SCRIMP

http://www.af.mil/news/video/index.asp I'd like to the tell the "I pretend I am in a friendlier, more courteous world" guy to ###### Off. I am embarrassed.

1: What are the actual requirements to PCS from the HH-60 to T-6 PIT and than Instructor? 2: Do the definitions of total time in the v1 take precedence over SARMS products? 3: How do other communities define total time? 4: Has anyone heard of a helicopter guy switching airframes after a T-6 instructor gig? For instance, could a guy go from the 60 to the T-6 to the C-17, etc? There are a lot of fundamental problems in this scenario. We are waiting to hear back from ACC, but I am trying to find out some "outside the box" information.

All, I have a somewhat unique question for the board. One of my guys is transitioning from the HH-60 to a T-6 instructor gig. The problem begins with the our schoolhouse. We graduate the school house as an 11-H3E, which is an aircraft commander. When we get to our units, the standard has been an administrative downgrade to a mission co-pilot/first pilot. The problem is that there is really no definition of a first pilot in our 11-2HH60 v1/2/3. The way it is used is that a guy fresh from the school house can act as aircraft commander for non-combat sorties, i.e. he can take it cross-country. This is the first of many problems. The second problem is in a table established in our 11-2HH60 v1. The table (as best as I can tell) is a throwback to when we graduated the schoolhouse as co-pilots. This table lists total time required for upgrade to Mission Pilot (combat aircraft commander) is: 400hrs total time 150hrs HH-60 time. There are also notes associated with it: NOTES: 1. Total flying time must be achieved prior to certification as an AC. HH-60G time does not include other time. For upgrade purpose, any H-60 variant counts toward HH-60 time. 2. Must have a minimum of 100 hours total NVG time prior to certification as a night mission AC. 3. Applies to pilots (FP) not previously helicopter qualified on initial upgrade to mission AC. 4. Applies to FP, previously qualified in other helicopter MDSs. 5. This table not applicable for AETC. 6. Waivers to these totals will be IAW paragraph 1.12. of this instruction. This brings me to my final question. What is the definition of total time? The 11-2HH60 v1 defines total time as: Total Flying Time—Total time for all aircraft flown in military service to include student time. Total flying time accumulated for upgrade purposes must be in the aircrew member's current crew position (i.e., pilot, flight engineer, aerial gunner). It also defines HH-60 time (I'm guessing by calling it PAA): Primary Aircraft Authorization (PAA)—Aircraft authorized to a unit for performance of its operational mission. The primary authorization forms the basis for the allocation of operating resources to include manpower, support equipment and flying hour funding (Joint Publication 1- 02). This term also implies, for the purposes of this instruction, to the particular MDS aircraft assigned to an individual's flying unit. PAA time refers to hours flown in unit assigned MDS aircraft (e.g. HH-60). PAA hours are used to establish minimum flying hour requirements for upgrade to aircraft commander, instructor and flight examiner. For upgrade, PAA time includes all categories of flight time logged with the exception of ―other‖ and ―student‖ time. So in the end, my overall question is, what is required for a guy to get a T-6 instructor job? Do the definitions of total time in the v1 take precedence over SARMS products? How do other communities define total time? What are the no-kidding requirements for a transfer to T-6 instructor? To me, total time is the essence of "air-sense" and begins with the very first T-6 ride. What do you guys think? 100th Question of the night: Has anyone heard of a helicopter guy switching airframes after a T-6 instructor gig? For instance, could a guy go from the 60 to the T-6 to the C-17, etc?

That shit is hillarious!

Try not to pass too much judgement from your ivory tower.

The Merlin (AW101) is pretty limited at the lower ends of an approach. They evidentally can't be more than X number of degrees nose high below X feet. I know that doesn't help a whole lot, but I know that it was pretty limited. Very long drawn out approaches for the end game. It doesn't sound nearly as agile as the 60. I hear they don't have a great MX rate either. They are supposed to be great to fly though.

I am putting together a CONOP for ACC. It is at the group level awaiting sigs, but has already been verbally approved by the A/3TV. The 1st Helo squadron at Andrews has a program as well that I used as a base.

I may have missed it, but what is the new SOS (8 week) class like? What should I expect? Looks like I am going to the January class.

Partied like a rockstar at a wedding this last weekend, and I was able to have some Sam Adams Utopias. For something that costs between $300-600 a bottle, I would have thought it would have tasted better. It was more along the lines of prune juice. I will stick to my Lonestar and Shiner.

Are there any restrictions for flying over the boneyard?

Great info! I appreciate all of the help.

100 questions....GO: 1) How can I find out if ACC has approved the iPad? 2) How are you getting around the power issue (for those of us that do not have a power outlet)? 3) How are you updating it without plugging it in to the AF Network? 4) If you use an optional GPS (bad elf, etc) can you download WX updates, new maps, etc? 5) How are you protecting them from damage? 6) How can I find out how much it would save our squad/group/AF to stop getting paper products from NGA? 7) What other things are you using it for (flight planning, PUB Reader, joining the mile high club by yourself while your CO is asleep, etc)? Any other info is much appreciated!

While this is a pretty incredible event, the Pedros are doing missions everyday that 90% (minus some CAF dudes and our EOD bros) of the AF would call insane. We continue to do this with busted ass equipment. If you pay close attention to the article, they don't fly with armor in their AO for several reasons. According to this article (which I think is being generous)... http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2011/08/air-force-pave-hawks-keep-in-air-082011w/ …we are at a 57% mission capable rate. You can guarantee that 99% of that 57% is in the deployed environment. This article, the MX availability during our most recent ORE, the insane cracks all along the helo, the blood and bullet holes should send some pen flares up Congressional asses. I don't know what it is going to take to get us some new iron, but something is going to give pretty soon....and unfortunately I would bet on people's lives. Good on the dudes in this article. They have balls beyond measure. It is a tough for all involved bringing home men under flags. Hopefully we can continue to set the bar high and highlight the need for drastic improvement/rapid replacement of our Rescue Helicopters. Cheers to the MFCEOs of Rescue/Red-headed step child of the AF! Keep it up!! PS. Why can't the tattoo guy show up when I am out there?

Has there ever been a helicopter transfer to the U-2?

The Merlin seems like a great aircraft, but after talking with people that actually fly it I have definite concerns with its tactical capabilities. I hope they ask us...and I hope that they get it figured out sooner rather than later.

I personally think CC has its own place. They know better than to actually fly with us in combat (very often), but they did set up our helos with some pretty nice cameras. I felt they did a very good job capturing the lives we saved this last summer. I have no issues with them. I personally think CC is needed. They know better than to actually fly with us in combat (very often), but they did set up our helos with some pretty nice cameras. I felt they did a very good job capturing the lives we saved this last summer. They documented the best and the worst of times in the back of our helicopter. I have no issues with them.

Maybe this is just a fixed wing thing...but I know I am damn proud of the missions I have done in OEF. If we made a 100(some dudes have 300-400 missions as co-pilots) patch I would wear it proudly everyday. Maybe the perspective is a little bit different down low. Personally, I have seen the work that some of you CAS guys do....and I would be proud of that as well. Even if you don't shoot every time...or you do the ISR stuff...I know that you guys have made a difference for us as well a lot of sweaties on the ground. Shit can get repetative for sure...but a lot of people depend on y'all when they are having the worst day of their life. Just my .02. Maybe I am too green to talk...

These things we do that others may live... To the dead, to the dying, to the ones still fighting. Him Him

I was pretty excited to see some camels! Gotta love Christmas in unknown locations!

Here are a few taken of us by PA on the last trip we took.

To our Brothers.

The af.mil article I found on it today mentions only 90 million being allocated for the M-model. I may have not carried my one correctly, but I do not think that 90mil will buy 112 aircraft...maybe closer to 6ish. http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123148160 Maybe this article is just a little out of date but to me the numbers do not match up.

I heard there was a huey crash at Rucker today...any info?

We just had a 135 dude go through...you still go through the 23d. You still fly the Huey. Life is still good. As far as a RWQ guy I am not sure about your civi tickets...I know we get both a inst and comm helo/fixed tickets. Hope this helps...PM me with any more questions. There is a Helo Dunker here at Rucker that you will most likely go through if you need to redo it.

As it turns out I go through women like some people on here go through crayons, but to answer your questions... 1) I have loved every bit of the Nightrod. I have owned it since August I believe and I have almost 3000 miles on it. I have taken quite a few 2.5 hour rides and ride it to work just about everyday...you have got to love the weather in the south. As far as comfort, I would say it is comfortable...it is smooth, but I would think they are several other models out there that are more comfortable. I don't have a problem with it what so ever...flying the Huey hurts my back way more than the bike does. 2) That is awesome that she wants to ride with you. If she wants to ride a Harley there are a lot of options in the sportster world...have you looked at the nightster? Pretty sharp and it would match a nightrod pretty well. Sits a little lower for her as well. There are also a lot of other options from yamaha, etc. that she could like...and may be a cheaper option in case she drops it or something...you know women and their smaller brains...its science. J/k. 3) Again, there are plenty of options regarding other bikes...I don't think the Suzuki rides are that much cheaper, but I may be thinking of Victory bikes. Head out to the dealerships and look around and find what you really like. 4) I don't remember what this question was so I will just add some more opinions...I would always start with ebay and then looking at stuff like motorcycle trader. I was able to save almost 4000 over what the local HD dealership was going to sell the bike for because I looked online and found another HD dealership in Nashville that was selling a nicer, still brand new model for almost 4000 cheaper. So definitely do your shopping...there is nothing wrong with buying a slightly used one off of ebay either...Dude in my class here at Rucker bought a Nightster off of ebay and it is in perfect condition...only problem he ran into was the cheaper shipping company he used took forever to get it to him. Hope this helps...if you have any more questions let me know!