Army Aviation Digest - Mar 1992

7/28/2019 Army Aviation Digest - Mar 1992

1/68

~ " " " .- ' c l 1 ' , . " ~ ... -

. - , ~


2/68

AVIATJ 'N DIGEST

to Best

ATC Focus: ATC Maintenance AMF ToSoldiers' AH-1


3/68

Warfighter 6 Major General Dave Robinson

Aircrew CoordinationFor 50 years we have trained some

of the best pilots in the world. In earlier times, aviators were trained mostly for single-pilot operations. Flyingwas somewhat easy; the L-19 BirdDog and H-13 Sioux were forgivingaircraft, and the mostly daytime mission profiles were not too complex.Our standardization methods andcheckride regimes were single-pilotoriented. We retained this orientationwith the OH-58 Kiowa and the UH-lIroquois. As the fleet was modernizedwith AH-l Cobra, OH-58D, AH-64Apache, UH-60 Black Hawk, andCH-47 Chinook aircraft, single-pilotperspectives diminished. However,we had much to learn about crewoperations in a modernized fleet.Today, a single pilot's mentality runscounter to the demands of complex,combined arms mission profiles andthe high-technology systems weoperate and maintain.

Unfortunately, as tasks multipliedin the cockpit and environmentalhazards increased, so did our accidentrate. As early as 1973, the U.S. ArmySafety Center identified problems inthe ability of crewmembers to coordinate their actions. In a subsequentstudy of Class A aircraft accidentsfrom 1983 to 1989, crew coordinationfailures steadily increased primarilybecause of more complex missionprofiles and expanding night flyingrequirements.A recent example of thisphenomenon is Operation DesertStorm. Only 17 percent 'of our flyingwas done at night, yet 68 percent of

r o t ~ r y - w i n g accidents occurredduring the hours of darkness. Most ofthese accidents involved aircrew coordination failures. Why? There is

strong evidence that peripheral visionis involved. During day operations,we have full vision capabilities. Atnight, our vision is limited peripherally, and important cues are missed. Aswe operate closer to the groundwithout sufficient visual cues, crewcoordination becomes essential.When operating complex missionequipment packages in demandingoperational environments, two sets ofeyes and the brain power of two individuals is much better than one.So how do we improve crew coordination? For many years, mostmilitary flight programs adoptedcivilian aviation's solution to theproblem-Aircrew CoordinationTraining (ACT) and CockpitResource Management (CRM) training. The ACT and CRM programswere developed for civil aviationsituations in which most of the mission profile was at high altitudes.Cooperation in the cockpit was basedon using crew discussion in thedecisionmaking process. While thisapproach has value, it only partly addresses the Army's tactical flyingneeds.Army Aviation's mission profilesare flown in the ground regime;obstacle hazards and the challenges ofpartial and sometimes total obscuration confront even the most capableaviator. In flight, decisions must bemade quickly, which calls for crewresponse to be nearly automatic.Many aviation field commandershave been working on crew coordination matters for sometime. Battlerostering an d special trainingprograms have been used in units.However, the Army has not institutionalized its concern for the total

U.S. Army Aviation Digest March/April1992

L19 Bird Dog

OH-13 Sioux

OH-58 Kiowa


4/68

UH-1 Iroquois (Huey)

AH-1 Cobra

AH-64 Apache

UH-60 Black Hawk

CH-47 Chinook

2

crew concept. In response to this need,the U.S. Anny Aviation Center hasbeen drawing on field experience, ourstandardization personnel, and infor-mation from other services to revisecompletely the aircrew training pro-gram. We recognize that good crewcoordination begins at the schoolhouse in primary training. Our train-ing philosophy has moved fromsingle-pilot operations to the totalcrew concept. This concept requireseveryone to be responsible for specifictasks and share in the total operationof the aircraft.

To do this, crew coordination re-quirements are being integrated intothe tasks, conditions, and standards ofthe aircrew training manuals. The goalis to take the guesswork out of dutyassignment. Each crewmember isresponsible for properly executing as-signed duties while understanding theactions and directives of the othercrewmembers. The new program alsostandardizes communication techni-ques to help eliminate ambiguity andconfusion in the cockpit.

While a certain degree offlexibility is justified by the fluid na-ture of tactical flying, standardizationis key to consistent behavior in thecockpit. We can no longer afford toassume that the other crewmembersknow what to do and when to do it.Assumptions to o often result incatastrophe.

Where do the subtle dimensions ofhuman behavior fit into the cockpitteam? We do not yet fully understand,nor do we have a vehicle to measurethe impact of personality on missionaccomplishment. We do know that tofacilitate cooperation and coordina-tion, commanders need to battle rostercrews. While many of you probablyjust cringed, battle rostering does notmean a crew must fly together everyflight. Keep in mind, however,familiarity with coworkers buildsstronger team ties and opens channelsof communication. Battle rosteringalso improves the crewmember's per-formance at a specific station.

As for risk management, a well-trained, cohesive crew will have a

much lower risk factor than a newlyformed or ad hoc crew, because com-munication breaks down the barriersthat inhibit effective cockpit coor-dination. There will be risk tradeoffsto deal with along this road of in-dividual, crew, and collective train-ing. Commanders will need to con-sider the added risk involved whenintegrating new crewmembers duringeither complicated missions or ad-verse environmental conditions.

Challenging and innovative train-ing is planned activity that focuses onteam performance. Don't limit yourconcept of a crew to jl!st the aviatorson board the aircraft. Crewchiefs,flight engineers, and aerial observersmust be a part of the training process,if crew coordination is to be op-timized. Crew coordination proce-dures must be implemented duringday operations first to expedite safelypositive habit transfer; this is thecrawl, walk, run approach to training.

Establish creative simulator train-ing programs to teach and confirmcrew coordination skills. Skilledstandardization instructors can learnmuch about a crew by watching crewdrills in the simulator. Crew skills inda y operations an d in the flightsimulator should be affirmed beforetaking on the more complex night en-vironment.

I am proud that Anny Aviation hasconsistently produced the best in-dividual helicopter pilots in the world.Without losing that individual ad-vantage, it is now time to developcrews with the same skill and exper-tise needed to match the complex re-quirements of our mission profiles.Synergism is the key--combining in-dividual elements to optimize their ef-fectiveness. By implementing crewcoordination training, we will becomesafer, more efficient, and more lethalwarfighters.

u.s. Army Aviation Digest March/April1992


5/68

VIEWS FRoM READERS

Editor:I read with great interest the ar-

ticle, "The Professional Noncommissioned Officer," in the Novem-ber/December 1991 issue of the U.S.Army A viation Digest. Congratula-tions to Captain Jennifer L. Peepleson being one of the first to identifythat, though we use the word"professionalism" in describing theNoncommissioned Officer (NCO)Corps, sociologists, and otherswithin academia do not.

In an articulate and concise piece,the author makes a strong case forinclusion of NCOs within the elitegrouping of officers, teachers, doc-tors, lawyers, and others recognizedas professionals.However, I have noticed thatsome sociologists add professionaljournals to their criteria for whatconstitutes professionalism. Suchpublications, open forums for the ex-change of ideas, are all common tothe groups listed above. Perhaps thatis why former Army Chief of StaffGeneral Carl E. Vuono made the es-tablishment of The NCO Journalsuch a high priority. In less than ayear, The NCO Journal has alreadymade a great impact on the U.S.Army as a whole, and broughtrenewed pride to an already distin-guished Corps of NCOs.

Hopefully, fine articles like "TheProfessional Noncommissioned Of-ficer," an d professional leaderdevelopment forums such as TheNCO Journal, will convince eventhose in ivory towers that we have an

NCO Corps that has not only earnedthe right to be called professionals,but sets the standards for profes-sionalism.

Colonel Fredrick E. Van HomCommandantU.S . Army Sergeants MajorAcademy

Fort Bliss, TX

Editor:The 1st Infantry Division 75th

Anniversary Commemoration andReunion will be held 7 and 8 June1992 at Fort Riley, KS. Formermembers of the Division interestedin participating may contact MajorWilliam B. McCormick, Public Af-fairs Officer, Building 405, 1st In-fantry Division (Mech) and FortRiley, Fort Riley, KS 66442-5000,phone DSN 856-3032 or commercial 913-239-3032.

Editor:The 41 s t Defense Working Group

of Nondestructive Testing (NDT)will be held 16 through 20 November 1992 at the Holiday Inn, Tucson,AZ. The working group is sponsoredby personnel assigned to the U.S.Air Force, Headquarters (HQ),Aerospace Maintenance andRegeneration Center (AMARC),Davis-Monthan Ai r Force Base(AFB), AZ.

The meeting is held annually foral l Department of Defense andGovernment activity participants

u.S. Army Aviation Digest MarchiApril 1992

who that have ND T responsibilities.The meeting has proven to be anexcellent vehicle for the exchange ofinformation, problem solving, anddiscussing new technology.

At this time, a call for paperspresenting an NDT problem or tech-nical paper by U.S. Government per-sonnel and approved by the SteeringCommittee is being put out. Pleasesubmit any abstracts for technicaland or NDT problem papers no laterthan 15 July 1992 to HQ, AMARC,Nondestructive Inspection Supervisor, ATTN: Mr. Paul Machado,Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ 85707-6201 , phone DSN 361-3670 or commercial 602-750-3670. Questionsalso should be directed to Mr.Machado.

Editor:I am one of those "well-intended"

Vietnam-era pilots who transportedcasualties but in a medical evacuation (MEDEVAC) aircraft.

Though obviously incountryduring a period of time that wasn'tclassified as "the bad 01' days," Dust-of f was available everywhere duringmy time incountry; therefore, "selftransport" of casualties was not re-quired.

I am not offended by CW4Tuttle's statement in his "Viewsfrom Readers" letter in the September/October 1991 issue of the U.S.Army Aviation Digest. (Note: CW 4Tuttle ' s letter responded to twoother "Views from Readers" letters;

3


6/68

VIEWS FROM READERS

i.e., Lieutenant Colonels Huether'sand Geiger's in the May/June 1991issue. Their letters were in responseto the article, "Armed OH-58DKiowa Warrior-The MUltipurposeLight Helicopter," in the November/December 1990 issue.) However, I do offer some Dustoff/MEDEVAC history that stateswhy some units transported casualties without calling Dustoff.

During the first 3 years or so ofthe V ietnam conflict, there were fewMEDEV AC aircraft incountry,much less located near the action.Dustoff existed, but out of place,from early 1962 until sometime in1965.

Early efforts by Captain (CPT)John Temperelli (commander, 1stAir Ambulance Detachment in Vietnam), Major (MAJ) Lloyd Spencer,MAJ Charles Kelly, an d MAJPatrick Brady, to name a few, werestifled by senior commanders. Commander Temperelli tried at everydoorstep to bring MEDEVAC to thevery location of hostilities and/or assaults. On several occasions, hevolunteered to accompany assaultsand was told "No."

On several occasions, other Armyaviators argued against dedicatingaircraft for MEDEVAC, and suggested putting removal red crosseson the MEDEV AC ai rcraft, whichwould allow them to be used forother missions. At on e point,MEDEV AC aircraft were cannibalized and parts used for slicks andguns. Fortunately, CPT Temperelliprevailed in his attempts to keepMEDEVAC a pure mission.

When the 57th Medical Detachment (MedDet) arrived incountry in1962, it had five UH-l A Hueyaircraft. Continued efforts failed in4

distributing these 5 aircraft to justth e right location to provideMEDEV AC. On one occasion,during a mission in the Delta, eventsturned sour. Four CH-21 Shawneeand one UH-IB were shot down.Repeated efforts by "slicks" to extract the wounded and downedaircrew were unsuccessful. The 57thMedDet was sitting in its assignedarea at Nha Trang, Vietnam, far tothe north. However, as the conflictwidened and more troops arrived incountry, senior commanders requested an d recei ve d moreMEDEV AC units.

In 1964, five more MedDetsreceived orders for Vietnam. InAugust 1965, an air ambulanceplatoon with 12 aircraft was assigned to the 1st Cavalry Division.They took the call sign"MEDEVAC," rather than Dustoff.In 1965 there were two more detachments assigned to Vietnam, eachwith six aircraft. The 498th MedicalCompany with 25 aircraft also arrived in Vietnam in 1965. The 45thMedical Company arrived in 1967with.25 aircraft assigned.

The MEDEV AC operated, if thatis appropriate to say, from 1962 to1965 with little assets and literallyno mission statement. During thisperiod of time, CW4 Tuttle is absolutely correct, self-transportationof casualties probably was a necessity. It was better to try and get theinjured to medical attention by anymeans. Without MEDEVAC assetsavailable, no other choice was available.

However, after 1967, MEDEV AC had grown into a single, dedicated business, dedicated to the ultimate mission of trying to save livesanywhere, anytime. Procedures,

mission statements, call signs, andfull support from senior commanders were in place. From thattime to the present, the mission ofmedical aircraft has continued to improve and grow.

MEDEVAC aircraft were not allowed to go into certain areaswithout "Cobras," to protect assets.As for that statement, "hot" areaswere established with protectiverules. That meant that some of theseareas were so "hot" that sending inan unarmed helicopter alone wasdisastrous. Depending on the natureof the area, guidance would dictatehow the MEDEVAC helicoptercrews reacted. For a short period oftime, the 45th Medical Companyhad a 10-grid square area that wasof f limits without gun cover. The45th Medical Company had literallyover 20 aircraft, in 20 days, shot upin this "hot" area. As conditions improved, this restriction was lifted.During another period of time, the45th Medical Company would notallow hoist missions to be performedwithout gun cover, fo r obviousreasons. The aircraft is extremelyvulnerable during hoist missions.This restriction, too, was lifted.

Naturally, some officers and evencommanders may be disgruntled atth e policies an d doctrine ofMEDEVAC. But, we must neverforget the early years, "the bad 01'days," and regress to 'some form ofoperation that has proved to be lessthan satisfactory. Less than satisfactory means loss of life or limb forsomebody.

Take offense? No. Learn something? Yes. Let the guns do gunwork. Let the observation aircraft doobservation. Le t the MEDEV ACaircraft do MEDEV ACs. Can some

u. S. Army Aviation Digest MarchIApril 1992


7/68

of the'se be combined? Probably.Doctrine will dictate this. Obviously, troop transportation, observation,and even some shooting can be donefrom the same aircraft. However, theUH-60 Black Hawk can't do whatthe AH-64 Apache can, nor viceversa.

Ask those who were lifted by us.And there were several lifted. Between May 1962 and March 1973,and estimated 850,000 to 900,000ca s ualties were trans ported byMEDEV AC. Especially after 1967,in most areas, standby crews ensuredthat literally no one was over 12 to15 minutes from a MEDEV AC

~ i r c r a f t . Leave MEDEV AC toMEDEV AC. Given the opportunity,we would be there.

Credit for the statistics must begiven to Mr. (formerly Major) PeteDorlan and Mr. James Nanney andtheir book titled, Dustoff, ArmyAeromedical Evacuation in Viet-nam.

CW4 Ronald H. Wells1255th Medical Company (Formerly 45th Medical Company)

Mississippi Army National Guard

Editor:The U.S. Army Field Artillery

School (USAFAS), Fort Sill, OK, isadding the USAFAS TargetingCourse to the list of fire supportprofessional development classes.The program of instruction for thecourse was developed through ajoint Field Artillery School and Intelligence Center effortwith additional supportfrom U .S. Air Force(USAF) and U.S. MarineCorps (USMC) liaisonpersonnel at Fort Sill.

The course is designedto train selected officersfrom all services on theU.S. Army targetingprocess and targeting

CLASS

2-923-921-932-93

team operations at division andabove levels. The course uses theArmy's targeting methodology of"decide, detect, and deliver" as thebasis for instruction. The intent is toproduce officers who areknowledgeable of Army tactics,techniques, and procedures, therebyenabling them to more effectivelysynchronize targeting in a joint warfighting environment.

The USAFAS point of contact iscurrently managing the class fillmanually. Requests for class seatreservations should be sent by letteror message to Commandant,USAFAS, ATTN: FSCAOD-WFD,Fort Sill, OK 73503-5000. The following infonnation is required: Fullname, rank, service, social securitynumber, security clearance verification, and duty position.

Resident class ins truction islimited to a maximum of 24 students. Student prerequisites for theinitial classes are Active Army Combined Arms and Services Staffgraduates, combat arms or combatsupport branch personnel assignedto or projected for targeting teamduties; USMC captains or officersabove that grade assigned to aMarine division or operational jointbillet; or USAF officer Air GroundOperations School graduates assigned to division or corps tacticalair control party or operational jointbillet. A SECRET CLEARANCE isrequired.

The USAFAS resident instructiontargeting course dates are as follows :

REPORT START END

141700JUN92 15 JUN 26 JUN021700AUG92 3AUG 14 AUG1817000CT92 19 OCT 30 OCT241700JAN93 25 JAN 5 FEB

Field Artillery Targeting Courseu.s.Army Aviation Digest March/April1992

Incoming students must report tothe USAFAC and Fort Sill BilletingOffice, Austin Hall , Building 5676,not later than report time above.Government meals and lodging areavailable. Th e course advancematerials will be provided uponsigning in.

The point of contact for the courseis Major Donald G. Oxford, DSN639 -5323/5194.

Editor:rI read with interest the article ,

"Aviation Logistics: Aviation Apprentice Mechanic Program, " bySergeant First Class Dennis Cary inthe September/October 1991 issueof the A viation Digest concerningthe concept of training an aviationmechanic in several disciplines. TheU.S. Coast Guard (USCG) aviationcommunity has, of necessity , "crosstrained" its mechanics for years. Anarmed service of the United Statessince 1790, it has always been small ,but efficient, and is one of the bestbargains the American taxpayer hasever received.I am an aviation electrician currently qualified on the HH-65A Dol phin helicopter, and am stationed atthe USCG Air Station Savannah ,Hunter Army Airfield (AAF) ,Savannah, GA. I usually troubleshoot electrical problems on theaircraft , but have helped changemain gearboxes, engine s, rotorheads , tail gearboxe s and rotorheads , hydraulic pumps, and otherengine and airframe items. I amqualified to inspect the repair workdone on practically any part of thehelicopter.

I am also a helicopter flightmechanic and hoist operator. Oursafety record is enhanced by the factthat we "fly 'em and fix ' em ." Amechanic who must fly on theaircraft he just fixed has quite anincentive to do a quality job. Most

5


8/68

VIEWS"FROM READERS

Coast Guard HH-65A air stationshave a "helo shop" that employs atleast one of each aircraft "rate"military occupational specialty inaddition to the nonnal complementof engine and airframe rates. Thisallows an avionics technician to gettheir hands dirty on an enginechange, windshield replacement, tailrotor balance, etc. A metalsmith(sheetmetal shop worker) can impartknowledge concerning fuel cells,composites, proper hardware selec-tion and installation, and can gainknowledge about the powertrainsystems, etc. The electrician in thehelo shop can provide insight to theengine mechanics about systemsthat affect engine operation, and canacquire hands-on experience withthe engines and other systems.

The Coast Guard deploys HH-65A helos to Coast Guard cuttersthat have very l imited repairfacilities, and even less work roomonboard. The knowledge of each ofthe three deployed aircrews must bebroadly based for effective repairs tobe made on the helo and keep it in a"up" status during the deployment.The practice of getting everyone in-volved in maintenance pays handsome dividends. Many Coast Guardavionics and electrician techniciansacquire enough hands-on experiencein their first couple of years' servicethat they easily pass the airframe andpowerplant license examination, al-though their primary job ma y be"chasing trons."

The concept will work if it is al-lowed to work. Most people like the

idea of being multitalented, andtherefore able to make more of acontribution to the team. One reasonI joined the Coast Guard was so Iwould not be "straitjacketed" into anarrowly-focused job description. Iwill be more marketable on the out-side, and more useful to the teamwhile I remain in the service. Theinevitable arguments will emergeconcerning "dilution" of people'stalents, but that is a ~ m o ~ e s c r e e nagainst change.

Get on with improvement foryour people, and for your service.The climate for change is very goodnow, since downsizing will allow forinnovators to come forward andshow their wares. Keep your futurebright!

Petty Officer First Class David J.Kiser

USCG Air Station SavannahHunter AAFSavannah, GA

Editor:I am writing this letter in response

to a July/August 1990 "Views fromReaders" letter about why 93P Avia-tion Operation Specialists should beawarded the Aircraft CrewmanBadge.

(Editor's Note: Department ofthe Army and U.S. Total Army Per-sonnel Command messages aboutAircraft Crewman Badge initiallyappeared in the January/February1990 issue "Views from Readers"section.)

I disagree that anyone other thancrewchiefs, flight engineers, doorgunners, and aerial observers shouldwear or be awarded the badge. In allother services the badge is reservedfor flight crews only. It is only afterproper aircrew training that on eshould be awarded the badge. Otherground personnel have anotherbadge that recognizes their impor-tant job!

The Aircraft Crewman Badge isthe only one I know of that, to earnit, you simply have to complete advanced individual training with acertain military occupationalspecialty. This is like being assignedto an airborne unit and wearing jumpwings without ever going to jumpschool or having to jump out of anairplane.

SPC Brian CashmanCrewchief/GunnerH Company, 3d AviationAPONew York

Editor:From 19 through 20 June 1992,

the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment(Blackhorse) will hold its 23d Annual Reunion at Fort Knox, KY. Thereunion is open to all BlackhorseTroopers; commissioned, noncommissioned, warrant officer, and enlisted personnel for any period ofservice.

For additional information writeto Mr. Bi II Squires, Secretary,Blackhorse Association, P.O. BoxI I , Fort Knox , KY 40121 , or callcommercial 502-351-5738.

Readers can obtain copies of the material that is printed in any issue by writing to theEditor, U.S. Army Aviation Digest, AlZO-PAO-AD, Fort Rucker, AL 36362-5042.6 u. S. Army Aviation Digest MarchiApril 1992


9/68

TheARWhere We Are Going and How We Are Gett ing There!

On 13 February 1992,Lieutenant General DennisJ. Reimer, Vice Chief ofStaff of the Army, wasguest speaker to theAmerican HelicopterSociety, Fort Rucker, AL.This article includes ex-cerpts from that speech.

A rmy Aviation, an EssentialElement in Three WarsToday, once again we are theworld's preeminent military power.Our Atmy,_the Total Anny, hasbeen victorious in three wars in thelast 2 years: the Cold War, Operation Just Cause, and, of course, Operation Desert Stonn (ODS)-andAnny Aviation has been an essential element in those victories.Our Anny' s anned helicoptershave a proud history, from the UH-1 Huey gunships of the 1960s inVietnam to the venerableAH-l Co-

THE FORCETOTAL FORCE

IU",Il\la&. THE EDGEURCES

u. S. ArmyAviation Digest MarchiApril 1992

bras, OH-58D Kiowas, and AH-64Apaches in Just Cause and DesertStonn. Anny Aviation has played avital role in recent conflicts, contributing powerfully to the combinedanns fight.In our manuever-based doctrinethat pits strength against weakness,Anny Aviation gives us a significantadvantage in agility and in increasingthe operating tempo. It is an integraland critical part of our force in both acombat and a support role. This wasshown across the board during ODSwhere, for example, the Apache firedthe first shots of ODS as it lethallysurprised and eliminated Saddam' skey early warning nodes and openedthe door to Baghdad.Anny airpower went on to providethe decisive edge 'in the ground warand assure its role in the future. Weconducted warfare in anew, moreexact, more sophisticated way; weelevated it to the Ph.D. level, fightingin four dimensions. It was precise,swift, lethal, and overwhelming.Combat will never be the same. Onthe battlefields of tomorrow, thestrengths Anny Aviation brings tothe force will be even more important.

Enabling StrategiesThe six fundamental imperat ives- we must keep doctrine, quality people, training, force mix, modernization, and leader development

7


10/68

The ARMY

in balance-will remain our guide,but as leaders we must concentrateour efforts in four broad areas, enabling strategies, that encompass different aspects of the imperatives.

First, we must maintain the edge.America's Army must remain trainedand ready. We cannot rest on ourlaurels, nor can we cut back on theintensity of our training. It is thatintense training that gave us the edgein the Gulf and saved American lives.However, readiness is relative and amoving target. Our task is to reshapethe Army while maintaining readiness. The Army of today must beadequate to deter or defeat the threatsof the next century. And we mustensure that we continue to deny ourpotential adversaries the initiative at

any level of conflict. This requiresthat we push the standards of each ofthe imperatives forward across allaspects of the Army.

We have the technological advantage and it has paid off; we need tomaintain it. Given the coming constriction in resources, there is noelement in the overall defense effortmore important than an energeticand well-focused, long-term researchand development (R&D) program.We are seeing this played out in thenew budget.

We had planned to begin assembly-line production of the RAH-66Comanche helicopter in the next several years. The proposal now is thatthe program be limited to completion of a technical demonstration

model. This is today' s reality. I seethis as both a burden and an opportunity for our contractors. Industryneeds to build prototypes that are sosuperior and so convincing that theybuild the case for procurement. Thiswill benefit us all.

We also are seeing other initiatives such as our team in Europetalking with the Germans and theFrench about possible participationin the Comanche program. We maysee more of this in the future as welook for bigger production runs tokeep unit costs down and programsafloat.

A major concern in this area iscompensation for R&D. As DeputySecretary of Defense Donald J.Atwood explained during recent

Army Aviation has played a vital role in recent conflicts,contrlbuting powerfully to the combined arms fight.

8 u.s. Army Aviation Digest March/April 1992


11/68

budget hearings, the method of contracting with industry has either encouraged them or they've encouraged themselves to buy in on theR&D phase, always bettiI.lg in theback of their mind that they couldget well in production. We need tobe sure that when we contract withindustry on R&D programs that theyhave an opportunity to make an equitable return on their investmentand a reasonable profit.

Secondly, we must reshape theforce to best accommodate the national military strategy. We have aplan to reshape the force: Go fromthe 28 divisions that we had down to20 divisions; go from 1.5 millionpersonnel to 1 million uniformedpersonnel.

Our civilian strength will go fromapproximately 400,000 to 300,000.This is a tremendous amount ofchange. This will result in an ActiveComponent (AC) strength of 12 divisions and 535,000 personnel and aReserve Component (RC) strengthof 6 divisions and 550,000 personnel. Additionally, we will have 2cadre divisions; where they will behas not yet been determined. Thismix of forces will ultimately give usa solid Army to successfully protectthe vital interests of our nation.

Reconstitution will be required incase of the emergence of a majorthreat to our security. The same willbe necessary of our supporting industries. Fiscal realities will forcecorrectly sized production facilities,eliminating spare capacity for surge/mobilization requirements.

We will most likely have to relyon commercial industry. This requires planning to obtain components from commercial productionlines-meaning tomorrow's systemswill need to be designed with commercial parts. We are going to haveto work acquisition reforms to makethis happen.

Thirdly, we must ensure that weproperly provide resources for the

force. We have to put our money inthe places and activities that preserve quality and readiness. We havesome things that came out of ODSthat we must fix. And, we mustcontinue our modernization, although not in the same way we pursued it in the past. Ourcurrent budgetis about $70 billion. In the nearfuture the years are going to be difficult, and 1994 has not been decidedyet. I think it is important to note thatby 1995 only 16 percent of our Federal budget, 3.4 percent of our grossnational product (one third less thanthe world average), will go towardsdefense, the lowest since 1940. Weare going to have some significantchallenges in this area.

This means we are going to haveto do things smarter, better, andcheaper. .be more efficient-thistranslates into things such as reduced maintenance requirements andreduction of the logistics tail. Wewill need push quality. Quality translates not only into cost savings andefficiency, it most importantly trans-

lates into saved lives, the lives of ourforces, and the people they protect.We are looking at moving towardcommercial and international specifications. And, we are looking tochange some business practices tobenefit government and industry.

Specifically, in light of the current budget proposal, we will need toreview OH-58D Kiowa and AH-64Longbow Apache and make someadjustments. We must maintain theability to perform the basic missionof defending the nation's vital interest. We are committed to protectingthe essence of the Army.

And finally, the need for readiness in an era rife with uncertaintydemands that we strengthen theTotal Army, civilian and military,AC and the RC. We need to ensurethat all personnel of our Total Armyare totally involved with their job,understand where the Army is heading, and are doing their job the bestthey can. The need for the true TotalArmy is more critical than it has everbeen.

Industry needs to build prototypes that are so superior and so convincingthat they build the case for procurement.

u.s. Army Aviation Digest March/April1992 9


12/68

TC 1-210Commander's Guideto Individualand Crew Training

New Direction forthe AircrewTraining Program

Chief Warrant Officer (CW4) James WinstonChief of the Training Branch, Doctrine DivisionDirectorate of Training and DoctrineFort Rucker, AL

Army Aviation's future direc-tion for training aircrews departsfrom the current focus on indi-vidual training to place moreemphasis on training and evaluat-ing each crew's ability to work 'together as a team. The futurechanges affect crew training; battlerostering; crew evaluations; FAC 3positions; risk assessment; NVG;and fratricide. Aviation unit com-manders expect to make crewtraining as successful as individualtraining.



13/68

he new Training Circular (TC) 1-210, Aircrew Training Program: Commander'sGuide to Individual and Crew Training, isII he capstone manual for aviation command

ers to use in developing their aircrew training programs(ATPs).

TC 1-210 is used with aircrew training manuals(ATMs) to meet individual, crew, and mission requirements. The A TMs are guides that give Army aviation astandard framework for individual and crew flight training programs after initial training. The Commander'sGuide and the A TMs govern the ATP.

Several significant changes are projected for the ATPthis year. The goal of the ATP is to develop cohesive,combat-ready aviation units. The direction of ArmyA viation will help accomplish that goal.

By the end of this year, the Commander's Guide andall A TMs will be revised to reflect the new direction. TheCommander's Guide, already sent to the U.S. ArmyTraining and Doctrine Command, Fort Monroe, V A, isscheduled for fielding in June 1992. The ATMs shouldbe fielded by the end of fiscal year (FY) 1992.

TC 1-210, the Commander's Guide forIndividual and Crew Training

The new Commander's Guide refers to FM 25-100,Training the Force, and FM 25-101, Battle FocusedTraining. These manuals provide guidance on designing, implementing, and evaluating a training program.The guidance can be tailored to meet training requirements unique to aviation units.

The common denominator in all training techniques istraining to meet the unit' s mission essential task list. Thetraining must link individual, crew, and collective training to accomplish the tasks in the mission essential tasklist.

Many commanders have already put some of the newconcepts into their unit standing operating procedures.However, to provide a standard throughout the ArmyAviation community, the revised commander's guidewill include more specific guidance and regulatoryrequirements than did TC 1-210, ATP: Commander'sGuide, published in 1986.

Along with a new title, significant changes will affectthe way units are trained.

Major changes include the following-Shift of ocus from individual to crew training. The

Commander's Guide published in 1986 and past ATMsu. S. Army Aviation Digest MarchiApril 1992

have focused on the aviator. To complement the existingexcellent individual training program, the next logicalstep is to focus on training the entire crew to work as ateam.

This will bridge a long-standing gap between individual and collective training. TC 1-210 and the revisedA TMs will link the ATP with collective training foundin field manuals, Army Training and Evaluation Program mission training plans, and other doctrinal materialfor combat training.

Crew coordination training. Crew coordination is thecommunication between crewmembers and actions takenin proper sequence to perform tasks efficiently, effectively, and safely. Lack of good crew coordination hascontributed to fatalities and costs millions in damagesduring the last several years.

The goal in developing crew coordination is to increase mission accomplishment and reduce accidents.BeginningwithTC 1-214, ATM:AttackHelicopter,AH-64, all A TMs will be revised to reflect this concept toincrease mission accomplishment and decrease accidents.

The task descriptions in the A TMs will be rewritten tospecify each crewmember's part in performing the tasks.TC 1-214 is the first manual to be printed with theapproved format for A TMs.

This emphasis on a coordinated team effort shouldsatisfy both safety and training requirements for theA TMs. To help begin the new concept as soon aspossible, the academic and flightline instruction syllabusat the U.S. Army Aviation Center, Fort Rucker, AL, isalso being revised to include crew coordination training.

Battle rostering ofcrews. Crews who consistently flytogether develop better cockpit coordination and aretherefore less likely to have accidents. Battle-rosteredcrews include not only aviators, but also flight engineers,crew chiefs, aerial observers, aerial fire support observers, and medical observers.

Battle rostering does not mean these individuals mustfly exclusively with each other on every flight. However,to be crew qualified, they must fly mandated crewiterations and pass evaluations as a battle-rostered crew.

Crew evaluations and tracking ofcommander-designated tasks. After progression to readiness level (RL) I,the aviator begins crew progression from crew e a d i ~ e s slevel (CRL) 2 to CRLI with the battle-rostered crew.Once designated CRL1, the crew must perform and trackthe prescribed iterations of the commander-designatedcrew tasks annually.

11


14/68

Aircrew Training Program

Besides to individual evaluations, an initial CRLIevaluat ion is required. The battle-rostered crew will thenbe evaluated annually from the date it becomes CRL1.Battle crew evaluations will focus on coordinated crewperformance of selected commander-designated crewtasks.

Addition o/flightactivity category (FAC) 3 positions.It takes a staff officer about 5 hours away from normalduties to get 2 hours of flighttime. A third FAC was createdfor key staff individuals who

numerous references and messages into a single sourceforNVG use.

Fratricide prevention. Two reasons have significantlyincreased the likelihood of fratricide: emergence ofweapons that permit engagement of targets at extended distances and increased use of allied equipment by hostilenations. However, taking advantage of unique night andNVG skills, and ability to operate under reduced visibil-

ity, reduces the possibility ofany adverse consequence thatcould occur from friendly fire.

have duties so important thatany frequent absence away fromwork hinders the unit mission.

The goal of the AircrewTraining Program is

For these and other reasons,antifratricide training should beone of our highest priorities inArmy Aviation. As fratricideprevention doctrine evolves,changes will occur in TC 1-210.

to develop cohesive,combat-readyaviation units.

Army Aviation'sfuture direction Aircrew Training Manuals

FAC 3 aviators have no aircraft hour requirements but mustmaintain simulator minimums,a current flight physical, currentinstrument qualification, and acurrent -1 0 exam.

Risk assessment. An intensetraining environment stressesboth soldiers and equipment,

for training aircrewswill help accomplish that goal.

Individual aircraft ATMs arebeing revised to include the newdirection in the Commander'sGuide. TC 1-214 is the first ofthe next generation of A TMs.creating a high potential for ac-cidents. The potential for accidents increases as training

realism increases. An accidental loss, whether fromtraining or war, is no different than a combat loss. Theasset is still gone.

With this risk assessment chapter included in TC 1-210, more emphasis is placed on assessing the riskassociated with Army Aviation's highly realistic training environment. A work sheet is provided to help thecommander assess risk based on individual, crew, weather , and mission variables. Battl e-rosteredcrews will havea more favorable risk assessment than nonbattle-rosteredcrews.

Night vision goggles (NVG). The publication ofTC 1-210 and the revised TC 1-209, ATM: Observation Helicopter, OH-58D, means aviators will no longer use FieldCircular (FC) 1-219, which is the ATM fOJ NVG. TC 1-209 is scheduled for fielding in FY 1992-93. Putting theNVG chapter in the new Commander's Guide fills thegap left by the outdated FC 1-219. This addi tion also puts12

In the coordinating draft stage, scheduled for fieldingin June or July 1992, are TC 1-209; TC 1-212, ATM:Utility Helicopter, UH-60; TC 1-216, ATM: CargoHelicopter,CH-47; andTC 1-218,ATM: UtilityAirplane.

Several months after these TCs are fielded, TC 1-211,ATM: Utility Helicopter, UH-1; TC 1-213,ATM: AttackHelicopter, AH-1; TC 1-215, ATM: Observation Helicopter, OH-58AIC; 1-217, ATM: Surveillance Airplane,OV-1; and TC I-XXX, ATM: Transport Airplane, willbe fielded. The development of crew coordination tasks,starting with TC 1-214, will be put in the other manuals.The manuals are rewritten to delete information in theCommander's Guide, so only one source, the Commander's Guide itself, will give general information. We canthus avoid having manuals published at different timeswith conflicting guidances.

The focal point of the ATMs will be chapter 6,Individual and Crew Tasks. The new focus describescrewmember duties to perform the crew's task success-



15/68

REVISED ARMY AVIATION AIRCREW TRAINING MANUALS

TC 1-209, ATM: Observation Helicopter, OH-58DTC 1-210, Aircrew Training Program: Commander's Guide

to Individual and Crew TrainingTC 1-211, A TM: Utility Helicopter, UH-1TC 1-212, A TM: Utility Helicopter, UH-60 . . ; \ t 4 " " ~ ' ; " 7 - ' ~ " - < ~ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' TC 1-213, ATM: Attack Helicopter, AH-1TC 1-214, ATM: Helicopter, AH-64TC 1-216, ATM: Cargo Helicopter, CH-47TC 1-217, ATM: Surveillance Airplane, OV-1TC 1-218, A TM: Utility AirplaneTC 1-XXX, A TM: Transport Airplane

fully. The new generation of ATMs will reflect thataircrews fly aircraft and each crewmember has specificresponsibilities to ensure safe and successful missioncompletion.

Chapter 7, Maintenance Test Pilot Tasks, will also beadded to each ATM. When the last ATM is revised, FM1-544, Standardized Maintenance Test Flight Procedures, will be superseded.

Tomorrow's ChallengeThe challenge to aviation unit commanders is to

implement the revised A TP as smoothly and efficientlyas possible. Changes in attitude, training, and equipmentto meet the needs of aircrews and their missions will

u.s. Army Aviation Digest March/April 1992

enhance unit readiness. Training ctewmembers to per-form their duties as an integral part of an aircrew willincrease aviation operational capabilities.

Now commanders can tailor their training program tofocus on mission proficiency. They can focus on themission for several reasons: specific guidance for eachcrew to work together as a team, not individuals workingseparately, is being developed for each A TM; and theshift toward the evaluation of crew performance comple-ments individual performance.

The U.S. Army aviator is one of the best trainedaviators in the world. Once the new program tools arefielded, aviation unit commanders should be able tomake crew training as successful as individual training.The challenge has been made-the rest is up to you.

13


16/68

Dr. Elizabeth PlumbEducation SpecialistDirectorate of Training and DoctrineU.S. Army Aviation CenterFort Rucker, AL

--Q--ASET II is an integral part of the aircraftsurvivability equipment (ASE) training program. TheASE program includes net, schoolhouse, and ASETII, III, and IV training, as well as training for thefuture ASE-electronic warfare officer course.

rmy Aviation's success and survivability onthe next battlefield depends on the aviator's ability toidentify the threat; know the capabilities and limitations of the threat; and effectively employ aircraftsurvivability equipment (ASE). The aviator receivescomprehensive threat and countermeasure training toperform these functions.

The Army has set a high priority on the requirementfor both initial and sustainment training on ASE, threat,and tactics. The project manager for ASE (PM-ASE),St. Louis, MO, coordinating with the U.S. Army Aviation Center, Fort Rucker, AL, initiated a training deviceprogram to meet this need.

This program consists of an interim desk-top device14

ASET I IProgrammed for All Aircraft

(Aircraft Survivability Equipment Trainer-ASET I); afollow-on desk-top device (ASET II); an in-flight radarwarning device (ASET III); and a threat emitter system(ASET IV).

With the fielding of ASET II, ASE training with thisequipment is a mandatory annual requirement in thenew Training Circular 1-210, Aircrew Training Pro-gram: Commander's Guide to Individual and CrewTraining.

The ASET I provided immediate, individual trainingon ASE, threat recognition, and tactics. This device wasused as a est for the follow-on ASET II program. ASETI, fielded in 1985, used the Microfix computer systemfor its hardware system.

The SECRET/NOFORN (not releasable to foreignnationals) courseware was used to teach threat, tactics,ASE operations, and countermeasures for AH-I Cobraand OH-58A/C Kiowa aircraft. This training programand the limited hardware achieved maximum use onlywhen emphasized by aviation unit commanders.

The ASET II training device uses the ElectronicInformation Delivery System hardware and Departmentof r m y standard interactive courseware. The highlyactive SECRET/NOFORN courseware incorporates visuals produced by computer-generated imagery and ismodularly computer-image generated (MODDIG).ASET II courseware teaches threat, ASE operations and



17/68

employment, tactics, infrared and radar principles, andcountermeasures.The scope of ASET II is expanded to include allaircraft: scout, attack, utility, and cargo, as well asspecial mission.ASET II courseware, currently being fielded to activeand reserve components, is designed into threemodes-tutorial, game, and management. The tutorial modepresents lessons on threat, ASE, and tactics. The aviatorlearns capabilities and employment of ASE, characteristics and limitations of threats, and countermeasures.

To progress to the game mode, the aviator must score90 percent on lesson tests. The aviation commander canuse the tutorial mode for threat and ASE initial andrefresher training.

The tutorial mode also places the aviator in eitherprompted or unprompted mini battle scenarios. Theprompted scenarios guide the aviator through theswitchology (the art of turning switches on and off inproper sequence) of ASE and gives hints about threatcapabilities and limitations, as well as the correct countermeasures. The unprompted scenarios, used as stepping stones to the game mode battle missions, containno prompts.

The game mode places the aviator in an intensifiedcombat mission simulation. The aviator must completea series of highly interactive visual scenarios that develop, reinforce, and challenge decisionmaking skills.Since mission scenarios present either low-, mid-, orhigh-intensity conflicts, the aviator is confronted withdifferent threats.To add further realism to the game mode, differentASE is inoperable for sections of the mission. Thesevariables determine a successful game mode:

Selection of the correct/incorrect course of action. Response time in selecting the course of action. Number of events in the scenario.

u. S. Army Aviation Digest March/April 1992

These variables determine the aviator's coefficient ofsurvivability (CS). The aviator needs a CS of 1.0 or lessto successfully complete the game mode.

The ASET II management mode tracks each av iator ' sprogress throughout the training program. The aviatorcan use a paper printout to determine strengths andweaknesses of individual and unit ASE knowledge. Theaviation commander can use this information to designremedial ASE or threat training. ASET II challenge testscan serve as a pretest and posttest for evaluation ofexisting ASE training programs.

The PM-ASE has toll-free hotlines 0800-1600 central time, Monday-Friday, to answer questions aboutASET II. The hotline numbers are 800-545-ASET;Panama, 800-111-0420; Germany, 0130-81-0439; andSouth Korea, 008-1-800-901-8289.

In fiscal year (FY) 1994, ASET II courseware isscheduled for update to include all new ASE and newthreat information.

The ASET III will be an in-flight training device thattransitions the aircrew from the individual desk-toptrainer (ASET II) to the full-up, force-on-force trainer(ASET IV).

ASET III will be used to teach ASE switchologyinterpretation and employment during unit training.ASET III is in the research and development phase withworldwide fielding scheduled for FY 1994-1995.

ASET IV will be a tactical threat emitter trainingdevice used at the combat training centers for force-onforce training. This training device will train the aviatorsand aircrews how to use ASE in Army tactical aircraftincluding scout and attack aircraft. ASET IV will be amultiple integrated laser engagement system whereaviators can practice realistic, force-on-force engagements.A master control vehicle and video display willenable the aviation commander to debrief and critique

the battle. ASET IV is scheduled forfielding in FY 1993.

The U.S. Army Aviation Center,Fort Rucker, AL, and PM-ASE areworking diligently to improve training of currently fielded and futureASE. With the fielding of these fourtrainers, Army aviators will be better prepared to fight and survive onthe modem battlefield.

For further information on ASEhardware or ASE training devices,contact the ASE project officer, DSN558-4110/4023, or commercial (205)255-4110/4023.

15


18/68

Chief Warrant Officer (CW4)Richard M. O'ConnellDES CH47 Chinook Standardization PilotDirectorate of Evaluation and StandardizationU.S. Army Aviation CenterFort Rucker, AL

Commander's Task ListT he new Training Circular (TC) I-210, AircrewTraining Program: Commander 's Guide to Indi-vidual and Crew Training, is the new commander'sguide. Its publication will significantly change thepresent aircrew training program as it applies to unitsand individuals.

~ ublication of the new commander's guide,Training Circular (TC) I-210, Aircrew Training Program: Commander's Guide to Individual and CrewTraining, will result in significant changes to the presentaircrew training program (ATP). .For example, the new guide will require commanders

to focus on the mission essential task list (METL) tocomplete as much aircrew training as possible duringunit collective training. The METL applies to the units.

The new guide will also reflect important changes fordeveloping and using theCommander's Task List (CTL).16

The CTL applies to the individual. Part of the CTL isshown on the next page.

Determining the CTLThe CTL reflects the purpose, development, contents,

and disposition of the unit. The CTL also provides astand-alone document that informs aircrewmembers ofaircrew training requirements according to the correctaircrew training manual (ATM).

Commanders use the CTL to specify training requirements. This ensures aircrewmembers gain and maintainthe necessary proficiency to do the unit' s wartime mission. Finally, once developed and signed by the commander, the requirements outlined on the task list become mandatory.

Determining the METLIn developing the ATP, the commander first must

evaluate the unit' s METL to determine collective train-u.s. Army Aviation Digest March/April 1992


19/68

ing requirements. The METL lists equally essential taskscritical for to wartime mission of the unit derived fromwar plans and external directives. Once approved, theMETL becomes the basis for developing training requirements necessary to do the unit's wartime mission.

Therefore, after reviewing the METL, the commanderanalyzes the unit's geographical area; probable peacetime employment roles; supported unit's mission; andpast requirements. From this analysis, the commanderdevelops supporting individual and crew task lists.

Developing Individual Task ListsDeveloping individual task lists is the next step. After

detennining unit mission requirements, the commanderreviews each duty position to decide how it can bestsupport the unit's mission.

The commander analyzes each duty position based onits probable employment role and designates it as flightactivity category (FAC) I, FAC 2, or FAC 3. Dutypositions designated FAC I require a higher level ofproficiency; they also have greater semiannual flyinghour requirements than positions designated FAC 2.FAC 3 aviators maintain simulator minimums only.

Hence, at this stage of the task list development, thecommander designates primary, and if proper, alternate,and additional aircraft.

Once the commander designates each duty position as .FAC I, FAC 2, or FAC 3, the process of developing atask list for each begins. Task lists include as a core allbase tasks from the correct ATM. The commander thenselects those special tasks from the ATM considerednecessary to support the unit's METL.

After selecting the appropriate special tasks for training, the commander decides if additional tasks to supportunit mission requirements should be developed. Thus,the commander develops the proper conditions and standards for any additional task selected for training.

At this point, the commander selects all tasks fortraining and detennines the number of annual task iterations. The Commander's Guide intends for the commander to designate task iterations based on individualaircrew proficiency. As a minimum, the commanderrequires the annual completion of one iteration of tasksdesignated for training.

Subsequently, the commander identifies special oradditional tasks felt critical for the unit's mission. Hethen designates them as mandatory for evaluation duringthe appropriate phases of flight.Developing Night Flight Requirements

The commander next designates tasks for unaided andaided night flight that ensure individual aircrew profi-

u.s. ArmyAviation Digest March/April 1992

ciency and support the unit's mISSIOn requirements.When determining aided night flight requirements, thecommander designates duty positions for night visiongoggles (NVG) to comply with guidance in Departmentof Army (DA) Message 28 1309Z Aug 91 ,subject: NightVision Goggle Training Message 91-2.

This message specifies the DA requirements for NVOdesignated positions by type of unit. In addition, themessage designates the approval authority for variationsfrom the DA minimum requirements as the first aviation0-6 in the chain of command.

Developing NBC Train ing and EvaluationRequirementsFinally, the commander specifies nuclear, biological,

chemical (NBC) training and evaluation requirements.All FAC 1 positions and FAC 2 positions selected by thecommander require training in the tasks outlined inchapter 5 of the correct ATM and those additional tasksselected by the commander.

Evaluate the unit's METL and determine totaltraining requirements. Evaluate each TOE or TDA duty position anddetermine its relationship to the unit's mission. Designate each duty position as FAC 1, FAC2, or FAC 3. ASSign primary and alternate oradditional aircraft, and determine crewmemberand aircrew training requirements. Develop a task list for each position:-Select applicable tasks from the ATM andestablish iteration requirements.-Include any tasks not listed in the ATM andspecify tasks conditions, standards, and iterationrequirements.-Specify the following:(1) NBC training requirements.(2) Training requirements for aided and

unaided night flight.(3) Flying-hour and simulation-devicerequirements for each crewmember.(4) Additional tasks to be evaluated. Publish a task list for each position andincorporate tasks into the unit's training program. Evaluate training and modify task list asrequired.

Flight activ ity category (FAC) designation and task listdevelopment17


20/68

The new TC 1-210 has significantly changed the present aircrew training program.

The new Commander's Guide requires commandersdevelop a suitable annual NBC evaluation program foraircrewmembers. Evaluations may be oral, written, orflight and need to be administered sometime during theaircrewmember's training year. Documentation of theannual NBC evaluation remains in the miscellaneoussection on the right side of the individual aircrew trainingfolder (lATF).

Developing Flight-Hour and SimulationRequirementsIn addition, the commander also specifies annualflying-hour and flight-simulatorrequirements. The Commander's Guide, or the correct ATM, contains guidancefor minimum flying-hour requirements. Minimum flightsimulator requirements are found in AR 95-3 and appropriate major Army command (MACOM) supplements.However, commanders who operate aircraft not coveredby an ATM will develop a suitable ATP for assignedaircrewmem bers.

When developing unique ATPs for their unit, commanders should follow the general guidance provided inthe Commander's Guide: The correct MACOM orchief,National Guard Bureau, must approve locally developedtraining programs. Forward a copy to the Directorate ofEvaluation and Standardization, U.S. Army AviationCenter, Fort Rucker, AL.

Developing Crew Task ListsCrew task lists must also be developed. Crew tasks are

elements of the battle and team tasks found in the properMission Training Plan. The crew training tasks lists aredeveloped only for those tasks involving flight or theplanning and preparation for flight.

Crew tasks are ATM tasks that make training andevaluation of aircrews easier. Crew tasks generally require intensified coordination by the entire crew. Thenew TC 1-210 has examples of crew tasks for differentaircraft.

Once the commander has established crew tasks, hewill assign iteration requirements. Task iterat ions will becredited to a battle-rostered crew. An individualcrewmember will not receive credit for accomplishing a

18

crew task unless the task is completed with the battlerostered crew.Developing and Changing the CTL

At this point, the commander develops and publishesa CTL for each duty position within the unit. The CTLincludes individual and crew task list requirements. The 'Commander's Guide specifies the minimum contents ofthe CTL. When publishing a CTL, any format applies ifit clearly specifies all aircrewmember requirements.

Thus, changes in CTL format specified by the newCommander's Guide include major requirements: FAClevel and date of FAC level designation; theaircrewmember's readiness level; notation of the paragraph, line number, and position title for the table oforganization and equipment or table of distribution andallowances duty position. "None" is entered on the tasklist if the commander determines requirements do notapply.

The new Commander's Guide contains an example ofa CTL for an active duty unit with instructions forcompletion. The sample CTL does not address all ATPneeds, but it does contain the requirements specified inthe revised Commander's Guide. Once completed andsigned by the commander, the task list is ready to use.

Unit commanders can change task lists based onchanges to the unit's mission or METL. Unit commanders may not change a task list to accommodate acrewmember who fails to complete ATP requirements.

Commanders periodically must revise or change atask list because of changing mission requirements.When this occurs, the new Commander's Guide requiresretention of the previous task list in the IATF until thetraining year closeout is complete.

Summary. Changes reflected in the new TC 1-210 represent a

significant shift in training emphasis. The new Commander's Guide requires commanders complete as muchaircrew training as possible during unit collective training. The focus of this collective training is the unitMETL. The material contained in the new TC 1-210,with FM 25-101, provides the necessary guidance toeffectively develop and implement an ATP.

u.s. Army Aviation Digest March/April 1992


21/68

Major James A. Fitzpatrick, ChiefChief Warrant Officer (CW4) Ronald S. Marchman (retired)Flight Standardization Division

Directorate of Evaluation and StandardizationU.S. Army Aviation Logistics School

Fort Eustis, VA

Maintenance Test Pilot Standardization

This article discusses the maintenance test pilot standardization program and clarifies some issues thatconfuse commanders, standardization personnel, andmaintenance test pilots. Because the program saveslives and enhances warfighting, it must continue as anintegral part of the commander's aircrew trainingprogram.

I l ! l ]AINTENANCE TEST PIWT (MP) standardization in the United States Army has progressedsignificantly since the first guidelines were published inthen Field Manual (FM) 55-44 in 1981. The original testpilot standardization efforts paralleled the existing pilotu.s. Army Aviation Digest March/April 1992

standardization program. Standardization philosophyhasn't changed significantly over the intervening years.Maintenance test pilot standardization is not a separate program; it is an integral part of the commander'saircrew training program (ATP). The commander must

develop a standardization program that includes all elements of the unit's aviation mission.The requirement to train and evaluate test pilots issimply one critical element included in the commander' sstandardization program. The commander has expertsavailable to help develop the ATP. These individualsinclude standardization instructor pilots, instructor pilots, aviation safety officers, maintenance test flightevaluators (MEs), and MPs. Standardization elements atall command levels must include a representative fromthe MP community. At the company level, this personmay be an MP if an ME is not designated.MEs ftom the Maintenance Test Flight Standardization Division, Directorate of Evaluation and Standardization (DOES), U.S. Army Aviation Logistics School(USAALS), Fort Eustis, VA, have found questions in the

19


22/68

MaintenanceTest PilotStandardization

field about ME/MP standardization. The following discussion addresses these questions.Readiness Level (RL) Progression

Aviators assigned to MP positions must successfullycomplete an MP evaluation before progressing to RL1.RL progression for the MP is identical to RL progressionfor all pilots. RL3 training is essentially refresher training in all base tasks. RL2 is training in mission tasks asdesignated by the commander.

Maintenance test flight tasks listed in FM 1-544,Standardized Maintenance Test Flight Procedures, orthe correct aircrew training manual (A TM) are the i n i -mum mission tasks for the MP. MPs must receivetraining and evaluation in these tasks before progressingto RLI.

Many commanders want to progress newly assignedMPs to RL 1 before the MPs complete training andevaluation. This is normally the case with recent graduates of the maintenance manager/maintenance test pilotcourse (MM/MTPC) who do not possess a high degree ofaviation experience when assigned to the unit.The theory is to let the aviator gain "experience"through participation in the unit's normal tactical oradministrative mission. By not following set RL progression procedures for MPs, the unit actually hampersits ability to perform the maintenance mission for tworeasons-

First ,and foremost, the unit loses the services of theschool-trained MP. The MP quickly forgets the skills andknowledge gained at the MM/MTPC if not used. Therecent graduate of MM/MTPC may not be required tocontinue practicing MP maneuvers and may not beinvolved in MP system training. I f so, the ability to retainthe valuable formal training quickly erodes. Secondly, additional training requirements are aburden on the unit once the decision is made to bring thenew test pilot back up to the standards specified in FM 1-544 or the correct A TM. Successful evaluation of test20

pilot mission tasks does not require the commander toplace the aviator on MP orders.MP orders are a command decision, much like pilotin-command (PC) orders. Remember, a newly assignedaviator must demonstrate proficiency in all base andmission tasks for progression to RL 1. This does notimply the commander must release this aviator as a PC.

The inexperienced maintenance officer should progressto RLI and gain experience during continuation trainingby practicing MP mission tasks.Mission TasksAircraft specific chapters ofFM 1-544 or the appropriate A TM is selected as mission or additional tasks fortraining and evaluation. Training Circular 1-21O,A Com-mander's Guide, Aircrew Training Program (31 October 1986), points this out for aviators assigned to aviationmaintenance' officer positions. The commander mustinclude these tasks in the MP's individual aircrew training folder (IATF) in the mission task list.Having a separate maintenance test flight task list forMPs using the Department of Army (DA) Form 5051-R(Maintenance Test Flight Training Record) is neitherrequired nor desired. DA Form 5051-R is designed as atracking sheet for the convenience of tracking applicabletasks.Commanders must ensure an aviator includes thesemission tasks in the IATF after progressing to RL1, evenif the aviator is not on MP orders. Future MPs mustcontinue practicing test flight skills until the commanddecides to place the aviator on MP orders.Iteration RequirementsFM 1-544 or the proper ATM requires that MPscomplete a minimum of four iterations of all maintenance test flight mission tasks annually. The number ofiterations can, and if necessary should, be adjustedupward, depending on the experience level of the individual aviator.

Complex tasks performed infrequently during maintenance test flights should be considered for increasediterations. Examples include the turbine engine analysischeck in UH-l Huey and AH-l Cobra aircraft and theengine performance check in the OH-58 Kiowa aircraft.The key is the commander must evaluate the capabilityofMPs and individually tailor the iteration requirements.Pilot-In-Command RequirementsDuring maintenance test flights, the MP is the PC. Theintent of Army Regulation 95-1, paragraphs 4-5 and 4-6,is when a' current, qualified, and properly briefed MPconducts a maintenance test flight, the MP is the missionpilot-in-command(PC).



23/68

Commanders should assess the PC requirements according to unit standing operating procedures (SOPs).This ensures unnecessary PC selection requirements donot restrict qualified MPs from performing unit maintenance missions.The PC requirements should be tailored to the individual's specific duty position. For example, if the MP'sduties require cross-country flight, the IATF and PCselection requirements should be tailored to enable theMP to accomplish this task.

Unit SOPs often do not consider the maintenancemission. Many times, commanders require MPs to bequalified in all aspects of the unit's mission beforeselection as PCs. This prevents the MP from performingthe unit's maintenance mission while undergoing training in areas of the unit mission not essential to themaintenance mission.Designation of MaintenanceTest Flight EvaluatorsBeginning 1 October 1990, when the new FM 1-544dated 4 September 1990 was released, questions havebeen asked about who may be designated as an ME. I f anindividual was functioning as an ME before 1 October1990, he may continue to be designated by the commander as an ME.After 1 October 1990, if the commander desires todesignate an MP as an ME, and the individual has neverserved as an ME, the ME candidate must be evaluated bya representative of DOES or a DOES designee. Procedures for the designation of MEs are outlined in FM 1-544, paragraph 2-2d.Subsequent Aircraft MP TrainingFM 1-544 specifies procedures for qualifying MPs insubsequent aircraft as of 1 October 1990. I f the aviatoru.s. Army Aviation Digest March/April1992

attended a formal MP qualification course of instructionin the UH-l, AH-l, or OH-58A/C, he may be crosstrained in either of the other aircraft and qualified as a'-,MP. This is after he completes an evaluation given by aDOES ME or a DOES designee.Sometimes qualification is sought in other aircraft.Then the individual must attend the formal course ofinstruction at USAALS or complete an equivalencyevaluation conducted by a DOES ME. MPs qualifiedunder subsequent aircraft training are considered graduates of the specific track of the MM/MTPC.Throughout this article, reference has been made toFM 1-544 or the correct ATM. DOES is including allmaintenance test flight mission tasks and qualification!training requirements in the individual aircraft A TMs.Work has been completed on the AH -64 Apache, UH-60Black Hawk, CH-47D Chinook, and OH-58D ATMs.When the new ATMs are published for these aircraft,FM 1-544 will cease as a reference. FM 1-544 will nolonger exist when all aircraft ATMs have been rewrittento include maintenance test flight mission tasks.

In summary, the commander has individuals to helpdevelop the unit standardization program. Among theseare the MEs who must be included in the standardizationprogram at all command levels. The commander needs toevaluate the unit's maintenance mission and ME/MPproficiency in developing a comprehensive training program for the maintenance personnel. The Director ofEvaluation and Standardization, USAALS, is happy tohelp units develop their ME/MP standardization programs.Questions about the maintenance test flight standardization program should be forwarded to Assistant Commandant, USAALS, ATIN: A TSQ-LES-M, Fort Eustis,VA 23604-5429, phone DSN 927-3266/4164 or FAXDSN 927-4164.

21


24/68

Sergeant First Class Robert D. H a g e ~Standardization Flight Engineer Instructor

Directorate of Evaluation and StandardizationU. S. Army Aviation Center

Fort Rucker, AL

The Nonrated Crewmember Standardization and1hlining Program for Utility and Cargo Helicopters

What do training, accidents, andmoney have in common? A study 7years ago found that improved nonratedcrewmember training could preventaccidents and save money. This articleshows how by explaining new infonnation in TCs 1-210, 1-211, 1-212, and1-216; ARs 95-1, 95-3, and 600-106;and FM 1-300.

22

lSI VEN YEARS ago, a research was conducted from Fort Rucker, AL, to determine the necessityof a formal nonrated crewmember training and standardization. The study revealed from units worldwide thatmany accidents could be prevented and a significantamount of money could be saved if the nonratedcrewmember had better training.

By now, most people in the aviation community knowabout some type of nonrated crewmember training andstandardization program.

A viation commanders know Training Circular (TC)1-210, Aircrew Training Program: Commander's Guide,31 October 1986, states the aircrew training program(ATP) does apply to nonrated crewmembers. Unfortunately, the amount of Department of the Army (DA)published guidance that a commander receives about

u.S. Army Aviation Digest MARCH/APRIL 1992


25/68

Engine malfunctions, such as this hot start on a CH-47 Chinook, prove that even a simple task suchas knowing where to stand during engine start must be part of crew training.

developing and maintaining a nonrated crewmembertraining program begins and ends with this statement inTC-210.

Many changes are being made to the publications togive the commander better guidelines for developingand maintaining this program. In this article, the authorwill clarify the "gray areas" and update the reader aboutthe changes and applicable publications.

The following publications regulate and give guidelines for developing and maintaining a nonratedcrewmember training program. The asterisk (*) denotesa change being submitted but not yet approved for thatpublication.Army Regulation 95-1AR 95-1 ,Aviation Flight Regulations, *paragrap h 2-6, Logging Flying Time. The codes FI (nonratedcrewmember instructor) and SI (nonrated crewmemberstandardization instructor) are used when a qualifiednonrated crewmember instructor conducts in-flight training or evaluations. This will allow an instructor to logtime for pay on an aircraft normally restricted to a certainnumber of crewmembers according to AR 600-106,Flying Status for Nonrated Army Aviation Personnel.The time accumulated under these codes will be record-u.s. ARMYAVIA TlON DIGEST March/April 1992

ed on DA Form 759 which becomes a permanent part ofthe crewmember's flight records. This will give thecommander a document to use to determine the qualifications ofa nonrated crewmember when selecting one tofill a vacant instructor slot.

*Section 1/, chapter 4, Flight Crewmembers. Paragr,aphs defining the nonrated crewmember (flight engineer or crewchief), FI, and SI will be added to thissection. These definitions will spell out prerequisites andqualification requirements for the different types ofcrewmembers.

*Paragraph4-5,FlightCrews. The reference to flightcrewmembers means all flight crewmembers.

*Paragraph 4-18, Hands-on Performance Test. Thisparagraph will be changed to include the nonratedcrewmembers hands-on performance test requirements.'Army Regulation 95-3

AR 95-3, Aviation: General Provisions, Training,Standardization, andResource Management,paragraph4-2, Aircrew Training Program. Subparagraph b statesthe ATP is mandatory for aviators and other crew membersspecified in the aircrew training manuals (ATMs). Oneof the most confusing things to deal with is conflictingstatements in our publications.

23


26/68

TC 1-210 states the ATP applies to all crewmembers.AR 95-3 states the ATP applies only to thosecrewmembers specified in the ATM. The statement inthe AR assumed the cargo and utility A TM supplementswould be published for nonrated crewmembers.

Nonrated crewmember duties will be included in theATMs. However, developing and publishing this information may take a while. The new TC 1-210, AircrewTraining Program: Commander's Guide to Individualand Crew Training, states commanders will developtheir own A TMs for nonrated crewmembers. In thisparagraph, DA civilian (DAC) aviators will be changedto DAC crewmembers.*Paragraph 4-18, Failure to Pass Hands-on Performance Test. This paragraph will be changed and willoutline procedures for nonrated crewmember test failures.All future ARs will use the words "nonratedcrewmembers" or "crewmembers" instead of"nonaviators."Army Regulation 600-106

AR 600-106 is undergoing a major revision. Paragraph numbers are not available. Before reading this AR,one needs to understand the different types of nonrated

c r e w m e m b e r s ~ Aviators can find definitions for acrewmember and a noncrewmember on page 2, paragraph 4, of the current AR.

One change in this regulation has the greatest effect ontraining and standardization of he nonrated crewmember.This change is relaxing the constraints placed on thenoncrewmember's ability to log flight time for pay.

Currently, a noncrewmember can only fly for pay ifthe duty performed aboard the aircraft cannot be performed by the assigned crewmember. The changed ARwill allow noncrewmembers to perform normalcrewmember duties in place of a crewmember who isabsent because oftemporary duty, leave, quarters, grounding, or other authorized reasons.

The noncrewmember who performs these duties mustbe military occupational speciality (MOS) qualified inthe aircraft in which duties are performed (67T, 67N, or67U). Also, that person must be integrated into thecommander's ATP. This means the crewmember mustbe a qualified RLI crewmember according to the applicable ATM.

The AR will also allow noncrewmembers to log flighttime for pay while being trained to perform crewmemberduties. I f used properly, these noncrewmembers can bean asset to the commander.

Normally, there are four or more noncrewmemberslots filled by the platoon sergeant and squad leaders ina maintenance platoon or section. I f wo of the slots were24

dedicated only to training new crewmembers, the timelag could be cut considerably. Time could be savedbetween losing a qualified crewmember out of the flightsection and gaining a qualified crewmember from themaintenance section.

The primary trainer for these crewmembers has to bea qualified and designated nonrated crew member instructor. For the flight time to count for pay, a trainingand evaluation grade slip must be completed accordingto the correct ATM.

Technical inspectors (TIs) normally have a difficulttime receiving flight pay for the time they accrue. Because TIs are MOS qualified and normally have somecrewmember experience, they may also log flight timefor pay as outlined in the above paragraphs. Unfortunately, other soldiers on noncrewmember flight status,such as electricians and avionic technicians, will stillhave a hard time accruing flight time for pay, becausethese paragraphs do not apply to them.

Field Manual 1-300Field Manual (FM) 1-300, Flight Operations and

Airfield Management, deals with the crewmember'sflight records. Currently, the only required recording inthe cargo and utility nonrated crew members flight recordsare two things: CE (the duty symbol they fly under) andthe time they fly. The changed FM will include the newflying duty symbols FI and SI.

FM 1-300 will also require the flight records clerks totrack the crewmember 's daytime (condition symbol D) \and night vision goggles (NVG) time (condition symbolNG) separately. This is necessary to keep up with currency requirements.

On the backside of DA Form 759 is part IV, theRemarks section. This section of the form is the bestplace to record all the crewmember's qualifications. TheDA Form 759 is a permanent record that stays in theflight records as long as the crewmember is in the Army.

When a soldier has permanent change of station to anew unit, the gaining unit commander should be able tolook at the flight records and individual training recordsof that soldier and determine that soldier's crewmemberqualifications.

Use simple statements in this section, such as "individual completed initial NVG qualification on 2/8/90,"or "initial CH-47 Chinook crewmember qualificationcompleted on 3/12/89."

Commanders sign certifying this information is correct,so make sure all the proper grade slips, diplomas, and otherdocuments are presented to operations personnel beforeputting these qualifications on DA Form 759.

u.s. ArmyAviation Digest MARCH/APRIL 1992


27/68

Training Circular 1-210Training and standardization for the nonrated

crewmember is becoming a way of life. The more indepth inclusion of the nonrated crewmember into TC 1-210 makes the nonrated part of he ATP easier to developand maintain.

Many changes to the new TC 1-210 affect the nonratedcrewmember program. To explain all these changes, thisarticle would have to be as large as the TC itself. It'seasier to say the nonrated crewmember requirementsremain the same. However, the new TC defines thembetter and in more detail.

Rated and nonrated crewmembers have not seen thesemajor changes:Crew coordination. One of the most driving factors toinvolve nonrated crewmembers in a fonnal standardization and training program is crew coordination. TC 1-210 contains a section dedicated to this subject andnonrated crewmembers need to read it carefully. Theymust understand crew coordination is not just somethingthat happens in the cockpit, but in the entire aircraft.

Battle rostering and crew training. Battle-rosteredcrews are crewmembers (rated and nonrated) who havebeen assigned to fly and train together as a crew. Thesecrews perfonn specific crew tasks contained in the ATM.They progress through crew readiness levels (CRLs)similar to individual readiness levels .

Crews do not need to fly together all the time. Theyhave to demonstrate proficiency in the designated task to

TC 1-210

AIRCREW TRAINING PROGRAMCOMMANDER'S GUIDE TO INDIVIDUALAND CREW TRAINING

HEAOQUARTERS, DEPARTMENTOF THE ARMY

Commanders use TC 1-210 and applicableATMs as guidelines to develop their units 'aircrew training programs. Crew coordination,battle rostering, and night vis ion goggles aremajor changes in the new TC 1-210 that affectthe nonrated crewmember program.

progress to CRL 1. They have to fly enough time togetherduring the training program year to perfonn the numberof tasks iterations required by the commander.

NVG. NVG is new to TC 1-210, but not tocrewmembers. This change, an entire chapter to the TC,consolidates all NVG training messages we have seen.

Crew coordination and battle rostering are the driving factors in continuation training for both rated andnonrated crewmembers.u.s. ARMYAVIATION DIGEST March/April 1992 25


28/68

Training Circulars 1-211,212, and 216A major revision of these aircrew training manuals

began in January 1992. The primary purpose of thisrevision is to rewrite the tasks in the crew coordinatedformat. The tasks will include the nonrated crew membersin these revised utility and cargo ATMs. In the description of these tasks, the nonrated crew member is the CE;the pilot on the controls, P*; and the pilot not on thecont:ols is P. The task description is written in sequentialorder, so a crewmember reading the task knows exactlywhat to do and when to do it.

The following is the crewmember's task descriptionfrom TC 1-216 for performing a before-landing check:

Before initiating an approach for landing, the p*will call for or perform a before-landing check.

The P will correctly use the checklist to make theappropriate checks and verify proper responses incorrect sequence. He will verify any before-landingcheck performed by the P*.

The CE will perform all checks when required bythe p* or P and give correct response when thecheck is complete.By rewriting the tasks in this format, they create crew

tasks for battle-rostered crew training and they incorporate the nonrated crewmembers into the tasks, standards,and descriptions.Individual tasks for nonrated crewmembers will alsobe included in the A TMs. The A TMs will include thenonrated crewmembers in all chapters, outlining anddefining all the nonrated crewmembers' A TP requirements.Personnel, Standardization, and Training

Officers. Commanders use TC 1-210 and the applicable A TMs as guidelines to develop their units' aircrewtraining programs. They approve the commander's tasklist and select qualified crewmembers to perform FI andSI duties. The commander delegates the management ofthe program to the standardization instructor pilot (SIP)and SI.

IPs and the SIP help the nonrated crewmembersdevelop their program. The SIP should directly supervisethe SI in the day-to-day management of the nonratedcrewmember program.

Platoon leaders should ensure the platoon sergeant hasenough time allocated for academic and in-flight training. They should also ensure training missions arescheduled to allow quality pilot and nonrated26

crewmember training is conducted simultaneously.Trying to balance a nonrated crewmember's time

among soldier training, aircraft maintenance, detail,duty, and crew member training is a tough job. Theplatoon sergeant needs all the help he can get.

Noncommissioned Officers (NCOs). The frrst sergeant is responsible for making sure the unit has requiredpersonnel. He must know the unit needs and request thenecessary schools and replacements for outgoingcrewmembers. This individual should also know thetraining requirements for a nonrated crewmember andallow the platoon sergeant enough time to train personnel.

The platoon sergeant must know this program. Thisperson is responsible for selecting and supervisingnonrated crewmembers. He should contact daily thecompany SI and platoon FIs, informing them of whattraining crewmembers need; receiving updates oncrewmembers' progress; and helping to train instructors.

I f he platoon sergeant is on flight status, he should flywith crewmembers and i n s t r u ~ t o r s frequently to ensurethey conduct training properly. The platoon sergeantcannot perform duties as an FI or SI unless he hasqualified for the duty and is designated as an FI or SI bythe commander.

The SI should work in the company or battalionstandards section under the supervision of the SIP. TheSI ensures the program is managed according to the TC1-210, ATM, and applicable ARs. He maintains theIndividual Aircrew Training Records and schedules allacademic and flight training.Although the SI does not directly supervise the platoon Fls, he works closely with them to ensure alltraining is done according to the ATM. He also trains andevaluates the Fls. The SI has no authorized slot for tablesof organization and equipment (TOE) or tables of distribution and allowances. Therefore, the unit must find aslot to fill this position.

I f he SI needs to be on full crewmember flight status,AR 600-106, paragraph 11, shows how to apply foradditional flight slots.

The FI ' s primary duty is to train the nonratedcrewmember. The FI also performs normal crewmemberduties and is usually assigned an aircraft within a platoon. An ideal ratio is one FI for every eight crewmembers.The CH-47 TOE has two slots identified by additionalskill identifier (ASI) N 1 for each platoon.

The Nonrated Crewmember Night Vision GogglesTrainer (NCT) trains nonrated crewmembers accordingto NVG messages or the NVG chapter in TC 1-210. Anyrated or nonrated crew member can perform duties as anNCT after meeting the requirements stated in the NVGmessage or TC 1-210.

u.s. ArmyAviation Digest MARCH/APRIL 1992


29/68

Today's complex missions and highly technological Army aircraft, such as the UH-60 Black Hawk,demand well-trained crewmembers.

The nonrated crewmember's primary duty is to perform in-flight duties and scheduled or unscheduled maintenance on the assigned aircraft. He is trained through RLprogression like a pilot. This training is outlined in theATM.

Any NCO who is an RLI qualified nonratedcrewmember may conduct training. However, an FI or SImust supervise the training and must also conduct nonratedcrewmember evaluations.

The CH-47 crew consists of two nonratedcrewmembers. Both crewmembers undergo the same RLprogression training and evaluations. Once a crew memberis designated RL 1, the commander may select thatperson as flight engineer.

The flight engineer is responsible for the helicopter,the crewchief, and any other personnel performing helicopter maimenance. Commanders should base their selections on experience, proficiency, rank, and the recommendations of the platoon sergeant and SI.

Any soldier qualified in MOSs 67U, 67T, or 67N andwho can pass a flight physical can be selected to performnoncrewmember duties as a flight engineer or crewchiefon his specific aircraft. Selection of soldiers to performthese duties should be based on maintenance experienceand proficiency, initiative, attitude, and conduct.

u.s. ARMY AVIA TlON DIGEST March/April 1992

S

Documents

Army Aviation Digest - Mar 1992