RAF planes 'at risk' as MoD cancels anti-missile system
I am not alone in this - flipster and mindbender have also posted subtle warnings to avoid disclosure.
I am not going to say which particular aspects gave me cause for concern. There is a world of difference between the technical details concerning the specific ac fleet fit and disclosing whether ac deployed in theatre would be thus equipped.
Sometimes it's the small asides in posts which are the most useful to the nefarious rather than the equipment details culled from the alleged public domain - and comment from those serving can be considered to add credence to otherwise speculative media statements.
I am not going to say which particular aspects gave me cause for concern. There is a world of difference between the technical details concerning the specific ac fleet fit and disclosing whether ac deployed in theatre would be thus equipped.
Sometimes it's the small asides in posts which are the most useful to the nefarious rather than the equipment details culled from the alleged public domain - and comment from those serving can be considered to add credence to otherwise speculative media statements.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beags - there is nothing in this thread which should require it to be deleted; go back to flying your Twotahawk or whatever you do these days between putting your dentures in Steradent.
Thank you for such a well thought out and valuable post.
You can throw all the insults you like, but don't post things which help the bad guys. Ever heard of 'Need to Know'?
Perhaps us old farts of the Cold War and other old farts of the NI troubles are more circumspect with the things we write on open fora.
You can throw all the insults you like, but don't post things which help the bad guys. Ever heard of 'Need to Know'?
Perhaps us old farts of the Cold War and other old farts of the NI troubles are more circumspect with the things we write on open fora.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lets start to be a bit more sensible on here shall we? if you guys are military then you should know that we dont talk about what types are deployed and in what fit. these threads start out seemingly innocent enough but end up giving away a surprising amount of info, and to be honest it seems to be by people who just want to be the know-it-all who can be a bit more "knowledgable" than the others. there is just no need to be discussing this stuff!
Jacko - i believe ive said all this stuff to you before and at the time you were kind enough to amend your comments on these forums. however, you seem to have a bit of a knack for pi55ing me off when it comes to these kind of topics. the issue i have is that you seem to be able to decide what is already out in the public domain and therefore what is common knowledge. well how about we say that you dont. what ends up in Air International is not necessarily the gospel, even when coming from official sources. most of the stuff that i see in publications like that (that i have a personal knowledge of) is ill informed or completely made up. because of that fact i hate reasoning of 'well its already been published so we may as well discuss it'. all this normally results in is the real facts making it out when they shouldnt. i dont blame you for this - the guys who should be keeping their big mouths shut are obviously the issue there - but i do ask you, again, to stop being so pushy on military matters that end up having real world consequences - especially when it may be me that is effected by it! you dont know whats going on as much as you may like but you have to remember that this isnt a game where whoever finds out the most wins.
most people on here probably dont know what they are talking about. to those who do try and be a bit more sensible about what you give away.
Jacko - i believe ive said all this stuff to you before and at the time you were kind enough to amend your comments on these forums. however, you seem to have a bit of a knack for pi55ing me off when it comes to these kind of topics. the issue i have is that you seem to be able to decide what is already out in the public domain and therefore what is common knowledge. well how about we say that you dont. what ends up in Air International is not necessarily the gospel, even when coming from official sources. most of the stuff that i see in publications like that (that i have a personal knowledge of) is ill informed or completely made up. because of that fact i hate reasoning of 'well its already been published so we may as well discuss it'. all this normally results in is the real facts making it out when they shouldnt. i dont blame you for this - the guys who should be keeping their big mouths shut are obviously the issue there - but i do ask you, again, to stop being so pushy on military matters that end up having real world consequences - especially when it may be me that is effected by it! you dont know whats going on as much as you may like but you have to remember that this isnt a game where whoever finds out the most wins.
most people on here probably dont know what they are talking about. to those who do try and be a bit more sensible about what you give away.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by truckiebloke
i didn't reply to this post to start a j v k argument. If you read what i said, then it is the fault of the contract with Lockheed that prevented us getting the better DAS. It was cheaper to put it on the 'K'.
The k has done a wonderful job for so many years, but KFWALM you are living in dream land if you think the k isnt falling apart. It simply is nowhere near the deployment levels of the 'j' and are falling off the program all of the time.
The k has done a wonderful job for so many years, but KFWALM you are living in dream land if you think the k isnt falling apart. It simply is nowhere near the deployment levels of the 'j' and are falling off the program all of the time.
give it a few years and the 'J' will start falling apart in the same places as its the same as the 'K' where it matters.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Beags - I've served during the CW, in NI and most off them since the wall came down, and I still disagree.
Juliet - This thread says nowt. As for what types are deployed; take a look at the MOD or RAF websites - its all on there.
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/Fa...tionForces.htm
Juliet - This thread says nowt. As for what types are deployed; take a look at the MOD or RAF websites - its all on there.
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/Fa...tionForces.htm
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, but the numbers and types will be announced and will include a press call at Slimeham, where the journos will film the aircraft, making the footage available for the whole world to see.
As for the DAS, I cannot see the exact nature of the DAS fit stated anywhere on this thread.
I'm bored of this now.
As for the DAS, I cannot see the exact nature of the DAS fit stated anywhere on this thread.
I'm bored of this now.
Juliet,
All of those details (numbers, and variant and destination) have been published together. The details of the defensive fit of the J and the K has been published elsewhere. The only detail that I haven't personally seen in print or online in some part of the MoD website is the numerical designation of the first squadron being deployed.
Make no mistake, I'm not suggesting that those details should be repeated here (if anyone cares to go back and blur the detail in their posts before Beagle has an aneurism, that would be fine and dandy), and I am not posting details about fit, deployments, etc. myself. I'm saying merely that a discussion about the J's capability and survivability being constrained by penny-pinching and a poor contract may be one way of helping to ensure that something is done about this, while suppressing the voicing of concern plays straight into the hands of the Treasury.
Flipster,
Though I'm now so old that most of my chums from UAS days are now sitting behind desks or are enjoying second careers, I do still have friends who will be intimately involved with this deployment, and who will be in harm's way. Were anything here more likely to increase the danger to them, rather than to solve the problems, I'd be the first to complain. Though I hope that, unlike BEagle, I'd do it without imbecilic generalisations and stereotypes based on people's profession, and without questioning their patriotism and honour.
All of those details (numbers, and variant and destination) have been published together. The details of the defensive fit of the J and the K has been published elsewhere. The only detail that I haven't personally seen in print or online in some part of the MoD website is the numerical designation of the first squadron being deployed.
Make no mistake, I'm not suggesting that those details should be repeated here (if anyone cares to go back and blur the detail in their posts before Beagle has an aneurism, that would be fine and dandy), and I am not posting details about fit, deployments, etc. myself. I'm saying merely that a discussion about the J's capability and survivability being constrained by penny-pinching and a poor contract may be one way of helping to ensure that something is done about this, while suppressing the voicing of concern plays straight into the hands of the Treasury.
Flipster,
Though I'm now so old that most of my chums from UAS days are now sitting behind desks or are enjoying second careers, I do still have friends who will be intimately involved with this deployment, and who will be in harm's way. Were anything here more likely to increase the danger to them, rather than to solve the problems, I'd be the first to complain. Though I hope that, unlike BEagle, I'd do it without imbecilic generalisations and stereotypes based on people's profession, and without questioning their patriotism and honour.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Up North
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I started this thread, it was not with the intention of a J vs K contest or generating a list of capabilities beyond what is available in public.
It was simply to do with the safety of the warm bodies contained within the flying assemblage of parts, and the possibility that HMG is once again seeking to cut corners with the lives of those in uniform.
Some public pressure is required to ensure that their duty of care is discharged, particularly with regard to Bliar's addiction to playing soldiers with Dubya.
It was simply to do with the safety of the warm bodies contained within the flying assemblage of parts, and the possibility that HMG is once again seeking to cut corners with the lives of those in uniform.
Some public pressure is required to ensure that their duty of care is discharged, particularly with regard to Bliar's addiction to playing soldiers with Dubya.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
in that case the scotsmans' article is typical of the tabloid press, shout about the MOD cancelling an anti missile system, mention the "continuing row" over the loss of a c-130.
the fact is that an anti missile system wouldn't have saved that aircraft, it was shot down with a bullet, so its not relevant at all.
the fact is that an anti missile system wouldn't have saved that aircraft, it was shot down with a bullet, so its not relevant at all.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: northside
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread has lost its way a little. Starting off with an article in a Scottish newspaper whcih reported that the government couldn't afford to fit a comprehensive DAS suite to an aircraft, the thread then soon degenerated into a J v's K slanging match before poor old Beagle was shunned and now the thread is losing its way when the main topic of discussion is the need to know. But getting back to the main article. If the Government can't afford a better DAS suite then so be it. I Cant afford a Ferrari and so I don't have one. Just thank yourselves lucky you have any form od DAS suite at all.
Originally Posted by southside
Just thank yourselves lucky you have any form od DAS suite at all.
southside to my blocked list
, much better idea methinks.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Someone made mention of hercs falling to bits. I seem to remember someone telling me the J wing was different to the H/K wing. Yes?
More Defensive systems the better I say.
So long as it's just not a system so crap that it is just telling me "You're about to die" .. 
As an aside.. anyone got the map coverage function to work as advertised..
More Defensive systems the better I say.
So long as it's just not a system so crap that it is just telling me "You're about to die" .. As an aside.. anyone got the map coverage function to work as advertised..
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Up North
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the Government can't afford a better DAS suite then so be it. I Cant afford a Ferrari and so I don't have one. Just thank yourselves lucky you have any form od DAS suite at all.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jackonicko
then such caution is stupid, and merely helps ensure that improvements don't happen.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its not new. I'll always remember my first intelligence brief on Operation Granby. Just got off a Herc with a bezillion missiles after a 2 sector flight to Dhahran, jets trailing down earlier that day. The man starts the brief: '18 F3s, 32 F15s, 1 Million Iraqis and attack expected in the next 3 hours'......Gulp!
They then asked for individual intelligence briefs, the yank went first 'Radar, Missiles, Secure this and that, NCTR, RWR, Chaff, Flares etc etc etc.' Cue our QWIL Uncle Ted he stands up and says:
'Yes we have a radar and 8 rockets. We have a good RWR but don't carry jammers or chaff and flares because we believe in dying like men!'
Brought the house down and eventually Phimat and Flares!
Cerberus
They then asked for individual intelligence briefs, the yank went first 'Radar, Missiles, Secure this and that, NCTR, RWR, Chaff, Flares etc etc etc.' Cue our QWIL Uncle Ted he stands up and says:
'Yes we have a radar and 8 rockets. We have a good RWR but don't carry jammers or chaff and flares because we believe in dying like men!'
Brought the house down and eventually Phimat and Flares!
Cerberus