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.

 

'Rogue pilots' friendly fire

page: 7
0
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
when are US forces going to start teaching unit recognition PROPERLY ?


I don't know that they aren't already, this incident happened four years ago. Another good question is when IFF systems will be fully compatible and why they weren't already before this incident.


I'm pretty sure US mainstream forces have always been taught recognition, at least on some level. It's more to do with the point that some pen pushing idiot (no offence to any pen pushers, well; not lots*) managed to fudge it so that unseasoned secondary forces e.g. National Guard who aren't trained in recognition were sent to a multinational coalition force in a foreign combat zone
I'm sure there was plenty of Trained, good USAF personnel that could have been sent. That's the real issue methinks.

*I just had to lie


PS - Wasn't G.W Bush a National Guard Airman - OMFG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


PPS - Forgive the numerous typos i think i've made, tis too late at night for the squidgy gray matter to function properly


PPPS - Sorry if this is getting boring but i just remembered i have google spellchecker on my toolbar, however the No. of typo's will remain "classified"


[edit on 9/2/07 by C ROBERTSON]

[edit on 9/2/07 by C ROBERTSON]




posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by C ROBERTSON
I'm pretty sure US mainstream forces have always been taught regognition, at least on some level. It's more to do with the point that some pen pushing idot (no offence to any pen pushers, well; not lots*) managed to fudge it so that unseasoned secondary forces e.g. National Gaurd who are'nt trained in regognition were sent to a multinational coalition force in a foriegn combat zone
I'm sure there was plenty of Trained, good USAF personel that could have been sent. Thats the real issue methinks.


That I can agree with, A-10's are pretty tough pieces of equipment to be handed to somebody who trains one weekend a month...



*I just had to lie


Nah, you told the truth right after.




PS - Was'nt G.W Bush a National Gaurd Airman - OMFG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


On paper he was, lol. I don't even think he showed up...



PPS - Forgive the numerous typos i think i've made, tis too late at night for the squidgy gray matter to function properly



Yeah, it must be pretty late over there, it's already 4pm here, I'm almost out of work, yay.


[edit on 9-2-2007 by 27jd]



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 01:17 AM
link   
I would enjoy watching some of you go out and fight in Iraq. Friendly Fire is a fact of war, it happens. Tragic as it is, were all humans and we make mistakes. Squandering each other on who is better and what not OVER THE INTERNET is a waste of time. Excuse me for my vent, lol

[edit on 10-2-2007 by nastalgik]



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 01:41 AM
link   
Not sure if this has been posted.

VIDEO OF PILOTS RADIO

AAC



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 06:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jimmy1880
Yes the tornado incident was an accident but never the less it was an American patriot missile that shot it down. Now read this
---[snip]---
IGNORANCE DENIED


No…not really….I stand by my earlier statement concerning the findings in this incident:

Originally posted by missed_gear
The entire article does not allow blame to fall on one side…as you suggest
Nor does the RAF lend itself to even recognize your secondary accusations which follow:


Your linked report provides the very same conclusions:


The Boardconcluded that ZG710’s IFF had a fault and, as an IFF Mode 4 response would have prevented the Patriot Anti-Radiation Missile classification and engagement, concluded that the lack of IFF at the time of the accident
was a contributory factor.
---[snip]---
Following initial investigation, it became apparent that certain power failures associated with the IFF may not be displayed to the crew. The most likely explanation for the absence of an IFF response was that there had been a power supply failure. The Board recommended that further work be conducted to research the failure modes, reliability and serviceability of the Tornado IFF system.
----[snip]---
The Board concluded that ZG710’s IFF had a fault, which was unknown to
the aircrew, and that the lack of IFF at the time of the accident was a
contributory factor.



Originally posted by Jimmy1880
As for my blindness how about you being my seeing eye doggy and lead me to the truth, why don't you prove me wrong.


Obviously there were errors on both sides in this incident…no?

I have no reason to change my comments, perhaps this will help….

UK Faults Self And US For Plane Shootdown (UPI)


mg



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 10:31 AM
link   
Just a thought, surley a Tornado has a much bigger RCS than an anti radiation missile, really we need less blind faith in technology and a little more thought, on both sides of the pond.


[edit on 11/2/07 by C ROBERTSON]




top topics
 
0
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join