load of old tosh
:)

[BEagle]

A pity that The Woman doesn't share your enlightened views, BlueWolf!


.

[SALAD DODGER]

I could not believe the huge logistic chain and the ammount of kit the Americans put into the Gulf to support the Apache Longbow. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I doubt the British military could operate its Apache without using a large percentage of the RAF SH and AT fleet and AAC Mk 9 's in support acting as caddies for its kit and huge ground support element. I heard that it would take up ALL the RAF Suppot helli assets if we were to operate all of our Apache in theatre in the same way as the Americans.

I just cant see how spreading them about is going to help matters as you are still going to require a reasonably large support element that we just cant offer and a very complicated logistics chain.

[There She Goes]

Some good points.....

Why did I post on AH when this subject has been 'kicked around' PPRUNE on many an occasion - usually ending up in a crab v pongo weeing contest.

Well...without pre-judging the official post op reports, it appears that the rotary units like 847 and SF squadrons performed significantly better than those 'lumped together' under 1 Div.


Unfortunately, from this end of the telescope it looks as those sqdofns in 16 Air Assault Bde were ill prepared (lack currency/tactical comptency/real peacetime training), lacked the kit (e.g. the only rotary aircraft in theatre without chaff and flare) and were a seperate entity to the unit/formation that they were there to support.

In contrast, the joint/multi national arena of the the Chinnies, Sea Kings, Lynx, (as well as the USMC assets)etc were able to operate as a team because of their close knit, specialised world (and yes, lets admit it, the Chinook is now an essential amphibious capability) which resulted in 3 Cdo Bde integrating all of the air assets from the outset in their plans and not as an after thought/reserve.

With AH just about to hit the streets and some pretty serious decisions to be made in the future, I return to the same question everytime - why does the AAC end up being the 'poor relation' in JHC? 847 NAS are specilaised and by all accounts do a very good job in the same aircraft that the AAC have. The SF boys do the same. So why is it that the rest of the AAC rarely gets invited to go on Ops (remember the Ploce debacle, Macaedonia, Kosovo, Sierra Leone - all saw 16 Bde deploy without the AAC (ignoring follow on forces post ceasation of hostilities). And yet if the hooligans go - most times the SF boys will go with them (I do say 'most') and the same goes with 3 Cdo Bde - 847 will always invariably go.

AH will make a huge contribution to the next conflict, but not if 'kept as a reserve' because people haven't trained with it, familiar with its MO and know what its capabilities (and limitations) are.

Therefore, AH on your doorstep, integrated from the outset etc etc. As to efficient logistics, don't penny packet them etc - valid, but what about somewhere like Odiham or Yeovilton. And before you say it is a crab trying to take over the world - nope I am happy with my aircraft thanks. But - both locations are not too far away from Middle Wallop for ES (Air) support, Sim, and SPTA, Royal Marine country, JSFAW etc etc. From day one the customer/commander on the ground regularly sees, operates and pi$$es it up with the AH crews.

From a training point of view, the specialist skills/tactics that do not come over night (remember the Chinnie that lost its back wheels landing on Ocean) will be retained and more to the point regularly practiced/rehearsed with the customer that will one day want AH at the rush. The manning plot to keep an effective double earmarked squadron properly trained to an R1 state would be hard work if such an organisation isn't specialised. Just as you get to grips with a specialised environment and are actually of use, you roulement/rotate to another squadron that isn't specialised - how does that work?

As an outsider I would hate to see this 'awesome' capability left on the sidelines when it could help us all out (cross component (remember Task Force Normandy acting as the trip wire for the GW 1 Air Campaign)....not to allow the AAC to try and recover some of their professional esteem/credability, but more importantly benefit the whole Defence community. Lets be honest, we are all suffering the enourmous cost of the programme. Its here, it ain't going back to Mr Boeing for a refund, there are no Whiskey Cobras coming for 847 NAS, TOW will go out of service - lets make something of this capability.

Aren't happy hours great! :ooh: :uhoh: :yuk: :{ :zzz: :ouch:

[mutleyfour]

Each component have its own!

There's not a logical reason for that as far as I can see. JHC is a tri service organisation that can task the right aircraft for the right job whenever and wherever.

One might argue that the Army should have a couple of squadrons of hercules attached to 16 AA bde, oh and a tornado sqn to protect them etc etc.

Im sure that when the AH darkens our doorstep it will be used extensively for all such events as deemed necessary. Too many people on this site want it to run before it can walk. To make it tri service would reduce that walk to a crawl.

[Dunhovrin]

Nothing valid to say just a smartarze remark:

they say the only 2 things visible from space with the naked eye are the Great Wall of China and an AAC regiment in the field.

Err I'll get me coat.


Blue Wolf - an excellent post which sadly fails to take into account the couter-productive effect such efficient use with have on the careers of dogmatic, fixed-midset bureacrats who are only bothered about their next 'pip' and thus subscribe to the Flatutes Veritus (sp?) philosophy described elsewhere in Prune

[mutleyfour]

they say the only 2 things visible from space with the naked eye are the Great Wall of China and an AAC regiment in the field.

Hey Dunhoverin

Whose "they", could it be the "crew duty time"mob chatting over a few beers in the nearest 5 star hotel?


Should read; the great wall of China and your Ego!

[There She Goes]

Mutley - I have just surfaced from my pit with an awful hangover from last night, but mate that was banter - honest, nothing sinister - just taking the Mick.

There are some good points coming out here - not all I subscribe to, but constructive argument......as to hotels, white socks, crew duty time etc.....surely not....the next thing you will be saying is that the Navy are gay and wear flares!

Back on to the subject, Mutely.....I agree you guys should not not bite off too much at once with the AH, but I put it to you that this walk, crawl, run strategy that you and the AAC is potentially running out of time. Correct me if I am wrong but El Presidente expects this shiney new toy next year, with a full toy box only 6 months later. Tell the guy on the ground that AH is only at the crawl stage when he is needing its firepower to get him/those under his command out of a tight spot.

Just about to get back on it.....this headache is hurting me! Any suggestions, bloody Mary or is that too ponsy? :D

[mutleyfour]

Why single me out for the "its only banter" type of thread. What do you think my answers are? perhaps you might want to re-read them once you've got over that hangover.

[Magic Mushroom]

Now ladies...we don't want any ripped skirts or torn blouses here!!

For an excellent debate on the Apache, check out the following:


http://www.arrse.co.uk/cgi-bin/yabb1/YaBB.pl?board=fm_arm_aac

Regards,
M2

[There She Goes]

M2,

Thanks - it looks as though people are considering the issues. Interesting to see that some of the brown jobs also believe that specialisation is probably the best way to go given the limited number of aircraft and resources.

I am surprised that across all 3 Services (and branching into the International arena) that there has not been more comment on this capability in comparison to Typhoon or the future tanker. It was good to see your comments M2. Would you say that they reflect your capability in general (i.e. is everyone in the Magic world thinking outside of the AD/PI profile - or is it just your voice in the crewroom?)

Either this subject has been done to death on PPRUNE, no one really cares what happens, the Army have got it all sorted, or just waiting for the Army to screw up their programme and be there to catch the capability (pessimists view I know).

What is the latest with AH going to sea and when/how this capability is going to be produced, manned, trained and resourced? Is it true that it will always need a surface for running take offs and hard cover (i.e. road/industrial complex)?

I am genuinely interested in the aircraft in a sad spotter kind of way, but more importantly I think I have an idea of what it is about to bring to the party and therefore want to know what it can do for me and also how I can help it. I echo M2's request as to where the other Services can find out about AH on the shop floor (in the weeds rather than high fluting 'big hands, big map' 20 years time policy stuff - i.e. the here and now)?

Any ideas or contacts for a day out?

[Magic Mushroom]

TSG,
Glad that you found the link useful. ARRSE has some excellent stuff on it (as long as people don't bite at the Crab crunching!). However, I get the impression that there is little love lost between the ARRSE and PPRuNe management, so mind that you don't get barred!!

Regards your question as to whether us in the E-3D world have moved on from AD: That is a most resounding YES!!! In almost every conflict that we've been involved in, BH, Kosovo, Afghanistan and most recently Iraq, we've been used mostly in an ABCCC role, with control of DCA pretty much secondary. The biggest problem for us is that even official RAF doctrine still lists us as a defensive ac (check out the RAF website!). We are gradually overcoming such cold-war thinking, but many still consider us as an airborne CRC. However, the entire E-3D force is focused on modern ops and the future for us looks very bright indeed.

As far as AH goes, I think that the Army have got it right. Given that it's such a quantum leap in capability for them, they are right to take things slowly. And if I think that we've got problems overcoming Cold War thinking regarding my own type in the RAF, the AAC have got a MASSIVE problem in getting over the entrenched mindsets about Aviation that exist in some arms of the Army. I have little doubt that the AAC can fly and operate AH and that (as long as they get sufficient black boxes), the REME can keep them flying. But the biggest challenge to the AH being a success is the wider Army and their views on how AH should be employed.

Regards,
M2

[mutleyfour]

TSG

Just a quickie, it was out to sea last week! A couple of miles too. So things are moving on!