LCACs and tsunami support?

On 5 Jan 2005 21:22:29 -0800, wrote:

Speaking of helicopters, how come they're not sling-loading
nets/pallets of supplies?

Perhaps because SH-60Fs aboard carriers aren't intended for such
missions and don't have the proper equipment?

These are ANTI-SUBMARINE helicopters, NOT cargo aircraft.

--
Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself"
"Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/

Andrew C. Toppan wrote:
On 5 Jan 2005 21:22:29 -0800, wrote:


Speaking of helicopters, how come they're not sling-loading
nets/pallets of supplies?


Perhaps because SH-60Fs aboard carriers aren't intended for such
missions and don't have the proper equipment?

These are ANTI-SUBMARINE helicopters, NOT cargo aircraft.

Andrew, the SH-60B and F variants are both equipped with single
6000lb capacity cargo hooks that open approximately 2 inches for a
pendant. Both are very visible in the relief effort. Which proper
equipment do they not have?

Often you post good information here, often you come across as very
rude, and sometimes you are wrong. This time, you are the second
case, the third case, and plain full of crap all at once.

To be sure, go to news.navy.mil, click on "search" at the top of the
page, select photos, then type "sh-60f" and "vertrep" in the field.

You know, nobody is right all the time, but the guy asked a
legitimate question and he asked politely.

On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 23:27:22 -0600, Jim Carriere
wrote:

Andrew, the SH-60B and F variants are both equipped with single
6000lb capacity cargo hooks that open approximately 2 inches for a
[snippage]

I am well aware of this.

Had I posted all this, your response probably would have been
something like this:

VERTREP is not the same as delivering humanitarian supplies into
undeveloped or devastated areas. VERTREP transfers prepared,
palletized cargo between two flat decks. This relief operation
requires flying supplies (which probably are not palletized,
containerized, or otherise easy to handle) into forward areas where
there may be no place to land, no place safe to set a heavy load,
nobody on the ground to receive the cargo, no organization, and indeed
vast hordes of people rushing the aircraft. This is different from
VERTREP and requires different gear - are you going to leave all your
slings and pallets behind every time if you have no way to retrieve
them?

--
Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself"
"Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/

Andrew C. Toppan wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 23:27:22 -0600, Jim Carriere
wrote:


Andrew, the SH-60B and F variants are both equipped with single
6000lb capacity cargo hooks that open approximately 2 inches for a

[snippage]

I am well aware of this.

Had I posted all this, your response probably would have been
something like this:

VERTREP is not the same as delivering humanitarian supplies into
undeveloped or devastated areas. VERTREP transfers prepared,
decent explanation of logistics issues

I don't follow your response.

Walt BJ asked a fairly broad question, inquiring why the helicopters
were not sling loading nets and pallets. You answered very
specifically that SH-60Fs did not have the proper equipment. I said
wait, they do have hooks, what other equipment does a helicopter need
to carry a sling load?

Now you answer, backtracking then speculating about a response I
supposedly would have written had your answer about SH-60F equipment???

The gist of my reply to you was threefold: One, that the 60F (and
60B, which in this case is aboard the aircraft carrier) is capable of
carrying slung cargo. Two, that you answered Walt BJ unnecessarily
and unprovoked rudeness that is characteristic of many of your
answers. Three, it is OK with me to be wrong here, no one is
perfect. The problem is rudeness plus being wrong is very unproductive.

Let me be clear- if you meant that the carrier based squadrons lacked
equipment to sustain a sling load logistics effort, that you knew all
along that of course all of the aircraft have cargo hooks, and I
interpreted your answer as a different meaning- that is fine with
me... oh well, just another misunderstanding on usenet.

Getting back to the subject line (this is not meant to sound
insulting), I'm sure you realize the 60F is a minor part of the
relief effort, and there are several other helicopter types operating
over there.

Chill it, you guys!

As an ex-LPD, LPH, PHIBRON Commander, my PHIBGRU's constant chant was -
"Sailor, there's a way!"


"Jim Carriere" wrote in message
...
Andrew C. Toppan wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 23:27:22 -0600, Jim Carriere
wrote:


Andrew, the SH-60B and F variants are both equipped with single
6000lb capacity cargo hooks that open approximately 2 inches for a

[snippage]

I am well aware of this.

Had I posted all this, your response probably would have been
something like this:

VERTREP is not the same as delivering humanitarian supplies into
undeveloped or devastated areas. VERTREP transfers prepared,
decent explanation of logistics issues

I don't follow your response.

Walt BJ asked a fairly broad question, inquiring why the helicopters
were not sling loading nets and pallets. You answered very
specifically that SH-60Fs did not have the proper equipment. I said
wait, they do have hooks, what other equipment does a helicopter need
to carry a sling load?

Now you answer, backtracking then speculating about a response I
supposedly would have written had your answer about SH-60F equipment???

The gist of my reply to you was threefold: One, that the 60F (and
60B, which in this case is aboard the aircraft carrier) is capable of
carrying slung cargo. Two, that you answered Walt BJ unnecessarily
and unprovoked rudeness that is characteristic of many of your
answers. Three, it is OK with me to be wrong here, no one is
perfect. The problem is rudeness plus being wrong is very unproductive.

Let me be clear- if you meant that the carrier based squadrons lacked
equipment to sustain a sling load logistics effort, that you knew all
along that of course all of the aircraft have cargo hooks, and I
interpreted your answer as a different meaning- that is fine with
me... oh well, just another misunderstanding on usenet.

Getting back to the subject line (this is not meant to sound
insulting), I'm sure you realize the 60F is a minor part of the
relief effort, and there are several other helicopter types operating
over there.

On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 12:11:56 -0600, Jim Carriere
wrote:

I don't follow your response.

My point is this: no matter what I had said, you probably would have
objected and said my answer was silly, because you're in the mood to
argue.

When we started this, SH-60s appeared to be the only (naval)
helicopters involved in the mission (the amphibs weren't in range
yet). That has changed now, but your argument about other aircraft
being involved is irrelevant at the time of the original question.

And if we really want to talk about what's silly, the original
question is a bit odd - did anybody know if helos were using cargo
slings or not, or did someone just *assume* this because they hadn't
*seen* a picture of it happen? It's a safe bet we haven't seen
pictures of even 1% of what's going on over there.

Considering it was basically a hypothetical question, I provided a
pretty good hypothetical answer. Nobody said it was the only possible
answer.

--
Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself"
"Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/

Andrew C. Toppan wrote:
On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 12:11:56 -0600, Jim Carriere
wrote:

I don't follow your response.

....
When we started this, SH-60s appeared to be the only (naval)
helicopters involved in the mission (the amphibs weren't in range
yet). That has changed now, but your argument about other aircraft
being involved is irrelevant at the time of the original question.
....

OK, now I follow, and I think I see your point of view. Most of my
exception to your original reply (to Walt BJ, not me) was due to the
tone- you did use capital letters, which normally means shouting. In
my original reply, I did include a statement that you often post good
information.

As the last poster directed, I'll chill it now.

----------
In article , Jim Carriere
wrote:

Two, that you answered Walt BJ unnecessarily
and unprovoked rudeness that is characteristic of many of your
answers.

I'm with you here--he thinks he knows so much that he is quick to be rude to
anybody he suspects does not know as much as he does. Occasionally this
results in his inserting his foot in his mouth, as he did here. He needs to
remove that foot and use the mouth to eat some humble pie instead.




D

On 9 Jan 2005 01:12:03 GMT, Clark wrote:

(argumentative). That is just downright wrong. The only way to train the boy
is to point out his errors, no ifs ands or buts.

The last thing I need is this stupid "train the boy" attitude. This
just tells me you're a grizzled cantancerous old man who can't stand
anybody who isn't the same way.

--
Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself"
"Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/

Andrew C. Toppan wrote:
The last thing I need is this stupid "train the boy" attitude. This
just tells me you're a grizzled cantancerous old man who can't stand
anybody who isn't the same way.

Most boys would react the same. Most men would appreciate the criticism.

--
John Miller, Navy veteran, experienced as both man and boy