C-27J Spartan Training Info

[alwyn2d]

Now, that the ANG has the C-27J mission in total, where is the C-27J School House? I have no idea if the AF senior leadership truly wanted this mission, but it's great in receiving new airframes regardless of size. Nice decision on the part of Sec Def Gates, who made it possible. He cut the legs from under the Army on this one.

Since the AF likes to play down and dirty by playing Army with new PT standards and JET/ILO assignments nowadays, why not transfer all of the Army's fixed wing aircraft to the AF as well. That will be an additional 250-275 airframes. Possibly another 800-900 pilot positions. Let the Army specialize in helos, that's their bread and butter anyway. If the Army pilots want tactical fixed wing aircraft, join the Air Force if they can meet AF standards. The AF need all the fixed wing airframes they can get their hands on, as our force structure is dwindling on a daily basis.

http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123175593

Edited November 8, 2009 by alwyn2d

[selfc23fe]

KWRB

[brock]

The Army Chief of Staff made this decision not the Sec Def. The Army is a little busy right now and would not be able to man the MC-12 and C-27 so the C-27 mission went to the ANG.

The Army guard is in desperate need of the C-27 and I see more making it to the ARNG.

I think you'll see the Army fixed wing fleet move to the Air Force when the Air Force gives up all of its rotary wing assets. They are already trying to pilfer the Army med mission in OEF so why not just transfer those assets to the Army. Never going to happen on either side.

[TarHeelPilot]

The Air Force isn't able to man the MC-12, either! See 3% of rated staff billets filled for proof.

[kbronc]

KWRB

Source?

[selfc23fe]

Source?

I graduated from it.

[StoleIt]

I think you'll see the Army fixed wing fleet move to the Air Force when the Air Force gives up all of its rotary wing assets. They are already trying to pilfer the Army med mission in OEF so why not just transfer those assets to the Army. Never going to happen on either side.

The AF can't give up CSAR. You think the Army is gonna lift USAF PJ's behind lines to pick up air crew?

[Guest Hueypilot812]

Now, that the ANG has the C-27J mission in total, where is the C-27J School House?

I have no idea, but seeing as though MD will be the first ANG unit with them, it might wind up there. Who knows.

I have no idea if the AF senior leadership truly wanted this mission, but it's great in receiving new airframes regardless of size.

Yes, it is nice to receive new airframes, but no, the USAF leadership didn't really want this mission. They DID, however, want to prevent the Army from being in control of a fixed-wing flying program. Regarding the tactical airlift, look at how the USAF leadership employs the tac airlifters it has now. Landing in the dirt isn't quite as common as it should be, and airdrops could be more frequent. But the USAF leadership doesn't want to risk bending airplanes to help out the Army, which is why the Army turned to civilian operators like Blackwater for many airdrop/LZ missions. 98% of all tac airlift missions in theater begin and end on a 10,000'+ paved runway.

Nice decision on the part of Sec Def Gates, who made it possible. He cut the legs from under the Army on this one.

It has more to do with budgets and manning, and less to do with Gates coming to the USAF's defense. Honestly, Gates has kept the C-27 alive because once the Army backed out due to funding, I can guarantee you the USAF senior leadership would have loved to have just killed the entire program.

Let the Army specialize in helos, that's their bread and butter anyway

It's only their bread and butter because of public law. Look at the Navy and Marines...both have complete FW and RW assets. Only the Army and AF argue and fight over this nonsense. And honestly, do you REALLY think that AF senior leadership would do any better at the RW mission? The Army has helos because they are organic and necessary components of their force structure. The Army couldn't function the way it does without having their own aviation assets.

why not transfer all of the Army's fixed wing aircraft to the AF as well.

What's your reasoning for this? The Army has certain fixed-wing assets because the USAF can't or won't fill those mission needs, such as battlefield ISR, OSA requirements and in this case, "real" tactical airlift. The Army has C-23 Sherpas that they have utilized to the max. Those airplanes flew the missions that couldn't or wouldn't get fulfilled through AFCENT. The USAF has traditionally been focused on the strategic level...it has always regarded missions like COIN, tac airlift and other niche missions as irritations.

Your suggestion sounds fine on paper, but in reality, if the Army sent its C-12s, C-23s and RC-12s to the USAF, Big Blue would likely retire most if not all of those airframes and just do away with the mission so it could allocate funds somewhere else that it deems higher priority...leaving the Army short.

If the Army pilots want tactical fixed wing aircraft, join the Air Force if they can meet AF standards.

That's pretty f'king retarded to say something like that. "if they can meet AF standards"? I'm sure you, as a USAF pilot, could easily go jump in an Army helo and fly the hell out of it, right? Because after all, Army pilots are a step above cave men, correct? I'd be willing to bet that you would be challenged to learn how to fly helicopters and employ them in the manner the Army does.

On second thought, maybe you feel Army aviators aren't as savvy as USAF pilots because they lack the micromanaged volumes of regulations the USAF has to govern flying operations. The Army operates much like the Navy does...it's a big boy program...here are a few basic rules and regs, the rest is up to you to apply common sense...f'k up and we'll hammer your nuts. Not like the USAF where every little move you make in the cockpit has a rule attached to it.

I'm sure the Army aviators on here are reading that quote wondering if you'd be able to "meet Army standards".

Edited November 8, 2009 by Hueypilot812

[Bergy]

Heard through the grapevine (i.e. from a member of the unit), that Mansfield, Ohio was selected for the -27 school house. Could be bad info...just what I heard.

[Guest Adam West]

Heard through the grapevine (i.e. from a member of the unit), that Mansfield, Ohio was selected for the -27 school house. Could be bad info...just what I heard.

Mansfield was initially selected for the FTU, but the decision was rescinded due to lack of transparency in the selection process. Six bases will receive the 27J, and everyone is still on the table for hosting the schoolhouse. Rumor is that Baltimore and Mansfield are top options for the FTU due to their experience in similar type airframes and mission, but the decision has not been made yet.

[brock]

The AF can't give up CSAR. You think the Army is gonna lift USAF PJ's behind lines to pick up air crew?

You might want to do you home work. Look at who went in to get crews during Desert Storm. I just returned from OEF , and Army medevac was sent to pic up a downed AF crew. Sadly the crew ( AF) did not survive.

I was tasked to fly a late night mission and turned it down due to weather and the condition of the patient. The AF said they could do it and destroyed an aircraft after running it into the side of a hill. Experience?

In the end the mission will probably be shared. The 160th has the most experienced helo bubbas in the DOD hands down. You aren't going to be a FMQ or flight lead over there unless you have some serious experience. Last time I checked the AF sends it guys straight to CSAR units right out of the 60 course. How much experience do those guys have? So to answer your question, yes the Army has and will continue to fly those missions.

[StoleIt]

You might want to do you home work. Look at who went in to get crews during Desert Storm. I just returned from OEF , and Army medevac was sent to pic up a downed AF crew. Sadly the crew ( AF) did not survive.

I was tasked to fly a late night mission and turned it down due to weather and the condition of the patient. The AF said they could do it and destroyed an aircraft after running it into the side of a hill. Experience?

In the end the mission will probably be shared. The 160th has the most experienced helo bubbas in the DOD hands down. You aren't going to be a FMQ or flight lead over there unless you have some serious experience. Last time I checked the AF sends it guys straight to CSAR units right out of the 60 course. How much experience do those guys have? So to answer your question, yes the Army has and will continue to fly those missions.

Should have been more specific, but what about in an area where the Army isn't operating? OIF and OEF seem like exceptions since the Army is using MedAvac so often. What if the army wasn't there? At least if it's in house and we have another "Watch" type mission we can order a CSAR unit to be there in case things go south. I don't remember if the Army had any MedAvac units sitting around during Northern/Southern Watch in case something went downhill (maybe they did).

[Guest Hueypilot812]

Standard Army MEDEVAC isn't really optimized for CSAR operations. It's designed to give ground commanders the ability to rapidly evac casualties to the rear, not rescue air crews. I'm not saying that Army crews couldn't be TRAINED to do a CSAR mission, but the two missions really are apples and oranges...I'm a former MEDEVAC pilot myself. We were designed to operate close to the FEBA and get the wounded to aid stations quickly. Having switched to the USAF, I now know there's a lot that Army pilots aren't aware of when it comes to AFCENT operations, for example back when I flew for the Army we didn't know much about SPINS, just stay below the coordination altitude and you'd be fine. But that's because we really didn't HAVE to know much about ATO/SPINS/etc, because we belonged to the ground commanders and operated as part of the ground forces. Just like we didn't know much about AFCENT air ops, USAF crews don't know much about Army ground ops.

Considering everything that goes into a CSAR operation, you really need crews that are in the know, are familiar with the way air packages are put together, understand the SPINS and have aircraft and training that allows extended ops beyond the FEBA. USAF CSAR is uniquely trained to do that. The 160th could do it as well, their aircraft are equipped to do so, they would only need additional training to be ready. But basic slick MEDEVAC? Not so much...again, the only commonality between the two missions is you're picking somebody up.

[Breckey]

You might want to do you home work. Look at who went in to get crews during Desert Storm.

The AF didn't have any CSAR assets in Desert Storm due to the fact that CSAR itself was gutted after Vietnam and almost all of the assets were transferred to Special Operations. The only "rescue" units were those still flying the MH-3 and although they asked repeatedly to go to the fight, they were denied by HQ.

There were only three successful rescues of downed Allied personnel during Desert Storm, on each by the AF, Navy, and SOC. (The AF rescue was by an MH-53 so although it was truly SOC it was AF personnel making the recovery)

[brock]

Should have been more specific, but what about in an area where the Army isn't operating? OIF and OEF seem like exceptions since the Army is using MedAvac so often. What if the army wasn't there? At least if it's in house and we have another "Watch" type mission we can order a CSAR unit to be there in case things go south. I don't remember if the Army had any MedAvac units sitting around during Northern/Southern Watch in case something went downhill (maybe they did).

Well since it isn't 1998 I was talking about the here and now. But you bring up good point. If the Air Force wasn't so myopic and saw the need for mission then we wouldn't be talking about it.

I guess the thing that bothers me the most is it seems like the Air Force doesn't want the mission till the Army wants it. The Air Force is very territorial about it's CSAR mission but feel they are just as well suited to fly the dust off mission. The Air Force RQS in OEF isn't very busy doing the CSAR mission. So they want to get involved and fly an Army mission. If the tables were turned, do you think the Air Force would be letting the Army fly CSAR missions?

[alwyn2d]

The Army Chief of Staff made this decision not the Sec Def. The Army is a little busy right now and would not be able to man the MC-12 and C-27 so the C-27 mission went to the ANG.

The Army guard is in desperate need of the C-27 and I see more making it to the ARNG.

I think you'll see the Army fixed wing fleet move to the Air Force when the Air Force gives up all of its rotary wing assets. They are already trying to pilfer the Army med mission in OEF so why not just transfer those assets to the Army. Never going to happen on either side.

If the Army CoS gave up the C-27J, perhaps he'll be willing to transfer the other fixed wing assets but not likely. He must be non rated officer. AF needs pilot seats especially on the fixed wing side.

Sec Def stopped the purchase of the HH-47s for the AF. AF rescue mission is under review. Gates has stated he wanted to see if there a more inexpensive way of rescuing aircrew members other than with a dedicated mission. Question, how much is a crew member worth dollar wise. We would like to say any amount, but we don't have an unlimited budget. Gates still has his hand in the cookie jar on that decision.

[alwyn2d]

I have no idea, but seeing as though MD will be the first ANG unit with them, it might wind up there. Who knows.

Yes, it is nice to receive new airframes, but no, the USAF leadership didn't really want this mission. They DID, however, want to prevent the Army from being in control of a fixed-wing flying program. Regarding the tactical airlift, look at how the USAF leadership employs the tac airlifters it has now. Landing in the dirt isn't quite as common as it should be, and airdrops could be more frequent. But the USAF leadership doesn't want to risk bending airplanes to help out the Army, which is why the Army turned to civilian operators like Blackwater for many airdrop/LZ missions. 98% of all tac airlift missions in theater begin and end on a 10,000'+ paved runway.

It has more to do with budgets and manning, and less to do with Gates coming to the USAF's defense. Honestly, Gates has kept the C-27 alive because once the Army backed out due to funding, I can guarantee you the USAF senior leadership would have loved to have just killed the entire program.

It's only their bread and butter because of public law. Look at the Navy and Marines...both have complete FW and RW assets. Only the Army and AF argue and fight over this nonsense. And honestly, do you REALLY think that AF senior leadership would do any better at the RW mission? The Army has helos because they are organic and necessary components of their force structure. The Army couldn't function the way it does without having their own aviation assets.

What's your reasoning for this? The Army has certain fixed-wing assets because the USAF can't or won't fill those mission needs, such as battlefield ISR, OSA requirements and in this case, "real" tactical airlift. The Army has C-23 Sherpas that they have utilized to the max. Those airplanes flew the missions that couldn't or wouldn't get fulfilled through AFCENT. The USAF has traditionally been focused on the strategic level...it has always regarded missions like COIN, tac airlift and other niche missions as irritations.

Your suggestion sounds fine on paper, but in reality, if the Army sent its C-12s, C-23s and RC-12s to the USAF, Big Blue would likely retire most if not all of those airframes and just do away with the mission so it could allocate funds somewhere else that it deems higher priority...leaving the Army short.

That's pretty f'king retarded to say something like that. "if they can meet AF standards"? I'm sure you, as a USAF pilot, could easily go jump in an Army helo and fly the hell out of it, right? Because after all, Army pilots are a step above cave men, correct? I'd be willing to bet that you would be challenged to learn how to fly helicopters and employ them in the manner the Army does.

On second thought, maybe you feel Army aviators aren't as savvy as USAF pilots because they lack the micromanaged volumes of regulations the USAF has to govern flying operations. The Army operates much like the Navy does...it's a big boy program...here are a few basic rules and regs, the rest is up to you to apply common sense...f'k up and we'll hammer your nuts. Not like the USAF where every little move you make in the cockpit has a rule attached to it.

I'm sure the Army aviators on here are reading that quote wondering if you'd be able to "meet Army standards".

It's not if the AF wants the mission, if directed and in this case by the Sec Def, it best be done. He fired the last CoS AF for not carrying out his directives. It really pisses me off, when the Army always complaining about AF support as if the AF doesn't give a damn about the ground commander's mission. Army aviators hear the same crap from the non rated Army officers in mission support. Damn aviators, just can't get the job done. I bet there wasn't one Army aviation general officer that agreed with the C-27J transfer. But, the Army CoS did. Must be non rated.

Believe me, it was absolutely necessary for the Army Air Force to separate from the Army in 1947. You talk about stringent AF regs, why do you think they came about? Back in the 30-40s the Army lost hundreds if not thousands of aircrew members due to poor equipment/funding/training in PEACE TIME. The Army ground commanders did not have a clue on the dangers of aviation or their use. If you're Infantry and tired lay down. Tired in an aircraft, your life's in jeopardy. USAF regs are written in blood to save lives and assets including Army lives.

Meeting the AF standards are quite easy. If you're an Army RLO aviator, a interservice transfer is possible if the fixed wing assets are transferred. For the Warrant Officer aviators, they must have a 4 yr degree without exception and approx 40% of the WO do not. And, the WO must attend AF OTS before the age of 35 to earn their commission. If the WO aviators are unable to meet these standards, they will not have the option in transferring. If the Army aviators do not wish to transfer in the numbers needed, the AF will just plus up on SUPT. Don't think this transfer will ever happen but it would open up more pilot seats for our 2nd Lts.

Regarding AF CSAR mission, that may be on the chopping block based on funding not available for new airframes.

Edited November 9, 2009 by alwyn2d

[brock]

The Army's biggest problem is it is the Army and run by Infantry, Armor & Artillery Officers. They see the aviation Branch as someone who takes there funding. They do whine about crew rest, weather and other factors they have no understanding of. Everyone suffers because of this. The guard is in real need of a replacement for the C-23. Our stateside mission depends on it.

Army Aviation had a strong advocate in Gen. Cody, but he's gone. You only have to look to the defunc RAH-66 program to see how well the Army manages programs. After 14 billion dollars in R&D they decided that it didn't fit our needs. We used the money for the LUH and ARH. I flew the LUH and it is a POS. The ARH has been cancelled due to cost. Our KW pilots need a new airframe. They have to suffer because Army Aviation can't get their crap together.

The fix wing guys flying Oden have to deal with flying some pretty s*&ty aircraft. The Air Force might not have wanted the mission, but at least they got you guys new King Air 350's. I think they did that program of the shelve in record time. The Army fly's the same mission. Why don't we buy the same aircraft?

I can see why the AF doesn't want the Army involved in procurement. My rant foe the day.

[busdriver]

So they want to get involved and fly an Army mission. If the tables were turned, do you think the Air Force would be letting the Army fly CSAR missions?

You seem awful butt hurt about Rescue flying in support of Medevac, it was an Army RFF that got that whole thing started.

As to Dustoff going and picking up aircrew, nothing in OEF is "CSAR" nada, zip, zilch. There is no FLOT to cross, no IADs to plan around, no CSARTF to build, etc. As for the Army going to pick up AF crew this past summer, guess what? Every one of us was glad that happened! Closest asset gets the job done. It's not about protecting my terf, it's about patient advocacy.

Yes, we get guys straight out of the school house, they're called co-pilots.

[alwyn2d]

The Army's biggest problem is it is the Army and run by Infantry, Armor & Artillery Officers. They see the aviation Branch as someone who takes there funding. They do whine about crew rest, weather and other factors they have no understanding of. Everyone suffers because of this. The guard is in real need of a replacement for the C-23. Our stateside mission depends on it.

Army Aviation had a strong advocate in Gen. Cody, but he's gone. You only have to look to the defunc RAH-66 program to see how well the Army manages programs. After 14 billion dollars in R&D they decided that it didn't fit our needs. We used the money for the LUH and ARH. I flew the LUH and it is a POS. The ARH has been cancelled due to cost. Our KW pilots need a new airframe. They have to suffer because Army Aviation can't get their crap together.

The fix wing guys flying Oden have to deal with flying some pretty s*&ty aircraft. The Air Force might not have wanted the mission, but at least they got you guys new King Air 350's. I think they did that program of the shelve in record time. The Army fly's the same mission. Why don't we buy the same aircraft?

I can see why the AF doesn't want the Army involved in procurement. My rant foe the day.

Gen Cody was truly an exception to the rule. He had over 5000 flight hours in his career. I bet you have a few CW4/CW5 that have fewer hours. The Army CoS position will always be held by a non rated General Officer. That being the case, they will always look upon the aviation branch as sucking funding from their other needed programs. Especially, since the RAH-66 Comanche funding is all about depleted.

The Army just goes out of their way to be Army different regarding aviation. You guys not only wear two piece flight suits, you can't even wear your hard earn wings on the A2CU when flying. If you're going to be a pilot, at least look like one. Plus your aviation commanders have less flying experience than your squadron/company pilots. What's up with that? What a way to run a railroad. But, the Army are the true professional in helo operations, hands down. Perhaps in the near future they will pickup the AF CSAR mission as well. Sec Def Gates is hinting at this for the time being. AF may not like that but CSAR request for $15B for a new helo may put them out of business.

The AF could easily pick up the Army's fixed wing missions on the active duty and ANG/AFRes side. Hopefully, they will allow the Army pilots to transfer over to the AF if given the option. There's only 250-275 aircraft total. There is new leadership and mindset in the AF today on the General Officer level. That took effect when the last AF CoS and Sec AF were fired. The AF is recognizing the importance of the Army's tactical environment and the systems they need in their war on terror. From UAS, MC-12 and the C-27J. In addition, the AF is reviewing the need for at least 100 light tactical fixed wing aircraft. They see the writing on the wall and they best get with the program. As long as the AF CoS is a pilot, he/she will find ways to put 2Lts in pilot seats. This comes about on the AF CoS love of flying in the biggest and baddest AF in the World. Truly flying above the best.

Edited November 9, 2009 by alwyn2d

[fire4effect]

It's not if the AF wants the mission, if directed and in this case by the Sec Def, it best be done. He fired the last CoS AF for not carrying out his directives. It really pisses me off, when the Army always complaining about AF support as if the AF doesn't give a damn about the ground commander's mission. Army aviators hear the same crap from the non rated Army officers in mission support. Damn aviators, just can't get the job done. I bet there wasn't one Army aviation general officer that agreed with the C-27J transfer. But, the Army CoS did. Must be non rated.

Believe me, it was absolutely necessary for the Army Air Force to separate from the Army in 1947. You talk about stringent AF regs, why do you think they came about? Back in the 30-40s the Army lost hundreds if not thousands of aircrew members due to poor equipment/funding/training in PEACE TIME. The Army ground commanders did not have a clue on the dangers of aviation or their use. If you're Infantry and tired lay down. Tired in an aircraft, your life's in jeopardy. USAF regs are written in blood to save lives and assets including Army lives.

Meeting the AF standards are quite easy. If you're an Army RLO aviator, a interservice transfer is possible if the fixed wing assets are transferred. For the Warrant Officer aviators, they must have a 4 yr degree without exception and approx 40% of the WO do not. And, the WO must attend AF OTS before the age of 35 to earn their commission. If the WO aviators are unable to meet these standards, they will not have the option in transferring. If the Army aviators do not wish to transfer in the numbers needed, the AF will just plus up on SUPT. Don't think this transfer will ever happen but it would open up more pilot seats for our 2nd Lts.

Regarding AF CSAR mission, that may be on the chopping block based on funding not available for new airframes.

Pretty arrogant.

The military doesn't exist to make sure you get the job you want. It's to deter wars if possible and win wars if necessary. Everything else you get above that is gravy.

I think the army needs the C-27 and will probably get some down the road. Nothing is more responsive to your needs than organic assets. It's that simple. At the same time I'm pretty sure some in the different services will want to protect their "turf". No doubt deals are struck at echelons above reality. Plain disgusting.

We've ALL come a long way since the 30s and 40s. But that was WW2. That argument is not even relevant now. There have been exhausted soldiers who got too close to the edge of a crappy dirt road in Iraq who drove off into a canal and 4 guys drowned.

Tired will always be a killer.

I suggest that anybody in the military who thinks he's getting a raw deal should tell that to the E-4 at Walter Reed trying to learn to walk again.

Feel free to transfer those extra 2LTs to the Infantry. The Army can always use the extra help.

[busdriver]

Rambling about which I know nothing about.

Just stop.

[Guest Jollygreen]

The AF didn't have any CSAR assets in Desert Storm due to the fact that CSAR itself was gutted after Vietnam and almost all of the assets were transferred to Special Operations. The only "rescue" units were those still flying the MH-3 and although they asked repeatedly to go to the fight, they were denied by HQ.

Most of the assets weren't transfered to AFSOC, they were closed.

The USAF had three squadrons that deployed to perform SOF and CSAR missions during DS/DS. 20 SOS (AD MH-53J, Hurby), 55 SOS (AD MH-60G, Eglin), and 71 SOS (AFRES MH-3, D-M). All three squadrons were under, or gained by, AFSOC.

You seem awful butt hurt about Rescue flying in support of Medevac, it was an Army RFF that got that whole thing started.

As to Dustoff going and picking up aircrew, nothing in OEF is "CSAR" nada, zip, zilch. There is no FLOT to cross, no IADs to plan around, no CSARTF to build, etc. As for the Army going to pick up AF crew this past summer, guess what? Every one of us was glad that happened! Closest asset gets the job done. It's not about protecting my terf, it's about patient advocacy.

Yes, we get guys straight out of the school house, they're called co-pilots.

100% accurate post. Thank you.

[135ASelect]

I wasn't at drill this weekend, (135 Airlift, MDANG) but last drill, October I got to read over the proposal for the FTU at KMTN. Hope we get it. Honestly I'm looking forward to flying the airplane, I don't care if most tac airlift in theater starts on a 10000' runway, I'm just glad we're keeping a flying mission.

[Guest Hueypilot812]

You talk about stringent AF regs, why do you think they came about? Back in the 30-40s the Army lost hundreds if not thousands of aircrew members due to poor equipment/funding/training in PEACE TIME. The Army ground commanders did not have a clue on the dangers of aviation or their use. If you're Infantry and tired lay down. Tired in an aircraft, your life's in jeopardy. USAF regs are written in blood to save lives and assets including Army lives.

Thanks for the history lesson. I'm talking about NOW. In case you're interested, the Army has crew rest rules too. They just don't have tons upon tons of other micro-managing, convoluted rules about everything else flying. Damn, the USAF even regulates the shades you have to wear.

Meeting the AF standards are quite easy. If you're an Army RLO aviator, a interservice transfer is possible if the fixed wing assets are transferred. For the Warrant Officer aviators, they must have a 4 yr degree without exception and approx 40% of the WO do not. And, the WO must attend AF OTS before the age of 35 to earn their commission. If the WO aviators are unable to meet these standards, they will not have the option in transferring. If the Army aviators do not wish to transfer in the numbers needed, the AF will just plus up on SUPT. Don't think this transfer will ever happen but it would open up more pilot seats for our 2nd Lts.

Thanks again for the education. I'm well aware of what it takes to switch from Army aviation to the USAF. My user name is from the days when I flew Hueys for the Army. I'm now a C-130 EP for the USAF. Believe it or not, a lot of guys on this forum have a LOT of experience, so be careful about insulting everyone's intelligence about stuff that you read in a magazine when most of the people you're talking to did it for real.

By the way, the USAF has often shorted the Army when it came to certain missions...just start asking people about CAS. If you're still not convinced, then ask yourself why Blackwater has done more airdrops and dirt LZ work than the USAF has.