This has to be one of the more foolish decisions made recently. Lack of low level and NVG experience aside, it will be the first time they've seen a landing area smaller than a relatively sterile 5,000ft+ runway. It'll be especially great coupled with the new Kirtland exclusive syllabus that seems to take much of the New River phase (including contact) and moves it into sim. Nothing like having your first dusty/restricted/slope landing, all while trying to judge winds and recon the site, be in a nearly $100 million aircraft. That is assuming you managed to find one that wasn't broken or stuck PL'd in a LZ for 10+ days.
I'd be really interested in hearing the supposed logic behind the change. Would it be incorrect to assume it was highly political and predominately featured FW leadership in the process? Yes, they've been taking fixed wing transition guys for years, but they've mostly been operational before and have quite a bit of experience. The Rucker leadership was very vocally opposed to this decision when it was initially brought up a year or so ago, after they started dropping to T-1's. The only stated reason I heard about a year ago, albeit in a roundabout manner, was "helicopter pilot's lack of familiarity with the enroute structure." Yeah... because that's what gets you killed when much of your mission involves regularly flying below 200' AGL, at night, on NVG's, with TF/TA, landing to unsurveyed LZ's in remote areas. It seems as if nearly all the 22 class A's regardless of branch, have been in the terminal area. Who am I kidding though, I'm sure they'd have been prevented if only the crews had more experience filling out DD-175's.
All that being said... I'm sure it'll be a popular drop out of T-1's/T-38's and they'll end up with some quality studs in the pipeline who'll adapt well, but that still doesn't make this decision any less idiotic or help prepare them any better.