How are callsigns used within a US Army Attack Helicopter Battalion/Company?

[shagrat]

Am 9.11.2021 um 16:39 schrieb Zeagle:

Callsigns are assigned to flights. They don't just pick them themselves. For example, take the 93rd TFS MAKOS. Their approved callsigns include MAKO, SHARK, and AKULA. They usually append a number on the end of that to help differentiate callsigns in the ATC environment.  You might have MAKO11 flight of 4 and SHARK21 flight of 4.  The individual callsigns would be MAKO11, MAKO12, MAKO13, and MAKO14 and likewise for the SHARK flight. When joined-up they use the callsign of the lead aircraft. When they split up they use their individual callsign such as SHARK22 or SHARK23, etc. When a flight is joined up, only one aircraft talks to ATC.

Those numbers appended to the callsign have no relevance to any number physically on the plane. The Navy is a different in that they use the board number or MODEX for certain operations. I do not know how the Army does it. 

I am sure that an ATO would direct a squadron to use certain callsigns and flight numbers in order to cut down on confusion. 

Now, a JTAC or AWACS controller, or some other kind of commander onboard an aircraft will usually have a pre-briefed callsign that they will use. All players are usually aware of this callsign.  An AWACS controller might have a specific callsign to use independent of the callsign of the aircraft he is in.  

 

 

 

That's how it's done in the Air Force... As someone mentioned above, the Army Air Corps is a bit different.

I found the "Dragon 34 dash -1" bit very interesting, as I've never heard, read this before. 

 

[Raptor9]

4 hours ago, shagrat said:

I found the "Dragon 34 dash -1" bit very interesting, as I've never heard, read this before. 

That's because, depending on the structure of the theater ATO assignments, the lead aircraft could be Dragon 34, and the trail could be Dragon 27.

In this case it would get very confusing calling one aircraft vs the other to coordinate fires, and trying to keep them sorted. Since the lead aircraft's primary responsibility is talking to the ground force, the flight just uses the lead callsign, but appends "dash 1" or "dash 2" to signify lead or trail.

[shagrat]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb Raptor9:

That's because, depending on the structure of the theater ATO assignments, the lead aircraft could be Dragon 34, and the trail could be Dragon 27.

In this case it would get very confusing calling one aircraft vs the other to coordinate fires, and trying to keep them sorted. Since the lead aircraft's primary responsibility is talking to the ground force, the flight just uses the lead callsign, but appends "dash 1" or "dash 2" to signify lead or trail.

Yep, but air force usually organizes flights under the same callsign and "No." so a "Mako 3" flight consists of "Mako 3-1 and Mako3-2 (-3, -4)" and "Mako 4" would be another F-16 flight. It seems that numbering logic for the callsign does not translate 100% to the Army Air Corps?

I noticed the British WAH-64 squadrons start counting with 0 so you happen to have "Dragon 0-1" and "Dragon 0-2" as callsigns, but then it's not the Army anyway, but apart from that they follow the Callsign FlightNo.-Position scheme. 

 

Edited November 23, 2021 by shagrat

[shagrat]

vor 6 Stunden schrieb kgillers3:

Only time I do it is when working terminal control with a jtac so he doesn’t get confused on what ship he’s talking too. Because when we check in it’s Apache 1-1 flight of 2. So if I’m dash 2 I’ll call -2 in etc. or are you exampling the 34 part specifically. 

 

What is interesting is the Callsign + No. with 34 and(!) dash 1/2 for the aircraft. I mostly read it as the first number after the Callsign as the flight and the second already identifying the position. So "Apache 34" 'should' be Apache 3 flights second elements wingman?

Are there situations where you have 27 or even 34 flights with the callsign Apache scheduled or is that 27/ 34 from the aircraft ID and the individual calllsign of the aircraft?

[Raptor9]

59 minutes ago, shagrat said:

What is interesting is the Callsign + No. with 34 and(!) dash 1/2 for the aircraft. I mostly read it as the first number after the Callsign as the flight and the second already identifying the position. So "Apache 34" 'should' be Apache 3 flights second elements wingman?

Are there situations where you have 27 or even 34 flights with the callsign Apache scheduled or is that 27/ 34 from the aircraft ID and the individual calllsign of the aircraft?

Yep, I'm aware of the various methods for assigning callsigns among flights.  However, I'm referring to the common methodology that US Army Aviation is placed on the Air Tasking Order.  As I mentioned, it depends on theater; or more specifically how the CAOC/JAOC is managing the ATO.  In the example I listed above, Dragon 34 and Dragon 27 are assigned to two specific AH-64 tail numbers on the ATO.  Regardless of whether they are in the same flight, those are the callsigns assigned to those aircraft.  There may be more than one naming convention for labeling aircraft callsigns that exists in the same ATO document.  You could have two AH-64's in a flight with callsigns Dragon 34 and Dragon 27, and overhead working the same area are a flight of F-16's with callsigns Viper 71 and Viper 72.

But again, as I mentioned, it can vary depending on the circumstances.  You could have two AH-64's assigned callsigns of Dragon 34 and Dragon 27, where those two callsigns are assigned to specific tail numbers, and then another pair of AH-64's from the very same unit, that very same day, are assigned callsigns of Dragon 03 and Dragon 04 because of the specific mission tasking they are on, regardless of what tail numbers are placed on that mission.  And this is all in the same ATO cycle.

The point being is that there is no universal standard, even within a single ATO cycle in a theater.  It is all based on how the over-arching command, control and communications plans are implemented on any given day, and you may have all sorts of different countries and military branches operating in that theater.  This is why, depending on the unit the AH-64's are talking to (and I'm only speaking about US Army Aviation AH-64's here), they may simply use the lead aircraft's callsign, regardless of the number of digits, and then just add "dash 1", "dash 2", "dash 3", etc, to make it easier for the supported ground unit they are communicating with.

[Sinclair_76]

On 11/12/2021 at 4:14 PM, Remco said:

Meanwhile the most patriotic callsign I've had is "Windmill"....

 

Dutch SF have used the callsign Nassau. I would consider that more patriotic than Windmill.

[Paladin1cd]

I know 1-227 AVN used Dragonfly 4-1 for example. 

[Remco]

On 11/25/2021 at 7:13 AM, Sinclair_76 said:

Dutch SF have used the callsign Nassau. I would consider that more patriotic than Windmill.

Well yes, but I'm not SF, I'm just a humble apache driver, hence I had to make do with Windmill.

Worst of all we don't even get to use the Redskin callsign anymore nowadays because it gets the Americans knickers in a bunch... 

[Sinclair_76]

4 hours ago, Remco said:

Well yes, but I'm not SF, I'm just a humble apache driver, hence I had to make do with Windmill.

Worst of all we don't even get to use the Redskin callsign anymore nowadays because it gets the Americans knickers in a bunch... 

What are you using instead?

[hannibal]

On 11/8/2021 at 5:08 PM, MrReynolds said:

Being Cornish / English,  I'm calling the "Ugly 1,1" call sign

i am going for "potato 1,1" call sign lol

[Zeagle]

On 11/23/2021 at 8:21 AM, Raptor9 said:

That's because, depending on the structure of the theater ATO assignments, the lead aircraft could be Dragon 34, and the trail could be Dragon 27.

In this case it would get very confusing calling one aircraft vs the other to coordinate fires, and trying to keep them sorted. Since the lead aircraft's primary responsibility is talking to the ground force, the flight just uses the lead callsign, but appends "dash 1" or "dash 2" to signify lead or trail.

This is fine if there is just one flight in the area. But get two flights in there and this gets confusing fast as there could be two "dash 2" guys answering. Flights always use the lead callsign, such as "DRAGN34" and add their position to it. In this case wingmen would be "DRAGN35", "DRAGN36", etc.  (BTW...5 letters only for the callsign) This way you know which aircraft in which flight you are talking to. The wingmen never get on the radio unless the flight has been split up.  Obviously they are on some intercom or interflight freq to talk among themselves.

If two flights have joined, then you could have for example DRAGN34 with DRAGN27. They would use the lead callsign for ATC until split up. In this case they would advise ATC that the wingman is actually DRAGN27 or vice versa depending on who was in the lead. If they were talking to some ground unit, I am sure there would be some sort of pre-brief as to who was going to be doing what.  

As far as the ARMY way of doing things, I have no idea. I did talk to many US ARMY helos in my career. All the flights I worked  conformed to the above description. We never had confusion as to who was who. Except maybe that one time the USAF tried to intercept some US ARMY helos during my busy day working the Cayman Caravan. But that is a story for another day.

[kgillers3]

1 minute ago, Zeagle said:

This is fine if there is just one flight in the area. But get two flights in there and this gets confusing fast as there could be two "dash 2" guys answering. Flights always use the lead callsign, such as "DRAGN34" and add their position to it. In this case wingmen would be "DRAGN35", "DRAGN36", etc.  (BTW...5 letters only for the callsign) This way you know which aircraft in which flight you are talking to. The wingmen never get on the radio unless the flight has been split up.  Obviously they are on some intercom or interflight freq to talk among themselves.

If two flights have joined, then you could have for example DRAGN34 with DRAGN27. They would use the lead callsign for ATC until split up. In this case they would advise ATC that the wingman is actually DRAGN27 or vice versa depending on who was in the lead. If they were talking to some ground unit, I am sure there would be some sort of pre-brief as to who was going to be doing what.  

As far as the ARMY way of doing things, I have no idea. I did talk to many US ARMY helos in my career. All the flights I worked  conformed to the above description. We never had confusion as to who was who. Except maybe that one time the USAF tried to intercept some US ARMY helos during my busy day working the Cayman Caravan. But that is a story for another day.

-2 isn’t for atc, it’s for the jtac or ground force controller for engagements. 
 

think “and flight”, that’s a atc ism. That doesn’t go to the ground dude for engagements.

[Zeagle]

Yes but get two flights orbiting the target and your screwed with the -2 ism

 

But I mean we can all do what we want. It's our sim and our servers..

[Zeagle]

it's all good man. I understand what you are saying. But I think that for most DCS players, this and anything radio related is a bit of a mystery. 

It would be nice if we could get some folks from the real world all together on the same server to create a more realistic training environment for DCS. This is something I have tried to do in the past but with limited success. 

If you are interested, maybe we could work on something.

 

[Raptor9]

2 hours ago, Zeagle said:

This is fine if there is just one flight in the area. But get two flights in there and this gets confusing fast as there could be two "dash 2" guys answering. Flights always use the lead callsign, such as "DRAGN34" and add their position to it. In this case wingmen would be "DRAGN35", "DRAGN36", etc.  (BTW...5 letters only for the callsign) This way you know which aircraft in which flight you are talking to. The wingmen never get on the radio unless the flight has been split up.  Obviously they are on some intercom or interflight freq to talk among themselves.

Not everything is so cookie cutter.  A lot of the times, things rapidly become "brief by exception".  For example, let's say that "Dragon" was the callsign of a two-ship of Apaches and "Hawg" was the callsign of two A-10's, both overhead working the exact same area with the same JTAC.  In this case, yes, the second Apache would most likely not simply say "dash 2" to announce his identity, but it might be "Dragon dash 2" to delineate himself from "Hawg dash 2".  But again, even that is not always the case when all players understand the context of the situation.  If the JTAC hears "Two in with Hellfire from the east", then he obviously knows the Apache is firing because the A-10 doesn't carry Hellfires.  But we are really going down the rabbit hole on this one.  My point is, when the players (aircrews and JTAC alike) understand the situation and have built up a good rhythm, the communication can become less formal and more efficient.  But it all depends on the individual situation.  To be clear, I am not referring to "players" as in DCS players, I'm talking players within an prescribed tactical area.

Regarding the "5 letters only for the callsign", that has zero relevance to checking in on the radio with a JTAC.  You aren't submitting a flight plan to him, you are saying in plain English what your callsign is.  And wingmen do get on the radio if necessary.  Again, things are rarely "it will be this way only, always".  Yes, the lead aircraft is the primary person to talk to the ground force/JTAC, but there are plenty of instances in which the second aircraft speaks directly to the JTAC.

2 hours ago, Zeagle said:

As far as the ARMY way of doing things, I have no idea. I did talk to many US ARMY helos in my career. All the flights I worked  conformed to the above description. We never had confusion as to who was who.

Other branches or nations may have more strict procedures that dictate "you will only do it this way with no deviation", but I've seen many instances in which the situation forced such deviations due to tactical necessity.  If you have two Apaches scanning each side of a village for hostiles, and the wingman sees several individuals with weapons advancing through an alley on the friendlies, in that instance it is much more conducive to have him call the JTAC directly with his contact report.  Versus playing the telephone game back and forth, which takes time that they may not have, and the lead aircraft often times doesn't have the ability to describe what his wingman is seeing as well as his wingman can.  Especially when it comes to articulating exactly what the individuals are doing to ensure they are in fact hostile.

Or it's as simple as the JTAC directs the wingman to call in his attacks or sensor contacts directly.

[gatordev]

I get the impression that there's also a misunderstanding between a JANAP callsign, an ATC call sign (which may or may not be a JANAP), and a tactical call sign.  A tactical call sign could be just a section/division (or whatever the Army calls that) C/S, or as mentioned earlier, it could also be from an ATO. 

JANAPs are a more organized C/S structure that can go from high echelon all the way down to an individual asset, although it's typically used at the unit-level (ship, aircraft, etc).  While the JANAP instruction is massive, it's never current, so there's lots of variations from what might just be written in there.

Obviously this is more service specific and not Army related, but it's also possible to take off as JANAP 703, get to the range, and then use a tactical C/S (HAWK ONE-ONE) for either interplane and/or working with other playmates.  As raptor and others have said, it can be very situation dependent.

I've also seen it where Apaches will be tasked by someone other than a JTAC or FAC, and instead is controlled by someone who doesn't control the terminal phase of the weapons (SCAR).  And the SCAR doesn't really care what the callsign is, but if controlling multiple sections, both callsign and "side number" (which could just be 1-1 or 1-2) is extremely helpful in sorting, because the SCAR is probably managing assets by some means other than visual, and across longer distances than a JTAC.

[Raptor9]

And to further convolute the discussion, when doing platoon or company level missions, the aircraft may use team-organized callsigns where two Apaches are Red Team, and two more are White Team, etc. In this case, the callsigns used within the flight would be "Red 1, Red 2, White 1, and White 2" while the air mission commander would be reporting back to higher headquarters with his own callsign. Example: the company commander calling back as "Dragon 6".

This set up allows him to maneuver his teams on the battlefield and perform command and control more efficiently. Each team might have an assigned sector, target set, objective, or role on the mission.

Edited December 16, 2021 by Raptor9

[CybrSlydr]

Are we going to have to call the local COPs when we fly near and ask for rouse and gun status? 

"Banshee 1-1, Gator Main.  Rouse and gun status cold, over"

Don't want us to catch a 105mm round or be near the impact zone.  lol

[kgillers3]

1 hour ago, CybrSlydr said:

Are we going to have to call the local COPs when we fly near and ask for rouse and gun status? 

"Banshee 1-1, Gator Main.  Rouse and gun status cold, over"

Don't want us to catch a 105mm round or be near the impact zone.  lol

Just do it like the civ mi-8s. Just fly in Small bullet big sky

[q800]

A small anegdote from the army i serve.

Ok. So there's a this little, OFFICIALLY aprooved by the Ministry of Defence, field manual, more of a quick reference book for N.C.Os, usually infantry squad leaders. And there's a JTAC chapter with whole procedure, authentication, ramrod, check-in, that kind of thing, and there's exemplary chatter between delivery guy and customer. Some funny guy put there something like this as an example: "JTAC 11, this is HOTLESBIAN 11 radio check/how do you read? HOTLESBIAN 11, this is JTAC 11 read you LC."

Now that's a catchy name for ya!

Edited December 28, 2021 by q800

[AlphaOneSix]

On 12/28/2021 at 6:29 PM, q800 said:

HOTLESBIAN

I was fond of suggesting that for use as a SARNEG since it's 10 non-repeating letters.

[q800]

Yes, you're right. Thought that would be a little bit funny. As i remember sarneg example in this book is SUPERWOMAN. Or i made up something in purpose of presenting funny fact. It's been long time since i've checked that book, that is basicaly a learning script for fresh NCOs. Nevemind. ED give AH-64. NOW.  Seriously, i can't wait for it. 

Edited December 30, 2021 by q800

[sasquatch98]

Just to be little pedantic I saw it referred to as the Army Air Corps in the thread that hasn’t existed since 1947, it’s the Aviation branch normally just referred to as Army Aviation in the US.

[Raptor9]

2 hours ago, sasquatch98 said:

Just to be little pedantic I saw it referred to as the Army Air Corps in the thread that hasn’t existed since 1947, it’s the Aviation branch normally just referred to as Army Aviation in the US.

They were referring to a different nation's military.  Not everyone follows the same naming convention for their Army helos as the US Army.