...whatever, but the fact remains that someone on the bridge of the Vincennes should have picked up a pair of binoculars.

The video taken on the bridge at the time was widely shown a few years ago. Not the finest hour for the United States Navy. And a human tragedy on a huge scale.

I also saw the programme and there are two other points mentioned that might be germain to this discussion:

1. The civ a/c departed 30 mins (I think) behind schedule. When the Vincennes looked at the civ flight schedules, no a/c should have been there at that time. This became another small piece of the jigsaw building to the supposition that it was hostile.
2. The departing field is a mixed Civ + Mil. It appears that, the Vincennes radar op picked up a mil a/c on the ground and - through a mishandling of the roller ball (similar to computer mouse) held the mil a/c and this ID was confused with the civ a/c that then took off and was monitored.

In other words, like all disasters, this was a classic Swiss Cheese.

As others have pointed out, this was a really good example of Reason's model. Hindsight is such a wonderful thing, but given the information available to the captain at the time, and his responsibility for the ship and it's crew I find it very difficult to imagine that I or anyone else would have done differently. Maybe I was a little on the sarcastic side for you to really get my point.:confused:

bang on the money there thunderball, bang on.

awarding a medal is simply insulting, still with luck, we will all see the unravelling of the american machine sooner than later, they way they are going , and the quality of their deployments thus far , indicate that they are running out if ideas, skill and will power, sooner rather than later, and by the way can anyone speak chinese ?

oh, I'm really looking forward to that intrigue when it arrives.........NOT.

The Reagan administration followed the age-old 'in for a penny ........" on this one.
Slap in the face, innit ?

Well I certainly hope that things will hold out at least until 2009 when we change our *cough* ruler. Oh, and it is probably best not to underestimate the quality and quantity of a nation's willpower.


Indeed. I don't think the USN is at all alone in the free world
(let alone any past tyrannical w o r l d s.)
when it comes to making deadly command decisions.

Ahh, talk is futile - only a properly timed bow will be required by then. :}

Server went down as I was attempting to add this most important bit:

While it is best to probably not underestimate the quality and quantity of a nation's willpower, you can be sure that there are pretty good odds in overestimating the relative intelligence of the American electorate :uhoh:

And it is good to have friends in the world - G-d knows we need 'em. The next few decades are not going to be easy, considering where we are now.

Im afraid that I don't have time to read the USN report. However page 10 of the US Senate hearing (Sept 8th 1988) states that the AEGIS computer saw a Mode 3 squark of 6760, which was flight 655's assigned code, although the identification supervisor incorrectly reported it as 6675.
Also, on page 54 of the above report, Admiral Fogarty states that "Due to heavy pilot workload during take-off and climb-out and the requirement to communicate with both Approach Control and Teheran Center, the pilot of Iran Air flight 655 probably was not monitoring International Air Distress".
The exact wording of the radio transmissions are not given in the Senate report, only that warnings were given. However it did identify several technical problems with the radio equipment and the fact that simultaneous warnings from USS Sides could have garbled the transmission.
This was a classic case of a multitude of minor errors combining to cause an incident. It is the classic 'swiss cheese' scenario. Hopefully, if the military have an equivalent of our CRM courses then lessons will be learned so as to prevent this happening again.

Airclues

Does anyone know if they've installed civlian airband radios on USN ships?

Yes Founder, USN warships do have VHF radios.

Don

Have seen the docu/dramas and read (summary of) report and content to draw own conclusions from those.

Spare a thought also for the souls on Clipper 103 and in the town of Lockerbie itself whose lives were undoubtedly lost in retaliation for the Vincennes' actions.

All for the sake of a very small scalp prior to heading into port.

How very sad...

Rgds
T3

I'm not familiar with Clipper 103 or Lockerbie, just what I've heard in the media, could you tell me at about them? How are they related to the Vincennes actions?

Best Regards
Tim

Tim

It is a commonly held belief, and one I personally subscribe to, that the downing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie in December 1988 was an act of revenge for the downing of the Iranian airliner by the Vincennes.

This being commissioned by Iranian intelligence services and executed through the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, with involvement also on the part of Lybian intelligence services. (Ghaddaffi having had an adopted daughter killed during the USAF raids on Triploi in 1986 probably only too happy to assist).

Not wishing for the thread to drift, Google yourself and a few thousand hits will come up. Here is a link to just one:

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/ju...lock-j15.shtml

Rgds
T3

You are not familiar with 103, only what you've heard in the media? If you are in Europe, HOW could you not be familiar with 103?

Only what you hear in the media. Wasn't this documetary about the Airbus shootdown a form of media?

I did read about the Airbus shootdown before I saw the documentary... But I havn't read anything about the 103... but I will =) You see I wasn't that old when these events took place...

Thanx for the info, it's interesting and I'll read more about it =)

Kind Regards
Tim

For pity's sake THE AIRCRAFT COULD HAVE BEEN EASILY AND POSITIVELY IDENTIFIED WITH 7 X 50 BINOCULARS. IT WAS A CLEAR DAY. SLANT RANGE AT INTERCEPT 7.5 MILES.

Indeed it might have been but: when you have a warship bristling with technology and you have great faith in that technology and have been trained that your entire job is to work through the technology and then the technology will bring you the enemy ... ? I once saw someone sacked from a job because the company believed the technology - not the human being.

Just an afterthought ... It seems as if this warship only had electronic lookouts. There may well have been 'manual' lookouts who had seen the civ a/c and would have been expecting that the guys down below would know about it and were preparing to strike a mil a/c. They might have been rather surprised when the civ got blasted.

I counted at least 4 lookouts on the bridge from the offical navy film about the incident, but if the had a view of the area where the aircraft was I do not know...

he has a point.


perhaps further training is required ?

Trigger Happy?
 

I too saw the documentary, and if anything I thought it underplayed the pressure the Vincennes' crew was under; and also, the fact that US military in a hot zone are naturally trigger happy anyway.
Yes it was an unfortunate set of circumstances, and yes there are lessons to be learned from the incident, but to award medals to any of the people responsible is crass in the extreme.
As for it being linked to 103, I've never heard that version of events, I always thought there were other factors at play, especially given Libya's involvement.
I would ask one thing though: I thought AWACS would be able to discern an F14 from an Airbus? And if so, how come there wasn't one up?
Also, to the person who said that the US vets what it sells to potential enemies, I would think the Falklands would have taught the US that the Exocet is a very good bit of anti-ship technology, and if the French can make money out of it they will sell it, even if it means working out how to fit it to an F14. It's a more level playing field than you would think.
Cheers,
Desertia