Iraq air support 'failed UK troops'

[WE Branch Fanatic]

See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2937526.stm

Is there any truth in this?

What implications does this have for the future, when UK forces will increasingly depend on US forces, and will rely on them completely for certain things, such as the air defence of naval/maritime forces?

[Big Cat Handler]

WEBF,

One of the reasons behind a separate Air Force was to allow the air assets to be commanded at as high a level as possible, rather than giving each platoon/company/whatever commander his own aviation assets. This should mean that the aircraft are sent to wherever they are needed most, rather than indivdual commanders refusing to allow 'their' assets to assist others. This is probably in AP3000 somewhere.

That's not to say that the Yanks didn't decide that their boys were more deserving of air cover than the Brits - and who knows whether they were right. But the overall principle of what happened is in line with the way it's supposed to work.

BCH
Still afflicted by memories of Operational Studies at IOT

[West Coast]

Your not alone in such observations. Marine air has been sheperded under the umbrella of JFACC instead of under the control of a Marine air group commander. I suggest taking your toys and keeping your air seperate. A lament only perhaps as I believe any joint ops will be run along the same lines.

[Flugplatz]

As a former 'Brown Job' who has been an end-user of air-support in its various forms , my experience tells me that in any event CAS should really be regarded as an unreliable luxury.

The reasons for aborting sorties have included: 'Airframe gone U/S', bad weather, a political sensitivity to actually flying any sorties, ridiculously long chains-of-command usually involving hyper-cautious UN officials / media-averse ministers, or that old chestnut: "the aircrew have run out of flying hours".

Army officers know there is only one really reliable (at least within 24 km range) method of fire-support: Artillery :ok: (more responsive, effective and longer lasting since you don't see it fly away after a few minutes).

Just to add grist to the mill, we usually got better overall support from the skates than the brylcream boys when the chips were down (sorry, but the RN Seakings didn't leave me and my guys out on an icefield in Norway for an extra 12 hours like happened to some of the rest of the Coy..:{)

I have the honour tobe, Sir, your obedient etc,etc..

[FEBA]

Flug...
It's been a few years since I observed the fall of shot from the 105's. How accurate are 29Cdo these days?

[L J R]

Supporting people from common ground [and country] is always nice.

Being able to do it is often a fine line between those who task assets based on higher apportionment, and being in the right place at the right time.

Being ill-represented by ill informed journalists is part of the job.

Sometime putting ordnance in a particular position is a difficult task from a CAS / PAS perspective, given appropriately strict ROE and Comm difficulty, especially when flying at M .8 +.

While I appreciate the gripes of the lads on the ground, and while artillery may be the best alternative. Air power is often more flexible.

Shall I put my tin hat on now??





sorry about the spelling!!

.

[Mr C Hinecap]

Chaps. Lets be honest here - and for those who don't realise, this may come as a bit of a shock............We don't have enough of it to go on our own!

For all those who found that new info, sorry - no way of softening the blow. However, my £0.02-worth is as follows:
US Marines - far more aircraft than the RAF has, period. No comparison.
We have capabilities the coalition partners don't have and vice versa. Higher control makes best use of mix.
How I'd have loved to see something like an Apache providing CAS for the Brown Jobs etc. Possibly in the future - possibly with an RAF roundel on the side? Nice thought.
Taking cover :E

[owe ver chute]

Mr C Hinecap, do the RAF use a different roundel to the RN FAA and the Army?

The size of the British Armed Forces has diminished to such a level it can no longer function in isolation. The long awaited British Apache happens to be operated by the Army, but I would imagine that it will be commanded by a Crab on Ops (JHC) when it is needed by those formations. I feel sorry for the troops who will be committed to every scuffle that Tony sends UK troops into, I think they will suffer just like the RN Sea Harrier force pilots, always being away, they'll either be getting a divorce or leaving the forces! I digress.
The UK forces could merge RN, Army and RAF and call it simply the UK Military, it would still be smaller than the USMC, it would be more cost effective, cohesive and therefore more efficient.

[DuckDodgers]

West Coast

"Marine air has been sheperded under the umbrella of JFACC instead of under the control of a Marine air group commander. "

This was simply not the case in IRAQI FREEDOM. CFACC, Lt Gen Moseley was NOT in charge of USMC air assets during this conflict and as a result were not present on the ATO. USMC air assets remained under the command of the Marine Air Grioup Commander and operated as an indiginous Marine asset. Yes there was a Marine presence within the CAOC in the form of the MARLO but this was mainly for deconfliction issues for example.

Getting back to the crux of the argument, prioritization of CAS was governed by the overall Strategic objective in association with the objectives of the AOD for each ATO period. There are many more technical points that cannot be discussed on an open forum and to round it off the boys on the ground seem to think that air is there to primarily support them, when in reality it is a nicety we afford once the other tasks have been completed.......

[AceRimmer]

This could be just a cynical ploy by a politician to get their name in print "worrying about things that affect other people". Oh wait, that's what happens whenever a politician opens their mouth.