It's the bi-annual "Not enough parachuting" article

[StopStart]

Good to see the DT being fed yet more dribble by badly informed Army "sources" about how there isn't enough parachuting going on and that if it doesn't improve immediately they're all going up sticks and move elsewhere.

Some cobblers (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/8024732/RAF-grounding-SAS-over-parachute-training.html)

I've read the article twice and the only "facts" I can see in it are that a) Brize Norton is in Oxfordshire and b) the weather in the uk can be bad in November. Other than that it is all unmitigated horsesh@t. Think the DT needs to find some better military sources :rolleyes:

[Cows getting bigger]

All the RAF Falcons do is just drop into football stadiums.


..... is true as well. :)

[Clockwork Mouse]

Looks a fairly well informed and balanced article, if unpalatable to the light blue fraternity.

[Evalu8ter]

Hmmm, taking the "Air" out of SAS eh? Wouldn't tell that to 7 Sqn / JSFAW if I were you....Think you'll find the vast majority of jobs are delivered by RW. Yes there remains a need for small scale covert para, but at the expense of what? I have to agree though,it does reek of another "own goal" regarding the Falcons. However, the army do go very quiet when you point at the large number of men they have on civic/display duties.......

[barnstormer1968]

Bearing in mind the SF do already train in other areas (as mentioned in the article), they should perhaps move to training in Fort Bragg, as the quality of training would be superior to what the RAF can offer. Then everyone is a winner (except the AT fleet, when bean counters hear than one if AT's roles has diminished.....Used or not)

Edited to add: I have no beef with the fact that the RAF may not have enough resources to be able to do the training, but am always amazed at certain light blue types who have no understanding whatsoever of why and how the the parachute training is important/enhancing, yet still spout the usual cobblers of how is it not needed in this day and age.

[Ivan Rogov]

From the article it sounds like the "source" is a bloke down the pub, or an overheard conversation in one.
Joining in with the half truths and tripe which are being so poorly reported will only end up with us (RAF/Army) stabing each other in the back.

[Tiger_mate]

I know of an individual recently placed at short notice on the Para course and job done in 2 weeks of what he states was training second to none. He is in a post so established. The differance between UK and USA apart from climate is that the US has 3 x C17 fully committed to Para role which with weather that can largely be taken for granted does optimise the training potential. If there are individuals who wish the UK SF to subscribe fully to the US system rather then the UK system, there are better ways to staff this then chinese whispers to the daily rag.

I am looking forward to post SDR when self preservation rubbish such as this can be restored to its rightfull place; in the bin. I wonder if the US work on a supervision ratio of 1 on 1 which is how UK DZ operate when training. What UK Defence Plc do is awesome, and operating limitations are a factor of having the elastic stretched to breaking point across the piste.

[Father Jack Hackett]

For those of you who haven't noticed, the Hercules fleets have been comprehensively neglected over the last decade. The k-models have given tremendous service but is now to all intents and purposes dead or at least it will be post-SDSR. An effective replacement is still some way off.

Meanwhile, the mighty J has been doing the lion's share of the work for many years as the K fleet has progessively declined and is now starting to creak with a resparring programme about to commence which shouldn't have been required until well into the 2020s.

So why the surprise when the RAF and specifically the AT fleets are constantly pushing s**t uphill with such chronic underresourcing. Let us be under no illusion here, the boys and girls who are still left at Lyneham would be happy to decamp to El Centro several times a year and give the army all the para training it can handle but that's just not possible any more. So don't blame the RAF and instead vent your ire on the true villains in MoD and the treasury.

To quote The Right Stuff: "No bucks, no Buck Rogers".

And as for giving the Falcs a hard time, do remember that their day-jobs involve running PTS so that should afford them a certain amount of priority - regardless of whether or not they've got smoke cans strapped to their ankles, they still need to jump fir Christ's sake!

[vernon99]

And as for giving the Falcs a hard time, do remember that their day-jobs involve running PTS so that should afford them a certain amount of priority - regardless of whether or not they've got smoke cans strapped to their ankles, they still need to jump fir Christ's sake!

Can anyone shed any light on how much the Red Devils cost, or where they do their training, and who pays? Perhaps the RAF should start publicly responding to these reports. Publishing the point above that the Falcons are the course instructors, and therefore need to maintain currency first, then highlight the Army display team excesses.

[jango999]

Red Devils are funded by Sponsorship, not the MOD! They have their own A/C paid for by Sponsorship. They do not have the luxury of a C 130 outside PTS hanger or provisions of such MOD funded exercise's like ACE in the states to go and train which I believe the article is referring to.
If true and the RAF are sending their display team to the very place Hereford soldiers should be training then the person making these decision needs a good talking to.
ACE is run in the ideal environment to train SF soldiers, its similar to the type of places they will conduct operations.

Its a. Air consentration Ex, so why not wait and send them at the same time.:ugh:

[the_boy_syrup]

Can't the SAS just tag along with the Falcons?
They can do their jumps in he States as well then

Reds used to jump in Cyprus at the club at Dekahlia IIRC for summer training
The guy who ran the military side in 94 when I did a course was an ex Red detached to run it from 2 Para

[Captain Stable]

What some people need to remember is the additional fact that teams like the Red Devils, the Falcons, the White Helmets, the Blue Eagles AND the Sparrows all act as excellent recruiting tools. If the MoD doesn't pay for them all the better.

And right at the moment we need all the recruitment we can get.

[Could be the last?]

It's not what the RN have just said........... All recruit trg on hold for the next 6 months!
:confused:

[Pontius Navigator]

Thomas Harding still has a hard on about the RAF and having to walk to the air terminal at Brize just like a Sun reporter. I see that Con Coughlin has had his Typhoon trip but I don't think they rescheduled Tom's since they withheld the offer 3 years ago after his bitching about Brize.

[jango999]

That's the party line for the red arrows as well.:rolleyes:

End of the day if a method of entry is being effected because the RAF cannot deliver the good, it leaves options for Operational infill limited.

I could imagine a squadron on ops in the planing stage for a PAF "hands up who is qualified to jump" and only two troopers stick their mitts up.:ugh:

Its all well and good needing these display teams for recruitment, but in the same breath would it not put off a potential recruit when they read there is no guarantee you will get the full training to do the job required.
Just because the RAF are prioritising resources for the RAF publicity machine to drop in to a football stadium.

That was not the reason the RAF Parachute training school was set up at Ringway all those years ago, was it!:rolleyes:


We ought to have a corps of at least 5000 parachute troops.....I hear something is being done already to form such a corps but only, I believe, on a very small scale. Advantage must be taken of the summer to train these troops......."

Winston Churchill April 1940.

I dont see a mention of a display team in that speech:E

[Two's in]

Quick decode of the article for those not trained in Special Ops jargon:

"Officers are furious" - My mate Rupert
"the SAS says" - bloke in a pub in Hereford
"a special forces source." - bloke in a pub in Hereford who's seen Credenhill on a sign
"said an Army source." - Rupert's mate
"A senior officer in the Parachute Regiment" - Rupert's mate's mate in Aldershot

[jango999]

Ruperts mate in colchester :ok:.

[gijoe]

As said on another thread, don't worry RAF you are all for the chop soon anyway.

Then we will get a proper PTS-type training organisation - one that tells it's SNCOs and JNCOs what they are about to do for the rest of the day unlike the officer vs staff vs students mincing/command that goes on in the hangar at BZN today.

G:ok:

[NorthSouth]

Maybe none of you guys have been reading the NOTAMs lately. Perhaps this is just top brass embarrassed reaction to the DT coverage but there's a whole host of HAHO and more conventional PJE exercises notified in many parts of the UK over the last couple of weeks, so it would seem the SAS is not short of jump training.
NS

[barnstormer1968]

Father Jack
You may find I am quite well informed after all, and maybe that is why I had " I have no beef with the fact that the RAF may not have enough resources to be able to do the training," in my post, as I am very aware of the state of the Herc fleet. I am also aware that the USAF has plenty of airframes to train our little Brit gaggle, plus nice weather, and plenty of experience.

So, bearing in mind: I know the K fleet is just about non existent, the J fleet is very busy, Our weather can often be poor, the USAF have airframes ready, they have better weather, they are very good at para training and have masses of experience, Para training is great to boost troops confidence/courage, which can be a battle winner etc etc etc

Feel free to tell me what I have missed, that makes me so uninformed (I take it you know all about the uses and enhancements that para training gives my fellow green brethren too). I have not even restated the part about the possible loss of AT financial support if para training were to go fully to the U.S.

I find it sad that I repeatedly support the RAF, but then still constantly see posts attacking other services, due to some in the RAF feeling a bit insecure!
It is just as silly for someone to say the army are happy with the amount of para training they have, or they would change it! If that were really true, then the RAF would also be happy with the diminishing flying hours aircrew get to train and stay current with (despite constant complaints from aircrew and even from NATO)

Rant over:}

[alfred_the_great]

Just to put on my Staff Officer hat on...

The reason the jumps course is in Nov is because one cycle of selection starts in June. The J7 team at DSF must have enough historical evidence to show likely proportion of jumps lost due to wx in Nov. If it is not acceptable, then they need to move their courses dates until the rate is good enough.

To allow "80" SAS and "100" 18 Sigs guys go "front line" without doing jumps training is not a decision for the RAF to make. I don't know the risk appetite in DSF, but someone (likely COS to DSF, DDSF or DSF actual) has signed off to those servicemen moving on without the correct level of training.

DSF is the only Department I know of to be submitting proposals requesting an increase in budget during the SDSR (and one threatening a complete loss of SF capability if 2p is cut from their budget). Given the rest of Defence's desire to genuflect in their direction, I doubt if DSF (or SO1 J7 DSF) said that "from tomorrow all jumps will be conducted in America, hang the cost", anyone would bat an eyelid.

So, to summarise:

DSF (actual or organisation) made the decision, some c*ck is stirring trouble for the RAF, DSF is rubbing his/their hands in glee.

[Twon]

It's hard to argue against the SF need, particularly if they are using the capability on current ops, but the Para Regt joining in is a bit unnecessary; if we are scaling back our expectations across all services, why do they think a mass para drop capability is still required and should be immune from cuts?

[alfred_the_great]

There's lots of capabilities that are being used that are being considered for the chop.

The problem with our SF is that they use the "HMG neither confirms nor denies..." line to avoid scrutiny from the outside world. The most powerful 2* in UK Forces doesn't face public reckoning, they are as bad as any other part of HM Forces for their cock-ups and they get away with. Yes, they can march long distances with heavy weights at high speeds, but as Mark Urban's TF Black shows, they run their lives entirely to their own satisfaction, which may, or may not, be the best way to aid the "conventional" forces tasks.

[nigegilb]

Is anyone still pretending that this Defence Review is a considered process?

looks like every man for himself now. Heard the other day that one of the options is to scrap C17s and keep the J fleet going for a little while longer until it can be replaced by A400M. Something about the A400M only being 30 kts slower than a C17. Christ, you have to wonder..

The stuff about SF throwing their teddies out of the cot might have some substance, who knows. What is undeniable, is that swathes of military capability, currently being used, or recently having been used is about to be lost, if not forever, at least unavailable in the short to medium term.

That said, I have to agree with the above comment, DSF appears to think he and his organization is above scrutiny.

[dallas]

Hmmm, taking the "Air" out of SAS eh?
I'm not convinced dropping the letter A would be the PR move of the century :}

One issue I did spot some time ago is the weak link between the TS taskers and the strat lot - it led on at least one occasion to a brass band enjoying a smooth departure to Cyprus in a Mk4 while on the same day the SAS lost a qualifying jump due to lack of a/c.

[Father Jack Hackett]

Barnstormer,

I'm so used to some of the mendacious nonsense that has originated from some of the green-suited fraternity recently going back to the old "utterly utterly useless" crack, I might appear to be a bit of a sensitive soul. However I'm sure you're not of that ilk so I apologise for flashing up.

I really would like to know how aware or otherwise the average brown job is about the current state of the RAF while it tries to provide the best support to the Army within considerable constraints. I get the impression that many just think it is the Air Force being utterly utterly useless. Under normal circumstances I'd dry my minge and live with being unappreciated, I don't need adulation for just doing my job and would lose little sleep over my service being dissed in the naafi/mess. However, in the febrile pre-SDSR environment, with the Army apparently in the ascendent, unwarranted gripes about the RAF within the upper echelons of the Army could well influence the outcome of the review with serious long-term implications for UK defence.

[Top Bunk Tester]

At risk of rehashing old issues and bear in mind that the opinions below are purely my opinion. I have been involved in sport parachuting for almost 30 years now and have been 'around' PTS for nearly all that time. I'm also ex Herc crew, albeit a route Queen.

PTS are a spent force, there is absolutely no reason to continue to train for mass static line parachuting in todays British military. I can see a limited SF role for this, but that does not justify PTS's existence There is clearly a space issue at Future Brize. PTS take up a rather large building and an entire hangar. Can anybody see how PTS can survive the SDSR? We don't have the hours left on either flavour of Herc to waste on S/L training, just so that Para Regt can earn their para pay, trot's out tired old line of 'when was the last British airborne assault'. Any SF S/L requirement could easily be fulfilled by Bragg as would the MFF requirement. The only question that may arise is keeping up aircrew quals, a limited number of PJIs could rotate through Bragg/Hereford on a permanent basis and Herc crews could do a couple of dets a year to Bragg.

Sport Parachuting has always led the way of any Military jumping in this country, both in terms of equipment and techniques and RAF WOTG has always been PTS's eyes on the Sport Para community, they follow what we have been doing for years. Now, I am reliably informed that OC Adventurous Training (AT) has decided to cease all Sport Para at WOTG as of next year. I believe there may be a hiden agenda here though. AT will still continue though. Again this is just another 'reason' to keep WOTG open for the white elephant that PTS has become and to try and keep all para in the light blue basket. If this is the case, do we 'need' two AT dropzones why not consolidate WOTG/Netheravon into one DZ, the obvious choice would be Netheravon.

I am a staunch advocate of Sport/Mil para and I realise that the above appears to go against that, but you just have to do the numbers in todays climate to see that it makes logical sense. If they're talking about binning two new carriers then what chance do PTS have in the big scheme of things.

Just my tuppences worth.

And just to cast out and see what bites, I was selected for and worked for my brevet, unlike PJIs :ugh:

[Tiger_mate]

FWIW, my opinion is that para trained soldiers are required for the multitude of scenarios in which a conventional fixed wing landing cannot take place and which is beyond the range of helicopter insert. Jungles, mountains and tundra come immediately to mind, there will be lots of others. Statistically unlikely I'll grant, but never say never.

Netheravon has sufficient helicopter activity for it to potentially be a conflict of interest were it to be the only DZ. WOTG could survive in the manner of Chetwynd ie no resident staff at all.

[Top Bunk Tester]

TM

Granted that is the party line, and I agree. BUT in the current climate can it be justified?

[barnstormer1968]

Father Jack

Thanks for that.
I would say in return that a good number of army folks don't understand air power, or tactics, in exactly the same way that many light blue folks don't understand army tactics.

I am not sure how much each service really should know about the others, but it is just as frustrating for me to hear someone who was involved in para training to think it has no place in the modern army!

Operational parachuting may not be paramount, but the training is what separates the paras from other foot infantry units (and why Churchill made his now famous comment about them conquering fear).

I agree with another poster, who feels someone is stirring, and also that many decisions in the SDSR will be as much guided by tabloid headlines as operational needs, which is a scary thought.
The possible further demise of the RAF saddens me, as I feel it has already been slashed beyond any credible role of defending the nation (if we assume that is one of its roles). I don't buy into the fact that newer platforms can be purchased in fewer numbers due to greater effectiveness either, one only has to look at Nimrod to see that we are now left short of proper anti sub (plus the other bits) cover, but still pursuing new SSBN's. That is just madness in all but 'political aspiration' terms.

As for taking the 'A' out of SAS, we have already had SS troops in the UK orbat for a short period, and learned that lesson before!....Hang on, who am I trying to kid in that we 'learn lessons':}

[Clockwork Mouse]

RAF dropped special forces into trees by accident.
Dear Father John,
Mendacious nonsense? Interesting article in the Telegraph may explain to you why some of the green-suited fraternity or brown jobs in 1 Para who are recovering in hospital might consider that the RAF, on this occasion at least, were utterly utterly useless. I think that they are probably very aware of the current state of the RAF.

[MOSTAFA]

S*it happens - I remember vividly the night of 12 Sept 1974, my first JATFOR I think it was called. I think the outcome was reported as something to do with temp inversions (utter ball*cks).

As for, should they shouldn't they - having qualified at both Basic 1973 and MFF, with my latest MFF refresher 1998. They were the best, most professional courses I have ever done with the RAF and that includes CFS
(1989).

Outdated - I don't think so. Expensive yes.

[gsa]

Maybe none of you guys have been reading the NOTAMs lately;)

It's been a change to have so many Herc movements up here over the last week, And a surprise to have one pass late Saturday night whilst drink was firmly in hand.

[c130jbloke]

This is all very fine and good, but lets get back to the important issue here - CHOP THE FALCS AS THEY ARE A WASTE OF MONEY !!!!

And like somebody else said, I worked for my brevet :ok:

[ROGO]

I feel obliged to take the bait on behalf of all those who get their knees in the breeze:

Top Bunk Tester: Selected and worked hard for your brevet...in gash holding jobs in between long courses during which you mostly played X Box in your flying suit and preyed on the women of Lincoln during Tutor training using lines about how you fly fast jets...right? Must've been a killer ;)

c130jbloke: You make no mention of chopping the Dead Sparrows...they can't cost much more than 9 blokes and their parachutes eh? :E Studiously ignoring the recent increase in numbers of holding officers from your general direction of late too...

Most of what was written in the DT is bunkum, almost certainly from a disgruntled grunt. Nothing like a bit of fiction to sell papers. :ugh:

[Top Bunk Tester]

ROGO - Obligingly I'll bite back

If you care to look at my logbook you'll find that I've got my knees in the breeze more times than most (1500+) and have held several instructor ratings.

Think I held for a grand total of 6 weeks, X-boxes were a thing of the future and I organised (in part) the next LYN open day, which was very successful. Was never recoursed. Think the first thing I failed was my squadron route check for fuel handling, which was easily remedied. And I have a Brevet not a pair of wings, so Doncaster was my hunting ground not Lincoln.

Also I think you'll find that the Reds are a little more highly thought of by Joe Public than the Falcs are. If it came to a PR pi55ing contest, guess who would win. I remember the days when there were double digit para display teams from all three services. Some more 'qualified' than others.

[c130jbloke]

ROGO:

You mean like this post where I went after the Reds:



Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: planet earth
Posts: 356 I second MGD ( again ) With people looking down the barrel of unemployment ( seriously unfunny ) its a fair question to ask what is an entire squadron's worth of cost ( at 6.3 mil - my @rse ) doing to justify its existence ? If we are going to chop SSBNs, then the Reds / Falcons / RAFP dog teams and Christ knows what else are more than fair game...

As for jealousy, if its by people who are under threat of losing their jobs when you see what may be considered needless waste ( why do the reds need an SO1 to run the show ? ) then yup, you bet.

This is absolutely nothing personal against anybody, but the prospect of getting a P45 somewhat sharpens the focus.....


And bugger me, having read my own post, I note that I also say get rid of the Falcs:ooh:

Just so you are aware, don't take it personally as I would chop anything which is not relevant to preserve defence capability as I am thinking about the next war and not the bun fight we have going on right now.

1 - 0 to me :eek:

[Top Bunk Tester]

C130JBloke

Hear hear. As I said in my original post if two brand new carriers are possibly on table for chop what chance do PTS et al have :D

[Clockwork Mouse]

Rogo
"Most of what was written in the DT is bunkum, almost certainly from a disgruntled grunt".
What exactly was bunkum? That they were from 1 Para? That they were dropped at night? That they were dropped by a RAF C130? That they were dropped in the wrong place? That they were dropped into trees? That 9 were injured and hospitalised?
Damn right it came from a disgruntled grunt. Fortunately a live one (just).

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Not quite sure what you are driving at here CM ?

[Airborne Aircrew]

I'm uncertain why No.1 PTS and the training it provides, or not, to the men who throw themselves from the kite has anything to do with this story. The root cause of the incident was a Nav who couldn't which is hardly a new phenomenon where paras are concerned. :ugh:

[Pontius Navigator]

Allegedly they were dropped in the wrong place but there are lots of possible factors that might apply.

How high?

Was there a wind sheer?

Was the DZ position correct?

etc etc

[airborne_artist]

Landing in trees is an occupational hazard for those of us who like a bit of P1 time under the silk.

It's entirely possible that there were errors made, but you'd need to look at the data in more detail - and then factor in the unpredictability of all met.

Frankly if the guys don't like the prospect of landing in trees/water/slurry pits then they should join a craphat regiment.

[Wrathmonk]

The root cause of the incident was a Nav who couldn't

To put the views of AA (as opposed to a_a!) into perspective and a genuine question rather than a fishing exped ... and certainly hoping not to kick off a J's vs K's thread but ... are the J's used for routine para training (when it happens) and if so, do they put a Nav on board or not? If not (which I would assume is the case:E) who controls the Red to Green switch - the Co or the Loadie? Or is it controlled automatically by the little black box that does the nav's job for you?

Edited to add : I know the DT article states a K was used in this particular instance but curious about about the broader training requirement issues with regards to platform availability etc.

[StopStart]

The Js do all the "routine" para and most of the not so routine para. Despite the entire world thinking the J is brand new, they've been around for about 11 years now..... :hmm:

To answer your questions, no we don't put a Nav on board as the aircraft has a two person flightdeck and is designed to be operated by said two persons. The CARP is computer generated (sometimes with manual assistance) and the system armed by manually putting the red light on. The computer then puts the green light on automatically (for SLR drops).

We get a lot of practice at all the para disciplines which is partly why the DT article rankled so much in the first place. That and the fact it was generally bollocks.

I have no idea what happened with the blokes going into the trees suffice to say accidents happen. Quite what the army plans to replace the C130 with for their mass airdrops I don't know but I wish them the best of luck with their pipe dreams. :rolleyes:

[Airborne Aircrew]

AA:

Frankly if the guys don't like the prospect of landing in trees/water/slurry pits then they should join a craphat regiment.While I'm happy to agree with that sentiment entirely there is the little issue of 1 1/2 miles... Link (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/8025969/RAF-dropped-special-forces-into-trees-by-accident.html)

Now, there's risk put upon one by the nature of the job and there's that put upon you by the incompetence/errors/call it what you will of others... Put me on the DZ and in a tree - My problem. Put me a mile from the DZ in trees - Your problem.

Someone mentioned that maybe the DZ co-ordinates were wrong. *COUGH* It's Otterburn... It's a fixed, mapped DZ that has probably been there since I was jumping. :hmm:

[Airborne Aircrew]

Believe it or not, aircraft don't need Navigators anymore. You see as well as the thrust and Lift Demons used by all Lockheed aircraft in this particular case they have installed lots of nav pixies who do lots and lots of calculations really really quickly. The best thing is, is that they are always right.

You're trolling... Right? Reports state that the drop took place maybe as much as, (not believing it word for word), a mile and a half away... It's ok to be lost... We've all been there. But to throw 30 or more chaps out of the back of a kite on a hunch is a bit much. Having spent more time than I care to remember on Otterburn TA I can, with reasonable certainty, say that 3/4 of a mile off track will most likely put the parachutists somewhere they'd rather not be. The crew messed up. It's actually commendable to admit it and fix the system so we don't kill troops in the future...

[Airborne Aircrew]

Exactly.

So why is everyone picking on No. 1 PTS for this? It has nothing to do with parachute training. More to do with basic nav training for aircrews than anything else*.

* All agenda's aside, of course...:hmm:

[Airborne Aircrew]

Is that better Airborne

I bet you're another of those that hate Mirror Mechanics... :p

Seriously. I don't mind slapping the stupid but I do think it's important that the stupid are properly identified before the slapping, (metaphorical, of course), begins.

[Airborne Aircrew]

We don't hate all of you. I did tell everybody to stop picking on you guys in my last post.

Look, in the flying world there things called authorisation sheets. Lots of information gets recorded in these authorisation sheets, including the names of the crew. So it will be easy to find out who the big nasty navigator was who got his or her sums wrong that made the big rufty tufty paras land in the trees and start crying.

Were you as bright as you try to make out you might surmise from my nickname here that I have not only been a military parachutist, (ie: a para), but have also been military aircrew, (ie: "in the flying world"). Since you have failed to make that, most simple of connections, I am not at all surprised to see that you are unable to see that Paras dropped as much as a mile and a half off the DZ has nothing to do with how "rufty tufty" they are when they bitch a little and more to do with the most basic competence of the aircrew that dropped them. Let's face it, I'll guarantee they didn't miss their runway by a mile and a half when got home - or do you propose we light the DZ of our soldiers like a christmas tree in the future so they have a chance of dropping the troops in the right place?

Quit trolling... You're terrible at it...

[parabellum]

Hey, nobody forced them to jump. They could have steered away from the trees. Maybe that would have stopped them from bleating to the newspapers.


You demonstrate that you know absolutely sod all about military parachuting or the soldiers involved.

[Airborne Aircrew]

Hey, nobody forced them to jump. They could have steered away from the trees. Maybe that would have stopped them from bleating to the newspapers.Not only has he never jumped, (assuming he's not a troll), but he has certainly never jumped at night. Even on the most "reasonable" of nights one is generally unaware of the ground until the last 50' or less. Put a 30' tree there at a rate of descent of about 20fps and you have a whole second before you are in the trees and, more importantly, 1/4 of a second before your container is entangled... But he wouldn't know that nor appreciate the difficulty.

He reminds me of where this is "aimed"...

http://www.hqrafregiment.net/download/file.php?id=1032&mode=view

:D:E:}:E:D

[c130jbloke]

Would never have happened if the Falcs had been there :E

Nice to see all the standard statements coming out and if somebody really did say all that, then you have to wonder about the mindset of some of these guys. I would love to know what really happened too and I seem to recall that's what they get Para pay for.

All that before breakfast :eek:

[ROGO]

Morning!

Clockwork Mouse: I was referring to the previous article on priority for training.

Top Bunk Tester: Respect, I didn't doubt it. I can only speak for the 'youth' of today in terms of holds. I nearly mentioned Atari and NES but I was worried you'd think I was taking the mick ;) In terms of PR, while the Reds may be 'higher profile', if you look at cost/benefit, the view changes somewhat. The first units/items to be looked at when seeking spending cuts will surely be those with the biggest cost. Compare a carrier to a much smaller item, the Red Arrows to a much smaller unit and the perspective changes. Only time will tell eh? As for PTS as a whole, as I understand things, it exists principally to provide parachute trg (yes, the Display team use that tour to gain the experience required to instruct, along side the PR value). As such, it will probably not be targeted in itself. If the (mainly Land-owned) para capable units remain untouched, then PTS will too...and vice versa.

c130jbloke: I don't take it personally. A fair point, well presented...only...if you're 'thinking about the next war', something to consider. While the mass parachute insertion capability may not be fully applicable against the asymmetric threat of insurgents in the 'stan, can't you see the value of it in potential future conflicts? Examining where the threat is most likely to come from, and the sizeable standing armies we may face, there is great value in retaining the capability, non?

As for staring down the barrel of a potentially loaded P45...it does somewhat sharpen the focus...http://65.55.40.231/att/GetInline.aspx?messageid=0cd610d0-ca50-11df-83b0-00215ad9a7a6&attindex=0&cp=-1&attdepth=0&imgsrc=cid%3aimage001.gif%4001CB5E65.11FB70B0&hm__login=lonsdale_ben&hm__domain=hotmail.com&ip=10.12.166.8&d=d7060&mf=0&hm__ts=Tue%2c%2028%20Sep%202010%2006%3a24%3a09%20GMT&st=lonsdale_ben&hm__ha=01_42f71cbeabc90b065c48d467d8970c1fa1d7edd89481d54c4c 9035ce0c5a5ce0&oneredir=1

[Wrathmonk]

StopStart

Thank you. 11 years - how time flies by!