Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Answer yes or no to the RAF bombing Syria this coming week.

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Answer yes or no to the RAF bombing Syria this coming week.

Old 6th Dec 2015, 15:16
  #281 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 79
Posts: 16,775
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
OAP, that might seem obvious but not necessarily true. I can't remember the F4 but think there was some issue with AIM7.

Winchester isn't the issue but balance might be for carriage of other stores.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2015, 15:26
  #282 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
TBH Pontious, I am not privvy to the Typhoon RTS. But nowadays () incompatible stores fits are not de rigueur.


OAP
Onceapilot is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2015, 19:08
  #283 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: England
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
MODs please lock this thread.

The votes done, the bombings started, this thread is history. Look how its decaying..Please, put it down, its sad now. Take it to Threadnitas...strap it to Brimstone and fire it at a Technical, just stop it.
Hangarshuffle is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2015, 19:20
  #284 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In an ever changing place
Posts: 1,038
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hangarshuffle

As you are the OP you can delete the whole thread if it no longer suits your purpose.
Above The Clouds is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2015, 20:48
  #285 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Age: 55
Posts: 226
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Courtney Mil. Thank you, I think on reflection you are right. The ROE flow from the policy. Pity the policy sometimes seems to be built around the PR campaign and a wish to make warfare seem a pick-and-choose technological game. I really hope we have learnt something and if Chilcott had got off his backside, the recent MPs' debate might have used his report to be better informed.

I still truly hope the RAF are getting the right policy and suitable ROE, otherwise we have pretty much sent them on a fool's errand. The public now have a perception that airpower can make a difference (if not actually decisive). This time next year I think people are going to want to see a quantifiable difference made by all of the bombing. The fact that we seem to be going for the oil wells gives me some confidence that we're not just stuck on first base.

I was serving during the Blair/Hoon years, and now I tend to have very sensitive skin and an over-developed 'bulls..t detector' when it comes to the claims of politicians and some of our senior officers.

Flug
Flugplatz is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2015, 21:38
  #286 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 2,125
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Pontius Navigator View Post
OAP, that might seem obvious but not necessarily true. I can't remember the F4 but think there was some issue with AIM7.

Winchester isn't the issue but balance might be for carriage of other stores.
No particular issue with weight and balance at any fuselage station, nor are they required to help offset wing stores. The forward right is rather close to the gun vibration / acoustics, which is pretty much the only consideration if you don't need a full missile fit.

If a missile is fitted it can only be for defence.
Just This Once... is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2015, 22:13
  #287 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tarn et Garonne, Southwest France
Posts: 5,321
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Originally Posted by flugplatz
Courtney Mil. Thank you, I think on reflection you are right. The ROE flow from the policy. Pity the policy sometimes seems to be built around the PR campaign and a wish to make warfare seem a pick-and-choose technological game. I really hope we have learnt something and if Chilcott had got off his backside, the recent MPs' debate might have used his report to be better informed.
No, Sir. ROE is not PR. Not in the slightest way. If you think that politicians use their influence to shape ROE then I could almost understand that - although that is not the case.

I have just deleted my explanation because nothing about this is appropriate here.

If you are here to do harm or you think that your opinion is more imoportant than the safety of those doing their duty, then take it up elsewhere.
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2015, 23:58
  #288 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Exit stage right.
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Reports on Newswires about US bombing an SAA position just before ISIS launch an attack.

Apparently position has always been in Syrian hands so difficult to claim confusion about who in control.

Is someone looking to start WW3 ?
racedo is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2015, 00:54
  #289 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lancashire
Age: 46
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Makes sense, Turkey are on ISIS's side.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-releases-proof-turkey-is-smuggling-isis-oil-over-its-border-a6757651.html
Thelma Viaduct is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2015, 17:15
  #290 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Lincs
Posts: 2,306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Racedo wrote

Reports on Newswires about US bombing an SAA position just before ISIS launch an attack.
The US has said that the Coalition did not carry out the strike. News just breaking on Sky News that the US believes that it was a strike/accident by the Russian Air Force.

How will this be spun? If it was a Russian strike will they own up to it or will we see a bit of propaganda spin? The Syrians are already firmly blaming the Coalition so will we now be seeing staged footage with the remains of US munitions at the site?
TEEEJ is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2015, 18:38
  #291 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Washington.
Age: 72
Posts: 840
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
"Makes sense, Turkey are on ISIS's side."

Repeat a lie often enough, someone might believe it.

If any country has a stake in the defeat of ISIS, it's Turkey and any suggestion that Turkey is pro-ISIS is total and absolute baloney, and likely has its source in the kitchen of dear Valdimir the terrible.
GlobalNav is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2015, 18:49
  #292 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Onceapilot View Post
Well done glad rag! Underlining the caveat on my post and being abusive to me shows something!
There is NOT going to be an inter-coalition dust-up out there. The TURKS will have been given an internal red card and all other NATO players will be on an air to air self-defence weapons hold (or very similar).
Now, pray tell your opinion?

OAP
Well you have certainly had time to re align your thoughts; anyone who says we send our aircrew into that cauldron...without the means to deter and defend themselves ...




took long enough for the anvil to arrive...
glad rag is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2015, 19:15
  #293 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Arrow

Originally Posted by GlobalNav View Post
"Makes sense, Turkey are on ISIS's side."

Repeat a lie often enough, someone might believe it.

If any country has a stake in the defeat of ISIS, it's Turkey and any suggestion that Turkey is pro-ISIS is total and absolute baloney, and likely has its source in the kitchen of dear Valdimir the terrible.
So how do you look upon that most stalwarts of allies, Pakistan then?
glad rag is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2015, 20:05
  #294 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks for your opinion glad rag.....Unfortunately, it is worthless.

OAP
Onceapilot is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2015, 20:49
  #295 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Exit stage right.
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by GlobalNav View Post
"Makes sense, Turkey are on ISIS's side."

Repeat a lie often enough, someone might believe it.

If any country has a stake in the defeat of ISIS, it's Turkey and any suggestion that Turkey is pro-ISIS is total and absolute baloney, and likely has its source in the kitchen of dear Valdimir the terrible.
Your own VP said it 14 months ago and unlikely he speaking that much out of tune.

Course he was forced to apologise for upsetting an Ally but didn't seem to be many on US side even those who dislike him who were claiming he was wrong.
racedo is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2015, 21:15
  #296 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Washington.
Age: 72
Posts: 840
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
"Your own VP said it 14 months ago and unlikely he speaking that much out of tune."

Well my goodness, corrected by no less a source than Mr VP. He is an unimpeachable source, of course, just look at his political history. And from an administration with such a glowing sense of strategy and competence in the region. Practically the whole lot of the upper echelon should hang their heads in shame - particularly those in the White House and Foggy Bottom.

Just consider the wisdom of a regional government giving any thought of supporting ISIS - it would amount to abdication of its own sovereignty, a call to anarchy and chaos - anathema to all of Turkey's future international aspirations. And if there was any reason for Turkey to be a pro-ISIS player, why would they host coalition forces? Incredible.
GlobalNav is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2015, 21:56
  #297 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Age: 55
Posts: 226
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Okay CM, I promise not to comment on the present Syria/Iraq situation. In the coming months, I will await positive and meaningful results in defeating ISIL through airpower, because you are clearly of the conviction that our pilots have all the tools they need to do the job (including appropriate ROE).

If you think there is no link between PR and ROE then I believe that you are sadlly mistaken. Our policy is set by the politicians as to what they want to achieve and what they think will be reaction from the general public. I am not saying they are all cynical manipulators, but I think it is also true that very many of them can't seem to grasp the realities of warfare, conflict and thee proportionate use of force. Ergo, you get idiots like Jeremy Corbin saying he doesn't agree with the Police's "Shoot to kill policy" - a classic example of good, workable ROE - but the basic principle of which Mr Corbin clearly doesn't begin to understand.

So we have arrived at recent conflicts such as the Balkans, post-GW2 Iraq and Afghanistan with initial policies and strategies that are woefully inadequate but which are played up as effective, substantial and fully capable of resolving the situation. Referring back to the UN mission in Bosnia, what else but 'PR' or gross delusion can be the reason for declaring Srebrenica a 'safe area' when it was anything but? Similarly CAS was promised to deter hostile acts, but were the pilots able to be scrambled, arrive at the target and decide when and where to bomb? Only after passing up a chain of command leading to the senior UN representatives, by which time the action was often already over. Yet the public perception was maintained that our fighters were on-call and would be used effectively - not hamstrung into virtual uselessness.

We saw the same thing in Iraq with the 'Snatch' debacle. Only after severe casualties and increasingly bad PR were any changes made. There was quite a campaign about this in the UK (relatives turning up on TV etc) and it got results. Not sure that would have happened without the press taking up the cause.

As a parting shot, several of my friends from recent conflicts have commented that they would preferentially ask for US CAS since the Americans were percieved as having much less restrictive ROE and be much more likely to engage the target!

Flug
Flugplatz is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2015, 23:06
  #298 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Exit stage right.
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by GlobalNav View Post

Just consider the wisdom of a regional government giving any thought of supporting ISIS - it would amount to abdication of its own sovereignty, a call to anarchy and chaos - anathema to all of Turkey's future international aspirations. And if there was any reason for Turkey to be a pro-ISIS player, why would they host coalition forces? Incredible.
You looking at this from a US perspective using rationality.
Turkey looking at this from what Erdogan wants and demands.
racedo is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2015, 23:53
  #299 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: North Yorkshire
Age: 81
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As a parting shot, several of my friends from recent conflicts have commented that they would preferentially ask for US CAS since the Americans were percieved as having much less restrictive ROE and be much more likely to engage the target!
But what target? Several of my friends from recent conflicts view their less restrictive ROE as the reason for so many blue on blue engagements.

Last edited by Clockwork Mouse; 8th Dec 2015 at 00:19.
Clockwork Mouse is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2015, 02:08
  #300 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wherever it is this month
Posts: 1,690
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by racedo
You looking at this from a US perspective using rationality.
Turkey looking at this from what Erdogan wants and demands.
Good point, this. Rationality is a contested concept in politics and any other "science" involving human behaviour, and the West gives it too great a credence when it starts banging on about the 'rules-based international system' and other such things. Essentially, we use "rational" to describe parties whose thinking we understand, and "irrational" to describe those whose thinking we don't. As such, our use of "rational" or "irrational" says much more about our own knowledge and understanding of the world than it does about the other side's sanity.
Easy Street is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.