firstly lets deal with how the british armed forces deal with casualties. A casualty can only be pronounced dead by a doctor. And I'm sure the Chinook with the IRT team and its doctor did this at the cross over between apache and chinook. the body would then be taken to the nearest Role 3 facility for identification and continuation of cascomp proceedures to make sure the correct information was relayed to the UK so the family could be infromed. The identification will include recording of injury and issuing of death certificate and cooperation with various concerned agencies like the RMP who will take evidence etc. the body will then be prepared for transport back to the UK all this is best done at the hospital which has a 'morgue facility'.
I would agree that the Chinook and support hele crews are well placed to have carried out this operation. But given the scale of the operation and the megre assets allocated I would sugest that the government is playing fast and loose with brave men and womens lives.

Yeah it worked a treat at Monte Cassino didnt it?

Fact is that the blokes of 42 and 45 are out there doing a great job with a lack of resources. The old adage of 'Improvise, adapt and overcome works up to a point' and the British Forces have been expected to use that ideology for far too many years. Poor equipment and lack of it is losing lives.

The good old Sea King would have been perfect for ops in Afganistan but it's old and it would be unlikely to get off of the ground at those altitudes, so where is it's damn replacement?

Lack of CAS, lack of dhobi facilities on base?

It's about time that our those in charge realised that it won't be long till were faced with a disaster like a modern Isandhlwana.

GPMG,
Totally agree - the very heroic actions were forced upon these crews that were having to scrape the barrel for this immediate combat recovery. They were forced into this corner/decision by the lack of assets availible at that moment at time - without second guessing, I wonder IF there had been a credible immediate combat recovery plan/brief availible would they have opted for their actions?
I get the feeling that the lack of SH lift will eventually hit home - and I believe this incident will further the case, and as I have said in earlier posts anything (including a Lynx) would surely have been better than an 2 AH flying back into harms way with untrained (I didn't say not briefed) individuals heath robinson secured to the aircraft conducting what looks like an emergency procedure.
I can see a possible knee jerk reaction of Sea Kings now being sent into theatre to try an appease this fallout and sudden (now public?) realisation and understanding of the implications of not enough SH lift assets. I just hope that the junglies (who also are renowned for their 'can do' attitude) are not placed in exactly the same situation in an aircraft that is limited in performance. Looking at some of the heights and temperatures out there even the Sea King with go faster stripes and fluffy dice improvements may be seen wanting.
Why is everyone else investing in SH lift (French, Germans, Australians and even the Kiwis with NH90!) and we are left doing significantly more, with less and extremes of environment? Can someone please quantify and define the peace dividends from the fall of the Warsaw Pact, because all I see is less/wrong investment in a highly volatile and kinetic world.
Which penny hasn't dropped or how much risk are our Lords and Masters willing to take? Not over dramatic, or inter Service rivalry or playing politcs - just stating fact:
SUPPORT HELICOPTERS ARE AN ESSENTIAL ENABLER AND COMBAT SERVICE SUPPORT THAT SAVES LIVES - WE DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH FOR THE NUMBER AND TYPES OF OPERATIONS THAT WE ARE ENGAGED IN - THEREFORE LIVES WILL BE LOST AS A RESULT UNLESS EITHER THE OPERATIONAL TYPE/TEMPO IS REDUCED OR MORE SUPPORT HELICOPTERS ARE PROCURED
Forgive me, I am beginning to sound like WEBF and his hallowed Sea Harrier thread - so I will get off my soap box.
:(

GPMG,
How many casualties were suffered prior to the bombing? What was the reason bombing was tried?:ugh:

Please note the wee difference between a few mud huts and Monte Cassino before making that comparison.

Bombing precision and tactics from WWII and today are quite different are they not?

Just to clear the air about misconeptions about the bombing.....it was requested by Brigadier General H.W. Dimolene, Commander of the 4th Indian Division and ordered by General Sir Harold Alexander.

The US 34th Infantry Division Commander, whose troops had made it to the top of the hill before being pushed off the hill by the German defenders told Alexander the German gunfire did not come from the Monastery but rather from the hill below the building.

The ground forces were not informed of the bombing attack prior to the bombing thus were not prepared to coordinate the ground attack after the immediately after the bombing. That allowed the German defenders to recover from the bombing before the ground attack began anew.

The US forces making the initial attack on the Monte Cassino defences lost 2100 men in 48 hours of fighting and the 34th division that followed up in the next few days took 80% casualties during their attack which got them to the top but then had to withdraw.

British troops then took up the attack and suffered casualties.....all before the bombing.

There are lessons to be learned from all that.

There is an excellent article on this in the Scottish Mail on Sunday, pages 10,11,12. I assume it will also be in the Mail on Sunday.

It is mate just finished reading it. There is also MOD video footage.

Bl00dy Hell!
Absolutely amazing - I don't know 'Tom' but judging by his last comment I think he realises just how lucky he was that day.
"It had been a close thing."
I am not sure what Gary Robinsons comments mean:

"I don't think it was heroic or dangerous. I felt 100 per cent safe at all times, because of the plan and the covering fire. At the end of the day it's our job."

However, it looks as though the Royal Marines have made up their minds about their thoughts on what type of platform is best suited to Combat Recovery:

Brigadier Jerry Thomas, Commander of British Forces in Afghanistan, said: "The Apaches are small and therefore less vulnerable to incoming fire, faster, and carry a formidable array of weapons."
I hope that the AH IPT are now going to dust off the pictures of that escape pod!


Seriously, this is stuff of James Bond films and Tom Clancy novels - and I beg to differ with Gary Robinson, the actions were both heroic and dangerous!

Link to the MoS article.
Couple of pictures from there:
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/200...01_468x381.jpg
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/img/galle...e5_350x280.jpg
OUTSTANDING.

There is some video footage on the Beeb, incase anyone has missed it:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/video_and_audio/default.stm

Hats off to you brave boys.

ppf :ok:

The alternative Blair New World outcome...
 

Date: 1 April 2008
To: Maj HugeBalls, 45 Cdo RM
Fm: Mr Spineless Wonder, Chief MoD Health and Safety Advisor, Abbey Wood
Dear Maj Hugeballs,
Subject; Use of Apache Helicopter for External Transportation of Personnel
Regarding your recent request of last year to employ an item of Government Furnished Equipment for an alternative primary purpose to that stated at the Cardinal Point Specification document; the Health and Safety Executive have reached the following conclusions;
1. Even with hearing protection, the ambient noise level in the proximity of such personnel would exceed 87DbA for periods of 2 minutes or more.
2. The danger of ocular impairment due to dust and other debris being present while operating under the rotor disc is regarded as being outside the limits of the managed risk metrics.
3. The drop hazard for personnel traveling externally only allows for any such flights to be conducted below 193mm AGL and below 12kph; conditions that can only be met when the Apache is being towed by a ground handling vehicle.
4. Due to the likelihood of live ammunition being in the proximity of personnel, regulations requires that all weapons be “made safe” and a full safety inspection is conducted by range qualified personnel prior to daily operations. This regulation should also be communicated to enemy combatants who are also liable under the Health and Safety at Work Act.
5. The static electricity discharge risk requires that any externally mounted personnel remain grounded via an earthing strip, thus limiting the radius of operations to 23.72 metres from the take off point when using an H&S approved grounding device.
In light of the preceding evidence, the Executive is unable to grant you authority to conduct any external transportation of personnel operations, and you are further reminded that the conduct of such operations renders you liable to prosecution under the terms of the Health and Safety at Work Act.
Please take the time to fill in the attached customer survey by answering the questions with a response from 1-10, where a 10 means “I am delighted at the pro-active response provided by the Health and Safety Executive, they make everything I do a genuine pleasure”, and a 1 means, “I know where you live, I will hunt you down like dogs and visit cruel and unusual punishments on you all”.
Yours sincerely,
Spineless Wonder

Two's in...........Absolute quality:ok:

As they say, "Many a true word spoken in jest.":p

We used to have a saying in our Sqn, back in the 80s; "Well hard". As is the way with these things, it was somewhat overused and trivialiesd, but...
Well hard!!! :eek:

Mind you, my pilot would only ever run off and leave in the middle of a fire fight once! :=

Check out the photos on rotorheads forum. .

hats off to them.

Bravo 656 Sqn. Well deserved recognition for all the excellent work. :ok:

A truly amazing and utterly fearless episode. Heartiest congratulations to all involved - all of whom deserve to receive awards for gallantry in the face of the enemy.

The images of those RMs riding that AH64 bareback shows just what a real 'can do' fighting force is capable of.

Well done indeed to all involved!!

Good grief, whatever next? BEagle heaping praise upon Pongos and Royals!

Must be mellowing in his dotage.

What an awesomely BALLSY thing to do, BRILLIANT!!
Compare it to the behaviour at my local beach - Branscombe!
We really DO live in a different world!
lsh

All of a sudden I have realised that my wife is lying. These guys truly have massive cahoonas.

Meeting any of the guys in a bar would be an honour. Stuff emptying the wallet, i'd need credit cards, bank cards, cash, and anything else I have to show the level of respect I have for them. Massive effort for all directly involved, and a privelige to be part of the same outfit.:ok:

R.I.P. L/CPL Ford.
Thoughts are with his family. Be proud of the man.

I'm not a Royal Marine, preferring my service to be much more comfortable, but if ever there was an example of self-respect and mutual esteem so inextricably intertwined, then surely this is it.
Selflessness, pride, mutual respect are not adequate concepts to describe what happened. Don't we all feel a lot better knowing there are men like this around?
RIP L/Cpl Ford, you had some truly great mates.

Chatted to an other ex Bootneck yesterday and it was intereting to hear his views. I was saying what a hoofing effort it was, brave, good advert for the corps etc.

He turned round and said it was a bloody disgrace and a complete f**k up. He went on to ask what the hell was a Captain and an RSM doing risking everything at the front line on a dangerous mission like that, Colonel H syndrome he called it. Why was the initial attack so badly planned, was their any recce of the fort before hand?
He believed that it was a case of trying to cover up a very poor effort in the first place.

I can see his point to an extent, did an RSM and a Captain have to do what they did? Were there no individual fireteams available who have the knowledge and experience of working together and who would have been better suited to pulling this off? Why was the initial assualt sent into retreat?

Interesting point of view, but it doesn't take away from the bravery displayed.
If you look too closely at most displays of heroism, you will probably find a planning fu@kup somewhere.
Almost by definition, heroism is above and beyond the call of duty, so if someone has to display it, something has probably gone wrong somewhere, I think......

The guy wasnt questioning the bravery, but he was questioning the reasoning behind who went and how it came to be that we ended up in that situation.

I'm guessing that the lack of numbers in the BG and the lack of SH means that the action was started with few if any additional and immediately deployable assets in reserve should things get sticky. They got very sticky, and they had to make do with what they had on the ground. They also knew that with Ford incapacitated they had little or no time to wait.

Armchair 20/20 is great in these situations of course.

At last - someone is recognising that yes it was an incredible act of individual bravery but you just have to stop and think for a moment. We are led to believe that we are short of Apaches and AH aircrew, and also that an RSM/young officer were strapping themselves to the outside of the cockpit.
Just imagine the complete and utter fallout if (and if surprise was on their side, the laws of probability weren't) heaven forbid we had lost 2 Apache, plus crews and also the RSM - some of whom may have ended in orange boiler suits (I know not TB style, but you catch my drift) or being dragged through the streets of Gamisir Mogadishu style. And what if the subsequent recovery mission to these 'downed' AH crews had also lost lives as fighting patrol had to fight there way in and out back across the river.
I shudder at what could have been and although I do not question for one moment the bravery and these amazing flying skills and I would never pass judgement on anyones cockpit in the heat of battle.
But - lets learn from this episode. Is it really the way that UK plc wants to be doing business? Is this really the way that UK forces are rescued when things go wrong - if it is, then God help us as I think this particular AH JPR tactic back into the field of fire has just lost all of its nine lives.
Fundamentally, 'Tom' made a judgement call at that moment in time that both Senior Officers and the Media have provided positive spin. However, if it had gone wrong would 'Tom' have been supported or would his judgement or perceived 'wreckless' behaviour been all over the press.
I have said this again and again - this isn't about 'Tom' or the RSM or any of the operators - it is all about them being forced into that situation because there were no other options availible to him or those back in his HQ. He was forced to take those massive risks because of the lack of a suitable JPR/Immediate Combat Recovery plan, due mainly to lack of rotary wing assets. If , as reported, the CH47s were on another job (how many are out there!?!), then there are obviously too many tasks for the resources in theatre.
I reiterate, the huge risk that the Teenie Weenies and Royal Marines taken that day was a result as someone much further up the chain taking the whole lack of rotary support 'on risk' in the full knowledge that something like this was going to happen. If for one moment that the hierarchy believed that Afghanistan was not going to have a JPR scenario and the risk was acceptable needs to re-vist his/her risk register/matrix.
Armchair 20/20 is exactly what we want Artist, exactly what we want otherwise you can bet someone elses life that some Staff planner will pull this procedure out of the hat again and dare I say become a norm.
We need to acknowledge the individual acts of bravery (and I agree there is such a fine line) but we must identify, learnand apply every lesson that comes out of it other wise one day we will wake up to some horrendous/extremely sad news from theatre.

Errrrrr....uhhhhhh.....Leading.....perhaps?

Now look chaps, I know some of you are in the RAF, but even a cursory glance at the medja surrounding this event would show that the Royals assaulted on the ground, rather than from the air, in their BVS-10 Vikings. It's likely that the Royals' reserve was similarly mounted and close by for reinforcement. Very possibly, by the time anything was discovered to be amiss, troops had withdrawn and the fastest way to effect a quick target recce and extraction was from the air - on a opportunity basis and with some element of surprise.

Chances are the whole thing was put together at a HQ where combat troops hadn't got back to yet or were guarding and it was first come first served.

We expect our officers and senior WOs to lead by example in the Army and RM and that's what happened here. Or would you prefer the senior blokes sent in 4 sprogs?

How very armchair of you!

Yes, it could have been a horrendous mess, but it wasn't. Sometimes it's Colonel H and sometimes it's Pte Beharry, but frankly second guessing it from the never-accurate media dishonours these chaps' achievements and for my money, when an officer (or RSM) becomes too valuable to risk, he's no longer an officer. And the same goes for Apaches.

MaroonMan hits the nail on the head with his views on the risk taken up the chain by this most mendacious of governments (cf. Des Browne's performance in the commons of late). Let's save our ire for them and people like GPMG's booty friend who's probably desperately jealous!

As Teddy Roosevelt once opined about those that criticize bold action in combat.....

Both myself and my mate are ex bootnecks, both have the utmost respect for what those guys did, however you have to question the way these events came to pass, planning, equipment resources etc.

If you can't understand the original question try and get a friend to explain it to you, you seem to be a special needs case.

SASLess,

PM Please.

Hmm reasoned debate indeed. Mind you, I'm not the so-called 'ex-booty' with the 'mate' who has this view, to which he's entitled if he actually exists. Sounds a bit like the 'mate' who's needs some advice from the clap doctor to me - you know the one that you're just asking on behalf of?

You sound like a walt to me gimpy. And your 'mate'.

Take your head for a **** cockrobin, and it is pronounced G P M G not gimpy, if you can't be bothered to say it then don't bother to carry it.
Nice try with the walt accusation but totally incorrect the same ref my oppo who is very real.

Now bugger off and stop being a keyboard hero, probably as close as you would ever get.

GPMG,

CockRobin floats in and out of this means every now and then and ALWAYS spouts tosh which most folks grin at and treat as just the dribblings of one who maybe used to have faculties:rolleyes: ..........so dont take the bait fella:ok:

at the end of the day the 4 guys who strapped themselves to the apaches deserve to be honoured and respected no mater what their rank or appointment. The idiots who sent them into this mess under resourced and out on a limb personally imho need to become unemployed very rapidally and thease guys are not in Afghanistan or even in uniform (though some of their uniformed yes men should be there as well)

I happen to agree with the gist of Christopher's main post. There wasn't time for too much planning, thinking, re-thinking, re-planning etc. This was an opportunistic plan put together at great speed by those in a position to do it and act on it. Not the motto of the RM or the RE but famous nevertheless and in this instance I believe appropriate, it was a case of "Who Dares Wins".

Thanks parabellum for actually reading my post. As for the gimp and ABIW (I wondered when you'd climb out of your hole), I think from now on I'll just spell both your names as R.E.M.F.

...

"My oppo who is very real"

quite. You'll be telling me to "be afwaid...be vewy afwaid" next will you?

Bought any "spare" medals from silvermans recently have you gimp?

CR you are a t**t, the guys you are slagging off are real, I just wonder who the real Walter is?

Christopher,
Please do not lead this thread into the gutter. I know exactly who you are, we have worked together before and although you do come across a tad bitter in that you were forced out of the cockpit against your will at an early point in your flying career in the 'interests of the Service' to pursue a Staff career. I would suggest that if you want to continue this little spat -and you get a kick out of it - then continue it by PMs, as although I can go off thread at times, you most certainly have the ability to quickly degenerate what up until now has been an open and informed discussion in and around the related subjects of bravery,risk taking, resources, JPR etc etc.
Please don't mud sling or bitch slap here - it really isn't you , doesn't do you any favours and I know that you mean well at heart and are vry professional in what you do now.

One of the young guys story...

http://www.thecourier.co.uk/output/2...y9222484t0.asp

A grandson asked of his grandfather who was in "E" Company of "Band of Brothers" fame...."Grandpa, were you a hero in the war?"

Granda's reply was...."No Son....but I was surrounded by Heroes."

Seems to apply to those Marines and Aircrew!