Army aviation battalions are organized, and likely function differently from Navy or Air Force. [I don't know how Marine aviation units are organized or staffed.]
Army pilots/flight crews fly whatever aircraft they are assigned to that day. If they fly the same aircraft two times in a row, it's blind luck. [It is possible that AF, Marine and Navy flight crews' aircraft are similarly assigned on a luck of the draw basis - I don't know.] Army maintainers work on whatever aircraft they are assigned to work on...they don't "own" an aircraft.
Air Force and Navy aircraft are "owned" by the maintenance groups. And those AF and Navy maintainer groups have a different chain of command from the flyers. By contrast, Army aircraft are "owned" by the aviation battalions' flight companies, and those flight companies' staff include their own enlisted maintainers. And that organizational distinction makes a big difference. Army aviation battalion leadership can implicitly put pressure on their flight company commanders, who in turn can "influence" flight companies' maintainers to "make it happen" (wink, wink).
In today's Army aviation units, everything done to an aircraft is meticulously recorded (electronically). [I suspect AF and Navy units are the same.] Any failure immediately triggers research from that maintenance database: who did the work? What work was done? Did the work (reported to have been) done strictly comply with the maintenance manuals? Who (name of the enlisted supervisor) inspected it? What maintenance test pilot (name of the MTP) "audited" everything? What MTP signed off on the bird as being flightworthy? What Maintenance Evaluator ("ME") evaluated the MTP and certified that said MTP's competence passed muster? Etc. etc.
In the event of any failure that results in "significant" damage or destruction of an aircraft, an Army accident investigation group almost invariably reviews everything. And if there's a death involved, the review runs to the competence of the maintainers, MTP, flight crew, instructor pilot who trained that flight crew, battalion BAMO and commander, etc.
It gets very serious very quickly. Bad findings trigger court marshals and possibly Donald Ducks (dishonorable discharges).
At least that's what my son - an Army CWO Blackhawk pilot - tells me. I believe him. He's personally witnessed such things while assigned to the 160th (enlisted maintainer), and the 101st and 82nd Airborne divisions and 1st Cav (pilot, MTP and ME).
Army pilots/flight crews fly whatever aircraft they are assigned to that day. If they fly the same aircraft two times in a row, it's blind luck. [It is possible that AF, Marine and Navy flight crews' aircraft are similarly assigned on a luck of the draw basis - I don't know.] Army maintainers work on whatever aircraft they are assigned to work on...they don't "own" an aircraft.
Air Force and Navy aircraft are "owned" by the maintenance groups. And those AF and Navy maintainer groups have a different chain of command from the flyers. By contrast, Army aircraft are "owned" by the aviation battalions' flight companies, and those flight companies' staff include their own enlisted maintainers. And that organizational distinction makes a big difference. Army aviation battalion leadership can implicitly put pressure on their flight company commanders, who in turn can "influence" flight companies' maintainers to "make it happen" (wink, wink).
In today's Army aviation units, everything done to an aircraft is meticulously recorded (electronically). [I suspect AF and Navy units are the same.] Any failure immediately triggers research from that maintenance database: who did the work? What work was done? Did the work (reported to have been) done strictly comply with the maintenance manuals? Who (name of the enlisted supervisor) inspected it? What maintenance test pilot (name of the MTP) "audited" everything? What MTP signed off on the bird as being flightworthy? What Maintenance Evaluator ("ME") evaluated the MTP and certified that said MTP's competence passed muster? Etc. etc.
In the event of any failure that results in "significant" damage or destruction of an aircraft, an Army accident investigation group almost invariably reviews everything. And if there's a death involved, the review runs to the competence of the maintainers, MTP, flight crew, instructor pilot who trained that flight crew, battalion BAMO and commander, etc.
It gets very serious very quickly. Bad findings trigger court marshals and possibly Donald Ducks (dishonorable discharges).
At least that's what my son - an Army CWO Blackhawk pilot - tells me. I believe him. He's personally witnessed such things while assigned to the 160th (enlisted maintainer), and the 101st and 82nd Airborne divisions and 1st Cav (pilot, MTP and ME).
Quite an experience.
