New Harrier footage from Afghanistan

[lancs]

Would seem that the top brass have decided to refute the 'utterly, utterly useless' claim with some new footage:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/check/nolavconsole/ukfs_news/hi?redirect=st.stm&news=1&bbram=1&bbwm=1&nbram=1&nbwm=1&nol_storyid=5407758

[QFIhawkman]

Hmm, thanks for that Auntie Beeb.

Sh*t sticks unfortunately. Especially when thrown by such a trustworthy relative.

The public will remember us as being "Utterly, utterly butterly" for years to come.

Good link though, well done.

[soddim]

Perhaps the only way to redress the issue is to determine if the army major's experience of that one engagement was attributable to the RAF.

However, even if it was the case, it was just one engagement and cannot be taken as representative of the campaign.

[chinny]

:confused: I hope that was sarcasim with ref to 'trustworthy relative."
:8
cc
VTSP

[whiz]

That video does nothing to refute the utterly, utterly useless claim. All it shows is a bomb exploding, it could be utterly utterly anywhere. :rolleyes:

Edited to add that I think the RAF are utterly, utterly marvellous and the video is an example of extremely poor PR.

[Tombstone]

I don't think footage of bombs taking out groups of Taleban fighters would do much for the cause, other than stur up more anger within the Islamic community.

A video of effective CAS could be integrated into the training package used by regiments sending troops into theatre. I think it is very, very important that credibility is regained & showing the young guys heading out there that we are helping is something we should be doing right now.

[Data-Lynx]

Have you tried this video-link (http://www.operations.mod.uk/video/20041004-harrier03.wmv) for coverage in theatre, with HUD info?

[ratpackgreenslug]

Any attempt to refute the claim of "utterly, utterly useless" is itself somewhat utterly, utterly useless as the claim is unfortunately true. Not for the first time the bluff has been called with the cards showing little more than a busted flush. There are two elements to the problem; the first is that of the procurement of poor equipment with the second being the organisation doing the flying tending to employ those who believe their own propaganda. The RAF isn't fit for purpose on this one, but then, what purpose is it still fit for? Helicopters to the AAC are what is needed rather than a token contribution of cold war era spamcans from the RAF.

[The Helpful Stacker]

a token contribution of cold war era spamcans from the RAF

Does your comment on 'token contributions' include the sterling work being undertaken by the RAF's Chinook crews and support staff or is that a little too much of a fly in the ointment of your otherwise poorly thought-out piece of obviously every-so-slightly biased ranting?

Perhaps the British Army should bin its Challenger tanks and Warrior APC's as they were designed for thundering towards the IGB to head off the 3rd Shock Army and what about those expensive nuclear ballistic missile submarines the RN still holds on to, talk about Cold War relics....

No, much like much of the RAF still has a place in this world so has some of the British Army and Royal Navy. I say some as if you are still serving (or have actually ever served other then on some Playstation game somewhere) then you should be put out to pasture with the rest of the small-minded single service specific relics and leave those of us who have adapted to the brave new world to carry on.

Ho hum.

[Pontius Navigator]

BOAC killed the Harrier video thread the other day as it was 'old' footage. Old to ppruners, new to the beeb http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6042912.stm

Bit like the Amadillo Video, once you get BBC acclaim . . .

"An MoD spokesman said: "The Harrier provides excellent support to our guys on the ground but we do not recommend that they fly that low so we will have a word with them. "

Yeah, "like you hairy lot, and you Ms, don't you ever pull that stunt again, even if it was the boss what did it."