Arms over Afghanistan?

[greenwizard]

GUN's or NOT?

"A Marine Corps Hornet pilot said the RAF crews were prepared to go anywhere over Afghanistan, unlike the US Air Force tankers. "They will go with you wherever you want to go. With so many targets now being designated at a late stage it is vital we have that flexibility. "When we want to refuel, they are always there. Their contribution is absolutely immense," he said."

B]Given Afghanistan's previous history with POWs should Tanker crew's carry side arms to protect themselves if shot down???[/B]

[Ivor Bigwan]

If you're shot down in a Tanker the only use for a gun would be to shoot yourself before you hit the ground! The aircrew pistol is ****** all use for anything else.

PS Oh dear aren't we allowed to say buga?

[ 11 November 2001: Message edited by: Ivor Bigwan ]

[greenwizard]

If thats the case why bother with all that extra training and preperation??

Surely there is always the chance they might survive the impact, fright, flames etc !! :(

Would be nice to survive all that and then captured alive!! NOT

[skywatcher]

You are right greenwizard. It's times like these that you realy find out what our lords and masters are like. To much civvy management and not enough of what were about. Weapons should be issued to all members as it gives that little extra chance of survival. It generally fits into the all too difficult category from what I have seen. Wouldn't like to be caught by the Taliban now :(

[ 14 November 2001: Message edited by: skywatcher ]

[RATBOY]

Looks like the RAF tanker crews are now almost honorary U.S. Marines. You have the best air-ground people in the world watching your back if you go down, doubt if the Hornet you just tanked is going to stand by and watch while the locals exact their revenge. That's better than any 9mm you can carry in your survival kit.

[ 14 November 2001: Message edited by: RATBOY ]

[The Eternal JP]

I would have thought the gun would be useful if you could not prepare to put up with the S*** hole that we are all based in any more. Several hours of Bin Liner spotting followed by a mile and a half walk to your en-suite tent to sweat to sleep and then get woken by the noise of those quiet VC10 chaps getting aborn at 0zzzz00 (what's the 0 stand for!!!!). I'm suprised we haven;t gone dolally already!! By the way, I was joking about the en-suite bit!!

[X-QUORK]

That's bloody outrageous, they make you sleep in tents !!? The first priority should be for the Royal Engineers to build you a hotel, surely ?

I can feel a letter to my MP coming on. :D

[The Eternal JP]

I'm sorry, does someone have to do some work so I can do my job properly. A hotel, no....somewhere to get a shower without some plastic bag ripping above your head....yes!

And can I raise the question....if the AAR's are going peshwari nan side, should they not be doing the A course!!!!

[skywatcher]

AAAH Hotels now those were the days.LOL

[The Gorilla]

Skywatcher...
Yes those days are over for sure. I can remember when people used to moan about 3 weeks in a single hotel room in Italy!! How those days seem so far away now :(

I Actually heard someone today, who doesn't have bags covered in sand yet, bemoaning the fact that his wine cellar is running low!!

Where is all going to end?? :confused: :confused: :confused:

[ 16 November 2001: Message edited by: The Gorilla ]

[MrBernoulli]

Actually, the real reason the tanker crews will take the Marine pilots anywhere sausage-side is because the tankers have no tactical int. Simple. Ignorance is bliss.

[Reichman]

Actually, Mr B, we take them where they want to go - because they ask us, we do get tactical int, and ignorance WOULD be bliss.


Edited for spolling

[ 18 November 2001: Message edited by: Reichman ]

[greenwizard]

Knew the wheels didn't love the AAR boys when asked about the crap accommodation and flight safety implications of lack of sleep!!! They were told to wind necks in and stop trying to blackmail wheels into decisions.

NICE :confused: :confused: :confused:

[BEagle]

The green shoots of airline recovery have started with the call back of certain 'furloughed' US airline personnel. When the UK follows suit and the airlines start needing more pilots, the memories of the 'blackmail' statement will still be fresh in the minds of those ready, willing and able to stay in the big-ac RAF - but equally available to those who will NOT treat them like $hit............

Investors in People....?

[brockenspectre]

I like the terms of the original post here - that the Brit tankers will go where the US ones won't and the US "ground" forces recognise the professionalism and dedication of Brit Forces. I am Brit and have a v dear friend (yes, I am fem and he isn't!!) who is SpecOps (US) and he too has in the past (can't tell you what he is doing now else I would have to kill you) mentioned how he and his ilk appreciate Brit support forces (submarine as well as air) who deliver teams to where they are meant to be with the least drama, the most professionalism/accuracy and the greatest humour!

^5

:D

[MrBernoulli]

In reply to Reichman above:

If the tanker crews our now getting tac int that is a good step. When I was flying sorties to Talebanland there was NO tac int, just general chit chat about roughly where they thought the Taleban might be running to next. We certainly did NOT know where all the horrible guns and missiles were.

[ 22 November 2001: Message edited by: MrBernoulli ]

[greenwizard]

I hear that apparently some junior Officers are not doing enough secondary duties in Muscat!!! :p
Sounds like Blunties have a firm grip of the situation ;)

[Rolling Map]

Secondary duties! They are all to busy driving around in thier hire cars and designing pathetic posters to stick up in the toilets. Percentage of war effort?