AOC 1 Group

[benedick]

Is it true that AOC 1 Gp stood in front of the crews at a recent CQWI course and asked them if any of them did not think it unreasonable for him to order them to fly their aircraft into the ground in order to destroy a vehicle carrying a Taleban commander?

[Flap62]

More importantly, I do hope someone put their hand up.

[r supwoods]

Depends on who supplied the intelligence ..... :oh:

[Union Jack]

.... asked them if any of them did not think it unreasonable ....

If I understand correctly the point you wish to convey, methinks some editing may be required to your original post - two negatives and all that sort of thing?

Jack

PS I think (note no "not") it extremely unreasonable, unless of course the AOC were prepared to lead by example!

[JessTheDog]

I suppose it is not unreasonable for him to order it. It may be unreasonable for him to order it and expect it to be done! :}

[Red Line Entry]

Some may not like the man, but I have never seen an individual who can stand up in front of a group of officers and speak with clarity and insight on the subject of "Leadership" for an hour and a half. All without notes.

OK, he's a harrier pilot, so supressed ego may not be his problem, but IMHO, he's one of the the most inspirational and intelligent AOCs we've had for a long time.

[Mr C Hinecap]

He may be that - but I don't actually see the Groups adding any value whatsoever to our efforts. They seem to be a bit of a 'self-licking lollipop' and, in a couple of years being around them, I have seen nowt to write home about.

[JessTheDog]

There is an interesting debate to be had, even if the anectdote is without foundation:
- Would such an order be a legal order under military law and UK domestic law? Would refusal to follow such an order breach military law?
- What about the moral component? We recall the Battle of Britain pilot who rammed a German bomber apparently targeting Buckingham Palace, and who thankfully survived to tell the tale. Would a Taleban commander really inspire a similar intervention? Would this be worth a similar self-sacrifice?
- Strategy. Is this the best way to achieve a war aim? Humans and vehicles move at predictable speeds and could be bombed later, estimating their movements if required.
- Scenario. Would this be the Scarlet Pimpernel himself, Mr Bin Laden? Or would this be some other figure, of whatever importance but presumably replacable (as indeed Mr B-L may well be). Would there be credible intelligence suggesting that the commander was controlling an imminent WMD threat? (Hmm, we've heard that before!)
- Airframes and aircrew recruitment, selection, training and death benefits are not cheap. Would this be an appropriate use of equipment and personnel?
- Perhaps most fundamentally, leadership. I would expect that a good leader and commander would only issue orders when he or she would be confident of obedience. If the order was not obeyed, what reflection on the commander's leadership? What about the leadership above the commander - at the political level?
If the anectdote is true, perhaps the 2* was trying to generate such a debate.

[tablet_eraser]

Double negatives are so much fun...

[ShyTorque]

The correct answer would have been: "I would follow you anywhere, sir!"

[stickmonkeytamer]

Knowing him, he would just eject beside them, walk up to them, and punch them into oblivion (after politely introducing himself first)..., not only for being the enemy, but for not being good enough to to be Harrier pilots.:E

SMT

[Gainesy]

I suppose that if you don't have a gun on the jet, then nutting them is a viable option.:uhoh:

[NoFaultFound]

Well...

I was there, and there was a huge amount of shock at what he said. A true "Black Adder" moment.... Baaaahhhhhhhh:uhoh:

[Talking Radalt]

fly their aircraft into the ground in order to destroy a vehicle carrying a Taleban commander?
What was the Taleban commander doing in the aircraft in the first place? :}

[mbga9pgf]

Is this the same AOC 1 Group that sat most of his operational career sat in a QRA bunker waiting for the war to start, whilst spending GW1 and 2 in the CAOC?

Not digging, genuine question....

[Delta Hotel]

mbga9pgf,
What would a Harrier mate be doing on QRA?:confused:

Wrong bloke I fear.......

[mbga9pgf]

ok, maybe not Q, but certainly waiting in a bunker waiting for the war to start... its not as if he went up against a credible threat in a frame any time in his life?

Or have I got the wrong bloke?

[Gainesy]

So what did he actually say?:confused:

[Kitbag]

mbga9pgf

Seems to me you're saying that any VSO who has not flown Ops is a waste of space?

[maxburner]

I suppose a reasonable return question might have been that given it is peace time, would the said AOC have been prepared to authorise a deliberate crash.

[Tigs2]

mmm
Me thinks AOC 1 Group has found the next evolution for flying development for the mil.
Crash Resource Management. Has anyone told DASC?:ok:

What did he actually say?

[mbga9pgf]

Me thinks AOC 1 Group has found the next evolution for flying development for the mil.
Crash Resource Management. Has anyone told DASC?


Thats how it reads from the first post.

[BootFlap]

Would it invalidate my life insurance? After all, couldn't be suicide if I was following orders................ could it?:D

[Union Jack]

There must be someone at 1 Group ready to spill the beans!? You know you want to .....

Jack

[Zoom]

Sounds like a real leader.

Sorry, did I say leader? I meant tw*t.

[JessTheDog]

Sounds like a real leader.

Sorry, did I say leader? I meant tw*t.

In today's world, they mean the same thing. People who will stamp all over their colleagues and subordinates in order to "play the game".

[Flap62]

So his idea of leadership is to suggest that is within his power to authorise the first example of an ordered kamikaze attack in the Royal Air Force's 89 year history.
What we are dealing with here is a monsterous ego running amock. He is subtly suggesting that he is so powerful that, if he wished, he could order anyone in his command to die. The only thing worse than a fool is a deluded fool.
He should be reminded that the aircraft are not his to do with as he wishes, no more than any station commander has his own private air force.

I find it troubling that it would appear that no one in the room thought the suggestion was ridiculous and put their hand up to tell him so. If someone did please, please tell me I am wrong. Are we really now so cowed and lacking in spirit that no-one had the courage to stand up to him?

AOC he may be, God he is not!

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Thank Goodness I'm in 2 Group:p

...but then by tomorrow we might have been re-structured (again):eek:

[Phochs3]

This event most certainly did happen.....absoutely incredible.

Issues I have with this ridiculous idea:

1. The idea of senior officers ordering their personnel to commit suicide is disgusting.

2. Is the life of one rag worth the life of one UK serviceman?

3. Imagine, as you are floating skyward towards the pearly gates having parked your jet in the desert at 500kts, that INT had it wrong, and that the bloke driving the car was actually a plumber driving his children to school?

4. Imagine trying to fly your fast pointy thing at an evading car. I am almost certain that you would tent peg, having missed. The bloke driving only has to swerve at the last minute and generate a miss distance of 20 feet or so and it's good night Vienna and mission failed.

IMHO, utter, utter madness, stated from the relative security of a position in the hierarchy that would never have to carry out such an act.

[Flap62]

Once a AN-22, always a AN-22!

[JessTheDog]

Is "controlled flight into a target" a recognised tactic?

Is it included in an approved training syllabus?

Is it "proportionate use of force" as required by the various laws and conventions on armed conflict?

:confused:

[Fg Off Max Stout]

Is it a good use of resources?

Your Commanding Officer would have to be stark raving mad.... Baaaaaah!

[Dan Gerous]

Fear not chaps, according to the BBC news website (sorry don't know how to post the link) Qinetic have carried out trials for multiple remote controlled aircraft, being operated by one pilot in the air. So there you go Cyber Kamikaze's.

This is the link, hopefully it will work.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6514413.stm

[Captain Kirk]

This incident did happen and I was there. To be clear - I think the idea is barking for all the reasons stated; would you trust Int/would it make a difference being uppermost in my mind. However, I think you will find that the AOC was deliberately floating a controversial idea to spark a debate - he seems to have been successful!

The full context was to stimulate thought on the changed nature of the demands upon AD vs Muds - I suspect, for example, that we would all consider flying into a rogue airliner though I'll warrant we would all hope for a survivable collision, even if we knew we were probably deluding ourselves.

He can certainly have the odd Melchett moment but he is also the most dynamic AOC that I have seen for along time, with a clear vision of where he wants to take a Service that he clearly wants the best for. I'd rather have a leader like this than a timid man whose primary interest is the next promotion and a consequent fear of ever putting his head above the parapet.

[Had Enough 77]

Captain Kirk,

"He can certainly have the odd Melchett moment but he is also the most dynamic AOC that I have seen for along time, with a clear vision of where he wants to take a Service that he clearly wants the best for. I'd rather have a leader like this than a timid man whose primary interest is the next promotion and a consequent fear of ever putting his head above the parapet."

He may well have a clear vision of where he wants to go, but will the powers that be let him in todays climate? I think an AOC's power is not what it once was, which is quite sad really.

[idle stop]

QWI course? Doesn't say much for the quality of weapons application training if the last resort is to ram with the aircraft. Or are we too broke now to afford cannon, rockets etc?

[zedder]

No. All our aircraft are just too broke!:ugh:

[Mike Oxmels]

Sounds like the Sun journos have been cribbing from Pprune again. Tomorrow's front page will be this thread! I might actually have a read of the gutter rag tomorrow before I wipe my hoop with it.

[andgo]

Check out Tuesdays 'Sun' ladies.....

Ooops :E

[Mike Oxmels]

Beat ya to it Andgo!

[Mal Drop]

I went on a suicide mission once, had to come back as the headband was on too tight and I was getting a migraine...

Bless you Douglas Adams

[ORAC]

CFIT = Controlled Flight Into Taleban.

[Sadbloke]

You could get an 11 Sqn pilot to do the deed - miss by miles!

[LunchMonitor]

The Sun Article (http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2007150271,00.html) containing direct quotes from all you "Top Guns"

[Zoom]

Reported on the BBC TV news this morning. Now I know that the lunatics really have taken over the asylum.

:uhoh:

[Woodgreen]

:uhoh:

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1258815,00.html

[Zoom]

BTW, I notice that the Sun reporter forgot to mention that he lifted almost all of his copy PPRuNe. Time to sue, I reckon.

[TBSG]

Has the power of intellectual rigour and challenge been cast aside by the mainstream RAF? Is it so wrong to think the unthinkable in this modern age? I find it surprising that some of you take offence over an issue that may or may not happen, but which is not inconceivable in the modern world.

While any order to crash into a car containing a terrorist may well be illegal, it should not stop individual aircrew from thinking about it, or the possibility of having to fly their aircraft into a hijacked airliner to stop Canary Wharf from going the same way as the Twin Towers. This would have to be a personal decision, taken at the time, under difficult circumstances. What would you really do? That is what the AVM appears to have said.

The answer is not to throw the teddy out of the pram because someone has asked a difficult question. And the AVM (who I have never met) does appear, from some of the comments, to want to make you all think a little more about your profession and its place in the modern world - surely that is one of the key functions of these conferences. What is so wrong with that?

[Inspector Dreyfuss]

This story was carried by BBC News 24 this morning as well. Perhaps the AOc should volunteer to an interview to explain his logic?

[airborne_artist]

Of course, if the RAF's Typhoon had been specced from the outset with the cannon, none of this discussion would be necessary.

[cokecan]

"Of course, if the RAF's Typhoon had been specced from the outset with the cannon, none of this discussion would be necessary."

staggeringly unlikely of course, indeed so far from the realms of possibility as to be discounted without further thought, but imagine if the Typhoon/GR4 had actually used all its ammunition in a previous engagement?

Crab is an asset, an expendible asset to be used to achieve outcomes the nation sees fit and in evermore hazardous ways as the stakes - for the nation, not the individual Crab - increase. if the greatest priority of the state were the lives and aircraft of Crab then said Crab would not be in the 'Stan, they would be sat in a bunker in middle England with 600ft of overhead concrete protection, wearing NBC suits and with a stockpile of food and water lasting for the next thousand years.

this 'discussion' says many things about the RAF, none of them good.

Crab has an over-inflated sense of his own importance and can't handle unpleasently rigorous intellectual debate regarding the comparative importance of his own life/aircraft and the requirements of the state he serves.

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

I think what worries me most with your post coke, old chum, is I think you actually believe what you have written :eek:

[FormerFlake]

MSN are also running the story.

http://news.uk.msn.com/Article.aspx?cp-documentid=4619966

[Maple 01]

Self sacrifice may be fine when it's your choice as in the Hurricane pilot that rammed a Do-17 over London but ordering it as part of a RamKommando? Fec that! Even the Nazis thought it was a waste. Just buy some bloody bullets for the cannon.

Anyone sign-up as a Kamikaze?

[endplay]

Surely this is a reasonable philosophical question. If you, as a pilot, are prepared to shoot down an airliner with scores of innocent passengers then I assume you will have rationalised this in a quiet moment. It can’t be that you are merely following orders. After all, you wouldn’t shoot a child simply on the orders of a superior officer, would you? It must be that the deaths you are about to cause are for the greater good. More innocents will be saved by your actions and I salute your “willingness” to even contemplate such action let alone take it.

Now move on. There is no way to stop this aircraft other than ramming it and losing your own life. You’ve rationalised the deaths of the pax as being for the greater good so why not your own?

That, I think, is the question that was posed by the AOC and is worthy of more consideration than is being shown here.

On a lighter note. The rest of the RAF have been telling aircrew to go fcuk themselves for years and if you followed the AOC’s advice you would certainly achieve that.

[SixOfTheBest]

I do think most who have posted on this thread are confusing madness with the ability to provoke thought and debate. Anyone who has ever worked with the good AVM would know that he often asks difficult questions to provoke such debates and gauge reactions. There have also been quite a few derogatory comments from certain parties that, I would hazard a guess, have never even met the man. Whilst he does have his moments, I defy anyone on this site who has worked for him to argue against his charisma and intellectual capacity. So many threads over the years have screamed out for 'leaders' who are not afraid to say 'no' and yet, when we do have one, we collectively stone him! So, what is it to be? A yes man? Or someone that IS controversial, is NOT afraid to speak his mind and DOES ask difficult questions (deliberately)? I'm afraid that the 'yes' man, typically, will not fulfill the latter criteria. As to the great argument that one who has never seen Ops is not fit to lead, well, I disagree, and I have seen lots myself. Truth be known, he has too. And before you start stoning me, I am not a career man, and look forward to leaving fairly soon. My thoughts are based on personal experience with said AVM. The man, though having his faults (don't we all?), is several steps ahead of both his seniors and subordinates. Don't underestimate his abilities. I would like to think that, when I leave, we have more people like Walker at the top.
Finally, this was a simple question to provoke debate, and it certainly has, 6 months after it was posed. So who are the idiots?!!!

SOTB

[Flap62]

TBSG,
for you to say that this type of comment and response should cause us to look at the place our profession has in the modern world would be ridiculous if it were not so laughable. Try telling all the people who have carried the burden of Ops for the last 6 years that we are in a position where we can consider losing assets and highly trained people on 1 target, however valuable. If we have such a depth of reserve then let's see some of it today to alieviate the burden.
This comment was not thrown out as a hypothetical discussion point - AOCs in front of a roomful of junior officers do not do that! In the silence that followed his comments no-one put themselves forward to say they thought such an idea was repellant. That being the case, then if he did not immediately say that the topic was simply an extreme view and that there is no way that he would countenance such a thing, he leaves no other impression than that he thinks it an option.
Ignoring the ridiculous concept that someone could be ordered to attempt to fly into a target on the basis of dodgy dosier type int, where would that place us morally. We quite rightly parade our outrage and indignance at the reprehensible actions of suicide bombers in the middle and far east. How would this type of action play on Al Jaz television?
For a whole plethora of reasons, this is simply a "larger than life", vaguely cartoon character allowing his ego to run amock.

SOTB, hi fella-tally the village!. We posted at the same time so excuse edit to reflect.
There is no point in a "leader" stimulating debate and then leaving the topic in the air. He asked a question, the floor gave no answer and so what are his views? Where does that leave us? Where does that leave the shiney new QWI who now doesn't know if his AOC is a thought provoking and inspirational leader or completely raving hatstand! That is not decisive leadership, that is at best some-one on a raving ego trip and at worst someone who poses a difficult question and then doesn't have the balls to answer it if no-one else will.
As to what I think, and having had the priviledge of operating under his command, I refer you to my previous post re An-22!

[moosemaster]

OK, so he raised a debate, but surely the debate SHOULD be, why is there only 1 aircraft involved in the mission?

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but don't the pointy ones fly around in PAIRS?

Also, if INT is so sure that the target is there in the first place, why would the strike aircraft have used their ammo on a lesser value target? It's not as if they have to battle their way through intensive aerial defenses to get there is it?

It's good to ask questions and provoke thought, but make sure you aim the discussion in the correct direction. The ultimate sacrifice has already been made by over 100 of our colleagues because their country asked them to risk their lives. The fact that those people were still sat in that room rather than on a Virgin Atlantic flight deck indicates that they are willing to face the risks.

This one I feel should have been aimed at the politicos, NOT the Crabs.

[2Ronnies]

Tough job he's got though - provoking a single thought in a bunch of QWIs would be beyond the wit of most Harrier jockeys. ;)

[SixOfTheBest]

FLAP,

Long time no booze fella! Said village, i'd warrant a guess, is still there!!! Maybe even the red tractor as well!!

I think with said AVM, you either love his syle of leadership or you hate it. Having seen the rest of what is on offer, i'll go with his particular brand. I would also add that, perhaps, one does not have a more intellectual forum than he did when this question was posed. Immediate reactions were understandable but, on reflection, was it SO bad? I think not though if faced with the dilemma for real I would probably not be able to clear my ears. Something as simple as this gives a REAL snapshot into the mentality of the 'enemy' rather than reading someone else's views in an article. To me, personally, it highlights the vast difference in culture.....but are we THAT different in this respect? I think the only differences are the cirumstances under which such a 'abhorrent' prospect could become reality. I know (at least I think i do) under which cirumstances I would consider this! I assure you that they would not be the same ones that Captain Mohammed and his heavy plastic belt would be! But isn't one persons perception anothers reality? Christ, need a stiff drink now before I start to sprout ear hair!

At the end of the day, IMHO, the man asked to provoke and he got the result, evidenced by this and the papers. Change the 'circumstances' and then ask yourself the same question. I would hazard a guess that each persons' 'cirumstances' will be different but that each person DOES have a theoretical scenario where they WOULD!

[Wader2]

The solution is obvious. Of course you should fly the aircraft into the offending vehicle.




From another thread it would appear to be SOP in SOAF :}

and survive of course.

[Union Jack]

We quite rightly parade our outrage and indignance at the reprehensible actions of suicide bombers in the middle and far east. How would this type of action play on Al Jaz television?

In a word, badly, so your sensible point is both well made and well said. There have been enough suicidal people in cockpits already in this decade.

Jack

[nice castle]

Errrr, buy a few more helos, keep practising vehicle stops.....and hey presto, no need to fly expensive jets and highly trained jocks therof into the ground.

Should I put in a 'gem' to 1 Gp? Might be worth 20 quid..

Second thoughts, they'll read as far as the word 'helo' and file swiftly under B1N!

And I thought these AOC chaps were supposed to consider the 'big picture'.

[mbga9pgf]

How about we get decent kit that doesnt fail or we dont do the OP? (its certainly improving, but, as usual a few years late).

How about we dont go to war without the right number of people? (Who downsizes whilst struggling with retention?)

How about we dont go through a huge transformational period in the armed forces whilst at the same time fighting a war on two fronts? (No, we are all expected to "man up" and do our bit, just deal with it...)

Now, THAT would be leadership. I personally would stand up and be counted by any senior officer that stood up for the things his/or her troops had been screaming about for the past 2 years... and I am not just talking about 1 Grp here... there is a significant lack of voice when it comes to speaking up against paltry 400 million increases in the defence budget.

[Rheinstorff]

I can see that the AOC was trying to provoke debate in his usually provocative way. I certainly wouldn't crticise him for that - the more intellectual debate we have on the use of force in all its forms, the better informed our future decision makers will be.

If I were to venture comment on provoking debate in this way, it would be that the individual should have considered the type of audience, the manner the question was posed and the rank gradient between himself and the audience. That it was silent and not prepared to engage in debate on a contentious subject merely relects that the manner it was put to them was poorly judged - if the point was to encourage discussion, not merely to leave the thought for further consideration.

I, as serviceman, am a little disturbed by some of the attitudes that have surfaced. Those of us who serve have an unlimited liability; many of us test the odds of that being realised by going in harms way on a daily basis and for sustained periods (a lot of them doing it as I type this). The vast majority, who get paid very little by comparison to aircrew and use inferior equipment, accept their calling with honour and integrity and frankly 'man-up' (sorry girls, but you know what I mean) to the (statistically much greater) risk that they may be the man/woman who will have to go into a situation that requires the ultimate sacrifice. There has been too little leadership at all levels in the RAF to reinforce the core ethos that ensures ithe moral component contributes fully to an effective fighting force in the broadest spectrum of operations. It is no suprise that the other Services view elements of the RAF as a joke - not the kit, but the people - and see it as little more than the militant wing of British Airways. The RAF should be offended to its roots that many in the Army would rather be supported by the USAF even if that brings an increased risk of fratricide. The RAF has been corrupted by cynicism and an attitude that places the individual needs above the team needs and the team needs above the mission. That is all wrong, and I applaud AOC 1 Gp for making the point, albeit in a manner that I would not wholly agree with.

Rant ends.

[airborne_artist]

Perhaps you might read this account of HMS Glowworm, and Lt Cdr Roope VC (http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_HMSGlowworm.html).

[Rheinstorff]

I know the story well and I'm inspired and humbled by the leadership and sacrifice. What happened to the RAF's fighting spirit? It comes from leadership (at all levels) not on whether you've got the best kit.

[TBSG]

Flaps62,

"for you to say that this type of comment and response should cause us to look at the place our profession has in the modern world would be ridiculous if it were not so laughable

Eh? Why? A critical eye towards what one does is surely no bad thing.

"Try telling all the people who have carried the burden of Ops for the last 6 years that we are in a position where we can consider losing assets and highly trained people on 1 target, however valuable."

Well guess what, I'm one of them. So don't bother with the sanctimonious lecture.

Now - you decide. Is 1 aircraft and 1 pilot more or less valuable than the lives of the thousands that might die in any terrorist attack using aircraft on Canary Wharf or any other mass casualty scenario? Should you not at least consider the question rather than dismiss it out of hand? Is there a different answer if the target is a pickup with an AQ leader in the back? Probably, but why? Do you know? We live in a different world where terrorists seem unafraid to die and we need to know what the implications are. I am sure the AVM would not ever plan such a response, but he is definitely justified in getting his audience at the conference to think about it.

If we cannot contemplate some potentially serious and real issues in what we do, for fear of upsetting the intellectually challenged and myopic out there, then we are worse off.

[mbga9pgf]

I think that all of us that go to theatre know the full risks, but there is a subtle but distinct difference beween taking an extreme (calculated) risk to get the job done, as we all do from time to time whilst in the sand pit, as opposed to sacrificing ones life (as a certainty) for a nation that is not even your own. We are not talking about flying our aircraft into another to prevent possible harm to our Monarch or Government institution, we are talking about certain death acting upon information provided to us by a third party.... BIG difference in my opinion.

Would I risk my life to defend friends I had served with, colleagues I have a close bond with? Certainly. Would I crash an aircraft into a third-party target on the whim of an Into? I dont know. But to make comparisons of guys on the front line (squaddies) that yes, risk more than we do, often thanklessly, for their bretheren IS different from the sacrifice suggested. There is no reward in this instance for sacrificing all to in effect, act as a human 1000 lb'er.

[Wader2]

Of course there were many precedents during the Second World War.

I cannot evaluate the validity of otherwise of Fighter Command ramming the Luftwaffe or Bomber Command prssing on with crippled bombers just to drop their bombs and then crash.

The big difference was we had plenty of replacement aircraft and a reasonably plentiful supply or replacement aircrew.

Now we have neither.

Could we, in all conscience, afford to lose say 15% of our in-theatre forces on the possibility, and only the possibility, of decapitating the AQ leadership?

A_A,

Just read your post and of course it is the other side of the same coin I mentioned. You might also consider Amethyst and Cornwall.

We are in a different world.

[TheSmiter]

Top marks to benedick! Achieving national media coverage with his first prune post is mightily impressive :D Well done!
And a big :* to those who poo poo'd him

Now if we can just get them to publicize all the other broken bits we might get somewhere.

[pshakey]

how does one achieve a dream posting to 'the RAF's elite 1 Group'?

[Wader2]

how does one achieve a dream posting to 'the RAF's elite 1 Group'?

Join the RAF; good chance of a job in Flt Ops on a 1 Gp station. We need good Ops Officers or Assistants.

[UnderPowered]

That's funny!

But seeing as we're talking about leadership, I worked for him for nigh on a year in said HQ, and I didn't see him walk the floor and talk to his people once.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6521311.stm


big brother is watching you..... hilarious!

[SaddamsLoveChild]

I do have to say that I think AOC 1 Gp is one of the few 'seat of the pants' tell it like it is senior officers that garners my respect. I think that anyone who deploys now and does not consider what their involvement means is deluding themselves. By signing on the dotted line and remaining in service you agree that you are willing to make that sacrifice; if you arent and dont believe that, then you should leave.

Command is a lonely place and unpopular decisions have to be made, all he was doing was trying to stimulate debate and remind individuals of the need to consider the unthinkable. Some of the comments on this thread are appalling, on the 25 anniversary of the start of the Falklands I am disgusted that some of my peers think this way and comment to erode the service in comparison to our brothers in the Navy and Army.

Get on with it, do your Jobs, consider what may be required of you and if you dont like it get out. I dont believe I can support this Governments position and I am leaving in a couple of months but until then I will do my duty.

MAN UP or MOVE ON...........

[UnderPowered]

You should change your handle to "AOC 1 Gp's Love Child"! Or at least for 2 months, then you can change it again to "Richard Branson's Love Child"...

[skyhigh269]

Unfortunately for your parent Service, the shame of your carping on crabs will not be confined to you, but will be shared by your shipmates. Best you stay close to the bilges from where I suspect you emerged and where you certainly belong!

[ShyTorque]

"
Get on with it, do your Jobs, consider what may be required of you and if you dont like it get out. I dont believe I can support this Governments position and I am leaving in a couple of months but until then I will do my duty.

MAN UP or MOVE ON..........."

Strong words. What if, on your last day before you leave, you were ordered to fly yourself and your aircraft into a terrorist vehicle?

[cokecan]

"Shame - we know where cokecan comes from..
Unfortunately for your parent Service, the shame of your carping on crabs will not be confined to you, but will be shared by your shipmates. Best you stay close to the bilges from where I suspect you emerged and where you certainly belong!"

no fishhead me.

my providence is somewhat Greener.

are you getting your knickers in a twist at being called out by one of your own senior officers? not so much 'the few', more 'the militant wing of EasyJet....'

[JessTheDog]

The debate has certainly picked up since the Scum lifted it without acknowledgment.

It is a good debate, obviously crashing a perfectly good aircraft (not one of ours surely?) into a target is an extreme scenario. Possibly not if it was the only way to avoid a mass loss of life or to acheive an overriding strategic aim. The WW2 examples of such self-sacrifice are inspirational and heroic. However I do not think the comparison is valid with ops occuring nowadays.

Such self-sacrifice requires inspiration in turn - a just cause or a moral imperative, as well as confidence in credible leadership and in the esprit de corps. I think that - short of a 9/11 type attack on a major UK city - such inspiration does not exist with regard to our operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Such an order would not be likely to be obeyed. Our troops (etc) are fighting in a morally dubious war with little confidence in a just cause, any moral imperative, political leadership, military management and public support.

[Len Ganley]

In the hope of cheapening the debate................

I thought we were trying to get away from using 'dumb' weapons:E


Well, someone had to say it.

[RETDPI]

Well the original fleet-sinking, nation-saving "Kamikaze" was a Typhoon.



Is there something we should be told?

[Pontius Navigator]

Anyone seen the brilliant news coverage on BBC at 6?

The GR1 Fighter and an AOC who seemed to have had a massive face lift. I didn't recognise him.:)

[ShyTorque]

I always associated Kamikazee pilots with the last, desperate efforts of the stalwarts of a dying empire, who had realised they could never win. So.... :ugh:

Sorry, I just had a vision of a white van full of headbands driving towards number ten, Don't know what came over me...... :hmm:

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

A Typhoon's a "divine wind"? Well I never.

[Archimedes]

What's happened to mbga9pgf? His account seems to be defunct.

Has he flown his computer into a Taleban at the behest of AOC 1 Group? :confused:

[threepointonefour]

Given recent events (Typhoon flypast at Tattershall Leisure Park) I think I can confirm that the AOC was indeed talking hypothetically ... the chances of a Typhoon hitting ANYTHING are pretty slim ...! :ouch:

[threepointonefour]

A better question is do you wish to fly with a mate who you can't trust to be part of the team ...

Didn't someone say that this was at a QWI conference ...?? :D

[sitigeltfel]

Things to start you worrying.



You drive onto base and the gate guards bow instead of saluting
They address you as “San” instead of “Sir”
You go to the Mess for a bite to eat and are offered Sushi or Tempura
Your Mess bill is handed to you although it is the middle of the month
When you get to the crew room everyone wants to shake your hand
You ask to see the Form700 and are told not to bother
As you walk out to the flightline you notice you have been allocated the oldest, highest hours aircraft
Someone has painted a large red Rising Sun on the tail
The ground crew insist on tying a white silk ribbon round your bone dome
On climbing in you discover the ejector seat pins have been superglued into their slots
You look in the mirrors and cannot help noticing that the navigator is being extremely diligent with his strap in checks
On starting up you notice the tanks are only half full
When taxiing out all the ground crew line up and give you “Banzai’s”
After take off you contact Fighter Control and hear gentle sobbing in the background

[Bob Viking]

Calm down buddy.
I think it's blatantly obvious that the papers have got all their info from this very website! The BBC report even directly quotes it as opinions expressed on the pilots website PPRUNE. It's just a shame none of the others had the decency to do the same.
I'm pretty sure that no-one went running to any papers.
What it does highlight however is that every journo and news reporter, when looking for aviation related scoops, looks straight away to this site for his 'insider knowledge'. Maybe the point here is to be careful what you write on this site. It seems to me if this thread had never been started, then none of this would have ever come to light!
Doh.
BV:D

[Zoom]

Nicely put, siti, and true, Bob

I don't think that intelligent people like QWIs need to have their consciences pricked by some air rank self-inflating ego, or ARSE. If something like this had to be done it would come from within the person at the moment, as it has many times in the past, and not from an order - insinuated or otherwise. If you're not careful it won't be long before pre-mediated suicide becomes an acceptable option, as it is in other cultures, and you will soon find it in your tactics manuals - probably as The Walker Option.

[Inspector Dreyfuss]

A good point Bob. However, was it really a bad thing that this sort of debate was aired? With a public that is increasingly out of touch with the military perhaps raising such an issue - however odious that most of us find this particular subject - might help to get the public to consider the issues at stake during 2 significant conflicts.

I personally find the suggestion ludicrous and the way that the question was posed at the Conference (according to one of the senior guys present, I wasn't there) does sound inappropriate and reveals a rather arrogant attitude. Par for the course perhaps. I'm not surprised that there was a stunned silence. Nonetheless, at least some of the news coverage did attempt to tackle some of the wider moral issues at stake and provoked some thought amongst some of the apathetic public. Some good may therefore have come from it, I believe.

[Ewan Whosearmy]

Not *every* journo. Just the lazy, scumbag ones.

[Bob Viking]

So, I say again, every journo then!

I'm only kidding!

Jacko, don't start!

BV:} :ok:

[Jackonicko]

Hooked.

Still not good enough for a conversion slot onto a modern fighter, Bob? :E

(Not jealous at all. No sirree......)

[Danny]

The Beebs article can be read here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6521311.stm)

Nice to know that your points of view are taken into consideration. A proper referral and a link would have been nice though. :suspect:

[An Teallach]

It's there, Danny - top right.

RELATED INTERNET LINKS
RAF
Prune Pilots' website
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

[DownloadDog]

Is he related to Phil the Greek per chance?

[Union Jack]

It seems to me if this thread had never been started, then none of this would have ever come to light!

But then again, perhaps it is just as well that it did, so that those of you most likely to be involved now know exactly what is expected of you by your "leaders"!

Jack

PS Isn't Bob Viking's quote at *** above what this forum is all about?

[dogrobber]

wot next promotion numbnuts....he,s a screamin lunatic and is probably looking at a military takeover ,starting with a suicidal dive ,on orders of course ,by one of his syncophants into the parliament buildings during pmqs

[dogrobber]

i
suggest the next time u have contact with this gentleman u wear a :mad:

[Confucius]

Maybe we should buy some of these... (XP-79B)

http://www.airbornegrafix.com/HistoricAircraft/FlyingWings/xp79_title.jpg

In Jack Northrop's words "It was designed as a projectile, with the thought that it could be used to intercept and knock wings or tails off other airplanes. Rather than shooting at them, this airplane was going to slice sections off the other airplanes to destroy them."

Just right for a harrier type.

[Union Jack]

Thank you very much, Mr Walker, I'm sure your son will go far.

Jack

PS I thought that priors were supposed to be celibate?:)