Umbach and Schmidt get Off
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Not a huge sand box but very nice winters anymore
Age: 57
Posts: 548
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Umbach and Schmidt get Off
Well well!!! Once again we see how you can get away with murder!!!!
It appears that Maj. William Umbach and Maj. Harry Schmidt will not face criminal charges.
"Lt.-Gen. Bruce Carlson of the 8th Air Force in Barksdale, La., decided after months of consideration that the two airmen should not face criminal charges."
The last time we saw something like this was when the USMC managed to score a kill on an Italian gondola. Can you imagine the outrage which would be shown if a Italian jet did the same in the US!
What is up with this????????
It appears that Maj. William Umbach and Maj. Harry Schmidt will not face criminal charges.
"Lt.-Gen. Bruce Carlson of the 8th Air Force in Barksdale, La., decided after months of consideration that the two airmen should not face criminal charges."
The last time we saw something like this was when the USMC managed to score a kill on an Italian gondola. Can you imagine the outrage which would be shown if a Italian jet did the same in the US!
What is up with this????????
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: no longer on the Pond
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on Saudi, don't think any of us ever really thought they'd face justice. Personally I doubt they'll even be grounded. Schmidts lawyer is suggesting that the USAF just pay off the families ala families of the Phillipino girls run over a couple of years ago, to the sum of maybe $250K USD. Seems that everything really does have a price in the good 'ole US of A.
Lupus Domesticus
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NZ
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The answer to this situation is simple.
It does not involve payments to agreived families, or justified outrage by such as ourselves in fora such as this.
It requires a simple standing order applicable within all allied units.
"Return fire if fired upon."
The problem will shortly thereafter cease to reccur.
Just a thought.
It does not involve payments to agreived families, or justified outrage by such as ourselves in fora such as this.
It requires a simple standing order applicable within all allied units.
"Return fire if fired upon."
The problem will shortly thereafter cease to reccur.
Just a thought.
Command and Control Deficiencies Too
We all know that fire on the ground during a training exercise was misconstrued as fire against a/c -- and the pilots (and families of all concerned) will have to live with that the rest of their lives.
The other problem is how they were routed to the area without any notification that a live fire training exercise was under way. The Canadians did make the notifications and the AWACS crew did dig them up -- sadly a few seconds late.
That information should have been communicated to the crews BEFORE they entered the area.
The other problem is how they were routed to the area without any notification that a live fire training exercise was under way. The Canadians did make the notifications and the AWACS crew did dig them up -- sadly a few seconds late.
That information should have been communicated to the crews BEFORE they entered the area.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The edge
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ratherbeflying,
You're absolutely right - had C3 run as it should, that information would have been made available in a timely manner. However, we all know that in wartime we don't always get every bit of info we need. That requires us to fall back on our professionalism and sound judgement so that we can complete the mission effectively without killing our own or noncombatants. To me, the official report on the incident clearly reveals the disgraceful lack of professionalism these pilots exhibited. They disobeyed the war Special Instructions (SPINS), they disobeyed a C3 order to wait, they broke the Rules of Engagement, and they even broke their own Lead/Wing SOP's in order to conduct an illegal and unnecessary engagement. Both the SPINS and RoE are absolutely clear on how one should react to a perceived SAFIRE threat. In neither of these documents can be found a scenario where their actions would ever be considered necessary, even under the pressures of combat. You can see from the report that those two characters were pre-disposed to 'kick some ass' (sic) even before they left the ground. Had the report I saw not been from an official source, I wouldn't have believed it. In my opinion, had two mature, professional men (or women) been in those cockpits, we wouldn't be having this discussion, irrespective of the lack of information. Being paid to fly a multi-million pound/dollar fighter bristling with lethal weaponry is a gift few people will ever experience. And with that gift comes a certain responsibility to live up to the image the tax-paying public has of you.
You're absolutely right - had C3 run as it should, that information would have been made available in a timely manner. However, we all know that in wartime we don't always get every bit of info we need. That requires us to fall back on our professionalism and sound judgement so that we can complete the mission effectively without killing our own or noncombatants. To me, the official report on the incident clearly reveals the disgraceful lack of professionalism these pilots exhibited. They disobeyed the war Special Instructions (SPINS), they disobeyed a C3 order to wait, they broke the Rules of Engagement, and they even broke their own Lead/Wing SOP's in order to conduct an illegal and unnecessary engagement. Both the SPINS and RoE are absolutely clear on how one should react to a perceived SAFIRE threat. In neither of these documents can be found a scenario where their actions would ever be considered necessary, even under the pressures of combat. You can see from the report that those two characters were pre-disposed to 'kick some ass' (sic) even before they left the ground. Had the report I saw not been from an official source, I wouldn't have believed it. In my opinion, had two mature, professional men (or women) been in those cockpits, we wouldn't be having this discussion, irrespective of the lack of information. Being paid to fly a multi-million pound/dollar fighter bristling with lethal weaponry is a gift few people will ever experience. And with that gift comes a certain responsibility to live up to the image the tax-paying public has of you.
Guest
Posts: n/a
No i'm not surprised. i don't think any of us are. So I guess the A-10 that shot up the troops in GW2 can expect the same treatment?
Blue Wolf is right, take the lead from the F-16 pilot who was locked up by a Patriot , and thought "You or me, and guess what, I'm going to die in bed"
The message is clear, feel free to engage everything, there won't be any comebacks
Blue Wolf is right, take the lead from the F-16 pilot who was locked up by a Patriot , and thought "You or me, and guess what, I'm going to die in bed"
The message is clear, feel free to engage everything, there won't be any comebacks
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah the Canadians could/should have shoved Stingers up the F-16s asses but then their families would have sued in Canadian court who would allow the case and award loads of dosh!
Nozzles,
If you read through the entire report (don't know where it is myself) then you are much better able to comment.
But I generally suspect that culture and mindsets also play their part in such incidents. While there are often official pronouncements and procedures carved in stone, the lower levels can be under pressure to take shortcuts to get the job done.
If you read through the entire report (don't know where it is myself) then you are much better able to comment.
But I generally suspect that culture and mindsets also play their part in such incidents. While there are often official pronouncements and procedures carved in stone, the lower levels can be under pressure to take shortcuts to get the job done.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southern england
Posts: 1,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RBF, the Canadian report is here http://www.vcds.forces.gc.ca/boi/finalv2/content_e.asp
Sounds remarkably like Cpt Will Rogers and the Vincennes incident involving Iran Air flight 655.
Sounds remarkably like Cpt Will Rogers and the Vincennes incident involving Iran Air flight 655.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: no longer on the Pond
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure the boys on the ground would have loved to have thrown a few missiles at them, unfortunately they were on a firing range. That is what seperates this incident from all the others. To claim "fog of war" is nuts. Schmidt himself was in charge of the IntCell, therefore it was HIS responsibility to know the facts and brief everyone else.
At least, according to last night's news, Umbaugh has asked for early retirement, having been given a letter of reprimand. Schmidt, the fecking little weasel won't admit any type of responsibility. Hopefully, someone down there, will actually have the b@lls not to let this go and fry him.
Needless to say, but I will anyway, the 1800 Canucks headed back for Kabul shortly won't be very confident in US CAS.
At least, according to last night's news, Umbaugh has asked for early retirement, having been given a letter of reprimand. Schmidt, the fecking little weasel won't admit any type of responsibility. Hopefully, someone down there, will actually have the b@lls not to let this go and fry him.
Needless to say, but I will anyway, the 1800 Canucks headed back for Kabul shortly won't be very confident in US CAS.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The edge
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RBF,
I hear what you're saying. There is definitely a culture and mindset difference between Brits and Yanks (and I'm sure Canuks too). They're definitely more weapon orientated in civilian life, and I think this rubs off on their psyche.
However, I can't agree that pressure from above can be to blame. The very first paragraph in the Afghanistan ROE section of the SPINS (this para is UNCLASS) states: "We expect nothing less then 100% understanding of, and compliance with, these rules". That's the order from above.
The pilots involved were under no pressure. They saw non-threatening tracer fire below and away from their position. They took no defensive action because they didn't need to. They didn't egress the area because they didn't feel threatened-they simply bimbled around inside the perceived AAA engagement zone. One of them dived out of his safe altitude towards the threat to take a mark on the position. He requested to engage with his gun. The logical weapon to use is not the gun, because you have to dive into the threat envelope to engage it. The only weapon a smart man would have considered for such an engagement would have been one of the Laser Guided Bombs he was carrying (and subsequently dropped). But the gun is more fun, more punchy, more warlike. He was not under pressure, on the contrary he was specifically told to wait prior to engagement-an order he ignored. He claimed that he was 'rolling in, in self defence'. The time lag between the perceived threat and his initiating the attack define his attack, legally, as retaliation. Retaliation is specifically forbidden under the laws covering the inherent right to self-defence.
I hear what you're saying. There is definitely a culture and mindset difference between Brits and Yanks (and I'm sure Canuks too). They're definitely more weapon orientated in civilian life, and I think this rubs off on their psyche.
However, I can't agree that pressure from above can be to blame. The very first paragraph in the Afghanistan ROE section of the SPINS (this para is UNCLASS) states: "We expect nothing less then 100% understanding of, and compliance with, these rules". That's the order from above.
The pilots involved were under no pressure. They saw non-threatening tracer fire below and away from their position. They took no defensive action because they didn't need to. They didn't egress the area because they didn't feel threatened-they simply bimbled around inside the perceived AAA engagement zone. One of them dived out of his safe altitude towards the threat to take a mark on the position. He requested to engage with his gun. The logical weapon to use is not the gun, because you have to dive into the threat envelope to engage it. The only weapon a smart man would have considered for such an engagement would have been one of the Laser Guided Bombs he was carrying (and subsequently dropped). But the gun is more fun, more punchy, more warlike. He was not under pressure, on the contrary he was specifically told to wait prior to engagement-an order he ignored. He claimed that he was 'rolling in, in self defence'. The time lag between the perceived threat and his initiating the attack define his attack, legally, as retaliation. Retaliation is specifically forbidden under the laws covering the inherent right to self-defence.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are right, there is a mind set difference. In the UK we teach "If there is any doubt, there is no doubt". It would appear that these chaps were taught "If there is any doubt, shoot".
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
The man's mad....maybe he's going to plead insanity...
AP - (New Orleans):
Major Harry Schmidt, the US fighter pilot who mistakenly bombed Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan last year, killing four, has refused to accept the Air Force's offer of an administrative hearing and could now face a court martial.
The former instructor at the US Navy's "Top Gun" fighter school claimed that the man who would have overseen the hearing, Lieutenant-General Bruce Carlson, had already made up his mind that Major Schmidt had violated procedure - a claim that he denies.
Major Schmidt, 37, has said that the Air Force gave him no warning that allies would be performing live-fire exercises the night of April 17, 2002, when he dropped the laser-guided bomb near Kandahar.
AP - (New Orleans):
Major Harry Schmidt, the US fighter pilot who mistakenly bombed Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan last year, killing four, has refused to accept the Air Force's offer of an administrative hearing and could now face a court martial.
The former instructor at the US Navy's "Top Gun" fighter school claimed that the man who would have overseen the hearing, Lieutenant-General Bruce Carlson, had already made up his mind that Major Schmidt had violated procedure - a claim that he denies.
Major Schmidt, 37, has said that the Air Force gave him no warning that allies would be performing live-fire exercises the night of April 17, 2002, when he dropped the laser-guided bomb near Kandahar.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK, sometimes!
Age: 74
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The following are extracts from the Official Summary of the Facts...
Neither COFFEE 51 nor COFFEE 52, both of whom stated they believed they were being targeted at some point by the ground fire, maneuvered their aircraft defensively in relation to the perceived surface-to-air threat. {A brief description of an accompanying image}
Throughout the engagement COFFEE 51 maintained a level right-hand turn approximately from the source of the ground fire, almost completely circling the Tarnak Farms Range. Coffee 52 made a descending left turn and put the SAFIRE site in the center of his _____ in what appears to be an attempt to mark the coordinates of the SAFIRE site. While doing this, COFFEE 52 descended to ____ in the dive, breaking the floor imposed by the OEF ROE. COFFEE 52 did not climb above that altitude restriction until after the bomb hit, four and half minutes later. COFFEE 52's lowest altitude during the incident was ____, just above the floor that required CFACC permission to descend below. COFFEE 52 also slowed while taking the mark. His slowest airspeed during the rest of the incident was ____. Based on his altitude, this is much slower than the desired airspeed of _____.
And later...
Because there were alternative methods of taking a mark in the F-16C, COFFEE 52s descent towards the site and transition below the restricted altitude floor was not necessary to obtain the SAFIRE coordinates.
And...
COFFEE flight failed to either accomplish standard defensive maneuvers against the perceived AAA threat or attempt to leave the immediate threat area as mandated by the OEF SPINS.
And...
Both pilots of COFFEE flight demonstrated poor airmanship and judgment and a fundamental lack of flight discipline throughout the course of the incident.
And finally a few of the official words about the two pilots...
Major William Umbach was the 170 EFS Commander. He was responsible for all areas related to the execution of missions assigned to the 170 EFS during the deployment.
Major Harry Schmidt is the 170 EFS Weapons Officer, responsible for training and standardization of 183 FW wing pilots. He was also assigned to direct the 170 EFS MPC, which included overall responsibility for preparation of mission materials and ATO compliance during the deployment.
It also mentions how Schmidt was a graduate and instructor of the 'TOPGUN' school and how, although he was flying as the number 2 (wingman), he logged his hours for that sortie as an instructor. So, in my opinion, a couple of senior sqn officers that should have known more about what was going on than a normal sqn pilot. Instead they behaved like a couple of cowboys and get away with murder.
MadMark!!!
Neither COFFEE 51 nor COFFEE 52, both of whom stated they believed they were being targeted at some point by the ground fire, maneuvered their aircraft defensively in relation to the perceived surface-to-air threat. {A brief description of an accompanying image}
Throughout the engagement COFFEE 51 maintained a level right-hand turn approximately from the source of the ground fire, almost completely circling the Tarnak Farms Range. Coffee 52 made a descending left turn and put the SAFIRE site in the center of his _____ in what appears to be an attempt to mark the coordinates of the SAFIRE site. While doing this, COFFEE 52 descended to ____ in the dive, breaking the floor imposed by the OEF ROE. COFFEE 52 did not climb above that altitude restriction until after the bomb hit, four and half minutes later. COFFEE 52's lowest altitude during the incident was ____, just above the floor that required CFACC permission to descend below. COFFEE 52 also slowed while taking the mark. His slowest airspeed during the rest of the incident was ____. Based on his altitude, this is much slower than the desired airspeed of _____.
And later...
Because there were alternative methods of taking a mark in the F-16C, COFFEE 52s descent towards the site and transition below the restricted altitude floor was not necessary to obtain the SAFIRE coordinates.
And...
COFFEE flight failed to either accomplish standard defensive maneuvers against the perceived AAA threat or attempt to leave the immediate threat area as mandated by the OEF SPINS.
And...
Both pilots of COFFEE flight demonstrated poor airmanship and judgment and a fundamental lack of flight discipline throughout the course of the incident.
And finally a few of the official words about the two pilots...
Major William Umbach was the 170 EFS Commander. He was responsible for all areas related to the execution of missions assigned to the 170 EFS during the deployment.
Major Harry Schmidt is the 170 EFS Weapons Officer, responsible for training and standardization of 183 FW wing pilots. He was also assigned to direct the 170 EFS MPC, which included overall responsibility for preparation of mission materials and ATO compliance during the deployment.
It also mentions how Schmidt was a graduate and instructor of the 'TOPGUN' school and how, although he was flying as the number 2 (wingman), he logged his hours for that sortie as an instructor. So, in my opinion, a couple of senior sqn officers that should have known more about what was going on than a normal sqn pilot. Instead they behaved like a couple of cowboys and get away with murder.
MadMark!!!
I'm with Nozzles
Read the report -- will follow with interest Schmidt's court martial.
Interesting how he also seems to be the guy who excised the live fire notification from the mission planning
Interesting how he also seems to be the guy who excised the live fire notification from the mission planning
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Not a huge sand box but very nice winters anymore
Age: 57
Posts: 548
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With any luck this tact will backfire and the SOB will get what's coming to him.
You know, I can accept human error. What I cannot stand, is the lack of moral fortitude of this man to stand up and admit that he screwed up.
You know, I can accept human error. What I cannot stand, is the lack of moral fortitude of this man to stand up and admit that he screwed up.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah the Canadians could/should have shoved Stingers up the F-16s asses but then their families would have sued in Canadian court who would allow the case and award loads of dosh!