The issue of fratricide is very complex and the details tend to be ignored by people who rush to judgment.
One of the rules of thumb is that the primary responsibility for avoiding fratricide from aircraft is the FAC (Forward Air Control) team. So if you have an air/ground fratricide what you first want to learn exactly what the controllers on the ground told the pilot.
The next thing to do is ask - was either the shooter or the victim:
1) Someplace other than where they thought they were
Or 2) someplace other than where they reported they were.
The reason you do this is because -statistically - in the vast majority of fratricide incidents somebody was not where they thought they were (or was not where they were supposed to be).
I have not yet seen the video but I suspect that it does not tell the whole story. It makes great theater but does little to prevent future occurrences.
In fact one of my biggest criticisms of British forces is that they refuse to adopt a 'lessons learned' attitude from fratricide events. In particular the British forces have a very bad habit of misreporting positions and failing to obey Graphical Control Measures. Another criticism I have of the British regarding fratricide is that they were offered our 'Blue Force Tracker' (A system designed to provide warnings if friendly forces are in an area you do not expect them to be) they felt no need to purchase them.
But I expect that people would rather inflame passions and point fingers than sit down and ask exactly what went wrong.
2007-02-06 07:01:47
·
answer #1
·
answered by MikeGolf 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
To answer your question - a little of both. The pilots were inexperienced and that was probably the main cause of the incident.
A better question is, why is the Sun working so hard to reopen old wounds by dragging this out 3 years after it was already hashed over ad nauseum? They don't seem very eager to play terrorist beheading videos, which are vastly easier to obtain. Makes you wonder which side they're on.
2007-02-06 04:44:46
·
answer #2
·
answered by dukefenton 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
The fuking pilot is to blame he's kills a british guy and become's a fuking hero and then fuk me he becomes a bloody general
2007-02-09 15:22:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by I'm Just Me 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Having read some of the SEPTIC TANKS answers how can they defend the indefensible????
In answer to dukefento BECAUSE THEY WANTED THE TRUTH TO COME OUT something you yanks are afraid of.
If your son or Daughter was killed would you want to know why????
Or would you like to be lied to for 3 years.
2007-02-08 11:18:20
·
answer #4
·
answered by TONY G 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
Whatching it now on Sky News, dont think anyone new what they were doing. So much for modern technology. How many more troops have to loose there lives due to poor communications. Come on U-S-A. get your act together.
2007-02-06 04:45:03
·
answer #5
·
answered by newciderman 6
·
3⤊
1⤋
communications with ground staff , the pilots did all by the book and you could tell how gutted they were
but why are we still havig proplems now with it still not being cleared for investigation hearing ???
2007-02-06 04:35:25
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
There's this old German saying during World War II :
"When the British drop their bombs, the Germans hide. When the Germans drop their bombs, the Americans hide and the British hide. When the Americans drop their bombs, the Germans hide and the British hide".
2007-02-06 15:26:09
·
answer #7
·
answered by roadwarrior 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
No, I haven't seen it.
2007-02-06 04:32:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋