It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Do you want to know about the SAS? Tactics and methods and so on...well here it is.

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 15 2006 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
The units are built for the same thing. The SAS may face a situation that they may be ordered or if they believe they can apprehend the suspects and interrogate them as well as rescue the hostages. Same thing for SWAT. Question is if the SAS prefer to kill the suspects or apprehend them in anyway they can. Same as for SWAT. How does SWAT deal with a scenario if tangos took over a school? Kill the tangos and rescue the children? If the tango has a bomb vest on him or her, then a SWAT member will not hesitate to kill that person. The SAS may not be in the law enforcement, however they could be order to apprehend a suspect without having to kill that person.


I agree the SWAT video was a little strange ... they took forever to clear the first room as just one problem. Getting bogged down in situations like that is what get hostages or SWAT officers hurt. This was obviously a training situtation ... maybe (hopefully) with a few new members??

However comparing SWAT to SAS or SF/Delta Forces/Etc is not a very fair comparison. My understanding of SAS and the other special forces from around the world is that they are full-time ... meaning the officers assigned to them spend all their time in that specific unit training or executing missions.

On the other hand most SWAT departments in the USA are not fulltime or anywhere near there. The exception being the large police agencies (LAPD/NYPD and the like). Most smaller departments of 50 to 100 officers can't afford the luxury of having 14 or so people dedicated full time to a SWAT assignment. So what you get are the "beat cops" or detectives and the like who do extra training to be on a SWAT team. To compare the two just doesn't seem fair to most SWAT teams.




posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 04:05 AM
link   
Yeah i heard something similar about places like RAF Mildenhall and Lakenheath and other US bases on British soil, that the SAS etc were legally entitled to infiltrate bases to test security. Apparently around the time of the Rendlesham forest incidient one of the American secruity staff had walked into to an armounry to find a cluster of SAS men having a brew sitting on top of an artillery round! not sure how much of that still goes on though.



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 12:30 PM
link   
Oh cmon.


The Tactics me and my friends use in Counterstrike & Rainbow Six are better then that.


I agree. Pure PR/Propaganda.



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000
Oh cmon.


The Tactics me and my friends use in Counterstrike & Rainbow Six are better then that.


I agree. Pure PR/Propaganda.


and who sardine are the people doing this pr/propaganda?



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 02:27 PM
link   
I've talked to a few guys in US SF, seal, and Marine recon. All of them say that the training around the world for different groups is first rate,and that realisticly it's a crap shoot if two opposing teams were to rumble against each other. Some are better at dynamic entries others have better snipers etc... but they are all pretty vicious when the time comes.

Also, I know SEAL 6 wasn't designed around SAS training. MAybe someparts were borowed but they themselves re wrote the playbook in a lot of ways. They thought Delta training and SAS training were too formal and not dynamic enough. They did like working with the GSG9, and Israelies.

the russian military has a SF naval group that aren't afiliated with Spetsnatz and they are pretty bad ass said a seal guy I know. Same guy also said that the SAS has gotten a little soft lately compared to the British Royal Marines. He trained with them and he said that they have a much darker charachter to their ideology.


CX

posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by BASSPLYR
Same guy also said that the SAS has gotten a little soft lately compared to the British Royal Marines. He trained with them and he said that they have a much darker charachter to their ideology.


Training with is no replacement for having done selection. Many top class soldiers from the most elite infantry units fail selection on the first day.

CX.



posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 11:24 AM
link   
I agree selection is tough but your assuming that the SAS selection is the only tough one there is and that other countries don't have testing as hard. But thats not true all SF selection is pretty damn difficult. I'm sure the spetznatz who train in the siberian winters don't know anything about hardship (even though they suck at hostage rescue). What about the devgru guys their selection is easy? I'm sure anybody can be an elite israelie SF commando, they don't even use good judgement to select them,obviously they don't have any national pride... yeah right.

If SAS are the best and everybody's had 30 years to imitate them and their selection should be just as difficult if the #ries are serious. Most SF groups are pretty hardcore period. And I wouldn't count out the marines either British or American or Austrailian for that matter. The SEAL 6 guys thought SAS selection and training was too soft and formalized and not dynamic enough. So maybe SAS wouldn't get through their selection. I've heard that the SAS as legendary as they are are becoming too big of a machine and that standards have gone down just like with any orginization that gets that large.(delta, SEAL 6/Devgru, Army SF etc) Even though the SAS did do brilliant work and operated like the best should all through out the Iraqi wars. Force Recon more than prooved themselves in the last Iraqi/US war. And just about every branch of the military US or not knows to stay out of a gunny seargents way.



posted on Aug, 20 2008 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Slice
 


Silly boy. Delta Force is our elite ct and hr unit. They are the studs of our military.



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 04:20 PM
link   
Please do remember that Mac and Eddie were demonstrating the various techniques thought to be used by the SAS for the programme, 'SAS: Are You Tough Enough?' and bears no resemblence to actual operational proceedures.

For example, my previous units used FWAMs as breaching devices. I know that's overkill, but no need for Flashbangs because anybody behind a wall when those buggers go orf, are either dead, blinded by brick dust or almost certainly be deafened by the blast.

Another point to note, is the site used. It most definately is NOT the so called 'Killing House' or anywhere near it.

The YouTube vids are interesting and as a former weapons instructor who taught 9 milly Browning and Sterling, I can relate to what Eddie Stone is [excuse the pun] banging on about.

Being able to draw yer 9 milly, acquire the Tango or Tgt and squeeze off a double tap [keeping the rounds on tgt] takes hours of practice but once learnt, you never forget.



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 11:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Slice
 


Actually UDT (underwater demolition teams) started training in 1943, refined their "commando" skills in Korea, and the SEALs were created Jan 1 1962.

**MOST** NATO SF are patterned off the British SAS.
I say most because you get guys like the Portuguese SF in Afghanistan that are a complete joke. The Germans, the French, the Australians, the Canadians, and the US (yes the US) SF are offshoots of the SAS.



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Slice
 


the average shot to kill ratio for Us marine is 50,000: 1 in Vietnam. The average shot to kill ratio of a at sniper was 1.62:1. So its not the amount of bullets but the training of the squad.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 02:17 PM
link   



posted on Dec, 16 2008 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by mojoberg
 


The difference between American and British army policy is the Americans Man there equipment yes it is far superior but superior equipment does not think, As by contrast the British equip there men and they rely on their training and wit to do the job not on superior fire power. British and Israel SF best trained in the world



posted on Dec, 16 2008 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by mojoberg

well at least these tactics used by the SAS are known to work. Whereas the SAS rely on more simple methods and tactics to get the job done you could say they American SF rely too much on technology and less on effective soldiering and tactics. In the tora bora mountains of afghanistan SAS soldiers were frustrated with the US forces when hunting Bin Laden due to the fact they would not attack until they had all their air assets in place the SAS then decided to go in by themselves killing many enemy.



Reminds of a British army quote about American tactics...

'All the gear and no idea'...



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Slice
 


Speed means the diff. between life and death. Plus, the SAS are trained to shoot and kill, and use minimal supplies. In other words, they can blow the hell out of anything without all that gear. Im American but facts show SAS are more superior than US SF.



posted on Oct, 30 2010 @ 06:58 AM
link   
Have any of you even served in the Army???? cos you's r all talking #.



posted on Oct, 31 2010 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Slice

Originally posted by mojoberg Ex SAS soldier ANdy Macnab wrote in one of his books that in a joint sas/delta force exercise in rescuing hostages the dejta guys had so much kit on them that the SAS had fast roped out of the helicopters and had made entry into the building before the Delta guys had even got out of the helicopters.


That means the US Marine Delta Force came completely prepared for ANYTHING. That doesn't say much for the SAS. So what they can enter a building faster. How much backup ammunition did they have? How many flash bangs, frags, and smoke grenades did they have? Medical equipment? Communication equipment? Speed is not always the best solution. Being prepared for the SNAFU is. SAS is more like a Suicidal Acceleration Squad. Would you rush into combat with 100 bullets or 1000?


When you say US Marine/Delta Force are prepared for anything, does that mean that if they are rescuing hostages in a built up area, they need artillery, air support and a thousand rounds of ammunition per man?

Do you mean that US Marine/Delta Force feel naked and under-armed without belts festooned with frag and stun grenades?

The SAS philospohy is as follows: KISS and SAS! In other words Keep It Simple, Stupid! and Speed, Aggression and Suprise!

In keeping operations simple, there is little room for operatives to make mistakes. Mistakes do sometimes happen but these are anticipated in the planning stages of all operations and, well, all British troops practice their SOIs or SOPs prior to the start of any operation and keep practising until all drills become second nature and all eventualities have been planned for.

Speed, Aggression and Surprise is that basis of all SAS close combat operations and thus far, no other armed force anywhere in the world has come up with an alternative.

As somebody who has been on the receiving end of an SAS (training) hostage rescue exercise and was thus expecting it, when it kicked off, it was mind-numbingly fast, furious and all over within 5 or 6 minutes.

It left us hostages reeling from the effects of stun grenades, CS gas and although we wore ear defenders
(H & S) our ears were ringing from the shatteringly effective small arms fire.

If US Marine/Delta Force operatives had been as well prepared as our own SAS troopers are, then perhaps the recent hostage rescue would not have gone tits up!




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join