Apache[s] over London?
Apache[s] over London?
Guest
Posts: n/a
.. the matt-green, rotary-wing, fire-breathing variety ...
I only saw one at a time, but unless they have those new fangled warp-drive thingys then there were 2.
Low (500ft-ish), creaping along heading south with lots of pointy, function-over-form, attachments hanging from the winglets [or whatever they're called]
I only saw one at a time, but unless they have those new fangled warp-drive thingys then there were 2.
Low (500ft-ish), creaping along heading south with lots of pointy, function-over-form, attachments hanging from the winglets [or whatever they're called]
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: here and there
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My City Slicker mate reckons he saw 2 over Euston a couple of weeks ago. Gave him a bit of a fright given that the Station was closed on a Sy alert at the time. I don't know why he was worried- thought you guys couldn't actually fire your weapons without the debris ruining the tail rotar. Poor little Apache. 
Dave
Dave
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I have heard the tail rotor issue is fixed and was media hype anyway.
The Apache is awesome and how do you know they were not patrolling London on alert? Stranger things have happened.
I hear the UK training Sqn (673/672?) might be given some form of UK SF supprot role like RN Seaking training Sqn as they have a lot of the expertise.
The Apache is awesome and how do you know they were not patrolling London on alert? Stranger things have happened.
I hear the UK training Sqn (673/672?) might be given some form of UK SF supprot role like RN Seaking training Sqn as they have a lot of the expertise.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what experience is that then Crabbo - tactical circuits and bumps at Keevil or the ever so demanding night routes through SPTA?
Although not currently in a position to take on any operational roles from the Field Army (none of the AH Trg Sqn QHIs although very good at their 'sticks and poles' and all experienced generally in Avn operations have been through CTR/CR trg, and not many have tactical related adquals (what would you prefer on Ops a QFI or QWI?)) there is undoubtedly a very strong argument that in the near future when the Trg Sqn starts to re-cycle ex Field Army QHIs/QHTIs/ACTIs/AH WIs etc etc then just as an Operational role is fulfilled by the Sea King Trg Sqn, there is sound mileage in removing the capability back to Wallop and double hatting the AH Trg Sqn (I think it is 673 or AHTU and not 672...but I could be wrong)
As we all know military tasks versus number of aircraft versus number of qualified crews versus physical time away of personnel will soon force the issue as the numbers just do not add up.
In the mean time, until DAAvn refuses to accept an OCU/OEU concept (and JHC currently doesn't press the issue) then the Field Army will just have to stag on and do the best they can 'spreading the jam even thinner'.
Ultimately this will result in either all the lads and lasses (of all ranks) being ragged rotten to cover all of the commitments (16 Air Asslt Bde, Fishead and Ssssh!) or things being cuffed fantastic and short cuts taken to create an impression of providing a capability.
4 months, 12 days and 18 hours - hey what do I care!
Although not currently in a position to take on any operational roles from the Field Army (none of the AH Trg Sqn QHIs although very good at their 'sticks and poles' and all experienced generally in Avn operations have been through CTR/CR trg, and not many have tactical related adquals (what would you prefer on Ops a QFI or QWI?)) there is undoubtedly a very strong argument that in the near future when the Trg Sqn starts to re-cycle ex Field Army QHIs/QHTIs/ACTIs/AH WIs etc etc then just as an Operational role is fulfilled by the Sea King Trg Sqn, there is sound mileage in removing the capability back to Wallop and double hatting the AH Trg Sqn (I think it is 673 or AHTU and not 672...but I could be wrong)
As we all know military tasks versus number of aircraft versus number of qualified crews versus physical time away of personnel will soon force the issue as the numbers just do not add up.
In the mean time, until DAAvn refuses to accept an OCU/OEU concept (and JHC currently doesn't press the issue) then the Field Army will just have to stag on and do the best they can 'spreading the jam even thinner'.
Ultimately this will result in either all the lads and lasses (of all ranks) being ragged rotten to cover all of the commitments (16 Air Asslt Bde, Fishead and Ssssh!) or things being cuffed fantastic and short cuts taken to create an impression of providing a capability.
4 months, 12 days and 18 hours - hey what do I care!
Last edited by MaroonMan4; 12th Aug 2005 at 17:26.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: somewhere, under the rainbow
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"From what I have heard the tail rotor issue is fixed and was media hype anyway"
Absolutely correct. A bunch of them have been fired now, all without incident.
Harrumph
Absolutely correct. A bunch of them have been fired now, all without incident.
Harrumph
