Army Aviation Digest - Apr 1983

8/12/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Apr 1983

1/44

USAARLSCI SUPPORT CENTER

O. BOX 620577FORT RUCKER AL 36362 0577


2/44

N U ~ I B f : R

EommlnderArmy Aviltion

Fort Allbln


3/44

IL-PRODUCING countries have been makingby rolling back their prices on crudeNow, Army Aviation and its oil analysis program"front-page" news with the successful

of a new chip detector and filter concept thatour Army aircraft,000 gallons of oil for savings of at least1.5 million annually.Major General Story c. Stevens, commander of the

,us in this month's lead article about the new oil70 ,000 hoursUH-1s have proven so successful that AVRADCOMbe extended,000 hours from the current 100- to 300-hourtest was limited to UH-1s , the newis equally applicable to other helicopters.As continues to be evident throughout the force, we

this year in our endeavors to befree. That's "headline" news in any publicaand a great many people deserve credit for theirin our renewed assault on needless accidents., Mr. G. Thomas White and his colleagues at the, VA , are to betheir efforts to isolate causes andI recommend that youMr. White's article carefully, for as he points out,

still with us. In turn,eness of the causes of mast bumping is a majorto this problem. You should, therefore, take

modifications that dicof maneuverability safely achievableflying nap-of-the-earth in combat environments.And since when is good news a cause for concern?Sandra S. Martin of ARI and CW4 Lloyd Washer of

that question for us in the arti"Aviation Warrant Officer Retention, A Continuing" They point out that since the Army increasedawareness and at tent ion to warrant officer attritionFY 1979, the retention rate has steadily increased50 percent to more than 60 percent.increased the annualoutput of aviation warrant officers from onlyFY 1978 to 859 in FY 1983. Not only has this train

officer population ,, the proportionate number eligito leave has increased accordingly. Thus, the poten

in training dollars invested could approachmillion per year or more than 100 ,000 per aviator.Thus, any above normal attrition rate for aviation per

most successful. Dr. Martin and CW4 Washerwhat was done, including how the Army AviaBranch may affect future retention. A well that documents

timely andthat we have, trained and retained good people and t h ~

enjoy what they are doing in a challenging careerand remaining in the force in unprecedented numbers.Thanks now to all of our readers for your tremendousresponse to the recent readership survey. Returns arestill pouring in, and results are being tabulated, butone thing is clearly evident: "Hangar Talk" and the morerecently created "Tower Talk" are extremely popularwith our readers. CW2 (P) Gary Weiland, the author,covers AR 95-1, "Army Aviation: General Provisions andFlight Regulations" this month.If you have not tested yourself in an earlier issue,I urge you to try this month's quiz on page 18. You mayfind that you need to get the book" out and refresha bit. But, you'll hardly be alone. According to oursurvey responses, a great many people at all levels ofArmy Aviation get the book out to rev iew what theyhave forgotten after reading "Hangar Talk:' That's theprofessional approach.And finally, 15 April 1983 brought good news to theArmy Aviation team-not in terms of an income taxreturn, though I hope many of you received a generousrefund, but a formal announcement that the Secretaryof the Army and the Chie f of Staff on the 14th had approved the centralization of all aviation proponency atthe Aviation Center and the establishment of Aviationas a Branch of the Army. This long awaited and muchdeliberated decision was received with great enthusiasm by aviators and crewmembers everywhere,commissioned and warrant officer, and enlisted, juniorand senior. But the challenge is now ours as neverbefore to make an even greater contribution to thecombined arms team of our Army. Remember, one andall, that this decision, the establishment of the Branch,was made with that thought in mind-to provide ourArmy even more from Aviation than ever before. Thatis now our mission and there is no doubt that we cando so. The confidence of our leadership in the "Aviation Branch" and reposed in us will be reaffirmed manytimes over in the years to come. As Aviation teammembers, we will continue to strive for excellence

Major General Carl H. McNair Jr.Commander, U.S. Army Aviation CenterFort Rucker, AL


4/44

ARMY AVIATION~ J ~Sirs I ~ ) I S

Major General Story c StevensCommanderu.s Army Aviation Research and Development CommandSt Louis MO

2

OST ARMY helicopter pilots haexperienced that uncertain feelith t occurs when a chip deteclight illuminates while in fligFortunately, most of the precationary landings which result are later determined have been unnecessary, but this does little to elimina

the tension during the landing. Most of the unnecessaaborts associated with chip detectors are due tobuildup of normal fuzz across the electrical contacor a short circuit in the wiring. U.S. Army AviatiResearch and Development Command's (AVRACOM's) Applied Technology Lab (ATL) at Ft. EustVA has long been concerned with those and othrelated problems which produce high abort rates aexcessive m inten nce costs; e.g., ineffectidiagnostics, too-frequent oil changes, high no-faremovals.ATL is currently flight testing a new chip detectand filter concept for engines, transmissions and geboxes which is showing great promise for virtuaeliminating unnecessary chip detector aborts agreatly increasing bearing life while producing an etremely accurate diagnosis of the conditions of the owetted components. This system, which consists ofnew in-line chip detector and an extremely fine filtehas been flight tested in excess of 70,000 hours woutstanding effectiveness.Those of us who have been around Army Aviatifor a while recognize a need for sophistication in tuse of lubricating oils, particularly in the areas of codition monitoring of the oil-wetted components aof overall oil utilization. Although we use chip detetors and spectrometric analysis for diagnostic purposeeach of these has severe limitations. The chip detetors are not scientifically or strategically locatetherefore, they have a very poor collection efficienin addition to producing false indications. The spetrometer is limited in its diagnostic capability fhelicopter application in that it can only deal with pticles less than 8 microns, which are of little or no valfrom a diagnostic standpoint. Coupled with these spetrometer limitations, the problems experienced in tlogistics (sample-taking, delivery to lab, analysis, cor message from the lab in case a problem is founcause that program to be of limited value.As a result of these diagnostic problems, Army Avtion experiences a no-fault removal rate of engintransmissions and gearboxes of about 35 percent.Historically, we have changed the oil in our UHHuey engines and transmissions every 100 and 3

u S ARMY AVIATION DIGE


5/44

were unen the aircraft were new. Litwas known about component life expectancies andwere reasonable. Aircraft maturityls. Air Force and Navy turbine engine and gear

of magnitudethan that for Army Aviation components.It has been recognized for many years that

of oil-wetted coms, and that, of course, is the reason for the inof chip detectors and use of the Army Oil

be addressed is what is the best, mostway of receiving and analyzing this informaUnder the ATL Oil Debris Monitoring Program,of diagnostic techniques have been in

ofofwere designed to give an indication of the quan

of metal in the oil. During the course of work beby ATL, in-house and under conbecame evident that the size of the metallic paras well as the quantity, was significant.was recognized that large particles (those of 20than those particles of a smaller size. During

of time, work conducted by AVRADratory and others showed the

of clean oil on component fatigue life.an

had a fatigue life offive times that of components operating in anon current Army aircraft (except the T-70080

size.In 1978 ATL with two objectives, initiated an ongoof an advanced

its aircraft engines and transmissions to at leasthours. This program involves a fleet of UH-lof the U.S. Army Aviation Center at Ft.

Test Activity (ADTA) and is the culmination ofof research efforts involving oil-wetted com-

ponent particle analysis, filtration studies and component reliability assessments. The 50 aircraft in the program were divided into a 12-aircraft control fleet anda 38-aircraft test fleet. The control aircraft and themaintenance performed on them were not modified inany manner other than eliminating lubricating oilchanges. The test fleet had 3-micron filters and newfull-flow, fuzz-discriminating, chip detectors built byTEDECO installed on both engines and transmissions.No oil changes were made on the test fleet.The primary features of this new chip detector areits extremely high collection efficiency due to its designand location in the oil line and its capability to detectnormal fuzz and or chips of insignificant size but notcause the illumination of the chip light. Fuzzdiscriminating chip detectors were installed in both the42- and 9O-degree gearboxes on the test fleet as well.Early in the program, several minor redesigns andmodifications of the system were required to producereliable, effective operation. One of these changes involved minor revisions to the chip detector gap which,of course, influences the sensitivity of the chip detector system. Another modification required, and whichhas interesting implications, was the redesign of thebypass arrangement on the filter housings. t wasdiscovered on cold starts when the filter went intobypass it would cause the regurgitation of previouslytrapped debris. Although this was first noticed on testaircraft, the filter head was standard and had not beenmodified in any way. This implies that the filter designof every UH-l and AH-l Cobra flying today allows allfiltered debris to be reinserted into the lubricationsystem upon a cold start of the aircraft. Filter headmodifications on the test fleet resolved the problem.At this writing, the test fleet has logged in excess of70,000 hours, 50,000 of which have been flown sincethe filter bypass redesign.The transmisson lube system schematic at figure 1shows that the standard cleanable filter, having a ratingof 80 microns, has been replaced by the new chip detector in the test installation. In addition, it can be seenthat the 3-micron filter replaces the standard externalfilter having a 38-micron rating.The engine lube system schematic is illustrated infigure 2. The chip detector is installed in the scavengeline directly after the pump with the 3-micron filterlocated between the chip detector and the oil cooler.As shown in figure 3 the overall organization of theprogram is comprehensive and incorporates thecapabilities of a number of organizations. The procedures used during the flight test program were such


6/44

3 micron filter

FIGURE : Transmissionoil system schematic

\

that upon the occurrenceof a chip light, the chip detector was removed from the aircraft and replaced witha spare. The removed chip detector was then sent tothe AOAP lab at Ft. Rucker for analysis, photographing and cleaning. The debris was then sent to theoint Oil Analysis Program JOAP) lab at PensacolaNaval Air Station, FL, where it was classified,photographed and retained. In cases of severe contamination, the filter was also removed from the air

craft and the debris analyzed.Oil samples were taken from both test and controlaircraft every 50 hours. They were subjected to AOAPanalysis and then sent to the Naval Air Propulsion TestCenter in Trenton, NJ, for physical and chemicalanalysis of the oil.Engines and transmissons which were removed formetal contamination were followed by teardown inspections accomplished at ADTA and the conditionof the

4

FIGURE 2: T53 engine schematwith full flow debris monitor

L--- u l l flow debr ismonitor

oil-wetted components documented. In addition, ctain other engines and transmissions whichwere remoed for reasons other than metal contamination, e foreign object damage, oil leakage, etc., were also sujected to teardown inspection with the resudocumented. This process provided, for the first timfeedback information on the condition of engines atransmissions which had been identified by chip inditions as having failures in progress. It also allowed feeback information on the general interior conditionthe oil system of engines and transmissions which hbeen operated without oil changes for long periodstime, both with standard filtration and the 3-micrfiltration.The results of this program have been outstandinSamples of oil taken from engines and transmissooperating up to 2,000 hours have shown that the condition is not measurably affected and, in fact, t

U.S. RMY VI TION DIGE


7/44

oil still met new oil specifications, regardlessthe level of filtration.The 3-micron filters had a very strong, positive efof the interior of the engines andumerous comments were recorded by

f the interiors and the excellent condition of the wearTo date, 6 transmissions and 13 engines have been

100 or so hours of operation.

of those engines andmetal contamination, but were subjected to tear

of the removals for metal conby the Spectrographic Oilis understandable since thefilters remove virtually everything of AOAPOnly three chip lights have been experienced on the- and 90-degree gearboxes, with no removals peris dramatic

of the ineffectiveness of standard gearbox chipand their contribution to false removals and

The program has demonstrated that the full-flowand ultrafine filtration, produces a superior dia

and operating environment for oil100 percent

: Oil debris monitoring and fine filtration progam

N PC . TRENTON N.LOIL EXTENSION CONSULTANT

fORI RU KEROIL SAMPlES

OIL TESTS

TECH . SUPPORT CTR .JOAP PENSACOLA flA ._ - 1OIL ANALYSIS AMPlifICATION

DEBRIS N L YSIS

RIPORT , RICOMMINDATIONS60 000 flight hours TO VR DCOM. . . 38 test aircraft. . . 12 control aircraft

AllMANAGI PROGRAMCOORDINAII IITWIINIlIMINTSSTORI , ANAl YII D TINGINIIRING N L HIS OFCOMPONINT INSPICTION

effective in detecting failures of oil-wetted componentsin engines and transmissions. t has also been 100 percent effective in not producing false alarms or no-faultremovals. Explicit removal criteria have been developedfor the transmisson. Removal criteria for the engineare not as well developed and that process is being continued. Further data is being gathered on these enginechip detectors and on chip detectors having designrefinements.Based on the failure detection reliability of thesystem tested and the substantial time periods overwhich chip indications occur prior to a failure,AVRADCOM has recommended that such a system beinstalled on all UH-1 and AH-1 aircraft and that thechip lights be moved from the cockpit to a maintenanceadvisory panel. Such action would eliminate missionaborts due to false chip lights and would have no effect on flight safety. t has also been recommended thatthe transmission be placed in an on-conditionmaintenance status.The results of this program lead to the o n ~ l u s i o nthat the oil change interval in the existing fleet shouldimmediately be extended to at least 1,000 hours andATL is of the opinion the oil should be placed in anon-condition status. The on-condition argument canbe supported very easily by the current availability ofsimple, easily applied test measures to determine theacidity and viscosity of the oil at the aircraft site.The substantial benefits of the implementation ofthe results of this work are immediately obvious. Thevirtual elimination of no-fault removals of engines,transmissions and gearboxes will produce large benefitsin such important areas as reduced componentoverhauls with the associated maintenance man-hoursper flight hour, provide substantially increased MTBRsmean time between engine) removals), reducedspares/pipeline costs and a substantial increase in aircraft availability. t has been calculated that nothingmore complicated than extending the oil change interval produces a savings of 57,000 gallons of oil ( 1.5million). A cost effective analysis has been performedon the installation of the tested system on the UH-land AH-l fleet which indicates a payback of initial investment in about 18 months.Although the program outlined herein relates to theUH-1 aircraft, the lessons learned can be directly applied to other helicopters. Certain peculiar wear modesof engines and transmissions must be considered, butproper integration of the diagnostic system into thelubrication system will be effective and extremely productive, and should be undertaken.

5


8/44

VI TION W RR NT OFFICER RETENTION

CONTINUINGEFFORT

Dr Sandra S MartinAnacapa SCiences Inc.

U S Army Research Institute Field UnitFort Rucker AL

CW4 Lloyd WasherWarrant Officer Division

U S Army Military Personnel CenterAlexandria VA

G L O S S R YAFS active federal service FY fiscal yearRI Army Research Institute HQDA Headquarters Department of the ArmyTM aircrew training manual IERW init ial entry rotary wingWO aviation warrant officer MILPERCEN Military Personnel CenterD Department of the Army PERSACS Personnel Structure and Composition

DCSPER Deputy Ch ief of Staff for Personnel SystemDOD Department of Defense PMOS primary milita ry occupational specialtyDTD Directorate of Tra ining Developments POI program of InstructionFAC flight act ivity category TOY temporary dutyFM field manual USAAVNC U.S. Army Av iation Cen ter

6

N FISCAL YEAR 19MILPERCEN noted a trenI toward decreased retentioof AWOs. Retention data indicatethat, for those AWOs who hgraduated from flight training in F1976 and FY 1977T and who weeligible to leave the Army in F1979, retention beyond initiobligation was about 45 percent. contrast, during the 3 previouyears, retention of AWOs at thsame career point had remainerelatively constant at about 65 pecent (figure 1 .MILPERCEN was concernethat, if the high rate of AWO separtion continued, Army Aviationreadiness and combat effectivenewould be seriously reduced. Thconcern prompted MILPERCEN request that ARI provide researcsupport to investigate AWO attrtion. In response to the request, ARconducted a worldwide surveyArmy aviators that identified thdemographic characteristics ancareer factors that contribute AWO attrition.The 10 factors that AWO attritewho participated in the survey idetified as having the most influencon their decisions to leave the Armare shown in figure 2. These factosubsequently became the focus ofseries of initiatives developed bMILPERCEN to improve retentioof AWOs. Major initiatives include

I qlnnina witb FY 1977, tbe fiscal year wascbanaed from 1 July tbrouab 30 June to 1 Octobetbrouab 30 September. FY 197TI represents tbeperiod 1 July 1976 tbrouab 30 September 1976durlna wbic:b tbe transition to tbe new fiscal yearconcept occurred.

u.S. RMY AVIATION DIGES


9/44

.,

in the series are summarized infigure 3. The research and theresulting initiatives were described indetail in a series of Aviation Digestarticles published in 1981 (August,September, November and December). Copies can be obtained bywriting to: Editor, Aviation DigestP.O. Drawer P, Ft. Rucker, AL36362.Impact Of The Initiatives

Since initiation of the AWO retention effort in FY 1979, retention ofAWOs has steadily increased. Ingeneral, the increases in retentioncorrespond with the Army's effortsto improve AWO retention.

FIGURE : Retention of AWOs at the end of initial obligation7 ~ o

' O ~ 6 ~ oO ~c 5 ~ oC.:.:'O..c> 4 ~ o. c 3 ~ oc Z~ o>c 2 ~ o

0 1 ~ o

During FY 1980, the first year ofthe retention effort, retention offirst-term AWOs increased from47.2 percent to 53.9 percent (figure1 . Although ARI's survey did not

1973197419751976 1977T1977 1978 1979fiscal year of IERW completion(The fiscal year shown is the year of flight school completion. The end of initial obligation for the AWOs included in this figure was 3 years after flight school completion.)

FIGURE 2: Career factors influencing AWOs decisions to leave the ArmyAttriteeRANKORDER CAREER FACTOR

1 Unequal flight pay (warrant officer flight pay versus commissioned officer flight pay)2 Lack of concern for the individual3 Low pay (all pay and allowances)4 Erosion of benefits5 Lack of competence in aviation matters by chain of command6 Lack of professional respect and recognition from commissioned officers7 Lack of opportunity for desirable installation assignment8 Lack of leadership9 Potential for higher paying aviation-related position outside of the Army

10 Lack of predictability of future in the Army

APRIL 1983 7


10/44

FIGURE 3: Retention initiativesArea Of Concern Initiatives

Equalization of flight payIncrease in base pay

Pay and Benefits Concurrent travel allowancesField grade housingProposed pay step increases for warrant officerswith more than 20 years AFS

Reorganization of Aviation Assignments Branch sothat assignments are controlled by PMOSExpansion of Professional Development Branch toinclude long-term planning for the Warrant OfficerCorps

Assignment and Warrant officer representation on theCareer Management DCSPER staff

Additional skill identifier ASI 4A) to assign WarrantOfficer Senior Course graduates to selected positionsProposal for a single promotion system

Expanded opportunity for aircraft transition trainingIncreased quota for Warrant Officer AssociateDegree Program

Professional Inclusion of CW3s P) and CW4s in the zone ofDevelopment consideration for the Warrant Officer Senior CourseRevision of Aviation Warrant Officer AdvancedCourse to include training for additional duties

odification of requirements for civilian educationprograms to include Regular Army warrant officerswith up to 25 years AFSProposal for funding to permit attendance of theAviation Warrant Officer Advanced Course as a TDYwith return to home station

8

begin until September 1980 a greadeal of publicity about the overaretention effort preceded the surveyIn addition, a number of preliminary surveys were conducteprior to the more extensive surveyThus, it can be assumed thatthroughout FY 1980 AWOs wergenerally aware of the Army s interest in them.A further increase in retention occurred in FY 1981 during which 5percent of the AWOs who completed their initial obligation remained in the Army. The additionaincrease in AWO retention corresponds with the conduct of thRI survey, publication of its findings and an 11.7 percent increase ibase pay. A 60 percent retention ratin FY 1982 indicates that the overa

increase in AWO retention isrelatively stable one.Feedback from individuals in thfield suggests that the continued increase in AWO retention is due, ipart, to the retention initiatives thawere enacted during FY 1982. In addition, there is evidence that thdecline in the economy during recent years has limited the availabilitof civilian jobs. The decreasechances of finding a civilian jomight have encouraged retention oAWOs who would have chosen tleave the Army.Reasons For Continuing Concern

Figure 1 shows that the currenrate of AWO retention approximatea level that was considered for manyears to be acceptable. Howeverdespite the recent improvement i

u.s. RMY VI TION DIGES


11/44

retention rate, there are reasons forcontinuing concern about AWOretention.Increased AWO Training Rate Inresponse to the high AWO separation rate and increasing aviationforce structure requirements,HQDA directed the Aviation Centerto increase the AWO training rate atFt. Rucker from 192 in FY 1975 to816 in FY 1982 with 859 projectedfor FY 1983. Figure 4 illustrates thedramatic increase in AWOs trainedat Ft. Rucker over the past few years.The high training rate necessaryto meet the Army s increasing aviation requirements is the primaryreason for the Army s continuedconcern about future retention ofAWOs. That is due to the hightraining rate, the Army must reexamine the acceptability of a60-percent first-term retention rate.Figure 5 illustrates the projected lossof AWOs that can be expected overthe next 4 years if the first-termretention rate remains at 60 percent.While the higher training rate increases the number of AWOs whoremain in the Army, it also increasesthe number of AWOs who leave theArmy even with the improved rateof retention In FY 1979, whenretention rate for first-term AWOswas 45.2 percent, the Army lost 142AWOs at the end of initialobligation. 2 (Note: 142 represents54.8 percent of the 259 AWOs whowere trained in FY 1976.) As indicated in figure 5 the Army can ex-pect to lose 1 229 AWOs between FY

'The initial obligation was changed from 3 to 4 yearseffective 1 October 1978.

APRIL 1983

FIGURE 4: Number of Active Army AWO graduates from IERWflight training by fiscal year projected)

~ 8 5 900\IQ) 800- 800 816--L-----1I--- .1~-0 70000 600

~0:: 500w- 4000300)cE 200~c 100

197319741975 1976 1977T 1977 1978 1979 198019811982 1983fiscal year of IERW completion

Source: Programs Branch , Directorate of Training and Doctrine , USAAVNC, January 1983.

FIGURE 5: Projected number of AWO losses FY 19841987Number ProjectedFlight of FirstSchoo l AWOs Term

o m ~ l e t i o n Trained8 RetentionFY 80 597 60FY 81 800 60FY 82 816 60FY 83 859 60

projectedTotal 3,0728 The training output figures are Active Army only

1984 and FY 1987-i.e., 40 percentof the 3,072 AWOs who are trainedin the FY 1980 to 1983 timeframe.The continuing AWO retentionproblem becomes of even greater

End ofInitial Expected ExpectedObligation Retention AttritionFY 84 358 239FY 85 480 320FY 86 490 326FY 87 515 344

Total 1,229

concern when the losses are viewedin terms of training replacementcosts. The cost of replacing an AWOwho leaves the Army is estimatedfrom the cost of training a new

9


12/44

FIGURE 6: FY 1979 estimated minimum replacement cost of a UH1 trained aviation warrant officerCumulativeYears of FAC 1 DOD Annual Cost of TotalService as Annual Estimated Cost of Proficiency CumulativeCost Aviator Flight Cost Per Proficiency Training Cost ofof (Initial HourIERWa,b Obligation) RequirementsC

(1) (2) (3)121,431 1 96121,431 2 96121,431 3 96

a The estimated cost is based on actual FY 1979 training costs expressedin FY 1981 dollars.b The reported cost is provided by Directorate of Resource Management,USAAVNC.C The reported hours represent the minimum number of flight hours that the ATM(TC 1135, January 1979) requires annually for an FAC 1 aviator.d The reported cost represents DA 's FY 1979 estimates of the hourly reimburse

ment rates for DOD users (from FM 101-20 , January 1979). Flight hour costsfor a specific installation may differ from the DA estimates.

Flight Training (Cumulative TrainingHour d (Col 3 x Col 4) Total of Col 5) (Col 1 + Col 6(4) (5) (6) (7)235 22,560 22,560 143,991

35 22,560 45,120 166,551235 22,560 67,680 189,111

8 The totals do not include the additional training costs incurred by the qualifitions listed below. If the aviator has any of these qualifications, the appropritraining cost(s) must be added to the reported totals.Instructor Pilot Course P)Rotary Wing Instrument Flight Examiner Course (IFE)Aviation Maintenance Officer Course (AMOC)Aviation Safety Officer Course (ASO)Aviation Warrant Officer Advanced Course (AWOAC)

21 ,018,316 ,42 ,817,

FIGURE 7: FY 1983 estimated minimum replacement cost of a UH1 trained aviation warrant officerCumulativeYears of FAC 1 DOD Annual Cost of TotalService as Annual Estimated Cost of Proficiency CumulativeCost Aviator Flight Cost Per Proficiency Training Cost ofof (Initial HourIERWa,b Obligation) RequirementsC

(1) (2) (3)127,173 1 96127,173 2 96127,173 3 96127,173 4 96

a The estimated cost is based on actual FY 1981 training costs expressed in FY1983 dollars.b The reported cost is provided by Directorate of Resource Management,USAAVNC.C The reported hours represent the minimum number of flight hours that the ATM(TC 1-135, January 1981) requires annually for an FAC 1 aviator.d The reported costs represent DA's FY 1983 estimates of the hourly reimbursement rates for DOD users (from HQDA Message, DALDAV 0815107 , October 1982).The costs do not include operation and maintenance crewmen hourly per diem

1

Flight Training (Cumulative TrainingHour d (Col 3 x Col 4) Total of Col 5) (Col 1 + Col 6 8(4)332332332332

(5) (6) (7)31,872 31 ,872 159,04531,872 63,744 190,91731,872 95,616 222,78931,872 127,488 254,661

rates. Flight hour costs for a specific installation may differ from theestimates.8 The totals do not include the additional training costs incurred by the qualiftions listed below. If the aviator has any of these qualifications, the approprtraining cost(s) must be added to the reported totals.

Instructor Pilot Course (P)Rotary Wing Instrument Flight Examiner Course (IFE)Av iation Maintenance Off icer Course (AMOC)Aviation Safety Officer Course (ASO)Aviation Warrant Officer Advanced Course (AWOAC)

1922,16(FY 83 cost availa22

u.s. RMY AVIATION DIGES


13/44

aviator to a comparable level of proficiency. An AWO who separatedfrom the Army at the end of initialobligation in FY 1979 represented aminimum training replacement costof 189,111 (figure 6). An AWOtrained in FY 1983 will represent aminimum training replacement costof $254,661 at the end of initialobligation (figure 7). Thus, the lossof 142 AWOs in FY 1979 representeda total loss of about $27,000,000(142 AWOs multiplied by 189,111training cost per aviator; figure 8).In contrast, the projected loss of 344aviators in FY 1987 will represent atotal loss of about $88,000,000 (344AWOs multiplied by $254,661 training cost per aviator). Since the projections of future losses are not based on inflated dollars and do not include the costs of additional aircraftqualification courses, the actual lossrepresented by these aviators will bemuch greater than $88,000,000.

ging OJ The Force Continuedconcern with retention is furthersupported by MILPERCEN s current projections of losses due to aging of the force (figure 9). Agingof the force refers to the largenumber of AWOs in the current inventory who are approaching20-year retirement eligibility. Thelosses shown in figure 9 are basedon FY 1982 retention data that indicate an annual loss rate of 24 percent for those AWOs remaining past20 years of service. However, thehistorical loss rate of 36 percent forAWOs past 20 years of service suggests that the actual losses due toearly retirement may be even greater

APRIL 1983

FIGURE 8: Estimated number and training replacement cost of AWOs who leavethe rmy at the end of initial obligation

Numberof AWOsFlight Number of End of WhoSchool AWOs Initial Percent Leave

Completion Traineda Obligation ttrition Col 2 x Col 4)FY 1976 259 FY 1979 54.8 142FY 1977T 123 FY 1979 52.8 65FY 1977 488 FY 1980 46.1 225FY 1978 456 FY 1981 41.0 187FY 1979 420 FY 1982b 40.0 168FY 1980 597 FY 1984b 40.0 239

projectedFY 1981 800 FY 1985 40.0 320

projectedFY 1982 816 FY 1986 40.0 326

projectedFY 1983 859 FY 1987 40.0 344

projected projecteda The training output figures are Active Army only.b Due to the transition from a 3year to a 4-year initial obligation , effective 1 Oc

tober 1978, few first-term AWOs are eligible to leave the Army in FY 1983.cThe training costs for first-term AWOs who left the Army in FY 1979 through

FY 1982 are based on FY 1979 IERW and proficiency training costs. The training costs for first-term AWOs who are projected to leave the Army in FY 1984through FY 1987 are based on FY 1983 IERW and proficiency training costs.

EstimatedMinimumTrainingReplacementCostsC

27,000,00012 000 00Q43,000,00035,000,00032,000,00061,000,000

81,000,000

83,000,000

88,000,000

than the predicted losses. The problem is serious in the face of increasing authorizations and requirementsfor AWOs (figure 10).

An additional concern about thepredicted losses due to aging of theforce is the loss of aviation experience. The AWOs currently approaching 20-year retirementeligibility are from the Vietnam eraand thus have a vast amount of avia-

tion experience, including combatexperience. Even if only 24 percentof these AWOs leave the Army eachyear, once they reach retirementeligibility, the inventory of experienced aviators will be seriouslyreduced. The reduction in experience could have a serious impacton the Army's readiness for futurecombat.

11


14/44

FIGURE 9: Projected senior AWO losses per yearFiscal Year

Years of activeFederal Service 83 84 85 86 87 88 8919-20 54 48 90 94 148 163 11420 21 33 29 23 44 46 73 8021-22 13 14 10 9 18 19 2922-23 15 10 10 19 2023-24 13 12 2 2 2 2 324-25 7 7 6 5 5 5 425-26 6 8 8 7 5 6 626-27 4 4 9 9 8 6 727-28 2 2 5 6 6 5 428-29 0 0 5 5 6 6 52930 4 8 12 10 9 10 1030R 10 7 14 7 7 6 7Total 161 149 195 209 270 320 289

Note: The projected losses are based on an actual FY 1982 loss rate of 24 percent for AWOs past20 years AFS.Source: Professional Development Branch Warrant Officer Division MILPERCEN December 1982.

Current AWO Retention ActionsPersonnel Management FeedbackSystem The financial loss shown infigure 8 and the projected loss of ex-perienced aviators indicate that,despite the recent increase in retention, the Army needs to continue its

AWO retention effort. As a part ofthe Army s ongoing effort to improve retention of AWOs, ARI currently is developing a separationquestionnaire designed specificallyfor AWOs. ARI was tasked byMILPERCEN to develop the questionnaire as a follow-on to the retention survey. A peliminary version ofthe separation questionnaire has

12

been developed and is being fieldtested.When the separation questionnaire becomes operational, it will beadministered to all separating AWOsas a part of their general outprocessing from the Army. Informationprovided by the questionnaire can beused to establish a system that yieldscontinuous feedback about AWOattrition. The system can providecurrent information about thenumber and types of AWO losses tothe Army and about the factorsthatinfluence AWOs to leave the Army.Information about AWO losses canbe used to determine aviator

replacement needs, assess trammrequirements and forecast the AWOforce strength. Information abouattrition factors can be used to helpersonnel managers and decisionmakers monitor the effect of specfic policies and events on AWOretention.Leadership Changes The top 1factors identified by AWO attriteewho participated in the ARI surve(figure 2 represent three majoissues: pay and benefits (factors 13, 4 and 9 ; assignment and careemanagement (factors 7 and 10 ; ancommissioned officer leadershiand supervision (factors 2, 5, 6 an8 . The resulting DAiMILPERCENinitiatives (figure 3 produced actions that addressed primarily thissues of: a) pay and benefits, anb) assignment and career management. The commissioned officeleadership issues, which requirlong-term DA actions to effecchanges, were not directly addresseby the initial series of actions.The leadership factors that weridentified as major contributors tattrition reflected the AWOsperceptions that commissioned officer aviators lacked the competencnecessary to be good leaders andecisionmakers in aviation mattersIn addition, the commissioned officer aviators were preceived as lacking professional respect for thAWOs experience and technicaknowledge in aviation.

n Army Aviation Branchdesignated this month by the Armyinclude changes that will have farreaching effects on commissioneofficer leadership. The Aviatio

u.s. ARMY AVIATION DIGES


15/44

1 : Projected authorizationsfor AWOsFiscal NumberYear o AWOs83 5,88584 5,91585 6,27286 6,27687 6,26488 6,355

Adjusted PERSACS as of December 1982

commissioned officersas full-fledged members of the

ofAviation Training In addition to

training program are beingthat affect leadership.are being developed by DTD

will provide aviation leadershipand war

e training in addi tionalrequirements, including manresponsibilities. The

warrant officer ranks.

Although the retention rate forAWOs has significantly increased,the need for further improvement inAWO retention is clearly evident. Atthe current rate of retention, theArmy is retaining only 6 out of 1AWOs that it trains each year. By increasing its training rate to retain alarger number of AWOs, the Armyis paying a heavy price for meetingits force structure requirements.In order to reduce training ratecosts and still meet its requirements,the Army must find a way to maximize retention of high-qualityaviators. An immediate step inmeeting this objective is a determination of the optimal number ofAWOs that must be retained in orderto meet the Army's projected AWOrequirements at a minimum trainingrate.Setting an optimal retention goalwould be facilitated by analyses ofboththe performance level ofAWOswho typically leave the Army andthe costs of retaining these AWOs.A performance analysis would identify the types of AWOs who leavethe Army-i.e. good performers ormarginal performers. Informationabout performance is necessary todetermine the impact that AWO attrition has on Army Aviation's effectiveness, since that impact islargely determined by the performance of those AWOs who leave.While AWO attrition has traditionally been viewed solely in termsof its negative consequences, it ispossible that certain benefits may bederived from the loss of someAWOs-i.e., marginal performers. Acost-effectiveness analysis would

permit an assessment of both thecosts and benefits associated withAWO attrition. In addition, theanalysis would facilitate the establishment of a retention goal that isrealistic in terms of the costsassociated with the actions requiredto prevent attrition. A costeffectiveness analysis would helpachieve this objective by identifyingthe conditions under which it maybe more cost effective to accept attrition than to prevent it.

Based on the informationpresented here, it seems clear that aretention program is needed thatconsiders both the Army's requirements and the most economicalmeans of meeting these requirements. ARI previously hasrecommended that a retention teambe established to spearhead theAWO retention program. The retention team would be the primaryagency for implementing, coordinating and monitoring the Army'scontinuing ffort to improve retention of AWOs.

] Beginning with FY 1977. the fiscal year waschanged from 1 July through 3 June to 1 Octoberthrough 3 September. FY 1977T represents theperiod 1 July 1976 through 3 September 1976during which the transition to the new fiscal yearconcept occurred.

2The initial obligation was changed from 3 to 4 yearseffective 1 October 1978 .

3


16/44

Summer whenit sizzles

ON Y A FEW shortweeks ago you were concernedabout the effects ofcold weather, ice and blowingsnow on your people andmachines. Now it's already timeto get ready for summer problems. Flying will be complicatedby thunderstorms and high density altitude, while blowing sandand dust will add to yourmaintenance woes. Extreme heataffects machines and they don'tfunction as well but the effectsof heat stress on humanmachines are worse. Machinescan break down-people can die.When the air temperature combines with reflected heat frompaving and other surfaces,ground temperatures can soar.High humidity adds to the

4

discomfort and lowers exhaustionthresholds. The body attempts tocope with excessive heat byconduction-convection, radiationand evaporation. When surrounding air temperature is below bodytemperature and the air moves,through body motion or wind,you are cooled by the process ofconduction-convection. However,when surrounding air temperatureexceeds that of your body, yougain heat and become even hotter f surface temperatures ofsurrounding objects are belowbody temperature, you lose heatby radiation; but when surfacetemperatures exceed bodytemperature, again you gain heatand become hotter stillSweating is the body's most effective mechanism for cooling

and maintaining propertemperature; but in order to coosweat must evaporate. Sweat driping from your body on a stickhumid day with little air movement won't cool you.When your body tries to cooitself by vasodilatation in theskin, your heart rate increases ablood circulates from the centerof the body to the skin. Theseadjustments place a strain on thcirculatory system and play animportant role in the productioof heat illnesses. The effects cabe even more critical if you arepoor physical condition,overweight, and maybe not soyoung any more.According to the NationalWeather Service, an airtemperature of 95 degrees E

u s RMY AVIATION DIGE


17/44

combined with 80 percenthumidity equals 136 degrees ofapparent temperature." Whenthe apparent temperature exceeds130 degrees, heatstroke orsunstroke may occur. Beforesuch extreme conditions become

imminent, there are some thingsthat should be done. Acclimatize. A 10 to 14-dayperiod of acclimatization is ex-tremely important for peoplemoving from a cool climate to ahigh temperature area. Physicalconditioning must be donegradually and work should bescheduled to allow alternateperiods of work and rest. Training should include cardiovascular

endurance activities; e.g., runningin place, rather than muscle worksuch as pushups. Even after people become acclimatized to ahigh temperature environment,there are circumstances which willcause them to have to repeat theprocess. For example: a leavespent in a cool climate, a periodof hospitalization, or only twoweeks of working in an airconditioned building will requirethem to become acclimatizedagain when exposed to conditionswhich can result in heat stress.Sufficient rest is importantduring the acclimatization period

and abstinence from alcohol isrecommended. After a winterhiatus from physical activity, individuals should be cautiousabout leaping suddenly intostrenuous summer sports. Avoid dehydration. As littleas a 1 to 5-percent water losscan result in discomfort andreduced efficiency, and you canlose up to 2.5 liters of water inan hour of strenuous activity ona hot day. Your body will needfluids long before you actuallyfeel thirsty. The best policy is todrink liquids on a scheduledbasis. Making a habit of drinkingfrom every water fountain youpass by will help. (Some MiddleEastern countries require aircrewsto drink 3 gallons of water aday ) Coffee and other drinkscontaining caffeine should beavoided because they tend to further dehydrate you. f plain waterdoesn't appeal to you, stick tofruit flavored drinks.As you lose water by sweating,you will also lose salt. Normally,you will get enough salt in yourfood to replace any losses; but intimes of extremely high heat andhumidity, you may need to add alittle salt to your normal diet.DON'T take supplemental saltwithout consulting a flightsurgeon

I : >\

f adequate water and sufficient salt are not provided tobalance losses, any of the following heat illnesses can result:eat cramps caused by loss ofsalt through excessive sweatingcan include severe stomach, legor arm cramps; pale wet skin;dizziness and extreme thirst. Thevictim should be taken to a cool,shady place and, if conscious,given a glass of .1 percent salinesolution Y4 teaspoon of tablesalt in 1 quart of water).eat exhaustion is caused byloss of water and salt throughprofuse sweating. Symptoms arethe same as for heat cramps, plusheadache and weakness. The victim may appear to be drunk, dizzy or drowsy and the skin is pale,cold, moist and clammy. The person may faint. Lay the victim flatin a cool, shady spot; elevate feetand loosen clothing. f the victimis conscious, give .1 percent salinesolution slowly. Get medical helpeatstroke results from prolonged exposure to hightemperatures and is more likelyto strike a person who is not acclimatized to heat. Previous heatinjuries make a person more subject to future attacks. f the victim stops sweating, the skin feelshot and dry, and the victim collapses and remains unconscious,

APRIL 983 5


18/44

you have a true medical emergency. About 25 percent of the victims of heatstroke dieTemperatures in heatstroke victims sometimes reach 106 degreesto 110 degrees E Pupils of theeyes are wide open, and theremay be muscular twitching. fpossible, immerse the victim incool water while waiting for anambulance. f you are unable toimmerse the victim in water, soakhis clothing or wrap him in a wetsheet while fanning to hastenevaporation. DO or try to givewater to an unconscious person.Get medical help, fast Prevent burns. Ultravioletradiation from the sun on unprotected skin can produce painful and dangerous burns. The effects of sun will be intensified byreflection on bright surfaces. Exposure should be limited to nomore than 5 minutes a day at thebeginning of summer and careshould always be taken not tooverexpose the body to the sun'srays. While clothing reduces ex-posure of the body surface to

solar radiation, it also decreasesair movement over the skin.Clothing should be loose fitting,especially at the neck, wrists andlower legs, to allow for circulation of air.Painful burns can also resultfrom touching surfaces whichhave been exposed to the sun.When air temperature is 96degrees E an olive-drab paintedaircraft can register 136 degreesand a shoulder harness buckle ona parked aircraft can be 150degrees. (In the desert, surfacescan hit 180 degrees and beyond.)Ground crews should becautioned about picking up tools,which have been lying in the sun,with ungloved hands. Mats andpads should be used to protectthe body while working on surfaces that have been exposed tothe sun's rays. Adjust work schedules.Whenever possible, schedulemaintenance work for the coolermorning or evening hours. Appendix A, TB Med 507, "Prevention, Treatment and Control of

PROTECT YOUR MACHINES

6

Cover aircraft whenever possible with canvas or matting. Leavecanopies partly open (except during dust or rainstorms) toprevent excessive heat buildup. Avoid hovering in helicopters, or reversing engines in fixedwing aircraft to prevent damage from blowing sand and dustto other aircraft. While aircraft are parked, use covers and dust excluder plugson all engine openings, vents, air intakes, exhaust outlets,breathers, over propeller hubs and feathering domes, cowlsand over all other vital components and openings, includingpitot and static ports. Whenever possible, transfer fuel directly from the -original containers to tanks to avoid picking up dirt.

Inspect your aircraft thoroughly and frequently. Clean orreplace filters at regular intervals. Check flight controls forfreedom of movement and control cables for specifiedtension. Clean aircraft and engines as needed with water and appropriate cleaning fluids. DO or use gasoline, steam, or ahigh pressure water hose to clean helicopters. Use your maintenance publications. f you run into a specialproblem, don't guess, check with the supervisor.

Heat Injury, " describes how theWet Bulb Globe Temperature(WBGT) index is computed. Theindex will tell you when outsideactivities should be suspended,but your own knowledge of yourcrew's physical condition, age,state of acclimatization and othefactors will help you decide whento schedule physically demandingactivities.Take advantage of anyavailable shade to protect yourpeople from the sun's direct raysCamouflage nets or tarps can beused to create shade where thereis none.As a rule, aviators aren't affected as much as ground crewsby extreme heat because of theirlimited physical activity and thesomewhat cooler temperatures athigher altitudes. (You may have little difficulty convincing aircrews that they have it betterwhile they are involved inpreflight activities.) Most of thehigh temperature stress they encounter is prior to takeoff whenthe heat-soaked aircraft, reduced

u s RMY AVIATION DIGES


19/44

air movement in the confinedcockpit space and the flyingequipment they must wear contribute to a high heat load. I ttakes 15 or 20 minutes at thecooler temperatures aloft just todissipate the heat they have accumulated on the ground. I fcrews are flying prolonged lowlevel missions where the flightlevel ambient temperature is high,their tolerance limits should beclosely calculated and monitoredby the flight surgeon and flyingsupervisors.Psychomotor changes causedby extreme temperatures can affect pilot performance,particularly in association withnew or emergency situations. InHow Weather Can Affect theWay You Feel and the Way YouFly M C Flyer August 1981Captain R. M. Lloyd states:As bodytemperature rises,crewmember skills are affected, especially complicated tasks. At 103degrees E man's ability to

perform complex tasks ishampered by twice thenumber of errors compared with performance at98.6 degrees E, the body'snormal temperature. Interestingly, as people gethot they tend to performmore rapidly, but theymake more mistakes. Shortterm memory can be affected by heat stress whichcan make it more difficultto copy down instructionscorrectly. Judgment can beimpaired, as the case ofone unfortunate B-52 crewillustrates:The bomberdeveloped a fault in itsheating system which wentbananas and tried to roastthe crew. The aircraft commander even undresseddown to his undershorts.They bypassed threeperfectly good airfieldsbefore finally becomingtotally incapacitated andcrashing. All souls on

board were killed with theexception of the tail gunner who had his ownheating system which wasunaffected-he bailed out.At the same time that extremeheat adds to your maintenance

and flying problems; it subtractsfrom your people's ability tocope. Their strength and energyare sapped just at the time thatdemands are greatest. Reactionsare slower, tempers are shorterand mistakes are more likely. Theloss of a war for want of ahorseshoe nail can have itsmodern parallel in undetectedmalfunctions, replacement ofwrong parts or improper repairs.Pilot error can increase and aircraft and lives may be lost.Forewarned is still forearmed.The sooner you anticipate problems associated with extreme heatand humidity and begin gettingready for them, the less effectthey will have on you and yourcrews. Summer is a time forrecreation and fun-we want youto stay around to enjoy it. oep t 4

g . . : : _ , U ~ ~ - - ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' - - ~ - ~ 4 i ~ i 3 i i : i Q : : ; : ~

APRIL 1983 17


20/44

Hangar Talk is a quiz containing questions based onpublications applicable toAnny Aviation. The answers are atthe bottom of the page. I f you did not do well, perhaps youshould get out the publication and look it over.

18

AR 95 1Army Aviation: General Provisions

and Flight Regulations

CW2 (P) Gary R. WeilandDirectorate of Training DevelopmentsU.S. Army Aviation CenterFort Rucker, AL

1. Flying time begins when an aircraft'sengines are started for the purpose of flight.a. True b. False

2. Smoking is permitted in Army aircraft dur-ing low level flight.a. True b. False

Z n . l ~ s s o l 6 'q 01Z- 7 a l q ~ l 'q 'S-17 ~ . l ~ d ~ 8

S-17 ~ . l ~ d 'q LZ 17 ~ . l ~ d 'q 9

1Z ~ . l ~ d q S

3. Aviation unit standing operating proceduresmust include a crew rest program.a. True b. False

4. Passengers will not be carried in an aircraftwith chemicals onboard.a. True b. False

5. Pilot in command is a crew dutyassignment.a. True b. False

6. Aviators flying helicopters may reducevisibility minimums for approaches labeledCOPTER ONLY' by 50 percent, but not lessthan 1 4 mile or metric eqUivalent.a. True b. False

7. Dual very high frequency omnidirectionalrange VOR) equipment requirements specifiedon approach charts apply to Army aircraft.

a. True b. False

8. Dual VOR approach minimums specified onapproach charts apply to Army aircraft.a. True b. False

9. An operable landing or searchlight is re-quired for day flight.a. True b. False

10. A maneuver such as a break is consideredto be an aerobatic maneuver even whenconducted in conformance with the aircraftflight man uaI.a. True b. False

81 -Z ~ . l ~ d ~Zl Z ~ . l ~ d ~ .01 Z ~ . l ~ d 'q z

OZ l ~ . l ~ d q I( 1 - ~ 6 HV)

SH3MSNV

u.s. ARMY AVIATION DIGES


21/44


22/44


23/44


24/44


25/44

REPORTINGFIN LLate News From rmy viation ctivities

UNIT REPORTSFt. Rucker, AL The US. Army Aviation Board(USAAVNBD), Ft. Rucker, is preparing for theLight Air Cavalry Troop Test scheduled to commence this spring at Ft. Lewis, WA, as part of the9th Infantry Division's High Technology LightDivision testing program.Thirteen OH-58s from Ft. Rucker are scheduled to take part in the various phases of testing.The helicopters, which have been modified withair transportability kits, permit their four-mancrews to configure them for loading aboard C-130

reconfigure it for flight. Use of the air transportability kit also permits two OH-58s or two LCHsto be airlifted in a C-130 instead of only one. Sixcan be transported in a C-141 B. Development ofthe air transportability kit was spurred by theneed for the Army to have the capability to rapidlydeploy combat ready troops and equipmentstrategically and tactically to any part of theworld and then quickly assemble them into aneffective fighting force.Evaluation of the Army's ability to meet therapid deployment criteria will be of major concern during the forthcoming test. Training ofhelicopter crews was conducted on 12 and 13February 1983 at Cairns Army Airf ield by AviationBoard personnel in conjunction with Air ForceC-130 crewmembers. Among those on hand toobserve the training were BG Charles E. Teeter,deputy commanding general, U.S. Army AviationCenter, and COL Robert A. Wagg, Jr., President,US. Army Aviat ion Board.

or C-141B transports in about 7 2 minutes as op- ~posed to the more than 2 hours previously re- f)quired by a crew of six. Similarly, a crew of four 8 i ~ ~ can offload a modified OH-58 surrogate or light 5 R t ~ 1 f icombat helicopter LCH), reconfigure it for flight f)>.and arm it for the type of mission it is to perform .0in about 20 minutes. This is less than one-fifth ~..cthe t ime previously needed by a crew of six. Fur- ather, no wrecker or crane support is needed toready the modified helicopter for airlift or to

loading Up. OH58s are equipped with air transportability kits. These helicopters will participate in thel ight Air Cavalry Troop Test this spring at Ft. lewis,WA

APRIL 1983

Airmobile Attack. Republic of Korea soldiers scurryfrom one of 18 UH1 Hueys used during a recent training exercise in which the 52d Aviation Battalionworked with the ROK troops for a combined effort oftroop mobility

Seoul EUSA)-Two armies jOined forcesrecently in a training exercise which supportedthe effectiveness of combined efforts to maintainpeace on the Korean peninsula.The US. Army's 52d Aviation Battalion used itsaircraft to transport more than 400 Republic ofKorea (ROK) Army troops, using a maneuverdesigned to provide more efficient troop mobility.According to MAJ George H. Artola, operationsofficer for the 52d, the uniqueness 'of this exercise was the use of multiple routes and multiplelanding zones (LZs). We moved a battal ion ofROK soldiers about 20 kilometers from a pickup

3


26/44

zone PZ) near Uijongbu, to multiple LZs in support of an air tactical scenario where the ROKswere to secure a bridge.We tried something different that we hadn'tdone in a while , MAJ Artola explained. Insteadof flying basically one route with all the choppersin sequence and landing in the same area, we hadthree groups of six aircraft each leave the PZ flying separate routes to three different LZs. Thismeant we had a total of 18 aircraft flying and landing troops in three different areas all at the sametime, putting the maximum number of troops onthe ground at once.Each chopper in the lift was loaded with ROKsoldiers. The aircraft flew to the multiple LZs, allin the vicinity of the bridge, dropped off thetroops to conduct thei r ground operations in thatarea and returned to pick up the next incrementof troops. This was done three times, using UH-1Hueys and CH-47 Chinooks, to get the full ROKbattalion transported.By using multiple routes, we reduce thenumber of aircraft exposed to the antiaircraftthreat in any part icular area;' MAJ Artola explained. Multiple routes going into multiple landingzones break up the capability of enemy airdefense to concentrate on anyone particularflight corridor. SSG Cindi Small)

Ft. Campbell, KY-The U.S. Army's 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault), Ft. Campbell, KY,recorded another illustrious first on 28 February1983 when its 159th Aviation Battalion becamethe first Army helicopter operational unit to takedelivery of a newly modernized Boeing CH-47DChinook. Delivery-from the Army's AviationResearch and Development Command (AVRADCOM), St. Louis, Mo-took place in ceremoniesat Campbell Army Airfield. The CH-47D is the firstof several that will be delivered to the 159th during the next year.

Ft. Wainwright, AK-Air traffic controllers ofthe 7th Signal Command are reaching out tomodern technology for help in the battle againstthe problems peculiar to the arctic soldier.Four members of the 2d Platoon, 57th ATCCompany FWD), recently were trained in the useof night vision goggles. It is the first and only unitin Alaska so trained.Previously, the feasibility of using the gogglesin Alaska was questionable because of the highly

4

reflective qualities of the snow. The gogglesshould only be used in minimal light. Artificialdaylight or even bright moonlight can cause thegoggles gain control to close down, temporarilyinterferring with the wearer's vision. The towecontrollers qualified in the use of the goggles wildeploy with the 222d Aviation Battalion to FtGreely to test them in the field. They will run acontrol tower in a remote location under no-lighconditions.

Ft. Ritchie, MD-When a civilian aircraft crashed and burned near Ft. Campbell, KY, recently, iwas a 7th Signal Command air traffic controllethat was instrumental in saving the life of thedowned pilot.SFC Eddy O. Carter, assigned to 7th SignaCommand's unit at Ft. Campbell, has beennominated for an award under the Air Traffic Control SAVES Program for his performance whilecoordinating the rescue efforts.SFC Carter was working the arrival/departureposition at the Campbell Army Radar ApproachControl (ARAC) Facil ity when the emergency occurred. The Campbell ARAC tapes indicated thathe remained very calm and reassuringthroughout the emergency.The pilot of the aircraft said that the professionalism and efficiency demonstrated by thecontroller made him confident that even if he didcrash and was injured, he would be resucedimmediatley.SFC Carter was advised by Memphis Centerthat a Cessna 172 en route from Outlaw Field,Clarksville, TN, to Memphis had developedengine problems and was returning to OutlawField.SFC Carter immediately had the CampbelArmy Airfield crash alarm system activated andrequested medical evacuation (medevachelicopter assistance. He advised the pilot thamedevac was on the way and asked for a description of the area where the plane was going downMarking the point where radar contact was loswith the aircraft, SFC Carter contacted the SabreArmy Heliport control tower, the facility closesto the downed airplane, and asked for help fromany airborne aircraft to locate the crash site.Two Army aviators, 1LT James Brockway andCW2 Stanley McGowlen, were flying an OH-58Kiowa in the vicinity and agreed to help in thesearch.

u.S. ARMY AVIATION DIGES


27/44

The pilots saw smoke coming from a woodedarea 2 miles before reaching the site. Uponreaching the site, the pilots reported seeing thedowned aircraft and that it was on fire.After finding a landing area about 300 metersfrom the wreckage, CW2 McGowlen ran to thecrash site with a first-aid kit and fire extinguisher.He found the pilot of the downed aircraft lying unconscious about 15 feet from the burningplane. Just as he reached the pilot, the plane'sright fuel tank burst into flames. As he waschecking the pilot 's vital signs, the plane's otherfuel tank exploded, scattering burning debris allaround him and the injured pilot.The officer removed the debris and put out thefire. The medevac helicopter, called by SFCCarter, then arrived at the scene. The crewevacuated the injured pilot to Campbell ArmyHospital where he was treated for minor injuries.SFC Carter's quick thinking and sound judgment had the OH-58 hel icopter at the crash sitewithin 9 minutes and the medevac helicopter atthe site within 15 minutes. (Ellen A. Britsch)

Rankin AAF Gets C12 Huron. It may have beenassigned to Saudi Arabia for the past 4 years, butnow it's on Japanese soil. The new addition is aC-12 which will be used to support the US. ArmyJapan/IX Corps mission at Camp lama s RankinArmy Air Field. The plane landed at Atsugi NavalAir Facility after an extensive worldwide journey.This extensive travel took the aircraft andcrewmembers through a variety of cities andcountries including France, Italy, Greece, SaudiArabia, India, Thailand, Philippines and Okinawa.Rankin Army Airfield now has its own plane tohelp in its assigned support mission. Eventhough the C-12 is housed at Atsugi, because ofcertain landing condit ions at Rankin, the aircraftwill help Camp l m in its responsiveness to fixed wing missions.

Change of Command. Major General Carl H.McNair Jr., is being reassigned from his posit ionas commander of the US. Army Aviation Center,Ft. Rucker, AL, to that of Deputy Chief of Stafffor Combat Developments, US. Army Training andDoctrine Command, Ft. Monroe, VA. BrigadierGeneral P) Bobby J. Maddox will be the nextcommander at Ft. Rucker. He will be transferredsometime this summer from Ft. Campbell, KY,where he is assistant division commander, 101stAirborne Division (Air Assault). Meanwhile,Brigadier General Ellis D. Parker, Deputy Director of Requirements and the Army's Aviation officer with the office of the Deputy Chief of Stafffor Operations and Plans, Washington, DC, willreplace BG P) Maddox with the 101st.

NEWS EVENTSWashington, DC-The Helicopter AssociationInternational has established the InternationalHelicopter Foundation, primarily to promotehelicopter safety and education, and to collectand preserve data relating to the history anddevelopment of the helicopter. An important partof the new foundation is John Slats Slattery'sHelicopter Archives, a collection of historicalhelicopter memorabilia dating back to the late1920s. Other key elements of the foundation willbe programs aimed at promoting and enhancingpublic knowledge of helicopter operations and

technology, and stressing safety in all aspectsof helicopter activities. For more information,contact: Sarah Hammann1110 Vermont Avenue, N.W.Suite 430Washington, DC 20005Telephone: 202-466-2420 (Telex 89-615)

Lynn M The first General ElectricT700-GE-701 production engine has beendelivered to the US. Army at ceremonies at thecompany's Lynn facility. Two T700-GE-701 turboshaft engines power the Army's new AH-64AApache advanced attack helicopter.C12 for Camp Zama The T700-GE-701 is an uprated version of the

o I I I I r = : : ~ . original T700-GE-700 engine developed to powerthe Army's Black Hawk hel icopter. The Apacheengine features 10 percent more power for nor3. mal operations than the original T700 and 20 per-cent more power for single-engine contingencyoperation in hot climates.

25


28/44

PEARI SPersonal Equipment And Rescue survival Lowdovvn

Brenda Sando photo by eflections Studio

ALSE TrainingThe Aviation Life Support Equipment (ALSE)Course for enlisted personnel at the U.S. ArmyTransportation School, Ft. Eustis, VA, is completingits 16th class. The school has graduated one officers'class and the second class started on 27 March 1983.The third class for officers is planned for June 1983.Quotas for both the officer and enlisted courses maybe secured through your unit training activity. Due tothe high demand for quotas, it is imperative that yourrequirements be submitted at the earliest possible date.

26

Aviation Resource Management Surveys (ARMS)The ARMS team now includes an ALSE representative. The last ARMS included Anniston Army DepoAnniston, AL, and the Aviation Development and TeActivity, Ft. Rucker, AL. By the time you get this issuethey will have been to Ft. Huachuca, AZ; Yuma Proving Ground, Yuma, AZ; White Sands Missile RangeNM; and Sierra Army Depot, CA. We have found thathese visits are beneficial to the units and they certainly highlight the level of ALSE training and in somcases identify ALSE support needed.Body Armor, Small Arms ProtectiveAircrewman, Front Torso And Front Back TorsoAssets of the assembled items in sizes short, nationastock numbers (NSNs) 8470-00-935-3183/3192, anregular, NSNs 8470-00-935-3184/3193, are exhaustedRequisitions received for these NSNs will be rejectewith status code CK:' Assets are available for size lononly, NSN 8470-00-935-3185/3194. Army activitieauthorized subject body armor should requisition outof-stock sizes by available components and assemblthe item.

SIZE VEST FRONT PLATE BACK PLATEShort 8470 00 999 1473 8470 00 935 3177 8470 00 935 3174Regular 8470 00 999 1474 8470 00935 3178 8470 00 935 3175

NafE: Specification for the assembled item, whichwas previously cancelled, has been reinstated and futurprocurement is planned. Army activities will be advisewhen assets of the assembled items are available in alsizes. Point of contact is Geraldine Lyles, Army Support Activity, AUroVON 444-2537 or Mr. EDaughtery, DRCPO-ALSE, AUroVON 693-3307.SPH 4 Helmet, Flyer'sCracked SPH-4 helmet (NSN 8415-00-144-4981 anNSN 8415-00-144-4985) shells are not authorized to brepaired in accordance with TM 10-8415-206-13 and wibe disposed of through property disposal channels.additional information on maintenance and repairrequired, your point of contact is U.S. Army 1tooSupport and Aviation Materiel Readiness Comman(TSARCOM), Directorate of Maintenance, ATTNDRSTS-MCAPL, 4300 Goodfellow Blvd., St. LouisMO 63120; Mr. Boone Hopkins at AUroVON693-3112/4 or commercial 314) 263-3112/4.

u.S. ARMY AVIATION DIGES


29/44

Jacket, Flyer's, Medium Weight (Nomex) And Jacket,CW, Aramid, OG-I06Jacket, flyer's, medium weight, LIN L14520, NSNs8415-00-221-8870 and 8415-00-217-7387 (s), authorized to aviation personnel, is being phased out and isno longer being procured. Replacement item is jacket,cold weather (CW), Aramid, OG-I06, NSN 8415-01-074-9413 (s), which is authorized for combat vehiclecrewman (CVC) and aviators. However, requisitioningby CVC is not yet authorized.The replaced item, jacket, flyer's, medium weight(Nomex), will be issued to Army flyers until stocks areexhausted. Aviators should continue requisitioning thereplaced item in sizes with available assets. The replacement item jacket, CW, Aramid, OG-I06, should be requisitioned on out-of-stock sizes only. Automaticsubstitution will not be made.A list of Defense Personnel Support Center's(DPSC) (S9T) remaining assets by size is provided forthe phase-out item. NSNs are also furnished for thereplacement item. Size is applicable for both the phaseout and replacement item:

Jacket, Flyer's, Jacket, CW, AramidMedium Weight(Phase-out Item) (Replacement Item)Assets NSN Size NSN

0 8415-00-221-8870 XS-SH 8415-01-074-94130 8873 XS-RG 94146 8874 XS-LG 9415788 8879 S-SH 94161,936 8884 S-RG 94170 8886 S-LG 9418436 8920 M-SH 94190 8415-00-217-7387 M-RG 94200 7391 M-LG 94217400 LSH 94270 7401 LRG 9422360 7402 LLG 94230 7422 XLSH 94240 7423 XLRG 94250 7424 XLLG 9426

PEARL'S Questions And AnswersAbout 2 years ago I remember reading a very in-teresting article from the Louisiana Army NationalGuard pertaining to aviation life support equipmentand the training that one sergeant received in one ofthe ALSE schools. I believe it was the Army NationalGuardALSE Course which w s conducted at theArmyNational Guard Training Center Lit tle Rock AR

You are absolutely right and the gentleman whowrote the article is MSG Bartholomew J. Dawson,

Louisiana Army National Guard ALSE technician. Hecan be reached by writing to Headquarters, LouisianaArmy and Air National Guard, Office of the Adjutant General, Army Aviation Support Facility, Building101, Lakefront Airport, New Orleans, LA 70126. I haveheard many good comments about that article and havebeen thinking of running the article again.Another excellent article was titled The GreatestShow on Earth by CPr Lynn Lanzoni and was printedin the April 1981 Digest. In fact, many articles havebeen written on this fast growing area of ALSE, andI would certainly recommend their retention andreview, especially for the new ALSE people we are getting in.

Additional Skill Identifier (ASI) Q2Originally the military occupational specialty (MOS)67 series was identified for the ASI Q2, but many ofour aviation commanders have found that they can better send personnel with other MOSs to undergo theALSE training. All enlisted students graduating fromthe Ft. Eustis ALSE Course 860-ASI Q2 are given certificates of graduation. These students' names are furnished to Headquarters, Training and Doctrine Command and Military Personnel Center (MILPERCEN)for the Q2 identification. As far back as November1981, MILPERCEN has supported these actions. AMACRIT (TOE Manpower Authorization Standardsand Criteria) is being developed by the Ft. Eustis groupwhich will justify an ALSE career field. This will ensure that we can identify spaces specifically to ALSEon TOEs (tables of organization and equipment) andTDAs (tables of distribution and allowances) and willprovide for more incentive to make a career MOS inthis critical field. Commanders are continuing to sendMOS 67 and other MOS personnel to the ALSEschool, and we will continue to support this.SPH-4 Ear Seals (Correction)Reference is made to the November issue of the Avia-tion Digest and the PEARL article on the SPH-4 earseal. This article was called into our office, and we findit should be disregarded as far as aircrew personnel areconcerned. In fact, the mention of the SPH-4 ismisleading as these are not nonhardening ear seals butare the old plastic type and are used on H140/Uheadset, NSN 5965-00-892-1010. The Defense Electronics Supply Center (DESC), Dayton, OH 45401(RIC-S9E), can be reached on AUTOVON 986-6407or commercial 513) 296-6407. By the way, the correctNSN for the SPH-4 nonhardening ear seal is8415-01-111-9027. Should more information be desired,our point of contact is Mr. Tommy Vaughn,AUTOVON 693-2492/3307.

If you have a question about personal equipment or rescue/survival gear write PEARL DARCOM ATTN: DRCPO-ALSE4300 Goodfellow Blvd. St. Louis MO 63120 or call AUTOVON 693 3307 or Commercial 314-263-3307

APRIL 983 27


30/44

CongratulationsTo those aviators selected by the January board forentry into the Army Aviation Engineering Test PilotProgram. As expected, competition among applicantswas extremely keen. Those selected are truly bestqualified.' ,

Captain Leo B. CaytonCaptain Jan S. DrabczukCaptain Richard H. LanghorstCaptain John R. MartinCaptain Austin R. OmileCW3 Thomas M. Valentine

Congratulations again and best of luck on a mostdemanding assignment.The same to those Army aviators selected for Com

mand and Staff College for academic year 1983/1984.The number selected precludes reproducing all of thenames here, but a hearty "well done" to the 182 aviatorsselected.

Upcoming Policy ChangeA revision of AR 600-105 ''Aviation Service of RatedArmy Officers" will empower the general court-martialconvening authority to approve Flying EvaluationBoard (FEB) proceedings.Current policy states that an FEB will be convenedwhen one or more of the following conditions exist: Lack of proficiency. Flagrant violation of flying regulations. Undesirable habits or traits of character. Insufficient motivation.

28

Failure o complete graduate flight training. Failure to maintain medical certification. Personal request by an aviator for voluntary disqualification. Directed by HQDA or Chief, National GuardBureau (NGB).An FEB may be conv,ened by the commandinggeneral (CG) of the Active Army; CG, District of Columbia National Guard; and Active Army commandersin command of posts, camps, forts, stations, divisions,brigades, regiments, detached battalions or corresponding units of the Army.Present policy in AR 600-105 states that when the

appointing or a higher reviewing authority believes disqualification is proper, the report will be sent to thenext higher reviewing authority for review. The appointing or any higher reviewing authority may take finalaction on the board proceedings when it restores aviation service.Currently, when all reviewers recommend disqualificaton, regardless of the rank of the reviewer, theproceedings must be forwarded to Military PersonnelCenter (MILPERCEN) for final action. This reviewprocess is needlessly time consuming. All FEB proceedings, prior to arrival at MILPERCEN, have beenreviewed by general officers. Effective with the revisedAR 600-105 (scheduled for this month), when the appointing authority recommends disqualification, theapproval authority will be exercised by the lowest levelauthority exercising general court-martial jurisdiction.In the event the appointing authority exercises suchjurisdiction, approval authority will be exercised at thatlevel. The Chief, National Guard Bureau, will approveall FEBs for Army National Guard aviators.

U S ARMY AVIATION DIGEST


31/44

The following shows the selection boards scheduled983 and the months they convene:

PromotionsLieutenant Colonel

ajor

AUSRARARA

Command

JuneMay

JuneSeptember

JulyJulyJuly

Combat Arms OctoberCombat Support Arms October

ieutenant Colonel, Combat Arms Novemberieutenant Colonel, Combat Support ArmsNovember

Lieutenant Colonel, Combat Service SupportNovember

Service School/P(oject ManagerSenior Service College AugustCommand and Staff College OctoberProject Manager October

as well as the physical date on yourRecord Brief. Board members know that aviaare required to take annual physicals. Your fullcopy, so be sure you present the best possiappearance. See R 640-30 for details.

APRIL 1983

The following Hotline numbers can be called on officialbusiness after duty hours, They will be updated andreprinted here periodically for your convenience, If youragency as a Hotline it would like included, please send itto viation Digest PO ,Drawer P Ft. Rucker,AL 36362,

UTOVON CommercialAviationFt. Rucker, AL 5586487 205255-6487EngineerFt. Belvoir, VA 3543646 703-664-3646

I ~ l d ArtilleryFt. Sill, OK-ARTEP 639-2064 405-351-5004Redleg 639-4020 405-351-4020InfantryFt. Benning, GA-ARTEP 835-4759 404-545-4759I ntelligenceFt. Huachuca, AZ-Training 879-3609 602-538-3609Maintenance and SupplyTobyhanna Army Depot, PA 795-7900 717-894-7900Missiles and MunitionsRedstone Arsenal, AL 746-6627 205-876-6627Ordnance (Help Line)Aberdeen Proving Gnd, MD 283-4357 301-278-4357QuartermasterFt. Lee, VA 687-3767 804-734-3767SignalFt. Gordon, GA 780-7777 404-791-7777TransportationFt. Eustis, VA 927-3571 804-878-3571Turbine EnginesCorpus Christi Army Depot, 861-2651 521-939-2651TX

29


32/44

VIEWS FROM READERS

Editor:I'm interested in keeping up with thecurrent events within Army Aviationeven though my Branch is Infantry, andmy age of 37 restricts me from applying for flight training.I would appreciate it if my namecould be added to your mailing list to

receive the Aviation DigestThank you for your time in readingand answering this letter.2LT Richard G. Mansfield, USARRinggold, GA Your unit should be able to obtaindistribution for you and others in yourunit by submitting DA Form 125 in accordance with instructions on the form.Private annual subscriptions can be obtained by submitting a remittance of$26.00 to: Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402.

Editor:Captain Wright [Reporting Final, October 1982 Aviation Digest] IS not theonly female aviator rated as a Chinookpilot. Although she is assigned to CCompany (AVIM), 34th Spt Bn 6th CavBde (AC) and is not currently flying the.Chinook, Captain Beth Garrity isCH-47 rated. She is presently doing asuper job as a Direct Support Maintenance Platoon Leader and I'm certainshe'll do just as well when she STRAPSON one of those two headed machines.

CPT Robert G. David6th Cav Bde (AC)Ft. Hood, TX

Editor:Request two copies each of Part Onethru Part Five of the five part seriesForty Years of Army Aviation:'CW3 J. L. NanceTSARCOM

Editor:Request one copy of the comple[Army Aviation Systems PrograReview] series.MAJ Jeffrey W. Wright, M330th EW Avn Co (FWD)

RelQx 2ATe ha s you on -the scopeorticles from the Aviation Digest requested in these letters have been mailed. Readers can obtain copies of material

printed in any issue by writing to: Editor U S rmy viation Digest P.O. Drawer P Ft. Rucker L 36362

30 U.S. RMY AVIATION DIGES


33/44

Editor:Please find enclosed a poem that I vewritten along with artwork of the aircraft I ve described in the poem.

f you find them suitable for publication, I would be honored as my fascina-

tion with the capability and sophistication of the AH-64 Apache s what compelled me to create both the poem ndpicture.

P C H E

Keep up the good work.Gregory D BruceArmy AviationWarrant Officer Candidate

I take the name of a fearless tribe;Nap-of-the-earth I do dare glide; Seeking quarry night and day;Helmet sights engaging prey;Masking, unmasking, remasking in stride;Apache, Apache is king of the skiesLaser target designation;Deadly, silent illumination;Total enemy obliteration;Apache-style elimination

/

H ELLFIRE armed and on the way;Apache the victor, as always, todayIn any weather, over all terrain;Thru heat or snow, fog or rain;

uturistic warfare without strain;Apache is king of its domain

///

3


34/44

u RMY

Directorate of Evaluation StandardizationR PORT TO THE FIELD VI TIONST ND RDIZ TION

Turning The CornerHAS ARMY AVIATION finally recovered from lastyear and turned the corner in its accident prevention program? Have the aviators and their supervisorsat last come to grips with their responsibilities to thetotal aviation program? The Department of the Armyhas a strong interest in the problem, plus an acuteawareness of the roles of aviators and supervisors inaviation accidents, and has charted positive courses ofaction to improve the aviation accident preventionprogram.The accident investigators and analyzers tell us thatthe Army recorded 59 Class A accidents in fiscal year(FY) 1982. This computes to an accident rate of 3.7per 100 000 flying hours a dramatic increase from lastyear's 2.6 and the highest rate since 1973. The accidentsspanned the entire fleet of Army aircraft and werespread across all levels of aviator experience.The most revealing and troublesome bit of information was the fact that 42 of the 59 Class A accidentsinvolved crew or supervisory errors.

FLIGHT CREW ERRORS Faulty judgment Violation of regulations or flight discipline Failure to follow established procedures Inattention to tasks Pilot-induced loss of controlSUPERVISORY ERRORS Failure to provide adequate training Failure to correct actions of subordinates Failure to provide guidance Failure to ensure IP f i c t i o n s Failure to take corrective actionThe list of flight crew and supervisory errors hintsstrongly of numerous failures to follow standardizedprocedures. Such failures can be charged to both flightcrews and supervisors.

3

A good example is an accident discussed FLIGHTFAX, 27 October 1982. The mission was aministrative, not tactical. Yet the aviator was flying cruise airspeed about 100 feet above a bay and hit twwires which severed the tail rotor drive shaft. Hmanaged to reach the shore where the aircraft begato spin due to low airspeed and crashed. This pilot habeen counseled on two previous occasions founauthorized low level flight. Here is a prima facie caof violation of regulations and flight discipline. Thinformation also indicates a failure on the partsupervisors to correct the actions of the subordinatThis aviator had been caught in the act on threoccasions how many other times he displayed totdisregard toward regulations, flight discipline and standardized procedures, is not known, but enoughenough. Draconian measures are sometimes necessato set an individual straight, and in this instance wenot applied.

In FLIGHTFAX, 15 December 1982 Supervisorerror: Failure to ensure instructor pilot (lP) qualifications was evident in the case of an IP conducting higaltitude training. The pilot of a UH-1 Huey ran oof left pedal during a landing attempt in mountainouterrain. After the aircraft yawed to the right, a goaround was executed. A second approach for landinwas attempted; the aircraft again yawed to the righ(full left pedal applied), but when the pilot attempteto fly out of the turn, rotor rpm was lost. The IP goon the controls, but it was too late for corrective action and the aircraft crashed. The IP had no higaltitude experience during the preceding 6 years anhad not received a high altitude checkout before assuming IP duties. While supervisory error has been citeas the dominant factor in this accident, the IP's judgment and actions, plus his inattention to standardizeprocedures, must also be taken into consideration.

The IP accepted the mission when he knew thahe was not current and qualified to perform IP dutiein this instance. The IP did not caution against a second attempto land after the first at tempt indicated possible poweand control deficiencies.

u s RMY VI TION DIGES


35/44

The IP s ability to correctly compute a PPC (perquestionable under the circumstances. The acts of omission by both the supervisor and

ere breakdown in the unit s standardization proof IP duties and

by the installation standardization comis suspect in this case.Army Aviation becomes more complex with everyday. The number of tasks and maneuvers andincreased dramaticallyr the years. The demands on the supervisor and thehave also increased. A viable standardization pro

area of major importance. Write to us at: CommanderrmyAviation Center ATTN: ATZQ-ES Ft. Rucker L

c

The supervisor cannot be expected to know everydetailed qualification of everyone of his aviators. TheIP on the other hand is aware of his qualifications andhas a responsibility to keep his supervisor informed,especially when assigned a mission for which he knowshe is not current and qualified.The purpose of this article is not to disagree withthe conclusions as stated in FLIGHTFAX, but to showthe interrelationship of the aviator and the supervisorin the accident prevention effort. Together they havebeen responsible for more than 70 percent of Class Aaccidents in FY 1982. Together they have thewherewithal, through a dedicated standardization program, to turn the corner on aviation accident prevention and to still come up with a banner year in the remainder of FY 1983.

3636 ; or call usat AUTO VON 558-3504 or commercial 205-255-3504. fterduty hours call Ft. RuckerHotLine AUTO VON558 6487 or 205-255-6487 and leave a message

Nviat ion Center Training nalys is and ssistance Team

Instrument Flight Examiner CourseISSUE: Recent graduates of the IFE Course indicated that the course would be far more beneficial

if academic instruction was conducted at the beginning of the course rather than conducted during theflight portion of the course. Perhaps a correspondenceprogram could be established to allow students toprepare for the course prior to attendance.

COMMENT: Academic instruction is scheduledthroughout the IFE Course to complement the flightline instruction and effectively use the total trainingday, Le. flight line in the morning and academics inthe afternoon. I f resources permitted, academics couldbe scheduled to occur anywhere in the course flow;however, the current 50-50 mix of academic and flightinstruction most effectively uses our limited resourcesand keeps the course length within the current numberof authorized training days.

The limited number of students that attend the IFECourse does not justify the expenditure of resourcesrequired to develop and maintain a correspondenceprogram for this course.Courses of instruction, lesson plans and programed instruction materials for the IFE Course areavailable from the U.S. Army Aviation Center. Thesereferences are listed in the Department of Academicnaining Catalog of Instructional Material which maybe requested by notifying the Commander, U.S. ArmyAviation Center, ATTN: ATZQ-T-A-T-E Ft. Rucker,AL 36362. Information concerning instrument flightprocedures can be found in the Airman s InformationManual and Federal Aviation Regulations publishedby the Federal Aviation Administration/Agency andavailable through the Superintendent of Documents,U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC20402. Additional information can be found in FM1-5 and AR 95-1.

33


36/44

WHY ME? -THE THRE T OFFICER

C WSING TH DOOR to the commanding officer's office behind him, WOl Peter Pilot adjusts hishat and proceeds past the first sergeant's desk and outto the parking lot. Visibly unhappy, Pete is thinkingto himself, Why me? Here I am, just out of Ft. Ruckerand the Cobra transition, my first aviation assignment,and they make me the unit threat officer. Jeez, I wantto fly I don't want to teach classes on stuff I don'tknow anything about. I don't know what to do, whereto start...What the heck am I going to do?Know the situation? This kind of scenario is not uncommon and, for aviators, additional duties havealways had special significance, especially at O R (officer evaluation report) time. Well what can someonelike WOl Peter Pilot do? How can he prepare himself?For starters, get with your operations/training officer who should be able to translate the generalguidance the commander gave you into specific requirements. The operations/training officer has manyresponsibilities, not the least of which is the combatreadiness of the unit. Any training program that doesnot incorporate a realistic threat presentation, that doesnot challenge the crews to contend with a simulatedthreat array, is a training program without realsubstance. The best pilots in the world, highly skilledin gunnery, would suffer if they w

Date post:	03-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	aviationspace-history-library
View:	228 times
Download:	0 times