HSL on deployment

[John]

My son is soon to complete FRS flying the SH-60B, just wondering what
the future holds when he deploys. Presumably on a cruiser or destroyer.
How do the aviators 'fit' in the ship's responsibilities, typical (if
there is such a thing) deployment lengths, do they get attached to the
same ship all the time or varies depending on need. How many hours of
flight time, frequency of training (SAR, ASW etc) flights?
Just wondering...
Thanks

John

[gonefishn]

"John" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> My son is soon to complete FRS flying the SH-60B, just wondering what
> the future holds when he deploys. Presumably on a cruiser or destroyer.
> How do the aviators 'fit' in the ship's responsibilities, typical (if
> there is such a thing) deployment lengths, do they get attached to the
> same ship all the time or varies depending on need. How many hours of
> flight time, frequency of training (SAR, ASW etc) flights?
> Just wondering...
> Thanks
>
> John

Each one of these questions could take several paragraphs to respond to. I
suggest you identify which squadron he will be reporting to and call the
Public Affairs Officer (PAO) on the phone. If he/she's unwilling to discuss
over an 'open line', then go buy them a cup of coffee and discuss your
concerns in person.

If the PAO is 'clueless' (often the case as it is usually the most junior
Officer) then talk to the Command Master Chief (CMC).

[Gordon]

Six-seven month deployments after 3-4 months of short cruises (duration
1-3 weeks each), most helo aviators are welcomed aboard ship - not
exactly as equals but at least better than most "non-ship's company".
during work-ups, they will have lots of ASW practice and at least
occasional SAR flights but when the cruise itself begins, two likely
scenarios play out - his ship sails with a battlegroup and he is tied
to a carrier, or the ship ends up doing more detached service. if he
is stuck in a BG, then its a lot of ocean searches, identifying little
bonka boats and aging tankers, occasionally working with foreign
navies, etc. detached sailing means the possibility of going into the
Gulf, getting 'involved',.. spending more time in exotic locations.
Having done both kinds of cruise in HSL, nothing beats the
opportunities you get once you leave the carrier far behind.

Your son will love it, trust me. Years from now he will look back on
these deployments as some of the best times of his life.

v/r
Gordon

[[email protected]]

Slightly offtopic... but close to what you mentioned, Gordon, in the
small Carrier Strike Groups (insetad of larger CVBGs of 1980s), there
must be even more probable SH-60Bs from "smallboys" are detached to the
carrier.

Some Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates are gone for foreign navies
(e.g. two of them we have in Poland), Spruance-class destroyers without
AEGIS might be regarded too old to protect the carriers, many Arleigh
Burke-class ships have no helo hangar, and CVWs are smaller than in the
good old days. So there is a need for helos, and not much place for
landing, except the Boat...

I guess it must be much more convenient now to detach some LAMPS helos
to the carrier for maintenance and safety reasons?...

Best regards,
Jacek

[Gordon]

Yeah, but the food on a bird farm is never as good - Eisenhower chow
was dreadful, Midway bland - but on a Tin Can, we always had good
food.. ;)

v/r Gordon

[Michael Fenyes]

As I started to reply to this post feeling that the memories of my HSL
deployment were still fresh in my head, I realized that almost 21 years
have passed since then. So while I feel I can speak with authority on
how it was in the mid-80's, I have no way of knowing how they handle
things now. But the U.S. Navy is an institution that embraces change in
some arenas and refuses to step out of the past in others. With that
being said I feel I can confirm some generalities:

Life on anything-but-a-CV is much better than life on a CV. The food is
better, berthing spaces are better (quieter), fresh water tends to be
more plentiful (no water hours), and a whole host of other things that
are practically impossible on a ship with 6,000 people. Which includes
a close-knit small-town know-everybody atmosphere.

Ask anybody who has sailed on both which one they'd rather stick with
and I'm sure the majority with say "small-boy".

Michael E. Fenyes
HSL-33 '83-'86

[Gordon]

Mike, is it? Always good to meet a former Seasnake.

You still have one kid, Mikoyan, or are you still building more?

All is well in San Diego - I miss your company old friend.

v/r
Gordon

-Seasnakes for ****in' ever!-

[Michael Wise]

In article . com>,
"Gordon" > wrote:

> Yeah, but the food on a bird farm is never as good - Eisenhower chow
> was dreadful, Midway bland - but on a Tin Can, we always had good
> food.. ;)


It may not be as good, but you can get it nearly 24 hours a day. Nothing
like going to the forward galley at 0'dark thirty and loading up your
flight suit leg pockets with a couple of sliders which have been under a
heat lamp for a few hours. ; )


--Mike

[[email protected]]

Gordon wrote:
> Yeah, but the food on a bird farm is never as good - Eisenhower chow
> was dreadful, Midway bland - but on a Tin Can, we always had good
> food.. ;)
>
> v/r Gordon

As far as I remember, once upon a time when Ike and America served as
"floating airfields" for US Army helicopters deployed to SoLant, the
bottom line about the Army people stationed on the carriers was "the
Navy chow is good!"

Just imagine how bad must be the Army food;)

Best regards,
Jacek

[Yeff]

On 18 Apr 2006 08:29:11 -0700, wrote:

> Gordon wrote:
>> Yeah, but the food on a bird farm is never as good - Eisenhower chow
>> was dreadful, Midway bland - but on a Tin Can, we always had good
>> food.. ;)
>>
>> v/r Gordon
>
> As far as I remember, once upon a time when Ike and America served as
> "floating airfields" for US Army helicopters deployed to SoLant, the
> bottom line about the Army people stationed on the carriers was "the
> Navy chow is good!"
>
> Just imagine how bad must be the Army food;)

My Air Force tech school at Goodfellow Air Base ("Goodbuddy Air Patch")
was mixed service for a good portion, and we shared classes and
instructors with Army personnel. They were universal in their praise of
Air Force chow.

On another note, there was a guy at my last duty station who had done a
couple of deployments on OBIS (USS OBSERVATION ISLAND). He claimed that
for the first few weeks out the chow was better than anything he'd had
on an Air Force base, or on any military base for that matter. Once
things were no longer so fresh the quality dropped to average. I'm
betting, though, that 13 years after I last talked with him he's still
praising the ox-tail stew he was served and feel in love with on OBIS.

--

-Jeff B.
zoomie at fastmail dot fm

[Gordon]

Hefe, I thought that place was known as "Fort Goodfellow" due to its
Army heritage..?

yf G

[Yeff]

On 20 Apr 2006 20:26:03 -0700, Gordon wrote:

> Hefe, I thought that place was known as "Fort Goodfellow" due to its
> Army heritage..?

Nope, that was just a joke name put on shirts by Army personnel assigned
to the base just to tweak us Zoomies. Seriously.

It started out as the San Angelo Air Corps Basic Flying Training School
in 1940, redesignated as Goodfellow Field in 1941. After the
establishment of the US Air Force in 1947 it was redesignated Goodfellow
Air Force Base in 1948. It was a nice place to be stationed for awhile
back in 1984.

<http://www.goodfellow.af.mil/Training_Wing/History/ho/docs/chrongdf.htm>

--

-Jeff B.
zoomie at fastmail dot fm

[Gordon]

That's what I get for listening to my sister - a Zoomie linguist
Officer! :))

BTW, you were there at the same time she was.

G