Libyan mission racked up $11M in hotel bills
 

From the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation...

Libyan mission racked up $11M in hotel bills - Politics - CBC News

Complete non-story. Italian bases maxed out, short term alternative needed. Effort concentrated on delivering operational effect, so what's the quickest and easiest (and probably cheapest) way to provide food and accommodation? Rent some hotel rooms.

Do you take a tent when you travel on business?

That's the price you pay if you want to do ops I am afraid.

Don't want to pay the bill? Don't go to war.

This was once quite common when your "business" was a military operation. I guess standards must have changed a lot lately. :E

Ciao,

Dg800

It sounds like $CAN 11M in International Aid to me. Moreover, that's International Aid which won't be going into some bent dictator's pocket.....

Tents? How awfully lower order. In any case, there's the question of feeding, watering and providing acceptable sanitation for several hundred troops to consider.

Simplest solution? A decent contract with a hotel.

Please, not another rant about how it's much more macho to operate out of tents and how girlie we all are in the air force because we do it the sensible way.

It was boring years ago. :zzz:

Good job it was only Canadian Dollars :E

Just to provide some meat to the bones of just another jocky's post, a blunty Lt Col tried to put us in tents but the proposal was rejected due health and safety (noise and mozzies)and ultimately lack of manpower to make tented village work. He then tried to put us in condemned buildings which met similar fate but ONLY due to them being scheduled for demolition.

Every man and his dog tried the same but accom was premium. Canadians had the rough end of the stick having to travel over 2 hrs just to get to work.

Question is do you want the job done safely or not.

Sorry but it is a story because the Carrier Aviation fraternity will be on here and using this as further evidence.

;)

Out of interest what was the Hotel bill for the UK's people? Triied googling it but no joy.

However much it cost it was a lot cheaper than running an aircraft carrier.

And the food was better!

What a ridiculous statement. Haven't you read anything Mr Ward has written? Aircraft carriers are virtually free.

Hotel Rooms?

I suppose it was "safer" to put troops all over the place in small bunches in hotels...no security....then drive all sorts of unprotected vehicles to/from "work"....than put them inside a secure area right next to the operation.

Now tell me about the Mozzies again?

The USAF has air conditioned tents now....hell even the Army does that now.

You lot break my heart telling me all about the necessity of living in a hotel, sleeping on white sheets, eating off white table clothes, and using the Squadron silver ware. You you carry along your Serviette Rack so you can have you own mouth wipe too?:ugh:

SAS, m8, sometimes you are so full of.....:=

You are usually better than that. :(

SASless,

No personnel were killed by enemy action in Italy. Therefore the threat assessment that allowed the use of hotel accommodation was correct in exactly the same way as it was correct in 1991. It WAS 'safe'.

You (deliberately) conflate 'need' with 'preference'. We air force types will do whatever 'needs' to be done to achieve the mission; if you ground-pounders 'prefer' to do it the uncomfortable way - crack on.

Agree with JA jocky - your contributions are normally more reasoned - has happy hour started early?

If that's your argument for opting for hotels, then deserve all the criticism that the crabs inevitably get. I'm not saying that hotels wasn't the right option, but I hope those that made that decision, came up with a better justification than noise and mozzies!

The decision was ultimately made by a 2* army chap. The location of the tented area was to be by the rwy (24 hr ops) and the army doc (who accompanied Lt Col) provided the H & S risk assessment. Any issues - take it up with the brown jobs as a great deal of the AIR campaign was controlled by those with limited appreciation of such. No "crabs" involved unfortunately for you. We were merely thankful common sense prevailed in some areas.

SAS - at no point did anyone mention that it was promulgated as a necessity to stay in hotac - just that all other options were discounted for one reason or another. If you disagree with that decision that is your prerogative. I would merely question your attitude towards your currently serving military colleagues.

Any fools can be uncomfortable, and usually are.

Jealousy is a harsh mistress. :E

Over the past decade I have spent a considerable amount of time living in tents on operations and much less time in hotels. Ellamy made a nice change from the former and reminded me of the 'bring a bottle' wars we used to do! But my point is that the RAF can suffer under canvas if the situation dictates, however in this case it was more practical to utilise hotac. So comments such as

are just ill-informed garbage.

Genuine question. As we rebrigaded into Expeditionary Air Wings some time ago, did any investment go into the provision of tented/ mobile accomodation and support services or is there a standing assumption that we will deployUK FW only onto well found bases with either barracks or nearby hotel accomodation?

I feared the EAW thing was a bit of politically motivated re-branding but am more than happy to be proved wrong.

The reality is that although it suits the agendas of the other services to portray the RAF as pampered and under worked, the issue is usually driven by aircraft and logistics.

Anyone who has worked on fast jets knows that they are temperamental and need cosseting. Extremes of climate (hot/cold/wet) will quickly make your deployed "wing" useless if they aren't properly protected. In addition there is the matter of logistics. FJ that are warfighting use fuel, weapons and spares at a prodigous rate. You add in the need for a runway to take-off from and all these factors mean you can't deploy to a hide site somewhere in the woods.

I'm sure that you could scour google and think up a scenario where the eng/logs/airfield requirements are filled but there is no accom but it is unlikely to happen, although if it did then the crews would just crack on with it. As another poster said it is all a matter of need and has been proved many, many times in the recent past.

Personally I think that we should look after our people and provide decent accommodation, it is basic leadership, not to mention common sense. If I am flying an aircraft I would prefer it if the guys that worked on it were provided the best rest possible in whatever circumstances they found themselves in. If you are on the ground and an aircraft is throwing weapons around I would suggest a rested and happy crew is far more desirable than a tired and pissed off one. Similarly if you are a pax in our mighty AT or rotary fleets.

Sorry, that was a bit of a rant but people regurgitating the same tired old mantra irritates me.

Orca - Don't know if the EAWs do, probably not, but the JFAC HQ does. Does the RN MCC HQ?

orca,

UK EAWs and FJ units practice deploying to and operating from tented accomodation and operations sites on Ex DEPLOYED TITAN, which is the UK in-house version of a NATO OPEVAL. Not sure when the last one happened - might be a couple of years ago now - but it does happen, usually at Fairford.

Quibbles about costs of MT are just as petty as some of the hotel-bashing. Simple: if you are worried about a £m here or there, don't go bombing countries 1500nm+ from home...!

I don't think we have a MCC HQ. If you mean the Maritime Battle Staff (from whom a MCC HQ would invariably be picked), they occasionally parade around in camouflage but I have never found out why, after all their back drop is very unlikely to feature temperate vegetation. They also keep a bergen ready due to being at R2, as apparently you can't get home to pack in the 5 days available.

I'm not entirely sure that what they do has any relevance when compared to a simple question as to whether or not we had actually invested in tents. But I suppose this is pprune and one must either take offence or assume agenda whenever possible.

Personally I am outraged but if someone could tell me why and about what that would make Friday night far simpler.

Cheers.

A quick re-attack if I may.

I've always quite liked the JFAC 'battle tent' or what ever they call it, but never really understood the need for it. After all the free world is littered with CAOCs and armed with a secure telephone, ICC and something like NSWAN surely one can pump out an ATO to anyone in the world...what am I missing?

And yes, you are correct, I am genuinely questioning why the JFAC practises living in tents vice the more traditional 'why the RAF doesn't'.

Thanks for all the informative replies....


.... Ah sorry plenty of pontification and posturing about requirement etc but no figs.

Sometimes I think this site should be called the Political Prat's ranting Network

Althenick


BBC News - Cost of UK operations in Libya

Pretty much a word-for-word quote from kipper fleet 2 star circa 1999

"We have to do tents. Makes no economic, or security, sense (SAS et al please note), but if we don't do it, we gonna get put in the spotlight and binned"

Glad that worked out then :uhoh:

In 2002 I spent most of my final few months in the Air Force living in tents in Muscat and Thumrait.
In Thumrait it was unavoidable because of a genuine shortage of accommodation.
In Muscat it would been possible to take over the Novotel, just outside the main gate at Seeb. It would have cost far less than than all the equipment and personnel required to keep the camp going.
But to show solidarity with our bretheren across the water the tent city stayed.
So you could work a nineteen hour day, flying across five time zones, on minimum crew rest and possibly have to repeat the process the following day.
During the night, you would have crews on diffent flights moving around with lights on and off all the time.
From the Flight Safety point of view it was lunacy, and as we pointed out several times, in gross breach of a GASO.

althenick,

Spending public money always has and always will involve politics. What else do you expect, seriously?

Dalek

We probably shared a tent as from memory there was circa 34 of us in there. Getting dressed in the dark produced some interesting sights on occasion.
The fury when the SS exercise aircrew in the tent next door managed to nick our well hidden stash of happy juice. That lovely admin Sgt, he was a helpful chap wasn't h?
Having said all that, i did enjoy BFOT life once I got used to it and prefered it in some ways to individual hotel life.


Would I want to do it again, er, mmmmm.

101
Two months to go in RAF. I cadged a lift to the gate, walked to the Novotel and negotiated for a room. About £20. Great nights sleep, pool, plus tennnis court, plus bar.
Looked out at the peasants roughing it.
Pity Auntie Betty didn,t pay

Have the RAF become the ‘London Bankers’ of the military world and lost touch with reality? The government statement that ’We are all in it together’ certainly does not appear to exist in many parts of the RAF.

At the best of times that would not be good for joint service teamwork and morale, however in the current financial climate it is even more annoying to hear the RAF constantly trying to justify why they must have things that the other services have been used to doing without in the good times, let alone during the current very bad financial times.

It is about time that the Government wake up and redirect more of their limited resources to those UK armed forces that have not lost touch with reality and appreciate that they belong to an armed force rather than those expecting to be treated like VIP airline staff.

If you do not like aircraft noise, mosquitos, tents, going away from home (unless you have a nice hotel) and must have top notch Health & Safety conditions, then you really should not be in the armed forces. There are many people out there in the other forces who have a more focussed and realistic ‘can do’ attitude and who would be willing to take on your roles with much better flexibility and teamwork.

The RAF PR machine knows that, and that is why their mission for so long appears to have been to try and get rid of the Fleet Air Arm fixed wing force. Thankfully other world Governments who have Harriers/other Navy fixed wing aircraft have not allowed their land based Air Forces to con them into getting rid of their carrier based fixed wing capability. This even includes Italy (despite their current severe financial hardships), as highlighted in the following website: - A tale of two Harriers: How Italy held on to carrier strike - Defence Management

Fishead paranoia again. It simply isn't true.

As for the rest of your ridicuous tirade, it simply doesn't merit a reply. Because it's total bolleaux!

Gullwings, you obviously come from the same stable as the Senior Officer in Muscat who, as part of a morale boosting speech, uttered the immortal line ' don't try and black mail me with flight safety' :ugh::ugh:

I think 'plebs' is the insult of choice at the moment. :ok:

If I recall he was one of the 2 Senior Officers involved in the Mull episode.

Perhaps a reply to him should have been-the blackmail is not coming up the tree sir!

Not often I totally agree with BEagle, but on this occasion I am forced to do so.

Superb rant. BZ :ok:

Cost - you would be surprised. The Army set up a tent city at Davis Monthan AFB a few years ago for an Apache exercise, and spent more in doing so than it would have cost to accommodate the entire det in the USAF's very cheap on-base accommodation. Considering they were training for HERRICK, where their accommodation is in air-conditioned blocks, it struck me as classic practice bleeding.

As for Gioia, one of the reasons why a tent city wasn't built is that the (high) cost of the groundworks required to avoid a quagmire would only be recouped over a certain period - and at the start of the operation, when the decision was being made, the detachment was not forecast to be long enough to make the expenditure worthwhile. These decisions were made on the advice of Royal Engineers from J4...