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.

 

Inside info on Seal Team 6 shootdown

page: 5
9
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 8 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by bluemirage5
If the Seals on this helicopter incident had nothing to do with the Pakistani incident then why would officials even mention it? I say the two are VERY much related.

Families among these proud men are already asking questions; another Tillman incident on the horizon but on a much grander scale? Highly probable.....VERY probable. We have'nt heard the last of this yet by a long shot.


My thoughts were exactly as yours. The Tillman situation, the Minot B=52 nuke flight over America and the resulting mysterious deaths of those military men on board that flight and also the Ron Brown death in the Clinton administration on board a commercial aircraft while he was scheduled to give testimony on White House corruption. Many other instances could be mentioned where our government has been accused of killing people to shut them up. Time will tell if this incident is one of those.




posted on Aug, 8 2011 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by randyvs
 


That’s quite a few assumptions you have made about me, none are true other than that I do expect vast amounts of genuine evidence before I will accept an accusation such as “The SEALS did not kill OBL”. But so should everyone otherwise you would be living in a massive cess pool of ignorance.

But keeping on topic, do you have any views regarding this helicopter crash


Sometimes, making assumptions is the quickest way to get information. Make an assumption, let it fly, the response will tell you much.
Views ?
Other than the fact that it was more than a crash ? Yeah, I do.
I think it's one of the most horrible things that can happen to parents.



My heart pours out to the families of these honored dead. You will see them again.




edit on 8-8-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 08:10 AM
link   
I was thinking about this and I have some questions maybe someone here can clear them up for me.

1. Since when does a Seal team fly any missions during the day. I though all missions were done under the cover of darkness.

2. Why would the seals be using a Chinook as mode of transport in a mission.

3. Why Seal Team six. I heard that another unit was ready to go and was denied it was either a Ranger unit or another Marine unit altogether.

4. An RPG....I thought those things had a hard enough time hitting a stationary target. Plus I doubt a RPG has the take down power.

Just some questions that DO NOT add up. I smell a snake and its time to strike its head.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by the4thhorseman
I was thinking about this and I have some questions maybe someone here can clear them up for me.

1. Since when does a Seal team fly any missions during the day. I though all missions were done under the cover of darkness.

2. Why would the seals be using a Chinook as mode of transport in a mission.

3. Why Seal Team six. I heard that another unit was ready to go and was denied it was either a Ranger unit or another Marine unit altogether.

4. An RPG....I thought those things had a hard enough time hitting a stationary target. Plus I doubt a RPG has the take down power.

Just some questions that DO NOT add up. I smell a snake and its time to strike its head.



Good questions, dude. So far the news is not detailing where Taliban got that intel (or suggests it was a lucky strike). I have no idea, although it would be interesting to know what happened to the alleged Ranger unit that was in trouble.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by the4thhorseman
 





1. Since when does a Seal team fly any missions during the day. I though all missions were done under the cover of darkness.


To say all SEAL Team Six operations take place at night is untrue, why would it be true, it would be somewhat limiting to have a unit like SEAL Team Six when you can only use them in the hours of darkness. Members of SEAL Team Six where active during the start of the battle of Mogadishu and I think you will find that was in day light




2. Why would the seals be using a Chinook as mode of transport in a mission.


Again why wouldn’t they, the CH-47 is somewhat obsolete however 160th SOAR are usually responsible for the transportation of Tier One units and the usually use the MH-47G variant of the Chinook although I think it was a CH-47 that went down. It is not uncommon for SEALs to move around in Chinooks, it was a Chinook that went down during operation red wings.




3. Why Seal Team six. I heard that another unit was ready to go and was denied it was either a Ranger unit or another Marine unit altogether.


I haven’t heard anything about that, and to be honest a definitive answer to the question “why was SEAL Team Six on that helicopter” is got to be difficult to get, most of their operational details remain classified. According to the media they were part of a QRF, or an “immediate support group” assisting a group of Rangers who were pinned down on the ground. It is possible that you have got this mixed up assuming that there were Rangers available to assist in the operation rather than that it was the SEALs who were going to reinforce the pinned down Rangers. Why send SEAL Team Six, that’s probably a operational detail we will never be privy to.




4. An RPG....I thought those things had a hard enough time hitting a stationary target. Plus I doubt a RPG has the take down power


You could take a CH-47 down with a .22 if you know what you’re doing, a RPG is going to make a mess of a CH-47 if it gets a good hit. Again if you look at the battle of Mogadishu they took down two Black Hawks with RPG’s and during operation Red Wings a Chinook went down when hit by a RPG. I am certain that if you look at the operation history of the Chinook and its many variants you would quickly see that many have gone down as a result of enemy fire.

I hope that answers your questions.

edit on 9-8-2011 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 08:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by the4thhorseman
I was thinking about this and I have some questions maybe someone here can clear them up for me.

1. Since when does a Seal team fly any missions during the day. I though all missions were done under the cover of darkness.

2. Why would the seals be using a Chinook as mode of transport in a mission.

3. Why Seal Team six. I heard that another unit was ready to go and was denied it was either a Ranger unit or another Marine unit altogether.

4. An RPG....I thought those things had a hard enough time hitting a stationary target. Plus I doubt a RPG has the take down power.

Just some questions that DO NOT add up. I smell a snake and its time to strike its head.


I can answer these questions.
1. Yes, while most SEAL missions are executed under cover of darkness, this mission was for a QRF (Quick Reactionary Force). It was in response to help a Ranger unit coming under heavy fire/attack.
2. The Chinook is a great rotatory wing aircraft. It can hold large payloads and personnel. As for the use in this? It makes no sense. A QRF should have been responding in 4 Blackhawks. 2 for transport and 2 defensive positioning.
3. These in lays the great mystery. Why would to other units be called off from QRF response, and set to the SEAL team.
4. An RPG can take down almost any rotary aircraft. But, it has to be a very detailed hit, think rotors. From what I gather from contacts and friends, it was not an RPG. Think a little bigger and more sophisticated.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 08:47 AM
link   
@othersideofthecoin and @macman

Thank you both, for your answers. So it is logical that these things can happen logistically speaking but illogical that they did logistically speaking.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by the4thhorseman
@othersideofthecoin and @macman

Thank you both, for your answers. So it is logical that these things can happen logistically speaking but illogical that they did logistically speaking.


Emmmm does that make sense?

Could you expand on that.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin

Originally posted by the4thhorseman
@othersideofthecoin and @macman

Thank you both, for your answers. So it is logical that these things can happen logistically speaking but illogical that they did logistically speaking.


Emmmm does that make sense?

Could you expand on that.


Sorry what I was saying these things can happen based on your answers and based on macmans answers than can happen as well but they do not seem logical logistically speaking.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOMALY502
My wife looked at me right after hearing about this, and said what is the chances that the taliban just happened to randomly pick this helicopter to shoot down. I think they definitley got a heads up from someone...But from who, is the question..
**I thought the same exact thing!Knowing the route to be flown and time?They were tipped off makes sense.Still an RPG? Still having a problem with that though.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 09:00 AM
link   
reply to post by AgentX09
 


Helicopters go down quite a bit as a result of enemy fire, this is a war zone, there are going to be militants kicking about with RPGs. The SEALs where enroot to a combat zone where Rangers where under fire, there would have been plenty of Taliban with RPGs and they got lucky when that helicopter turned up, they took a shot and the chopper went down.

In war helicopters get shot down and people die.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 09:01 AM
link   
reply to post by the4thhorseman
 


It is logical that a helicopter could be shot down.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOMALY502
My wife looked at me right after hearing about this, and said what is the chances that the taliban just happened to randomly pick this helicopter to shoot down. I think they definitley got a heads up from someone...But from who, is the question..


The helicopter was not "shot down," it was brought down by an RPG, that is a Rocket Propelled Grenade, which is fired from a hand held launcher, and must be aimed at the intended target. They are said to have an effective range of 300 meters against moving point target, and 500 meters against stationary point target. So, with this in mind, the helicopter had to have been flying very low, and very slow. Now a Grenade blast on a helicopter like that one. www.chinook-helicopter.com... may or any not actually bring down the chopper, it would have to go off at exactly the right point to damage one of the rotors, or the transmissions of same. I would say that the RPG was fired into the door of the helicopter, thus killing or severely wounding the flight crew, which then brought down the bird. The one who fired the RPG surely had good intelligence, and this was, as is known in some circles, a "hit." I would say in retaliation for the Bin Laden thing.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by the4thhorseman
 


It is logical that a helicopter could be shot down.


Yes I know I am only speaking on the type of helicopter used. Given the situation why were Black Hawks used.

"The CH-47D has been seen wide use in Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan and Operation Iraqi Freedom in Iraq. The Chinook is being used in air assault missions, inserting troops into fire bases and later bringing food, water, and ammunition. It is also the casualty evacuation (casevac) aircraft of choice in the British Army.[29] In today's usage it is typically escorted by attack helicopters such as the AH-64 Apache for protection.[30][31] Its tandem rotor design and lift capacity have been found to be particularly useful in the mountainous terrain of Afghanistan where high altitudes and temperatures limit the use of the UH-60 Black Hawk.[2] The CH-47F is being fielded by more units such as the 101st Combat Aviation Brigade and 4th Combat Aviation Brigade in the U.S. Army as it continues to operate in Afghanistan."

Source

I have always seen Chinook as a heavy lift unit. Side note what is crazy about this page from wiki is how fast it has been updated. Not implying anything just amazed how fast it was updated.

"On 6 August 2011, a Chinook crashed near Kabul killing all of the 38 aboard. It was reportedly shot down with a rocket-propelled grenade by the Taliban. The 38 were NATO forces including about 30 U.S. special forces and seven Afghan troops. The previous biggest single-day loss for Americans also involved a Chinook that was shot down near Kabul in Kunar Province in June 2005 and killed all aboard, including a 16-member U.S. Special Operations team.[34][35]"



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 09:26 AM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 


RPG’s “shot down” helicopters (you shoot a “shoot” a RPG and the helicopter goes “down”).

Different RPG’s have different ranges, the RPG-7 is one of the most common found amongst militant groups has a effective range of 200M, however a maximum range of almost 900M. But that’s assuming it was a Soviet RPG, what if it’s a Soviet 9K38 Igla the Maximum range of those anti-aircraft weapons can be up to 6000M. Either way a RPG still has the maximum range to take out a helicopter.

Now baring in mind they were enroot to assist Rangers that where under fire it is possible the helicopter was preparing to land when it was shot down and as such was flying slower and lower. RPG’s have brought down helicopters in the past and will do in the future.

Again in war’s helicopters get shot down.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 09:31 AM
link   
According to official army news on afn the army is looking into the crash to see what caused it so there release is it was just a crash no fire fight none of that if not how much would they have to look into.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by the4thhorseman
@othersideofthecoin and @macman

Thank you both, for your answers. So it is logical that these things can happen logistically speaking but illogical that they did logistically speaking.


Is it possible? Yes.

Is it probable? Maybe 1 in a million that all the different aspects came together to form a perfect situation.



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 08:23 AM
link   
Glad to see that I am not the only questioning the mode of transit in this mission:


Special operations sources also told The Washington Times that it would have been better to send two helicopters instead of one to reduce risks. “The SEALs do seem to like stuffing a lot of valuable guys in one [helicopter],” said a second special operations officer who also served in Afghanistan. “There may have been an operational reason not to spread them out over two, [but] I just don’t know what that would be.”

They also questioned the type of aircraft dispatched for the mission. The NATO command in Kabul identified the downed helicopter as a Boeing CH-47 Chinook, not the modified version, the MH-47. The MH-47 Chinook is configured for nighttime missions by the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, based at Fort Campbell, Ky.

The Army Times said the Chinook was piloted by a regular Army crew, not aviators from the specially trained 160th. “This was a regular Army crew and bird, so the crew would have less experience, training and countermeasures compared to a 160th,” the second special operations source told The Times.


Source



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 09:37 AM
link   
Yep, even the SOP communities are asking "What the hell?".
www.washingtontimes.com...



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   
Where there's smoke, there's fire? Reuters is reporting the Taliban fighters who shot the Chinook down were fleeing to Pakistan when they were killed by pursuing troops.

I'm going out on a limb to say that we'll start to hear reports very soon that Pak intelligence was somehow tied to those fighters. First steps towards the Russian disclosure?



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join