MOD announces RAF Tornados in air on way to Iraq.

[Deepest Norfolk]

Just heard on Radio5 Live.
How nice. Just in case our targets have anything that could harm us, let's give them advanced warning so they can be REALLY prepared.
Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.
More like treason, IMHO.

DN

[Whitewhale83]

The Tornado isn't exactly a subtle aircraft I would expect the enemy would figure out they are there quite quickly. Also air ops have been going for a while so I would expect if the enemy does have air defences they would already be deployed.

[SPIT]

It has just been on BBC news. Its a wonder that the bloody press have not said what the target is neither given the N/A of the crews ?? just to help ISA and their friends (if they have any)?? :mad::mad:

[barnstormer1968]

I must be missing something here.
What possible harm can the press be doing by stating the RAF are joining in?

The press are notorious for getting aircraft types wrong, and many journalists couldn't tell one weapon from another.....
Unlike the ISIS watchers who WILL be detailing every EXACT movement, departure time and weapon load which will then be relayed onwards.
Even if the aircraft fly off in a direction to confuse onlookers this doesn't work more than once or twice, as has been identified when attacking aircraft have done this in the past two decades.

IMHO its a bit odd to think that a very large group like ISIS who can capture large areas, run international media ops and PR and have many tech savvy members in the group wouldn't know how to watch an airfield :)

[Pontius Navigator]

Barney, you have a point, but a weak one.

Compare and contrast;

Accredited BBC journalist broadcasts in real time on open source.

Covert jihadist supporter observes airfield and attempts timely transmission while voiding arrest by security services.

[KPax]

Don't care as long as they make it back safely, safe skies guys.

[Melchett01]

Barnstormer,

There is a principle at stake here, it's called OPSEC. We have a whole JSP devoted to security, shame the MOD sees fit to ignore it when they feel like it.

PN has it spot on, and this was a major problem we had to contend with in AFG with dickers sitting outside the wire watching everything we did send reporting it. Now in this case, I'll grant you, the operational impact is likely to be minimal, but that isn't the point and next time people might not be so lucky and whoever decided this was a good idea has demonstrated poor judgement.

So some gobby media type in MOD has decided a good headline trumps OPSEC. Where does it stop? I've seen people dragged up on charges for less serious security breaches - because this is what this is. Hitler knew we were coming, didn't mean we had to help him with video footage of preparations and the fleet launching. If they wanted to do something, they should have repeated 'I counted them out and back' once it was over. Fuming doesn't come close!

[Roadster280]

Maybe it is disinformation. Or perhaps they'd already been & gone before the announcement was made. At least I hope that's the case.

Lt-Col Jones, CO 2 PARA on Op CORPORATE was said to be incandescent that the MOD had briefed the world that Goose Green was to be attacked, before it actually was. Rumour has it that if he hadn't been killed in that action, he had intended to take it further.

[Shack37]

Was this an official MoD press reléase or some tw&t doing a little "leaking?

Either way, some plonker needs his ar se kicked.

[Stanwell]

.
I think it's simply called 'political grandstanding'.
See, we're going to sort this whole mess out with everything at our disposal (7 GR4s).
Now, do you all have your flags ready to wrap yourselves in?

[Melchett01]

Shack,

It all looked very well planned and coordinated, right down to getting the crews to walk to the jets with helmets on and visors down to protect their identity followed by shots of the jets taxiing and getting wheels up. Ironically accompanied by some Sky commentary on how we were at war again.

This wasn't an accident or an inadvertent leak, someone knew exactly what they were doing.

[MPN11]

In a couple of my more interesting non-ATC appointments, the basic principle of STFU applied.

But then I never had to work with the Media, thank <Deity>.

[maliyahsdad2]

As this thread appears to have started some 3.5 hours after the jets had left Akrotiri (they returned an hour or so ago) I can't see it being much of a security issue.

[Two's in]

It's called "being seen to be doing something". Very popular with Governments who have no real clue how to get out of a situation largely of their own creation.

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

We have a whole JSP devoted to security, shame the MOD sees fit to ignore it when they feel like it.

Perhaps '440 is soon to be a "guide" rather like '101 became. :ugh:

[ShotOne]

This is 2014 guys. If you think you can send a load of jets somewhere secretly, you're living on another planet. Even if you could, the media war is part of the real war.

[Typhoon93]

ShotOne, why can't you?

Why couldn't offensive operations be conducted covertly over Iraq by the RAF? How would media coverage of offensive operations while they are ongoing benefit us against ISIL? I am genuinely interested.

I understand the need for diplomatic clearance and without said clearance, military aircraft flying in to another's airspace while armed could be construed as an act of war..... although didn't the RAF already have diplomatic clearance? Or does the RAF need separate clearance when the aircraft is armed?

[ATFQ]

ZZZZZZZZZZ

[Pontius Navigator]

From a media POV they want to publish the FIRST flights. In GW2 they showed the first Tornado missions and then repeated the footage for 3 days.

[Melchett01]

This is 2014 guys. If you think you can send a load of jets somewhere secretly, you're living on another planet. Even if you could, the media war is part of the real war.

Quite possibly, but from an official (ie not leaked by spotters) perspective there is a right way to do things and a wrong way to do things.

[Dysonsphere]

Well at least some pilots will be getting some serious stick time in. Whats the transit time from Cyprus.

[Whenurhappy]

This campaign is the first to be directly - and very publicly - approved by Parliament and there is considerable support for this across the political and public spectrum, and yes, perhaps in our 'contract' with the British public, they want to know, and want to see, what we are doing.

The media is full of spotter-details on Storm Shadow, EPWIV, (alleged) RC 135 capabilities &c and there is a huge public and political expectation of a long, but ultimately successful operation. Don't forget that the IO campaign run by 'us' is central to our mission planning - just as it is for ISIS, assuming that their collect, report, analyse and disseminate loop works (and that's a big 'if'), but by the media declaring that aircraft are airborne increases the pressure on the insurgents; they may go to ground and in effect we've achieved a mobility kill. Northern Iraq is a huge piece of sand and the probability that the ISIS C3I (again, a big 'is') is capable of detecting where those aircraft are in the battlespace (except by visual means, by which time, I suggest, it's a bit late)is negligible. They may have an array of sophisticated AAA and MANPADS, but they lack an ADGE. Call me old fashioned, but that is a critical - and missing - component.

[Heathrow Harry]

ATFQ wrote:-

"Today’s combat aircraft are more capable than those of 1991 but eventually technology cannot substitute for numbers, especially when attempting to sustain enduring operations."

This of course is another example of NR Augustine's famous Law from 1984

"law number 16, which shows that defence budgets grow linearly but the unit cost (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_cost) of a new military aircraft grows exponentially (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exponential_growth): In the year 2054, the entire defence budget will purchase just one aircraft. This aircraft will have to be shared by the Air Force and Navy 3½ days each per week except for leap year, when it will be made available to the Marines for the extra day."

[Radar Command T/O]

ShotOne

Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 754
This is 2014 guys. If you think you can send a load of jets somewhere secretly, you're living on another planet. Even if you could, the media war is part of the real war.

I suppose we could always stick some jets on an aircraft carrier and and fly from 30 or 40 miles off the coast. Hard to get onto a Ship if you're not welcome, not so hard to park a few dozen press at the end of a runway.

I believe we had that capability until quite recently. What happened to it, Mr Cameron?

[Dysonsphere]

Razor blades I belive

[Haraka]

HH
"law number 16, which shows that defence budgets grow linearly but the unit cost of a new military aircraft grows exponentially: In the year 2054, the entire defence budget will purchase just one aircraft. This aircraft will have to be shared by the Air Force and Navy 3½ days each per week except for leap year, when it will be made available to the Marines for the extra day."

I had immense amusement with this in the early 80's when dealing with a certain MoD Civil Service department's prediction on future Tu 22M "Backfire" production.
It seemed unduly high.
When queried, the lady concerned admitted that her figures were an extrapolation of production figures of something that she had studied in the then USSR .

: Washing machines.

[Uncle Ginsters]

It quite simple really - the MoD's timing of press releases gives away the true raison d'etre of the mission.

You can send missions in any level of secrecy required...however, IF the mission's prime aim is PR and political leverage, then why would you (depending on the degree of control of the air)?

It's been a theme over the last couple of years. Not pleasant if you are THAT crew, either way.

[Hangarshuffle]

Parts of British public life seem devoid of shame or humanity at times. IMHO a news blackout on operations should be totally maintained. But the appetite for the news is at times even more than voracious. Its probably horrifying for families of serving personnel.

[barnstormer1968]

PN and Melchette

I knew I'd get a bite, but you are both wrong IMHO.

This tactic has been used for over sixty years, and even a few decades ago was a worthwhile effort for nation states SF to undertake (some PPruNers have in fact help facilitate airfield over watch).

Pontius, when you consider just how easy it IS for the exact movements to not only be reported well before the tonkas will be thinking of releasing weapons, you may see the advantage of the near real time report rather than the half baked (rarely live and often after the attack) media report. The watchers won't 'try' to report as you out it, but 'will' report.
It may be worth remembering I come from a green rather than light blue background so this isn't the first time I've considered how this 'watching' might be done :)
It's also worth noting that monitoring movements and reporting onwards isn't illegal for a civilian. The last few times RAF Fairford has been a staging point for USAF B52 raids there have been loads of people watching the take offs and landings, yet there was no restriction on use of mobile phones. I was even once asked by a copper on duty how many I thought were spotters and how many were spies :)

Melchette.
OPSEC you refer to is a military thing that military folks are bound by. Journalists on the other hand often work for commercial companies and have their employers profit in mind, and they are NOT bound by OPSEC whether you or I like it or not :)
When bound by the official secrets acts I couldn't reveal what type of pen or colour of ink I used, by a journalist could photograph anything I wrote and publish it worldwide.

The issue here is with what many of us here would like to happen, but living in a free society the media and anyone concerned else are perfectly happy to do what they want!

[Pontius Navigator]

BS, you are of course correct in the context quoted.

I am sure you are familiar with Akrotiri, so the wire there is quite different from Fairford. If base security is stepped up and aircraft route away from the island, load outs will not be seen easily.

PR would indeed be the driver.

[Arcanum]

This is 2014 guys. If you think you can send a load of jets somewhere secretly, you're living on another planet. Even if you could, the media war is part of the real war.

Agree.

A couple of years back, all of East Anglia could hear the GR4's heading out to Libya to deliver some Stormshadow's. Sat in my double-glazed house, 40-miles from Marham with the TV on it was pretty obvious the aircraft overhead weren't civilian. Nor lightly loaded.

Without cutting Cypress off from the world how would it be possible to stop word getting out? Locals would innocently put stuff on Facebook, Twitter, etc. Perhaps the MoD have realised that in the modern world there is no feasible way to stop this kind of information from getting out.

[barnstormer1968]

PN

As a comical take on this.
Another issue the RAF have is that it only has a couple of aircraft left to fly.
Back in the time of your flying career there was a lot more to look at and so it was harder to keep tabs on things, and a lot less tech to do it with :)

The way the cuts are going the RAF may soon just be sending ordnance via FedEx, with instructions to the target recipient on how to set off the bomb :)

[Wrathmonk]

a news blackout on operations should be totally maintained

Which would sadly lead to multiple individuals, claiming to be "in the know", posting crap on sites such as this which would be translated by the media as "fact". That, I would suggest, would be worse for the families involved.

In this day and age of smart phones, instant news via Faceb**k. Twatter, Instagram and the like the MOD have got to lead turn the armchair experts.

Just out of curiosity, do the tracks of the aircraft operating out of "the secret airbase in Cyprus :yuk:" appear on Flight Tracker and the like? I assume they have to squawk into and out of their AOR? There are naval trackers about (such as the one here (http://shiptrackingais.********.co.uk/p/militaryvesseltrackingais.html)) but which, given the speeds involved is less dynamic.

[chopper2004]

Anyone seen this?

Flash - Death threats for Saudi pilots after raids on jihadists - France 24 (http://www.france24.com/en/20140924-death-threats-saudi-pilots-after-raids-jihadists/?ns_source=outbrain&ns_campaign=lien&ns_mchannel=acquisition&ns_linkname=editorial&aef_campaign_ref=outbrain_france24en-site&campaign_date=inconnue)

[althenick]

Well at least some pilots will be getting some serious stick time in. Whats the transit time from Cyprus.

ISIL would love to know that especially the ones who are probably observing the movments at Akotiri right now. :ugh:

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Never mind fighter pilots, if you work in a food processing plant in Oklahoma you are a target of these evil b@stards now.
Alton Nolen, Oklahoma beheading suspect, will be charged with 1st-degree murder - World - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/alton-nolen-oklahoma-beheading-suspect-will-be-charged-with-1st-degree-murder-1.2779971)

We're all in it. That's the nature of evil.

Good to see the Saudis doing their bit.

[Pontius Navigator]

PN

As a comical take on

The way the cuts are going the RAF may soon just be sending ordnance via FedEx, with instructions to the target recipient on how to set off the bomb :)

Er, I think they have already done this delivering AKs and ammo from the 'Stans.

You are right, in my day real aircraft had bomb bays. We could truck a full bomb load around the world with no one the wiser.

Handy things, bomb bays. Could start a new thread "What we carried in our bomb bay"

[barnstormer1968]

PN

Goodness me.......Noooooooooo don't start that thread (I think it's been done anyway) or we will be bombarded again with tales of weber BBQs, Scottish fish and alcohol :)

I hear bomb bays are making a come though, so that's good :)

[ShotOne]

"Sending ordnance by FedEx...." Been happening for ages! A large proportion (probably most?) of the ordnance expended in Afganistan and Iraq WAS delivered by commercial airlines with their crews exposed to every bit as much risk as anyone in the armed forces. Witness the 2003 missile strike in Iraq ( DHL not FedEx) which was only saved by the most superb flying of its crew.

[barnstormer1968]

Now there have been two replies to my FedEx comment it's obvious I wasnt clear in what I meant :)

I was referring to sending the ordnance direct to the opposition by post instead of using RAF aircraft, not delivering it to the allied side !

[Pontius Navigator]

BS, ah!

I presume you mean air freight sans parachute.

Otherwise, shades of Milo Minderbender.

[Two's in]

I suspect in Barnstormer's world the "signature not required" box would definitely be checked.

[4Greens]

RAF - Four aircraft.

RAAF SIX aircraft

What's the world coming to ?

[pr00ne]

4Greens,

In the REAL world...

RAF - four TORNADOES plus tanker and airlift support

RAAF - six a/c

RAF - a/c deployed in Afghanistan.

RAAF - nil

RAF - a/c deployed for Nigeria ops

RAAF - nil

And...

RAF - a/c flying combat ops over Iraq

RAAF - ???

[4Greens]

The RAAF have a tanker and a recce aircraft as well.

[pr00ne]

4Greens,

Makes sense, why aren't they flying ops though?

[BBadanov]

Total RAAF force in the Gulf currently 8 x F/A18Fs, 1 x E-7A, 1 x KC-30A, 1 x C-17A, and 1 x C-130J.


The C-17 and C-130 have been doing ops into Iraq for the past 6 weeks. Others shortly.

[Distant Voice]

It's called "being seen to be doing something". Very popular with Governments who have no real clue how to get out of a situation largely of their own creation.

Spot on. We are about to spend millions on missions over Iraq (and Syria). Missions without an end game. Missions that are being flown as a token, and putting aircrew lives at risk. History shows that you can not bomb an ideology into defeat, you have to present (and sell) an better idea. Over the past decade we have left conflict situations in a worst state than they were at the start. Iraq, Afghanistan, Lybia, Egypt etc.

DV