This taken from an on-line diary, allegedly from the magazine Private Eye
I liked the item in the current issue of "Private Eye", which has become essential reading:
"The extraordinary advance in 21st-century computer-guided laser weapons technology has been demonstrated to devastating effect in the first week of the war. The ability of the American missile systems to lock on to British targets, including warplanes, tanks and television crews, has stunned observers. Said one US ordnance expert: "With the progress we are making we should have neutralised the British forces by next week and will have secured London".
Surely no one is suggesting that British troops have been targeted by American missles intentionally right? If its a joke it really isnt very funny. A man leaving a war zone with the knowledge that he accidentally killed friends has a heavy burden indeed. The memory of those killed in unfortunate accidents would also be soiled by cheap accusations. In a war that has anywhere from 800-1200 fixed wing air craft and probably just as many helos in the sky 24 hours a day with some 150,000 troops on the ground, these things are going to happen. It really boils down to lack of communication on both sides. Allied forces working hand in hand yet somehow still seperate. In afghanistan 3 Canadians were killed by an American air strike. Its no big achievement to lay blame to people but the fact is that both were probably just doing their jobs. Thats fine except neither knew the other was there. A system where every single fighting element knows the location of every single other element would be perfect but I have yet to see such a system and doubt it is anywhere on the near horizon. We should all be united now more than ever.
Sorry TR, there's a major post on FF which Mark and Bruce probably have not read. Basically FF isn't and is definitely not to be the subject of 'humour'. The person who presses the button must be in purgatory and unable to explain to themselves, let alone the families of those killed, how it happened. As you say in such an intense combat environment accidents do happen. It is interesting to note, for those howling about US strikes on UK forces, that the Challenger hit last week was hit by FF from another Challenger. I'm not trying to score points, but trying to keep things in perspective.
You should talk to somebody who gives a f**k.
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v77/Robiz/movie_star_wars_yoda.gif[/img]
El Presidente
Thats the spirit. I had hoped that any Patton vs. Montgomery style nationalism would have been put aside before the commencement of these hostilities. We are two nations with as much in common as any other 2 nations in the world. I pray that it stays that way. Millions of Americans are praying all over this country now and every Brit in Iraq is in their prayers. Parents here grieve over British lost with the same sincerity as American lost. Thats the only thing we need to be focused on. When this is over, if we find our leaders being petty and bickering over post war spoils or legalities. Lets not forget that the blood of our countrymen are mixed in history as well as the battlefields in Iraq.
I'm tiring of hearing the 'fog of war' explanation for blue on blues. I readily accept that in some cases this is a factor in the cause of the incident. However it is in no way a 'blanket' excuse. Each incident should be fully investigated independantly and lessons learned.
The case of a challenger being hit by another challenger is quite different from an A10 attacking a Scimitar when you consider some of the facts. The challengers were engaged in a large tank battle at night, whereby anything the commander or gunner see's in his sights is potentially a threat. Split second decisions need to be made when a target is swinging its turret your way.
The A10 attacked a very distinctive British vehicle in broad daylight at close range. The vehicle was using anti-blue on blue measures as recomended. The vehicle posed no threat to the aircraft.
My point is fairly well illustrated when you examine these two cases. I'm not into point scoring between nations allied during time of conflict and consider the US forces as professional as our own. But some questions need answering.
More joint training exercises are needed, and a more serious approach to vehicle recognition and rules of engagement.
Sadly the advance of hi-tech weapon systems has not been matched by a hi-tech solution to target aquisition and identification. Something that our Government was 'committed' to after the first Gulf War.
Apparently the American military are very hot on instituting an enquiry board immediately there is a Blue on Blue. They have no compunction about removing people from positions of authority. According to one of Janes people on the radio last night, they have already removed a USMC Colonel from active duty and returned him to the US. He had been flying his socks off and got 'overkeen', causing a B on B.
Equally place yourself in the cockpit of an F16, at 350 to 450 knots, approx 500 mph. It is apparently nigh on impossible to spot personnel, a lot of the time they are dropping on co-ordinates, given them by forward air controllers or even ordinary sigs ops. Differentiating targets at speed and in poor vis is extremely difficult, especially when advised your target is 12 O'Clock of the burning tank, 1200 metres! Asked what exactly they can see in terms of people at those speeds and altitudes, a pilot replied, honestly "Nothing."
You should talk to somebody who gives a f**k.
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v77/Robiz/movie_star_wars_yoda.gif[/img]
El Presidente
I totally agree with that. Its just that these circumstances cannot be applied by default to all cases.
In the most recent incident involving the Kurdish and US SF convoy the F15's who engaged circled for some time before striking. They were called in by the US SF Officer on the ground to engage an enemy Tank some 300 yards away. To the outsider it is hard to understand how a circling fast jet still cannot distinguish between white 4x4s with bold TV lettering and an Iraqi tank. I don't doubt for a second that these are mistakes, but they do seem to be seriously unecessary.
Take your point Rob, ref fast movers. Rarely will they attack without FAC/TACP target provision, but they do have that wonderful phrase” Targets of Opportunity" How fighter ground attack aircraft are supposed to go to work on peacetime ranges is great in theory, but when the target is firing back or when the driver has had no real rest in the last six days it is something else. Genuine accidents are one thing, sloppy drills are quite another. I believe they were responsible for the A10 attacking theWelsh Fusiliers last time and for the loss of the Canadians in Afghanistan. There is not enough information on any of the recent incidents to form an opinion. The Canadian incident was talked about on here and has some moving comment from both a Canadian( Gipper) and a US Marine( various names Teufelhund, USMC Guest or Ron) Click here to read it, viewtopic.php?t=321&start=0
Please ignore comments about Mutleys sexuality.
Naw, bollocks, it’s all true.
They were called in by the US SF Officer on the ground to engage an enemy Tank some 300 yards away
To a pilot in an F16 dodging in and out of cloud, which is what these guys were doing, a target of opportunity 300 metres from the controller is virtually in the controllers lap. Easy for us armchair pundits, desperately difficult for the pilot, remember his sole aim is to assist the guys who requested him, he doesn't intend harm, but occasionaly, far too often lately, it all goes tits up.
You should talk to somebody who gives a f**k.
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v77/Robiz/movie_star_wars_yoda.gif[/img]
El Presidente
scaleyback wrote:I totally agree with that. Its just that these circumstances cannot be applied by default to all cases.
In the most recent incident involving the Kurdish and US SF convoy the F15's who engaged circled for some time before striking. They were called in by the US SF Officer on the ground to engage an enemy Tank some 300 yards away. To the outsider it is hard to understand how a circling fast jet still cannot distinguish between white 4x4s with bold TV lettering and an Iraqi tank. I don't doubt for a second that these are mistakes, but they do seem to be seriously unecessary.
Perhaps it was a GPS guided bomb and the SF officer gave the pilot the wrong coordinates? That happened at the prison siege in Afghanistan last year. They called in an airstrike on their own position accidentally.
A correction to my previous; The tank was one mile away, the aircraft was an F14 at 500 feet ordnance was a 'Maverick'.
Given that the F14 is a two seater aircraft and looking at the basic facts available to us its still hard not to suspect that carelessness played a part.
