AOC 1 Group
 

Is it true that AOC 1 Gp stood in front of the crews at a recent CQWI course and asked them if any of them did not think it unreasonable for him to order them to fly their aircraft into the ground in order to destroy a vehicle carrying a Taleban commander?

More importantly, I do hope someone put their hand up.

Depends on who supplied the intelligence ..... :oh:

Eggs Benedick
 

.... asked them if any of them did not think it unreasonable ....

If I understand correctly the point you wish to convey, methinks some editing may be required to your original post - two negatives and all that sort of thing?

Jack

PS I think (note no "not") it extremely unreasonable, unless of course the AOC were prepared to lead by example!

I suppose it is not unreasonable for him to order it. It may be unreasonable for him to order it and expect it to be done! :}

Some may not like the man, but I have never seen an individual who can stand up in front of a group of officers and speak with clarity and insight on the subject of "Leadership" for an hour and a half. All without notes.

OK, he's a harrier pilot, so supressed ego may not be his problem, but IMHO, he's one of the the most inspirational and intelligent AOCs we've had for a long time.

He may be that - but I don't actually see the Groups adding any value whatsoever to our efforts. They seem to be a bit of a 'self-licking lollipop' and, in a couple of years being around them, I have seen nowt to write home about.

There is an interesting debate to be had, even if the anectdote is without foundation:
- Would such an order be a legal order under military law and UK domestic law? Would refusal to follow such an order breach military law?
- What about the moral component? We recall the Battle of Britain pilot who rammed a German bomber apparently targeting Buckingham Palace, and who thankfully survived to tell the tale. Would a Taleban commander really inspire a similar intervention? Would this be worth a similar self-sacrifice?
- Strategy. Is this the best way to achieve a war aim? Humans and vehicles move at predictable speeds and could be bombed later, estimating their movements if required.
- Scenario. Would this be the Scarlet Pimpernel himself, Mr Bin Laden? Or would this be some other figure, of whatever importance but presumably replacable (as indeed Mr B-L may well be). Would there be credible intelligence suggesting that the commander was controlling an imminent WMD threat? (Hmm, we've heard that before!)
- Airframes and aircrew recruitment, selection, training and death benefits are not cheap. Would this be an appropriate use of equipment and personnel?
- Perhaps most fundamentally, leadership. I would expect that a good leader and commander would only issue orders when he or she would be confident of obedience. If the order was not obeyed, what reflection on the commander's leadership? What about the leadership above the commander - at the political level?
If the anectdote is true, perhaps the 2* was trying to generate such a debate.

Double negatives are so much fun...

The correct answer would have been: "I would follow you anywhere, sir!"

Knowing him, he would just eject beside them, walk up to them, and punch them into oblivion (after politely introducing himself first)..., not only for being the enemy, but for not being good enough to to be Harrier pilots.:E

SMT

I suppose that if you don't have a gun on the jet, then nutting them is a viable option.:uhoh:

Well...

I was there, and there was a huge amount of shock at what he said. A true "Black Adder" moment.... Baaaahhhhhhhh:uhoh:

What was the Taleban commander doing in the aircraft in the first place? :}

Is this the same AOC 1 Group that sat most of his operational career sat in a QRA bunker waiting for the war to start, whilst spending GW1 and 2 in the CAOC?

Not digging, genuine question....

mbga9pgf,
What would a Harrier mate be doing on QRA?:confused:

Wrong bloke I fear.......

ok, maybe not Q, but certainly waiting in a bunker waiting for the war to start... its not as if he went up against a credible threat in a frame any time in his life?

Or have I got the wrong bloke?

So what did he actually say?:confused:

mbga9pgf

Seems to me you're saying that any VSO who has not flown Ops is a waste of space?

I suppose a reasonable return question might have been that given it is peace time, would the said AOC have been prepared to authorise a deliberate crash.

mmm
Me thinks AOC 1 Group has found the next evolution for flying development for the mil.
Crash Resource Management. Has anyone told DASC?:ok:

What did he actually say?

Thats how it reads from the first post.

Would it invalidate my life insurance? After all, couldn't be suicide if I was following orders................ could it?:D

Calling HQ 1 Group ....
 

There must be someone at 1 Group ready to spill the beans!? You know you want to .....

Jack

Sounds like a real leader.

Sorry, did I say leader? I meant tw*t.

In today's world, they mean the same thing. People who will stamp all over their colleagues and subordinates in order to "play the game".

So his idea of leadership is to suggest that is within his power to authorise the first example of an ordered kamikaze attack in the Royal Air Force's 89 year history.
What we are dealing with here is a monsterous ego running amock. He is subtly suggesting that he is so powerful that, if he wished, he could order anyone in his command to die. The only thing worse than a fool is a deluded fool.
He should be reminded that the aircraft are not his to do with as he wishes, no more than any station commander has his own private air force.

I find it troubling that it would appear that no one in the room thought the suggestion was ridiculous and put their hand up to tell him so. If someone did please, please tell me I am wrong. Are we really now so cowed and lacking in spirit that no-one had the courage to stand up to him?

AOC he may be, God he is not!

Thank Goodness I'm in 2 Group:p

...but then by tomorrow we might have been re-structured (again):eek:

This event most certainly did happen.....absoutely incredible.

Issues I have with this ridiculous idea:

1. The idea of senior officers ordering their personnel to commit suicide is disgusting.

2. Is the life of one rag worth the life of one UK serviceman?

3. Imagine, as you are floating skyward towards the pearly gates having parked your jet in the desert at 500kts, that INT had it wrong, and that the bloke driving the car was actually a plumber driving his children to school?

4. Imagine trying to fly your fast pointy thing at an evading car. I am almost certain that you would tent peg, having missed. The bloke driving only has to swerve at the last minute and generate a miss distance of 20 feet or so and it's good night Vienna and mission failed.

IMHO, utter, utter madness, stated from the relative security of a position in the hierarchy that would never have to carry out such an act.

Once a AN-22, always a AN-22!

Is "controlled flight into a target" a recognised tactic?

Is it included in an approved training syllabus?

Is it "proportionate use of force" as required by the various laws and conventions on armed conflict?

:confused:

Is it a good use of resources?

Your Commanding Officer would have to be stark raving mad.... Baaaaaah!

Fear not chaps, according to the BBC news website (sorry don't know how to post the link) Qinetic have carried out trials for multiple remote controlled aircraft, being operated by one pilot in the air. So there you go Cyber Kamikaze's.

This is the link, hopefully it will work.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6514413.stm

This incident did happen and I was there. To be clear - I think the idea is barking for all the reasons stated; would you trust Int/would it make a difference being uppermost in my mind. However, I think you will find that the AOC was deliberately floating a controversial idea to spark a debate - he seems to have been successful!

The full context was to stimulate thought on the changed nature of the demands upon AD vs Muds - I suspect, for example, that we would all consider flying into a rogue airliner though I'll warrant we would all hope for a survivable collision, even if we knew we were probably deluding ourselves.

He can certainly have the odd Melchett moment but he is also the most dynamic AOC that I have seen for along time, with a clear vision of where he wants to take a Service that he clearly wants the best for. I'd rather have a leader like this than a timid man whose primary interest is the next promotion and a consequent fear of ever putting his head above the parapet.

Captain Kirk,

"He can certainly have the odd Melchett moment but he is also the most dynamic AOC that I have seen for along time, with a clear vision of where he wants to take a Service that he clearly wants the best for. I'd rather have a leader like this than a timid man whose primary interest is the next promotion and a consequent fear of ever putting his head above the parapet."

He may well have a clear vision of where he wants to go, but will the powers that be let him in todays climate? I think an AOC's power is not what it once was, which is quite sad really.

QWI course? Doesn't say much for the quality of weapons application training if the last resort is to ram with the aircraft. Or are we too broke now to afford cannon, rockets etc?

No. All our aircraft are just too broke!:ugh:

Sounds like the Sun journos have been cribbing from Pprune again. Tomorrow's front page will be this thread! I might actually have a read of the gutter rag tomorrow before I wipe my hoop with it.

Check out Tuesdays 'Sun' ladies.....

Ooops :E

Beat ya to it Andgo!