Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: MajWoody on March 17, 2009, 11:29:19 PM
-
This is what it's like to ALMOST be on the receiving end of the Gau 8 avenger (30 mil) of a Warthog. It's more awesome than I ever imagined.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhKp6B7Ktpw&feature=related
btw, turn up the sound. :rock
-
No mistaken those guns!
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Iz5MwPsfyo&feature=related
:O
-
Those guys have a habit of lighting up the wrong side. A-10's are overrated for close air support, because the Air Force lacks the mentality, training and experience for the mission, and not because the aircraft isn't capable. But I am prejudiced.
-
No wonder why Brits dont' like Americans. I would be p*ssed to though if that was me. A-10 might be overrated Stoney but you have to admit it is still one bad*** plane.
-
A-10 might be overrated Stoney but you have to admit it is still one bad*** plane.
Absolutely--its killed more Americans in combat than any enemy aircraft since WWII.
-
What is the joke I heard a Marine tell? Something like:
If you need air support, call in a Marine aircraft. If no Marine aircraft are available, call in a Navy aircraft. If no Navy aircraft are available, call in an Allied aircraft. If no Allied aircraft is available, figure out a way to do it without air support.
-
Absolutely--its killed more Americans in combat than any enemy aircraft since WWII.
you have any qualifications or are you just letting words roll out your pie hole?
-
Unfortunately, there are several instances where A10's have fired upon friendly vehicles, however I suppose that is an issue with close air support. The issue is usually command giving incorrect coordinates or improper intel. There is a film somewhere of a couple A10's firing upon a British convoy, the American pilot sounded like he was about to burst into tears he felt so bad, one friendly casualty. The problem was the command in this case, told them there were no friendlies in the area.
There have been arguments that the British-American communication hasn't been the best, and that's caused a lot of casualties for the British due to our aggressive trigger finger. So it's hard to really say who's fault it is, but it's actually rarely the pilots.
-
you have any qualifications or are you just letting words roll out your pie hole?
January 1991, 9 Marines/Sailors killed between 2 incidents involving A-10's firing on Marine vehicles. I have met people associated with the 2nd incident in which 7 Marines were killed when their LAV was hit with a Maverick Missile.
March 2003, between 8-17 Marines were killed when their Amtrack was hit by a Maverick Missile. The track was loaded with wounded Marines making their way back to 1 Bn/2nd Marines BAS when it was engaged. I had personal interest in this one, and was able to read the investigation. I'll throw some blame at the forward air controller, but the responsibility for dropping the ordnance lies with the PIC.
The Brits and Canadians may have a bigger beef, since I know A-10s have torched 2 Warriors. Anyway, do some google searches for A-10 fratricide and you'll find plenty.
To be fair, my statement is a truism, as American deaths to enemy aircraft since WWII are extremely rare. And, to be fair, the amount of fratricide attributable to Vietnam era aircraft would probably (a) compare and (b) be harder to find due to less fratricide documentation back then. My point is that people look at the aircraft and weaponry and say "ultimate close air support aircraft" when its operational history in that role has been dubious. On the other hand, I know that there's at least one F-117 pilot that can probably attribute his successful rescue to A-10s. As an interdiction aircraft, they excel, mostly because the Air Force excels at that role. CAS is best left to the Marine Corps, in my former professional opinion.
-
Stoney I didn't word my statement correct like an idiot. I should have said the A-10 is a bad*** if used correctly. I for one have fell in love with it due to how much firepower and damage it can take. It reminds me of the JUG. I was wondering what your opinion is on the Apache being used for CAS.
-
Stoney I didn't word my statement correct like an idiot. I should have said the A-10 is a bad*** if used correctly. I for one have fell in love with it due to how much firepower and damage it can take. It reminds me of the JUG. I was wondering what your opinion is on the Apache being used for CAS.
I've never seen the Apache used for true Close Air Support, and unless somethings changed, I don't really think Army doctrine supports their use as such. [Oversimplification disclaimer!!!] The Army chooses to use Apaches as more of a maneuver unit and it conforms more to an interdiction mission than true CAS. Is the aircraft capable of CAS? Absolutely, the weaponry and systems available to an Apache pilot are superb and well suited to the rotary-wing CAS mission.
Also, I do not doubt the professionalism of any U.S. service member--merely that it takes more than good hardware to perform this mission properly.
-
I've never seen the Apache used for true Close Air Support, and unless somethings changed, I don't really think Army doctrine supports their use as such. [Oversimplification disclaimer!!!] The Army chooses to use Apaches as more of a maneuver unit and it conforms more to an interdiction mission than true CAS. Is the aircraft capable of CAS? Absolutely, the weaponry and systems available to an Apache pilot are superb and well suited to the rotary-wing CAS mission.
Also, I do not doubt the professionalism of any U.S. service member--merely that it takes more than good hardware to perform this mission properly.
I've heard of the Apache as a tank-buster CAS, but usually from safe or longer range positions and/or night missions. Problem with helo's doing CAS is they are incredibly prone to fire. A10's can get in, kill, and then get out very quickly and take tons of damage in the process. One of the main reasons the A10 is so effective.
Then again, I'm just a civilian reading what is published and from aquaintences who were in the military
-
It mainly boils down to intel. Most fratricide incidents take place because of poor or just bad intel. I hate to say it but friendly fire is not a new thing, there have been FF incidents going back a long way back in warfare history. Once again it's just more well know now when these things happen because of news, the internet, and people who say things on the condition of anonymity because they aren't allowed to talk about the things.
-
In war friendly fire is going to happen, granted you try to prevent it, try to setup policy's and safety rules.
But you can never fully penetrate the fog of war, and prevent all accidents from happening.
Simply not possible to fully foresee all possible interactions and consequences.
-
http://www.ww2f.com/information-requests/30024-close-air-support.html
this link is to a forum discussing this topic but of wwII incedents. I find it hard to believe that with modern radios alone that it could have been worse now than then. I would think there must have been some sort of miscomunication to cause this. I really would not believe the navy a10 pilots are nothing more than a bunch of bungling idiots like some here seem to think they are.
-
navy A-10 pilots? don't think so. Air force operate the A-10s
-
A thats not a close call, this is a close call :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJgIsjs3_B4&NR=1
In all seriousness though, Thank gawd no-one got killed there though.
-
Well, at least some of you have a clue...
I spent several years as a part of the A-10 program...as both military and civilian. It was a while back, so it's possible some things have changed...but here's what I know to have been facts.
1. Every active duty A-10 squadron had at least one (often 2 or 3) 'liason pilots'...army or marine fixed wing pilots. They were involved in every mission...either flying or as a ground link between the pilots and the grunts / jarheads. At that time, this was mandated...I suppose it could have changed but I doubt it since it was a very effective arrangement.
2. The A-10 is unquestionably the best CAS platform in the inventory right now...that's why it's retirement was forestalled several years ago. There is simply no other platform that can perform the task better (regardless of which branch the pilot serves with).
3. Friendly fire is a fact of war...has been throughout recorded history...long before aircraft, missles or bombs were a factor.
During my time with the program I was honored to meet and work with hundreds of ground troops (both army and marine) and I never met a single one didn't love to see an A-10 overhead when the s**t was hitting the proverbial fan. Every pilot I met (Army, USAF and Marine) absolutely adored the airplane...at that time they were lining up for a slot in an active squadron.
I don't normally involve myself in the discussions on these boards...but I take offense at the malignment of any combat pilot regardless of his branch of service or aircraft. Those who have been involved in a FF incident are invariably devastated by it...many never fly in combat again. Unless you've actually flown in combat, you have no right to comment...you simply have no understanding of the forces at play. Do you honestly think these guys are idiots who just use their weapons indiscriminately? You figure Joe Pilot is just flying around looking for something to blow up...oops that one hit a marine! No modern day combat pilot releases a weapon without confirmation of the target...typically from multiple sources. In nearly every FF incident I've ever read about or been a party to it is found that the fault lies with poor intel or troops being out of position rather than with the pilot who pulled the trigger. There are exceptions...but not many.
-
No wonder why Brits dont' like Americans. I would be p*ssed to though if that was me. A-10 might be overrated Stoney but you have to admit it is still one bad*** plane.
Hey theres a surprise. A "close support tactical aircraft" actually shooting near friendlies.
If you actually watched the video then you must have seen the 2nd drop and strafe was done in the same area of the first. The difference is it looked like they also dropped cluster which freaked the Brits out. They were in no danger.
If anyones at fault its the Bit infantry for sitting up and losing cover while filming their "Miss Daisey".
Absolutely--its killed more Americans in combat than any enemy aircraft since WWII.
Sounds like its Pie Hole time. Most of all when considering all the troops those aircraft saved.
If memory serves then it was an F-16 that dropped on those canucks and the Brit mav was fired by a Yank Helicopter.
Absolutely--its killed more Americans in combat than any enemy aircraft since WWII.
More Pie Hole action here? Forgot a few wars didntya?
-
but I take offense at the malignment of any combat pilot regardless of his branch of service or aircraft. Those who have been involved in a FF incident are invariably devastated by it...many never fly in combat again. Unless you've actually flown in combat, you have no right to comment...you simply have no understanding of the forces at play. Do you honestly think these guys are idiots who just use their weapons indiscriminately? You figure Joe Pilot is just flying around looking for something to blow up...oops that one hit a marine! No modern day combat pilot releases a weapon without confirmation of the target...typically from multiple sources. In nearly every FF incident I've ever read about or been a party to it is found that the fault lies with poor intel or troops being out of position rather than with the pilot who pulled the trigger. There are exceptions...but not many.
:aok
The inherently dangerous risk of Close Air Support during Combat can be measured by feet, these guys put ords on top of enemy positions even while friendlies are in Danger Close proximity, not as a norm, but when they have too.
What would suprise you is how many times they have done so with No Casualties, or at least resulting in Death.
Absolute crap!
I completely agree, just the sheer number of missions that have been completed successfully compared to the collaterel damage incurred is minimal.
You can never get a 0% Risk factor in any weapon deployment system or technique.
-
Those guys have a habit of lighting up the wrong side. A-10's are overrated for close air support, because the Air Force lacks the mentality, training and experience for the mission, and not because the aircraft isn't capable. But I am prejudiced.
Absolute crap!
-
Unless you've actually flown in combat, you have no right to comment...you simply have no understanding of the forces at play. Do you honestly think these guys are idiots who just use their weapons indiscriminately?
I absolutely do have a right to comment, since one of my Marines got killed that day--but like I said, I'm prejudiced. I read the complete investigation of the incident, and the Forward Air Controller involved sat in one of my classes not 6 months before the incident as I describe the procedures for requesting and coordinating CAS. I've talked at length with the XO of the infantry company my guy was attached to so I got a play-by-play of the entire incident from the ground. I understand all the forces at play, and I absolutely do not think it was indiscriminate use of firepower. I didn't say that the pilots weren't sorry for what happened or anything.
Look, I know this seems inflamatory for you Air Force guys out there. It certainly wasn't my purpose, but there is a trend that exists. AV8s and F18s have dropped as many bombs in close proximity to friendly troops as A-10s have--a lot more if you include training, and they don't have nearly the number of fratricide incidents. I've worked with all the services aircraft in training, including A-10s, so I've gotten to see the different services proficiency at the mission.
You don't have to agree with me, but don't act like I'm just casually tossing declarations around.
-
If you actually watched the video then you must have seen the 2nd drop and strafe was done in the same area of the first. The difference is it looked like they also dropped cluster which freaked the Brits out. They were in no danger.
I don't believe there were any cluster munitions employed. Was all gun.
-
(http://www.patriotguard.org/Portals/0/More%20Pictures/Peace%20Through%20Superior%20Firepower.jpg)
(http://bannister.us/images/A-10-MVC-006F.JPG)
It's just mean.
-
Ya 30 mm of luv.... :devil
-
i woulda pooped myself
-BigBOBCH
-
Been flying the A-10 in strike fighters for a few days, am loving every second of it.
Lost a wing tip last night,but was able to land.
-
Those guys have a habit of lighting up the wrong side. A-10's are overrated for close air support, because the Air Force lacks the mentality, training and experience for the mission, and not because the aircraft isn't capable. But I am prejudiced.
Whenever you have a weapons system with the lethality of the A-10 any mistake what-so-ever ends in tragedy. To say the A-10 pilots make a "habit" of killing their own is disgusting on your part. I spent 10 years in the military and still work for the department of defense, and I can honestly say that the preferred aircraft for air support by ground forces is the A-10, despite what your experience in the USMC might have lead you to believe.
"But Navy /USMC F-18 have less FF incidents" of course, they drop bombs, not fire cannon. The A-10 is used at extreme close range where the harriers and hornets would never be used.
as far as the USAF lacking the warrior mentality, please click below.
http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123043414
-
I've seen the AIR FORCE a-10 work in person. I was a lvt'er(amtracker in the crotch err usmc).I am a die hard jarhead. I thought after seeing that puppy work in person....."those a-10 pilots are as good as any cas supplyd by the corps" They hit exactly what we wanted smashed....1st pass......the army apache had just been brought online.....think it was 1983.... the army wanted to show us how "bad" this new apache was......it was bad allright....he expended all ords....and didnt hit a damned thing......our usmc cobras.....(veitnam vintage) then came and took care of business for us.... 1st pass....addational pass's were just for our enjoyment I think :)
-
Whenever you have a weapons system with the lethality of the A-10 any mistake what-so-ever ends in tragedy.
I cannot take any military professional seriously that says fratricide is a "normal" part of war. I know it happens, but it doesn't have to. We'll probably have to agree to disagree on that.
To say the A-10 pilots make a "habit" of killing their own is disgusting on your part.
Perhaps habit was a poor choice of words, but there is a trend backed up with documented cases of fratricide or near-fratricide. I didn't even list them all. Again, I'll make the statement that I don't doubt the professionalism of the pilots and I don't think they're doing this willfully. They just lack the training and familiarity with what's going on on the ground.
I can honestly say that the preferred aircraft for air support by ground forces is the A-10, despite what your experience in the USMC might have lead you to believe.
What branch, and what did you do? You go ask a Marine infantryman whether he'd rather have an Air Force A-10 support him or a Marine F-18/AV8. I've got some friends that will take exception to your contention.
"But Navy /USMC F-18 have less FF incidents" of course, they drop bombs, not fire cannon. The A-10 is used at extreme close range where the harriers and hornets would never be used.
No. You don't know how the Marine Corps trains or employs CAS if you make this statement. Danger-close bombing missions and strafing were conducted by Marine fixed-wing. Not to mention the two specific examples I mentioned involved Maverick missiles and not 30mm.
as far as the USAF lacking the warrior mentality, please click below.
I didn't say the USAF lacked a warrior mentality. I used to drink with F-15 pilots when I was stationed in Okinawa, and those guys are shooters. I said the Air Force lacks the mentality for CAS. That's not the same. Send the A-10s out by themselves to the kill box to run interdiction, they excel at that mission. Air Force doctrine just doesn't lend itself to being a supporting arm.
-
Those guys have a habit of lighting up the wrong side. A-10's are overrated for close air support, because the Air Force lacks the mentality, training and experience for the mission, and not because the aircraft isn't capable. But I am prejudiced.
How are you prejudice sir? I wanna think your a helicopter pilot becase i know they dont like hogs, but im pretty sure that A10s have some of the best numbers as far as enemies killed, like its not closed to being matched by any other aircraft but i might be wrong, when we are on the ground we do look alot alike we like to use smoke to show who not to shoot at but what if the hog has no visual as to who is friend or foe, very hard to see the flag on a soldiers shoulder from 100 feet away image say 3000 ;)
-
I don't have skin in this thread, but since we are talking FF - lets take 2 examples of how it happens. You really need to go through the full chain of events from the sensor to shooter end to see how these things can happen. The first 2 links are, oddly enough from A-10 CAS aircraft who during OIF were working with a FAC trying to ID some GV's with Orange panels. They did turn out to be British, but pay attention to the comms by the FAC when the A-10s asked if there were any friendly ground assets in their box.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RK10pqBpz8g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3THYnJ-PK6U
The second example is a USA AH-64 during the 1st Gulf War which was directed towards what was thought an enemy GV group. The data he was being relayed didn't match with what the computer was telling the pilot. Both cases are tragic, but its extemely important again to see how the shooters decision was made at the time. In the Apache's case, wind drift changed his perspective and track over the ground so it appeared he was looking at the bad guy - when the computer was telling him no diddlying way.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8-wr8_qRBQ
Anyway, Stony - you know me well. I'm a C4ISR guy - you know my work history and who I worked for. I'm all about getting the right information to the right people at the right time.
-
What branch, and what did you do? You go ask a Marine infantryman whether he'd rather have an Air Force A-10 support him or a Marine F-18/AV8. I've got some friends that will take exception to your contention.
Well, of course, Marines want their boys protecting them. That's a bias question and if you asked that to a Marine, you'd get a bias answer.
-
STONEY,
I know you think you are qualified to speak for all USMC personnel. I know you believe that insulting AF Pilots (and that part of the armed forces) makes you more loyal to your branch. I have met marines that were the very definition of professionalism and I have met marines that were so blinded by the Hoorrraaahhhh attitide they instill in basic that they can bring themselves to admit anyone can do anything better than the corp. I really hope someday you wake up and realize what combined arms means and what an insult to the boys in blue your posting is.
Until then, if you think you can speak for all usmc, please refer to colkink post. I listed it below for your easy access.
I've seen the AIR FORCE a-10 work in person. I was a lvt'er(amtracker in the crotch err usmc).I am a die hard jarhead. I thought after seeing that puppy work in person....."those a-10 pilots are as good as any cas supplyd by the corps" They hit exactly what we wanted smashed....1st pass......the army apache had just been brought online.....think it was 1983.... the army wanted to show us how "bad" this new apache was......it was bad allright....he expended all ords....and didnt hit a damned thing......our usmc cobras.....(veitnam vintage) then came and took care of business for us.... 1st pass....addational pass's were just for our enjoyment I think :)
-
Pxdig,
The good Capt's(stoney) experience is that way because he lost troopers in his group to a FF incident in 2003 from an A-10. Pls understand. Just like I'd like you to understand when I say MANPADS have broken the back of air superiority below 13k - but then again my experience is tainted having lost a close friend from flight school - who happened to be the 5% pk for an SA-7 in November 2003 and was the first coalition aircraft loss of the war.
Lt brian slavenas - Peoria Illinois, ch-47
-
I cannot take any military professional seriously that says fratricide is a "normal" part of war. I know it happens, but it doesn't have to. We'll probably have to agree to disagree on that.
Perhaps habit was a poor choice of words, but there is a trend backed up with documented cases of fratricide or near-fratricide. I didn't even list them all. Again, I'll make the statement that I don't doubt the professionalism of the pilots and I don't think they're doing this willfully. They just lack the training and familiarity with what's going on on the ground.
What branch, and what did you do? You go ask a Marine infantryman whether he'd rather have an Air Force A-10 support him or a Marine F-18/AV8. I've got some friends that will take exception to your contention.
No. You don't know how the Marine Corps trains or employs CAS if you make this statement. Danger-close bombing missions and strafing were conducted by Marine fixed-wing. Not to mention the two specific examples I mentioned involved Maverick missiles and not 30mm.
I didn't say the USAF lacked a warrior mentality. I used to drink with F-15 pilots when I was stationed in Okinawa, and those guys are shooters. I said the Air Force lacks the mentality for CAS. That's not the same. Send the A-10s out by themselves to the kill box to run interdiction, they excel at that mission. Air Force doctrine just doesn't lend itself to being a supporting arm.
I guess when the USAF dropped Clusters on 300+ Iraqi's in the 1st Persian Gulf War to help the extraction of eight Green Berets, they were "just shooters"? They were dropping them at distances that on paper, they shouldn't have lived. But they did. They were told to, by the Green Berets.
Yes, this is on TV, but I read about this long before that.
-
Beavis and Butthead joins the Air Force:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMnyVioLJbs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1GDf2aN5YQ
"We're in jail dude!"
-
No. You don't know how the Marine Corps trains or employs CAS if you make this statement. Danger-close bombing missions and strafing were conducted by Marine fixed-wing. Not to mention the two specific examples I mentioned involved Maverick missiles and not 30mm.
One of those two specific examples you mentioned, I saw the video of that. The A-10 pilot in question asked the person on the ground repeatedly to verify the targets position. The person on the ground verified the target multiple times, so the A-10 pilot fired. This incident also happened at night and back then the A-10s had virtually no avionics installed. That incident was not the fault of the A-10 pilot, it was the fault of the person on the ground.
-
Greetings,
As an Armor Co Cdr, I had the 'joy' of being supported by A-10s at the NTC. They 'killed' more of my tanks than the OPFOR did in at least one of our fights.
In fact, my Bn Cdr told the FSO and ALO, "Send 'em deep, or send 'em home." AF does not do CAS. They do engagement areas.
Regards,
-
Well if were talking Gulf-1 then the odds were far higher friendly armor would take you out in a friendly fire incident.
Then there was that incident nobody remembers where the USMC A-6 Intruders fired a bunch of missiles 12 miles "inside" the no fire line and killed 8 Saudi friendlies, wounding 12. But everyone remembers the A-10 cause of the videos and the Brits putting up a stink, "rightfully so I suppose". And of course now there are so many USMC survivors of A-10 fire on the web they should start up their own club cause I guess Marines shooting Marines doesn't count.
Meanwhile the F-18 is a piece of crap for CAS due to its fuel load, loiter time, and the fact that one sheep herder and his one 7.62x39 can cost the US Taxpayer 40 million $ with one lucky shot. And I guess their going to fix all this with the 60 million per copy F-35B. :huh Sounds to me like the USMC has its head up its arse.
I dont know what the breakdown has been since 2003 but its no secret our Helicopters aren't the answer. We've lost a lot of rotaries in Iraq and Afghanistan and have had a lot shot up, "like the Soviets before us". So they sure aren't the CAS answer. They are all headed in the wrong way altitude-wise to provide the close in support troops need. The simple fact is the A-10s are there because Fast movers and rotaries cant do the mission. A Brit. Apache shot up a whole bunch of their own troops last year too in Afghanistan. Didnt hear about that did ya? I guess the story couldn't sell the Times fast enough as one where Yank A-10s did the shooting.
Personally I think the Brit troops in this video, from the first post, should all lose a stripe for grab arseing when in combat. Then again they had the A-10 to blame should a ricochet had hit the one nitwit standing up with his video camera. Or the one continually babbling if anyone had "shart themselves".
-
A Brit. Apache shot up a whole bunch of their own troops last year too in Afghanistan. Didnt hear about that did ya? I guess the story couldn't sell the Times fast enough as one where Yank A-10s did the shooting.
Yes we did - all FF incidents are widely reported. The reason this case got more media attention was because the US inquiry exonerated everyone from blame, the US govt then refused to release witnesses or any evidence for the UK inquiry. The cockpit recordings were leaked to the Sun newspaper, so the US govt was then forced to officially release the recordings for the inquiry. It was newsworthy because it was yet another piece of evidence illustrating the rubberstamp/coverup approach the US mil has to incidents like these.
-
So what was the results of the "inquiry" into your own Apache incident?
As for the rest of your statements do you have any supportive evidence?
-
I dont think the Apache inquiry has begun yet. The rest is all a matter of public record, feel free to use teh google.
-
I dont think the Apache inquiry has begun yet. The rest is all a matter of public record, feel free to use teh google.
Dont be hating on the Apache, it is by far the best helicopter in the world
-
Seems not all the Brits hate the A-10s.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-majors-email-british-harrier-support-in-afghanistan-revisited-02661/
-
As a Brit i can honestly say i dont hold anything against Americans who kill friendlies. I just imagine how many of the enemy we would have to kill without American help, and of crouse, how many Brits would be killed by the enemy who have been killed by American CAS missions.
S! USAF
-
Dont be hating on the Apache, it is by far the best helicopter in the world
I wouldn't - the Army loves em :aok
-
These witch hunts on soldiers who kill friendly's just sucks, people die and 9 times outta 10 the man/woman pulling the trigger has no idea the people they are killing are not enemy, you know dang well not a single one of those pilots climbed into that cockpit knowing they were about to kill a "friend".
Friends, enemy, civilians, supporters of any cause.
$|-|1T happens people, you had all better learn to live with that fact, or your never gonna get outta this life alive. :rock
-
I don't have skin in this thread, but since we are talking FF - lets take 2 examples of how it happens. You really need to go through the full chain of events from the sensor to shooter end to see how these things can happen. The first 2 links are, oddly enough from A-10 CAS aircraft who during OIF were working with a FAC trying to ID some GV's with Orange panels. They did turn out to be British, but pay attention to the comms by the FAC when the A-10s asked if there were any friendly ground assets in their box.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RK10pqBpz8g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3THYnJ-PK6U
The second example is a USA AH-64 during the 1st Gulf War which was directed towards what was thought an enemy GV group. The data he was being relayed didn't match with what the computer was telling the pilot. Both cases are tragic, but its extemely important again to see how the shooters decision was made at the time. In the Apache's case, wind drift changed his perspective and track over the ground so it appeared he was looking at the bad guy - when the computer was telling him no twittleing way.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8-wr8_qRBQ
Anyway, Stony - you know me well. I'm a C4ISR guy - you know my work history and who I worked for. I'm all about getting the right information to the right people at the right time.
Awe @#$%... The A-10 one is horrible. I mean, they did what they could! They were told no friendlies in the area, what can you do from there? Anyone know the outcome for those pilots? It sickens me reading those youtube comments of people who just don't get it... It seems to me NOT to be the ineptitude of the pilots. That was DEFINITELY a comm. breakdown. No question, and I can think of nothing more those pilots could have done.
-
I wouldn't - the Army loves em :aok
yes im bias
-
For Serenity.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/feb/07/military.topstories3 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/feb/07/military.topstories3)
-
For Serenity.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/feb/07/military.topstories3 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/feb/07/military.topstories3)
Thanks Tec. Even though they were absolved of guilt, they will probably take their own private guilt to the grave. I really don't see how anyone having seen that video could possibly blame the pilots. Multiple times it was confirmed there were no friendlies in the area... and in a world where information is spread so quickly and freely, I wouldn't be surprised to hear of enemy vehicles using the same friendly identifiers on the tops of their vehicles...
-
serenity you should probably read this too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/190th_Fighter_Squadron,_Blues_and_Royals_friendly_fire_incident_-_March_28,_2003 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/190th_Fighter_Squadron,_Blues_and_Royals_friendly_fire_incident_-_March_28,_2003)
whereas some of these incidents are unavoidable, most, like this, are avoidable and only occur because proper proceedure isnt followed. I cant help feeling that the incident would not have happened the way it did if the pilots had been full-timers rather than reservists.