Announcement

Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

DAPs in regular AA units

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DAPs in regular AA units

    I heard one of the cadre at Ft Rucker talking about air assault units going to one MH-60 DAP per company. He wasn't saying this in any official capacity. Just something he had heard, although he was very experienced. That would be freakin' awesome since I'll probably never get to fly attack any other way. But, to me, it sounded like a bunch of BS.

    Do LTC Richey or any other knowledgable aviatio gurus know anything about this?

  • #2
    Re: DAPs in regular AA units

    Haven't heard this specific rumor, but have heard similar talk in the past. Don't know that this is anything actually in the works. Wouldn't surprise me if something like that eventually happened, but would not expect it any time soon, and guard would get it way later.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: DAPs in regular AA units

      I'm sure you're right. It's like winning the lottery... The odds are pretty bad, but it gives you something to dream about.

      About the Guard though, we had Mike models 2 years ago, which is probably sooner than 95% of active units.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: DAPs in regular AA units

        I get 160th, but I'm not sure beyond that.

        Attack guys spend a lot of time maintaining that skill set in addition to operating the aircraft. Doing that on a part-time basis is already a very difficult challenge.

        I assume lift guys have to spend some time practicing their missions, to include the state missions, plus staying ahead of the airframe. Adding the technical and tactical aspects of gunnery it a whole lot to deal with. I'm not sure that makes a whole lot of sense in the active duty perspective, much less guard/reserve.

        Also, I know DAP is convertible, but not sure if that's a positive impact alongside the state mission requirements. Which means there won't be political pressure to make it happen - as opposed to Mike models & more units.

        I'm not against it. I certainly get that it'd be cool. I just don't know if it brings a lot to the table. Way above our paygrade though.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: DAPs in regular AA units

          For the sake of conversation...

          Everything you are saying makes sense. However, doesn't it pose the question why any Guard units have Apaches?

          If you're going to convince your state legislature to spend money on military aircraft, wouldn't you want the most versatile aircraft for the dual mission (blackhawk)? 64's can't rescue flood victims or move the governor around or airlift civilian materiel. If a contingency call for Apaches, then AD could send them, but if your state is flooded a 64 is useless.

          Yet so many states have them. Their guys practice the fine art of gunnery and do all those things you named. In my mind, it seems like they should dedicate the 64's to active duty where there is no dual mission and leave the less lethal flexibility to the Guard.

          P.S. What about mini guns? Just kidding

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: DAPs in regular AA units

            Seriously, Apache units bring a whole lot of money to the state, a big chunk of which is stripped off to prop up other types of units. Plus they look cool flying over a stadium!

            Any part-time flying can be a challenge. Staying on top of any mission skill set in addition to that is a full schedule. I don't think the attack skill set is necessarily any harder than the lift/evac/state mission skill set. I think they both take a lot of effort to maintain. I just don't think it's reasonable to try to keep up with both at the same time & still master the aircraft. It's hard enough to PC when you're only flying a couple three times a month. I think it's a bit much for active duty even.

            160th, they don't have apaches, so it's common support of an airframe they do have in a unit that has to be able to support tight logistics in small packages. You have to figure some of their guys are coming over from attack. And I'm guessing they fly exclusively attack with that platoon. That seems more workable.

            Don't get me wrong, it's a cool platform. I just don't see why it's essential to field that versus having an Apache escort. If it's a coordination thing, maybe it makes more sense to get attack Bns lined back up with their respective CABs for deployments.

            Comment

            Working...
            X