Two-man Tornado Downed By U.s. Missile
V_MAN
V-MAN Join Date: 2002-11-03 Member: 6217Members, Constellation
V-MAN Join Date: 2002-11-03 Member: 6217Members, Constellation
in Discussions
<div class="IPBDescription">What is it with the US an friendly fire?</div> CAMP AS-SAYLIYAH, Qatar (Reuters) - A Royal Air Force Tornado jet has been shot down by a U.S. Patriot missile in the first reported incident of "friendly" fire in four days of war in Iraq, British officials have said.
"We can confirm that a Tornado GR4 aircraft from RAF Marham returning from an operational mission was engaged near the Kuwaiti border by a Patriot missile battery. The crew are listed as missing," said a British military statement issued at Central Command headquarters in Qatar on Sunday.
An investigation was under way, it added.
The Tornado GR4 is a two-seat supersonic attack plane built jointly by Britain, Italy and Germany and was designed to attack Soviet bloc airfields.
British forces suffered a serious setback in the 1991 Gulf War when five of these planes were shot down by the Iraqis in a short period. A sixth was lost later in the war.
The highly-automated Patriot system is designed to shoot down fast incoming targets such as supersonic jets and ballistic missiles.
"It looks as though one of our aircraft returning from an operational mission was engaged by a U.S. Patriot, obviously by mistake," British forces commander Air Marshal Brian Burridge told BBC television earlier.
A U.S. defence official told Reuters at the Pentagon: "Apparently a Patriot shot down a British Tornado."
British spokesman Group Captain Al Lockwood, speaking to the BBC, expressed his regrets and added: "In the end we have to get on with the job. It has been tragic and there is a great deal of sorrow for those concerned and their families and friends."
FAMILIAR FOE
The war to oust Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has faced stiff opposition with Prime Minister Tony Blair putting his career on the line. More than one million people took to the streets of London to protest last month.
In 1991 there was a public outcry when British soldiers were killed by a U.S. attack plane. Government ministers and senior officers pledged to improve the systems designed to prevent misidentification of targets in the heat of battle.
Warplanes have transponders emitting a code identifying them as "friendly" when challenged by their own side.
Defence Minister Geoff Hoon said he deeply regretted Sunday`s incident, but that no system was completely foolproof.
"There is no single technological solution to this problem. It is about having a whole set of procedures in place. Sadly on this occasion they have not worked," he told the BBC.
A 1982 U.S. Army Combat studies paper looked at 269 "fratricide" incidents in four modern wars and assessed that friendly fire accounted for "something less than two percent of all battlefield casualties".
In the Gulf War, by contrast, 24 percent of Americans killed (total 35) and 15 percent of those wounded (total 72) fell victim to their own forces in 28 friendly fire incidents.
The "fog of war" and battlefield inexperience were partly to blame but modern computer-assisted weapons also give forces the ability to strike presumed enemy targets at far greater range -- sometimes with unwanted consequences.
The worst episode for Britain in 1991 was when two U.S. A-10 "Warthog" ground attack aircraft mistook Warrior fighting vehicles from the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers for Iraqi T-55 tanks. Their fluorescent V identifying marks were invisible to the pilots looking through binoculars from 8,000 feet. They were hit by two Maverick missiles, which killed nine and wounded 11.
"We can confirm that a Tornado GR4 aircraft from RAF Marham returning from an operational mission was engaged near the Kuwaiti border by a Patriot missile battery. The crew are listed as missing," said a British military statement issued at Central Command headquarters in Qatar on Sunday.
An investigation was under way, it added.
The Tornado GR4 is a two-seat supersonic attack plane built jointly by Britain, Italy and Germany and was designed to attack Soviet bloc airfields.
British forces suffered a serious setback in the 1991 Gulf War when five of these planes were shot down by the Iraqis in a short period. A sixth was lost later in the war.
The highly-automated Patriot system is designed to shoot down fast incoming targets such as supersonic jets and ballistic missiles.
"It looks as though one of our aircraft returning from an operational mission was engaged by a U.S. Patriot, obviously by mistake," British forces commander Air Marshal Brian Burridge told BBC television earlier.
A U.S. defence official told Reuters at the Pentagon: "Apparently a Patriot shot down a British Tornado."
British spokesman Group Captain Al Lockwood, speaking to the BBC, expressed his regrets and added: "In the end we have to get on with the job. It has been tragic and there is a great deal of sorrow for those concerned and their families and friends."
FAMILIAR FOE
The war to oust Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has faced stiff opposition with Prime Minister Tony Blair putting his career on the line. More than one million people took to the streets of London to protest last month.
In 1991 there was a public outcry when British soldiers were killed by a U.S. attack plane. Government ministers and senior officers pledged to improve the systems designed to prevent misidentification of targets in the heat of battle.
Warplanes have transponders emitting a code identifying them as "friendly" when challenged by their own side.
Defence Minister Geoff Hoon said he deeply regretted Sunday`s incident, but that no system was completely foolproof.
"There is no single technological solution to this problem. It is about having a whole set of procedures in place. Sadly on this occasion they have not worked," he told the BBC.
A 1982 U.S. Army Combat studies paper looked at 269 "fratricide" incidents in four modern wars and assessed that friendly fire accounted for "something less than two percent of all battlefield casualties".
In the Gulf War, by contrast, 24 percent of Americans killed (total 35) and 15 percent of those wounded (total 72) fell victim to their own forces in 28 friendly fire incidents.
The "fog of war" and battlefield inexperience were partly to blame but modern computer-assisted weapons also give forces the ability to strike presumed enemy targets at far greater range -- sometimes with unwanted consequences.
The worst episode for Britain in 1991 was when two U.S. A-10 "Warthog" ground attack aircraft mistook Warrior fighting vehicles from the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers for Iraqi T-55 tanks. Their fluorescent V identifying marks were invisible to the pilots looking through binoculars from 8,000 feet. They were hit by two Maverick missiles, which killed nine and wounded 11.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The US's increased reliance on unmanned missiles and other technological gizmos has the benefit of reduced military and civilian casualties on both sides. A corollary is that the percentage of casualties from friendly fire will go up massively, but I don't believe that the absolute number is going up.
It's also notable that one of the more serious incidents against the US forces was committed by one of their own soldiers. When was the last time something like that happened to a western power? Was it a pre-planned infiltration of the military by an organisation, or a serious personal grievance against being forced into this particular conflict from an individual soldier?
I've just today seen a <a href='http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctwo/listings/programme.shtml?day=today&service_id=4224&filename=20030323/20030323_1845_4224_6842_45' target='_blank'>BBC documentary</a> about how the US military is busy recruiting poor black kids (and other ethnic minorities) from schools with the offer of college sponsorship in return for a year or two of military service. Many of those taking it up are doing so because it's the only way they could possibly afford to go to college, and they're just praying that they don't have to go into combat. So they may not be conscripts, but they're victims of a harsh economic system at home, and I can imagine many may not be happy at being on this particular mission.
Mr Bush recently passed legislation forcing all secondary schools to provide <a href='http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/2002/45/ma_153_01.html' target='_blank'>access to the military</a> and contact details of all students. Creepy. His vision of America somehow seems to be edging ever closer to that of some of the less "freedom-loving" states out there.
1 dead 15 wounded..., not 16 dead
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The phenomenon of soldiers deliberately attacking those on the same side became known as "fragging" during the Vietnam war, because fragmentation grenades were often used. The attacks were often sparked by confrontations involving racism.
Precise figure remain unknown, but according to some historians at least 600 American soldiers were killed in fragging attacks in the course of the Vietnam conflict.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As for friendly fire, the fact of the matter is that the US hasn't had significant casualties in any military action since Vietnam (excepting perhaps Mogadishu, although I haven't got figures on hand). The American public is used to reports of our boys whooping up and taking no damage in return, so the vast majority of reported deaths are from friendly fire. It's not a matter of increased FF deaths, just a lack of deaths from opposition.
When I play NS I at least hit the same room where the enemy is(usually) <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
This is the least sloppy war in the history of the human race, without anything else even remotely close. To say otherwise is to not understand history. Go read about the bombings of cornwall, london, dresden, brelin, tokyo, shanghai, or anywhere else if you want sloppy (i.e. mass murder on civilians by the hundreds of thousands). If this is sloppy, what do you call nagasaki?
Guess we will never know, but I got the impression that these missiles are rather accurate. In these modern times it just seems weird to shoot something in to wrong country. Also I thought that these missiles would be handled almost as carefully as Nuclear weapons. Shoot one of those in to wrong country <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->This is the least sloppy war in the history of the human race, without anything else even remotely close. To say otherwise is to not understand history. Go read about the bombings of cornwall, london, dresden, brelin, tokyo, shanghai, or anywhere else if you want sloppy (i.e. mass murder on civilians by the hundreds of thousands). If this is sloppy, what do you call nagasaki?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Point taken, however WW2 was very different from the current Iraq situation. I didn't sleep on the history lessons, I don't have to read about dresden or berlin bombings. However in those times the power-balance was more even than in Iraq, thats why it's understandable that generals just tried to cause as much havoc as possible to win the war. Iraq seems like a road trip compared to WW2, and thats why I'd appreciate more careful handling with weapons that can cause a lot of damage. Especially since you don't actually have any rush shooting your missiles.
...but c'mon, 3 missiles, it can't be just one time accident <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
Edit: concidering they all happened to miss their targets on a relatively short time-span(AFAIK)
**** i bet it runs microsoft in em just had a bsod.
Ohh and Sand storms :/
Now thats a smart comment
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->**** i bet it runs microsoft in em just had a bsod.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Almost laughed.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Ohh and Sand storms :/<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
...can be predicted so you don't launch missiles when there is one coming
In response to a question about the current accuracy of Tomahawk missiles, Gen. Clark (former NATO commander) said, "Which window do you want it flown through?" It's not unreasonable to think that there will be malfunctions or mistargets now and then, but when they do hit properly - they damn well hit properly.
It's also interesting to have these misses in the face of reports that Russian arms companies may have been supplying Iraq with the technology necessary to divert some of these weapons. Even if that has been confirmed, it can't necessarily be behind any misses, but I don't think it's unreasonable at all to be paranoid about that, especially when firing into windows where the slightest confusion in target or route could have disastrous consequences in civilian casualties.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Ohh and Sand storms :/<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
...can be predicted so you don't launch missiles when there is one coming <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah but it fuxs up everything when it goes threw. Even aircraft carriers get screwed when the sand storm comes threw. That sand is so fine it gets into everything and gets everywhere. <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo-->