CH47 Chinook

[Zoomie]

assume that they'd be on ground right from the start, as a new Sqn would need all the IT infrastructure as well as COMSEC material be shipped in and a COMSEC account creation.

Does Petawawa not have their own IT section to provide this support?  Unless these pers were primarily for deployment support - the Base/Wing level IT department should have this task.

 

[aesop081]

The Tac Hel sqns, last i saw, have their own Sigs sections to support the field CP and all that stuff that comes with living in the field with the Army. I can't see the Chinook sqn being any different.

The IT and COMSEC stuff can easily be handled by base as it is elsewhere.

 

[Old Sweat]

I'm not sure about the comsec stuff being done by somebody else, and it's been several decades since my custodian* course, but somebody has to hold, issue, receive and all the rest when the squadron is in the weeds. I suggest that is something that ultimately falls on the CO's shoulders, and he will want a competent authority of his own to do the hard stuff.

* I learned my real custodian skills in recruit training, and I still wield a mean mop, but the other custodian course is where I first learned really net terms like "This page intentionally left blank."

 

[aesop081]

but somebody has to hold, issue, receive and all the rest when the squadron is in the weeds.

That does not create a requirement for a signaler. My unit for example draws its COMSEC stuff from the Wing vault when we deploy but we do not take a Jimmy with us.

 

[REDinstaller]

Tac Hel Sqns also have CPs in the field as you Sqn would not. As per the COMSEC account, this is a unit holding not Base.

 

[aesop081]

Tac Hel Sqns also have CPs in the field as you Sqn would not.

While this is true at home, when deployed on OP MOBILE we most certainly did have a CP and still no requirement for a signaler to handle COMSEC.

 

[PuckChaser]

While this is true at home, when deployed on OP MOBILE we most certainly did have a CP and still no requirement for a signaler to handle COMSEC.

Did you have an actual COMSEC account created for MOBILE, or were you just drawing from another unit as it was a snap deployment?

 

[Good2Golf]

The NCO I/C Sigs is usually the custodian and the OpsO or his/her designate is often the alternate custodian.  The OpsO is responsible to the CO to ensure that cryptographic material and equipment is handled IAW applicable regulations and policies.  At Tac Hel squadrons, the Sigs section is within the Ops Flight, hence the OpsO's responsibility to the CO for crypto.  As the unit holds most crypto (less that for specialized systems held by formation - a specific case within tac hel sqns) on their own unit accounts, the CO is ultimately responsible for its proper handling, as Old Sweat noted earlier.

Regards
G2G

 

[aesop081]

Did you have an actual COMSEC account created for MOBILE, or were you just drawing from another unit as it was a snap deployment?

COMSEC was drawn from 14 and 19 Wing crypto vaults by each respective crew when we departed. Further COMSEC was sent to us later and was handled by our own guys. We did not have signalers in our organization.

Can a Tac Hel Sqn in Petawawa not draw its COMSEC from Base when i needs to go in the field ? How are CH-146 Sqn organized now WRT to signalers ?

Edit : Thanks to G2G for the organization rundown.

 

[PuckChaser]

There are army sigs in each of the CH-146 Sqns, the number 3 comes to mind but I'd have to check at work tomorrow. G2G might have the number off-hand though.

That would be a big PITA if they had to go to LFCADA in Pet and sign out crypto everytime they wanted to train with it, not to mention the items to run secure circuits in the building. You have a bone to pick with SigOps being employed at Tac Hel? Seems like you don't want us there....

 

[Jammer]

2 CMBG Sigs LFCDA will control distribution to the Sqn Sig section. How that section will look is TBD.

 

[aesop081]

You have a bone to pick with SigOps being employed at Tac Hel?

Nope.

 

[PuckChaser]

2 CMBG Sigs LFCDA will control distribution to the Sqn Sig section. How that section will look is TBD.

Is that typical of the other accounts in the Bde, being a sub-account of LFCDA?

 

[Good2Golf]

2 CMBG Sigs LFCDA will control distribution to the Sqn Sig section. How that section will look is TBD.

Is that typical of the other accounts in the Bde, being a sub-account of LFCDA?

It's* distributed to the sqn, from the Bde's Crypto Dist Authority when required and held by the unit's custodian (NCO I/C Sigs in the Pet case.)  Three (3) is (or was just a few years ago) a good number for conventional TH Sqn sig ops tasks.  Other stuff is appropriately looked after by other folks.

Cheers
G2G


* - conventional crypto

 

[REDinstaller]

All Bde units are sub-acct holders of their appropriate LCFDA. The only exception would be while on Operations where units would not transfer items to an AOR, they would draw upon arrival.

 

[observor 69]

Speaking to the thread title :

RAF New Chinook Helicopters

Defence Secretary Visits RAF Odiham To Announce £1BN Contract For 14 New Chinook Helicopters...

The Defence Secretary, Dr Liam Fox, has today announced a contract award for 14 new Chinook helicopters, the RAF’s workhorse on the frontline in Afghanistan.

The contract with Boeing to supply the Chinook heavy lift helicopters will bring a significant enhancement to the mobility of frontline forces. Already the largest fleet in Europe, this new contract will bring the UK’s overall number of Chinooks to 60.

http://www.raf.mod.uk/news/archive/new-chinook-helicopters-22082011

 

[Gorgo]

Good for them.  :nod:

 

[HeavyHooker]

That is kind of a shocker considering all of the austerity measures in place through out the Brit military. 

 

[Kirkhill]

Daily Mirror

The broken Tory promise on new Chinook helicopters is a betrayal of British troops in Afghanistan.

And it exposes the tawdry use of the Forces as a political football by a party that talks a good game yet runs and hides on the pitch.

To slash Labour's order for 22 Chinooks to 14 is bad enough but delaying deployment of them until 2015 - after operations are due to cease - is contemptible.


Shame on David Cameron and Defence Secretary Liam Fox who repeatedly challenged Labour when it was in power to produce the extra helicopters.

Axing troops, freezing pay, scuttling our only aircraft carrier and now ditching Chinooks prove the Government has launched a devastating attack to destroy Britain's military


Read more: http://www.mirror.co.uk/opinion/voiceofthemirror/2011/08/23/chinook-deployment-delat-is-contemptible-115875-23365842/#ixzz1W3QxLxUs
Go Camping for 95p! Vouchers collectable in the Daily and Sunday Mirror until 11th August . Click here for more information

The Mirror is not my preferred source but was quick to hand as I head out the door.

To be fair to Cameron Labour's actual promise was on a par with 2 per man per week perhaps.  The promise was for 12 immediately (which I don't believe they actually got around to ordering) and up to 10 at some indefinite point on the horizon.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Meanwhile, back here....

Four Chinook helicopters flown by the Canadian military in the deserts of southern Afghanistan soon will be headed to another desert — in Arizona.

Unable to sell the aging aircraft, the federal government has decided to ship the Chinooks to the 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group, a U.S. air force installation known as "The Boneyard."

The helicopters will be stored at the open-air facility outside Tucson until the government can find a buyer, said Tracy Poirier, a spokeswoman for the Defence Department.

The department, however, declined to provide a cost estimate for the storage, saying it is prohibited from revealing the details of contracts made with a foreign governments.

"This was the most economical option available to us," Poirier said. "This facility is the biggest of its kind in North America and very specialized at storing and reinstating old aircraft." ....

Postmedia News, 26 Aug 11