Another "blue on blue" incident

gandalf

Looks like the Anglo-American invasion forces are more of a danger to themselves than the Iraq army is. 2 British tank crew have been killed.

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1085094,00.html

Poor bastards, if I was religious I'd pray for them.

Gandalf.

Gordon

Gah all these words that are used to make a bad thing sound not bad
Blue on blue
Ordnance
President

It also seems that many more UK soldiers are being harmed than US soldiers, maybe my calcs are off.

Speaking of danger to themselves - I wonder if any more new recruits in the US army will go intentionally blue on blue? I loved the quote from the guy in charge of the camp at Kuwait was it?
reporter: Do you think the soldier that wielded the grenades was trying to wipe you out?
soldier: well you can choose to make that assumption but I do not.

Yeah, sure he was just wanting to show you the nice shine he had put on the buffing of the grenades, you keep taking those anti-sleep and concentration drugs mr. soldier!

Shinji

When the FF incidents happened the first few times, people in Britain were annoyed and upset at the loss of their troops but mostly the mood was "oh well, bloody Americans eh?".

Now it's not so funny. I've heard some pretty genuine anger directed at this issue in the last day or so. Quite a few pro-war people I know have opined that if there are any further FF incidents, British troops should be withdrawn and the Americans left to do their own dirty work.

There's particular anger over the Tornado that was shot down by Patriots, because the Americans are loudly claiming that the Tornado's IFF wasn't working, whereas privately the British military has apparently expressed the belief that the Patriot bank was almost three miles away from where it was meant to be, and had actually switched its own IFF off. Not the first time the Americans have chosen to ignore AWACS or IFF and shot down their allies, by a long shot...

Amusing comment from a senior UK army source yesterday morning, actually, who said that the biggest difficulty being faced in the war was the communication barrier - the one between the UK and the US forces. In his words, when the UK say they have "secured an area" they mean that they've swept it for enemy forces, cleared any booby traps, performed a detailed search and stationed troops at key points. When the US say they've "secured an area", they mean they've managed to drive through it once without getting shot at...

bonkey

Originally posted by Shinji
whereas privately the British military has apparently expressed the belief that the Patriot bank was almost three miles away from where it was meant to be, and had actually switched its own IFF off. Not the first time the Americans have chosen to ignore AWACS or IFF and shot down their allies, by a long shot...

Well, in fairness, a Patriot bank has also locked on to a US plane in recent days. There, however, the pilot was obviously a bit quicker, and he shot at the Patriot battery when he heard lock-on being acquired on him, instead of the other way around. Active radar makes a great target Apparently, no-one was injured.

jc

Shinji

OH well that's all right then - I mean, as long as they're killing each other as well as their allies, there's hardly any room for complaint is there?

Thorbar

When you consider the level and volume of firepower these people are dealing with you can't be surprised that you're going to get several incidents of friendly fire. I loved how the Russian anti-aircraft guns have a built in device that wont allow them to shoot on Russian aircraft.

bonkey

Originally posted by Shinji
OH well that's all right then - I mean, as long as they're killing each other as well as their allies, there's hardly any room for complaint is there?

Complaint, yes, but statements about the US shutting IFF down and killing their allies are misleading. Its not just their allies they shoot down - they're well capable of doing their own in as well in a similar manner, and frequently do.

jc

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Victor

Originally posted by Thorbar
When you consider the level and volume of firepower these people are dealing with you can't be surprised that you're going to get several incidents of friendly fire. I loved how the Russian anti-aircraft guns have a built in device that wont allow them to shoot on Russian aircraft.

It's called IFF (Identification Friend or Foe), just like what was discussed above. It's not fool proof.

Shinji

Complaint, yes, but statements about the US shutting IFF down and killing their allies are misleading.

Well no - I never claimed that these were hostile or deliberate actions on the part of the US servicemen involved. God knows why they feel the need to shut down IFF (but apparently it happens a LOT in the US military - and pilots have also been known to repeatedly ignore AWACS reports) but when they do so, people die. It's just that it's a bit more serious, IMO, when the people dying aren't your countrymen, they're your political allies.

Victor

Originally posted by Shinji
God knows why they feel the need to shut down IFF (but apparently it happens a LOT in the US military.

IFF is normally turned off, it is only turned on to identify a particular target and then turned off again. It would be turned on again if there is an intention of firing at the target. Leaving any transmitter broadcast constantly allows that transmitter be targetted.