+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

Date post: 08-Aug-2018
Category:
Upload: aviationspace-history-library
View: 229 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend

of 48

Transcript
  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    1/48

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    2/48

    PROFESSIONAL BULLETIN1-87-3 NOVEMBER 1987

    1 93C Air Traffic Controller, MG Ellis D. Parker2 Aggressor Helicopter Training Unit, CPT (P) Greg

    R. Hampton10 MILES/AGES-AD, CW4 Perry M. Smith14 PEARL'S16 AH-64, A Total System for Battle, Mr. Ron Brunelle

    and Mr. Ray E. Deyopage 10

    [EJ4 DES Report to the Field: Aviation Standardization

    and Training Seminars-May 1987, MASTERCAUTIONlOWRPM APUMr. Bill Weber

    26 Aviation Personnel Notes: Engineering TestPilot; Revised Career ManagementUnder TWOS; FAA Form 8500-9; ASI 08(Tactical Air Operations); Change to ASI W5AH-64/0H-58 Maintenance; Consolidation ofMOS 68J and 68M; Army Aviation NCOAcademy

    28 Automated =J; Robotics, Mr. Shelby W. Harrod30 Human Frailty, CW4 Robert J. Rendzio35 15C35: An Exception to OPMS II38 Sustainment of the Combat Aviation Brigade,Army Aviation's Achilles Heel?

    LTC Stuart W. GeraldOutside Back Cover : ATC Action Line: ExteriorLighting for NVS in the NAS, Mr. Jesse M. Burch Jr.Cover: Shown are just some of the militaryhelicopters flown around the world, which is onereason why the U.S. Army needs realisticaggressor forces training. CPT Greg Hampton'sarticle, beginning on page 2, discussesthese reasons. Can you identify all of theseaircraft? For help see figure 2 on page 6.

    The mission of the U.S. Army Aviation Digest professional bulletin (USPS 415-350) isto provide information of an operational , functional nature concerning safety and aircraftaccident prevention , training. maintenance, operations, research and development ,aviation medicine and other related data. Information contained in this bulletin does notchange or supersede any information presented in other official Department of the Armypublications .

    The Digest is an off icial Department of the Army professional bulletin publ ishedmonthly under the supervision of the commander , U.S. Army Aviation Center. Views expressed herein are not necessarily those of the Department of the Army nor the U.S.Army Aviation Center. Photos are U.S.Army unless otherwise specified . Use of the masculine pronoun is intended to include both genders unless otherwise stated . Materialmay be reprinted provided credit is given to the Digest and the author unless otherwiseindicated.

    Art icles, photos and items of interest on Army Aviation are invited. Direct communication is authorized by writing Editor, U.S. Army Aviation Digest, P. O. Box 699 , Fort

    ROTORA TOTAL SYSTEM FOR BArrLE

    page 16

    page 38Major General Ellis D. ParkerCommander, U.S. Army Aviation Center

    Richard K. TierneyEditorBy order of the Secretary of the Army:Carl E. VuonoGeneral, U.S. ArmyChief of Staff

    Official:R. L. Dilworth

    Brigadier General , U.S. ArmyThe Adjutant General

    Rucker , AL 363625044 , or by call ing either AUTOVON 558-3178 or Commercia205-255-3178. Manuscripts returned only upon request .

    Second class postage paid at Daleville , AL, and additional mailing offices .Active Army un its receive distribution unde r the pinpOint distribution system as out

    lined in AR 31 0-2.Complete DA Form 12-5R and send directly to CDR,AG Publ icationCenter, 2800 Eastern Boulevard , Baltimore, MD 21220. For any change in distributionrequirements , initiate revised DA Form 12-5-R.

    National Guard and Army Reserve units under pinpoint distribution should submit DAForm 12-5-R. Other National Guard units submi t requests through their state adjutangeneral.

    Those not eligible for official distribution o r who desire personal copies of the Digescan orderthe magazine from the Superintendent of Documents , U.S.Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402.

    POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington , DC 20402.

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    3/48

    Major General Ellis D. ParkerChief, Army Aviation Branch

    93C Air Traffic Controller

    On 1 October 1987, the Army Air Traffic ControlSchool at Ft. Rucker reached a significant milestone inmerging military occupational specialty (MOS) 93H (AirTraffic Control Tower Operator) and MOS 93J (AirTraffic Control Radar Controller) courses into a singletrack 93C Air Traffic Controller (ATC) Course. The realignment of these two courses into one will provide thefirst soldiers to the field in January 1988 in line with theimplementation of he 93C MOS worldwide in December1987. This merger will give the commander in the field amore effective controller, as well as more latitude in personnel assignments.

    The Air Operations Divisionof he Department of Enlisted Training is responsible for training our air trafficcontrollers. Skill level one advanced individual trainingisconducted in three phases: common ATC subjects,tower/radar peculiar and combat support training. Thecommon subjects phase prepares the student for the Federal Aviation Administration Control Tower Operatorexamination. After completing the examination, the student progresses into aircraft designations, general operating procedures, flight information publications,weather, radio telephone/interphone procedures, nonradar instrument flight rules academics and nonradar approach control.

    In the tower phase, the student controller is trained ingeneral airport procedures, communications, light gunsignals, runway use, airfield lighting, aircraft separation,instrument/visual flight rules (VFR) and special VFR operations. Instruction in the tower labs begins with simulated light traffic that becomes heavier as the courseprogresses.

    NOVEMBER 1987

    Upon completion of tower training, the student controllers move into radar academics, alignment, fundamentals and operation. In the radar simulation theyreceive practical training in radar separation, identification, target confirmation, radar-out procedures, vectoring, clearances, emergency procedures, traffic advisoriesand pilot reports.

    The combat support phase covers the installation, operation and maintenance of tactical ATC equipment.The final week of training consists of a field training exercise in which the students work in a tactical ATC facilityand control live traffic for the first time.

    After completing the Ft. Rucker course, the controllers next become ~ c i l i t y rated at their station of assignment. After that, they receive over-the-shoulder evaluations and semiannual written examinations. All trainingand testing is designed to produce a highly qualified p rofessional soldier and air traffic controller whose mainconcern is the safe an d expeditious flow of aircraft.

    We are now in the processof developing doctrineandupgrading equipment to support Army Aviation in theAirLand Battle. The first step, the consolidation of ourcontrollers into a single MOS, has been completed. Withequipment upgrades still in the development phase,ourcontrollers will continue to relyon skill, resourcefulnessand determination combined with an intensive trainingprogram to accomplish their vital tasks.

    Air traffic control has come a long way from the daysof ragwing aircraft, 90-horsepower engines and semaphore communication. With today's faster, heavier,more sophisticated aircraft, the workof Army air trafficcontrollers is indeed crucial to the safety of our aircrewsand aircraft.

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    4/48

    Needed, needed right now-

    ~ G G R E S S O I \ . .HELICOPTER

    TRAINING UNIT"Fear kills more people than death."

    General George S. Patton

    THE INTERMITTENT snowand fog that blew across TheSteppes was a well-known forerunnerof the Russian winter. A cold predawn darkness offered nothing newto end the monotonous routine of thesoldiers of the Third Rumanian

    ~ m y . They have long been guardingthe northern flank of the Germanforces that were locked in the deaththroes of wresting control of the metropolis ofStalingrad from the forcesof the Soviet Union. The RumanianThird Army was about to become thegoat of the battle that turned the tideof the Second World War.

    At precisely 0630, on 19 November1942, a rolling artillery barrage signaled the beginning of the end of theThird Reich. Operation Uranus, theSoviet offensive that was aimed at encircling the Nazi forces attacking thecity on the Volga, had specifically targeted the poorly trained and inexperienced Axis' allied Rumania Army fordestruction. Eighty minutes of concentrated artillery bombardment wasonly a prelude to the inevitable armored onslaught. When the roar ofguns ceased, the ominous sound of

    2

    tank engines and creaking tracks ofthe Russian Fifth Tank Army couldbe heard in the straw-lined Rumaniantrenches. The initial wavesof Russianinfantry were adequately dealt with,but as the first T -34s burst out of thegrey mist, the Rumanians soon foundthemselves in a situation for whichthey were not in any way prepared.

    As the Russian armor began tomake headway, the cry of "tanks inthe rear" spread like wildfire throughthe Rumanian trenches. Great numbers of Rumanian troops succumbedto a phenomenon known as "tankfright"; a panic that seized entireunits inexperienced in operationsagainst armor. Hysterical Ruma-nians leaped from their trenches andprepared positions, screaming thatRussian tanks were hot on their heels.This hysteria conveyed itself like a

    Captain (P) Greg R. HamptonAir Combat DivisionDirectorate of Combat Developments

    U.S . Army Aviation CenterFort Rucker, AL

    row of dominoes up and down thelines and soon destroyed any semblance of order in the Axis front; theorganized line of resistance crumbledas the massed Russian armored formations sped on to their objectivesfar into the German rear.History was in the making. Within2 months, an entire German FieldArmy was reduced to ashes in the surrounded city of Stalingrad, and thecourse of western civilization was inexorably changed. Fo r the lack ofproper training of one unit against thedominant maneuver weapon systemof the era, Nazi Germany would suffer one of the most crushing and humiliating defeats in the annals of military history. To be sure, the Naziregime would have been crushedsooner or later, but at that moment,at that particular place, a military organization succumbed to fearthrough inexperience and failed in itsmission; failed for the lack of havingadequate training against a realistically portrayed enemy force.Times change, but soldiers remainthe same. The linear battlefields ofthe Russian front have now given wayto the vertical and horizontal mixingof air and ground forces under thedoctrine ofthe AirLand Battle. Positional warfare has been replaced bythe maneuver school of doctrine thatrelies heavilyupon instilling the tenetsof agility, synchronization, depthand initiative into our soldiers to produce victory while fighting outnumbered. At the forefront of this concept of warfighting stands th econcept of "air mechanization," theuse of vertical maneuver, facilitatedby the employment of the modern attack helicopter. Pioneered by theU.S. Army, this concept has developed the Aviation Branch into an ex-tremely fluid maneuver force, capable of waging war throughout theentire spectrum of the deep, close andrear battle areas.But we are not alone. The forces ofthe Warsaw Pact have simultaneously seen the potential in the useofthe attack helicopter and have developed a vast array of combat helicop-

    U.S. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    5/48

    FIGURE 1: The vast variety of combat helicopters that make up the world's inventory of threat rotorcraft.AFGHANISTAN FRANCE KOREA, SOUTH SOUTH AFRICAMi-8 Hip, Mi-24 Hind D SA-318/319 Alouette III, Hughes 500 MD, AH-1S SA-332 Puma, SA-312SA-342 Gazelle, SA-330 Cobra Alouette IIIPumaALGERIAMi-8 Hip, Mi-24 Hind D, SA- LAOS SYRIA319 Alouette III EAST GERMANY Mi-8 Hip, Mi-24 Hind A Mi-8 Hip, SA-342 Gazelle,Mi-8 Hip, Mi-24 Hind DIE Mi-24 Hind D, Agusta A-109ANGOLA LIBYAMi-8 Hip, Mi-17 Hip K, Mi-24 WEST GERMANY Mi-8 Hip, Mi-24 Hind D, TAIWANHind D, SA-316Alouette III, MBB BO-105P, PAH-1 , AlolJette III Hughes 500 D/MD, SikorskySA-342 Gazelle Sikorsky CH-53 S-70

    MOROCCOARGENTINA GUINEA (BISSAU) Hughes 500 MD, SA-342 TURKEYAgusta A-109, SA-332 Puma Mi-8 Hip, Mi-17 Hip K, SA-316 Gazelle AH-1S CobraAlouette III, SA-342 GazelleBOLIVIA MOZAMBIQUE UNITED KINGDOMHughes 500 HUNGARY Mi-8 Hip, Mi-24 Hind D SA-314 Alouette II , SA-330Puma, Agusta A-1 09,Mi-8 Hip, Mi-24 Hind D Westland Lynx, WestlandBRAZIL NETHERLANDS ScoutHughes 500 D, Mi-17 Hip K, MBB BO-105SA-332 Super Puma INDIAMi-8 Hip, Mi-17 Hip K, Mi-26 UNITED STATESHalo, SA-365 Dauphin NICARAGUA UH-1H Huey, UH-60 BlackBULGARIA Mi-8 Hip, Mi-17 Hip K, Mi-24 Hawk, CH-46E Sea Knight,Mi-8 Hip, Mi-24 Hind D Hind D CH-47D Chinook, CH-53EIRAN Super Sea Stallion, AH-1TIWAH-1J Cobra, Bell 214, Cobra, AH-64 ApacheCHINA Hughes 500 D NIGERIASikorsky S-70, SA-316 MBB BO-105Alouette III, SA-365 Dauphin, USSRMBB BO-105 IRAQ Mi-4 Hound, Mi-6 Hook, Mi-8Mi-8 Hip, Mi-24 Hind D, SA- PAKISTAN Hip C, Mi-17 Hip K, Mi-26342 Gazelle, MBB BO-105, AH-1S Cobra, Mi-8 Hip, SA- Halo, Mi-24 Hind DIEIF, Mi-28COLUMBIA Alouette III, Hughes 500 D 332 Puma, SA-316 Alouette III Havoc, KA-? Hokum, KA-25Hughes 500, OH-6 Cayuse Hormone, KA-32 Helix

    ISRAEL PHILIPPINESCUBA AH-1 S Cobra, Hughes 500 Sikorsky AUH-76, Hughes VENEZUELAMi-8 Hip, Mi-17 Hip K, SA-332 MD, Sikorsky S-70 500D AgustaA-109, SA-316Super Puma, Mi-24 Hind D Alouette III

    ITALY POLANDCZECHOSLOVAKIA Agusta A-109, Agusta A-129 Mi-8 Hip, Mi-24 Hind D VIETNAMMi-8 Hip, Mi-24 Hind D Mangusta Mi-8 Hip, Mi-24 Hind D

    ROMANIAJAPAN Mi-8 Hip, SA-342 Alouette III, YEMEN REPUBLICDENMARK AH-1S Cobra, Hughes OH-6 SA-332 Puma Mi-8 HipHughes 500 Cayuse

    EGYPT ELSALVADOR YEMEN, SOUTHJORDAN UH-1 H, Hughes 500 Mi-8 Hip, Mi-24 Hind 0SA-342 Gazelle, Mi-8 Hip, AH-1 S Cobra, Hughes 500AH-1S Cobra MD, Sikorsky S-76SAUDI ARABIA YUGOSLAVIA

    KENYA Sikorsky S-70 Mi-8 Hip, SA-341 Gazela,ETHIOPIA Agusta A-1 09Mi-8 Hip, Mi-24 Hind D, SA- Hughes 500 D/MD316 Alouette III SOMALIAMi-8 Hip ZAMBIAKOREA, NORTH Mi-8 HipMi-8 Hip, Hughes 500DSOURCES: The Military Balance 1986-87, International Institute for Strategic Studies , 1987. Defense Helicopter World, " The Military Balance 1986," Vol. 5 No. 2, April-May 1986.

    NOVEMBER 1987 3

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    6/48

    ters in order to promulgate verticalmaneuver and envelopment. Othernations of the world also have seenthe light and, as figure 1on page 3 reflects, a vast spectrum of combatrotorcraft will be employed in anymajor conflict in the future.

    It therefore behooves us to prepareto counter the combat helicopterthreat in the development of our doctrine and materiel requirements, butmore importantly, in our training,for it is here that an army hones itsfighting edge. Only by training relentlessly against a realistically portrayedand equipped threa t helicopter forcecan we gain the experience in peacetime of how to fight one of thebattlefield's most destructive and elusive enemies . . . the attack helicopter.

    the Concept"We can always learn from each other ."

    General George s.PattonWhat is needed now is an Armyowned and operated rotary wingadversarial organization designed topromote and foster an awareness ofand a means to counter enemy helicopters. This organization's primefocus would be to act as an enemy helicopter force during collective training events throughout the continentalUnited States and in Europe at bothhome station and at Army collectivetraining centers. Its goal, during thesetraining events, is to train the combined arms team members by portraying and replicating the battlefield

    capabilities of the threat attack helicopter force and thereby provide realistic training experience in peacetimewithout the cost of war. Quite simply,the Army rotary wing adversary forcewill provide the necessary bridge between intelligence and tactical knowledge to the common soldier.This concept is really nothing new.For years now, the U.S. Air Forceand U.S. Navy have been employing

    4

    specialized adversary forces to traintheir aircrews in dissimilar air combatmaneuver training. This requirementwas brought about by the dismal performance exhibited by both servicesduring aerial engagements in the Vietnam conflict. Both the Navy "AultReport" (1968) and the Air Force"Red Baron" study (1972) determined that previous forms oftrainingwere inadequate. The Air Force andNavy had both concentrated too extensively on improving the machinewithout spending enough effort onthe men who were flying the aircraft.As a result, the two services foundtheir once vaunted enemy kill versusfriendly loss ratios drop from 9: 1 inKorea to a disma12.42: 1 for the Navyand 2.25: 1 for the Air Force duringthe period 1965 to 1968.An alarmed Navy initiated the conversion of the Pacific Fleet Replacement Training Squadron, VF-121,during the 1968-69 bombing halt,into "the Navy Post GraduateCourse in Fighter Weapons, Tacticsand Doctrine," better known as"Top Gun." This school used A-4and F-5 aircraft as aggressors whostudied and reproduced the tacticsand "mind-set" of the enemy ai rthreat. Graduates of this course whoreturned to Vietnam dramatically improved the Navy air combat kill ratioduring 1970 to 1973 to an amazing12.50: 1 while the Air Force performance actually worsened (1.92:1).The Air Force quickly got onto thesame track with the formation of the64th Fighter Weapon Squadron atNellis Air Force Base, NV, in October1972. This aggressor organizationquickly gave birth to three additionaladversary organizations basedthroughout the world that fly F-5,MiG-21 surrogate aircraft to train AirForce aircrews as to enemy tactics,formations and mind-set. Subsequently, the Air Force established thecontinuing "Red Flag" series ofexercises that employ the aggressors aswell as ground air defense systems infully instrumented, realistic "battles" above the deserts of the Nellistest ranges.

    The success of the Red Flag seriesof exercises by the Air Force led directly to the Army's activation of theFt. Irwin, CA, military reservation asthe National Training Center (NTC)and the conversion of two groundmaneuver battalions (the 6th Battalion, 31st Infantry, and the 1st Battalion, 73d Armor) for use as the opposing force (OPFOR). The NTC hasshown itself to be the most realisticcollective training tool the Army hasever had, short of actual war, and hasled to the proposed development of alight infantry oriented training complex at Ft. Chaffe, AR, as well as aEuropean training facility at Hohenfels, Federal Republic of Germany, all aimed at providing realisticcombined arms t raining experienceagainst an enemy who fights as we expect him to fight. Indeed we can andhave learned from each other.

    the Threat"I t is currently impossible to imaginemodern combined arms combat withoutthe use of combat helicopters."

    LT GEN V. SadovnikoChief of the Combat Training

    DirectorateGroup of Soviet Forces, Germany

    The combat helicopter threatposed to the combined arms team is aformidable one to consider. Todayand in the future combat helicopterswill proliferate the battlefield in orderto exploit the vertical maneuver dimension's fluid nature. The principaladversary to th e North AtlanticTreaty Organization (NATO) Alliance, the forces of the Warsaw Pactled by the Soviet Union, have apparently adopted the concept of helicopte r vertical envelopment. The purpose is to facilitate the offensivemomentum necessary fo r the promulgation of their operational maneuver group doctrine. They havecarved out a niche in their force struc-

    u.s. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    7/48

    ture for the employment of the armedhelicopter. All indications seem topoint to an ever-expanding missionrole for the Soviet rotary wing combat arm. Many combat missions areassigned to Warsaw Pact helicoptersto include: Close air support Ground attack Antitank operations Escort of airmobile assaults Antihelicopter operations.

    Consequently, the Soviets employ attack helicopters in every major exercise as a vital part of their combinedarms doctrine.Naturally, the Soviets have beenupgrading the number and quality oftheir helicopter forces. These assetshave virtually doubled in quantityand effectiveness since 1979. A growing decentralization effort ha spushed Soviet Army aviation forcesdown to division level and has bolstered existing Hind/Hip formationsat independent regimental andArmy/Front levels. Existing Hindequipped formations are seeing product improvements and modernization to enhance their survivability onthe increasingly lethal battlefield.The Soviets are now rapidly equipping their helicopters with a wide variety of infrared jammers, suppressors and decoy devices, in addition tobolted-on armor plate, no doubt as aresult of 8 years ofcombat experioocein Afghanistan. Additionally, the Soviets have further developed the capability to vertically move armoredforces through the development andfielding of the world's largest production helicopter, the Mi-26 Halo,which is capableofmoving 2 airborneinfantry combat vehicles or 90 combat troops deep into enemy territory.But what is most disheartening tothe NATO maneuver commanders isthe Russian development of anApache-like, point designed anti tankhelicopter, the Mi-28 Havoc. Thethought of being drilled by threat attack helicopters with Apache-likecharacteristics from standoff rangesin excess of many friendly air defense

    NOVEMBER 1987

    systems has the NATO Alliance concerned and rightfully so. The Havocis expected to be deployed soon and,in conjunction with the deploymentof the Kamov Hokum air superiorityhelicopter will, for the first time, challenge NATO for the maneuver rightsof the third dimension of the battlefield.In all, more than 4,400 Soviet combat helicopters stand ready to wagethree-dimensional war against us inany major conflict, and they are getting better at it every day.

    The nations of the Third Worldalso must be addressed. Recently, thearmed helicopter has proven its worthin several brushfire conflicts aroundthe world. The New York Times hasreported that the Iraqi tank forceshave been all bu t paralyzed duringdaylight hours by Iranian helicoptergunships. The Syrians managed to severely disrupt the Israelis during theLebanon incursion in 1982, by employing Gazelle helicopters armedwith antitank missiles. Conversely,the Israelis made good use of theirHughes 500 Defender helicoptersagainst the Syrians during the finalstages of that brief war, destroyingnumerous tanks and armored infantry vehicles with seeming impunity.More recently we have seen, andcontinue to witness, export versionsof the Mi-24 Hind helicopter beingused in counterinsurgency operationsin Nicaragua with great effectiveness.The Chinese Army is pressing hardto acquire and develop a combat helicopter capability through the acquisition of many types of First World helicopters to include S-70 commercialBlackhawks and SA-365 Dauphinaircraft. Indeed, a potential enemymight employ a tremendous varietyof combat helicopters against us.What this discussion leads to is:

    What helicopter will the Armyrotary wing adversary force use? Who will fly them in training ex-ercises? How will they be organized? Where will they be stationed? And of course, what will be thecost?

    the Aircraft"The primitive can also be a weapon."

    Adolph GallandWorld War II German Fighter Ace

    The wide spectrum of rotorcraftthat face use in any possible conflictmust be considered carefully beforeselecting any potential aircraft . Idealistically (or better yet simplistically),it would be nice to acquire one ofeachof he actual threat helicopters for usebut money and political concerns, aswell as logistical concerns, rule outthe acquisition of any single threat helicopter for day-to-day training use.As figure 2 (on page 6) demonstrates,there are just too many of them outthere. Therefore, we must concentrate our efforts on obtaining a helicopter that: Can perform inflight equal to orbetter than that of our potential enemies. Possesses a mission equipmentpackage (or simulation thereof) ofwhat we assess the bad guy to be capable of. Is reliable enough to facilitatehigh-density use.

    Looks different enough to promote the aircraft identification andrecognition process. Can be modified or "finetuned' to replicate the various othersignatures that threat aircraft possess. Not be currently employed as afront-line attack helicopter by any ofthe members of the NATO Alliance.The bottom line for performancefor any aircraft we acquire will be thatit possesses the true battlefield capabilities of the threat helicopter forcesin our training.Several candidates have surfacedand are depicted in figure 3 (page 7).All possess the flight characterist icsor can be slightly altered to reflect theadversary's needs. While none ofthese aircraft really look like thefrontline Soviet helicopter threat,they all are different in appearance.This fact enables the soldier to still

    5

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    8/48

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    9/48

    "Know the enemy and know yourself; in ahundred battles you will never be in peril.When you are ignorant of the enemy butknow yourself, your chances of winningand los!ng are equal. If ignorant both ofyour enemy and yourself, you are certainin every battle to be in peril."

    FIGURE 3: Possible adversary forces aircraft candidates.

    train effectively as he or she must stilluse the recognition process to identifythem as not friendly and subsequently facilitate engagement. TheAir Force and Navy both have foundthat this is the case and that replicating the performance as well as tacticsand mission equipment performanceis what promotes good, realistictraining. Above all, it must be understood that the adversary aircraft isnot an end in itself, but merely a toolto demonstrate threat helicopter doctrine, tactics, formations and weapons effectiveness.One of the most important learning tools that the adversary aircraftwill employ will be extensive engagement debriefings. Videotape recordings from onboard gun cameras, aswell as verbal comments made by theadversary crews during actual engagements, will be reviewed by allmembers of the combined arms teamwho train with it. The aircraft willhave the capability of landing at aunit's location and conducting an onthe-spot afteract ion review using theonboard video and immediately discuss the unit's strength and weaknesses and reinforce lessons learned.Additionally, the adversary aircraft

    NOVEMBER 1987

    will employ a real-time casualty assessment system, such as MILES/AGES I or II, to add realism to all engagements; but the heart and soul ofthis initiative resides in the pilots whoconvey the tactics and capabilities ofthe aircraft.

    the Pilots"Man is the only war machine ."

    General George S. Patton

    Army rotary wing adversary pilots will be experts in Soviet capabilities and will provide a valuable sourceof soldier/crew education on threathelicopter doctrine, tactics, formations, weapon systems and "fightingphilosophy. " These aviators will provide an effective interface betweenthe intelligence community and thesoldiers in the field and will improvethe soldiers' knowledge of the enemyand eventually their ability to fightand win on the modern battlefield.The men and women who fly our adversary aircraft must be experiencedaviators who possess a firm knowl-

    edge ofour tactics and doctrine. Theymust then be schooled in the Sovietmind-set and fully immersed into thethreat's doctrinal background andaware of heir ethnocentrisms so as tocompletely reproduce the Soviet pilot's way of doing things. We must literally breed out the typical Americanaggressiveness and replace it with theSoviet "d o as I do" rigid commandand control thought process thatcauses the threat pilots to fly the waythey do.

    Most importantly, however, wemust employ aviators who are train-ers, teachers, subject matter expertsbut are not competitors. These trainers ofmen must be able to accept (andwe hope this happens on a regular basis) their daily destruction in training.Egos will have no place in this organization. These aviators must be recognized as the enemy but they also mustbe the best we've got, for they will behanging it out on the line day-in andday-out in training. Additionally,these people must be retained in theirpositions for the maximum amountof time possible considering it willtake at least 6 months to train them tobecome adversaries. The bestmustbeused to train theforce.

    7

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    10/48

    the Organization"War is no longer fought in a series ofscattered individual encounters. Wartoday is fought by organized masses ofmen and machines ."

    Giulio DouhetProphet of Modern Aerial Warfare

    No matter how effective an individual aircrew or helicopter is by itself, it must be properly organizedand employed to gain the most goodfor the money. The Army rotary wingadversary force is no exception to thisrule and is extremely dependent uponits organizational tenets to execute itstraining mission. The Army rotarywing adversary force will reflect onesingle focal point-that of meetingthe day-to-day counterhelicoptertraining needs of the U.S. Army.

    The force design required for thisinitiative must reflect both a resemblance to how our principal opponenthas organized his helicopters and alsofacilitate effective and efficient employment of assets in day-to-daytraining at the Army's collectivetraining facilities and unit home station. Figure 4 reflects the necessaryforce design for this to take place.This organization mirrors the principle concerning issues of theSoviet-style divisional helicoptersquadron, that is designed to employmultiple attack helicopters simultaneously while also being able to conduct lift and assault operations withan organic transport platoon. The adversary force design allows for thiscapability by having two separatecombat helicopter platoons that employ a generic attack/assault helicopter that can be tailored by the additionof wing stores to reflect either type ofcombat helicopter. Additionally, theforce design allows for the simultaneous employment of assets at, andaway from, the training center location. This will allow for home stationtraining of many Army units (Active,

    8

    Reserve, National Guard) through- nizations at the NTC, the Jointout each regional district as shown in Readiness Training Center (Ft.figure 5. By basing one of these orga- Chaffe), and at the Combat Maneu-

    u.s. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    11/48

    ver Training Complex in Germany,the adversary force can facilitate thisimportant training both in collectivecombined arms scenarios and in individual unit training at home stationwhile still maintaining a presence atits base location. This "road show"capability will be one of the biggestselling points of the initiative and willgreatly enhance Army home stationtraining.

    the Cost"Brother , can you spare a dime?"

    Anonymous

    Today, when additions to a"capped" Army force structure aresuggested, the immediate reaction is"No,-we can't afford it!" or "Areyou prepared to take it out of yourhide?" However, careful examination of adversary training has provento be far less expensive and, more importantly, far more effective than anyother training we execute using Blueforce-on-force scenarios. But what isthe price of training?It is hard to really define a validmeans of gauging its value, but we doknow that the ultimate testwill be oureffectiveness in actual combat. Thosewho have faced an aggressor-bethey Air Force pilots, Naval aviatorgraduates of Top Gun, or soldiers returning from their annual thrashingby the OPFOR at the NTC-all ofthem indicate the unqualified successof this type of training.The bottom line on the acquisitionof 36 adversary helicopters is boundto be one of the major stumblingblocks of this program, but it is a costthat must be paid. The combat helicopter threat is one that affects all ofthe members of the combined armsteam and, therefore, must be jointlypaid for because all will end up fighting that threat. Moreover, the "facesand spaces" for the 36 pilots and yetto be determined ground personnel ofeach of the separate adversary companies must be apportioned through-

    NOVEMBER 1987

    out the Army as the Aviation Branchcannot absorb fielding the entireforce structure requirement alone.The diversion of acquisition and operational funds to procure and manunique helicopters for the Army rotary wing adversary program wouldhave a minor effect upon the overallArmy budget, especially if a phasedapproach toward aircraft acquisitionis undertaken. Examine the tradeoffs. The skills gained from helicopter adversary training would not onlyreduce the number of our combat systems lost in battle but would also result in greater numbers of threat helicopters being destroyed, th usnegating one of the enemy's most potent maneuver assets. We havelearned through example that combat is not the place to train.TheV .S. Army has recently undertaken a massive effort to come togrips with the combat helicopterthreat to our ground forces throughthe development of the Forward AreaAir Defense System initiative. Armydoctrine and tactical manuals nowaddress the need to counter these formidable aerial weapons platforms ina combined arms manner with allteam members contributing to the effort. But, what is preached a/so mustbe practicedand we must train regularly against a realistically portrayedhelicopter force to realize an effectivecapability. Rarely do opponents simulate threat helicopter formations,tactics or weapons employment during REFORGER (Return of Forcesto Germany) or division and brigadelevel training maneuvers. I f a threatcapability is simulated, the forces thatemulate the Red side often introduceinaccuracies in simulation that envariably produce erroneous sightcues and improper habit patterns.Additionally, units that train againsteach other regularly tend to developtactics that counter the opponentstactics and machines rather than thatof the threat. When you fight Blueversus Blue, you learn the best meansof fighting yourself, not the enemy.Realism is a must-have requirementfor training and we must pay for it.

    the Payoff"In no other profeSSion are the penaltiesfor employing untrained personnel soappalling or so irrevocable as in themilitary."

    General Douglas S. MacArthur

    If the key to the effective projection of combat power on the battlefield is the soldier and crew that mansthe weapon system, then the realistictraining portion of the equation is themost important aspect of readiness.It has been shown by our other services, as well as through our experiences at the NTC, that the best way toachieve this readiness is through aggressive, structured, regular and realistic training. This facet of the combat developments star has habituallybeen last on our list of priorities, butthe growing realization of our reliance upon the human factor in wardemands that we pay attention to thepractical, hands-on use of our combat systems in conjunction with ourcombined arms brethren. History hasclearly demonstrated that technologyalone is a poor substitute for training.The groundwork has been laid andthe results have been impressive. TheArmy rotary wing adversary forcewill simply add on to an already established training system and make us,for the first time, have to contest thevertical maneuver dimension in ourtraining and thus make us better prepared for war. The cost will have to bepaid but reflect upon these facts:

    I f 1 Havoc can kill 15V.S.M-ls/BFVsand 4 Havoc's conduct 4 sorties a daythen 240 armored fighting vehicles

    or 2 brigades cease to exist.But, if through realistic training, wereduce the threat attack helicopter'seffectiveness by 50 percent, then thesavings are immense. A savings of120 combat systems, with a price tagin excess of $210 million, not to mention the lives of the crews, is realized.The Army rotary wing adversaryforce is needed-needed right now.9

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    12/48

    MILES/AGES-AD

    THE RESULTS and quality of force on force exercises have for many years been dependent on the qualityof the controllers. The determination of who shot whomwas a judgment call of the controller, if in a good vantagepoint to observe. Multiple Intergrated Laser EngagementSystems (MILES) was developed to eliminate this problem and to provide real-time casualty assessment duringthe exercises.

    MILES uses gallium arsenide diode lasers to replicatefiring of the weapon. An array of detectors is installed onthe player vehicle to receive the coded laser beams and torecord a hit. A microprocessor on the target decodes themessage and determines the appropriate effect(near-miss, hit or kill). The probability of kill given ais programed for each system. The MILES also accountsfor ammunition expended. This keeps the number ofshots fired in line with that of the actual system.

    Basic MILES to support armor, mechanized and infantry was fielded in 1980 with great success.Air-to-ground engagement simulation-air defense(AGES-AD), as a follow-on to the basic MILES, addedaviation and air defense to the training battlefield. TheMILES/AGES-AD program provided systems for theAH-1 Cobra, OH-58 Kiowa and UH-1H Huey helicopters an d also supported the Vulcan, Chaparral an dStinger air defense weapons.

    Since the fielding of MILES/AGES-AD in 1985, it hasreceived both praise and criticism. To quote ColonelJames Lloyd, commander, 4th Aviation Brigade, 1stArmored Division, "MILES is the key to realistic attack helicopter training." However, there is still much room for

    10

    CW4 Perry M. SmithDirectorate of Training and DoctrineNew Systems Training and Simulator

    Acquisition DivisionU.S. Army Aviation Center

    Fort Rucker, AL

    PROGRAMOVERVIEW

    improvement. Many lessons have been learned andchanges are underway.

    Areas of ConcernA major concern of MILES/AGES-AD is weapon

    performance, i.e., range and kill dispersion patterns.However, eye safety must be guarded/maintained. A laser is nothing more than a light beam. Factors of the environment have a major impact on it. Weapons designedwith a range of 3,500 meters are able to simulate a kill at5,000 meters on a clear day at Ft. Huachuca, AZ. Yet, ona rainy day in West Germany, maximum range is 2,500meters. The theory that the laser can penetrate as far asthe eye can see isn't totally correct. This is quite apparentat the National Training Center (NTC). Dust and smokedeflect the coded laser to an extent that kills aren't recorded when dust or smoke obscures the target. The tech-

    The cockpit kill indicator for the OH-58A and OH-58C hasbeen relocated to the right side of the instrument panel toresolve visibility obstruction.

    u.s. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    13/48

    no ogy used for this design is about 11 years old. Thereare studies ongoing to find a solution. The collection ofdust and dirt on the glass tha t covers the laser transmitterand the detectors are also considered negative factors.Attempts should be made to keep these areas clean.The effectiveness of the AH-1 MILES/AGES-AD often has been questioned. Tests have attributed the majority of the problems to environmental conditions as mentioned above and the boresight of he telescopic sight unit(TSU): boresight should be done as often as practical. Itis essential that boresight be performed at the beginningof an exercise and at any time there is a change in temperature of 15 degrees F. Verification should be done at aminimum of daily. (Verification is simply firing theweapon at a MILES equipped target.) The "Instructor'sMILES AH-1S Helicopter System Training Guide,"page 73, states, "TOW alignment must be performedwith auxiliary power unit (APU) power only. Do not useinternal power." This places a burden on tactical units.To reduce this burden, the development of an alignmentdevice is underway. The device will attach to the front ofthe TSU and eliminate the need for an APU and a distantaiming target.Another aspect of the MILES/AGES-AD effectiveness is that it relies on the actual weapon system to befunctional to operate. Each of the systems is complex.The MILES/AGES-AD and the weapon system shouldbe thoroughly checked prior to an exercise. The contractor logistics support (CLS) is responsible for checking theMILES prior to issue; however, the MILES test set is being fielded to assist operators in troubleshooting. Furthermore, ArmyTraining Support Center has positioneda MILES contract training specialist at major installations to provide training and assistance.Installation of the MILES/AGES-AD, in particularon the AH-1, is a time-consuming process. Some unitshave the training systems installed and left on the aircraftfor extended periods, which facilitates the potential accumulation of rust and corrosionthat will drastically reducethe reliability of the system. The systems should not remain installed on the aircraft for more than 30 days. Inaddition, components suspected of being faulty shouldbe tagged and turned in to the appropriate activity for repair. Every effort has been made to reduce the installation process; however, no significant breakthroughshave yet been made. It should be noted that the more often a unit uses the system, the time required to install it isless. The benefits are worth the effort.The MILES TOW transmit ter has the same laser codefor both the airborne and the ground TOW systems. Thispresents the problem of who shot whom in large-scale ex-

    NOVEMBER 1987

    ercises. An estimate of$15 million has been made to modify the system to differentiate between the two. The in- .strumentation systems that are being installed at themajor combat training centers will resolve the problemfor those locations. The current position is to rely on thecontroller to overcome this situation in small scale exercises.The time of flight (TOF) for the actual TOW missilevaries with range. An eye safe rangefinder is not availablefor the AH-1 and since no range data is available, a medium time of 12 seconds is used for all TOW shots. This isconsidered to be the normal engagement range TOF(about 2,200 meters) for the airborne TOW.The 0 H -58 A and C aircraft were restricted from flightwith MILES/AGES-AD in May 1986. An interim solution has been achieved and 14 sets have been fielded to theNTC. Actions are ongoing to satisfy the Joint ReadinessTraining Center and the Combat Maneuver TrainingComplex. The Armywide fix is anticipated by third quar ter 1988.

    Bogus kills also have been a major concern forMILES/AGES-AD. A bogus kill is identified as the activation ofthe kill indication system for no apparent reason. Several factors have been identified as contributing: weak system batteries; accidentally switched off ;radar emitions; sun rays; and improper grounding ofMILES to the aircraft. Shielding has been added to components of the system to reduce these problems.Many aviators who have been on exercises at the NTCbelieve the opposing force armored vehicles have aprewarning of a MILES TOW engagement. This is notpossible with the design of the current system. TheMILES control box requires 22 TOW kill words to register a hit. The system will not provide any indication untilthe 22 TOW words are received and/or a 10-second engagement period has elapsed. One explanation for the intermittent flash of the strobe is engagement by anotherweapon.Another issue surfaced at the NTC is the difficulty inkilling a tank in hull defilade. The detectors around theturret are masked from the aircraft by the ground. Thereare no detectors installed on top of the turret. In additionto this, an engagement that occurs from the flank of atank has the same hit/kil l probability as a frontal shot ifthe tank turret is turned toward the engaging system. Thisis due to the detectors being mounted on the base of theturret.

    (Note: The CATA publication, "NTC LessonsLearned: MILES Checklist, " June 1986, will help unitsprepare to conduct effective MILES training at theNTC.)

    11

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    14/48

    The smoke grenade and strobe are externally attached (left)to be compatible with the air-to-air Stinger and visible toground personnel during force-on-force training. Theaircraft kill indicator is mounted on a pallet (above) in thesame location as the M27El minigun.

    MILES/AGES-AD UpgradesThe lights on the cockpit kill indicator are not night vi

    sion goggles (NVG) compatible. The replacement of thelights with the blue/green NV G filters will solve this issue.This can be done by the local CLS sites.

    Installation of the MILES transmitter into the laseraugmented airborne TOW TSU is on hold waiting implementation of the C-Nite Program. C-Nite will provide,among other things, forward looking infrared capabilityfor the AH-l. Fielding of the C-Nite Program is scheduled for fiscal year 1990.

    The capability to fire actual rockets and cannons whilesimultaneously firing the MILES missiles has been requested by the field units. The request for a change hasbeen forwarded by Training and Doctrine Command tothe Project Manager for Training Devices. The fielding

    12

    date for such a capability has not been determined as yet.This effort will support AH-l and AH-64 Apache helicopters.

    The immediate need for MILES/AGES-AD to support Black Hawk training was surfaced in 1985. To satisfy the requirement on an interim basis, kits to modify127 UH-IH MILES/AGES sets was completed in August 1987. Armywide fielding of these sets began in J anuary 1987. These systems are to be replaced with the delivery of the AGES II program.

    To support the single station fielding of the Apachebattalions, 20 AH -64 accelerated AGES II kits will be delivered to Ft. Hood, TX, through December 1987. Theaccelerated systems will be built to prototype specifications and will be upgraded to production standards during Lot #1 production.

    u.s. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    15/48

    New SystemsThe air-to-ground engagement simulation II (AGESII) is a follow-on to the original MILES/AGES-AD program. AGES II will support tactical engagement simulation for the AH-64, UH-60, OH-58D, CH-47D and theHELLFIRE ground support system (HGSS). Eventhough AGES II is being built by another firm, the systems will remain compatible. Fielding for the AGES II isto begin second quarter fiscal year 1989.The AGES II program will have several major improvements over the original program. Each system willhave a discrete player identification code. This will enablea player that has been engaged to know not only the typeweapon that fired (as with the original system) but alsowhich player fired the shot. Event recording also will beincorporated into AGES II. During a mission, 250 eventswill be recorded for each player equipped with AGES IIto support afteraction review (AAR). Furthermore, therehas been a reduction in the number of belts required forthe detection system.Aircraft survivability equipment (ASE) had not beenfactored into the MILES/AGES-AD probability of hit(Ph) or probability of kill (Pk). This is being rectified withthe AGES II program. I f a particular piece of ASE is installed and employed properly, the Ph/Pk will be adjusted accordingly.In addition to providing laser codes to activate the killsystems, the AGES II will provide eye safe laserrange finder / designator (LRF/D ) capabilities via anerbium glass laser. Through the use of the AGES IILRF/D, actual TOF will be available for HELLFIREshots; autonomous and remote HELLFIRE launcheswill be possible. TheOH-58D, HGSSandanother AH-64may designate for remote launches.

    The air-to-air Stinger (AT AS) is to be fielded in fiscalyear 1990. A draft appendix to the ATAS required operational capability is being staffed to provide MILESATAS and concept formulation is currently underway.Fielding of the MILES ATAS is anticipated to follow theactual weapon system by about 6 months.The concept of embedded training will be used in thefuture for MILES/AGES as well as other training support requirements. The LHX and the V 22 Osprey arescheduled to be supported in this manner. This will eliminate requirements such as downloading rocket pods ortactical lasers and replacing them with training components. It will also lead to a much more user friendly system with reduced redundancy of components.

    NOVEMBER 1987

    Current SituationMILES/AGES-AD and other associated programshave many valuable aspects, but the most significant role

    it supports is the afteraction review. The AAR, when performed properly, provides all players, the staff and thecommanders immediate review of events and lessonslearned. All too often the AAR is omitted for various reasons. This results in a great deal of lost valuable trainingdata. Controllers and commanders must realize this toprevent the same mistakes from happening over and overagain.Aviation assets are vulnerable. The only way we canfind out our weaknesses and means of correcting them,without spilling blood, is through the use of MILES/AGES-AD in force-on-force exercises. History reflectsthat we will fight as we train. I f we don't train well, ourperformance on the battlefield will be poor.

    As stated, there are shortcomings in the MILES/AGES-AD program. However, if the systems are notused, nothing will be improved. Many units only useMILES/AGES-AD when going to the NTC. The NTC isnot the location to learn how MILES/AGES works (ordoes not work). The Army has based its force-on-force,collective battlefield training on MILES/AGES-AD. I t isthe responsibility of each soldier to strive to improve thetraining program. The way to accomplish this with theMILES/AGES-AD program is through written correspondence (message, letter, memorandum, etc.) to Directorateof Training and Doctrine at the U.S. Army Aviation Center. Please be as specific as possible about whatthe problem is. I f you have a recommended solution, itwould be welcome.Send comments to: CDR USAA VNC, ATZQ-TDSAS, Ft. Rucker, AL 36362-5163. x;-,-

    13

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    16/48

    PEARL!SPersonal Equipment And Rescue/survival Lowdovvn

    SPH-4 Flyer's HelmetThe SP H 4 flyer's helmet retention assembly, nationalstock number (NSN) 8415-01-056-0699, is no longer being procured. The correct replacement item is the regularretention assembly, NSN 8415-01-056-0699. This retention assembly has now been redesignated as a one size fitsall for both sizes of the SPH-4 helmet. Action officer isMr. James C. Dittmer, AMCPM-ALSE-L, AUTOVON693-3215 or cornrnercial314-263-3215.Career MOS for ALSE Technician/SpecialistThis action item has a long history dating back to 1969when the first draft study was prepared, and finally in1975, a coordinated aviation life support equipment(ALSE) military occupational specialty (MOS) study wasforwarded to Military Personnel Center at Departmentof the Army (DA).When the U.S. Army Aviation Branch was formallyestablished in 1984, everyone thought at long last ArmyAviation and Army Aviation life support has come intoits own and all necessary support services would fall intoplace. No quite so-in the case of ALSE we are still lightyears behind the other services, both of whom haveclearly identified career fields and MOSs, well qualifiedand trained personnel in these vital skills.We see many aviation units of the Active Army, theArmy National Guard and Reserves using manpower assets taken "out of their hides." Now we know that this iscertainly not the way to do it, but somehow they are doingthe best they can with very little. The ALSE MOS require-

    14

    ment is not a dead issue. It is alive, and we are gettingmuch more visibility from the DA level down. There isn'ta day that goes by that we don't hear about the requirement for the ALSE MOS, and I am firmly convinced itwill come about and surely be a distinct benefit to theALSE program.Yes, we do have a Q2 additional skill identifier, butwhat we need is a career MOS and at least a line in theTOE and MTOE of every aviation unit affected. Giantsteps have been made in the last 5 years with formal ALSEtraining courses at Ft. Eustis, VA; Reserve ALSE training, Vancouver, WA, under the auspices of Sixth ArmyAviation Officer; and Army National Guard training onALSE continues.Many personnel have been trained in this critical field,but it is difficult to keep track ofthem. Once they go PCS,we lose them. The career MOS would give us the tool totrack these specialists and keep them in the ALSE program.Another action we should consider is the upward mobility program; wherein, we can get interested personnelinto the ALSE program and train and promote in allphases of the ALSE effort.Now the challenge must continue for a formal ALSEcareer MOS field in the Army.PRC-90 Survival Radio AntennaWe can now give you some welcome news. Throughthe attention and concern of one of our action officers,we have identified a new improved survival radio antenna

    u.s. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    17/48

    in the Army supply system for the PRC-90 radio.As you probably recall, the old antenna used to breakwhen it was folded into the survival vest or accidentallystretched, making the antenna useless. The new antennahas a shorter base and is much more flexible and thereforeless susceptible to breakage. The NSN will remain thesame as that of the old antenna. When you receive thisnew antenna and put it into service, please let us know

    about its effectiveness.

    Army Support Activity TodayHave you ordered your new Support Activity SupplyDigest? The latest Supply Digest is no. 3-87. The Digestcan be secured from the U.S. Army Support Activity,P.O. Box 13460, Philadelphia, PA 19101-8419,ATTN: Vickie Di Domenico (STRAP-P) or call her onAUTOVON 444-2569. The Digest contains a wealth ofinformation pertaining to supply of ALSE clothing, etc.Action officer is Mr. Rainy Bell, AMCPM-ALSE-L,AUTOVON 693-3215.

    Items In Short Supply Release DatesThe following items of clothing were released for issueduring the months August to September 1987: coveralls,flyer's-36L, 38S, 40S, 42L; helmet, flyer's, SPH-4 XL;jacket, flyer's, Nomex, lightweight-XS-R, M-L, L-R,L-L, XL-R, XL-L.

    Flight Helmet Protective BagThe flight helmet protective bag was designed to pro-tect the flight helmet and as a protective covering whenever the helmet is being carried, i.e., to and from theALSE shop/aircraft or while on TDY or any other time itis not being worn. While traveling TDY on commercialaircraft the helmet will be carried in the helmet bag andcarried onboard as carryon luggage. It should be stored inthe overhead storage compartment. The helmet and storage bag will fit in commercial aircraft carryon luggage areas except possibly in the smaller commercial aircraft.Too many helmets are being damaged while beingshipped as airline baggage. Some aircrew personnel havebeen using the aircrew kit bag with the flight helmet beingshipped inside with other clothing. Following the procedures above will minimize damage to the flight helmet.

    Night Vision Goggles (NVG)This office (AMCPM-ALSE-L), has become quite in-volved in the NVG area, and an excellent article is published in FlightJax, Volume 15, Number 18, 11 February1987. We also suggest you secure copies of Flight/ax,

    PEARL'S and ALSSGRAMs.Requisitioning Special Measurement ClothingTo avoid delay in the processing and filling of requirements for special measurement clothing, requisitionsshould be submitted in accordance with the instructionscontained in: AR 32-4 (DLAR4235.18), dated 25 February 1975,"Special Measurement Clothing and Footwear, Orthopedic Footwear, Guidons, Streamers and Footwear. " AR 700-84 unit supply update, dated 24 November1986, "Issueand Saleof Personal Clothing, " chapter7-special measurement clothing and footwear.Th e following forms should be filled out completely. DD Form 358, Special Measurement Blank-Clothing for Men.

    DD Form 111, Armed Forces MeasurementBlank-Special Sized Clothing for Women. DD Form 150, Special Measurement Blank for Special Measurement/Orthopedic Boots and Shoes.Graduation date should be shown on all requisitions(when applicable). All requisitioners should indicate a

    point of contact. Document identifier AOE/A05 (withremarks) must be used, the RIC is S9T. Mail special measurement clothing requisitions off-line to:Defense Personnel Support CenterATTN: DPSC-VC2800 South 20th StreetPhiladelphia, PA 19101-8419.Note: To avoid a "RF" (no record) status code, followups should be made off-line, by mail, message or telephone.From the dateof receipt, DPSC has 49 calendar days toprocess woolen coats and flight items and 35 calendardays to processother items. Requisitions for stocked sizessubmitted as special measurement requisitions will be rejected by OPSC-VC (Directorate for Manufacturing).Note: Requirements for special measurement orthopedic footwear are stillto be submitted to the defense orthopedic footwear clinic. ~

    If you have a question about personal equipment or rescue/survi val gear, write PEARL '5, AMC Product Management Office, ATTN:AMCPM-ALSE, 4300 Goodfellow Blvd., St. Louis, MO 63120-1798; or call AUTOVON 693-3817 or Commercial 314-263-3817.

    NOVEMBER 1987 15

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    18/48

    16

    This sixth article in the series on the AH-64AApache aircraft addresses the caution/warning,fault detection/location and multiplex systems.The information contained here isfor familiariza-tion onlyand mustnot be used to operateor main-tain the aircraft.

    U.S. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    19/48

    Caution and Warning SystemThis system provides visual indicators in one or both crew stations toalert the aircrew to the existence of a

    hazardous condition. It also produces audio warnings of a conditioncritical to aircraft survival. The system is operational anytime 24/28 Vdcis present on the dc emergency bus.Two identical master caution andwarning (C/W) panels, figure 1, areinstalled in the aircraft. One is locatedon the top center of the pilot's instrument panel and the other on the topright of the copilot gunner's (CPO's)instrument panel.The master C/W panels operate independently with common sensors;once activated, each panel must be reset individually. The master C/Wpanels contain the following segments: Master Caut ion-An ambersegment switch that flashes at 5 1hertz (Hz) rate. When the segment ispressed and released it will reset to theoff condition. The master cautionsegment will illuminate when one ofthe other segments of the masterC/W panel illuminates.

    The following red segments haveno lashingfunction; they will illuminate steady-on upon detection of afault condition. Low revolutions per minute(rpm) rotor-Rotor speed (Nr ) hasdropped below 94 percent. Fire auxiliary power unit(APU)-Flames are present withinthe APU compartment. Engine lout and engine 2 ou t -Corresponding engine has failed.Two engine speed signals are monitored as follows:When an engine's power level is inthefly position and the engine's Np isbelow 89 percent, the respective engine out segment will illuminate. Theengine out light will also illuminatewhen engine Ng drops below 63 percent. Engine chop-Both enginechop relays have closed and removed

    NOVEMBER 1987

    the Np reference signal to both engines. High rpm rotor-Rotor speedhas climbed above 104 percent. Backup control system (BUCS)fail-A component within the BUCSsystem has failed. Press-to-test-A nonilluminat- .ing edgelite segment switch that,while pressed and held, will applypower for lamp test to all master C/Wpanel segments, all C/W panel segments and all other advisoryindicators.There are two C/W panels, figure2, one in each crewstation, on the bottom right-hand side of the pilot's andthe CPO's instrument panels. The pilot's panel contains 75 segments whilethe CPO's panel contains 32. Some

    segments are split to increase panelcapacity.Segments are illuminated by afail/fault signal from the appropriatefail/fault sensor. Upon initial illumination, the segment willflash at 2 1Hz rate to alert the respectivecrew member When the crewmember acknowledges the fault by reset- ting the master caution segment, theC/W panel segment will remain illuminated in the steady-on state, andremain on until the fail/fault is corrected.

    An audio warning tone will be activated in both crewstations by the illumination of either the low rpm rotor,engine lout or engine 2 out segmentson the master C/W panels. This toneis a 700 to 1,700 Hz continuous sweep

    FIGURE 1: Master caution and warning panel.

    ~ 0;]B @ ] ~ U C S O ~ I ~S' U t SPAIII Its; . .-t SIA, ~ ~~ EJ EJ EJ. .HIII ,' U tB ~ ~ ~ BIIIK&II ."11 II .' , ..._utEs[]IJGEJBJj)) s.s .. . .... ' I 'ff If, Jl "I C" MIII= .

    COPILOT/GUNNER

    PILOTFIGURE 2: Caution and warning panels.

    17

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    20/48

    tone that is preset in volume. It is resetin both crewstations by eithercrewmember pressing either the engine lou t or the engine 2 out segments.

    position will set the intensities dim. cuit breaker located on the emergencysectionof he respective crewstation' scircuit breaker panel.Both the pilofs and CPO's C/Wsystems are protected by a caution cir-

    An audio warning tone also will beactivated in both crewstations whenthe stabilator automatic mode fails.This tone is a 1,000 Hz continuoustone that is also preset in volume. It isreset in both crewstations by eithercrewmember pressing the reset button on the stabilator control panel,which is located on each collectivestick. ~ W t ' W i W ' H " t " " jIndicator REMOTE TRANSMITSELECT SWITCH TAIL WHEEL UNLOCKEDAdvisory indicators are locatedwithin each crewstation as indicatedin figure 3. ANTI-ICE ON BLADE DEICE ON EMERGENCY POWERThe intensity of the C/W lights iscontrolled independently within eachcrewstation, figure 4. The flight instrument control on each internallight control panel provides thebright/dim control. ORDNANCE SAFE ORDNANCE ARMED FIRE BOTTLE DISCHARGE ENGINE START

    In the o ff position, the C/W lightintensities will be bright; any othet FIGURE 3' AdVisory Indicators .

    QI) , - - - -- EMJla .A n I0@)000(5~ - - l O V l",OOLt..~ C D ~ ~ ~ , ~CAUTIOI AID WARNING 0 0 6 cD 0PANEL CIRCUIT 0

    BREAKERS 'oC1 r0, r ~ ~ ' ' ' ''eJ 0 ".86~ - 2 ~ ~ 8~ O 8 0 '::

    CPG CIRCUIT BREAKER PANEL- - - . - ,.IIIE EXTGH---. ~ ' U l L - - - - - - . flOG

    @ ~ ~ @ ) @ 5 ~ '7' -:- ~ @ 5 ~ c @ @: ' _ .... ._ IT":!: ~ : . : ,:!, :::c I.... , ...... ::; . ~ : : ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 . 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~i i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~(MEl l l lO.An @

    PILOTS NO.1 CIRCUIT BREAKER PANELFIGURE 4 Lighting control and circuit protection

    18

    LocationPilot's Center ConsolePilot's Tail Wheel Lock Control PanelPilot's Anti-ice Control PanelPilot's Anti-ice Control PanelPilot's Engine Overspeed Test Control PanelAdjacent to Pilot's and Copilot's Master SwitchAdjacent to Pilot's and Copilot/Gunner's Master ArmSwitchPilot's Fire Detector Test Control PanelPilot's Power Lever Quadrant

    CAUTION AND WARNINGLIGHTS BRIGHT/DIMCONTROL

    EXT IT00 FORM~AVaRT@OFFDIM

    ANTI -COLWHT

    @OFFREO

    FLOODaRT~ O F FDIM

    ~ o~ R T OFF I ' aRTINTERNAL/EXTERNALLIGHTING PANELu.s. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    21/48

    Fault Detection/Location System (FD/LS)The purpose of the FD/LS is to: Detect faults in the systems

    monitored. Alert subsystem failures to theflight crew. Identify the failed system. Identify the failed A VUM linereplaceable unit (LRU) and its approximate location on the aircraft.The fault detection/locat ion system interactive system devices, figure5, work together to perform allFD/LS functions. Fire control computer (FCC)Primary computer for the FD/LS. Itcontains all FD/LS test and displaysoftware routines. Multiplex remote terminal units(MRTUs)-Provide interface between the multiplex system and themonitored aircraft systems. EachMRTU contains built-in test circuitryto detect95 percent ofall faults withinitself. Backup bus controller (BBC)Automatically assumes control of themanual override switch (MUX) system if the hardwired FCC signal tothe BBC indicates a failure and ifthere is a loss of data on both databuses for a specified period of time.The BBC assumes control if theMUX on the fire control panel isplaced in the secondary (SEC) position. I f he BBC is the primary buscontroller, no FD/LS capability exists. Data entry keyboard shown infigure 5 provides the copilot gunnerwith the means to enter the FD/LStest modes and to acknowledge actions taken. When the functionswitch is not in the FD/LS position,internal self-testing of subsystems iscontinuously monitored by the buscontroller. Target acquisition and designation sight (TADS)-FD/LS providesthree system messages: head-out display, head-down display and alphanumeric display (AND).The inte-

    NOVEMBER 1987

    grated helmet and display sightsystem (IHADSS) can also displayFD/LS messages. Included are testprogress, required operator actionitems and status information. Symbol generator (SYMGEN)-Provides all symbology forthe IHADSS and T ADS (except theAND) including image auto trackgates, T ADS reticle, and TADSIIHADSS grey scale. In addition, theSYM GEN performs self-tests on a

    continuous basis. Aircraft system fault sensorsMultiple fault sensors locatedthroughout the aircraft are integral tothe FD/LS system. Multiplex system data busManner by which elements ofFD/LSdata are transmitted to the FCC indigital form.

    The FD/LS provides in-flightgo/no-go status of mission essentialand flight critical systems as follows:

    ~ ' N ? t l n i W ' i V l h i ' .VIDEO DISPLAYS HODHODIHAOSSAIRCRAFTSUBSYSTEMSMRTUS

    SYMBOLGENERATOR FCC

    AIRCRAFTFAULT

    SENSORS

    FIGURE 5. Fault detectlon/locatlon system Interactive system devices

    -:6: : j ! )PILOTs FIRE CONTROL PANEL -:.- (Q, .9l ; e 1!'@ . ;;:-:. 0 _ _ -.- t ~ 9'

    FIGURE 6 Fault detectlon/locatlon system Video sWltchology

    19

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    22/48

    FD/LS video switchology, figure 6, enables the FD/LS to displayinitial and continuous monitor of detected failures or keyboard initiateddisplays/messages . This will occurwhen the CPO fire control symbol

    DATA ENTRYFOILS~ C O O lST8Y TRGTOFF SF'!

    B ~ 0660G D ~oEJGI+ CL O '1 ENlO8KSP ~ SPACE

    generator (FC SYM OEN) switch isset to the SYM OEN position or theCPO T ADS switch is set to either theforward looking infrared (FLIR)OFF or the T ADS position. In addition to this the CPO IHADSS switch

    " ~ COOlo ST l y TGTOU s"

    r AILED SUBSYSTEM;__________ ...JNO -GO

    A J ( E Q ~ U = s ~ Y jNO -GO

    FIGURE 7' Fault detectlonllocatlon system continuous monitor failure callup .

    .. . COOl

    S ' IY TGT

    0" S',

    ENTRSPACE

    ANY KEY fOR fOlS MENU

    13 SYMG 17 APU14 TAOS 18 GEN15UTIL 19 TRAN16HE

    FIGURE 8. Fault detectlonllocatlon system keyboard Initiated tests .

    20

    I 1lJ

    is set to the IHADSS position. The CPO will be able to viewboth continuous monitor detectedfailure indications and keyboard initiated displays/messages. The pilotwill be able to view only initial contin-

    -EN TRSPACE

    {AILED SUBSYSTEM i__________NO GO

    ANY KEY FORFOLS MENU

    01 ADS 05 HARS 09 PNVS020ASE 061HDS 10 PYlN03 DICE 07 MSl II RKT04 GUN 08 MUX 12 STAB

    APUTEST IN PROGRESS

    U.S. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    23/48

    uous monitor detected failure indications with the pilot's video select(VID SEL) switch in pilot. I f he pilotplaces his VID SEL switch in CPO, hewill see what the CPO is viewing. FD/LS continuous monitorfailure callup, figure 7; if a failure isshown on the CPO's TADS orIHADSS it displays as the word

    "FDLS" alternating with the sensorselected message, to check for systemno-go status, theCPO will proceed asfollows:(1) Position the selector switchonthe data entry keyboard to the FDILSposition. The symbology will blankand up to two failed systems can bedisplayed at one time.(2) I f two systems are displayed,press the ENTR SPACE key to scrollthe display to enable other failed systems to be displayed. Continue toscroll the display until the message"ANY KEY FOR FDLS MENU" isdisplayed. This indicates all continuous monitor failures have been displayed. I f the ENTR SPACE key is

    pressed again, the failure call-outswill be repeated.Return the data entry keyboard selector switch to the STBY position.This resets the FDILS and allowssymbOlogy to be displayed. FD/LS, keyboard initiated system tests, figure 8, verify the

    go/no-go status of the LRUs of agiven system. The LRUs of systemsnumbered 01 to 19 in the figure can betested. The main transmission andengine nose gearbox temperatureandpressure absolute values also can becalled up for display, while theend-to-end test will verify the statusof all monitored LRUs.

    FD/LS keyboard initiatedtests; when a system LRU statusneeds to be verified, or a failed LRUwithin a no-go system needs to beidentified, proceed as follows:

    (1) Position the selector on thedata entry keyboard to the FD/LSposition. The symbology will blankand the message "ANY KEY FORFDLS MENU" will be displayed af-

    ter all system no-gos have beenscrolled.(2) When onedataentry keyboardkey (0-9 or CLR/BKSP) is pressed,the first half of the FD/LS menu willbe displayed.(3) Press the ENTR SPACE key to .scroll the menu to display the secondhalf of the menu.(4) Select the system to be testedand enter the appropriate numbercode for that system. Observe thenumber present for about 1 secondprior to the test starting. The systemwill automatically perform the testand announce failed LRUs on thedisplay.Return the data entry keyboard selector switch to the STBY position. Thiswill reset the FD/LS, blank theFD/LS d i ~ p l a y and enable symbology to be shown.The aircrew and maintenance personnel are also part of the FD/LS.Faults/failures that can be isolatedand identified by observationare noton the aircraft FD/LS.

    photo by l . Thompson

    They're there but you can't see them . . . the caution/warning, FO/LS and multiplex systems.

    NOVEMBER 1987 21

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    24/48

    _ .",gt'UiW'Ii'lil'ZhU.SECONDARY

    MUX BUS

    REMOTE HElLfiREElECTRONICS

    fiRE CONTROL \COMPUTER" OASECOMPUTER

    IDASEC IRH fAB MRTU~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ & 4 ~ - - ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - -CPG REMOTE

    TERMINALIBBCI

    PYLON MRTU

    FIGURE g. Multiplex system

    (6 Q 8 O ' 8DC0)

    CPG CIRCUITBREAKER PANEL

    MRTUCIRCUIT BREAKERS

    MULTIPLEXCONTROL SWITCH

    CPG FIRE CONTROL PANELFIGURE 10 Multiplex system controls and indicators .

    22

    Multiplex SystemThis system, figure 9, is a general

    purpose, electronic informationtransfer system. It provides a flexible,redundant interface between avionicand mission equipment intercon-nected with the MUX system. Also, itprovides for FD/LS signal routingand processing. The MUX system isdesigned with a 50 percent growth ca-pacity.The AH-64 system contains the

    following components: Dual (re-dundant) data buses; the primarydata bus is on the left side of the air-craft while the secondary data bus ison the right side.Located in the right forward avion-ics bay is the primary bus controller,the fire control computer.

    PRIMARY MULTIPLEXFAILURE INDICATORSCPG CAUTION ANDWARNING PANEL

    PILOT CAUTION ANDWARNING PANEL

    u.s .ARMY AVIATION DIGEST

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    25/48

    The BBC is the CPG's multiplexremote terminal unit. It is located inthe CPG's crewstation compartment.Location of other items is: SYMGEN-left forward avionics bay; remote HELLFIRE electronics-rightforward avionics bay; an MRTUright forward avionics bay; digitalautomatic stabilization equipment(DASE)-the aft avionics bay; pylonMRTUs-each wing pylon.Data link terminal units are usedfor all connections to the data busthroughout the aircraft. Multiplex data bus, figure 10,consists of a low-loss, twisted,shielded pair of wires terminated ateach end for impedance matching.Data transfer can be in either direction on the data bus, but in only onedirectionat a time (half duplex). Timedivision multiplexing allows transmission of signals to more than oneunit over one data bus line by staggering the time sequence of the signals.All connections to the data bus usea small shielded, data-link terminalunit; these provide impedance matching and short-circuit isolation.Operation of the MUX system isautomatic, being activated when ex-ternal power is applied to the aircraftor at least one generator is on line.The primary multiplex (PRIMUX) segment light on both C/ Wpanels will illuminate when thebackup bus controller has determined that the FCC has failed and theBBC has assumed control of the bus.I f the FCC regains control, the PRIMUX light will go out. The MUXcontrol switch allows the CPG to select the PRI data bus or the SEC databus . Placing this switch in the SECposition disables the PRI MUX caution light and commands the BBC toassume control.Each multiplex remote terminalunit is protected by individual circuitbreakers on the CPG's panel.The PRI bus controller is in theFCC and it controls all transmissionson the PRI data bus during normaloperations. Using addressed command words, it communicates indi-

    NOVEMBER 1987

    vidually, with each MRTU, the remote HELLFIRE electronics, theSYM GEN and the DASE computer.The BBC monitors the PRI buscontroller during normal operations.It automatically assumes bus controlon sensing a FCC failure or loss ofdata transmissions on both databuses for a specified time . The CPGcan select the BBC as the active buscontroller by placing the MUX switchon his fire control panel to the SECposition.MRTUs are used to interface theMUX system with the selected aircraft subsystems or components.Each MRTU can detect 95 percent ofthe faults within itself, and performfault isolation tests on command.A video display unit receives datafrom the FCC via the MUX data bus.This provides the AH -64 with a veryflexible primary flight instrument,since the symbology can be changedor updated by software modifications.The SYM GEN receives missionequipment status, video switching information and FD/LS informationvia the MUX data bus; this data canbe displayed on the IHADSS and theTADS.A remote HELLFIRE electronicsunit receives missile status, launchererrors and T ADS and laser data viathe MUX data bus. It outputs missilecommands, display data and FD/ LSdata.The DASE computer receives airdata sensor and heading attitude reference system information via theMUX data bus and functions as theMRTU for the aft avionics bay area.

    I f an MRTU or other MUX systemcomponent does not respond correctly on the PRI data bus, the primary bus controller will select the secondary data bus to communicatewith the failed unit only. All othertransmissions will stay on the PRIdata bus.Should the FCC be unable to communicate with a unit on either databus, it will take appropriate action,such as displaying a subsystem failstatus. The FCC's internal software

    programing selects the appropriatedisplay.When the BBC assumes bus control, it will communicate with theMRTUs and the MUX system components on the same data bus that theFCC was using when it failed or relinquished control. All system components respond on the same data bustha t they receive their commands. I f asystem component fails to respond,the BBC will switch the data bus tothat component. I f the componentstill does not communicate, the BBCwill take appropriate action.When the FCC is able to assumedata bus control and is capable ofnormal operation, the BBC will relinquish control upon receipt of a validsignal from the FCC.

    This sixth article in the series hascovered capabilities and characteristics of the AH -64A Apache's subsystems of caution/warning, faultdetection/location and multiplex systems. The next article will address theelectrical, digital automatic stabilization equipment and utility systems.

    ABOUT THE AUTHORSMr. Ron Brunelle Is responsible forthe design, development andpresentation of the Apache alrcrewtraining courses as well as for definingtraining device requirements,specifications, modifications andimplementation.He has more than 20years of experience In aviation,including an instructional backgroundIn both the flight simulators andclassroom environment. He is retiredfrom the U.S. Navy and Is a privatepilot. Since joining McDonnell DouglasHelicopter Company in 1984, Mr.Brunelle has held poSitions In alrcrewtraining and trainer engineering.Mr. Ray E. Deyo has been responsible

    for managing AH-64A Apache advancedprograms since October 1982. Theseresponsibilities Include applications ofthe Apache to customers other than theU.S. Army, both domestically andInternationally, as well as managingthose development programs that willresult In future Improvements to theApache. He has 28 years' service withMcDonnell Douglas HelicopterCompany and its predecessors,including duties In contractsmanagement and ordnance programmanagement.

    23

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    26/48

    u.s. ARMY

    ..Directorate ofEvaluation/Standardization 5

    REPORT TO THE FIELD AVIATIONSTANDARDIZATION

    Aviation Standardization and TrainingSeminars-May 1987Mr. Bill Weber

    Directorate of Evaluation and StandardizationU.S. Army Aviation Center

    Fort Rucker, AL

    The Directorate of Evaluation and Standardization (DES) has been conducting Aviation Standardization and Training Seminars (ASTS) since July1983. During this timeframe, the ASTS team hasvisited virtually every aviation unit in the world. Theteam has surfaced and resolved many issues thatwere brought to our attention by the participatingunit. Until recently, we have had no way of answering similar questions raised by other units prior totheir assistance visit. We hope to rectify this problem through the A viation Digest.

    Once per quarter, we will select issues from recentASTS visits and publish them here. This will enhance the information exchange between the Aviation Center and the field. We at DES are here toserve Army Aviation and you, the Army aviator. I fyou have any questions about these issues and theirresponses, please contact the Evaluation Divisionofthe Directorate ofEvaluation and Standardization,ATTN: ATZQ-ESE, Ft. Rucker, AL 36362-5216,or call AUTOVON 558-4691/6571.

    24

    Line 5of heDA Form 759 requires that the individual fill in his grade, branch and component.What should a warrant officer list as his officialbranch and component?

    The official branch designation is Aviation (AV)and the component designation is either RA, USARorNG.

    In the new "J" series table of organization andequipment (TOE), the technical inspector (TI) slotsarenotmeeting the needs of he units. When a unithas more than one type aircraft, they need morethan one TI. Since the 66military occupational specialty (MOS) is divided by specific aircraft, can a66Vinspecta UH-J Hueyora66Ninspectan OH-58Kiowa? What does a unit do i f heir only TI is sick,on leave, TD Y or in the field? Can the commanderdesignate in writing someone to perform TI dutiesor can he have another 66MOS conduct the inspection?

    The regulation does not prohibit the commanderfrom designating anyone on unit orders to performTI duties. It is assumed, however, that the commander would designate someone with extensivetraining and experience on that particular aircraft.AR 611-201, "Enlisted CMF and MOS," dated 1March 1986, states that a TI, MOS 66-, is qualifiedto perform TI duties on his/her particular aircraft.

    U.S. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    27/48

    - - -

    Therefore, he should not perform TI duties on otheraircraft. Should a situation exist where only one TIofa particular MOS is assigned, and that TI is absentfor whatever reason, the unit should call on its supporting or supported unit for TI assistance. This is-sue is currently being staffed at Ft. Eustis, VA, concerning the restrictive nature of the 66 MOS. Whenstaffing is complete and the issue resolved, the official response will be distributed to all aviation unitsworldwide.

    A school, such as the Basic NoncommissionedOfficer Course (BNCOC), needs to be developed totrain 93P E5 and E6 level soldiers. Are there anyplans to open such a school?I fnot, why not?

    A plan to establish a resident and nonresident 93PE5/E6 BNCOC has been developed and was imple-

    mented on 311uly 1987, at Ft. Rucker, AL. Questions pertaining to this course should be directed tothe Directorate of Enlisted Training, ATTN:ATZQ-DET, Ft. Rucker, AL 36362.

    HQDA message, DAMO-ZA, dated 171450Z'January 1984, subject: Night Vision Goggles (NVG) Training/Operations and Pilot in Command Qualifications and Selections, states that thePIC board will consist ofas aminimum one standardization instructor pilot/ instructor pilot, onesafetyofficerandonePIC. WillAR95-1 be changedto reflect this message?

    The referenced message was rescinded by DAmessage 042121 Z February 1987, subject: StatusofDA Standardization and Training Messages(01-87). AR 95-1, paragraph 3-20.1a applies. ~DES welcomes your inquiries and requests to focus attention on an area of major importance. Write to us at: Commander, U.S. Army Avi

    ation Center, ATTN: ATZQ-ES, Ft. Rucker, AL 36362-5000; or callus at AUTOVON 558-3504 or Commercial 205-255-3504. After duty hourscall Ft. Rucker Hotline, AUTOVON 558-6487 or Commercial 205-255-6487 and leave a message.

    u.s. Army Class A Aviation Flight MishapsFlying Hours Total Cost

    Number (estimated) Rate Fatalities (in millions)FY 87 (through 31 October) 3 132,404 2.27 4 $10.1FY 88 (through 31 October) 2 132,404 1.51 1 $2.6

    NOVEMBER 1987 25

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    28/48

    AVIATION PERSONNEL NOTES

    Engineering Test Pilot (ETP)A concerted effort is being made to develop a viable ca

    reer program for Army Aviation engineering test pilots(ASI 3P).There have been some problems in the past concerning career managmentiprogression of these highlyspecialized aviators. Part of he solution to past problemsincludes ensuring a feasible grade structure and implementation of a viable career track that ensures all ETPsare branch qualified. The Engineering Test Pilot Program is being incorporated in to the Army Aviation Personnel Plan. Army aviators interested in the Army Aviation Engineering Test Pilot Training Program areadvised to review DA Circular 351-87-1, dated 15 March1987.Revised Career Management Under TWOS

    Questions continue to arise about the status of the Total Warrant Officer System (TWOS) proposal to managewarrant officers by years of warrant officer service(WOS) rather than by years of active Federal service(AFS).

    The Army Chiefof Staffexpressed his support for thisimportant feature of TWOS. When the appropriatechanges to current personnel management policy are approved later this year, yearsojAFSwillno longer be con-sidered in career management decisions affecting warrant officer schooling, promotions, assignments andretirement.

    Under TWOS, warrant officers will be managed by 'years of WOS. Management by WOS means the person-

    26

    nel management clock will be reset to zero when an enlisted soldier is appointed a warrant officer. This will enable each individual to retain seniority for pay andretirement, while affording him or her the opportunity toserve a full 30 years as a warrant officer, or until reachingmandatory retirement age.

    Currently, othe r than Regular Army (OTRA) warrantofficers are released from Active Duty upon completionof 20 years AFS. Under revised career management procedures, promot ion to CW3 normally will occur at theeighth year of WOS. This means that enlisted personnelwho become warrant officers with 12 or more years ofAFS will have to be continued on Active Duty beyondtheir 20th year ofAFS in order to compete for promotiontoCW3.

    Once TWOS is fully implemented, warrants will be required to integrate into the Regular Army upon promotion to CW3. Warrant officers promoted to CW4 couldserve at least 24 years of WOS under proposed policychanges. Warrants selected for training and use as masterwarrant officers (MWOs) would have the oppor tunity toserve a full 30-year warran t officer career. Nonselectionfor MWO will not constitute a passover or require separation prior to the 24th year of WOS under the proposedpolicy.

    I f hese changes are confusing, two examples may helpillustrate how the revised career management will work.

    In the first example, SOT Smith has 4 years AFS whenhe is appointed a warrant officer. He can expect to be promoted to CW2 after 2 years (6 years AFS). In his eighth

    U.S. ARMY AVIATION DIGEST

  • 8/22/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Nov 1987

    29/48

    year of WOS (12 years AFS), he should be promoted toCW3 and mandatorily integrated into the RegularArmy .Promotion to CW4 normally would occur at Smith's14th year ofWOS (18 years AFS) and would enable himto serve up to 24 years of WOS (28 years AFS). If Smith islater selected to be a MWO, he will be permitted to serveup to 30 years of WOS by deferring his retirement to 34years ofAFS. I fnot selected for MWO, Smith would facemandatory retirement at 24 years WOS.

    In the second example, SFC J ones is appointed with 14years AFS. As an OTRA warrant officer, J ones will needto continue beyond 20 years AFS in order to compete forpromotion to CW3 and mandatory RA intergration inhis eighth year of WOS (22d year of AFS). Jones normally would be promoted to CW4 in his 14th year ofWOS (34 years of AFS). Jones' retirement points wouldbe adjusted to permit him to complete 24 years WOS as aCW4 and 30 years WOS as a MWO (or until age 62,whichever occurs first).

    These proposed policy changes are being reviewed bythe Army staff. Major commandswill be given an opportunity to comment on the proposed changes before theyare sent to the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel,Headquarters, Department of the Army, for approval.

    FAA Form 8500-9The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) nolonger requires Active Duty military air traffic controllers to obtain a Class 2A medical certificate (FAA Form8500-9, Medical Certificate).All air traffic controllers will still be required to pass anannual Class 2A medical examination. However, controllers will not be issued an FAA Form 8500-9. The flightsurgeon will issue a recommendation for flying duty, DAForm 4186; and a copy of this form, once approved, willbe attached to the controllers' training records at the airtraffic control facility.

    ASI Q8 (Tactical Air Operations)A recent revision to AR 611-201 now authorizes the use

    of additional skill identifier (ASI) Q8 (tactical air operations) with military occupational specialty (MOS) 93P.The ASI will be used to identify positions that require soldiers trained in the use of close air support, tactical airliftand tactical air reconnaissance in support of joint operations using ground and tactical air units . To qualify foraward ofASI Q8, the soldier must have successfully completed the Joint Firepower Control Course, U.S. AirForce Air Ground Operations School, Hurlburt Field,FL. The ASI will be used to identify operations sergeant

    NOVEMBER 1987

    and assistant operations sergeant positions in attack battalions, air cavalry squadrons and aviation brigades.Change to ASI W5 AH-64/0H-58 Maintenance

    The requirement to have AH-64 training prior to attending training for ASI W5 has been dropped for MOS68B, 68D and 68F. Since the 0 H -58D is not presently programed to be fielded with the AH-64, the prerequisitetraining no longer applies. OH-58D training was pulledou t ofthe 35K, Avionic Mechanic, and 35R, Avionic Special Equipment Repairer courses due to the small numberof OH-58Ds being fielded. The avionic training will beconducted as an AS! course and AS! W5 awarded to successful graduates at Ft . Gordon, GA.

    Consolidation of MOS 68J and 68MIn July 1987, a proposal to combine MOS 68J, Aircraft

    Fire Control Repairer, and 68M, Aircraft Weapons System Repairer, was approved by the Deputy ChiefofStafffor Personnel. The proposal eliminates 68M as an MOSand es


Recommended