Do you wish you went Guard/Res?

[Guest]

I have a question related to AD taking iron away from the Guard. Wasn't the Guard originally designed as a force to protect the state as well as provide disaster relief and other state functions? When, how, and why did that transition to many Guard units owning strategic assets?

Wait, what?

The Guard traces it's history back to the local militias from the Revolutionary War. That's really nice but times have changed and so have the military requirements of our nation.

The Guard serves a nice function for the state in peacetime but that is mostly Army and there is no state mission justification for something like the A-10. None whatsoever.

The Guard does not own any airplanes. The jets belong to the USAF. The end.

[PasserOGas]

This has been a great discussion with some great points.

I think you might be lumping the that KC-10 experience with the rest of the ARC world. I don't know how the KC-10 guys get away with that, but the ARC Herk world is a lot more intense. After this next trip to the shit/sandbox, I will have deployed with the Reserves every year for the past 4 years. Only one of them was a 30-day "stint." My understanding (and personal experience) is that AFRC is rotating reserve units on 120-day rotes with no chance of breaking it up into smaller chunks for the full activations. The "voluntary" rotes can be broken up into 60-day chunks (sometimes), which makes it about a 90-day total activation for our guys after you count processing on both ends of the world and travel time.

I am not trying to say that we pull the same weight as active duty - we don't. But we also don't get paid the same or have the same benefits/retirement as active duty. As others have mentioned, it is very difficult to manage a "real" job in addition to spending a few weekdays and two weekends a month at the unit.

I guess it all boils down to each unit or airframe being different. If you really want out of active duty and want the Gucci lifestyle of little to no deployments, then perhaps the KC-10 units are for you. But if you think that by joining an AFRC or ANG Herk unit will mean you won't deploy - think again.

Again, in my opinion, this is the trade-off for reservists not being compensated for full-time work. I look at the good deals (and I agree that it seems that the current strategy is to get ARC guys to volunteer for exotic TDY's and then simply force active duty to take the shitty ones) as sort of a consolation prize for not being able to access my retirement until I am 60 (or 59 and some change now, I guess).

I agree with all of your points. I have also heard it isn't exactly a picknick in the C-17 community. I should have been more specific in that I really have no first hand knowlege of how the other platforms handle this.

However, the difference in those communities is that while the guard is probably taking some trips, they aren't taking ALL of them. My bros in the t-tail world are definitely more experienced than pretty much anyone I know in the tanker. Right now the tankers are facing a very serious pilot seasoning problem. There are IP's I know that have landed at 5 fields since pilot training, and 90% of thier time is in and out of 1 of those. This has been going on for going on 10 years now, our corporate knowlege is being lost and will (in my opinion) someday get someone killed. We recently had someone come within 100 feet of another plane on an ALTRV in large part because the AC had never seen a coronet! When brought up to AMC they so far have just blown it off. I don't need to go to Guam (although I wouldn't turn it down). I do need do see some different fields/missions that I am responsible as a mobility pilot to know how to do. Right now even the most mundane non-deployed missions are for the most part going to the Guard, and the expierence from those is going with them.

I would also like to respond to Rainman's post.

I understand that activating a unit is a big deal. The problem I have is that we ARE activating them, then sending them on paid vacation for the most part. Again, tanker only.

[Guest filthy_liar]

Anyone else have any insight as to how the ANG transitioned from a state-owned militia to what it is today? Not asking what it is today, but rather how it came to be an institution that operates national assets.

[brickhistory]

Anyone else have any insight as to how the ANG transitioned from a state-owned militia to what it is today? Not asking what it is today, but rather how it came to be an institution that operates national assets.

Following Vietnam, the Pentagon decided to never again go to war with only part of its forces and only part of the pain being tied down to draftees/active duty. They made a concious sp?) decision to put combat, combat support, and other capabilities needed to fight a war in the Reserves (not as much) and the Guard (a lot). That way, if the bell rang, and Uncle sent us off to war again, everybody would know it - the sudden disappearance of those ARC folks would help ensure that the political will for a war was there as well as the hardware.

Come the post-Cold War drawdown and the never anticipated use of our forces for such a protracted period witout the plus up in forces needed to adequately fight these wars, you see the pendulem swinging again to get assets back into the AD since the being activated thing repeatedly doesn't play well politically.

You can't fight a war on the cheap. Either you buy enough AD to prosecute it or you use up the ARC to make up for it. Either way, the bill's gotta be paid somehow.

Edited April 27, 2010 by brickhistory

[Guest filthy_liar]

Following Vietnam, the Pentagon decided to never again go to war with only part of its forces and only part of the pain being tied down to draftees/active duty. They made a concious sp?) decision to put combat, combat support, and other capabilities needed to fight a war in the Reserves (not as much) and the Guard (a lot). That way, if the bell rang, and Uncle sent us off to war again, everybody would know it - the sudden disappearance of those ARC folks would help ensure that the political will for a war was there as well as the hardware.

Come the post-Cold War drawdown and the never anticipated use of our forces for such a protracted period witout the plus up in forces needed to adequately fight these wars, you see the pendulem swinging again to get assets back into the AD since the being activated thing repeatedly doesn't play well politically.

You can't fight a war on the cheap. Either you buy enough AD to prosecute it or you use up the ARC to make up for it. Either way, the bill's gotta be paid somehow.

That's the type of reply I was looking for. Learned something there. Thankin' you.

[JS]

There are IP's I know that have landed at 5 fields since pilot training, and 90% of thier time is in and out of 1 of those.

Wow! That sucks. The totally explains why the tanker guys that come to the Herk world or even the T-1 world totally suck (just kidding, sort of). On real-world missions in the box we usually hit around 5 different fields per day, not to mention the 5 different fields I went to last week on my two local training sorties.

I am not totally familiar with the tanker world, but a good friend in a tanker unit was quite astonished that we have UPT-like cross countries where we can just take a plane, if is not allocated to some aeromed or army training mission, and go wherever we want as long as it meets the UPT standard of being a military base or joint-use base. This opens up the game to everywhere like Nashville, Birmingham, or Minneapolis international airports to smaller places like Stewart airport in NY and certain exotic Navy bases on the different coasts. I was actually kind of shocked that they did not allow the tanker to explore the country on weekend training missions - especially considering that it is a self-sufficient aircraft in terms of not needing a power or air cart. Heck, you can even tanker (taboo word, I know) gas to the point where you wouldn't even need to fuel up at an overnight stop.

My bud told me that they have been trying to work deals like that to broaden their training horizons, but have run into some resistance. In Rainman's honor, I will blame the whole lack of experience in the tanker world on that omnipresent group of assholes known as "the leadership."

[PasserOGas]

Wow! That sucks. The totally explains why the tanker guys that come to the Herk world or even the T-1 world totally suck (just kidding, sort of). On real-world missions in the box we usually hit around 5 different fields per day, not to mention the 5 different fields I went to last week on my two local training sorties.

I am not totally familiar with the tanker world, but a good friend in a tanker unit was quite astonished that we have UPT-like cross countries where we can just take a plane, if is not allocated to some aeromed or army training mission, and go wherever we want as long as it meets the UPT standard of being a military base or joint-use base. This opens up the game to everywhere like Nashville, Birmingham, or Minneapolis international airports to smaller places like Stewart airport in NY and certain exotic Navy bases on the different coasts. I was actually kind of shocked that they did not allow the tanker to explore the country on weekend training missions - especially considering that it is a self-sufficient aircraft in terms of not needing a power or air cart. Heck, you can even tanker (taboo word, I know) gas to the point where you wouldn't even need to fuel up at an overnight stop.

My bud told me that they have been trying to work deals like that to broaden their training horizons, but have run into some resistance. In Rainman's honor, I will blame the whole lack of experience in the tanker world on that omnipresent group of assholes known as "the leadership."

I should note that those IP's are the exception, but not by much. Most of us have been to 10-15 different fields at some point since pilot training. However those trips are very rare, it takes around 4-5 years to get that many. The 90% in and out of one field still applies.

Yes we make suck at full procedure approaches, but who else do you know can cook a full meal on the bleed-air ducts?

Edited April 28, 2010 by PasserOGas

[Guest Crew Report]

Wow! That sucks. The totally explains why the tanker guys that come to the Herk world or even the T-1 world totally suck (just kidding, sort of).

You should see a prior Herk or even a C-17 guy land a -135.

:beer:

[Guest]

Is there some kind of unique trick to landing or flying an instrument approach in a herbivore that requires practicing on different runways or NAVAID freqs?

[FourFans]

Is there some kind of unique trick to landing or flying an instrument approach in a herbivore that requires practicing on different runways or NAVAID freqs?

Seriously?

[busdriver]

Is there some kind of unique trick to landing or flying an instrument approach in a herbivore that requires practicing on different runways or NAVAID freqs?

I'd have to guess they're referring to the odd full procedure approaches in places not serviced by "vectors to final for XXX approach." But what do I know, I'd rather fly special VFR in .25nm vis than fly an instrument approach.

[joe1234]

My bud told me that they have been trying to work deals like that to broaden their training horizons, but have run into some resistance. In Rainman's honor, I will blame the whole lack of experience in the tanker world on that omnipresent group of assholes known as "the leadership."

On one hand it looks like good training for multiple strange fields. On the other hand, a Herk's job is to go into a place with barely any approach guidance and make it work. So, exploring the country going to 5 small random fields in a day makes sense for training, because an airland mission is measured by whether they got the cargo to the destination or not.

A tanker's purpose isn't really to go into places like that. Not to say that they don't, but that's not why they exist. Tankers stick to bigger, built up airfields with support services because A/R mission success is measured in gas offloaded, not where the plane ended up landing at. Besides, these planes are airliners with gas tanks and a boom, not a military transport built from the ground up.

So I guess what I'm saying here is that the leadership has a point with their resistance to that specific plan.

[Spoo]

Seriously?

Strictly speaking, he does have a point. Most 8000' x 150' runways react similarly to a/c touchdown and TACAN 69X usually behaves just like Tacan 96X.

I'd have to guess they're referring to the odd full procedure approaches in places not serviced by "vectors to final for XXX approach." But what do I know, I'd rather fly special VFR in .25nm vis than fly an instrument approach.

I can't tell you the number of times I've been forced to do the full procedure turn (when it wasn't for practice or a checkride). I can't tell you because I don't ever remember it happening.

[Guest]

Seriously?

Yes, that was a serious question.

I ask because the answer is not at all obvious to me and instead of ripping the herbivore community I thought I'd get me some edumacation on why it is so important to practice landing and flying instrument approaches to "strange" fields." It just doesn't seem like it should be a big deal.

Cool with me if you don't want to answer.

[tac airlifter]

Yes, that was a serious question.

I ask because the answer is not at all obvious to me and instead of ripping the herbivore community I thought I'd get me some edumacation on why it is so important to practice landing and flying instrument approaches to "strange" fields." It just doesn't seem like it should be a big deal.

Cool with me if you don't want to answer.

Great question, as someone who has led OST trainers to about 100 different fields (in addition to operational missions) I feel I can provide a good answer. First let me say that I totally understand why the hardship of going many places seems like a non-issue to those who haven't done it. But once you start dealing with every variable you may have on a single flight the amount of knowledge and skills to master becomes apparent. What are the variables? In no particular order: climb gradient, obstacles (including low close in that need to be visually identified) runway markings (including asphalt/pavement combo's producing visual illusions), and as for visual illusions there's also slope and even runways that turn a little (although admittedly I've only seen this on dirt strips), a vast array of different approach types and markings (more on this later) and then PA, weather anomalies, weight and balance variations (PCN) local restrictions (in GIANT report) and localisms like traffic (trust me, locals in the backwoods of Utah can get weird). If this doesn't sound like any big deal, let me tell you that every single pilot who I instructed that cross flowed from another platform has at some point become completely overwhelmed by the mass of variables one must account for and master to do the air land mission successfully.

Spoo, you mentioned you've never flown a full PT for real. Well, it's common for airlift dudes to need that skill on short notice. First Jeppsen approach I'd ever seen was a NDB full PT into Jordan without radar and down to min's (NDB being the only approach available). Mission can't stop or slow so the pilot can take their time examining the approach; you get handed a pile of shit you weren't expecting and have to be good enough to make it work right now. Conceptually, that's true for every type of mission (I don't fly airlift anymore, so I have another perspective now) but I really think it's under appreciated by people outside airlift.

Also, let's talk about PA. Landing a heavyweight aircraft at sea level and 8000' is very different and when time is critical, one must be prepared to quickly and accurately examine TOLD and account for complexities. I've done both (sea level and 8k' PA) in training and operationally on the same mission. I did a lot of OST's in the -130 world and pushed us hard because when the time comes downrange I want myself and my students to perform like rock stars no questions asked no matter what weird shit is thrown our way. A lot of guys don't appreciate the many wind and cloud variables that a pilot can run afoul of until they've done a lot of LL's in the mountains. I don't want someone f'n up a mission into Salerno when they can practice at Gunnison.

I mentioned visual illusions; they really can get pretty bad. When your mind is concentrating on keeping track of a lot of stuff, including 8 different ICAO approaches and controllers who may or may not be proficient in English, suddenly guys find themselves on final and it doesn't look like what they expect so they carry some power and land a little long. Except this runway is only 5000' so they're screwed. I know, I know, guys reading this will laugh at how dumb air lifters can be. All I can say is that good pilots have burned the brakes and the plane trying to make the impossible work because they were saturated with difficulties of the "new." Think of all the fighters that have crashed into each other doing complex air-to-air. Dudes are focused and easy things become hard, it happens to us all. That's why we practice.

As for instrument procedures and what makes one harder than the other; man, just pull out a FLIP and ask yourself if you can fly 5 random approaches with no prep time, full PT and no radar in mountainous terrain to short fields at minimums with all the additional complexities of crew and mission and timeline on top of it (not to mention an enemy that knows airlift is a soft target); and in the -130 you've got about a 10% chance you'll be IFE at the same time for one reason or another. If you can do it no sweat, then I applaud you. But from experience I think it's a difficult task for any aviator to handle and only guys who practice and train to a high standard do it well.

It's interesting for me now in a squadron with fighter and bomber and airlift and tanker guys. The truth is none of us are better than the others as a community, and each of our (old) missions have hard things that outsiders don't understand to be hard. The discriminator between good pilots and bad ones is not what they tracked out of UPT, the discriminator is who really tries hard to be good and works tirelessly to be good and holds themselves to a high personal standard.

Airlift guys practice OST's at different sites because it really is a hard skill to go into vastly different circumstances multiple times in a single mission. You can only think so fast and process so much at a given moment; sometimes I'd do missions where I was at cruise at 20,000' for 3 hours and had time. Mostly I'd hit 7k' on climb out and immediatly be in the descent for some random spot with half the runway closed, a sandstorm blowing in, radios being jammed, something leaking out of the #2 and dudes barfing in the back. Hope this answers the questions, cheers to all.

Edited April 30, 2010 by tac airlifter

[FourFans]

edit: tac airlifter says it better.

FF

Edited April 30, 2010 by FourFans130

[Guest]

Great question, as someone who has led OST trainers to about 100 different fields (in addition to operational missions) I feel I can provide a good answer.

Thanks for the answer.

BTW, what's an OST?

The discriminator between good pilots and bad ones is not what they tracked out of UPT, the discriminator is who really tries hard to be good and works tirelessly to be good.

I would argue there are many discriminators but your latter point is definitely vital to individual, team and overall mission success.

FWIW, I flew choppers for a couple years so I'm familiar with the tac airlift mission hacker mentality and I totally respect the amount of work the tac airlift guys do. I will say, however, I never understood why some guys made such a big deal about things that I thought should be basic requirements/admin. I think that was more about SA than anything else.

Someone with low SA is going to struggle no matter what they do in life. Training will help but some things only God can give you.

[Guest Crew Report]

BTW, what's an OST?

Off-station trainer

[Guest Hueypilot812]

FWIW, I flew choppers for a couple years so I'm familiar with the tac airlift mission hacker mentality and I totally respect the amount of work the tac airlift guys do. I will say, however, I never understood why some guys made such a big deal about things that I thought should be basic requirements/admin. I think that was more about SA than anything else.

Operating out of strange fields has less to do with basic flying skills, and more to do with refining judgement, planning and airmanship. Yes, a C-130 lands the same for the most part on any basic strip of runway. But Herks actually do far less "strange field" flying than other airframes, notably the C-21. I flew the Lear for 3 years, and I saw a huge variety of conditions to fly in and out of, and it became a mental exercise of preparing yourself for whatever comes your way. Everything from landing on runways where you're TOLD-limited, dealing with weird/difficult/confusing departure procedures, operating at uncontrolled towers in a Learjet with 140 knot final airspeeds while Cessnas doing 60 knots on final are doing touch-and-gos, and the occasional full-procedure NDB circling approach in the weather, down to mins and landing on a short runway with standing water (RSC calculations).

The jet flew the same...but that wasn't the point. It was conditioning yourself to handle the wide variety of situations that crop up. I do understand the ACC world a little bit, because when I left the C-21 and came to the Herk, the crews at Dyess were doing about the same thing...unless they were deployed, 99.99% of the flying was around the flag pole at KDYS. The younger crews that hadn't BTDT started losing that valuable experience and came to base their decision-making skills based on doing the same thing every day.

Case in point...one night at Dyess we had a snow shower that left about an inch of snow on the runway. The weather had cleared out, but every other line scheduled to fly that night canceled except mine. It was great because I had the pattern to myself. The braking action was a little less than optimal, but damn, we were a Herk on a 13,000' runway. The next day the young pilots couldn't believe I flew on a runway that had a dusting of snow. But that was nothing compared to landing on an icy runway in Greenland or blowing snow across Bangor's runway. I felt crews were beginning to lose a certain amount of airmanship by flying nothing but the ILS to runway 16 every day.

Basically we had crews that could fly a low-level just fine. They could fly to a drop just fine. But put them in an unfamiliar environment outside the Abilene/Dyess area or OIF, and some of the crews flailed. If you keep flying the same vector-to-final ILS to the same long-ass runway with the same basic USAF-standard parallel taxiway layout, you get complacent and it makes it just that much more confusing when you wind up having to go to an uncontrolled field with bug-smashers in the pattern, or fly to an airport with a very complex layout.

My experience in the C-21 paid off far more than just flying skill. Hell, I developed lots of habit patterns that I still carry with me now...like calling the contract fuel FBO to make sure that not only will they be open (had that happen to me once in the Huey), but do they have a working fuel truck (had that happen to me in the C-21...no shit, landed and the line kid said "our truck doesn't work, can you just taxi your airplane up to the truck?"...lucky us, we had enough gas to pass on that offer).

Fighter dudes' primary job is to drop iron on targets or shoot someone down. There's no reason to go globetrotting, so for you guys it's not a skill set you really need to worry about. Airlift dudes' primary mission is flying shit into just about any airfield that can support the weight and the TOLD...and even then, it's on the crew to determine if we're TOLD/PCN limited. Off-Station Trainers provide a great opportunity for young pilots to see the variety of conditions they may be asked to operate in.

[Guest]

But put them in an unfamiliar environment outside the Abilene/Dyess area or OIF, and some of the crews flailed.

SA

Fighter dudes' primary job is to drop iron on targets or shoot someone down. There's no reason to go globetrotting, so for you guys it's not a skill set you really need to worry about.

You might be surprised.

You're not going to put a LGPOS down on an unlit FOL/road/dry lake bed in the middle of the night but that doesn't mean you won't do that in a Hog. In fact, you will do that if you're lucky.

Most of what you're talking about is mission planning, airmanship and SA, right? Experience and training are good but both need to be tailored to the combat mission. I imagine a Herk guy needs more "strange" field training than a tanker guy.

Shouldn't USAF pilot should be able to fly any approach their aircraft is capable of flying at any time? Study the approach plate for a few seconds and get it done.

Not looking for an argument here. I get the point...I'm just sayin'.

[/hijack]

[Spoo]

Spoo, you mentioned you've never flown a full PT for real. Well, it's common for airlift dudes to need that skill on short notice. First Jeppsen approach I'd ever seen was a NDB full PT into Jordan without radar and down to min's (NDB being the only approach available). Mission can't stop or slow so the pilot can take their time examining the approach; you get handed a pile of shit you weren't expecting and have to be good enough to make it work right now. Conceptually, that's true for every type of mission (I don't fly

airlift anymore, so I have another perspective now) but I really think it's under appreciated by people outside airlift.

Operating out of strange fields has less to do with basic flying skills, and more to do with refining judgement, planning and airmanship...

Huh, thanks!

[Guest]

Huh, thanks!

Smart ass. I know you're barely able to hold it back and you're ready to send this thread on a nuclear derailment.

I want it noted that I am being very polite and respectful. It's not a trick, I'm not luring people out so that others can have a cut and paste quote donnybrook...as far as you know.

[Guest Hueypilot812]

I've flown with people from other communities that were new to the Herk, including a dude in my current squadron. Put people in an unfamiliar scenario and you'd be surprised to see even "experienced" pilots miss things trying to get caught up. Just sayin'.

[Spoo]

Smart ass. I know you're barely able to hold it back and you're ready to send this thread on a nuclear derailment.

Whaaat? Who, me? I was being serious, those were good responses. Much more thoughtful and organized than anything I would have to offer.

[amcflyboy]

Case in point...one night at Dyess we had a snow shower that left about an inch of snow on the runway. The weather had cleared out, but every other line scheduled to fly that night canceled except mine. It was great because I had the pattern to myself. The braking action was a little less than optimal, but damn, we were a Herk on a 13,000' runway. The next day the young pilots couldn't believe I flew on a runway that had a dusting of snow. But that was nothing compared to landing on an icy runway in Greenland or blowing snow across Bangor's runway. I felt crews were beginning to lose a certain amount of airmanship by flying nothing but the ILS to runway 16 every day.

Been there, done that, feel your pain! Did an upgrade checkride in those conditions...and that was at home station! Long story when I'm good and drunk :beer: