When Rotary Wing Aircraft went from RAAF to Army

[VladTepes]

From another not-very-related thread...


The transfer of Rotary wing to Army was one of the dumbest things done in this country.

Do tell. :)

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Next thing they will be saying that the removal of all fast-jets from the RAN was the worst thing for this country! (never mind that we didn't have an aircraft carrier!)

[mowog]

I was in 35 Sqn at the time of the Rotary Wing assets transfer to Army. I was in Townsville when the disbanded 9 Sqn became 5 Aviation Reg.

At the time Army only had very basic aircraft and absolutely no experience in operating a fleet of complex aircraft like the Black Hawk. Army miss-management of the Black Hawk fleet caused problems in maintenance. Aircraft were being flown with no regard to a maintenance plan. This caused a back log of unserviceable aircraft that were grounded firstly because there were not enough people to service them and secondly the spares supply was low because of the failure to fly to a maintenance plan.

Aircraft due for maintenance were canabalised for components with hours so that these could be fitted to aircraft going out the other door. This created another problem where aircraft with short hour components ended up at the back of the maintenance Que.

Now while all this was going on and man power was in short supply Army was still being Army and making all the maintainers do Army stuff. You know important things like parades and running and playing on jungle gyms.

The direct result of all this was low aircraft availability. With low aircraft availability comes reduced training for Aircrew. With reduced aircrew training you get accidents.

You can draw a direct line from this fleet mismanagement to the 1996 Black Hawk crash in High Range.

People died because Army had no idea how to manage a fleet of complex aircraft.

[mowog]

From another not-very-related thread...



Do tell. :)

Note you started the tangent not me. :eek:

[VladTepes]

Note you started the tangent not me. :eek:

"Did not - You started it - You invaded Poland !" - Basil Fawlty. :D

[mowog]

Sorry minor edit on my response serviceable changed to unserviceable.

[mowog]

Next thing they will be saying that the removal of all fast-jets from the RAN was the worst thing for this country! (never mind that we didn't have an aricraft carrier!

Fast jets being removed from RAN had a direct effect on my career. We got a lot of the RAN guys transfer to RAAF (note: not many went to Army). This had long term effects on promotions because suddenly a lot of mustering's were well over their numbers.

Whilst not the worst thing to happen the silly thing is we leased back those Skyhawks from NZ to do the fleet support role they were scrapped from doing.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Fast jets being removed from RAN had a direct effect on my career. We got a lot of the RAN guys transfer to RAAF (note: not many went to Army). This had long term effects on promotions because suddenly a lot of mustering's were well over their numbers.

Whilst not the worst thing to happen the silly thing is we leased back those Skyhawks from NZ to do the fleet support role they were scrapped from doing.It had a significant affect on a lot of people not just in the career structure and promotion in RAAF.

Jet jockies who liked the technical challenge of landing on a moving runway with a sudden stop for one. Many RAN pilots had to migrate to other countries to continue naval jet aviation.

Then there was the effect on the town of Nowra. The jets could only be based at HMAS Albatross when not at sea, this meant that jet aviators and ground crew purchased houses in the town of Nowra because their future careers were to be based there. With the stroke of a pen the prices of houses in the town plummeted, not a happy time for people like me who was selling a house in Nowra at the same time. With hundreds of RAN staff leaving the town all the service businesses that supported those staff had a little less income and many laid off staff. etc etc. I could go on, but what I'm actually saying is that transferring a few choppers to Army and a few sailors to RAAF was hardly the worst thing for the country. There were far more idiotic things done, transferring the CSIRO technology for industrial robots to Japan could be one, solar cell technology from UNSW to China another. There are many more.

I will accept that the transfer of the rotary wing aircraft to Army may not have been well planned and executed, but lets face it, what to Blackhawk choppers do? They transfer soldiers, to do Army things and as such they are no different from an Army truck or an Army tank.

IMHO making sure that Army aviation ground crew are fit and can shoot to Army standards, IS IMPORTANT, when Army aircraft are deployed they will likely deployed to relatively forward areas where they may need the skills of fighting, unlike the RAAF who will sleep under clean sheets, in dry, stationary accommodation miles back from the pointy end of the fighting, unlike either RAN or Army.

Diana

[mowog]

I will accept that the transfer of the rotary wing aircraft to Army may not have been well planned and executed, but lets face it, what to Blackhawk choppers do? They transfer soldiers, to do Army things and as such they are no different from an Army truck or an Army tank.

Diana

For a moment the RAN fast jet thing was just all about me. I accept all those other issues it caused as well.

Yes the very problem with the Army was they thought in Truck/Tank Terms when trying to operate a complex aircraft fleet.

By your logic of moving Army Assets around then the C130's and C17's should also be transferred to Army as well.

When I was at 35 sqn 90% of our work was supporting Army. There was complaint that they were not getting the level of tasking required but that was because RAAF managed and maintained a safe fleet. The lesson is clear when Army got the assets in the early days they got a high level of tasking but as the fleet was mis-managed the available aircraft was drastically reduced.

I have been out of the RAAF for long time now so I have no idea if Army has now improved their game in the management of aircraft.

[mowog]

IMHO making sure that Army aviation ground crew are fit and can shoot to Army standards, IS IMPORTANT, when Army aircraft are deployed they will likely deployed to relatively forward areas where they may need the skills of fighting, unlike the RAAF who will sleep under clean sheets, in dry, stationary accommodation miles back from the pointy end of the fighting, unlike either RAN or Army.

Diana

I agree with you here... It is important... But...

The safety of the people you put into the air is paramount and Army forgot this simple fact with the Grunt first attitude.

Your last assumption I take exception to. I was part of the Operational Deployment Force as a member of 35 Sqn. 35 Sqn spent a lot of time in the bush in support of Army. We were able to perform this role with out loosing site of the importance of aviation safety. On average we spent more time in the bush than the average grunt. This was because there were lots of grunts and only 1 35 Sqn.

The only time I spent in Hotels was when I moving for postings.

I was in Townsville when 5 AV were ordered to stop doing doing grunt stuff until they improved fleet serviceability.

[zulu Delta 534]

I was in 35 Sqn at the time of the Rotary Wing assets transfer to Army. I was in Townsville when the disbanded 9 Sqn became 5 Aviation Reg.

At the time Army only had very basic aircraft and absolutely no experience in operating a fleet of complex aircraft like the Black Hawk. Army miss-management of the Black Hawk fleet caused problems in maintenance. Aircraft were being flown with no regard to a maintenance plan. This caused a back log of unserviceable aircraft that were grounded firstly because there were not enough people to service them and secondly the spares supply was low because of the failure to fly to a maintenance plan.

Aircraft due for maintenance were canabalised for components with hours so that these could be fitted to aircraft going out the other door. This created another problem where aircraft with short hour components ended up at the back of the maintenance Que.

Now while all this was going on and man power was in short supply Army was still being Army and making all the maintainers do Army stuff. You know important things like parades and running and playing on jungle gyms.

The direct result of all this was low aircraft availability. With low aircraft availability comes reduced training for Aircrew. With reduced aircrew training you get accidents.

You can draw a direct line from this fleet mismanagement to the 1996 Black Hawk crash in High Range.

People died because Army had no idea how to manage a fleet of complex aircraft.

Perhaps had you been one of the many grunts on the ground in Vietnam who were denied air support because of strict RAAF safety and servicing protocols you may have an entirely different view!!!
Luckily there were plenty of Yanks who were willing to flaunt the rules and fly in an emergency.
The ammo resupply that helped save the day at Long Tan was flown by Flt Lt Frank Riley who flaunted 'Department of Air' Orders (under which the RAAF operated) which clearly stated; "9 Sqn's role was purely as support and not to be flown in offence and that aircraft were not to be risked - (there was an exception to this rule that applied to SAS ops only!) and he volunteered to fly with no official clearance from the Sqn HQ.
This is only one case but there were many others, enough to incite Brigadier Jackson in 1966, to claim "9 Sqn was not adequately supporting the 1 ATF". This claim was by no means directed at the members of the Squadron, but more at the RAAF's reluctance to show flexibility in combat support.
Something HAD to be done.
Personal rant over
Regards
Glen

[Celtoid]

Guys I’m going to tread very lightly here…..it’s very sensitive and emotive subject. And I wish no disrespect on anybody or service.

Unless you are or have been a seriously senior officer, politician or some sort of spook in the Defence community…I guess you’ll never get the truth about the decision. And I doubt if there would be any comfort in it.

I was in 9 SQN when the transfer to the Army occurred.

At that time, I was aware of inferences that the RAAF did not support our infantry as we should/could have. My Girlfriend’s father had been an Infantry RSM in the Vietnam Conflict, Borneo and other campaigns….which of course made interesting conversations at the dinner table…..

All emotive stuff….

But as always….not necessarily accurate or justified.

Please correct me as I go….it’s not really about specifics…

Australia had less than 20 Hueys in Vietnam….the US had ….I don’t even remember the number……thousands maybe???
If you were in charge of those Australian assets….what would your choice be? Remember…not now, how you would have reacted then? Lose one…there’s ten guys that don’t get picked up the next time…..

Blood boils easily…..but if you were in their shoes……Maverick activities…..all lovely when they work….WTF were they thinking when it doesn’t???!!!

Me personally….go for it….and nay sayers should duck….but….cooler heads than mine would say otherwise. In some scenarios you could actually be executed or jailed for those sentiments.

The ‘establishment’ is there for a reason…..but when it came to Australian military helicopters, they right royally screwed up!

To rewind…in my day,,,LOL…there were two RAAF’s…the Sharp Nose Pointy End People (who lived in 5 Star) and there was tactical transport. We sat in the dirt….contrary to other’s belief.

I actually loved the ****….4WDs..a mix of LR and Toyo…helicopters and guns…..

But in the real world…..I’m with MOWOG…I’m sorry Zulu Delta but thank F we had no war on during the Blackhawk transfer….we lost an asset for in excess of a decade. It took extreme political pressure ….as in to get the Helo fleet flying again…..read what MOWOG stated….the Army lacked flying and ILS expertise to take over the Blackhawk assets….no emotion required…it is a fact.

There are no sides in this discussion…………other than support the ADF!!!!

[mowog]

Vietnam was before my time so I can't comment about what happened there.

I never saw war like service but I did do operational service in the Middle East with the MFO. (About the MFO - Multinational Force and Observer (http://www.mfo.org/))

There were 3 aviation units there. The Aussies and Kiwi's, the Americans and the French (Fixed wing).

We had real operational requirements to support troops in the field and I worked many long nights to ensure there were aircraft available for the troops.

What is interesting about this experience is the direct comparison to the US capability vs the ADF capability. Both groups had 10 Iroquois of our 10 2 were leased by the NZ Army. We flew around 16000hrs the US at the time had flown around 8000hrs.

We didn't have any aircraft lost in accidents. The US crashed a number of aircraft and killed a good number of people. The fact that in Vietnam that there seemed to be better air support was only because of the incredible numbers of aircraft they had there.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Vietnam was before my time so I can't comment about what happened there.

I never saw war like service but I did do operational service in the Middle East with the MFO. (About the MFO - Multinational Force and Observer (http://www.mfo.org/))

There were 3 aviation units there. The Aussies and Kiwi's, the Americans and the French (Fixed wing).

<snip>You could almost say four, as there was a joint RAN/US Army helicopter unit.

Back to the debate. As I said before the transfer of RAAF Black-hawks to Army was not managed well, and obviously very poor subsequent management/maintenance. But as I said the transfer was very logical in terms of role. The comment about C130's is a little different, the Hercs do support Army a lot, but they also support RAAF and at times RAN with logistical activities and yes there would be a valid argument for Army Hercs, the US Marines seem to have won that argument, but then again the various US forces have a very poor history of supporting each other, something that Australia seems to be a lot better at or at least trying to improve.

BTW mowog,can I ask about your Avatar. Your username seems to indicate the Morris Wolseley Garages yet you have a BMW in the image!

[mowog]

I should have qualified at the time I was there...

We had RAN guys there but none were directly involved with flying or maintenance. That may have been different for other rotations.

[101RRS]

When I first started flying as an Observer in the RAN many of the senior officers had flown in Vietnam with US cavalry flights with quite a few casualties.

The RAAF were always against the Navy having and offensive air capability and resisted the Navy's proposed replacement for Melbourne. The argued that the RAAF could provide air support for fleet operations - however war gaming and exercise experience showed the opposite was the case - Ok if you were within a few hundred Nm from a base but otherwise not much chop. Not the fault of the people on the ground - just the competitive political rivalryies at the top.

When Melbourne went out od service a large number of RAN aircrew went other ways - I went back to sea as a seaman officer (and sold my land I was going to build on in Nowra), a number joined the RN and a number went to the RAAF. These included Sub-Lieutenant Mark Binskin who has just left the position of Chief of the Air Force and is now (or about to be) Vice Chief of the Defence Force and I would expect to be the next CDF in about 3 years time.

I think moving tactical air assets from the RAAF to the Army was the right decision but was not well executed. RAAF should retain "Strategic" air assets such as heavy lift, continental air defence etc but "tactical" air assets should remain with the individual services.

I think that the Army have got over their initial lack of skill on operating the new aircraft types and now are highly proficient in operating their aircraft.

Garry

[VladTepes]

This thread is fascinating.

[mowog]

BTW mowog,can I ask about your Avatar. Your username seems to indicate the Morris Wolseley Garages yet you have a BMW in the image!

I have owned a lot of real Mini's / Moke's over the years. I still love them but don't have the time to keep one on the road.

[Celtoid]

When I first started flying as an Observer in the RAN many of the senior officers had flown in Vietnam with US cavalry flights with quite a few casualties.

The RAAF were always against the Navy having and offensive air capability and resisted the Navy's proposed replacement for Melbourne. The argued that the RAAF could provide air support for fleet operations - however war gaming and exercise experience showed the opposite was the case - Ok if you were within a few hundred Nm from a base but otherwise not much chop. Not the fault of the people on the ground - just the competitive political rivalryies at the top.

When Melbourne went out od service a large number of RAN aircrew went other ways - I went back to sea as a seaman officer (and sold my land I was going to build on in Nowra), a number joined the RN and a number went to the RAAF. These included Sub-Lieutenant Mark Binskin who has just left the position of Chief of the Air Force and is now (or about to be) Vice Chief of the Defence Force and I would expect to be the next CDF in about 3 years time.

I think moving tactical air assets from the RAAF to the Army was the right decision but was not well executed. RAAF should retain "Strategic" air assets such as heavy lift, continental air defence etc but "tactical" air assets should remain with the individual services.

I think that the Army have got over their initial lack of skill on operating the new aircraft types and now are highly proficient in operating their aircraft.

Garry

It's been 22 years since the RAAF were 'forced' to hand over the helicopters to the Army, so you would think that things would have improved significantly. I used the term 'forced' as it is noteworthy that there were many within the RAAF that were happy to do so, to let it happen. I believe from the mouth of the current CDF, "RAAF Prima Donna attitudes did not help the argument".

In real terms what does that mean....?

RAAF pilots 'generally' did not want to fly helicopters...they wanted fast jets. It was 'generally' the low performers that got posted to Helo SQNs. Obviously not completely true, but it played it's part. From my experience the RAAF aircrew largely, did not like to get in holes in the ground...they did not like to dig shell scrapes and gun pits, they did not like ration packs. So when emotive Vietnam sentiment was brought to the fore and General Gration and Kim Beasley were thick as thieves, the weak links in the RAAF's argument surfaced. The rest is history. However, it should be well noted that many within the RAAF foretold the outcome, as did many within the Navy and Army....as in, how much it was going to damage our Helo assets. In fact…legend has it…LOL….that a reversal was discussed on numerous occasions and the RAAF refused to take the Helos back.

The Navy aviation people should have learned some serious lessons of late, yet reports years after the Shark 02 incident, and insider tales, would indicate otherwise. There apparently is still a culture of cutting corners and covering up.

I have had no direct dealings with the Army for years, yet shortly after I left the RAAF and worked on the ARH Project, I was horrified that some of the same attitudes I'd experienced during the Blackhawk transition, were alive and well. An ARH is more technologically advanced than an F-18, yet in some quarters the ‘It’s a Truck’ mentality was still alive and well.

The RAAF has more than it's fair share of clowns, arrogance and incompetence but fortunately, hard lessons learned over almost a century produced a system that knew how to operate and support air assets. Of course the rocket scientists that decided to amalgamate the Aircraft Engineer trades (as in Techos) have raped the system of corporate expertise and ability…but that’s another story!

Anyway…getting back to the point….

Doesn’t matter which service tries but if you don’t understand air assets and the complexities that come with them, well you shouldn’t operate them. It really is that black and white! I’ve heard a perfect point in case….the US aircraft carriers all have naval aviators (Pilots) as captains….not naval seaman officers, that outcome was learned the hard way. Of course, that could be crap….it’s hearsay….the other stuff I wrote is solid!

Cheers,

Kev.

[dhc4ever]

Yep 22yrs and it STILL ****es me off, the wound still hasnt healed.
I have several stories regarding my views and my experiences during the takeover while I was at 5 sqn which morphed into the Australian Defense Force Helicopter School.
The grunts did a lovely job of painting ARMY on everything, landing aircraft tail rotor first, heavy landings, running around doing PT, but didnt seem to grasp the idea that to launch an aircraft required a few hours work, which meant showing up for work early ie near dawn to launch the first wave around GSD (green suited dick aka aircrew) office hours IE 8am.
It became very obvious very quickly that the only people doing ANY aircraft work before 11 am were all wearing blue uniforms, as the grunts were off doing pt, attending medical due to pt, mornos, personal admin etc etc etc.
It was bloody funny when all the blue suits also showed up one morning for PT and nothing was on the tarmac for the GSD's at 8am, things changed a bit after that funnily enough.
18 months later I was seconded from a RAAF fixed wing SQN to army aviation logistics management sqn, for some reason they need people that had a clue (thats where it is! as Im fairly cluelss these days).
Now I have a lot of respect for most of the army maintainers that were caught up in this ****fight, they were on the most part were good blokes shafted by the upper echelon. Having heard stories of 20 hr days, no maintenance stagger being followed and fly at all costs so we look better that the RAAF, Im not surprised that they have had the outcomes they did.
Still they've now had 22 yrs to get their act together and from media reports and people I know thast are still in the military rotary wing world they are doing a good job, but its taken about 25 bodies several airframes and 22 years.
Yes Im still lockwired in the ****ed off position about it all.

[mowog]

We had Army aircrews at 35 sqn for a while.

One day they let a full Army crew fly a bird without adult supervision. I went out did a BF on the required bird. The Army guys arrived to sign for the aircraft so I went out to do the launch. I was sitting in the aircraft waiting for the crew. They proceeded to pull the covers off the aircraft next to the one they were supposed to fly....

I decided to play their game and let them do a walk around get strapped in... I got the rotor and walked around the front...

They looked for start clearance and I gave them a thumbs down... They look around wait and seek clearance again... Thumbs down....

This happened 5 times before they sent the talking mirror (Load Master) out to see what was going on..

I told him mate its the wrong aircraft.....

He asked me why I didn't tell them before.... I said there would have been no fun in that.

The Pilot said he was going to report my attitude to the WOE.

I said that's ok because I was headed to HQ to tell his boss what he had done...

That crew never flew together again at 35 sqn.

[Ratel10mm]

...I have several stories regarding my views and my experiences during the takeover while I was at 5 sqn which morphed into the Australian Defense Force Helicopter School....

Is that you Pete?

Matt

[dhc4ever]

Is that you Pete?

Matt

Yes Matt.
Get around dont I :twisted:

[jb747]

RAAF pilots 'generally' did not want to fly helicopters...they wanted fast jets. It was 'generally' the low performers that got posted to Helo SQNs. Obviously not completely true, but it played it's part.

Whilst very few (if any) duxes of course went off to fly helos, the vast majority had worked out by the end of the course that fast jets, and in particular Williamtown, were not for them. From the RAAF blokes on my course, there were quite a few with a first preference for helos (the RAN people were a little more stuck, as A4 slots were like hen's teeth). The knucks weren't necessarily the best performers (although it's fair to say they were always in the top half), but they all had very similar attitudes.

[Mudguard]

I would also like to say that i spent time at the pointy end and also down the blunt end of maintaining Hercs, Caribous, Hornets and Pigs. Whilst i spent my share of time in clean sheets with the pointy end.... Wasnt often enought for my liking and it wasnt until i had spent my time in the bush with the Hercs and Bous. You dont find too many fast jets landing on dirt strips etc as it tends to break things that make it hard for them to actually do their job again.

I did spend time painted in dull green and brown paint picking the supposedly good stuff out of rat packs with "bous" in the bush and overseas.

I remember one time on exercise in some bush somewhere in Northern QLD getting a good telling off by my snake when i had carried a freshly brewed coffee in my cups canteen to the gun pit for a "stand to".... I wasnt going to leave it behind to get cold was i !!!.....Cups canteen in one hand and rifle in the other....

I have plenty of healthy repect for the AJ's doing it tough living in the bush. If i wanted to do more of that stuff i probably would have joined the Army. I have plenty of mates still doing it.

I dont think there is any good in saying people arent tough enough for not spending enough time in a gun pit or running around the bush. I have a healthy respect for the people that have done it and still do. I give them their due respect when i march on ANZAC day with them and with all the other returned servicemen and woman.

I wear my medals with pride and hopefully my kids will wear mine and my wifes medals with pride one day.

If i have given any offense to anyone by my comments i can be found in Perth occasionaly when back from a mine site, and we can discuss it all over a cold frothy looking at a sunset over the ocean. By then we will hopefully forget the differences between Green, Blue or White and agree that we had good times in whatever colour uniform we wore.

On a side note.... The Navy's DPCU's do look like pajamas though..... I laughed when i first saw one of my mates in them.....:)

[ramblingboy42]

What bunch of cry babies you crabs are. No wonder the army guys hurt you every opportunity they could. I have never heard so much rubbish in all my life. Its all born of a hate for the army.Dont know why it exists, I had to do training on RAAF bases and the comtempt I got from your SNCO's was disgusting and in some cases it was reported to my seniors because it was so bad. Theres nothing wrong with being trained hard and tough...hell we had to be....we were expected to kill people. But you guys would throw it in our faces. Funny, we never got that response from the Navy.

[dhc4ever]

Crabs eh,
spoken like a true army jerk. Got over yourself yet?
I worked extensively with the army for over 18 yrs, I trained quite a few on Iroquoise and Squirrels, I even got sentenced to Oakey for my efforts for 6 months. Only had problems with a few know-it-all malcontents, a few of the flying rear view mirrors and the odd pilot and anything that called itself an aircraft handler.
Most of the guys at my level were pretty good and generally switched on.
What I had the major problem with was the "its just a truck with wings" and you crabs know nothing attitude (we know boats)that seemed to come from the top.
You obviously have extensive army aviation experience, lets hear it................

[ramblingboy42]

hmmm .....do you know why or admit why you were called crabs?

[dhc4ever]

You obviously have extensive army aviation experience, lets hear it................(cricket, cricket, cricket)

Or do you want to persist with the childish name calling?
I can guarantee my vocabulary is bigger than yours........

On second thoughts don't worry about it, I've argued with AJ's in the past and don't want to be dragged back down to that level again.

[Pedro_The_Swift]

MOD HAT ON.

Enough.

another post not on topic and this thread is closed.