Reporting Live Ops threads

[quid21]

If a mission was 11 hours it's easy to see why 5 hours notice could be used by a conventional enemy to position air defences, or alert their crews to the possibility of attack thereby removing the element of surprise. Say this happened in April 1986, the Libyans would've had plenty of warning and there would have been more casualties due to the lack of surprise.

Whether that would make any difference with the current fragmented enemy who knows. But surely it's best to stop once you realise it's an operational mission heading abroad?

Just my 2 cents.

[eagle1]

A very interesting discussion going on here

For what it's worth, how would we all feel if we found out a "live op" was coming our way (to the UK) from the baddies ?
Would we keep quiet or would we want to broadcast as much info as possible to help each other ?

As I read earlier "catch 22"

[TonyO]

Odds are this is who the F-15s were going after: http://edition.cnn.com/2015/06/14/afric ... index.html

[martmpf]

What surprises me is that UK based resources are actually required to launch “live op’s” in the Middle East.

The US and other coalition/friendly forces have ample resources “in theatre” to launch a strike against any target identified. We probably all saw the posts on here about the brief UK visit of the Nimitz class “Theodore Roosevelt” carrier on its way to the region. I am sure its F18’s are quite capable of performing any action required.

Perhaps, if UK based aircraft are actually being used, then the operational reasoning could be for a training purpose, or a “global force” demonstration, because it’s not really that practical, efficient or required.

I have seen photo’s on here of the loaded aircraft departing Lakenheath, but none on return. Back still fully loaded or not?

Mart

[tony54321]

I don't think the aircrews can be too concerned about security after all B2 pilots were apparently selling t shirts and badges last week to the plane spotters outside Fairford.
They must know that all the movements are being photographed and reported.

[romeo bravo]

What surprises me is that UK based resources are actually required to launch “live op’s” in the Middle East.

The US and other coalition/friendly forces have ample resources “in theatre” to launch a strike against any target identified. We probably all saw the posts on here about the brief UK visit of the Nimitz class “Theodore Roosevelt” carrier on its way to the region. I am sure its F18’s are quite capable of performing any action required.

Perhaps, if UK based aircraft are actually being used, then the operational reasoning could be for a training purpose, or a “global force” demonstration, because it’s not really that practical, efficient or required.

I have seen photo’s on here of the loaded aircraft departing Lakenheath, but none on return. Back still fully loaded or not?

Mart

Not new, Op El Dorado Canyon back in 1986 from LN

[Vulcanone]

I don't think the aircrews can be too concerned about security after all B2 pilots were apparently selling t shirts and badges last week to the plane spotters outside Fairford. They must know that all the movements are being photographed and reported.

Except for the fact that most of the aircrew usually don't carry id patches on their flying suits. and as Aero Resource has found out some don't wish to be publically identified on the net.

As for the F-15Es being used well they have the fast packs on the intakes which gives extended loiter time on top of the already impressive range. Perhaps....

T

[quid21]

Its interesting and perhaps worrying at the same time that the US has launched an air strike from UK soil without the usual Daily Mail headlines. In the past there has been more publicity. I thought launching a strike from UK soil has to go before parliament for approval?!

[martmpf]

I think it may be government approval, not parliament. In any case, overflying France may require approval, which was refused in '86. Almost certainly Spain as well.

Clearly all OK as it happened.

The latest was the third in a few day's, although the second appeared to be aborted before destination. Was all on here.

[dinger]

Maybe the fact that the target in question was responsible for the deaths of UK and French nationals in Algeria eased the diplomatic decision making process.

Dinger.

[Thunder]

I thought launching a strike from UK soil has to go before parliament for approval?!

How do you know it didn't?

[martmpf]

I thought launching a strike from UK soil has to go before parliament for approval?!

How do you know it didn't?

Because parliament refers to the House of Commons, with potentially 630 MP's on live TV.

Hardly the best place to request what amounts to a covert mission.

"Government", can give the OK on the side

[alpha_india]

If a mission was 11 hours it's easy to see why 5 hours notice could be used by a conventional enemy to position air defences, or alert their crews to the possibility of attack thereby removing the element of surprise.

There's a certain limitation in applying the formula (average airspeed) x (mission duration)/2 even when you know the aircraft involved, their performance profile, time and place of departure in order to provide warning of an air raid.. ..

.. unless the Libyans were employing the psychic powers of Abdul Alhazred they would not have known the duration of the flight to calculate the range until 5 hours too late to do anything about it.

[Thunder]

I thought launching a strike from UK soil has to go before parliament for approval?!

How do you know it didn't?

Because parliament refers to the House of Commons, with potentially 630 MP's on live TV.

Hardly the best place to request what amounts to a covert mission.

"Government", can give the OK on the side

What I meant, I dare say that the UK and the USA along with NATO in general have an agreement in place that allows these kind of missions to take place provided that each country that is involved is given a head ups prior to each operation.