Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1981

8/12/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1981

1/52

USAARLSCI SUPPORT CENTER

P.O. BOX 62 577FORT RUCKER Al 36362 577

linG11 ,,,,F'. S


2/52

NOVEMBER 1981 VOLUME 27 NUMBER

*rigadier General Ellis D. ParkerArmy Aviation OfficerODCSOPS, Headqu arters,Department of the ArmyMajor Genera l Carl H. McNair Jr.Commander

U.S. Army Aviation CenterFort Rucker, Alabama

Brigadier General Richard D. KenyonDeputy CommanderU.S. Army Aviation Center

FQrt Rucker, Alabama

page 7

page 30

page 3

4

7

101214

16

18

63

32

35

384

424447

48

Preparedness , MG Emmett H. Walker Jr .The Aging Saber Sharpening For War, BG Herbert R.

Temple Jr.rmy National Guard Aviation, John J. Stanko Jr.

ARNG Aviation Operations Branch, LTC Roger Goodrich RE JARNG logistics Branch, AI MarshallARNG Safety Branch, LTC Roger PerkinsARNG Multi-Media Group, MAJ Kenneth BoleyReporting FinalAn Evaluation Of Demographic Items, CW2( P Bernard

T Sundy; Dr . John Ruffner ; Daniel WickWhat Meets The The Eye Real Or Illusion?WETEYE And Army Aviation , COL R L. HorvathSynthetic Flight Training System Program, LTC John

J. GriffithsThreat: The leak In The Soviet Air Defense Umbrella,

MAJ Frank E BabiaszAviation Personnel Notes: MAJ Michael K . JenningsDES Report To The Field: Aeroscout Instructor Pilot

TechniquesPEARL 'sCobra Versus Hind, CPT Dale W. MoffattTeaching Philosophy, SP4 Rick BretzATC Action line: Army Controllers To The Rescue

Inside Back Cover: 1981 ATC Winners

Back Cover: Weight And Balance, CW2 Gary R.Weiland

Cover: The Army National Guard is rich in history and tradition. The Aging Saber Sharpeningfor War symbolizes the Army National Guardcommitment to meet the Army Aviation challenges

of the 1980s

page 35

page 44

Honorable John A. Mars

Secretary of the Army

Richard K. TierneyEditor

The mission of the U.S . Army Aviation Digest USPS 415-350) IS to provideInformation of an opera t ional. functiona l nature concerning safe ty and aircraftaccident prevention . training . maintenance . operat ions . resea rc h a nd development .aVia ti on mediCine and other related data

ThiS publication has been approved by The Adlutant Gene ral . HeadquartersDePilrtment of the Army 25 April 1980 In ilccordilnce With Army Reguliltlon310-1

Ac tive Army un it s receive distribu t ion under the pinpoint distributIOn systemas outlined In AR 310-1 Complete DA Form 12-5 and send directly to CDR. AGPubllcallons Center . 2800 Eastern Boulevard . B a lti more . MD 21220 For anychange In distribution requirements . init iate a reVised DA Form 12 -5

The Dlg IS an offiCial Department of the Army periodical published monthlyunder the supervIsion of the Commanding General . U S Army AViation CenterViews expressed herein are not necessarily those of th e Department of the Armynor the U S Arm y AVia t ion Cente r Photos a re U S Army unle ss otherw isespeCified Use of the masculine pronoun IS Intended to Inc lud e both genders

u n less ot herW ise stated Material may be reprinted prOVided credit IS given to theDlg s t and to the author . unless otherWise indicated

Articles . photos and Items of Interest on Arm y AViat ion a re in Vited Directcommunication IS authorized to ' Ed itor . U.S . Army Aviation Digest. PO DrawerP . Fort Rucker . AL 36362 Manuscripts return ed upon reque s t .

National Guard a nd Army Reserve units under pinpoint distribution also shouldsubm it DA Form 12-5 Ot h e r Nallonal Guard units should su bmit requests through

their sta te adjutan t generalThose not elig ib le for offiCial distribution or who deSire personal copies of th e

Digest can order the magazine from the Superin tendent o f Document s . U SGovernment Printing Office . Washington . DC 20402 Annual su b S ripti o n ratesare 2000 domestic and 25 .00 overseas .


3/52

E OF the vi l l t i r tn 1 . . 111 ::1 ' ,031 ru , . . . . ' ,n roCa for two-thirds of theAviation to become more familiar withhe other thi rd- the latter grouphe National Guard aviation O I C H Y ' I , : : : ; n T

and essential of our total force.

General Emmett WalkerNational

as

ColonelKen

and SP6 were selec ted thebest air traffic controller and maintenance technician for 1981, and the Coleman GCA is theATC More coverage on their achievementiscontained herein. The ofair traffic control worldwide are cause for ourconti ng but a note of

is due to those who have ' c n n . n r o , ' r tto the national call for assistance with the FAACON That too addressed this issue.

visible in news earlier this yearwas the movement of some very sensitive chem-ical cargo one site to another.

Aviation was very a of thatand we asked R.L. Horvath of DARCOMto describe it for us in a "WETEYEand Aviation."

And this month we have the third in our four"Aviation Warrant Officer Retention series.

Its is An Evaluation ofItems" and offers some veryWhere do you or your unit fit into thiswas written Chief WarrantBernard T Dr. John Ruffner and Mr.Wick. very tel in this

of with to careerintentions is most I a contributing factor tothe decision of many aviation warrant officers toleave the that is wecan correct in-house Also remember that thisseries was writ ten fol the , , r n Tnconducted at the Aviation theResearch Institute and members of the WarrantOfficer Senior Course. Actions tothis have now seen aviation warrant officerretention pass the 60 mark-andan excellent indeed.

month with

and we whoAviation have much toI for as our contributions are

recognized on the combined armsteam. as we and write about our role indefense should war ever come, let us bethankfu I for peace.

General Carl H McNair Jr.U S Aviation Center

L


4/52

PREPAREDNESS

T HE HEAL TH OF the total Army is dependent on the Army National Guard (ARNG).The ARNG slice of the force structureconsists of 33 percent of the combat divisions,72 percent of the separate brigades, 57 percentof the Armored Cavalry regiments, 63 percentof the Infantry battalions, 43 percent of the FieldArtillery battalions and 40 percent of Army Aviation.

ARNG aviation faces an enormous challenge.In 39 unit training days a year, the aviation com

mander must be able to field a unit that can accomplish its mission in a short-notice, globaloption war on a modern battlefield that is continually increasing in tempo technology andlethality . The dynamics of modern warfare ruleout prolonged postmobilization training the nexttime the Army and AR NG are called upon tofight.

Consider some of the training realities thatface AR NG aviation. The Army organizes andreorganizes the ARNG, U .S Army Reserve andactive Army in order to meet the total Armyforce planning requirements. Reorganizations,as might be expected, place special demandson ARNG readiness achievement. Empathizewith the ARNG aviation unit commander whohas just had his unit reorganized or who hasreceived the latest equipment. This usually causesthe majority of his personnel not to be militaryoccupational specialty (MOS) qualified. Mostlikely, the commander s overall yearly trainingrequirement is too large to be immediatelyabsorbed by the Army institutional school systemnor is there sufficient time available during thenormal training year to accomplish these re-

qualifications. Additionally very few ARNGpersonnel can take 10 or 11 weeks out of theircivilian careers to become MOS requalifiedexcept at great personal sacrifice.

Given the training environment in the ARNG,it is critical that training designs in institutions,resident and nonresident be attuned to thespecial needs and realities of this environment.The one-Army training template approach usuallyrequires some modification for the ARNG. The

training environment found in towns and citiesacross the United States which are the posts,camps and stations of the ARNG is quite varied.The ARNG aviation commander faces land andresource constraints that may inhibit his abilityto create realistic challenging training. Eventhough aviation does have the mobility to moveto distant major training areas, energy conservation requirements may preclude doing so. Landand training airspace once ample for trainingdivisions is in some instances hardly adequatefor battalions.

Army training has been greatly influenced inrecent years by new technology. At the forefrontis instructional systems development which is abehavior-oriented method of teaching or trainingwhich guides the individual, step-by-step, tocomplete mastery of the learning objectives.The individual may use any or a combination ofinnovations such as teaching machines, audiovisual devices or simulators to attain predetermined objectives. Training innovation in the simulator area has expanded at a rapid rate. However,most of these sophisticated simulators and moreelaborate teaching devices are located at Army

U.S. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST


5/52

Major General Emmett H. Walker Jr.Director, Army National Guard

There is no second prizefor runner up

training centers and therefore may not be readilyavailable for most ARNG aviation units spreadthroughout the continental United States. Weare working to make more simulators available.

Another training consideration more personnelthan hardware oriented is that the average ARNGaviator is in his midthirties, wears senior wings,is a Vietnam veteran and has the same motivationfor measuring up to the Army Training andEvaluation Program standards as his active duty

counterpart. However, from past personal experience, he realizes that the battlefield is theultimate and sometimes fatal measure of training readiness.

This assessment of the training realities thatface the ARNG Aviation Program appears tooffer insurmountable obstacles. That is not thecase. The ARNG understands the reality of thetraining environment and accepts the challenge.To be a viable mobilization force in the 1980s, athree part approach for the ARNG AviationProgram must be taken.

First, the ARNG Aviation Program must revitalize its ranks with young aviators. Additionalquotas to the initial entry rotary wing programare being acquired to provide assistance in thisarea.

Second, a closer interface between the R NGaviation training manager and his active dutycounterpart must take place. The burden is onthe ARNG to provide input into the trainingenvironment that explains ARNG aviation capabilities and peculiarities to the system designers.This encompasses the development of trainingprograms and procedures to include the conduct

NOVEMBER 1981

of hands-on performance training for individuals.Examples include incorporation of the ARNGinput into Department of the Army level trainingdevelopments; integration of active and ARNGunits into tactical threat and nuclear, biologicaland chemical training; and inclusion in majorcommand post exercises and field training exercises. Additionally, training managers must assistactive duty counterparts in developing andexploiting the use of exportable training packages.

The third part of the challenge is equally essential. ARNG aviation must train as it expects tofight. This includes modern, sophisticated equipment employed in meaningful training scenariossuch as combined arms live fire exercises. ARNGaviation has made significant progress in obtainingmodern equipment such as the AH-1 S Cobra;but, this is the tip of the iceberg as far as totalmodernization requirements are concerned.

In short, we will not have the luxury of extensivepostmobilization reequipping and training. Theequipment and training readiness posture of theARNG aviation on mobilization day could bewhat is strapped on and taken into battle severaldays later. ARNG aviation reorganization andequipping must parallel that of the active Army.This will require all members of the ARNG aviationcommunity to actively pursue the maintenanceof high readiness standards. Obviously, this effortwill require all of us to produce training materialsand opportunities that are realistic and to trainto expected battlefield requirements. We cando it as a team. This combined team effort willmake the transition from come as you are to

ready now a reality.


6/52

T h e ging a b e r

T HE STORY STARTEDlong ago, but our visitinto the Army NationalGuard (ARNG) Aviation Programwill begin in the late sixties. Atthat time, about 1,600 aviatorswith varying degrees of experience from World War II and theKorean War to newly trained pilotswere flying about SOO piston powered fixed and rotary wing aircraftof various levels of reliability.

The influx of Vietnam veteranaviators was just beginning andthey molded nicely into theARNG force of the late 1960s.

In the early 1970s, the buildupof equipment began and aircraftnow familiar to all of us beganarriving in the ARNG inventory.

Through the early 1970s, theprogram grew, and in 1976 theARNG reached the 2,500 aircraftand 4,500 aviator plateaus. Alsoduring these formative years, theGuard s maintenance and facilities improved in order to meetthe challenges of a greatly expanded program. New missionswere met with enthusiasm andthe program continued to growin experience and ability. Thenew saber had been admiredand polished but seldom sharpened to keep it ready for battle.

The challenges of the 19S0swill be great for all in ArmyAviation; but for the Army National Guard they will be evengreater, for while the saber isstill sharp it has aged and new

honing is necessary if it is to beused effectively and efficiently.The challenges of training inattaining a younger and moremodern deployable force withintime constraints must be met andbested, if the ARNG AviationProgram is to remain a viablepa rt of the tota I force.

We have two goals in the nextfew years to reduce the average age of the aviator force,while building back to its authorized strength of 5,000. to accomplish this, increased undergraduate flight training quotas

above the 90 per year we nowreceive is essential. The requested increase is to 205 per year,a number we feel comfortablewith when dealing with 53 inputting entities. The ability of eachstate to recruit for quality prospects each year should enhancenot only our output from flightschool but the overall quality aswell.

Additionally, the influx of thisnew blood, these new aggressive young leaders merged withour already experienced, established force can only serve tospur both groups on to biggerand better achievements. Thiswill result in the new learningfrom the old and the old retainingthe competitive spirit that existsamong all aviators.

We continue to train to fight.Among the current ARNG aviator force, more than:

4,300 are instrument rated 3,400 are nap-of-the-earth

qualified 500 are weapons qualified

in the equipment on hand.All these programs are ongoingand continuous and all our aviators are using the aircrew training manuals with their task oriented training as the basis for theirtraining programs. We are dedicated to sharpening the forcenew and old for war.

The Guard aviation fleet hascome a long way in the past 10years and while the majority of

the 2,530 aircraft assigned arethe authorized types, we stillhave some problem areas. Thebiggest area of concern is inattack aircraft where the majorityof the fleet is still U H 1 B, C andM Hueys. Yes, Cobras, even Smodels, are now being receivedby the ARNG, but the problemwill exist for some time to come.Other examples of fleet differ-ences are OH 6 Cayuses andOH-5SA Kiowas in lieu of OH5SCs and CH-47 A Chinooks inlieu of CH-47Cs. The ARNG nowpossesses all the CH-54 Tarhesin the Department of Defenseinventory and the UH-1 fleet isaging with no relief in sight.

The fixed wing fleet is a mixedbag of U-3 (Cessna 310), T-42Cochise, U-SF Seminole and afew U-21A Ute aircraft.

There are a few bright spotson the horizon. More AH-1 S



7/52

Brigadier General Herbert R. Temple Jr.Deputy Director

rmy National Guard

S h a r p e n i n g o r a rCobras have been identified forthe Guard and more U-21 s arealso due to filter down in the

next few years. The fleet is stillsharp, but constant effort mustbe made to keep it that way.That effort must come from allinvolved in the aviation program,not from the Guard alone.

We have looked at some his-

tory, the force and the fleet, nowlet s look to the future and what sneeded to really sharpen the

saber for war.BasiCally what the ARNG asksis for the aircraft to meet ourwartime missions. We must betrained on the aircraft presentlydeployed and planned for deployment, not just our aviators,

the waywe were

the bu ildupe nds

sustainingth e fo r ce

NOVEMBER 1981

but our maintenance and groundsupport personnel as well. Weneed Cobras and UH-60 Black

Hawks at least in sufficient numbers to be able to train our cadresand trainers. We need scoutscompatible with the active Army s,CH-47Cs and Os to replace ouroverextended CH-47 As and weneed mission support aircraft

the fu tu re


8/52

which will carry more than twopassengers to permit our aviation program to assist our seniorcommanders in accomplishingtheir training programs. Withoutthe proper equipment, the saberwill become dulled no matterhow we try to sharpen it.

With the proper equipment,we will be able to train for ourwartime requirements. To properly train, we must have tacticalair traffic control equipment andnight vision goggle trainingequipment to permit our aviationforce to train at the same timeand in the same methods as theiractive force counterparts.

This training goes far beyondthe aviator force. The ARNGAviation Maintenance Programis recognized as one of thefinest; but to keep it so our

maintenance and ground support personnel must know how

in Europe is ongoing on a limitedscale for our aviation units, buthow about the other areas ofthe world. Not only in otherlocations but in other environments as well. In the desertsand mountains, in the heat ofArizona and the Caribbean andin the cold of Alaska. We haveunits which train in these locations regularly because they arebased there, but we must crosstrain our other aviation units inthese unusual environmentsOnly with realistic training andmodern equipment will we beable to entice the number andcaliber of young personnelneeded to fill our aging ranks.The aviation leaders of tomorrowwant to use the latest equipmentand will accept the challengingtraining requirements of the

modern battlefield, but we musthave something to offer. If weare to get the finest of the crop

from our officer candidate schoolsand enlisted ranks, we mustpromise them more and delivermore than just a set of wings towear. We must provide themthe capability to fight and surviveon the modern battlefield.

To really sharpen the sword,the ARNG must be invited toparticipate in more joint exercises. We cannot train in avacuum. We must interface withother aviation elements, othermembers of the combined armsteam and the other services. Ourattack companies must work withthe Air Force s A-10s, our liftunits with infantry and mechanized infantry. We must train asa team if we are to fight as a team.

If given the equipment, theGuard will man and maintain it.If given the time and the means,

it will train effectively and thesaber will be sharpened for battleno matter what the mission.o maintain and fix any aircraft

they are likely to see. This isespecially true of our aviationdepot roundout and aviation Jintermediate maintenance (AVIM)units.

ARMY GUARD AVIATION OF THE FUTURE

As we receive new aircraft,we must ensure the logisticalpackages are available to supportand accompany them. We in theGuard can no longer be expect

ed to test and fix everything onthe flightline with solely a mechanic s toolbox. The test equipmentand special tools needed to maintain sophisticated equipmentmust accompany the equipmentor we must be prepared to see itsit in a nonoperational condition.

Our units need to be trainedin the geographical areas andalongside the units they can beexpected to fight with. Training

6

IRCR FT TO MEET

W RTIME MISSIONS

QUALITY AND QUANTITYPILOT CANDIDATESTO MEET DEMAND

READY FOR WAR

ASSUME NEWMISSIONS

u.s. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST


9/52

r m y N a t i o n a l u a r d v i a t i o nN 7 OCTOBER 1981, the Army NationalGuard (ARNG) celebrated its 345th birthday.* Through successive reorganizations

many units perpe tuate the honors and traditionsof historical units. While only a very few of theARNG aviation units are carrying on famousnumbers, all are inbred with that sense of traditionof the regiments, brigades or divisions in whichthey serve. However, ARNG aviation is earningits wings every day in an area as valuable astraditions to our country. It's called readiness.

Whenever one begins to discuss the ArmyAviation Program in the National Guard it isnecessary to touch lightly on background. ArmyAviation has been part of the ARNG ever sincethe Guard's reorganization after World War II.The aircraft inventory in the ARNG (see figure1) is a story in itself and is best told at anothertime over a bottle of wine. It includes almostevery aircraft that has ever been in the activeinventory and a few that weren't. It includesaircraft categorized as contingency and training(C n, a term most active Army personnel neverneed to deal with. What the term connotes is aweapon system for which the Army is no longerin a position to sustain logistical support. Theoutstanding aviation logistic support programthroughout the ARNG had as its foundation thechallenging task of maintaining C&T aircraft.

The transformation of ARNG aviation from1970 through 1981 is an amazing accomplishment. During the dark days of the Tet Offensive,plans reverberated around the Pentagon formobilization of a tailored force to reinforce theAmerican forces in Vietnam. Within the ARNGonly two aviation companies were available forimmediate deployment. They were the mediumhelicopter companies; the 1105th in Iowa andthe 48th in California. These were the only two

The National Guard traces its lineage to the old North and East units of theRegiments of Massachusetts, which were formed in 1636.

NOVEMBER 1981

companies that had TOE (table of organizationand equipment) authorized aircraft (CH-37 Mojave)of the same type series and model as the activeArmy deployed units. (Temporary aviation units

in Vietnam were equipped with the new CH-47Chinook aircraft.) The Guard companies were100 percent strength, more than 90 percentMOS (military occupational specialty) qualified,but had issued to them only 8 aircraft instead ofthe authorized 18. In each company, the eightaircraft were flyable and deployable. They werenot mobilized. Two AR NG aviation units wereeventually called to active duty but did not seecombat as units. When you have been trainingwith, and maintaining OH-23B Raven and L-19Bird Dog aircraft as substitute systems for UH-lHueys, accomplishing the uni t's tactical missionwill require an appreciable amount of time beginning with receipt of the TOE aircraft. AlthoughARNG aviation units were not called to activeservice, almost 300 ARNG aviators volunteeredfor service in Vietnam. Their contributions andperformances were sterling and even thoughthey lost their identity as Guardsmen, we in theARNG program followed their accomplishmentswith pride. There were many exceptional individuals, but one stands out.

In late 1964, Captain Jerome E. Daly was amember of the 28th Aviation Battalion, Penn-

FIXED WING

L-4 U-9L-5 U-10L-17 U 210-1 T-42U 1 OV -1U-3 C-7U-6 C-45U-8 UV-18

UTILITY ROT RY WING

UH 1 UH-19

Figure 1

C RGO ROT RY WING

CH-34 CH-47CH-37 CH-54

OBSERV TION ROT RY WING

OH 6 OH-23OH-13 OH -58

TI CK ROT RY WING

AH 1TH 1

UH-1M

7


10/52

RMY N TION L GU RD VI TIONF CIUJIES

sylvania Army National Guard, with a desire toserve in Yietnam. Negotiationswith.lhelnfanttyBranch at the old Tempo A buildings indicatedthat ,active d ~ t yas a captain was not availablebut the Warrant OfficerBranch would offer aW01. 4 ylng aside federally recognizedcommission as anARNG captain, WO Daly wentto a r ~By cessation of hostilit ies he had flownmore than 2,500 combat on three and ah a ~ ftours, been selected as the Army Aviator oftbeYear in 1967 received every combat deco-

ration for bravery excepfthe o n g ~ s s i o n a lM 'dalof Honor, w ~ s d e c o r a t e dfield personallyby the Army Chief Of Staff, General . Hsrold K.J()hns()n, and subsequently received a directcommission 10 captain. LTC De Y remained onactive duty .snd now assigned tothe U.S.Army Materiel Developmenta.ndReadiness Com-mand(DARCOM).

ArmYAViation in th.ARNG in 1981 is dramali.cally different than i t was durinath, period ofthe Tel Offensive. We are no longer a peoplepool. The 157 aviation units have an averageGtrengthof 95 percent, use the Aircrew TrainingManual as their prescribed flying hour Programs,respond Immediately 10 Various state disastersor emergencies, aremoblUzable, deployable andcapable of mission accomplishment.

Tne ARNGwas major ,command to becompletely reorganized under Avl_tion Require-ments for the Combat of the Army(ARCSA) The seven ARNG aviation Intermediate maintenance (AYI M) companies, uponmobilization, will be the equal 9f any In theA r m y ~The four aviation classification repairactivities (depots), which augment Corpus _ .. _

8

if mobilized, are the onty units of tneir kindthe Army. These units, planned for early deploy-ment, are already at 104.7 percent strength andclOSing on combat ready no deficiency ratings.

In Alaska, the 207th Arctic Reconnaissance.GroLlP comprised of Eskimo teamsis supportedby ARNG aviation The Alaska ARNG usesUY 18s, the only Twin Otters in the Army inven-tory, to accomplish their mission. Another deHavilland product, the Caribou CV-2, in hlatuafor1o years with t h ~ \ i rForce,ls being I)ut backInto Army service by the ARNGas this articlegoes to.press.

Every one of the SOstatas, Puerto Rico,Virgin Islands and the District o f Columbia>'hasan ARNG A;viation P r 0 9 r a m ~ B e g i n n itransfer. of five UH-1Hs to the TexasARNG1971 , t i le National (llJarc:tBureau(NGB}invested heavily in supportof ItsARNGAvlilt101'lProgram. Constructio,n, schooling, training dollars,authorized.stockage/Ust funding, d e p o t f uand manning have all received enthosiasticsupport from the NaflonalGuard Bureauchiats,Army directors and their .staffs. theARNGaviation community hasr8sponded tothst supportwith achievement, profeslionalism 8ndane;n-l1ao.::ed readiness far beyond. whafused to beconsidered unattainable for Reserve forces.

ManagementandstaffsiJpel' 'sionof the ARNGAviation Program have been assigned.io .theAviation Divisipn, Army.Directorate Ofthe NationalGuard Bureau. In the t9 7 6 to 9 7 Umeframe,NG B assigned the responsibility for management and u supervision of the complete ARNGsafety program to the Aviation Division to includeoccupational safety and health, industrial hygt ne

ARMY AVIATION DIGEST


11/52

Aviat ionOperations

Mr. John J. Stanko Jr.Chief, Army Aviation Division

National Guard Bureau

Miss Debbie HorneSecretary

and all aspects of the multifaceted safety effort.This was a harbinger of things to come becausein December 1978, the Army reorganized theUnited States Army Agency for Aviation Safety(USAAAVS) into the U.S. Army Safety Center,chartered to provide support to the entire Armysafety effort, not just aviation.

To manage these two dynamic programs, theArmy Aviation Division, NGB, is organized intothree branches and also has operational controlof a multimedia team at Ft. Rucker, AL (seefigure 2 . In other articles in this issue, theirroles in the management effort are described.The style of management that we use is repeatedfrom branch to branch, program to program.Each branch is assigned its mission which inbroad terms pOints the way. Simultaneously theyare provided an interface chart which actuallyassigns their parameters. Then they must providereport cards in a regular sequence which annotate

the progress toward established standards, whichin all cases are the same as those prescribed foractive Army aviation units and aviation personnel.

The potential for significant contributions tothe Army's combat readiness by ARNG aviationhas rarely been explored in depth. To list just afew, consider that:

ARNG aviation has a seasoned cadre oftrainers and maintainers who operate in the diverse geography and meteorology of the 50states and territories year round: from the hotdeserts of southern Arizona to the Arctic Circlein Alaska, from the sea level Jersey and Floridacoasts to the 7,200-foot field elevation at SantaFe, from the overwater operations in the HawaiianIslands to the 11 ,OOO-foot operations in the RockyMountains and winter operations along theCanadian border from Montana to Maine.

The retention rate of ARNG Guardsmen whoattend initial entry flight training is at 87 percentafter 10 years, a remarkable percentage whichamortizes the high cost of producing an aviator.

The location of ARNG aviation in the population centers of each state provides for a recruiting base that taKes advantage of every corner

NOVEMBER 1981

of our country. The finest Army Aviation facilities in the

world are now in the ARNG. The expertise in aviation maintenance is a

mean composite displayed in achievement ofoperational readiness of the ARNG aircraft inventory at or above the established standardobjective (70 percent) year after year, recognizingthat this includes a complete mix of 2,500 Armyaircrilft.

The ARNG continues to explore new andbetter ways to be of service, i.e., depot roundoutprogram to help DARCOM meet the surge ofmobilization requirements in continental UnitedStates (CONUS) and outside CONUS; ArmyAviation training centers to help U.S. ArmyTraining and Doctrine Command meet mobilization surge requirements for aviation graduatetraining and aviation refresher training; an aviationmaintenance man-hour accounting program todevelop a meaningful ratio of maintenance manhour to flying hour for peacetime flight operations.

The Attack Helicopter Company, 163d ACR,

Utah ARNG, in 1 year with jus t 7 AH-1 Modif iedCobras has trained the entire company and 4crews, and is now in the process of exchangingtbe Modified for Fully Modernized Cobras. Thishas profound importance as the Army considersPOMCUS (prepositioning of materiel configuredto unit sets) of aircraft.

Finally, cost effectiveness. If an aviation unitcan be maintained in the ARNG at a respectablereadiness posture for about one-third the costof maintaining that unit in the active Army, thenthere will be available to the Army two-thirds ofthe cost to invest in other critical areas, or providea cost avoidance to the United States at a timewhen we desperately need cost reduction, orprovide the most economic means of expandingArmy Aviation to support additional divisions orthe reorganization to Division 86.

ARNG aviation is living the Total Army Program,cc demonstrating that citizen Soldiers are capableof achieving, maintaining and sustaining a combatready level of proficiency in the most sophisticated equipment that is provided their units andthat units can achieve an operational readinessrestricted only by the imagination of their leaders.


12/52

ARNG Av i a t i o n p e r a t i o n s r a n e hLTC Roger Goodrich

URING THE PAST 12months, the Army National Guard (ARNG) has

made significant strides in aviation training. Issues unique toan ARNG training environmentwere recognized through theArmy standardization channels,resolved and in some casesadopted for use Armywide. Closecoordination with the U.S. ArmyAviation Center (USAAVNC), Ft.Rucker, AL, resulted in ARNGimplementation of an aircrew training manual (ATM) whichprovides a logical progressionof ARNG aviator training basedon realistic time progreSSionsand task proficiency. For thesixth year, the standardizationinstructor pilot/instructor pilotrefresher training program wasconducted in conjunction withUSAAVNC, Forces Command

(FORSCOM) and the U.S. ArmySafety Center. This providedARNG instructor pilots an essential update through academicand refresher flight trainingOentralized management between FORSCOM, USAAVNCand National Guard Bureau (NGB),with decentralized accomplishment at unit/facility level, hasresulted in the annual programbeing tailored to the needs ofthe field, particularly in the lowdensity aircraft.. To maintain its force of 5,000aviators, the NGB was authorized an increase in the initialentry rotary wing (IERW) quota.There will be a ramp up startingin fiscal year (FY) 1982 of a 140-IERW quota for the ARNG increasing to ,205 in FY 1985 andbeyond.

Ongoing force modernizationwill ensure ARNG aviation units

1

are capable of meeting mobilization readiness requirements. AnARNG antiarmor capability willbecome a reality with continueddistribution of AH-1 S modif iedand modernized Cobras. Premobilization training in nondeployable aircraft will be significantlyreduced or eliminated during the1980s. As a result, ARNG aviation units will become increasingly compatible with their activeArmy counterparts in readinessfor mobilization missions.

Flight simulation in the AR NGhas expanded beyond requirements. Texas ARNG has beenusing the CH-47FS at Ft. Ruckerand an innovative 6-hour emergency condition recognitiontraining program has been developed for UH-1 Hueyaviators.

The ARNG aviation trainingsites (AA TS) development is on

schedule. As they come on linein the FY 1982 to 1985 timeframe, the AATSs, in coordination with USAA VNC will providestandardized individual trainingin low density and ARNG uniqueaircraft. The Eastern AATS wasactivated 1 August and the Western is slated for FY 1985.

The ARNG has worked withFORSCOM to reorient CONUSA(the numbered .armies in thecontinental United States) evaluations from ARNG aviation support facilities to ARNG aviationunits. Concentrating on the unitwill have a positive effect onARNG aviation uni t training andmobilization readiness.

The Guard emphasizes training to ATM standards for night(N) skills. Several units .are actively training in Night HawkeN H) skills, one of which willprogress into night vision gog-

gles (NVG) in FY 1982. The NHand NVG program will be expanded in FY 1982 through anNH/NVG military occupationalinformation course at Ft. Rucker.An ARNG IPon touratthe USAAVNC will qualify an initial cadreof 25 ARNG IPs. ARNG IPs willthen return to their states andinitiate an aggressive NH/NVGqualification program. Trainingwill be conducted in accordancewith FORSCOM priorities. Also,unit level distribution of variabledensity day light filters was completed in September 1981 , furtherenhancing our ability to conductNVG training.

Low lever tactical instrumenttraining is conducted during visual meteorological conditions atmilitary reservations or geo-graphical areas with nondirectional beacons and low popula

tion densities. But, concern continues to surface about the feasibility of training light observationhelicopter and attack helicopterpilots in tactical instrumentswhen these aircraft remain uncertified for instrument flightrules flight. In areas where tactical beacons are not available,the ARNG will continue to emphasize tactical instrument trainingat altitude with civilian instrument navigational aids or commercial radio stations. WhereARNG units have access to synthetic fl ight training system facilities, the SFTS provides the primary tactical instrument training program.

Integration Qf the ATM withunit ARTEPs (Army Training andEvaluation Programs) is increasing ARNG involvement in combined arms operations. Significant progress has been made

u.s. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST


13/52

LTC Roger Goodri ch**Chief, Operations Branch

Mrs. Sharon SchmittSecretary

Mr. Joseph Ebaugh* Mr. Walt r Mueller* Mr. Arthur Ries*Personnel Mgt Team Leader Operations Team Leader Training Stndz Team Leader

Mrs. Marilyn CiufoMil Personnel Technician

Miss Mary Jo SmithMil Personnel Technician

Miss Debbie HarwardClerk Typist

NOVEMBER 1981

LTC Gary Adams** Mr. Ronald Eaton*Operations Staff Officer Training Stndz Specialist

Member Maryland ARNG**LTC Goodrich-California Guardsman on Tour

LTC Adams- Utah Guardsman on Tour

Air Guard, Army Guard and active Army air traffic control (ATC)participation. As an example,Sentry Castle is a New YorkARNG joint training exerciseJTX) for the 42d Infantry Division

which integrates OV-1 Mohawksfrom the Georgia AR NG, CH-47Chinooks from PennsylvaniaAR NG, UH-1 and OH-6A Cayusehelicopters from New York ARNG,Air National Guard A-10 closeair support aircraft and activeArmy ATC units.

Limited progress continues inairspace management due toshortage of equipment and lackof repair parts. But, progress isbeing made with JTXs as exam-

pled by the 58th ATC Battalion,Ft. Bragg, NC; Co C, 28th Aviation Battalion, Virginia ARNG;and the 149th Aviation Battalionand 57th ATC Battalion at Ft.Ord, CA.

Guard aviation constitutesabout one-third of the total Army

Aviation Program and incuresonly 12.3 percent of the totalDA flying hour program. ARNGaviators logged more than 28,000ATM creditable hours in flightsimulators in each of the last 2years. The ARNG is exploring increased use of simulation as a viable alternative tooffset petroleum, oils and lubricants funding constraints. Ninetyone percent of the 293,375-hourFY 1981 program will be appliedtoward ATM requirements inconjunction with mission support. This is in support of theGuard's 5,000 aviators, 156MTOE (Modification Table ofOrganization and Equipment)and 61 TDA (tables of distribution and allowances) units. Briefly stated, ARNG aviation is costeffective in providing combatready aviation support to thetotal force. .iiiiIII1

11


14/52

ARNG L o g i s t i e s r a u e hMr. AI Marshall

E XPANSION OF Army National Guard (ARNG) aviation programs has ele-vated the status of its aviationunits from their former poorcountry cousin role to a forceof well-trained professionals withmodern facilities, aircraft and'equipment. The ARNG t)as anobjective composite operationalreadiness (OR) rate of 70 percentfor its 2,500 to 2,600 aircraft.The ~e nOR rate is consistentlyabove that objective. Managinga program of this magnitude requires constant attention to innumerable details, but the ultimate key to success lies withthe people who comprise theARNG Aviation Program.

ARNG aviation units have theobjectives to train thei r personnel to assure high levels of proficiency and to maintain a combat ready fleet of aircraft thatcan readily be deployed. To provide the necessary backup maintenance support for the aviationunits to ,,:Ittain and maintain theseobjectives, each state is organized with one or more Army Aviation Support Facilities (AASF),each with aviation unit main-

tenance (AVUM) and limitedaviation intermediate maintenance (AVIM) capability. In addit ion, there are four AviationClassification Repair ActivityDepots (AVCRAD) which providethe ARNG with nondivisionalAVIM and approved depot levelrepair capability. These fourAVCRADs located at Fresno, CA;Gulfport, MS; Springfield, MO;and Groton, CN, p r o v ~ d eaircraftlogistical services within theirgeographically deSignated support areas.

The AVCRAD's premobilization mission is to provide dayto-day AVIM and approved depot level maintenance supportrequirements for the 2,500 to2,600 aircraft aSSigned to theARNG. The AVIM maintenanceauthorization is prescribed byArmy regulation and Army technical manuals. Depot level maintenance repairs and services areauthorized by . Department ofArmy (DALO-A V) on a case-bycase basis, and accomplishec:lin accordance with U.S. ArmyMateriel Development and Readiness Command depot maintenance work requirements. The

mobilization mission of the ARNGAVCRADs is unique. Upon mobilization they will augment theexisting U.S. Army aircraft depotmaintenance system with subsequent deployment to meetexisting contingencies. The difference in the basic organization of the premobilization maintenance mission of these unitsand faCilities, as compared withactive Army units, necessitatesa different method for managingthis maintenance program.

National level managementand guidance for this dynamicaviation logistical program isprovided by the Aviation Logistics Branch of the ARNG Aviation Division located at Aberdeen Proving Ground (Edgewood Area), MD. The missionof the LogistiCS Branch is to:

Perform logistics management functions of aviationassets within the ArmyNational Guard.

Provide liaison with all materiel readiness commands.

Supervise the AVIM programin the Army National Guard.

Maintain operational controlof the four AVCRADs.

NGB Army Log Div

1 3 i i r i i ~ ~ ~;GB Army Org & Tng Div

NGB Computer Center

I I I ' o I f t ' l r . I ~VI TION.:lOGISTlCS ..:::...

BR NCH

i B ' i ~ I ~ /1 .'1 / /1J.jd NM

'M Iii@ij

State Aviation Officer

FORSCOM DCSLOG

2 U.S. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST


15/52

The branch is structured toaccommodate maintenance, sup-ply, quality, force structure, logis-tics readiness and fiscal manage-ment in support of the ARNGAviation Program. The AviationLogistics Branch is the ARNGinterface between the U.S. Armyagencies and the ARNG unitsand state agencies for aviationlogistical matters (figure 1). Theseinterfaces, in conjunction withnational level planning, AVCRADgeographical area managementand state operation have had asignificant positive impact on thelogistical support of the aviationprogram.

The report card for the logis-tics program has been excep-tional. It has provided supportto the ARNG aviation fleet at orabove the Department of Army

standards for the past 6 yearswhile supporting the flying hourprogram at minimum cost to theARNG and the Army. At thesame time, a successful effortto increase equipment reliabil-ity, decrease the maintenancebacklog, operate a successfulcost effect iveness program andto authorize equipment to pro-vide proper maintenance andoperational support has exceed-ed expectations.

The success of the individualARNG aviation units, the stateAASFs, the AVCRADs and theARNG Aviation Logistics Branchhas provided a logistical supportprogram which has contributedto the success of the entire ArmyAviation Program. These an ,dfuture endeavors will ensure aforce capable of providing readyunits for Army contingenciesthroughout the world.

NOVEMBER 1981

MAJ P) Carl Hill Mr. Alvin Marshall** Mrs. Jeanne UlrichAviation Readiness Offic er Chief, Aviation Logistics Office Secretary

Mr. John Joh,nson*Materiel Team lLeader

Miss Mary WalkerClerk Typist

Mr. Rodney Lindsay*Maint Team Leader

LTC Lionel Jackson** Mr. Jerry Nowicki* Mr. Donald Bowes* Mr. Roy Harper*Readiness Project Supply Mgt Spec Quality Assurance Spec Librarian

Officer

Mr. Robert Recker* Mr. Richard Taylor* Mr. Jack Sink*Supply Mgt Rep Supply Mgt Rep Equip Spec (Acft)

Mr. Alberto JimenezEquip Spec (Acft)

Mr. Franklin Thompson* Mr. Bob Dickens*Supply Mgt Rep Equip Spec (Acft)

*Member Maryland ARNG**Mr. Marshall 06)-Maryland ARNG Mobilization

Aircraft Control Element (MACE) Commander**LTC Jackson-Virgin Islands Guardsman on Tour 3


16/52

ARNG S a f e t y r a n e hLieutenant Colonel Roger Perkins

RIOR TO TH E current organization of theArmy National Guard (ARNG) SafetyBranch, Major General Francis Greenlief,

former chief, NGB, recognized the necessityfor creating an ARNG Aviation , Safety Office.Major Charles R Strickland organized such anoffice in 1972 with a skeletal staff composed ofshort-tour personnel. Late in 1973, the first fulltime technicians were hired to assist in thedevelopment of the rapidly expanding ARNG

Aviation Safety Program.Noting the ever-increasing personnel and

equipment losses in ARNG general safety areas,it was decided in 1975 to establish the ARNGSafety Branch within the ARNG Aviation Division.As a result of these added responsibilities, themission was realigned to encompass the development and direct ion of safety management for allground and aviation elements of the ARNG.This program presently includes safety policydevelopment, program control and guidance andprogram evaluation at all levels. Additionally, itspurpose is to reduce manpower, equipment andmonetary losses through mishap prevention withthe ultimate objective being a zero accidentrate. This, in turn, enhances the Army NationalGuard s combat readiness through resourceconservation.

The primary goals of the ARNG Safety Branchare to:

Ensure that written regulations and directives

4

for safety are both current and germane tothe ARNG program.

Establish well-trained safety personnel inall states and territories.

Assist the several states in securing adequateequipment and facilities required for safeoperations.

Improve safety through speCial emphasisprevention programs based on a review ofaccident reports, suggestions and safety

studies to aid the several states in theiraccident prevention efforts. Recognize deserving states, units and in

dividuals with appropriate safety awards andassist in the establishment of safety awardprograms in the several states.

Supplement the ARNG training and standardization programs with appropriate safetytraining programs.

Monitorcompnanceby the several states ofPublic Law 91-596, Occupational Safety andHealth Act, for federal employees.

These functions can only be accomplishedthrough constant coordination with the manyagencies and the several states involved. TheARNG Safety Branch works closely with theU.S. Army Safety Center and Department ofDefense and Department of the Army safetyoffices to enhance all accident prevention efforts.Only by working together can we hope to achievethe maximized effort necessary to reduce ourlosses and enhance our readiness.



17/52

Mr. Timothy FlynnAviation Safet r Team Leader

LT Clarence Suggs 111Aviation Safety Specialist

Member Maryland ARNGLT Perkins-Idaho Guardsman on TourLTC Suggs-Delaware Guardsman on Tour

NOVEMBER 1981

LT Roger PerkinsChief, Safety Branch

T

Mrs. Agnes EisenhartSecretary

Mr. Garland HughesGeneral Safety Team Leader

Ms. Vivian DealGeneral Safety Specialist

15


18/52

ARNG Mnl t i Med iaGronpMajor Ken neth Boley

T HE ARMY National Guard (ARNG) MultiMedia Group (MMG) located at F l Rucker,AL, manages, develops, coordinates andmonitors the planning and administration of allmultimedia instructional programs for ARNG aviation. The MMG influences the training of about5,000 ARNG aviators and crewmembers viaa learning center network at the 90 aviationfacilities throughout the 50 states, the District ofColumbia, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.The Multi-Media Group also manages the safetyeducation program for the ARNG. The programinfluences more than 340,000 Guardsmen andcovets all aspects of safety to include aviationand general safety and the Occupational Safetyand Health Act (OSHA) of 1970.

The M MG is under the operational control ofthe Chief, Army Aviation Division, National Guard

Bureau, and the military control of Headquarters,Alabama National Guard. Logistical and administrative support is provided by the U.S. Propertyand Fiscal Officer (USPFO) for Alabama.

Versatility is the key. W01 Swihart, the Media Group illustrator,must apply his talents to a variety of projects ranging fromposters to 35 mm slides

6

The Group was originally organized to supportthe individual aviator proficiency training programthroughout the Army National Guard by developing audiovisual packages composed of all available multimedia material in the Department ofDefense structure. Currently, the Group supplements the program by developing and producingaudiovisual material for ARNG peculiar requirements which cannot be satisfied by other sources.This mission is possible due to the media-orientedstaff and in-house television, slide and audiorecording production capability. The acquiredor developed material is then distributed to theARNG learning centers established at eachaviation support facility. During fiscal year (FY)1981 in excess of 1,800 individual lessons werefurnished to those training centers.

The M MG had recognized a need for aviation

life support equipment (ALSE) training in theARNG in 1979 but found an absence of appropriate training materials in the Army structure.Thus plans were begun to design an exportableprogram with which to train ARNG ALSE technicians, aviators and crewmembers. The firstaspect of the program involved the design andproduction of ALSE posters, and once they beganbeing fi lded DARCOM headquarters adoptedthem for use in the active Army. During Y 1981more than 5,000 individual posters were distributed to the ARNG and to Army units worldwide. The next phase of the ALSE program

involved coordination with the other servicesfor existing materials and the in-house designand production of programs to satisfy Guardpeculiar requirements. By the end of FY 1981,the Group s library supporting the field containednearly 20 separate lessons on various aspectsof life support with many additional programsscheduled for production.

The MMG s general safety miSSion, fi rst assumed in 1977 and actively pursued the following year with the addition of a training specialist(safety), made tremendous strides in FY 1981. A



19/52

CPT Gary DeKaySafety Tng Specialist

CW3 Wjlliam ShawnAvn Tng Specialist

Guardwide completely exportable Unit Safetyfficerl N O Training ourse was implemented

via in-house productions and civilian contractproductions through the training extension course(TEC) systems in the Besele 'r Cue See format.Additional lessons are scheduled for distributioneach month until all 2,900 Guard armories andassociated facilities have the complete course.

During the year a second course on Range Safetywas designed for development by the TEC systemand 10 lessons were in various stages of designor production by the end of FY 1981.

State-of-the-art audiovisual equipment is one aspect of themultimedia effor t. SSG Hobb ie is shown editi ng an In-housetelevision pr oduction

NOVEMBER 1981

W01 Ronald SwihartIllustrator

SSG Jules HobbieMedia Specialist

In a totally different area, the Group expandedupon experience gained the previous year withSpecial Emphasis Safety Programs and designeda'flational campaign to reduce injury and property

1 dl; ,mage accidents in Army motor vehicles (AMVs).The rewarding success of the 1979 program,which received U.S. Army Chief of Staff support,served as a springboard for the second program

entitled, Operat ion Safe Guard 1 Arrive Alive.Emphasizing special safety problems associatedwith selected vehicle operations, the programncorporated a 16 millimeter (mm) film, recall

decals, posters and driver aids to emphasizecorrect driver operations. The program is expected to achieve Significant reductions in injury,fatality and property damage loss involving AMVoperations.

Another major program during FY 1981 involvedthe design and distribution of posters addressinga aspects of safety. Throughout the year moretban 60,000 posters were mailed to facilitiesGuardwide.

The year proved to be an exciting one for theMulti-Media Group, with advancements madein many areas. A totally new state-of-the-art videoproduction system was acquired which tre-mendously expanded in-house capabilities. Two16 mm films were designed for the Guard andcompleted by the Army photographic facilitiesat Redstone Arsenal, AL.

With the ARNG becoming more and more avital portion of the total force concept, MultiMedia is keeping pace by fulfilling its role in theoverall National Guard Bureau program.

17


20/52

REPORTING FIN LLate News From rmy viation ctivities

FROM PANAMAA Moving Experience. A recent triservice

project starred CH-47 Chinook helicopters fromthe 242d Aviation Company, 219th CombatAviation Battalion, 193d Infantry Brigade (Pana

ma . The Army helicopters lifted three 77-foothigh antenna towers from a Navy communicationsfacility and moved them about 2 air miles to anAir Force base .

Each of the 6,300-pound towers had to behooked to the Chinook by the use of a "shepherd'scrook." That called for maneuvering the helicopterwithin feet of the tower 's tip and required closecoordination between the crewchief and the pilot.

It is estimated the project would have taken amonth to accomplish if the towers had had to bedisassembled, moved by road and then reassembled. The Chinook crews finished the work

in an hour Colin Hale, 193d PAO)

FROM FORT RUCKER

Improved Cobra Training. The first class ofthe new AH-1 S (Ful ly Modernized) Cobra Qualification Course at the Army Aviation Center ended6 October. The 6-week program combines instruction which was previously given in the qualification course and the TOW missile course. It isconducted solely in the AH-1 S (FM) helicopterrather than the variety of Cobra models whichwere used before. Class graduates were:

MAJ Fred L. Close J r .MAJ David D . SmithCPT Rob ert C . BlixCPT Halstead N. GreenCPT Thomas B. Peterman1 LT Richard R. Jones2LT Reginald R. Gillis2LT David w. Marck2LT Steven S . Moore

CW2 Sta nley S . McGowenCW2 David C . VesseyW 1 William S . ApkeW 1 Douglas G . BovardW 1 James T. HeaterW 1 Richard A HinesW 1 Jeffrey J. JohnsonWO 1 Howard R. PeacockW01 Gregory T. Schullo

Trailblazer. Second Lieutenant Danna Maller,a member of the history-making West Point Classof 1980, became the fi rst female graduate of the

8 u.s. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST


21/52

EVERYTHING'S STEADY. Second Lieutenant Danna Maller and instructor pilot Chief Warrant Officer, CW3,Donnie R. Willis go over the rotor connections of a U H-1 Huey helicopter before taking off on a routine trainingmission at Ft. Rucker, AL. She is the first female graduate of West Point to earn her Army Aviator wings.

U.S. Mi litary Academy to earnher Army Aviator

wings when she completed rotary wing flighttraining in September.

In her senior year at the academy, she selectedaviation as her career field, along with two otherwomen of the 62 who were the first to receivetheir commissions from that previously all-maleinstitution.

LT Maller said she is considering making acareer of the Army and that being in aviation willhave a positive influence on that decision . Ilike flying, she said.

Museum Getting Closer. The recent Army

Aviation Center Museum Foundation fund drivefor post personnel collected 80,250-far surpassing its goal of $25,000 .

Employees of Northrop Worldwide AircraftService , Inc., donated $52,407 in cash and payrolldeduction pledges. An additional $3,000 wascontributed by unions Northrop personnel belongto and by Northrop 's Management Club. Theaverage Northrop contribution was $54.38 perperson .

Mr. Ed Brown, director of development forthe foundation, said that the total amount included

NOVEMBER 1981

in theworldwide drive

to raise $2 millionfor

anew museum building now totals 490,000,including pledges for the next 3 years.

An exciting development, he noted, is thatthe Governor of Alabama has promised hissupport in obtaining 1 million from the state.Governor Fob James was visited 6 October by a26-member delegat ion from Ft. Rucker and thesurrounding cities. The governor was advisedthat the money should be thought of as a wiseinvestment rather than as a gift, based on thefact that the Army Aviation Museum is the seventhlargest tourist attraction in Alabama. With the

advantages the proposed building will offer, it isanticipated that it would be ranked even higher.While such an amount from the State of

Alabama would speed the drive along, Mr. Brownstressed that foundation officials realize themuseum will only be built as quickly as ArmyAviation people decide they want it built. Eachperson, either individually or as part of a unit,organization, etc., can have a part by making atax-deductible contribution to the Army AviationMuseum Foundation, Inc ., P.O. Box H, Ft. Rucker,AL 36362.

19


22/52

REPORTINGFIN L

Late News From rmy Aviation ctivities

FROM FORT HOO

Tactical ATC-I t Does Work. The 4/57th AirTraffic Control (ATC) Company (FWD) located atFt. Ord, CA, recently participated with CompanyB, 40th Aviation Battalion of the Arizona NationalGuard in a field exercise at Navajo Army Depotnear Flagstaff, AZ. The 4/57th ATC is assignedto the 16th ATC Battalion, Ft. Hood, TX. Thebattalion has two ATC companies, the 57th at Ft.Lewis, WA, and the 68th at Ft. Sill, OK. Platoonsof the battalion support continental United Statesdivisions and one separate brigade at nine

LIGHTS WENT OUT OVER ALABAMA. Chief Warrant Officer,CW3( P , Jeffrey M. Swickard, operations officer, Attack Branch,Hanchey Division, Department of Flight Training, Ft. Rucker,AL, received $765 for his suggestion that the terrain boardlighting be reduced from the day mode to the dusk mode fornormal operations of the AH-1 Cobra and CH-47 Chinookflight simulators. First-yearsavings are estimated to be $18,538

20

0Ol

J...J

different posts in the western United States toinclude Alaska and Hawaii.

Purpose of the exercise was fourfold. First,the 40th Aviation Company, a roundout unit ofthe 7th Combat Aviation Battalion at Ft. Ord,was to conduct an ARTEP (Army Training and

Evaluation Program). Second, the aviation crewswere to conduct tactical instrument training, usingthe 4/57th for ATC service. Third, the air trafficcontrollers would receive additional training inthe tactical aspects of their mil itary occupationalspecialty. Last, air traffic control, including radarcoverage, would be provided to the militaryaircraft operating in an area of otherwise uncontrolled airspace.

The concept of the operation for the 4/57thwas to establish a tactical control tower to providelocal and ground control at Navajo Army Depot,a ground control approach facility for radarcoverage and precision approaches for pilottraining, and a nondirectional beacon for instrument flying and landing approaches.

Training accomplished on this mission wasextremely valuable to all participants. Equallyimportant was the learning experience of NationalGuard and Regular Army units working andserving together. Perhaps the greatest accomplishment, however, was the realization by someand confirmation by others that air traffic controlcan and does function well in the field environment. Tactical ATC is indeed a viable part of the

aviation community and should be totally integrated into all aviation field exercises.

AWARD-WINNING AUTHORS. Second and third place winnersin the rmy Aviation Digest Annual Writing Contest, MajorJames H. Kenton, center, and Lieutenant Colonel J. W. Lloyd,right, of Ft. Rucker, AL, talk with Major General Carl H.McNair Jr., post commanding general, after receiving theDigest s Certificate of Achievement. Major Kenton's article,Aviation Training in the 1980s-Another View, appeared

in the April issue and Lieutenant Colonel Lloyd's (which hecoauthored with Colonel E. H. Grayson), The Aviation Commander-New Challenges During the 1980s, in November1980. The first place winner, Chief Warrant Officer, CW3,Russell D. Capps, is assigned to Ft. Lewis, WA. His winnin g

article, Flight In The Twilight Zone, was publishe d in September 1980

:aU

cJ)

00::Cl.

n

;..0.cCo'

00

.cCo


23/52

FROM C LIFORNI

APACHE Aviators. Army aviators (above) whoflew the AH-64 APACHE during its OperationalTest II this summer are pictured, together withother program dignitaries, at their graduationlast May: Front row, left to right, Norm B Hirsh,vice president, AAH Program, Hughes Helicopter,Inc.; MajorGeneral Edward M Browne, programmanager, DARCOM; Jack G Real, president,Hughes Helicopters, Inc .; Robert J. Whalen,president, Orlando Division, Martin MariettaAerospace; and Joseph J. Halisky, director ofprograms, Rockwe International; second row,left to right, LTC Burl Zorn, commander, 7thCombat Aviation Battalion; CW4 Larry Proper;CW3 Russ Helton; CW2 Jim Sandberg; CPT LarryCasper, commander, D Company, 7th CAB; andCW2 Gene Coppersmith; third row, left to right,CW3 Bill Yarlett, CW4 Joe Koch, CW3 TomWillmore, CW3 Frank Gabriel and COL DonaldWray, project manager, TADS/PNVS, St. Louis;back row, left to right, CW3 John Repcik, CW3Denny Dvorchak, CW3 Randy Dyer and CW2Skip King. The chief warrant officers are assignedto D Company, 7th CAB, 7th Infantry Division, FtOrd, CA

NOVEMBER 1981

SI KORSKY DONATES. The director of Government businessat Sikorsky Aircraft, Gary Rast, second from left, presents thesecond 5,000 installment of a 25,000 pledge to retiredArmy Colonel Max McCullar, chairman of the executivecommittee, U.S. Army Aviation Museum Foundation, Inc.The two are flanked by Major General Carl H. McNair Jr.,commanding general, Ft. Rucker, AL, and retired Army ColonelJim Townsend, treasurer and a foundation director. The 25,000Sikorsky pledged to the Army Aviation Museum Foundationfund drive is being paid over a period of 5 years. The generalholds a model of the Sikorsky-built U H-60 Black Hawk, themost recent addition to the Army's helicopter inventory

21


24/52

AVIATION WARRANT OFFICER RETENTION

anEvaluation

ofDemographic

THE ARMY RESEARCH InstituteARI) Ft. Rucker, AL, Field Unit.

under the sponsorship of the Mili-tary Personnel enter MILPER-CEN), recently completed a p rojectto identify the demographic andattitudinal factors which influenceaviation warrant officers AWOs)to voluntarily separate from theArmy. This third in a series of four

viation Digestarticles on the

A WO retention issue addressesdemographic and attrition informa-tion obtained from questionnairesadministered to a sample of AWOsat Army installations within the fivemajor commands MACOMs).

The first articl e August 98issue) presents an overview of theretention issue and the ARI/MIL-PERCEN study approach. The sec-ond September 1981) describesfactors found to influence the AWO

ItemsCW2 P) Bernard T Sundy

s . rmy Re search Institute Field UnitFort Rucker L

Dr. John Ruffner and Mr. Daniel Wick

Canyon Research Group



25/52

This is the third article presenting the results of an effort initiated andsupported by the leaders of the U.S. Army Military Personnel Center MGRobert Elton and MG Charles Bagnal. The Army Research Institute greatlyappreciates the support and guidance provided by MG Carl McNair Jr.commanding general U.S. Army Aviation Center Ft. Rucker AL. Also thefollowing chief warrant officers from the Warrant Officer Senior Course and

Advanced Course at Ft. Rucker volunteered to develop staff studies on someof the key retention topics: CW3 Homer Bentley CW3 Donald Curtis CW3Jeffery Gibson CW3 Joseph Licina CW3 Gary Pruyne CW3 Leroy Sweetand CW3 Carroll Vaughn. Their participation and dedication was particularlynoteworthy. LTC Robert Jones and CW4 John Valaer from the WarrantOfficer Career College at Ft. Rucker also provided a great deal of support onthe project.

Particular recognition should go to individuals at MILPERCEN who sponsoredthis project and provided guidance throughout the effort: COL Arthur BillsCOL George Morgan LTC David Carothers CPT Mike Borland and CW4 DickSauer as well as other members of the Warrant Officer Assignment Branch.

Thanks also should go to other members of Canyon Research Group which

actively partiCipated in this project: Dr. George Siering Mr. Bruce Smith andMs. Elinor Cunningham

decision to leave the service. Thefourth article will present the MILPERCEN/DA action plan developed to aid in resolving those factorsaffecting AWO retention.

ARI surveyed a random sampleof A WOs and all available attr iteesAWOs who stated a firm in tention

or had initiated actions to leavethe Army) at Ft. Rucker; Ft. Bragg,NC; Ft. Campbell, KY; Ft. Lewis,WA; Ft. Hood, TX; Ft. Ord, CA;Hawaii; Germany; and Korea seefigure). The third column in thefigure shows company troop commanders and plato on/section leaders surveyed for their opinion. Theinstallations represented about 95rercent of the operational AWOpopulation. A WO respondents weredivided into the following four cate-

gories based on their sta ted careerintention: 1) re t inee those whoindicated an in tention to remain inthe Army; 2) undecided stay -those who were undecided butwould probably stay in; 3) unde-cided get out who were undecidedbut would probably get out; 4)

t t r i tee defined above. l

which were found to be informativerelative to attrition are: age, maritalstatus, installation, source of entry,career status and track, civilianeducation, desire for a commissionand civilian job market. The remain-

NOVEMBER 1981

From this survey data, demographic characteristics were examined to help ARI MILPERCENunderstand why A WOs were leavingthe service. Several characteristics

1Attritees were also found within the random samplegroup . In order to generalize to the entire AWOpopulation, the data provided in this report is takenfrom the random sample group except where explicitlynoted .

ARIAWO

D

EUSAFORSCOM

FY

MACOMMILPERCEN

OS

TRADOC

USAREURWESTCOM

lossary

Army Research Instituteaviation warrant officerDepartment of the ArmyEighth U.S. ArmyU.S . Army Forces Commandfiscal yearmajor Army command

ilitary Personnel Centermilitary occupational specialtyU.S. Army Training

and Doctrine CommandU.S . Army, EuropeWestern Command

3


26/52

der of this article discusses aspectsof these characteristics relative toattrition. 2 The following review ofthe data is provided to give thereader a better understanding ofthe A WO population, as well as toprovide an aid for the predictionof attrition and the developmentof policies which will improve re-tention of AWOs in the service.

Age. The findings of the surveysuggest that AWOs who plan toleave the Army are typically young-er than those who plan to remainin the Army. The average age ofAWO attritees or undecided get outwas 28 years. In comparison , unde-cided stay n AWOs had an averageage of 31 years while the retaineesaveraged 34 years. I t is important,however, for the reader to realizethat age is related to several otherfactors which also affect attritionsuch as years of service and edu-cation level. This obvious inter-action between age and other vari-ables will be observed in latersections of this article.

Marital Status and Dependents.A larger percentage of single and

divorced A WOs attrite comparedto married A WOs. The t tr iteecategory was made up of 29 percentof the single group and 25 percentof the divorced group but only 10percent of the married group. Thiscould be due to the fact that attriteesare typically younger and probablyhave fewer long term commitmentsthan do the married AWOs. Also ,as the number of dependents forwhom an A WO is responsible in-creases, retention also increases.

After two or more dependents, thepercentage of AWOs who wereidentified as retainees almost doubled.It seems that, up to a point, themore dependents an A WO has, themore likely he or she is to remain

2 None of the variables discussed in the article cause attrition . These variables are examined in order tounderstand the attrition problem and determine thefactors associated with attrition or retention.

24

Sample Survey

~ ...~ ~ ~

o 1' ~~ ~

~ :~

USAREUR 199EUSA 81WESTCOM 47FORSCOM 314TRADOC 116TOTAL 757

on active duty. This in turn couldbe due to the fact that retaineesare typically older.

Installation. The installation orfactors associated with the installa-tion are often thought to influencethe decision to separate from theArmy. A WOs were asked to indi-cate their three most desired aswell as three least desired instal-lations. The three most desiredinstallations were Ft. Carson, CO,

Ft. Lewis and Ft. Rucker. A numberof different reasons were given forthe preference of these installations.Some examples of these reasonswere: good relations between mili-tary and civilian residents of thecommunity , favorable commandpolicies toward aviators and impor-tance of A WOs at the installation.

On the other hand, the threeleast desired installations were Ft.Bragg, Ft. Campbell and Ft. Hood.Again , a wide variety of reasons

were given for nonpreference ofthese installations. Some examplesof these were: extended periods offield duty and large A WO popula-tion at commands where aviationissues are not a major priority.

The survey also provided a moredirect evaluation of this area byasking all A WOs who were attrit-ing to indicate the amount of in-fluence their current permanentchange of station assignment had

I>.C" I>

~ ~ :,fJ

00 i,


27/52


28/52

What eets The

The Eye Real or IllusionHuman error and approachand landing are phrasesfrequently used in describingcauses of aircraft accidents.Statistics reveal that about 80percent of aircraft accidentsinvolve human error as acontributing factor. In addition,about 50 percent of all accidentsoccur during the approach and

landing phase.Your primary role in the cockpitis making decisions. In order to dothis you must sense and processinformation. Potential sources oferror range from limitations in yoursenses and perceptualmechanisms to inadequacies inprocedures and methodsprescribed for the flight crew. Thisarticle will briefly present somecharacteristics related to sourcesof information processing errorduring the approach and landing.

Your senses receive physicalstimuli and encode information;perception interprets informationand attaches meaning to it. Mostof the information which youreceive comes to you through youreyes; some comes frominstrument displays in the cockpit,but a large amount is obtainedfrom outside the cockpit, oftenunder conditions which may be farfrom ideal. Indeed, certainconditions may prevent thenecessary information from everreaching the eye. More often asignal reaches the eye but thebrain misinterprets and you seesomething else; in other words youexperience a visual illusion. We willdiscuss only the illusion, or falseperceptions, associated with directvision.

6

Visual illusions are potentiallycommon in flying and result fromthe incorrect interpretation of whatyou see. This may be due to therebeing too few visual cues so thatyou have to fill in the rest of thepicture by drawing on yourpreconception of the situation, byseeing what you think youought to see, or simply by

guessing. It may also occu r whencues presented to the normallymaster sense, vision, are weak andare in conflict with relatively strongresponses by other senses,particularly those of balance andorientation, which have sensors inthe inner ears.

The purpose of this article is todraw your attention to some of thecircumstances in which visualillusions may be experienced andto the hazards which the illusionsmay introduce on the approach toland. Increased awareness of thesefactors will enable you torecognize and compensate formost visual illusions and so reducethe risk of an accident.

Visual illusions during thelanding approach may be causedby one or any combinat on of thefollowing features:

Sloping approach terrain Sloping runways Runway width Rain on the windscreen Featureless approach terrain Runway lighting intensity

Shallow fog Rainshowers Darkness Black hole effect

Sloping approach terrainNormally, when a pilot makes a

visual approach he subconsciouslyjudges the approach path from acombination of the apparentdistance of the aircraft from therunway and its apparent heightabove the approach terrain. If theground under the aircraft slopesupwards towards the threshold, anillusion may be created,particular ly during the early stagesof the approach, t hat the aircraft istoo high see figure 1). Conversely,

Figure 1



29/52

ground which slopes downwardstowards the threshold gives theimpression that the approach pathis too flat see figure 2 .

Sloping runwaysThrough the regular use of ILS

glide paths and VASls, withthree-degree glide slopes, pilotsbecome accustomed to the

complementary angle of 177degrees between the runway andthe approach path see figure 3 .Additionally, from experience,pilots come to know withconsiderable accuracy the amountof power required to maintain thecorrect approach path to the pointof touchdown. If, however, therunway slopes upwards from thelanding threshold and the177-degree relative angle ismaintained, a visual approach will

be lower than it should be, byabout the same amount as therunway upslope, and the usualpower setting will be inadequate tomeet the requirements of theflatter approach. If the runway hasa downslope, the converseapplies, so that by maintaining the177-degree angle relative to thedownsloping runway, theapproach to the touchdown pointwill be steeper and the usualpower setting in excess of thatrequired.

NOVEMBER 1981

Runway widthThe ability to use the apparent

convergence - due toperspective-of two parallel linesto estimate their length is wellknown. Increasing or decreasingthe distance between the lines,however, can create the illusion of

DANGERI

~ ~ ~US RMYSAfETY CINTER

shortening or lengthening them.On the approach, a pilot bases partof his judgment on a mentalcomparison of the runway beforehim with the normal view of therunway to which he isaccustomed. Variations in therunway width, therefore, can be

Pilot's natural tendency is to correctdownwards to intercept his 'natural' angleof approach

. k ~__ ... J

View of rising slope runwayon correct gl ide slope

View of descending slope

_ - -

DANGERIPilot's natural tendency is to correctupwards to intercept his 'natural' angle of .,approach , . , . ~

. ~. ..... -

; . .

runwey on correct glide slope L ~ ; : : : ; : ; : = = ; F 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

View of level runwayon correct gl ide slope

Figure 3

27


30/52

misleading. For example, the widerthe runway, the shorter it appears;moreover, the width can also havean effect upon the apparent height

of the aircraft in relation to therunway, a wider runway making anaircraft appear lower than it is.

RainHeavy rain can affect the pi lot s

perception of distance from theapproach or runway lights bydiffusing the glow of the l ights andcausing them to appear lessintense. This may lead him tosuppose that the lights are fartheraway than in fact they are. On the

other hand, only a little scatteringdue to water on the windscreencan cause runway lights to bloomand double their apparent size,with the result that the pilotbelieves that he is closer to therunway than he actually is, leadingpossibly to a prematu re descent.Similarly, rain on the windscreencan cause illusions as a result oflight ray refraction. For instance,even though an aircraft is correctlyaligned on the approach path i t

can appear to the pilot to be aboveor below the correct glide slope, orleft or right of the runway centerline, depending upon the slope ofthe windscreen and othercircumstances. The apparent errormight be as much as 200 feet at adistance of 1 mile from the runwaythreshold.

Featureless terrainVisual descents over calm seas,

deserts or snow, or over unlit

terrain at night, can be hazardouseven in good visibility. Theabsence of external verticalreferences makes judgment ofheight difficult and the pilot mayhave the illusion of being at agreater height than is actually the

8

case, leading to a premature or toorapid descent. Height above therunway is also made more difficultto judge if, because of snow for

example, there is no contrastbetween the runway surface andsurrounding terrain. The problemis compounded if the descent ismade into the sun or in anyconditions which reduce forwardvisibility.

Runway lighting intensityBecause bright lights appear

closer to the observer and dimmerlights farther away, the intensity ofthe approach and runway lighting

can create illusions. Thus, on aclear night, the runway lights mayappear closer than they actuallyare, particularly when there are nolights in the surrounding area.

Shallow fog hazen shallow fog or hazy

conditions, especially at night, thewhole of the approach and/orrunway lighting may be visiblefrom a considerable distance onthe approach even though

Runway Visual Range ormeteorological reports indicate thepresence of fog. On descent intosuch a fog or haze layer, the visualreference available is likely todiminish rapidly, in extreme casesreducing from the full length of theapproach lights to a very smallsegment. This is likely to cause anillusion that the aircraft has pitchednose up, which may induce a pilotto make a corrective movement inthe opposite direction. The risk of

striking the ground with a high rateof descent as a result of thiserroneous correction is very real.

RainshowersA weather feature which may

reinforce a pilot s visual indicationsthat he need not apply power toreach the runway or to arrest ahigh rate of descent is an isolatedrainshower. A heavy rainstormmoving towards an aircraft can

cause a shortening of the pilot svisual segment that distancealong the surface visible to thepilot over the nose of the aircraft.

This can produce the illusion thatthe horizon is moving lower and,as a result, is often misinterpretedas an aircraft pitch change in thenose up direction. A naturalresponse by a pilot would be tolower the nose or to decrease, notincrease, power.

DarknessThe greatest confusion potential

exists at night. Darkness providesexcellent camouflage and the eye

loses much of its efficiency.Normally used cues such asshadows, color and detail are notavailable. Lights must compensatefor this loss, but lights usually lacksufficient definition to providemore than an outline, anincomplete stimulus to which thepilot mayor may not reactcorrectly. At the other end of thescale we have a profusion of lights.Large airfield complexes have somany lights that frequently there is

considerable diff iculty experiencedin just finding the runway.

Black hole effectThis illusion can occur on a clear

night with no visible horizon. Theaircraft approaches the runwayover the sea or other featureless,unlit terrain towards an aerodromewith bright c ity lights behind it.Visibility is so good that there islittle need to rely on theinstruments except to check the

airspeed. The straight-in approachis totally uneventful until theaircraft lands short of the runway,possibly by several miles. Whatcould have gone wrong?

Tests have shown that underthese circumstances a pilot relying



31/52

on a visual approach will tend to flyalong the arc of a circle centeredabove the pattern of city lights

with its circumference contactingthe terrain. Such a path resultsfrom maintaining a constant visualangle subtended at the eye by thenearest and farthest c ity lights.When deceptive conditions arepresent, such as upsloping cityterrain, this kind of approach pathcan go to critically low altitudes.The lack of foreground lightingresults in the pilot being deniedimportant closure informationwithout his awareness andconsequently the aircraft landsshort.

Avoiding the problemBe aware of the circumstances

in which visual illusions may occurand be prepared to take correctiveor alternative action. Learn torecognize impending situationswhich may place the safety of theaircraft and its occupants injeopardy.

Study aerodrome charts, mapsand other applicable referencematerial to determine runway

NOVEMBER 1981

slope, the slope of terrain aroundthe aerodrome, the relativeposition of the aerodrome and

surrounding features, theaerodrome approach and runwaylighting in use, etc., etc.

Anticipate the need for rainrepellant on the windscreen anduse as appropriate, beforedeparture.

Wherever available use I LS orVASI to monitor the glide slope. Ifa DME is located at the aerodromeuse the rule-of-thumb 300 feetper nautical mile for your descentprofile, but remember to take intoaccount the relationship of theDME beacon to the threshold ofthe runway in use.

If the nominated runway has noprecision approach aids, considerthe need to request analternative runway with precisionaids. When no precision aids areavailable fly a full circuit, never astraight-in approach. The aircraftcan be more accurately positionedat 600 feet on a 2-mile final havingflown a full circuit than on astraight-in approach without aids.It may also be possible to positionthe aircraft at a known point, suchas over a locator, at the correctaltitude and approachconfiguration. The pilot shouldthen obtain a visual image of therunway and maintain this imagethroughout the approach. If noneof the foregoing procedures arepossible, considerat ion should be

given to diverting to a moresuitable aerodrome.

On two-pilot operations use themonitored approach technique.

One pilot flies the instrumentapproach while the pilot who is toland the aircraft monitors theapproach and gains experienceof the ambient conditions beforetaking over control.

During single-pilot, IFRoperations the pi lot should use theautopilot as the pilot flying theapproach. While flying a coupledapproach, the real pilot shouldtry to gain experience of theconditions. The autopilot shouldremain engaged as long aspossible until the pi lot hasobtained a good visual picture, anda safe landing is assured.

On all operations, avoid landingexpectancy; be prepared to goaround or carry out a missedapproach if there is any doubtabout the safety of the landing.

Wherever possible, pilots shouldreceive training flights toaerodromes where it is known thatconditions can be conducive tovisual illusions.

In conclusion, remember thatillusions must be expected inflying; also that it is human n t u r ~to want to believe our own sensesrather than instrument indications.Knowledge of illusory sensationswill help because our responsesare determined more by themeaning we attach to stimuli thanby the stimuli themselves. It isultimately on the basis of

knowledge and self-discipline thatwe make decisions and select ourresponses.

How sharp are your eyes Didthey catch the the title?

- f rom Flying afety andDepartment of Transport AustraliaAviation afety Digest

9


32/52

Colonel R L Horvath .C tlief of Public Affairs

U.S. Army Materiel Development and Readiness Command

THEY WERE READY, readyand waiting each morning at0400. But they we re ne ver re

quired to perform their assignedmission.

They were four emergencyresponse teams ERT) located alongthe air route from St apleton International Airport in Denver, CO, toMichael Army Airfield at DugwayProving Ground , UT.

They were part of the 1,000 manand woman WET EYE Task Forcecommanded by Brigadier GeneralWalter Kastenmayer that operatedin Colorado and Utah during thetransfer of 888 nerve gas bombsand three I-ton containers. The

Task Force mission - to transfer thechemical materiel from RockyMountain Arsenal in Colorado toTooele Army Depot in Utah.

The backbone of the teams wasthe CH-47 Chinook helicopters andtheir crews. They would have responded to a crash of the C 141Air Force jet Starlifter that flewthe 15 sorties from Stapleton toMichael. The Chinooks were alsoprepared to carry the necessary

3

chemical decontamination equipment to the crash site.

Each of the ERTs had threeChinooks and crews assigned plusArmy technical escort personnel,security personnel, medical personnel and a public affairs representative- a total of 29 men andwomen including the flight crews.

Two additional response teamswere located at Buckley Air Nation-

al Guard Field in Denver and atMichael Army Airfield.

The game plan went like this.All of the ERTs were ready at 0400each day that flights were scheduledfrom Denver to Michael ArmyAirfield; equipment was loaded andcrews were on standby. f a C 141went down, the nearest ERT wouldrespond with the remainder of theteams serving as backup. Their

u s RMY VI TION DIGEST


33/52

mission was to get to the site fast,survey the situation and immediatelyinitiate emergency procedures.

The 15 sorties flown on 9 days inAugust went like clockwork. TheERTs were never ordered to carry

out the ir mission.Major Bill Goforth of the Army

Technical Escort Unit (TEU) atEdgewood Arsenal, MD, directedthe activities of the ERTs from theRocky Mountain Arsenal CommandCenter. He was assisted by MajorHoward Foster, the operations officer of the 14th Combat AviationBattalion, Ft. Sill, OK. The 14thBattalion is commanded by Lieutenant Colonel Allan F. Jones.

Majors Goforth and Foster werelinked to all of the response sitesby lift-ta-talk phones providing thetask force commander instant contact with the ERT commanders.

The command relationship ateach ERT was unique in itself. Thesenior aviator was responsible forthe aviation assets while the seniorTEU officer took care of the remainder of the assigned personnel.

The 178th Aviation Company(ASH) from Ft. Sill, commandedby Captain Bruce Grable, had aunit at Buckley in Denver and Craig,CO, and Michael Army Airfield.

The 179th Aviation Company(ASH) from Ft. Carson, CO, attached to the 14th Battalion for theoperation, is commanded by MajorDennis Pfaltzgraff. His unit wasdeployed at Provo and Vernal, UT,and Kremmling, CO. Additionally,the 179th provided a maintenanceteam which was stationed at Vemal.

Fortunately, the biggest problem

at the ERTsites was boredom whichwas alleviated by a preplanned community relations effort. Open houseswere held at each of the four enroute sites. Many town residents atthe response sites had never seen ahelicopter. These open houses metwith great success and afforded theopportunity of solid support forthe teams.

Sporting events and speakingengage

Date post:	03-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	aviationspace-history-library
View:	220 times
Download:	0 times

Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1981

Documents