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

Afghanistan 2021 Onwards

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.

Afghanistan 2021 Onwards

Old 23rd Aug 2021, 18:09
  #461 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 1,239
Received 40 Likes on 23 Posts
Originally Posted by F34
When people say "left behind" they didnt really. They are talking about HUMVEES which actually belonged to the Afghan military. The US stopped using HUMVEE operationally in Afghanistan years ago. There were though a few Navistar MRAP's left behind but nothing that is going to cause too much concern. As for the Blackhawks, like the HUMVEE's they were gifted to the Afghan Airforce and were "A" models refurbished with newer engines.
OK, that explains it. Hope they don't have any US/NATO specific Comms Equipment on Board!?
henra is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2021, 18:18
  #462 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 28,193
Received 732 Likes on 340 Posts
Iím just amazed that a lot of aircraft were captured, I was half expecting crews and families departing country in the Blackhawks etc, I see one country got three aircraft and a hundred plus people, so I take it that was the Hercs or some of them.
Some of the aircraft were not airworthy as seen in the films, but why they never disabled the rest is beyond me, shoot seven shades of sh*t out of them, fire a flare into the interior or a grenade, heck take a fire axe to the panel or canopy.

Even chuck a hand full of bolts down the engines when running, having tried to destroy Avon engines with sledges, saws etc I realise how difficult large lumps are.
NutLoose is online now  
Old 23rd Aug 2021, 20:02
  #463 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 751
Received 29 Likes on 18 Posts
UK scrambles to complete Kabul airlift as envoy flags risk of provoking Taliban
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-about-taliban

The Guardian website is reporting on a briefing of MPs by the UK Ambassador implying that any extension past 31 August is unrealistic.
"Speaking to MPs from Kabul, Sir Laurie Bristow, the British ambassador to Afghanistan, said trying to hold Kabul’s airport any longer would be fraught with risk."

The article highlights conflicting views

The virtual meeting also heard that planning by the British military for the end of the emergency airlift by the RAF, which has evacuated more than 5,700 people since 13 August, had already begun.
Maj Gen Nick Borton, the chief of staff for operations, said they were “now starting to plan the conclusion” of the evacuation “and the difficult business of drawing the operation to a close” eight days before the current deadline.
A final decision by the US is likely to emerge from Tuesday’s virtual G7 meeting, but any agreement would have to be negotiated with the Taliban, who control Kabul, the airport perimeter and access to it.
Officials in Washington confirmed that the UK has asked for the deadline for the Kabul evacuation to be extended, and the US has been resistant.
“We would absolutely consider the views and opinions of our allies and partners who also have people there, and are .. very much a part of moving people out,” said John Kirby, the Pentagon spokesperson.
A source familiar with the discussions said: “Biden’s stance is different from the UK stance on that, and I think there’s a recognition that the 31st makes it very difficult to get things done in time, so that’s being explored.”
“The challenge is of course the Taliban no doubt will have a view on that, so there’s a question about how much flexibility there actually is for decision making,” the source added.
Also
A spokesperson for the Taliban, Suhail Shaheen, told Sky News there could be a military response if Washington were to extend its evacuation operation. He said: “If they are intent on continuing the occupation, so it will provoke a reaction.”
According to the linked story:
The comments were made after a firefight between unidentified gunmen and US, German and Afghan guards at the airport left one Afghan guard dead and three wounded, underscoring the fragile security situation around the site and throughout the capital.
The fight, which took place at just after 7am Kabul time at the north gate of the airfield, started when former Afghan security forces who are acting as guards exchanged fire with the gunmen.
SLXOwft is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2021, 20:37
  #464 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 14,696
Received 362 Likes on 170 Posts
That’s one account of the gun fight. Here is another from CNN..

”The chaos continued on Monday morning, when sniper fire killed a member of the Afghan security forces helping secure the base, one source told CNN. The affiliation of the sniper was unclear, the source said.

In the confusion, Afghan forces returned fire, but in the direction of some US Marines, who opened fire themselves, injuring four Afghans, the source said.

The four are in stable condition and there were no US casualties.”…..
ORAC is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2021, 22:57
  #465 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 4,711
Received 20 Likes on 11 Posts
Originally Posted by tdracer
As far as I'm concerned, every senior US military leader who was involved in the "planning" (I use the word loosely) and execution of this withdrawal should be fired as soon as the dust settles - maybe even before. A few should even be court-marshaled. Then the people who were actually boots on the ground and saw what a disaster it was should be promoted to take their places - having seen what the price of failure really is.
It won't happen - the leaders be showered with praise and honor for their 'heroic actions' with lots of undeserved medals given out.
But it should.
I would suggest the State Department owns most of the blame for this debacle. It sure sounds like Military commanders were sounding alarm bells but the State Department mandarins were not interested in listening because it conflicted with their world view of a negotiated peace treaty with the Taliban, like that was ever going to happen

The Military was handed an impossible Shyte show and told to make it all belter

Big Pistons Forever is online now  
Old 23rd Aug 2021, 23:53
  #466 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 68
Posts: 3,987
Received 49 Likes on 23 Posts
Originally Posted by Big Pistons Forever
I would suggest the State Department owns most of the blame for this debacle. It sure sounds like Military commanders were sounding alarm bells but the State Department mandarins were not interested in listening because it conflicted with their world view of a negotiated peace treaty with the Taliban, like that was ever going to happen

The Military was handed an impossible Shyte show and told to make it all belter
In the good old days, if a military leader was ignored that totally, the proper response would be "you have my resignation, I won't be associated with this disaster".
But I agree, heads should roll in the State Department as well.
tdracer is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2021, 06:31
  #467 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: York
Posts: 584
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
With room on transports at a premium surprised to see an RAF C17 bringing back what is clearly a civilian 4x4 amongst the passengers sat on the floor.
dctyke is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2021, 06:59
  #468 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 14,696
Received 362 Likes on 170 Posts
With room on transports at a premium surprised to see an RAF C17 bringing back what is clearly a civilian 4x4 amongst the passengers sat on the floor.
From all the photos I have seen most flights have been departing with plenty of spare space - the problem being getting people into the airport and processed.
ORAC is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2021, 09:27
  #469 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: England
Posts: 1,917
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by dctyke
what is clearly a civilian 4x4
Or a very expensive specialist military vehicle perhaps?
Roland Pulfrew is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2021, 10:06
  #470 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 14,696
Received 362 Likes on 170 Posts
Two interesting snippets from today’s papers.

First from The Times. This suggests elements of the Afghan army survive - if only inside the airport. Even if this is on the agreement they are evacuated, it reveals a continuing animus between the Taliban and army members - remember thousands have been killed by the Taliban almost monthly. It suggests that, for all that some went across t9 the Taliban, that there are tens of thousands of army members, still with their weapons, who will make life uncomfortable for the new regime.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/s...ruce-pdprvdzlf

Shots at Kabul airport shatter deadly foes’ uneasy truce

Deadly foes stood talking at the gateway between the fear-filled chaos of the airport perimeter wall and the fuel-reeking runway.

Separated by no more than a few feet of earth and a waist-high strip of concertina wire, an American officer, his Taliban counterpart and an Afghan commando spoke with unsmiling deliberation in the dark of the night as they worked out details of how to allow a group of Afghan civilians though for evacuation…..

From the grass behind the American’s feet sat a few huddled groups of Afghan families lucky enough to get this far. A scattered band of Afghan commandoes, heavily armed, hatchet-faced and much the most ferocious presence there, looked on. They were due evacuation too, but in the meantime held the war, stepping across the wire to face off with the Taliban whenever they encroached too close…..

——————————

The second is from the Grauniad and considers the current famine and drought in the country and the suggestion from a WHO representative that empty inbound aircraft be routed via Dubai to bring aid.

Now that’s laughable in the current circumstances - who’d unload them (or have the time) and they wouldn’t be able to get trucks and drivers through the security perimeter - or stop them getting in the aircraft. But it does occur that it offers a possible negotiating position for after the 31st.

There would be no incentive to fly an aircraft in after the 31st unless there were load of evacuees to take out. If arrangements could be made for FO staff to be hosted by an embassy still open to continue giving out visas, then there would be an incentive for the new government to allow those with them to reach the airport and depart - each load of aid flown in replaced by 200-400 evacuees to be flown out.

Swopping food for lives may seem ruthless, but it could save lives in both directions.


https://www.theguardian.com/global-d...ember-un-warns

Afghanistan could start to run out of food by September, UN warns
ORAC is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2021, 10:30
  #471 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by dctyke
With room on transports at a premium surprised to see an RAF C17 bringing back what is clearly a civilian 4x4 amongst the passengers sat on the floor.
Has there been an explanation for this?
Mike6567 is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2021, 11:09
  #472 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 6,445
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Mike6567
Has there been an explanation for this?

Are we owed one?
wiggy is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2021, 13:53
  #473 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by dctyke
With room on transports at a premium surprised to see an RAF C17 bringing back what is clearly a civilian 4x4 amongst the passengers sat on the floor.
Got to admit...surely it can't have been worth the negative publicity for a Vauxhall car? Why did they even consider bothering with that? What am I missing?
VigilantPilot is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2021, 14:37
  #474 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 14,696
Received 362 Likes on 170 Posts
I have no idea why the vehicle was on the C-17, but am equally bemused as to why it’s presence would be seen as bad publicity.

There are literally dozens of aircraft arriving and departing. Many going in will be carrying tons of freight such as food, ammunition and vehicles - either for use on the airfield or by SF outside it. Many will not recognisable as military for obvious reasons. Much will abandoned when the evacuation reaches its end, what can be recovered will be.

There have been numerous photos of flights departing with only a handful of passengers. That is because the bottleneck is getting people onto the airfield and cleared onboard (we have already had one pax who turned out to be on the UK “no fly” list).

If there is a question it is why you think space not required for evacuees should not be utilised for vehicles, freight or other materiel but should be left empty?

Apart for PR purposes of course - but that’s not what the movers and crews turning the aircraft are there for.

Last edited by ORAC; 24th Aug 2021 at 17:27.
ORAC is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2021, 15:18
  #475 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The back of beyond
Posts: 1,984
Received 76 Likes on 42 Posts
If there is a question it is why you think space not required for evacuees should not be utilised for vehicles, freight or other materiel should be left empty?
ORAC, the issue is that the images coming out of Kabul show that all the space (and then some) IS required for evacuees.
melmothtw is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2021, 15:34
  #476 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 6,445
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by melmothtw
ORAC, the issue is that the images coming out of Kabul show that all the space (and then some) IS required for evacuees.
Do you mean evacuees post processing/screening who were denied boarding because of this car or are you talking about the potential evacuees outside the wireÖ
wiggy is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2021, 15:50
  #477 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: From UK
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
One Kam Air A340 (YA-KMU) appears to be on its way back to Kabul from AUH after leaving last weekend.

Another Kam Air A340 (YA-KMH) on the northern military side of the airport appears to have had its transponder on at Kabul most of the day under COMTF2A. Given this is the aircraft we saw with people standing on its roof and wings whilst storming it the other day, I am not sure I would like to be on it sans proper maintenance checks. Does anyone know if these checks are taking place and if it will fly?
RedDragonFlyer is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2021, 17:38
  #478 (permalink)  
F34
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: UK
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by melmothtw
ORAC, the issue is that the images coming out of Kabul show that all the space (and then some) IS required for evacuees.
Knowing someone out there who is part of the process who goes out of Kabul, its not always the case that aircraft are filled for various reasons. Also that vehicle will have a very valid reason why it comes back and if its the type im guessing its not just the fact its armoured that makes it important not to leave.
F34 is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2021, 17:40
  #479 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 14,696
Received 362 Likes on 170 Posts
The photos of flights departing half empty show it is not.

It should be realised that aircraft cannot sit on the ground until they are full before departing. Just like at any busy airport there are only so many parking slots and each one occupied will have another aircraft airborne en-route due to fill it.

Each aircraft on the ground will have a block time - and at the end of it they go, full or empty, to allow the next aircraft to take it. The manifest will have prepared, all checks done - and they go.

In the meantime there will be other materiel due to depart - be it SF or other vehicles, or indeed anything else in theatre which is ready to go. If they space and weight is available they’ll put it on. Why shouldn’t they?

In the meantime you have idiots like the ex-RM bleating about not being allowed to fly in his charter flight fir his animals.

You may have noticed all the other flights are C-17s and C-130s with APUs sitting in a ramp for loading. No ground units, no steps, no scissor loaders.

With the civil side closed I’m not sure who he thinks would be able, or willing, to turn his flight round when they’ve got their own jobs to do, let alone with the expertise to handle animals.
ORAC is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2021, 18:26
  #480 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 14,696
Received 362 Likes on 170 Posts
ORAC is offline  

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.