5
5
0
Over the last year or so a debate has been going on about the FY15 Defense Authorization Act which included the transfer of more than 190 Apaches from the ARNG to the Active Army with the Guard receiving about 100 older model UH-60s in return. Now it seems that a compromise has been reached to keep about 150 of the AH-64s in the Guard.
Is this a good move for the Guard? What does this mean in the future for the Aviation community as a whole?
Is this a good move for the Guard? What does this mean in the future for the Aviation community as a whole?
Posted in these groups: 
Aviation
Aviation
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
2
2
0
This is a good move. The Air Guard has attack assets, why not the Army Guard as well? The LUH can barely carry itself, let alone armament. I suppose we could mod some A+ Hawks to be gunships. Those A+ models have some serious power. We were blowing away the M models and L models in Afghanistan.
I was reading an article the other day that talked about this as well as the DODs plan to scrap the A-10 getting the axe as well. I say good on you Congress on both matters.
I was reading an article the other day that talked about this as well as the DODs plan to scrap the A-10 getting the axe as well. I say good on you Congress on both matters.
(2)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
SSG (Join to see) The problem with the original proposal was that the ARNG was only going to get about 100 'Hawks to replace the 190+ Apaches. This would drastically change the make-up of the ARNGs aviation community as well as the ARNG as a whole.
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
SFC Mark Merino
"The authorization bill deal also includes language prohibiting the Defense Department from retiring the A-10, rejecting arguments by budget officials that the aging aircraft was too costly to maintain.
The compromise does include trims in flight hours and maintenance for the aircraft next year, but only after a readiness study is completed.
Likewise, lawmakers will block Army plans to retire any Army National Guard Apache helicopters next year, instead offering some budget relief to keep them operational."
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/benefits/pay/allowances/2014/12/02/ndaa-deal-pay-raise/19784183/
"The authorization bill deal also includes language prohibiting the Defense Department from retiring the A-10, rejecting arguments by budget officials that the aging aircraft was too costly to maintain.
The compromise does include trims in flight hours and maintenance for the aircraft next year, but only after a readiness study is completed.
Likewise, lawmakers will block Army plans to retire any Army National Guard Apache helicopters next year, instead offering some budget relief to keep them operational."
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/benefits/pay/allowances/2014/12/02/ndaa-deal-pay-raise/19784183/
NDAA deal hits troops' pay, housing allowances
Congressional compromise will hit troops wallets with a lower pay raise and higher prescription co-pays.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
How will this further affect my poor Kiowa pilots? I imagine they factored in those extra AH-64's into the mix when they were trying to figure out availability on the pitiful amount of retraining slots. If they axe more Kiowa pilots now I am going to throw myself on the floor and pout and cry. That will show them.
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
SFC Mark Merino , the original proposal had the LUH's leaving the Guard inventory for the RA as well. I would assume that some of those A/C would be what the Kiowa jocks would wind up in.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
I read the article, SFC (Join to see), and I think it makes the Guard a more ready force to join the fight. Taking away all the Apaches would have been bad news for the Guard. I guess they're desperately trying to save money any way possible. That usually results in diminished capability and readiness. I see the change from all 190 Apaches being transferred to a max of 48 being transferred as a positive sign, not only for the Guard, but for the entire force.
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
CW5 (Join to see) , I agree with you sir. I understand that in this era of budget crunch, we need to be better stewards of tax payer money. But, doing so at the expense of readiness is never an acceptable course of action IMO.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google