Click here to close
New Message Alert
List Entire Thread
Msg ID: 2559277 Army Flight Training +1/-1     
Author:Just me.....
3/9/2019 10:47:35 AM

https://www.thebalancecareers.com/becoming-an-army-helicopter-pilot-3345045

 



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559283 Army Flight Training +29/-7     
Author:FlyArmy
3/9/2019 1:15:44 PM

Reply to: 2559277

The U.S. Army produces the world‘s best and most competent helicopter pilots. They fly the most advanced helicopters in the most demanding environments on the planet. God bless these men of courage and virtue!



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559285 Army Flight Training +9/-11     
Author:sure
3/9/2019 2:20:10 PM

Reply to: 2559283

oh brother



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559286 Army Flight Training (NT) +4/-7     
Author:I laughed so hard I puked!!
3/9/2019 2:21:00 PM

Reply to: 2559283


Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559287 I'm sure mom's on the way with a bucket (NT) +12/-0     
Author:and a mop...it's all good.
3/9/2019 2:30:03 PM

Reply to: 2559286


Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559295 Army Flight Training +8/-1     
Author:Why believe
3/9/2019 4:25:33 PM

Reply to: 2559283

otherwise?  

Truth be told Army pilots are competent but all the rah rah about they being the best should be left to real experience with other helicopter pilots from a world sample. 

Having done that US Army pilots are competent, but not necessarily the best though high on the list.  



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559309 Army Flight Training +5/-2     
Author:Anonymous
3/9/2019 7:40:21 PM

Reply to: 2559295

Ask units receiving students out of Rucker the past 2 years since they started the Lakota program (a complete re-write of the old TH-67/OH-58 version of Primary/Instruments/BWS)... Rucker used to put out students who were competent, almost PIC capable in their single engine trainer but now units are getting students who are incompetent co-pilots in any aircraft.  

 



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559325 Army Flight Training +2/-2     
Author:Hes right you know
3/9/2019 9:01:10 PM

Reply to: 2559309

it’s disturbing the quality of a pilot leaving Rucker. Complete garbage , zero air sense and don’t take one in the clouds . They are useless , my 5 year old is s better Instrument pilot ! 



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559651 Army Flight Training +0/-0     
Author:I sure
3/11/2019 7:53:06 PM

Reply to: 2559325

hope you guys are feeding this back to Rucker.  Army pilots cannot afford to be sub par, especially with the high competition for pilots throughout the industry and military.



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559649 Army Flight Training +1/-0     
Author:Interesting feedback.
3/11/2019 7:51:06 PM

Reply to: 2559309

My thoughts on that move to the  72  was they were presenting far too much for the student to develop intrinsically helicopter required skills because the students could fall back on the 'we got two engines, so who cares', or whatever excuse the curriculum inadvertently engenders.

Helicopters are helicopters.  In all education or training one starts at the bottom, where the fundamentals live.

Very naive move, going to the 72 for ab initio training.



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559695 Army Flight Training +0/-0     
Author:real world
3/12/2019 9:05:59 AM

Reply to: 2559649

They are training pilots for the Army. For the job that the Army needs them to do. Not for their follow-on civilian careers.

The basic piston engine skills you're referring to would be "nice," but I'm sure the Army has run the numbers and the training time required to teach skills with little to no relevance in their current fleet doesn't make sense. They did a similar thing with autorotations beyond primary some years back. The need for touchdown skills was so rare that the wear & tear and additional training required didn't make sense. So, the Army says, "So we lose a crew once in awhile. And?"

So, recent Army pilots transitioning to the civilian world will probably need some remedial flight training to fill those gaps. Oh well. I'm sure you can teach them.



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559725 Army Flight Training +0/-1     
Author:Anonymous
3/12/2019 11:57:21 AM

Reply to: 2559695

You don't understand... for the past 2+ years students haven't done a VMC approach to the ground until they get to 85-90 hours.  I'm not joking- every approach was VMC to a hover, then set down.  It was building a fear of the ground all because of possible Mast Moment exceedances (unique to the EC145/135) were more feared by the IPs than teaching to standard.  

Students weren't even doing run-on landings until recently (and were afraid of doing them when an IP chose to demo it).  

Students had zero air awareness even with a moving map available, IPs doing all the radio calls for them, etc.  We're talking basic Aviate, Navigate, Communicate stuff here.  This has nothing to do with a career down the road (and I'd be VERY cautious about getting a recent Rucker flight graduate for all you guys that may see them in the National Guard and trying to fly on the outside).  The Active Duty guys are pulling their hair out having to retrain them because of the stupidity of the "new" program they came up with for the Lakota.  Lots of bad habits have been built.



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559335 Army Flight Training +7/-1     
Author:64-2W
3/9/2019 10:01:07 PM

Reply to: 2559283

At one time I would agree with you but not anymore.  They definitely cannot think in a single pilot environment and you can forget autorotations.  

I was forced to train a man and at 25 hrs he could not complete a successful autorotation.  He was one of those that should never have been allowed near a helicopter.

He also thought flying 400 hrs in a year was a lot of time. HAHAHA



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559419 Army Flight Training +0/-0     
Author:plopter
3/10/2019 12:33:26 PM

Reply to: 2559283

As en ex Navy and Coast Guard helicopter pilot, I respectfully beg to differ.



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559331 Army Flight Training +7/-4     
Author:I've flown with them all
3/9/2019 9:34:52 PM

Reply to: 2559277

I've been flying for 29 years, and I've trained, evaluated, checked, taught, and flown with pilots from every branch of the service. I can say that there are good and bad pilots from every service branch. I've flown with some who were terrible and should never even be near a helicopter, much less fly one and be a PIC.

The Army guys tend to be the cockiest helicopter pilots because they have been told from day 1 that ,they are the greatest, think Nicholas Cage in Firebirds. Many of them just can't back up the BS bravado. I have also flown with some Army pilots who also could back up that reputation and then some. Some of my best friends are Army pilots too, and I love to fly with them. Most of all of the W-4's and W-5's are extremely skillful and knowledgeable. It's the W-2's and W-3's that often don't know what they don't know. I'm always leary when I have to fly and train with those guys.

 

 

 



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559339 Get over yourself Nickolas wannabe, Firebirds (NT) +0/-1     
Author:Was a failed attempt at Top Gun
3/9/2019 10:05:42 PM

Reply to: 2559331


Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559341 Army Flight Training +0/-1     
Author:OCONUS IP
3/9/2019 10:13:28 PM

Reply to: 2559331

What he said!  BTDT too.  I'm now working overseas as a contact !P with others from all over the western world.  Some are good, some aren't, and that funny part is the worst ones are the guys who talk the most about how "special"they are, for some reason they seem to mostly be from the UK.  The pilots we instruct and evaluate are not western and about 10% would be decent, some even good, by western standards.  So boys, it's all relative and it could be worse!

As for the whole Nichols Cage "Firebirds" thing, I will say as a career USA guy I never ran across anyone close to that "character."  I ran across some pilots who should have NEVER graduated flight school and been sent to an active duty unit and I ran across some real selfish d-o-u-c-h-e-bags, but never in my 25 years someone like the Cage character.  There were plenty of guys who seemed to think the were the best thing since sliced bread and often BSed each other about such things, but my experience was that all pretty much melted away after folks went down range..... 



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559343 Army Flight Training +11/-0     
Author:Must be the new Army
3/9/2019 10:18:18 PM

Reply to: 2559331

Been out awhile, but the Army used to be pretty good at keeping pilots humble. As good as can be expected, anyway, starting with the personality type needed to make a decent combat pilot. Began from day one at flight school and continued throughout my career. Army pilots aren't big shots outside their very small world and Big Army isn't bashful about reminding them of that.

I wouldn't make the claim that Army pilots individually are "the best," but I'd challenge you to name another flight training program that has more experience producing professional helicopter pilots. They probably have a pretty good idea by now what kind of candidate will be successful and they probably have an idea about the most efficient way to get there. I'd wager that, over time, they turn out a consistently higher percentage of good helicopter pilots than anybody else. I can't think of who'd be a close second. They know what works.



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559356 They did know, but now have forgotten.. (NT) +0/-1     
Author:Hopeless
3/10/2019 1:36:11 AM

Reply to: 2559343


Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559360 the problem with the army is +1/-5     
Author:Anonymous
3/10/2019 5:39:56 AM

Reply to: 2559356

they always have to bring things down to infantry speed and infantry ability to comprehend.

and then they wonder why pilots bail



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559399 the problem with the army is +11/-1     
Author:You!
3/10/2019 11:08:24 AM

Reply to: 2559360

For someone who claims to have been an army officer you don't show much understanding of how and why Army aviation exists. I agree that the Army trains the pilots to bring things down to infantry speed and infantry ability to comprehend. That’s because our primary job is to support the infantry.

It's a job that neither the Air Force or the Navy wants any part of. Why? As I recall the Air Force participated in a test program and decided that what the Army wanted was basically insane. You know the part about landing in a hot LZ in a vee of five formation with mortars being dropped on you and enemy fire from all four directions. I assume you know what I'm talking about because you've claimed on many occasions you were in Vietnam.

So if you really were an army pilot and I assume you went through the same training I did you already know why. Army aviation exists to provide transportation to a combat zone and supply the infantry (and anyone else who needs us) with whatever they need to successfully complete the mission.

You should know that training and familiarization with the troops really helps all to understand what is expected from aviation and of course what we can and cannot do. 

Your snide remark about the infantry gives one the impression that you think that they're stupid and slow. I don't believe that's true. I never have. It's also not a very smart thing to say. Maybe you were with a different army but the one I was in places a high value on the infantry. It may not have occurred to you but if and when you get shot down who the hell do you think is going to come along and save your sorry butt? That's right, the infantry. 

Maybe you should spend more time thinking about the drivel you post here although I doubt you'll ever do that because you have a propensity to run off at the mouth and overload this forum with your foolish nonsense in a vain attempt to get attention. 

Perhaps you've never heard the Army aviation motto which is "Above the Best."

I'm guessing you think that means you're are above the best and not in a good way.

You are not better than the infantry just because you are an Army aviator.

 



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559440 the problem with the army is (NT) +3/-0     
Author:Wow.
3/10/2019 2:05:04 PM

Reply to: 2559399


Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559756 the problem with the army is +0/-1     
Author:Point of order...
3/12/2019 1:30:44 PM

Reply to: 2559399

I flew in the Army for over 20 years and not once did I "provide transportation to the battlefield..."  I always flew attack helicopters, AH-1 and AH-64. Combat units, not combat support units. 



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2560593 the problem with the army is +0/-0     
Author:Sad
3/17/2019 6:07:34 PM

Reply to: 2559756

u never came down to where the real action resides.



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559792 the problem with the army is +2/-0     
Author:Yeup,
3/12/2019 8:04:24 PM

Reply to: 2559399

agree.  I did a tour in Vietnam and always considered myself just a part of the infantry equation.  



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2560522 Army Flight Training +1/-0     
Author:Try
3/16/2019 9:50:56 PM

Reply to: 2559343

a realistic survey of foreign training organisations both civil and military.  That'll give you a good reference rather than just having flown with military just in the United States ( I assume ).



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2559493 Army Flight Training +4/-0     
Author:"Don't know what they don't know"
3/10/2019 5:55:28 PM

Reply to: 2559331
Sounds like your referencing the medical personnel in HAA...


Return-To-Index