• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

CH-146 Griffon

Actually, Tac Hell is somewhat special.  Aside from maintaining fling wings with a utterly goofy supply setup which encourages rob actions at a dizzying rate, Tac Hell techs must hit the ranges twice a year, must maintain all the LSVW's ML's etc and maintain skills in driving them.  For example an HL driver must drive the dang thing on a regular basis to stay qualified.  No Techs do this normally. Wing transport takes care of the civilian pattern trucks on a normal AF Base.  In addition, field ex's require that a Tac hell Tech hold all kinds of kit that is not seen by most other techs.  For example, snowshoes and rucks!  Not to mention, training in the most basic of fieldcraft.  You would be amazed at the amount of people that have never lit a Coleman stove.  Practice setting up arctic tents, Modular tentage. Training in sentry duties, Stand To, defensive fire perimeters, arcs of fire,  unknown to most air force unless they are remustered from the Combat Arms.  All this is time away from doing the primary task of getting those rotors spinning has a tremendous toll in manhours available to fix airplanes.
Tac Hell units are remote from support, they stand alone unsupported by a large wing infrastructure and unsupported by on-site engineering assistance (large AMS's with Labs and workshops).
I have had employment in my 32 years in a wide spectrum of elements, aircraft, bases, units and even a staff job :crybaby:.  Tac Hell is most certainly the most demanding environment I have seen.  Fighters/Maritime Patrol/Transport have the life of Riley compared to Tac Hell and I will say it with the voice of experience.  I can't speak for Maritime Helicopters though, but they do get hot meals and dry beds at least.

I know there is a move afoot to train all service members with a basic soldiers knowledge, but I wonder how much will be retained after 10 years, and I have not heard how effective this training is.  It may make a difference, but not for a few long years.

Anyhow, for all the extra work involved in Tac hell, an apprentice requiring direct supervision all ALL tasks has a bigger impact in a Tac hell unit than it does in elsewhere. 

Edited to say  Hi "Alice"! ;D
 
cdnaviator said:
Scoobs, We could use ready-made technicians just as much as tac hel.  Any aircraft fleet would be happy to have only journeyman tech and not have to train new ones up to "A" level. Tac Hel is not that special.

Your wrong cdnaviator, TacHel is "special"  :rofl:.........cannot wait to the day I get posted back to the real Air Force
 
cp140tech said:
They seem to be fairly accomodating with regards to initial postings out of Borden.  If there is a particular type you'd like to work on, be certain to ask for more than one base that houses it.  Traditionally, it seems like Tac Hel is a difficult place to be posted as an apprentice.  We were told that Griffons were not an option for initial posting, but it does happen for some people. 
  I can't offer you any insight into the different Griffon squadrons, or their work environment... I've only been employed on the CP 140/A.  Bison33's posts have been right on the money, he paints a very accurate picture.

What are the aircraft that you can work on as an apprentice.
 
rhfc_pte said:
What are the aircraft that you can work on as an apprentice.

all of them !!!

except the ones maintained by civvies
 
rhfc_pte said:
What are the aircraft that you can work on as an apprentice.

  Pretty much anything, except for the Twin Otter....  I'm guessing here, but I expect that is an impossibility for an apprentice.  There aren't many positions for techs on them, and there is no shortage of people who would like to get onto that type.
 
cdnaviator and cp140tech are correct.  The only exclusions are Scarebus, Challenger, Hawk, Harvard, Jet Ranger, Grob 90, C9 King Air,Comorant and the Twotter.  Hmmm, the list of civvie maintained ac is almost tied. 8 to 9  I count the two 140 versions as one (unless we divvie up Herc models) and the Cyclone is still a dream.

http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/equip/equip1_e.asp will give you a list of ac and a write up of capabilities and locations.
 
cdnaviator said:
Scoobs, We could use ready-made technicians just as much as tac hel.  Any aircraft fleet would be happy to have only journeyman tech and not have to train new ones up to "A" level. Tac Hel is not that special.

cdnaviator, I'm not talking about "ready-made" techs.  I was talking about apprentices.  Even though the young Pte may be taking a course at an aviation college, he will still need to be an apprentice once he comes into the Air Force.  Therefore, he will need some trg, just like other apprentices.  As was said in other responses, Tac Hel is a unique environment that has additional burdens placed on its personnel, in addition to fixing a/c.  I was only stating that at Tac Hel units, it is prefered to have already trained techs, such as journeymen and above.  Tac Hel does not send apprentices on deployment overseas.  Of course, every fleet will have to take on some apprentices or that fleet will eventually have no one to work on the a/c.  Also, all fleets do not just want journeymen.  You want a mix of some apprentices, journeymen, "A" level, and "C" level techs.  "A" level techs can sign off on a maintenance action, while "C" level techs can release an a/c for flight.  Therefore, you need to have some "A" and some "C".  Without them, no a/c would be able to get fixed.
 
I think that Tac Hel is shooting itself in the foot by not taking on many apprentices. Most guys who are new want to go Tac Hel in their younger years. This way they can have the snot run out of them early on in their carrer. Then look forward to a more relaxed job after 10 years or so on the 18's or others.

I would think that the new apprentices after their quick OJT period and type course should be able to be receiving POM's with in 8 months, Depending on the length of the type course. This is what is happening on the F18 fleet right now.

I would have gone Tac Hel and done 10 years or more.

To receive a fresh new Apprentice means that they are not tainted yet, they have the drive to complete the job and do not have that union mentality that we see all to often with some of the older breed of Air Force technicians. You can also shape and mold the new guys into what you need.

That is just my opinion.
 
The problem with apprentice-level techs, as mentioned previously, is that they are not deployable. Because of that, 1 Wing built up to over twice the number of apprentice techs during the Bosnia years - they couldn't go, so those who should have been training and supervising them did instead.
 
eurowing said:
Actually, Tac Hell is somewhat special.  Aside from maintaining fling wings with a utterly goofy supply setup which encourages rob actions at a dizzying rate, Tac Hell techs must hit the ranges twice a year, must maintain all the LSVW's ML's etc and maintain skills in driving them.  For example an HL driver must drive the dang thing on a regular basis to stay qualified.  No Techs do this normally. Wing transport takes care of the civilian pattern trucks on a normal AF Base.  In addition, field ex's require that a Tac hell Tech hold all kinds of kit that is not seen by most other techs.  For example, snowshoes and rucks!  Not to mention, training in the most basic of fieldcraft.  You would be amazed at the amount of people that have never lit a Coleman stove.  Practice setting up arctic tents, Modular tentage. Training in sentry duties, Stand To, defensive fire perimeters, arcs of fire,  unknown to most air force unless they are remustered from the Combat Arms.  All this is time away from doing the primary task of getting those rotors spinning has a tremendous toll in manhours available to fix airplanes.
Tac Hell units are remote from support, they stand alone unsupported by a large wing infrastructure and unsupported by on-site engineering assistance (large AMS's with Labs and workshops).
I have had employment in my 32 years in a wide spectrum of elements, aircraft, bases, units and even a staff job :crybaby:.  Tac Hell is most certainly the most demanding environment I have seen.  Fighters/Maritime Patrol/Transport have the life of Riley compared to Tac Hell and I will say it with the voice of experience.  I can't speak for Maritime Helicopters though, but they do get hot meals and dry beds at least.

I know there is a move afoot to train all service members with a basic soldiers knowledge, but I wonder how much will be retained after 10 years, and I have not heard how effective this training is.  It may make a difference, but not for a few long years.

Anyhow, for all the extra work involved in Tac hell, an apprentice requiring direct supervision all ALL tasks has a bigger impact in a Tac hell unit than it does in elsewhere. 

Edited to say  Hi "Alice"! ;D

You think all that is unique to TACHEL?

MH techs need to learn all about firefighting, both the ship and the helo, ship's damage control, all the deck director/hand stuff like hooking up the hauldown wire and straightening the helo in sea state up to 5 degrees of pitch and 20 degrees of roll, HIFR, hoists, and slinging in sea states of 3 degrees pitch and 10 degrees roll. And when the helo is put to bed, there's cleaning stations and other related ship's tasks.

This is why we only send qualified techs to sea, no apprentices. I don't see why TACHEL couldn't do the same for exercises, I have a hard time believing that there's no room for apprentices in the TACHEL world, especially when you're on the ground and not limited by bunk space.

 
We send everybody on exercises, unless there's a good and valid reason not to. We can't send apprentices on operations, though, and that's where the Bosnia mission was killing us. We were established for eighty-odd apprentices in 1 Wing then, and this bloated up to over 180 actual ones stagnating and clogging up the system. They could not go, and more of the ones who should have been training and supervising them had to, so they were not learning at the rate that they should have, and the cycle continued. I'm not sure exactly what the situation is like right now, but I'll become reconnected with that as I start my latest attempt ot get recurrent (if G2G would only stop bogging down our tiny operational training flight).
 
Loachman said:
We send everybody on exercises, unless there's a good and valid reason not to. We can't send apprentices on operations, though, and that's where the Bosnia mission was killing us. We were established for eighty-odd apprentices in 1 Wing then, and this bloated up to over 180 actual ones stagnating and clogging up the system. They could not go, and more of the ones who should have been training and supervising them had to, so they were not learning at the rate that they should have, and the cycle continued. I'm not sure exactly what the situation is like right now, but I'll become reconnected with that as I start my latest attempt ot get recurrent (if G2G would only stop bogging down our tiny operational training flight).

Was there a good reason why a higher level apprentice could not go on operation and continue to learn in the field?
 
Other than that a minimum standard has to be set somewhere, and that on operations there is less opportunity to train somebody when the job is being done for real and there is even less room for error (not that there's much at all in garrison when it comes to flying ops), none that I know of.
 
Loachman said:
Other than that a minimum standard has to be set somewhere, and that on operations there is less opportunity to train somebody when the job is being done for real and there is even less room for error (not that there's much at all in garrison when it comes to flying ops), none that I know of.

There is no better training than actually doing it under real time conditions and getting it right.

Room for error....can't afford that here either

I think there is a good argument to made for reassessing the minimum standard.
 
Loachman said:
Other than that a minimum standard has to be set somewhere, and that on operations there is less opportunity to train somebody when the job is being done for real and there is even less room for error (not that there's much at all in garrison when it comes to flying ops), none that I know of.

Have to disagree with you there ( even though my experience is lesser than yours).  Flying for us on operations is no different than flying at home. In fact, most of our flights from home bases are domestic operations.  There is no room for error wether we fly from home base or from some far flung airfield half way around the globe. The torpedoes are just as live, the altitude just as low and the weather just as shitty.  I am not fully qualified in my job as i am a B category operator, yet i can finish my upgrade during operations overseas, and can do so even in wartime.  The same can be done for a technician IMHO.
 
cdnaviator said:
Have to disagree with you there ( even though my experience is lesser than yours).  Flying for us on operations is no different than flying at home. In fact, most of our flights from home bases are domestic operations.  There is no room for error wether we fly from home base or from some far flung airfield half way around the globe. The torpedoes are just as live, the altitude just as low and the weather just as shitty.  I am not fully qualified in my job as i am a B category operator, yet i can finish my upgrade during operations overseas, and can do so even in wartime.  The same can be done for a technician IMHO.

Not in MH it can't, not enough bunk space on the boats since the navy fills them up with their trainees.
 
  Sending apprentices away isn't a great idea for us.  The people that get deployed are usually chosen to fill spots requiring certain skill sets.  An apprentice wlll not be able to sign for his or her own work, let alone an 'A' level signature to certify maintenance action.  Pound for pound we need people who can carry the most weight and who are very comfortable on their respective systems. 

  Not to mention, small errors can take days to fix... it's surprisingly easy to u/s a plane with some pretty rudimentary jobs. 

  If nothing goes wrong and simple servicing is all that's required, anybody can do it.... when things go to crap, you really need good people. 

 
 
GAP said:
There is no better training than actually doing it under real time conditions and getting it right.

That does not translate to learning a technical skill, and it requires more people in-theatre to both do the job and teach/supervise/correct errors made.

GAP said:
Room for error....can't afford that here either.

Not for an aircraft about to fly, but an error by an apprentice that delays a training flight in Canada does not have the same effect as one that delays an operational flight overseas.

GAP said:
I think there is a good argument to made for reassessing the minimum standard.

Which exists to ensure that the tech is capable of doing the required jobs effectively, safely, completely, and in time.


 
cdnaviator said:
Have to disagree with you there ( even though my experience is lesser than yours).

Well, that's all relative - I have far less experience in my little niche than you do in yours.

cdnaviator said:
Flying for us on operations is no different than flying at home. In fact, most of our flights from home bases are domestic operations.  There is no room for error wether we fly from home base or from some far flung airfield half way around the globe. The torpedoes are just as live, the altitude just as low and the weather just as shitty.  I am not fully qualified in my job as i am a B category operator, yet i can finish my upgrade during operations overseas, and can do so even in wartime.  The same can be done for a technician IMHO.

But this was about "Comparing GRIFFON Squadrons", not Aurora Squadrons.

Each flying community has its own unique circumstances.

The apprentice problem is a recent one. There was no such thing in the good old days when we (10 TAG) had three aircraft types and more aircraft, more Squadrons, more people, and green uniforms. "Peace dividends", FRP, and such disastrous policies set the stage for the shortages that we have now, and Bosnia fertilized them.
 
cp140tech said:
Sending apprentices away isn't a great idea for us ..... when things go to crap, you really need good people.

And all of the stuff in between - most definitely.
 
Back
Top