Army Aviation Digest - May 1980

8/12/2019 Army Aviation Digest - May 1980

1/52


2/52

MAY 1980 VOLUME 26 NUMBER 5

* *rigadier General Richard D. KenyonArmy Aviation OfficerODCSOPS, Headquarters . Major General James H. MerrymanCommander Brigadier General Carl H. McNair JrDepartment of the Army U.S. Army Aviation CenterFort Rucker, Alabama Deputy CommanderU .S. Army Aviat ion CenterFort Rucker, Alabama

page

page 8

2 SOTAS The User Has A Say, LTC Dick Rasmussen4 SOTAS, Army Aviation Combined Arms Team,COL Wayne B. Davis8 Helicopters In Urban Combat, An Unanswered Question,CPT P) Adolf Car lson16 The Black Hawk And The Huey Partners In TotalSupport, MAJ (P) Leon L Bennett18 I Can't Hear You, SP4 Robin Proctor19 Wire Strikes22 Reporting Final24 Antihelicopter Operations, MAJ Frank E. Babiasz andCPT Carl E. Daschke28 The Vital l ink, The Aviation Liaison Officer,1LT Ke ith E. Sims30 Threat: REC An Integral Part Of Soviet Doctrine,MAJ Fo rrest D. Wil liams32 Aviation Accident Law, MAJ David E. Prewitt36 PEARL's39 OPMS Corner: Where Do You Stand In Army Aviation?MAJ Wil liam B. Leonard III42 DES Report To The Field: Analysis Of Army AviationAccidents FY 7945 Views From Readers

Inside Back Cover: ATC Action LineBack Cover: Changes In Aviation Selection And Train-ing ProgramCover: In articles beginning on page 1 readersare introduced to SOTAS, the Army's new Standoff Target Acquisition System which is in theengineering development stage. SOTAS is expected to unify the work of the intelligence andtarget acquisition communities on tomorrow'sbattlefie lds, where such unity can mean thedifference between victory and defeat

page 16

page 24

page 6Richard K. TierneyEd itor

The mission of the U.S. Army Aviation Digest USPS 415-350) is to provideinfo rmation of an operational , funct iona l nature co nce rn ing safety and ai rcraftaccident prevention, training , ma intenance, operations, research and development,aviation medicine and other related data.

This publi cation has been approved by The Adj utant General , Headquarters ,Department of the Army , 25 Ap ri l 1980, in accordance wi th Arm y Regu lation310-1

The Digest is an off icial Depar tment of the Army per iodical publ ished month lyunder the sup ervis ion of the Commanding Ge nera l, u.s.Ar my Aviation Cente r.Views expressed herein are not necessar ily those of the Department of the Armynor the U.S. Army Avia t ion Center . Photos are U.S. Army unl ess otherw isespecif ied . Use of the masculine pron oun is intended to include bot h gendersunless othe rwise stated . Mate rial may be repr inted provided credit is given to theDigest and to the auth or , unl ess otherwis e ind icated.

Ar ticl es, photos and items of inte rest on Army Aviati on are invited. Di rectcommunication is authorized to: Ed itor , U.S. ArmyAv iation Digest, P.O. Drawerp, For t Rucke r, AL 36362 .

Act ive Arm y u nits rece ive distr ibution unde r the pinpoint distribut ion systemas outli ned in A R 3 10-1 Com plete DA Form 12-5 and send directly to CDR, AGPublicatio ns Center , 2800 Eastern Bo ulevard , Baltimore , MD 2 1220. For anychange in distri but ion requ irements , initiate a revised DA Form 12-5 .National Guard and Army Reserve units under pinpoint distribution also shouldsubmit DA Form 12-5. Other National Guard units should submit requests thr oug hth eir state adjutant general.Those not elig ible for off ic ial d is tribution or wh o desire personal co pies o f th eDigest can order the magazine from the Su perin tenden t of Documents , U.S.Government Pri nting Office , Wash ington, DC 20402. Annual sub scription ratesare 17 .00 domestic and 21 .25 overseas.


3/52

new intelligence surveillance andsystem the Army has today is the StandoffAcquisition System. In my opinion it truly qualifies asforce mult iplier and is the most significant new ISTAem that we plan to put on the modern battlefield.I have perhaps a unique perspective of SOTAS. Asof the Army Intell igence Center andFt. Huachuca AZ and now commander of the Armytronics Research and Development Command I haveh user and developer. So it is from that vantagent that I say SOTAS more than any other system willthe intel ligence and the target acquisition BG Stubblebinetogether for the first time. These communities widely separatedare coming closer and closer together in modern battlefield architecthe catalyst in that process.SOTAS is the first of these tacticallSTA systems where a single collectionple functions. t provides a dynamic mover picture to themakers at brigade and division level while providing the same informationour killer systems-artillery, tactical and advanced attack heliis important from an affordability point to view because itlizes on a single technology for mult iple purposes. It may be the first majorin creating a single ISTA system. In addition it has the future potential foruting the information acquired by SOTAS down to battalion and companyas well as up to higher echelons such as corps.Some years ago SOTAS was called ALARM. In those days although we couldthere were onstation and survivability weaknesses.were not convinced we could keep it onstation long enough nor were we surecould survive a mid-intensity war. Survivability is never guaranteed but todayof the Black Hawk helicopter SOTAS can become the predominantof the mover information so vital in gaining and keeping the tactical

SOTAS proved itself the consummate system recently in European exercises. Init performed so well that our commanders in Europe have opted to retain theup production can be achieved.In the mover shooter emitter ISTA scenario SOTAS is king.

AY 198

Brigadier General P) Albert N. Stubblebine IIICommander U.S. Army Electronics Researchand Development CommandAdelphi MD

See GlossaryPage 4 1


4/52

HE TRADOC SYSTEM Manager for the Standoff TargetAcquisition System is charged withconduct of the total system manage

ment within TRADOC to ensurethat the user total system effortsare developed and fully integratedearly and continuously throughoutthe development cycle. Specifically the TSM-SOTAS office ensuresthat plans for training, personnel,logistics, testing and new doctrine/tactics are timely and fully integratedinto the materiel development program. These responsibilities are farreaching; this includes being theprimary user representative in allstudies, evaluations and other effortssupporting the development ofSOTAS.

SOTAS is a new concept andwill not replace anything currentlyin the Army inventory. It is a heliborne moving target indicator system, assigned on the basis of oneSOTAS per division. This platoonsized element will be integral to thedivision combat electronic warfareintelligence battalion. Each platoonwill use four EH-60 helicoptersfrom which the MTI sensor datais transmitted to several groundstations via a secure data link. TheSOTAS operational and organizational concept calls for the primary ground station to be collocated with the division TOC andpasses intelligence information tothe All Source Analysis System(ASAS), while targeting information

h serA Say aslieuten nt olonel Dick Rasmussencting TRADOC Systems Manager for SOTAS

is passed to T ACFIRE. There arefive secondary ground stations, onelocated with each maneuver brigade,division artillery and the division'stactical command post. Groundstations are mounted on 5-ton trucks.In addition to target informationinto T ACFIRE, the SGSs also supply intelligence information on moving targets to the brigade TOC.

The United States Army Intelligence Center and School has TRADOC proponency for SOTAS. TheTSM officially was chartered by theTRADOC Commander GeneralDonn Starry, in March 1978, andproponency transferred officially toFt. Huachuca AZ from the Combined Arms Center at Ft. Leavenworth, KS on 13 October 1978.

In addition to supervising andmonitoring the numerous activitiesof this program it is essential that

we meet with the user communityas often as possible to ensure weare truly presenting their views. Thusers are located at Forts SillOK; Benning, GA; Knox, KY; Gordon, GA; Lee, VA; LeavenworthKS; Eustis, VA; and Monroe, VAThe 1st Infantry Division, the Reforger division at Ft. Riley, usedSOTAS during Reforger 79.It should be noted here that thSOTAS systems currently stationedin USAREUR are referred to as thInterim-Interim, or 12 SOTAS, andshould not be confused with thED model. The 12 using advanceddevelopment (AD) hardware, istemporary measure that is configured much differently than the EDand production versions will be, buprovides for today a tomorrowcapability. Personnel from the PMand TSM offices participated iExercise Reforger 77, 78 and 79maintaining that close user contacrequisite to adequate operationadevelopment.Now to briefly discuss the statuof the program as it pertains totraining, personnel and logistics.Training Motorola GovernmenElectronics Division is charged witthe responsibility for the development of the technical manuals anthe extension training materialsSOTAS s a helibo rne MTI system. Datas transmitted to ground stations mount-

ed on 5 ton trucks


5/52

theof instruction for all in

operator skills.Honeywell Systems Researchin Minneapolis will use thesecreated materials to develthe program of instruction andPOls concerning teamskills. Honeywell will then

The Green Suit instructors, usingHoneywell facility, will then trainSoldiers who will particiateOT II. This concept will be used

operatorsthe tracking surveillance superother than

and maintenance perEH-60B helicopter,be trained by Sikorsky. A

course for STOs and TSSscurrently planned. The additionale to train maintenance personnelnot been determined, but shouldminimal.Personnel Studies have beenucted to determine which MOSsbest suited for SOTAS. In the Pare using a combination13 and intelli

(96B and 96D) MOSs. F opare E5 to E7 in grade. Theand production SOTAS platoondeveloped will include juniorSoldiers (skill level 2 asas skill level 3 and 4. The studiesindicate that within the skill2 category, the 96D Imagery

had the best prere-operator skills, thus the

station operators will beto be from the 96management field. The TSSare most closely alignedthe Order of Battle Warrant964A MOS. The primarystation workload requiresshifts of one TSS, twoan RTO each. An evalis being conducted to deterthe manning requirements forSGSs, however, the ED produccontract requires one STO on8-hour shift.

Weare getting smarter as we goand are currently updating1980

the SGS tasks to determine if theremay not be a requirement for twoSoldiers per shift. In addition to theaircraft maintenance MOSs, otherskills required to maintain the systemwill include data link repairman,sensor (radar) repairman, computerrepairman, and airconditioner repairman. MILPERCEN s initial recruiting and training plan has beenpublished to support the fielding ofSOTAS.Logistics The area of logistics,and specifically the area of maintenance, is proving to be a challenge,for SOTAS falls under two maintenance systems. The aircraft requires three level aircraft maintenance, whereas the ground stationsand components are maintained atthe traditional four levels of groundmaintenance.Where the aircraft will be stationed will determine if an AVUMsection will be required in the SOTASplatoon. If collocated at the divisionairfield as Division 86 dictates, support can be provided by the divisionaviation battalion. It is currentlyplanned that platoon personnel,through the use of built-in testequipment and built-in test software,will be able to perform the organizational maintenance. This area ofconcern will be monitored carefullyonce the contractor has completedhis front end analysis (FEA) todetermine the critical operator tasks.Direct Support maintenance will beprovided by the CEWI battalionthrough the use of contact teams.The total maintenance effort is beingclosely monitored and coordinatedwithin TRADOC and DARCOMto ensure ease of maintainability.As noted, SOTAS is in the EDphase of development, and all of usare working toward a successfulOTII. An interim SOTAS system, usingprototype hardware being builtunder the ED contract, will consistof two YEH-60B helicopters, onePGS and one SGS, which is differentthan the production platoon described earlier in the article. It isplanned that the interim detachments will replace the F systems in

ee lossaryPage

Germany, providing each U.S. division commander in Germany withan earlier full-up capability. Toaccomplish this feat, plans are beingmade to form a SOTAS unit.

The SOTAS unit will support OTII testing and will be reconfiguredinto four SOTAS detachments thatwill deploy to USAREUR uponcompletion of OT II. The initialgrou p of Soldiers to arrive in theunit will go TDY to Honeywell andbe trained as the players for OT II.One more class will be conductedto train the remaining personnelwho will return to the OT II site,receive and assemble their equipment and deploy to USAREUR. TheP detachment s equipment will bereturned to CONUS. This in itselfis an ambitious plan, requiring continual coordination with many commands and agencies.

There are other activities thatkeep the TSM office hopping. Weare supervising the revision to theSOTAS 0 0 concept to incorporate all SOTAS capabilities, and recently hosted an ROC review andupdate panel. Coming up in thenear future is an update to the Costand Operational Effectiveness Analysis and the Cost and TrainingEffectiveness Analysis. Both will beconducted at TRANS ANA.

The role of the TSM in newsystems development is to act asthe TRADOC representative toassist the PM in development andorderly fielding of the system. TheTSM monitors, supervises, energizesand acts as the coordinating officefor all activities in the user community. The SOTAS program hasprovided this office with a numberof challenges and experiences foundin few Army careers. It is a rewarding assignment in that each memberof the office has an opportunity tohelp develop and field a portion ofthe U.S. arsenal that will satisfy aneed and be compatible with othersystems in the hands of our combatSoldiers. This office stands readyto assist in any way that we may beable to help. _

3


6/52

rmy vi tiono rms eamolonel Wayne B Davis

Project ManagerStandoff Target Acquisition System

I MAGINE THE advantage anycommander would have if hecould look into a crystal ball, locatedin the command post, and see howthe enemy is deploying forces wellbeyond the FEBA. The StandoffTarget Acquisition System, orSOTAS , is such a crystal ball forour brigade, divarty and divisioncommanders. For the first time ever,

they can observe on a screen exactlywhat they are up against. Enemytanks, trucks and helicopters aredisplayed moving across an electronic map . The display providestheir number, speed and directionof movement, along with other in-formation.

During combat our commanders

AAHL RMAVUMCEWICONUSDARCOMdivarty

DMZOFEBISTAMILPERCENMaSMTINATO0 0aTPGSPMPOIReforgerROCRPVRTOSGSSOTASSTOTACFIRETOYTOCTRADOCTR S NTSMTSSUSAREUR

Glossaryadvanced attack helicopterAdvanced Long-Range irborne Moving Target Indicatoraviation unit maintenancecombat electronic warfare intelligencecontinental United Statesrmy Materiel Development and Readiness Commanddivision artillerydemilitarized zoneengineering developmentforward edge of the battle areaintelligence, surveillance and target acquisitionMilitary Personnel Centermilitary occupational specialtymoving target indicatorNorth Atlantic Treaty Organizationoperational and organizationaloperational testprimary ground stationprogram managerprogram of instructionReturn of Forces to Germanyrequired operational capabilityremotely piloted vehicleradio teletypewriter operatorsecondary ground stationStandoff Target Acquisition Systemsearch track operatorstactical fire direction systemtemporary dutytactical operations centerU.S. rmy Training and Doctrine CommandTRADOC Systems Analysis gencyTRADOC System Managertracking surveillance supervisorUnited States Army, Europe

could determine from the display ifthe enemy is trying a frontal assault,a flanking movement or whatever.And when the enemy's main thrustbecomes apparent, our commanderscould employ the Multiple LaunchRocket System, the Remotely Piloted Vehicle working with laserguided artillery projectiles, ourAAHs and our other killer systemsall of which can be employed optimally at their maximum effectiveranges to cause the earliest possibleattrition of enemy forces. While thisis occurring commanders could bemoving ground maneuver forces byour UH-60 Black Hawk units andground tactical vehicles into themost favorable position to repel andwipe out what remained of theenemy attack. And when we engagein offensive operations, the value ofSOTAS becomes even more obvious.By now you have probably hit onthe heart of SOTAS All the firepowerin the world will do the Army littlegood if it can 't locate targets to useit on. You can call SOTAS a targetacquisition system, an intelligencesystem, or whatever you choose;but, in the final analysis, it allowsour combined arms team to do amuch better job of putting iron onthe target using our killer systemsof the 1980s and beyond-duringgood or adverse weather, day ornight, and with an asset owned bythe division commander.

he Concept The SOTAS concept is depicted by figure 1: ascanning, moving target indicator

4 U.S. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST


7/52

CONCEPT

Figure

DIVISION-LEVEL SYSTEM REAL-TIME TARGET DETECTION

LOCATION ENGAGEMENTxxt PDIVARTY

~ /STATIONI El:J

MEETARTillERYSTRIKECCUR CY

nTOC Df C

x

SOT SESSENTI LElEMENTS

RA DAR SE NSOR- IN DEPEN DENT OF DAY / NIGHTIVISIBILITY RESTRICTIONS M OVING TARGET IND IC A TOR MTI) RADAR - VEH IC LES HELICOPTERS

PEO PLE RO TATING ANTENNAS RE A L-TI M E DATA L NK - PR OCE SSING ON GROUND /I NTEGRATION A IRBORN E PLATFOR M - LOS AVENUE OF APPROA CH SURVIVABILITY

on an airborne platform whichdeep intoterritory ; processes that

computer ; pipesan antijamlink to ground stations where

computer proThe data is presented, real

on an electronic map display.to the operationaloncept is survivability; the SOT Shelicopter flies far behind friendlyines and is, therefore, relatively saferom enemy air defenses.

will be sent to our European divisionsto provide a full-up system capability, but in fewer numbers.Why the accelerated developmenteffort? That can be answered bestby citing a remark made by GeneralBernard W. Rogers, NATO com-

mander and former Army Chief ofStaff. Responding to a questionasked by the House Armed ServicesCommittee on the most importantequipment needs for N TO , General Rogers said: We need new airdefense weapons and SOTAS. Tar-

Where We Are y SOTASa major weapons system under-scale engineering devel, the last phase of develop

he SOT S ED program has beenso that the full -upS capability can be providedour active duty divisions in the

first production systems reachfield, Interim SOT S systems,sing ED prototypes now being built,Y 1980

Figure 2Equipment Location In Helicopter

CONTRO LINDICATOR

See Glossa ryPage 4 5


8/52

get acqUIsItIon is one of NATO'sgreatest weaknesses.I want to briefly describe theequipment being developed to fillthe target acquisition void to whichGeneral Rogers referred:

The Airborne Radar The SOTASradar will be the most advancedairborne radar capable of sensingground moving targets. It is designedspecifically to operate in the electronic countermeasures environment we anticipate the Soviets couldbe capable of throwing against usin the mid-1980s and beyond.

The Data Link SOTAS will usean antijam data link that is beingdesigned for use on the Army's RPYas well. It communicates the encrypted radar data from the helicopter to the ground station.

The Aircraft The SOTAS aircraft

is a modification of the Army's BlackHawk. We will build eight prototypesin the engineering developmentprogram. Designated the YEH-60B,the SOTAS prototypes will be usedfor flight qualification and integration and testing of all the airbornesubsystems. The production modelof the SOTAS helicopter will bedesignated the EH-60C.

The features that distinguish thetwo SOTAS aircraft from a basicBlack Hawk are those modificationsrequired for the radar antenna torotate under the airframe and tooperate in a slower airspeed range.They are shown, in part, in figure 2:

Retractable landing gear. Relocation of avionics antennas. Automatic flight control systemoptimized for the SOTAS mission

Figure 4Primary Ground Station Cutaway)

airspeed range of 50 to 80 knots. Installation provisions for aradar electronics rack in the cargo

compartment.Wind tunnel antenna jettison testsand preliminary experimental flighttesting have been completed. Figure3 is a photograph of the YEH-60Bduring one of the contractor s testflights. Results from these tests wereused to refine the engineering designand to minimize technical risks. TheSOTAS helicopter developmenteffort is in a definite GO status, andwe anticipate a full-up system firstflight early next year.

The Ground Stations The groundstation (figure 4 is a very importantelement of the SOTAS system; it iswhere the radar information is processed for use by our commanders.It is presented in a tactically relevantform and is correlated easily withstandard tactical maps. The SOTASground station is interoperable withT ACFIRE and other informationsystems such as the future All SourcesAnalysis System. Further, the Armyis working closely with the Air Forceto ensure that our sister service cantake advantage of the unique capabilities provided by SOTAS. TheSOTAS ground station is the linkingelement in effecting enhanced Armyand Air Force weapons systems'interfaces in the division commander's area of interest.

How Did We Get Where We Are


9/52

The SOTAS program is inengineering developtoday because of successfuldevelopment and operational

the field withcal units. Using existing militarycommercial equipment, anAS wasand field testing began in 1975.g a modified UH-1H helicopterelements of a vintage 1960 APS-(figure 5 , and commercialand displays (figure 6),system demonstrated its opacceptance and enthusiasm.

the Interim-Interim, or Psys-was tested on the DMZ inparticipated in all Reforger, and recentlyed participation in a NATOmaneuver exercise

north of the Arcticle. Deployed from Germany byForce C-5s, the 3rd Armoredion's SOTAS Detachment workas a part of NATO s Allied

Europe Mobile Force,operational capabil

cold weather.

Figure

The Army is fortunate in having

2 to "go to school on." The lessonslearned from F SOTAS field testing have been invaluable, and havebeen incorporated in to the designfor the "full-up" SOTAS now beingdevelopc;d. Because of our experience with F, we will do a muchbetter job of delivering the requiredSOTAS mission capability tailoredfor the American Soldier in the field.

The SOTAS picture has beenpainted: SOTAS is a catalyst in theoptimum employment of the combined arms team, and Army Aviationis a valuable member of the team.A force multiplier-you bet

The SOTAS perspective is sum-Figure 6

marized by LTG Donald R. Keith,Deputy Chief of Staff for Research,Development and Acquisition, responding during an interview (withrmy RD A magazine) to the following question:

Q: What broad technology areasdo you see at this time as offeringthe greatest future military potentials? Do you see a number of smalleradvances, in such areas say as sensortechnology, improved communications, better armor, terminal homing weapons for the individual Soldier, etc.? Or do you see major breakthroughs looming in the futureexotic laser weapons?A: there are a lot of excitingthings going on today that are difficult to prioritize, but I guess ourability to acquire and attack targetsin depth is the generic area that Ibelieve will have the greatest impacton warfare. Weare now able tolook well beyond the FEBA and inreal time get that target intelligenceprocessed in order to deliver accurateterminally guided munitions to thetarget. We've been dreaming of sucha capability for many years; it isnow becoming a reality. As we fieldthis capability, and as we learn touse it, there is bound to be a changein the way we fight our own force.And it will also change the way theenemy fights us. I think i t will causeone of the greatest revolu tions inwarfare that we have seen in manydecades.

7


10/52

I am not an aviator but anInfantryman who has followed aviation developmentssince a tour with theAir Cavalry Division Innam. For the past few yearsI have been Involved varlous studies dealing with urban combat. This articlebased on Insights derivedfrom those studies. t Is byno means Intended to be thelast word on subject;rath.r I hope I t sparkssome Inter.st combat among the communityaviators.

CaptainDirectorate of Doctrine and LiteratureU.S. Army Infantry Schoolfort Benning, GAIN THE 1sue of this magazine, a friendof mine, Major AU XCllnclerWoods, published an article inwhich he asked, the heli-copter have a in combat-In-cities? (Also see, Feb-ruary 1976Aviation Todate, there has been no S81tisfiBC-tory answer to that question,observers are decidedly K . ~ m l -cal. In his onWarfars is no reason to bellie'tlreother than thathas a major in L IIII-U Uwarfare as the main tranSllorterof men and sUI)oliesphasis a d l t l e . ~ Jbut goes on tohelicopter will betarget spotting

8

at the the ....... -.environment. Aviation-orientedfield manuais say nothabout urban oOlsrsltions.

RESIDENTIALSPRAWL

~ e 1 I 1 e l l D I O C : K area.was made of e l l i c c o t ~ 9 r s 1 . , I V ~ . . a . ~of and aguns.

array of enemy machine-

Joseunlveirsi1tv Dr. Ellefsen diinto acore, the core

Figure : This model portrays the nature of urban terrain


11/52

the residential sprawl,ribbons, outlyingd outlying industrial(figure 1).This portrayal is, of course,owto location, size and history..havelarge townsped any

Figure 2: To the aviator, the core periphery raises the level of the ground

Figure 3: High-rise areas provide a greatdeal of cover for helicopters

Figure 4: Commercial ribbons may provide helicopter corridors

Y 198

are differences in degree, not inkind. In general, an observerflying over any city or town willnotice a remarkable correlationwith this urban model, especiallyif the area has undergone redevelopment in the last 30 years.Each of the model s regionshas distinctive construction char

a c t e r i s t i ~ s Outlying industrialareas and residential sprawl, forexample, consist of low buildings,one to three stories ta II. The size,construction and spacingof buildings are usually such that theseregions have the least effect onaeria I operati0rts (although theyoccasionally influence groundmaneuver significantly).The core periphery consistsof na rrow streets (12 to 20 meters) with continuous fronts ofbrick and heavy walled concretebuildings. The height is generallyuniform-2 or 3 stories in smalltowns, 5 to 10 stories in largercities.The city core and outlyinghigh-rise areas are the regionsmost commonly altered by modern construction. I n most citiesthe c o r ~ bas undergone morerecent development than thecore periphery. As a result, thetwo regions are often quite different. Typical city cores of todayare made up of high-rise buildings which vary greatly in height.Furthermore modern urbanplanning allows,much more openspace between buildings thanwas the case in the past and isstill the case in core peripheries.Outlying high-rise areas are dominated by this construction style

to an even greater degree thancity cores.Commercial ribbons are rowsof stores, businesses, etc., builtalong either side of major avenues (generally 25 meters orwider) through the built-up area.These buildings are uniformly 2to 3 stories tall, about a storytaller than the dwellings usuallyfou nd beh nd them.The military significance of thisurban model derives from thefact that each of the urban regions has its own maneuverability, observation and protection characteristics. These properties affect aerial systems andground systems differently.Because the core periphery,for,example, contains buildingsof uniform height densely situated along narrow streets, thisarea severely limits the maneuver of ground systems but provides them a great deal of cover.To the aerial system, the effectis essentially to raise the levelof the ground by a number ofstories, with the result that aerialmaneuver is not so canalized asground maneuver. By the sametoken, however, since aerial sys-tems cannot fly in the narrowspaces between buildings, theycannot seek cover among thebuildings as can the ground systems (figure 2 .In the modern city core andoutlying high-rise regions the situation is quite different, sincebuildings are more widely spacedand vary greatly in height. In astudy conducted for the MarineCorps by Mr. Orvin Larson of

9


12/52

Figure 5: British Army helicopters at Bessbrook, Northern Ireland. Operationsagainst the IRA make this Europe s busiest heliport

the Naval Personnel Researchand Development Center, it wasfound that fixed wing aircraftcannot operate among high-risebuild ngs. Helicopters, however,may be ideal for such regions.They can maneuver betweenbuildings, albeit at reducedspeeds, and can therefore exploiturban cover. Th is contrasts withground systems, which normallyfind maneuverability increasedand protection reduced whenthey move from a core peripheryto a high-rise region (figure 3 .Commercial ribbons presentanother possibility. Because theyusually are built on major avenues, these regions are wideenough to permit helicopters tofly nap-of-the-earth covered andconcealed on either side bybuildings Although there areoften street lights and trees,these could be knocked downto form helicopter corridors(figure 4).

In addition to the buildings,another element of the urbancombat arena which is importantto the aviator is the antiair threat.Here the environment also hasan impact. Because buildingstend to reduce the effective

Figure 6: South Vietnamese soldiers with LAWs at An Loc. Together with U.S. range of radars, low flying heli-helicopters, these troops defeated North Vietnamese tank forces copters can use urban maskingto protect themselves from thoseair defense systems which rely-I on radar for target acquisition or_ tracking. For that reason the_ greater part of the urban airI defense threat is comprised ofshort-range systems which require targets visually, such asSA-7s, automatic weapons andsmall arms. Cit ies provide manyplaces for these systems to hidefrom both visual and infrareddetection, and make target ac-quisit ion easier because low flying aircraft must slow down toavoid obstacles.

Figure 7: This North Vietnamese antiaircraft weapon, captured during the 1972offensive, was typical of the air defense threat at An Loc

The level of hazard in the urbanenvironment is a function of thetype and number of air defensesystems present. It is not surprising, then, that the urban con-1 U S ARMY AVIATION DIGEST


13/52

Figure 8: Armed helicopters should seek a terrain advantage to defeat urban targets

successfullyby perritish forces in Ulster, for

patrols because thes from Army bases are oftenor a mbushed. Helicoptersfor troopand comd and control. One techniqueof heliborne searchto illuminate rooftops inof antisniper operations.

ht in other urbanhave added a whole newto both overt and

to use terrain flight

Y 198

threat consists of sporadic rifleshots (although terrain flight isused on occasion to gain surprise). These tactics may requiresignificanfalteration when andif the first SA-7 s fall into the handsof the Irish Republican Army(figure 5 .U.S. Forces in Santo Domingoin 1965 and 1966 operated in asimilar environment In order tobypass rebel snipers on the surface routes, the helicopter wasfor a time the primary means ofmovement for both Marines andparatroopers. In one account, aUH-1 B Huey was used to lift a106 mm recoilless ri fle (the preferred antisniper weapon) to theroof of an a-story flour mill. Fromthis vantage point, .re could bedirecteda.t most rebel-held areasin the city.These operations are interesting in that they demonstratethe flexibility of the helicopter

in two urban conflicts, and it iscertainly not beyond the realmof possibility that U.S. forces maysomeday become involved insimilar actions. They offer littleguidance for helicopter operations in mid-intensity urban combat There is, however, one combat example which is worth looking at.he Battle For n o -Cobras In Mid Intensity Combat.The city of An Loc stands astride

the northern route into,Saigon.For that reason it was a priorityobjective of the North Vietnamese 1972 offensive. In April ofthat year North Vietnamese forcespounded the city with intenseartillery, mortar and rocket fire.y 12 April all Army Republic ofVietnam (ARVN) artillery batteries had been silenced. Allindications were that the city'sdefense was crumbling. NorthVietnamese Army (NVA) com-


14/52

Figure 9: Rooftop insertions, such as Figure 10: This drawing illustrates a Marthe one practiced here by Soldiers of ine Corps concept of urban air assaultthe Berlin Brigade, will not be common

Figure 11: Surprise and suppression are requirements for urban air assaultmanders estimated that a hastyattack, right into the heart of thecity, would end the battle for AnLoc and open the road to Saigon.The communist spearhead wascomposed primarily of armor: PT76s and T-54s. These forces haddiscovered the tanker s advantage of shock action, for whereever they had appeared, ARVNtroops broke and ran-almost toa man. The NVA felt that theywould be able to drive into thecenter of town without meeti ng

any effective resista nce. Theywere so confident that they hadgiven the lead tank platoon leader a Viet Cong flag to raise at thecity s headquarters. They werein for a nasty surprise.When communist forces entered the city, U.S; AH-1 Cobrastook them under fire, destroyingthe lead tanks wUh 2.75-inchrockets. The ta nkers reacted bydriving into side streets wherethey hoped the buildings wouldcover them. But these proved

to be no haven. ARVN troops inAn Loc regained some of theirconfidence when they saw thefirst NVA ta nks destroyed. Theywaited in side streets and alleys,armed with M-72 light antitankweapons (LAWs) (figure 6). Asthe North Vietnamese tanks triedto evade the helicopters, theydrove into these LAW ambushes.After a severe drubbing, communist forces withdrew from thecity and undertook a siege.The North Vietnamese attacking An Loc were supported byone of the most powerful airdefense arrays ever seen in SouthVietnam, including 12.7 millimeter (mm) and 37 mm antiaircraftguns (figure 7), and SA-2 andSA-7 missiles. By using properflight techniques U.S. Cobraswere able to operate in the faceof this threat until the air defensering became so dense that it wasimpenetrable for helicopters.Fixed wing close air support andparachute resupply operationswere able to continue.Allied forces in An Loc heldout until mid-June, when theSiege was lifted and rel ief forcesentered the town. Aerial operations were the major reasonfor the NVA defeat.This example suggests thatarmed helicopters have significant potential in urban combat.Tanks seem to be most vulnerable where their maneuverabilityis most restricted. From what wenow know about urban terrain,helicopters could exploit thisvulnerability. A helicopter in ahigh-rise area engaging a tankalong a street in a core periphery,for example would have theadvantage because it could maskitself before the target could,especially if side streets weremined or ambushed. Furthermore, if the buildings around thehelicopter were secured byfriendly infantry, the air defensethreat would be reduced to practically nothing. Finally, if the

12 u s RMY VI TION DIGEST


15/52

targets already had been locatedby ground forces, the helicopter'srequired time on station wouldbe minimized, further increasingth odds for survival (figure 8).Another potential use of armedhelicopters is the engagementof targets located in buildings.This mission is normally carriedout by systems such as tanks ortactical air (TACAIR), but it isconceivable that roads leadingto urban targets will be blocked,and that tall buildings or theproximity of civilians will rule outthe use ofTACAIR. Cobras coulde effec tive in this rule becauseof their ability to neutralize targets with pinpoint accuracy.Here, again, the use of infantryto secure the buildings aroundthe helicopter would greatly increase survivability.Urban Air Assault A Reas-essment. Of all the conceptsof helicopter operations in urbanombat, the one with the leasthistorical basis is the assault ontorooftops. There are a number ofreasons. Roofs are not normallystrong enough for helicopter

landings unless they were specifically deSigned for them or tosupport other heavy loads (suchas is the case with a parkinggarage). Furthermore, many roofsare cluttered with obstacles,which would prevent even ahover-down. Finally, rooftops aredangerous because they areeasy to reach with pinpoint fire.At one point in the fighting inSanto Domingo, a low intensityconflict, the majority of the 82dAirborne Division's casualties wereincurred on rooftops (figure 9).There may be occasions, ofcourse, when it is necessary toassau It onto the roof of a keybuilding. Such was the case during the 1968 Battle for Saigon,when two platoons from the 101 stAirborne Division assaulted ontothe roof of the U.S. Embassy,which had been seized by Communist sappers. Success in thisMAY 198

kind of an operation dependson minimum exposure and SUP-pression of all enemy positionsthat could fire on the helicopter.Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Special Agent RolandSwanson has done an extensiveanalysis of heliborne insertiononto rooftops for counter-terrorist/sniper tactics. In his instructionat the FBI Academy in Quantico,VA AgentSwansonteachesthehelicopter rappel as the preferredtechnique. The rappel is morereliable than a landing and is saferfor the troops than a jump froma low hover, especially at night.With practice (and the FBI recommends frequent periods ofrefresher training), insertion canbe accomplished with only a fewseconds of helicopter exposure.For larger scale air assaults,however, rooftop landing zonesare not practical; an open spacewithin the urban area must beused. Perhaps history's largesturban air assault was the insertion in 1965 of the 6th MarineExpeditionary Unit into SantoDomingo. The initialassaultecheIon consisted of 526 heliborneMarines from the USS Boxer.Follow-up operations continuedfor 6 days, including 1,605 sortieswhich lifted 386 tons of suppliesand 4,070 Marines ashore. Thelanding zone used in this operation was the polo field at theHotel Embajador, on the westernside of Santo Domingo.Similar open spaces are common urban features. The numberand size of open areas wereamong the subjects covered inDr. Ellefsen's studies, mentionedearlier. Every city that Dr. Ellefsen analyzed contained a spacelarge enough for heliborne operations within 2 kilometers ofthe ci ty's center.In a mid-intensi ty urban battleheliborne troop movement maybecome a significant requirement. U nits engaged in houseto-house fighting suf fer a more

rapid rate of attrition than unitsfighting in open terrain, and muste replaced quickly with freshtroops. At the same time, roadsare likely to be crowded with resupply and evacuation vehicles,

and also may be blocked withcraters or rubble. Helicopterscould provide a responsivemeans to move troops by flyingthe nap down selected commercial ribbons already secured andcleared of obstacles. The aircraftcould deliver the troops at thelast covered position short of thefighting and then return withoutexposure to enemy fire. Aerialresupply and evacuation wouldinvolve similar flight techniques.Air assaults into enemy-heldterritory present a more difficultpredicament In the USMC studyentitled Concepts of Operationsfor Landing Forces in Urban Environments the Marines consider such operations, citing surprise and fire support as requirements for success (figure 10).A viable technique might beto fly low, down a commercialribbon, with gunships and doorgunners suppressing buildingson either side supported byartil lery fires scheduled to impactjust prior to the helicopters' flyby. Feints and demonstrationswould help surprise (figure 11).Unresolved Issues FutureDevelopments. I n a I of thecombat examples mentioned inthis article helicopter forcesoperated with air supremacy. Thedegree to which the conceptsproposed here would be degraded by enemy air is a matterfor further analysis.The field artillery hazard tohelicopters also may e significant in cities. Most aviators donot consider field artillery to bevery hazardous. To an aviatorspeed ng a few feet above anarrow street, however, the skymay not look so big nor the bulletso small.Another hazard which requires

3


16/52

14

Figure 12: This sketch was used to coordinate air and ground operat ions at An LocFigure 13: This experimental map may help aviators planning urban operations. Note the building heightsshown in perspective

u s RMY VI TION DIGEST


17/52

study is wind effect. A helicopterflying low along a 25-meter widestreet does not have much clearance on either side of the rotor.Crosswinds along narrow sidestreets may create a venturiwhich might blow the aircraft intobuildings. Also, helicoptersflying among tall buildings mightncounter dangerously irregularwind patterns. These effects require study to determine the operationallimits of urban weather.One way to reduce vulnerbility to urban ground fire is toly at night. The development ofimproved night vision equipmentwould certainly enhance the heliopter's capabilities in built-upreas. A related developmentwould be improved surveillancemeans to detect gaps in enemyir defense. Visual, radar andinfrared detection are severelylimited in towns and cities, but amethod of seeding city blocksith unattended ground sensorsmay provide the surveillancedata that heliborne forces require.Ciose coordination between airfor

means for suchexist, the Armyto assess mapping reensure that air andare on theof music. Helicopocate targets

at the corner of Main and Elm.Forces at An Loc made-do witha hand drawn sketch (figure 12).The Defense Mapping Agencyand Engineer Topographic Laboratory are developing mappingconcepts which may aid in airground coordination and helpaviators visualize the ci ty as theywill actually see it (figure 13).Helicopter weapons and ammunition required in urban areasmay not be those most effectivein other areas. Folding fin rockets, for example, may be superiorto antitank guided missiles forurban targets. An armor piercing20 mm round probably wouldincrease the attack helicopter'sability to engage targets protected by structures. Testing ofaerial weapons (similar to theantistructure testing of groundweapons being conducted atAberdeen Proving Grounds, MD)would highlight their capabilitiesand identify their shortcomingsin urban areas.Finally, the urban obstacle thataviators seem to fear the most iswire. Wires are hard to see duringthe day and are almost invisibleat night-even with night visionequipment As Major Woods saidin his article, Wire never sleepsand is always on guard. To copewith the wire hazard, the Armyis testing wire cutters for utility,scout and attack helicopters. Wire

Figure 14: Wire cutters, similar to the ones shown, are being developed forscout, util ity and attack helicopters

Y 198

cutters will be life savers in urbanoperations (figure 14).Conclusions Although it isdangerous to draw conclusionsfrom the meager historical analytical evidence that is available,

there is at this point one principlewhich seems apparent- helicopters in urban combat wil l be mosteffective when used in conjunction with other members of thecombined arms team. Throughout this article are many examples where a helicopter's urban capabilities were enhancedby the actions of other elements.We can pret ty safely say, then,that if helicopters have a role inurban combat, it will not be characterized by the freedom of action that some aviators seem toprefer. But as an Infantryman, Iwant to encourage their questfor a piece of the urban action.Abraham Lincoln once said, Ifa man can't skin, he must hold aleg while somebody else does.If there is a way for helicoptersto help the Infantry skin theenemy in urban combat, I amconfident that Army and Marineaviators will find it.

CPT P) Adolf Carlson is on thestaff of the USAIS' Directorate ofDoctrine and Literature, Ft. Benning,GA. Key aSSignments for him sincehe received his commission in 1969from the USMA have included company commander duty in Vietnamand with the Berlin Brigade. Withthe latter he also worked in G-3 operations.The author gratefully acknowledges theaSSistance provided in the preparationof this article by:LTC Stuart T. AndersonUnited Kingdom Liaison Officer to USAISMr. LeRoy T. BurrowsU.S. Army Aviation R&D CommandDr. Richard EllefsenSan Jose State UniversityMr. Orvin LarsonNaval Personnel R&D CenterS. A. Roland SwansonU.S. FBI Academy

5


18/52

Major P) Leon L. BennettDirectorate of Combat DevelopmentsU.S. Army Infantry SchoolFort Benning, GA

TE UH-1 HUEYhasdoneanoutstanding job for usduringthe last 20 years. It, however,was designed only to withstandthe stress and strain of normalflight. As a product of the technology of the 1950s, it has somesignificant limitations in meetingtoday's requirements in both loadcarrying capability and survivability. Army planners, recognizing these limitations in 1966,wrote a requirement for a newutility helicopter. These visionaryplanners realized that the demands of future combat wouldrequire a helicopter that canrapidly transport a fully equippedinfantry squad into combat, haulcombat loads to forward elements and whisk casualties quickly to treatment areas. As everyone should be aware by now,the U H-60 Black Hawk is theanswer to this requirement.The UH-60 has superior overallperformance. It has considerably more troop and cargo liftcapability than the UH-1 overtypical operating ranges as wellas increased speed, endurance,maneuverability and survivability.The Black Hawk will lift 11 combat troops under hot day conditions and climb with th is loadat 700 feet per minute and cruiseat 145 knots. It has a cargo capacity, at sea level on a hot day, of8,300 pounds for a 50 kilometermission. The UH-60 is virtuallyimmune to small arms fire, has

6

ballistically tolerant blades, fuelsystem, redundant flight controlsand hydrauliCS, and a transmission ct,lpable of operating for 30minutes without lubrication. Additionally, the Black Hawk iscapable of being self-deployedto Europe and other missionareas when equipped with anextended range fuel kit.The Black Hawk is indeedhere. The 101 stAirborne DivisionAir Assault) has two combatsupport aviation companies fullyequipped and more aircraft areon the way. Current plans callfor a buy of 1,107 U H-60s. Thesewill replace specified UH-1 Hsin all active Army combat supportaviation companies (CSAC), aircavalry, and aeromedical evacuation units. Under considerationis the issue of UH-60As to replace the UH-1 in attack helicopter, special forces, and Europebased air support troop (armoredcavalry regiments). The rate ofreplacement is 15 Black Hawksfor 23 Hueys in CSACs, 7 for 8in air cavalry troops, and 1 for 1in aeromedical evacuation units.What then happens to theUH-1? There are about 3,500UH-1 Hs in the Army inventory.After fielding 1,107 Black Hawks,

Black Hawkthere remains a requirement toretain about 2,700 UH-1 Hs inthe n ~ e n t o r y These aircraft willcontinue to perform the air assault, medevac, special electronics and' general utility missionsin Reserve Component units, aswell as performing a variety ofmissions in the active Army.For the UH-1 to continue toperform its mission, certain improvements of the aircraft areessential. The Infantry Schoolat Ft. Benning, GA, and the Aviation Center at Ft. Rucker, AL,along with o ther users and members of the development community, conducted an extensivereview of the UH-1 system todetermine exactly what improvements are required. This reviewconsidered survivability, safety,and reliability, availability andmaintainability (RAM) factors. Ascost savings, consistent withsafety and mission essential factors, were primary considerations,this effort to improve the UH-1did not seek to increase the aircraft's performance capability.To enhance the UH-1 's survivability, an infrared (IR) suppressorwill be installed to reduce thevulnerability of the aircraft to bedetected and tracked by heat

U S RMY VI TION DIGEST


19/52

.~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~

seeking missiles. The UH-1 also corporates improved seals andwill be equipped with a radar a modularized system to reducewarning receiver to provide warn- troubleshooting time. Also ining of radar directed threats to cluded is improved oi l filtrationallow appropriate evasive ma- and a chip detector burn-off toneuvers and or deployment of provide finer filtration of engineother countermeasures. Select- and transmission oil which willed special mission aircraft will reduce wear and the frequencyemploy an IR jammer and a chaff of oil changes from 400 to 1,000dispenser to provide further hours or more.countermeasures against heat The chip detector burn-off feaseeking and radar guided weap- ture also will provide a more reons. Other operational improve- liable chip light to detect impendments include improved nap-of- ing failures. Improved stabilizerthe-earth communications (VHF/ bars will replace the existing staFM/HF), painting and decaling bilizer bars. These improved barsof the cockpit to improve night will increase corrosion proteevision compatibility with night vi- tion of the tube interior and resultsion goggles, and a seD-contained in on-condition operation as opnavigation system which will posed to the current 5-year reprobably be the lightweight dop- tirement life. A composite mainpier. Medical evacuation Hueys rotor blade will replace existingwill be equipped with a radar alti- metal blades. This compositemeter, distance measuring equip- ' ' blade will increase field repairment, and glide slope marker ability and survivability as wellbeacon, all required to perform as aerodynamic efficiency.thei r peacetime mission. Safety improvements, most ofRAM improvements include an which already are in the processimproved tail rotor with a low of being applied to the U H-1,maintenance hub and more e r ~ include a main rotor mast plugdynamically efficient blades, built- and several fuel system modifi-r vibrex cables to reduce the cations. The main rotor mast plugtime required to configure for strengthens the mast againsttracking and balancing and an bending loads. The fuel systemimproved servo cylinder that in- improvements in'clude: ,A fuel

M Y 1980

tank vent system designed toprevent the loss of fuel in theevent of a crash where the helicopter comes to rest on its sideor inverted, and a closed circuitrefueling system designed toprevent spillage, contaminationand fire from vapors, while alsoproviding NATO compatibility forgravity refueling with nozzles upto Y inches in diameter. A crashworthy auxiliary fuel system isto be installed on those aircraftwhich require range extensioncapabil ties.The improvement programsarrived at, as a result of thisreview, have been approved byHeadquarters Department of theArmy and will competefor fundsstarting with the FY 1982 budgetcycle. These programs will enable the UH-1 to continue as aviable member of the Army'sutility he licopter fleet.While we are gaining the requisite battlefield flexibility withthe addition of the Black Hawk,the retention and improvementof the Huey will provide the Armywith a combined utility helicopterfleet designed to meet the needsof future battlefield requirements.The Black Hawk and the Hueyare truly partners in support forthe ground commander.

MAJ P) Leon L. Bennett works inthe Materiel Systems DevelopmentDivision, Directorate of CombatDevelopments, USAIS, Ft. Benning,GA. A 1964 ROTC graduate of TheCitadel, he received a master's degree from N. Michigan University in1973. His military career includesduty as commander of both infantryand aviation companies and as aprimary staff off icer in those areas.

17


20/52

SP Robin ProctorPublic Affairs Office

Fort Rucker AL

T HIS IS A STORY about a Soldier named Speakup Johnson who has a problem which affectsabout 60 percent of all Army personnel: He hasdeveloped a noise induced hearing loss.Speak-up is a Vietnam veteran, but his problemdidn't stem from the war. In fact , it was a gradualprocess; and it took 12 years of driving 10-ton trucks,bulldozers, caterpillars and working around helicopterengines before he noticed any difference in his hearing.He said, It really became evident one night whenmy wife and I were coming from a concert. My earswere ringing and my hearing seemed fuzzy. A fewdays later my supervisor walked into my area. Itwasn't until he was going out the door that I realizedhe had been talking to ' me. The guys at work werealways kidding me about having selective hearing,but now I began to take them seriously.A major symptom of hearing loss is difficulty inunderstanding people, especially when talking on the18

telephone or if there are television or other backgroundnoises present. Also, the person with the hearing lossmisses certain words in conversation and may speakloudly to other people. The last symptom is annoying,and someone will eventually bring it to his or herattention.

CPT Susan M Liff, audiologist at Lyster ArmyHospital, Ft. Rucker, offered some insight into thefunctions of the ear:The delicate organ has three parts, the outer, themiddle and the inner. The outer ear directs the soundto the middle ear and protects the inner ear parts.

The middle ear sends sound to and protects the innerear. It also equalizes pressure on the eardrum. Theinner ear changes the sound energy to nerve energyand transmits it to the brain.If the outer and middle ear are damaged from anycause, they usually are medically t reatable; bu t thereContinued on page 5

u s ARMY AVIATION DIGEST


21/52

Wire strikes and high airspeeda deadly combination A rmy a ircraft have beeninvolved in a wire strikemishap on an average ofonce every 2 weeks for the past 9years. Thirty people have been killedand 46 more injured in wirestrike mishaps over the past 5 years.So far this fiscal year, four lives havebeen lost in wire strike mishaps.Let s review once again what weknow about wires and wire strikes.

~ S D i ~us RMY SAmy INUR

uman error is almost alwaysinvolved in wire strikes. Thoserare mishaps that happen after somein-flight materiel-related emergencyare the exception rather thanthe rule. ost wire strikes happen duringcruise flight. Most fatal wirestrikes occur at airspeeds above60 knots. The one cause factorcommon to the vast majority of fatal

wire strike mishaps is flying at cruiseairspeed at low altitude. Slower airspeed not only makeswire detection and avoidance easierbut also reduces the severity ofinjuries and aircraft damage if wiresare hit. Most wire strikes occur below5 feet agl with few occurringabove 15 feet.

The pilot of this Huey was killed when his aircraft hit powerllnes 6 feet above a lake.

M Y 1980 9


22/52

ire strikes

Pilots in units with strongcommand supervision to enforceSOPs dealing with flightdiscipline are less l ikely tobecome involved in wirestrike mishaps. An aerial reconnaissance overunfamiliar terrain is only partlyeffective in locating wires strung inthe area. For all practical purposes, itis virtually impossible to insure allwires are noted during sucha reconnaissance. Wire strikes seldom occur attakeoff and landing points whensurrounding wires are marked. ven though wires may not beseen, their presence should beexpected across rivers; along roadsand railroad tracks; between hills,poles, structures; and between anypole and a structure. ven when onlya single pole or building in opencountry is spotted, the possibility ofwires exists. The position of the sun, types ofwires, time of day, and existingatmospheric conditions candrastically affect the pilot s ability todetect wires. A change in one ormore of these variables can be adeciding factor as to whether wirescan be readily spotted, seen withdifficulty, or not seen at all. venlarge powerlines suspended bytowers can sometimes be difficultto see even on a perfectly clear day.

2

Some types of wires such as thoseassociated with missiles are almostimpossible to see during flight. Thedanger posed by these is greatestduring terrain f light over firingranges and over trees and otherfoliage adjacent to such ranges. The more crewmembers activelyengaged in spott ing wire hazards onany given flight, the less the risk ofwire strikes. Conversely, thepossibility of a wire strike is greatestwhen lack of crew coordinationdiverts the pilo t s attention fromvisually searching for wires.How can wire strikesbe prevented?Through team effort, and the teammust include the following people: The commander must continuallyenforce SOPs dealing with flightdiscipline. Breaches of flightdiscipline must meet with positivecommand action. Unit operatingprocedures for the types of missionsto be flown must be clearly spelledout in the SOP, and theseprocedures should be reinforcedregularly at aviation safety meetings.

OH-58 crashed nose-low afterhitting several telephone wiresstrung across a river. The area hadnot been reconned for hazards, andthe wires were not marked on thehazards map.

The operations officer mustschedule aircrews who arecompatible and who have attainedthe desired state of training asweighed against the complexity ofthe mission. The operations officermust provide hazard maps and briefaviators on wire hazards. The unit aviation safety officermust contribute to a wire avoidanceclimate in the unit by promotingprevention awareness in safetymeetings; by closely monitoringflight crew scheduling, briefingsldebriefings, posting, use of, andavailability of wire hazard maps; and,in the absence of a flight surgeon, bybeing aware of the psychologicalphysiological states of the aviators inthe unit. Unit instructor pilots mustpractice, teach, and reinforce wire

1This UH-1, flying VFR underlowering ceilings at night hit wiresand crashed on highway. The pilotwas killed.

U S RMY VI TION DIGEST


23/52

strike prevention criteria andcommonsense rules for detectingwires. IPs must place emphasis onslowing down when poor visibilityconditions (flying into sun, rain, etc.)are encountered and stopping toreorient when disoriented. Copilots and crew chiefs mustbe assigned specific cockpit tasksand duties. Open lines ofcommunication must exist betweenthe pilot at the controls and thosenavigating and / or clearing theaircraft in all quadrants. A calloutsuch as wires (level, low, high) at(o'clock position) should be used byaircrewmembers in the interestof brevity. The aviator must, as the finalauthority, consistently andsuccessfully combat the temptationto take shortcuts that may lead to a

wire strike. Every Army helicopterpilot who flies in the wireenvironment (and that 's just abouteveryone) must remain conscious ofbasic wire strike prevention measuresand think wires constantly whileflying in the terrain flight mode.Everyone on the team shares theresponsibility for wire strikemishaps, but final responsibilitystill belongs to the people in thecockpit. If every pilot on everyterrain .flight mission would planproperly, then fly the aircraft sloweras he goes lower, the number of wirestrikes as well as the number of liveslost would be reduced.Remember, speed is still the mainkiller in wire strikes. Slow downand livePortions of this article were adaptedfrom USAREUR Flight Safety Kit.

All on board were killed when pilot's attention was diverted and the Huey,flying at 9 knots, hit wires and crashed.

M Y 198

Seven steps for wirestrike prevention Make certain unit SOPs coverterrain flight and clearly establishsafe procedures for the typesof missions to be flown. Insure that pilots adhere toestablished procedures, andcommanders must take immediateand positive action regarding anyviolation of flight discipline. Make certain that thorough wirehazard and obstacle briefings areconducted before every terrainflight mission. Mark wires in the areas whereyou normal ly operate. Avoid contour flight unlessrequired by the mission. Contour isthe terrain flight mode where mostwire strikes occur. Insure maximum crew coordinationin searching for and calling out wiresduring terrain flights Above all else, go slow when yougo low.

2


24/52

L a t e N e w s Fron l r m y via t ion c t iv i t iesFROM FORT RU KERlight Training Eligibility Army officer andenlisted personnel, as well as civilians or otherservice members, may be eligible to request flighttraining.United States citizens who have been graduatedfrom high school; are between 17 and 46 yearsold; and who are 64 to 76 inches in height may beelig ible as long as they: Are not under investigation bycivil or militaryauthorities; Were not previously eliminated from flight

training; Were not previously denied a secret securityclearance; Have no court convictions or were adjudgedas a juvenile offender(this criteria may be waived) .Civilian or other service personnel requirementsare: Enlistment in the Army; A score of 270 or more on the FlightAptitudeSelection Test-Warrant Officer Candidate Battery(FAST-WOCB); Meeting of appointment criteria as delineatedin Army Regulation 135-100; Volunteering to accept appointment in theArmy Reserve; Serving on active duty for at least 48 months; Recommendation by a board of officers.Active officers must hold the rank of first orsecond lieutenant, captain or warrant officer withless than 61 months active commissioned or warrant officer service. Officers also are required toattain a score of at least 155 on the Flight AptitudeSelection Test-Officer Battery (FAST-OB) test;incur a 4-year service obligation; may not bealerted for overseas assignment; and may not bepending action under Army Regulation 600-31.Enlisted Army personnel must have completedbasic military training, have 2 years remaininguntil separation, not be on stabilized assignmentand not be alerted for overseas assignment. Otherrequirements include: A General Technical (GT) score of 110; No action pending under Army Regulation600-31 ; A score of 270 or more on the FAST-WOCBtest; Meeting the appointment criteria set forth inArmy Regulation 135-100;

Volunteering for appointment in the ArmyReserve; Active service of 48 months commitment; Being recommended by unit commander anda field grade officer.The 42-week flight training program is conducted at the U.S. Army Aviation Center at Ft.Rucker, AL. Upon the start of class candidatesare promoted to the rank of sergeant (unlessalready holding a higher grade) and receive payand allowances accordingly.Candidates begin drawing flight pay uponcompletion of the 6-week Warrant Office Mili taryDevelopment Course.Entry into the flight training program by civilianor other service personnel is accomplished onlyafter entry into the Army Army recruiters mayenlist personnel specifically for the flight trainingenlistment option.

Other service personnel must be separatedfrom their parent service before enlisting in theArmy or attending the flight program.Commissioned, warrant and enlisted personnelserving on active duty in the Army are authorizedto apply for flight training to their unit commander.After eligibility for attendance is determined,applications are processed through the normalchain of command to the Department of the Armyfor approval.Editor's note: If you do not qualify for the Army'sflight program, but know someone who may beinterested, we urge you to clip out the aboveinformation and send it to them .USAAVNC-PAO)

Recruiting and Retaining Soldiers Major General Maxwell R Thurman, a recent guest speakerat a graduation ceremony of the officer and warrantofficer rotary wing aviator classes at the AviationCenter, challenged the newest aviators in theArmy and Air Force to help in recruiting and retention of active duty personnel.General Thurman, commander of the U S ArmyRecruiting Command . Ft. Sheridan, IL, is responsible for filling active and reserve Army recruiting quotas. He said that volunteer enlistments are 22,000 ahead of last year's figures.The Army fell short of last year's quota by 16,000,so the current figures project real hope of fillingthe recruiting requirements for this year, hepointed out.

A good recruiter enlists four people a month(which means) it takes a week of hard work torecruit just one Soldier, said General Thurman.He then challenged the graduating classes tohelp improve retention of active service personnelby helping to create a positive atmosphere withinthe active ranks.U S ARMY AVIATION IGEST


25/52

He also reminded the aviators that for everyperson who elects not to reenlist or who is dis-charged from the Army, a recruiter must work 2weeks to fill that position. This is because only50 percent of persons enlisted remain in theservice. Thus the aviators have a vestedinterest in helping us keep good people in, hesaid. He brought up the fact that The Army isnever the same 2 days in a row. Due to retire-ments, discharges and people deciding to leavethe service, the Army must actively recruit tomaintain its operating capabilities.General Thurman said that the graduating avia-tors can and will be called upon to assist local re-cruiters in demonstrations at high schools andvocational-technical schools near their dutystations. You'l l have to tell those students whyyou joined the Army, he said. He stressed theimportance of recruiting high school graduatesby saying, We're striving to take more than half(of Soldiers recruited into combat arms) as highschool graduates. A total of 45,000 people are

Preserving the Past A monument erected in 1966 by aclass of warrant off icer candidates was scheduled for destruc-tion along with some old build ings at the Aviation Center, Ft.Rucker, until Soldiers of the 43rd Company, 4th Battalion,1st Aviation Brigade decided to preserve the stone and plaquein their company area. First Sergeant Lewis E. Rowan, belowleft, had the idea of salvaging this memorial and, with thewings designed and constructed by SSG Edward R. Richardson,below center, this reminder of the past stands proudly in anew setting. The commander of the 43rd, CPT Thomas J.Rini, l ooks on in approval.

needed to fill the Army quota for combined combatarms recruiting. He said that the graduates, likeall members of the Army team, should be activerecruiters at all times. He also stated that 280recruits were needed this year to meet the Army'srequirement for aviators.FROM T NN SSMaintenance Convention The Ninth Annual

Convention of the Professional Aviation Mainte-nance Association, Inc. will be held in MusicCity U.S.A., on 22 and 23 August 1980, in Nash-ville, TN.The business meeting and banquet will be heldat the Radisson Plaza Hotel, Two Commerce Place,Nashville.PAMA is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, nonsectarian,and nonunion association organized in 1972 topromote a high degree of professionalism amongaviation mechanics, technicians and repair agen-cies. The association is dedicated to promotesafety, knowledge and dignity in the aircraft main-tenance profession.Forfur ther information regarding the conventioncontact: Mr. Paul Wooten, Convention Chairman,202 Gracey Avenue, Smyrna, TN 37167.(PAMA)

FROM FORT C MPBELLTo The Rescue Soldiers from the 507th Trans-portation Aircraft Maintenance Company, 5thTransportation Battalion, 101 st Airborne Division

Reporting Final continued on page 47


26/52

NTIHELICOPTEROPEl l T IONSC W3 CAMPBELL carefully hovered the OHS8C scout aircraft over the field so that theopen valley beyond the sparse treeline could be reconnoitered by CPT Brownfield, the attack helicopter platoon commander. Coordination between the attackteam and the ground force commander already hadbeen made. It was now CPT Brownfield's job to act asbattlefield coorcfinator, a mission he never really believed that he'd perform for real. His other scouts ofthe attack helicopter team already had located theirbattle positions and were busy leading attack helicoptersinto firing positions. It was obvious that the time ofreckoning was near.In the distance, just beyond the smoke and dust,loomed hundreds of dark figures moving rapidly acrossthe valley floor. Soon, outlines of tanks began toappear, almost shoulder to shoulder, giving theappearance of one, not hundredsof charging armoredbeasts. Prearranged friendly artillery fires createderuptions within the formation causing the tank crewsto button up. A pai r of A-lOs made a low pass,spitting explosions within the tight formation, destroying tanks and suppressing the enemy air defense artillery weapons.CW3 Campbell hovered down below the treeline,carefully picking his way back to his own area of responsibility. He would be working with the attackbirds on the west flank and would provide artilleryadjustment for the defending forces. Additionally, hewould move to screen the Cobras' flank when theattack aircraft unmasked to fire their deadly missiles.As CW3 Campbell continued towards their positionto fire there was an uneasiness in his stomach, just agut feeling that something wasn't quite right. Theiractions and techniques had been practiced dozens oftimes before; it was the same kind of sour feeling hehad gotten on search and destroy missions in Vietnam.

4

Major Frank E abiaszandCaptain Carl E DaschkeThreat BranchDirectorate o Combat DevelopmentsFort Rucker AL

U.S. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST


27/52

MAY 19S

Soon they were passing behind the attack helicopters'firing position, knowing that shortly the firewordswould begin. CW3 Campbell came to a low hover,made a right pedal turn back towards the enemythrust, and observed the attack birds preparing tounleash all hell on the enemy tanks. Seemingly ready,he started again, low and slow, up the draw, to take upan observation point about 500 meters to the leftflank of the attack aircraft. The uneasiness he feltearlier still hadn t left. This was different though; forsome unknown reason, just different.

He painstakingly selected a position allowing goodobservation to the flanks and the battle area. Steadyingthe aircraft just above the trees, he looked back for afleeting second to see the attack aircraft slowly, deliberately, start climbing to their firing position. Suddenly,without warning, rockets screamed past the front ofthe scout as explosions violently erupted around theattacking Cobras, causing utter chaos among the crews.Radios suddenly became cluttered with broken transmissions, aircraft began turning and twisting out ofposition as rockets continued to devastate the area.Caught totally unprepared, CW3 Campbell quicklypushed in left pedal accelerating down the slope ofthe ridge, when out of the corner of his eye, he sawsomething that was totally unexpected. They lookedlike two giant dragons spewing fire and smoke as theyapproached just above the trees. Only 1,000 metersaway the fire spewed again as the first of the roundsshattered the canopy, sending bits of plexiglass allover the cockpit. The top of the instrument paneldisintegrated in a spray of electrical sparks, just beforethe rounds began pouncing into the armored seat andthe limp body of CW3 Campbell.

CPT Brownfield, the battlefield coordinator, desperately lunged forward in an effort to reach thecontrols but the 12.7 millimeter (mm) rounds held thesame fate for him. The scout aircraft impacted, whirledviolently and literally broke apart. The remainingCobras, realizing what was happening, left their firingpositions to seek the safety of another woodline.

The two HINDS did not bother to chase their prey,for their mission was not one of dedicated antihelicopter. Remaining low, silhouetted against the trees,they reversed course to continue their mission ofscreening the advancing armor attack. In the smallopen field below lay the smoldering wreckage of anunarmed scout helicopter that was not equipped tomeet the threatAs our simple scenario clearly illustrates, the likelihood of an air-to-air encounter is a very real problemand will severely hamper our tactical aviation operations. We feel that any future conflict with the Sovietswill inevitably place the Soviet attack helicopter andthe U.S. attack and scout helicopters in direct oppositionto one another. This particular belief is predicated

25


28/52

upon the fact that the HIND was designed, and isemployed, as an offensive weapon. The aircraft'smission of close air fire support places it in anenvironment where it will routinely encounter U.S.helicopters. Based upon this, we are only foolingourselves if we fail to recognize that chance encountersituations, helicopter versus helicopter, will occur onany future battlefield.

The first point, which we would like to establish, isthat the U. S. helicopter will seldom be concernedwith air-to-air engagements. The phrase air-to-airimmediately conjures in one's mind the image of twohelicopters locked in the classic dog fight type ofscenario. The idea of two helicopters performingloops, rolls, climbs and dives to either evade or engageanother helicopter is as ridiculous as it sounds. Inreality, the scout and attack helicopters performingtheir normal tactical roles, can be more accuratelydescribed as ground targets. We believe that thelow, slow and intermittent stationary requirements ofnap-of-the-earth flight, coupled with the extensiveuse of laager areas, firing and observation positions,dictate that the scout/ attack helicopter be viewed asa highly mobile GROUND TARGET. After all, it isof little concern to the attacker that the aircraft ishovering at 20 feet of altitude rather than sitting onthe ground. In either instance the target, weaponselection and method of engagement will be identical.Therefore, to preclude any misunderstanding, theterm air-to-air should, in fact, be changed to antihelicopter when describing a helicopter ve'rsus helicoptersituation.Is there really an anti helicopter threat? Yes Thisfact of life, regardless of what some believe, is borneout by several undisputable facts: The Soviets have fielded a very versatile attackhelicopter fleet. The backbone, of course, is the Mi-24 HIND series attack helicopter. In an effort tosupplement and expand their attack fleet, the Sovietshave modified one other helicopter. Both aircraft areequipped with effective air-to-ground weapon systemsin the form of rockets, antitank guided missiles(ATGM), and either Gatling guns or machineguns.SOVIET ATTACK HELICOPTER ARMAMENTHIND12.7 mm Gatlin Gun128 X 57 mm Rockets4 X ATGM

The Soviet attack helicopter is armed with a varietyof weapons which can be employed effectively in anantihelicopter situation. The Soviet pilots' selectionof weapon or weapons in an antihelicopter situationwill be range dependent. It is not unreasonable toassume, particularly in Central Europe, that most

26

antihelicopter engagements will occur at rangesbetween 1,000 and 2,000 meters, with the averagefalling closer to 1,000 meters. The terrain, predominateweather and U.S. helicopter tactical doctrine willseverely limit engagement ranges to about 1,000 meters.Based on these factors we can realistically concludethat the 57 mm rocket and 12.7 Gatling gun are themost effective antihelicopter weapons presently fieldedon Soviet attack helicopters.This position has been somewhat supported bySoviet open source literature which has alluded to thefact that the cannon 20 to 30 mm) may be the mosteffective antihelicopter weapon. Additionally, Sovietarticles also have indicated that the speed, maneuverability and firepower of the attack helicopter maywell establish it as the most effective antihelicopterweapon.As mentioned earlier, the primary mission of theHIND is that of close air fire support (CAPS), restrictingthe normal employment of the HIND to the forwardedge of the battle area (FEBA) and close to FEBAareas. t is not unreasonable to surmise that, with theAH-l and scout, routinely employed well forward insupport of the ground forces, encounters with theHIND will be a frequent occurrence.It would seem appropriate at this time to point outthat the Soviet attack helicopter is not normallyemployed in the same manner in which we use ourhelicopters. The HIND is an aggressive aircraft thatwill probably fly at faster airspeeds and at slightlyhigher altitudes than our attack helicopter. The HINDcan be expected to aggressively seek targets within itsarea of operations. The Cobra, on the other hand,relies on the use of firing positions and is primarilyantiarmor oriented; therefore, its employment is notas aggressive as the HIND's.You now have a situation where one aircraft (HIND)is employed in an area type situation, while the U.S.aircraft (Cobra) will be employed in a less aggressive,fairly stationary, single target, mode. To accomplishits mission, the Cobra and even the advanced attackhelicopter (AAH) must be employed in close proximityto the attacking forces - where is the HIND?, with orpreceding the attacking forces. Again, you can seethe probability of frequent antihelicopter situations.We recognize that the subject of arming the aeroscoutand possibly including a more sophisticated defensiveweapon on the attack helicopter is an extremely volatileissue guaranteed to start an argument on most anyoccasion. Therefore, several factors must be addressedin order to establish some very basic points: The arming of the scout helicopter would be fordefensive purposes. It is not our contention that theaeroscout be given the mission, direct or implied, ofoffensively seeking out opposing attack helicopters.Much the same as the point man for a recon patrol,

U.S. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST


29/52

the mission of the scout s very clearly defined as aninformation collector with a secondary mission ofacquiring targets for both the attack helicopter andindirect fire systems. Nothing should be expected ofthe scout which will detract from its mission; thisincludes expecting the aircrews to perfonn their missionin an extremely hostile environment unarmed. Afterall, You don't send the point man out on a reconpatrol without a rifle. The often expressed argument that the helicopterpilot s basically a frustrated fighter jock who harborsa deep-seated desire to become an aviation ace sjust not valid. The hard fact of life s that the scouthelicopter s no match for a Soviet high-performancefighter or even an attack helicopter. It would be anextremely foolhardy approach for the scout pilot toassume that his offensive capability s a viable matchagainst either aircraft. The idea of an offensively oriented scout mayhave abounded during the Vietnam conflict; but onemust consider that Vietnam was fought under acompletely different set of rules. Any future conflictscould well be n a different ball park and will requirea new set of rules due to lack of air superiority and thesophistication of the opponent's weapons.Fire control, or fire integrity, will basically be amatter of leadership and education. The aeroscout,armed with a minigun, missile or cannon, whichgoes forth to seek and engage the enemy will nodoubt meet the same fate as the unarmed aircraft.The aircrew must be trained to use their defensiveweapon .only to suppress fire and break contact.

n Father s Day

There are, however, some mission scenarios whichmay dictate employment of the armed scout or attackhelicopter in other roles. The first which comes tomind s an aerial effort launched to counter a reararea intrusion by Soviet attack and assault helicopters.Unfortunately, the forward employment scheme ofEurope's active defense leaves the division and corpscommander with a limited number of troops andequipment which could be committed to counter reararea assaults. A likely candidate s the divisional orcorps attack helicopter assets which could be employedto defend the rear areas' vulnerability to Soviet airassaults. The most effective means of countering airassaults s not after the troops have landed but ratherwhile they are en route. For the assault, while still inthe air, s most vulnerable to our interdiction. Toaccomplish this mission, we need armed aircraftaircraft that are armed with effective antihelicopterweapons.

In summary, the Soviets consider the attack helicopter to be a viable antihelicopter system. Therefore,we MUST address the total Soviet threat which includesarmed helicopters which are capable of engagingtactical helicopters. I f we expect our aircrews to survive,let alone accomplish their missions in this extremelyhostile environment, we must provide them withequipment which s designed to support theirmissionthis includes defensive weapons. We do not suggestthat helicopters inherit the air-to-air combat missionwhich has been historically associated with the AirForce, but rather we suggest arming the helicopter todeal with antihelicopter situations- in short, survival.

give Dad the

e suggest that your dad, brother, husband orfriend would enjoy receiving a gift subscription._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Attention Superintendent of DocumentsSend the United States Army Aviation Digest to:

name

add resscity state zip code

Enclose check oneo 17 domestico $21.25- overseasfor a one year subscription

and retu rn to:Superintendent of Documents

U.S Govern ment Printing OfficeWashington DC 20402

27


30/52

The Vital nkThe viation Liaison Officer

WHERE DO NEWLY assignedaviation liaison officers goto learn about their jobs? To a more

experienced aviator? To 10 or 2differen t field manuals? Or do theyjust wing it on their own vastknowledge ?Since there is not a single reference from which to find the answer,most aviators probably use a combination of the three choices givenabove. This article discusses liaisonduties and special considerationswith which aviation liaison officersmust be aware. A sample checklistalso is presented to provide assistance in organizing the mass of information liaison officers must haveto effectively perform their duties.Aviation liaison officers are a vitalcommunication link between supporting aviation units and supported maneuver elements. They assistin the tactical planning by advisingcommanders and operations officersof the supported unit on the supporting unit's capabilities, limitations, tactical employment and theoperational status of existing aviationassets. Since the liaisons are locatedat the supported units' tactical operation centers, they also must keepthe supporting units abreast of tactical situations and the front line trace.Effective liaison performance begins with a constant knowledge ofthe tactical situation. The adviceto the supported element and theinformation passed to the supportingunit must be based on the most current intelligence. Failure to adviseon this basis could result in faultyplanning, and as a consequence, aneedless loss of lives and aircraft.Thus, staying on top of the tacticalsituation is the foundation of thejob.

Total job performance also demands knowledge of the capabilities and limitations of the aviationassets. Aircraft considerations shouldinclude but are not limited to: op-28

irst Lieutenant Keith E SimsCompany A 7th Aviation Battalion

ort Ord CAerational status, weather conditions,altitude, outside ambient temperature , maximum cargo, maximumtroop load, terrain conditions, refuelcapability and security. Supportingunit considerations include: crewrest, reaction time, maintenancetime, resupply and critical personnelstatus. Most maneuver commandersand operation officers are not familiar with the specific practices andtechnical aspects of aviation units.Therefore this information shouldbe retained and applied as the opportunity arises, to keep the tacticalplan within the limitations whileemploying aviation to its full capacity.

Professional appreciation of themissions and tasks of the supportedunit serves to increase liaison efficiency. Supported unit considerations include: type missions,organic weapons, equipment, mobility, security capability and reactiontime. This professional appreciationof the supported unit will allow theliaison to plan ahead and to reactquicker and more positively to contingencies.

When tasked with a mission, theaviation liaison officer informs thesupporting unit, and provides thefollowing information at a minimum: type mission; points of contact; point of contact s location, frequency and call sign; enemy situation; special equipment needed;

U.s. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST


31/52

pick-up zone and landing zonelocations; and, any pertinent frequencies andremarks.Time permitting, the liaison officer meets with the airmission com

mander and the maneuver commander to obtain the specific missioninformation. This information servesto further advise the supported unitat the tactical operation center,should any contingencies arise during the conduct of the mission.So where does an aviation liaisonofficer go to learn about his job?The combination of the three choicesgiven in the introduction seems tobe a viable solution. However, aliaison officer can hardly take thechance of ever winging anything.The liaison's total job performancedirectly affects the efficient use ofaviation assets and timely missionaccomplishment. Properly preparedand organized, the aviation liaisonofficer can be an invaluable assetto both the supported and supportingunits.

How Can I et The

The U S rmy A viation Digest is an official Department of the Army publicationctive Army

Official distribution is handled by The Adjutant General. Active Army National Guard andArmy Reserve units under pinpoint distribution should request both initial issue and revisionsto accounts by submitting DA Form 12-5. Detailed instructions for preparing 12 5 can befound on the back of the form. Submit the completed 12-5 toCommanderUSA AG Publications Center2800 Eastern BoulevardBaltimore MD 21220National Guard units not on pinpoint distribution should submit their request through theirstate adjutant general.

MAY 1980 9


32/52

RE means electronic wadareand much more

REAT RE'I n Integral Part- Of Soviet octrineMajor Forrest D Williams

Threat ManagerDirectorate of Combat DevelopmentsU.S. Army Aviation CenterFort Rucker AL

T HEY HAD BEEN in attackpositions for several minutesnow, waiting for the final order tocommence firing on the advancingenemy tanks. CW3 Tubbs, pilot inthe scout aircraft, was growingimpatient. He had informed hisplatoon leader via radio that blueteam was ready and in position.This, in turn, had been transmittedto him by each of the two attackaircraft he was supporting. Onlyanother minute or two now, hehoped, and th

Date post:	03-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	aviationspace-history-library
View:	219 times
Download:	0 times