Kevin Brooks wrote:

"Guy Alcala" wrote in message
. ..
Kevin Brooks wrote:

"Guy Alcala" wrote in message

snip

The plan appears to be to purchase new aircraft to replace both the OH's
*and* the Hueys (may not be the same aircraft, obviously), and the
additional Blackhawk order is not going to impinge upon those plans
(note
the use of "also", as in "in addition to").

The tranxript and slides appear to be somewhat contradictory. One of the
slides shows the
proposed TO&E for AC/RC Multi-function Aviation Brigades, NG Brigades, and
brigades for the
Light divisions. The NG brigade lists the scout battalion as follows: 3
x 8 OH (LUH), which
to me implies that they're the same a/c. This is the a/c for which the
303 applies. At the
same time it lists 3 x 10 UH companies for the assault battalion, and the
UH definitely seems
to be the UH-60, as it is in the AC/Reserve components, while the OH for
the attack battalions
in the Light Divisions (the 368) appears to be the same a/c as that for
the NG (but armed).
OTOH, it may not be. The AC/RC brigades don't show a scout battalion at
all, the Block III
AH-64s apparently taking on this role. Maybe the slide is incorrect to
make this distinction,
but then there's the following exchange in the transcript:

Look at the timeline slide--it shows the LUH and OH programs as being
separate and distinct.

Yes, it does, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're different airframes (although I think
they probably will be, if they really want a Huey-sized LUH).

The slide you are referring to is confusing as all
get out--what the hell is "AER"? And where are the non-divisional units?
What about the DIV CAV SQDN; does it retain any helos? Whoever the guy was
who prepared this set of briefing slides needs to be divested of his
"PowerPoint Ranger" tab immediately!

I'll go along with that;-)

snip

The Guard Hueys are going away, no question, to be replaced by the new
LUH, but per the slide
that will serve as the Guard's OH.

Well, not so sure about that. That slide, and the way it does not
necessarily agree with the later slide, is kind of questionable in terms of
its detail.

I agree, but the "Divest" following the Huey (and also the OH-58) on the later slide seems
pretty definite.

snip

But the 6 Guard brigades are getting at least 30 and maybe
38 Blackhawks each as well as the 24 OH (LUH). The new recon helos for
the LDs are apparently
going to be a new design entirely.

That is not adding up either. I have not heard anything yet about drawing
the Guard division strength down that far (they are only showing two heavy
divs and (presumably) one light div in the ARNG). There are eight divisions
in the ARNG right now, and the plan was to redesignate two of them as CS/CSS
unit sources. That leaves six, of which one is a light division. See the
disconnect on the slide?

Oh, there are lots of those. I only count 9 AC divs, so what happened to the other? I assume
that the 82nd is one of the LDs, the 25th another, so who's the third? Would that be the 10th
Mountain, the 2nd or? Presumably not the 101st, as they have AH-64s. And the other thing I
find curious is the change from assault helo battalions (UH-60s) of 2 companies of 15 a/c, to 3
of 10. The reasoning behind the 15 a/c company was that assuming 80% serviceability (12 a/c),
an assault helo company would have enough seats (@11 ea.) to move a complete infantry company
in one wave. With the new organization and assuming the same 80% serviceable rate, they're
going to have to use 1.5 companies for the same lift, which seems unnecessarily complex. I
haven't heard of any major changes in the Infantry Co. TO&E (it would have to get considerably
smaller), so I'm puzzled by the rationale.


A 412 seems much too big, noisy and lacking in maneuverability to make a
good OH, and too close
to the UH-60 in capability to be worth buying as a utility helo, so what
would be its job?

Cheaper unit cost than the UH-60 plus cheaper operating cost, with a
somewhat reduced payload and range. The ARNG needs LUH's for the homeland
defense role, especially if/when their UH-60 elements are deployed
elsewhere. Disaster response, MEDEVAC, terrorist incident response, to
include mobility support for the NBC response teams springing up around the
country, customs/law enforcement support, firefighting support with bambi
buckets--a myriad of uses. Nothing says that the 412 can't serve the same
role as the current OH-58's do in the drug interdiction recon role, though a
ligheter and even less costly operating aircraft might be better in that
role. And again, if you look at that later slide, the apparent requirement
is for two different platforms--one LUH and one OH. I fully expect some of
the "UH" units on the ARNG side to be equipped with "LUH".

I've got to wonder how much an AB-139 would go for. It's probably more expensive than a 412 up
front, but a lot newer design and presumably far better at O&M, even given updates to the 412.
But I consider it a bit ridiculous to call any helo that weighs over 10,000 lb. + gross,
"light". Bell used to draw the "light" line at 6,500 lb., up to 10,000 lb. was intermediate,
up to 15,000 lb. (IIRR) was medium, and anything over that was heavy.

snip

I doubt the Army wants to blow
any
more money than it has to on aircraft that it can't, or would prefer
not
to,
integrate into its warfighting plans across the board; if you bought
only
UH-60's, then the tendancy would be to identify them with
contingency
plan
force development requirements. They'd be a bit less likely to want
to
integrate a low density platform like the 412 would be. But hey, its
early--who knows?

At least how I understand it, they're not willing to do that,

That is not what AvLeak is saying.

I know, but that assumes they understand the briefing and slides any
better than I do;-)

I don't know how much credibility we can put in these slides, or for that
matter in some of the ridiculous verbage in the transcript--I can just see
junior/midgrade staff weenies lstening to their bosses in those confusing
exchanges cringing and saying to themselves, "No, you idiot! That is NOT
what that means!"

LOL. Yes, I could definitely see that, having listened to Generals (retired and serving) blow
the details that any bright kid could straighten them out on. I often wonder why the TV
networks don't put some 12-year-old modeler on staff during wars, just to correct the errors
made by the 'expert' commentators. To be fair, though, such details are generally pretty far
below their paygrade -- after all, that's why they _Have_ staffs, to deal with the nuts and
bolts.

snip

I
doubt the amount of training required to prepare those Huey wrench
turners
for a platform like the 412 is any different from what is required to
prepare them for the UH-60, and unlike the AC side, those wrench turners
often spend their entire career in the same unit, so turnover won't be
as
big an issue. Crew training is not likely to be a major issue,
either--the
ARNG already manages C-23 training, just as the ANG is heavily involved
in
pilot training for the F-16 and F-15. Doing an in-house qualification
course
at either or both the eastern or western ARNG aviation training sites
(AZ
and PA, IIRC) would be no biggie as they have run crew training programs
for
years now on Cobras, Chinooks, and even Blackhawks and Apaches.

snip

If the idea is to neck down the the minimum number of systems, why even
put up with the hassle
of the extra pipeline?

Guy, face it, even the slide show is kind of clear in that a new line of
utility helos is coming.

I agree, the question in my mind is are they going to be "light" enough to also be reasonable
OH a/c, or are they really going to be two separate airframes. We'll just have to see what the
LUH RFP asks for in terms of weight and capacity.

Guy