- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
com'on we cant lose alberta rednecks in power! They have and always will do whatever they can for the military.
Canadian Special Operations Regiment (CSOR)
- Thread starter little jim
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
What does this mean:
F. FOR CAT 1 PERS - APPLICANTS MUST NOT HAVE
PHOBIAS TO HEIGHTS, WATER OR CONFINED SPACES. APPLICANTS MUST BE BASIC PARA
QUALIFIED OR VOL FOR BASIC PARA TRAINING IF NOT QUALIFIED.
Does it mean you have to be basic para, or that you would be willing to take basic para if it ever popped up?
F. FOR CAT 1 PERS - APPLICANTS MUST NOT HAVE
PHOBIAS TO HEIGHTS, WATER OR CONFINED SPACES. APPLICANTS MUST BE BASIC PARA
QUALIFIED OR VOL FOR BASIC PARA TRAINING IF NOT QUALIFIED.
Does it mean you have to be basic para, or that you would be willing to take basic para if it ever popped up?
M
MikeL
Guest
You either must already have your wings, or be willing to go on the course.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
I learned a new word today:
Constraints
want me to use an example?
I also learned a new phase today too:
Commanding Officer's Discretion
In combination these two things may be bad for any applicants.
Particularly if you are in a unit such as mine which is underborne and anticipating operations in the next 5 months.
Constraints
want me to use an example?
I also learned a new phase today too:
Commanding Officer's Discretion
In combination these two things may be bad for any applicants.
Particularly if you are in a unit such as mine which is underborne and anticipating operations in the next 5 months.
I wasn't aware that we had a Canadian equivalent to the, AH/MH-6 Little Bird, MH-60 Pave Hawk, and MH-47E Chinook.short final said:
When did this come about?
Edited to add:
http://www.army.mil/calltoduty/
Click "skip intro"
Bottom right click on "open" in the "Warriors Corner" box
Then click on the
"CW5 Byron C. Edmonds and
CW5 Don Tabron
160th Special Operations Aviation Reg
Ft Campbell
"Special Operations Aviation in Afghanistan""
Video/PPT link for more 16oth capabilities.
- Reaction score
- 19,669
- Points
- 1,360
Blakey said:
CH-135 and CH146-based "mid-size" (MH-60-ish equivalent) SOA since 1990. I and many others have flown along side 160th SOAR(A) folks on exercises down South. There have also been other opportunities to work with and discuss SOA issues with 160th pers.
Cheers,
Duey
With all due respect sir, flying with and "having the same capabilities" are to diffrent animals.Duey said:
Ive trained 10 SFGP (ABN) and 5th SFGP, doesn't mean that the Canadian military has the same capabilities.
I find that hard to believe.
- Reaction score
- 19,669
- Points
- 1,360
Well, let me add more detail then...
1) Up until recently, we have had a capability closer to the FBI HRT Special Operation Aviation Unit...both using the CH135 and the CH146...in fact...the CH146 is close to being 100% similar aircraft type used by the FBI, let alone the very similar Dom CT role supported,
2) when I said MH-60-ish (note the -ish), my intention was to indicate where our SOA capability roughly sat. The MH-60 Pavehawk is considered a mission-specific variant of the US Army UTTH (utility tactical transport helicopter) which, interestingly, happens to be exactly what the CH146 Griffon is to the CF, the CFUTTH. I neither said explicitly nor implied that the CH135 or the CH146 had the "same capability" as the MH-60, and
3) By "flown along side", I meant that I have trained with the unit and have a good understanding of its operators, capabilities and procedures -- understanding where similarities exist, how we can best ensure interoperability or coordination of operations, or at the very least, learn from their experiences to apply to our own operations. Nowhere did I say that we either: a) "trained" the 160th SOAR(A) [as in them learning from us], or b) "have the same capabilities" as the entire 160th SOAR(A), both of which you most recent post seems to imply I said.
Any other stuff that I should pick out of the pepper? ???
Regards,
Duey
1) Up until recently, we have had a capability closer to the FBI HRT Special Operation Aviation Unit...both using the CH135 and the CH146...in fact...the CH146 is close to being 100% similar aircraft type used by the FBI, let alone the very similar Dom CT role supported,
2) when I said MH-60-ish (note the -ish), my intention was to indicate where our SOA capability roughly sat. The MH-60 Pavehawk is considered a mission-specific variant of the US Army UTTH (utility tactical transport helicopter) which, interestingly, happens to be exactly what the CH146 Griffon is to the CF, the CFUTTH. I neither said explicitly nor implied that the CH135 or the CH146 had the "same capability" as the MH-60, and
3) By "flown along side", I meant that I have trained with the unit and have a good understanding of its operators, capabilities and procedures -- understanding where similarities exist, how we can best ensure interoperability or coordination of operations, or at the very least, learn from their experiences to apply to our own operations. Nowhere did I say that we either: a) "trained" the 160th SOAR(A) [as in them learning from us], or b) "have the same capabilities" as the entire 160th SOAR(A), both of which you most recent post seems to imply I said.
Any other stuff that I should pick out of the pepper? ???
Regards,
Duey
This issue has come up numerous times among many - resentfulness is bound to rear its ugly head knowing that some members had to do more to get the tan beret than others.
But think about what you're upset about. Are you mad because someone else is going to be wearing a tan beret, and people will think that he went through all of this training to earn it, but in fact he didn't? If that's the case, well, its too bad that you're wasting your energy thinking about what complete strangers thinks of OTHER complete strangers. You and your peers know what you did to earn the beret, and that's all that should matter. Who cares what Joe Blow down at 427 did to earn his? Everyone who works for CANSOFCOM has a contribution to make towards the mission - and everyone will be recognized for it in the form of the tan beret. If your pride is hurt because of someone elses' apparent lack of contribution, then you have bigger problems.
On a different subject - as far as Cdn. Aviation vs 160th - Duey summed it up pretty well. I didn't say the Griffon could pull the same numbers as a 60, 147, or whatever. All I'm saying is that there has been a Special Operations Aviation capability since the early 90's with 450 Sqn supporting the RCMP SERT, which later evolved to JTF2 support. While the focus was more on domestic counter terrorism, there is a small out of area capability, and its about to get a lot bigger with the standing up of 427 Special Operations Aviation Squadron on Feb 1.
But think about what you're upset about. Are you mad because someone else is going to be wearing a tan beret, and people will think that he went through all of this training to earn it, but in fact he didn't? If that's the case, well, its too bad that you're wasting your energy thinking about what complete strangers thinks of OTHER complete strangers. You and your peers know what you did to earn the beret, and that's all that should matter. Who cares what Joe Blow down at 427 did to earn his? Everyone who works for CANSOFCOM has a contribution to make towards the mission - and everyone will be recognized for it in the form of the tan beret. If your pride is hurt because of someone elses' apparent lack of contribution, then you have bigger problems.
On a different subject - as far as Cdn. Aviation vs 160th - Duey summed it up pretty well. I didn't say the Griffon could pull the same numbers as a 60, 147, or whatever. All I'm saying is that there has been a Special Operations Aviation capability since the early 90's with 450 Sqn supporting the RCMP SERT, which later evolved to JTF2 support. While the focus was more on domestic counter terrorism, there is a small out of area capability, and its about to get a lot bigger with the standing up of 427 Special Operations Aviation Squadron on Feb 1.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
short final said:
TOO BAD? This unit may get spec pay. And some fat lazy will get the same pay. I think all have to do the testing. The American and Brit pilots have to do the same test as the ground fellas if they fly DELTA/SAS. WHY CAN'T OURS.
Recce, I'll be the first to agree with you about the PT thing - I'm a huge advocate of that. But someone upstairs decided it wasn't necessary - so don't blame the flyers and hold resentment towards them on that sole basis.
The spec pay issue was raised at BGen Barr's brief, but has not yet been considered, so I would drop that arguement. As far as being fat and lazy, I would take that up with the individual. Considering the company they'll be working with, I would consider it to be a matter of professionalism to maintain a level of physical fitness, even if they don't NEED to meet the same standard. If one doesn't, that's their personal, unfortunate issue.
The spec pay issue was raised at BGen Barr's brief, but has not yet been considered, so I would drop that arguement. As far as being fat and lazy, I would take that up with the individual. Considering the company they'll be working with, I would consider it to be a matter of professionalism to maintain a level of physical fitness, even if they don't NEED to meet the same standard. If one doesn't, that's their personal, unfortunate issue.
Similar threads
