Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
United Kingdom Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Americns kill three British soldiers in Afghanistan
AdamB    8/24/2007 12:08:00 PM
US jet kills three British soldiers in 'friendly fire' blunder in Afghanistan 24th August 2007 Three British soldiers were killed by a bomb dropped on their position by a US war plane during fierce fighting in Afghanistan, it was confirmed today. At least two other men from 1st Battalion The Royal Anglian Regiment were injured in the friendly fire incident. One of these was described as critically ill. The 60-strong foot patrol had called in air support after they came under intense attack from Taliban insurgents in Helmand province yesterday evening. The MoD said the men were killed by a "single bomb" dropped from one of two US F15 aircraft called to help repel the enemy. A statement said: "Their patrol was attacked and during the intense engagement that ensued, close air support was called in from two US F15 aircraft. The real 'Saving Private Ryan': US soldier heads home after both brothers are killed in Iraq "A single bomb was dropped and it is believed the explosion killed all three soldiers who were declared dead at the scene." The injured soldiers were evacuated by helicopter to the medical facility at Camp Bastion, the UK headquarters, for treatment. The next of kin have been informed, the MoD said, adding the incident was one of "profound sadness." Officials said an investigation is now under way. A spokesman for British troops in Helmand Province, Lieutenant Colonel Charlie Mayo, told the BBC that of the two wounded soldiers, one was very seriously injured and the other was seriously injured. He told Radio 4's The World at One: "During this patrol they came into contact with some Taliban from a number of firing positions. "As they came under fire they then called in some close air support to assist them and an aircraft came in, it dropped a bomb and tragically this bomb killed three of the soldiers and injured two more." The two injured soldiers were evacuated to Camp Bastion. He added: "One of them is seriously injured and the other one is very seriously injured. "The circumstances of what actually happened, we are now investigating. There are a handful of different reasons why this tragic incident has happened and we are not in a position at the moment and I don't think we will be for some time to find out exactly what has happened." The International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), the Nato-led mission in Afghanistan, said it had procedures in place to minimise the risk of friendly fire incidents. ISAF spokeswoman Lt Col Claudia Foss said: "ISAF feels deep sadness over the death of three soldiers killed in what is probably a friendly fire incident in southern Afghanistan. "ISAF is committed to finding out exactly how this tragedy occurred and how similar incidents can be avoided." The US Embassy in London said in a statement: "The United States expresses its deep condolences to the families and loved ones of the soldiers who died, and we wish those who were injured a speedy recovery. "The UK soldiers were serving under the Nato-led International Security and Assistance Force (ISAF), which is helping the Afghan people to build a peaceful, prosperous, and stable country." The deaths take the toll of all British dead in Afghanistan since operations began in 2001 to 73. There have been 11 deaths in the last two months during increasingly heavy fighting. The Royal Anglians, which have been based at Pirbright in Surrey for about five years, have been one of the regiments hardest hit by the fighting in Afghanistan. There has now been a total of nine soldiers killed from the regiment. It is one of the worst casualty rates since Operation Herrick, the campaign in Afghanistan, began in 2001. In March 2003 Lance Corporal Matty Hull was killed and three other British soldiers injured when a US plane fired on them by mistake despite their vehicles being clearly marked. Yesterday's "fighting patrol" was intended to disrupt Taliban activity and reassure local residents north west of Kajaki in Helmund, they called for air support. A bomb was dropped and unfortunately three of our guys were killed," said a source. The MoD said: "It was an airstrike which British soldiers called in and what went wrong will be subject to an investigation." A spokesman said that there well- rehearsed systems between the allies to try to prevent friendly fire incidents. "There's a raft of mechanism in place to try to prevent these things. But these are daily occurances and these air strikes have saved the lives of countless British soldiers. In combat nothing is 100 per cent fool proof," he said. The troops were part of an operation to secure the Kajaki damn - described by the military as one of the most strategically important sights in Southern Afghanistan. British forces and engineers are trying to repair the hydroelectric damn so it can provide power for the Helmand province. "Our troops have been wor
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
EssexBoy       8/24/2007 1:14:01 PM
Tragic news, but I wish those daily mail readers would wait until the full facts are known before blaming the USAF pilots. Perhaps they'd prefer it if the US pilots didn't risk their lives to help our troops. They ought to consider how many British lives have already been saved by US CAS. Maybe if we equipped our own armed forces properly we wouldn't have to rely on the US.
 
I'm no fan of the current US administration, but the patronising tone of some of those comments really piss me off; as if our armed forces have never been responsible for "friendly fire" incidents.
 
Essex
 
Quote    Reply

flamingknives       8/24/2007 2:12:05 PM
Good grief, it's the Daily Mail.

It's regular readership couldn't manage critical thought if their lives depended upon it.
 
Quote    Reply

Panther       8/24/2007 2:56:33 PM
I saw a tragic article like this earlier this morning and the first thought in my mind was that AdamB would be posting something like it later in the day. And sure enough... just like clockwork, here it is! Pretty predictable.
 
Quote    Reply

Lynstyne       8/24/2007 6:43:11 PM
Rather than a gung ho fighter jock  i or even an irresponsible action such as the A10 pilots who convinced themselves to engage friendlys despite clear indication marks.
 This sounds more like a fog of war close combat one dropped short accident. unfortunatly (and dont get me wrong my heart goes out to all concerned including the pilot) accidents happen.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

neutralizer       8/25/2007 4:38:00 AM
At this stage it is unclear what happened or what the control arrangmeents wwrere (ie was their a controller on the ground with the troops).
 
Smart munitions don't rop short, their either hit the point they were aimed at or go haywire and ned up anywhere.
 
We don't know what sort of smart munition was being used.  Was it using laser designation (from ground or air) or was it relying entirely on GPS. 
 
 
Quote    Reply

eldnah       8/25/2007 3:34:54 PM
Why has not the most obvious and simple solution been adopted? Have only the Brits supply CAS for their troops and the Yanks for theirs and therefore avoid the potential causes for blue-on-blue events because of national differences in doctrine, tactics, equipment, language etc..
 
Quote    Reply

Lynstyne       8/25/2007 10:39:42 PM
do you really think that if the raf was the sole cas supplier for the british army blue on blues would never happen.
 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       8/25/2007 11:33:35 PM

At this stage it is unclear what happened or what the control arrangmeents wwrere (ie was their a controller on the ground with the troops).

I thought SOP was to have USAF controllers attached to forward coalition units where merge was likely? 

 
Quote    Reply

neutralizer       8/26/2007 1:09:15 AM




At this stage it is unclear what happened or what the control arrangmeents wwrere (ie was their a controller on the ground with the troops).



I thought SOP was to have USAF controllers attached to forward coalition units where merge was likely? 



The short answer is 'not UK SOP'.
In Iraq liaison was provided by teams from a USMC ANLICO (either 2 (US Atlantic Fleet) or 3 (USMC reservists) if I understand it correctly) however they did not usually control actual attacks.  Basically they provided a TACP function. This was part of the control problem with the FF incident there. 
 
Historically UK has used primary and secondary FACs, plus AAC pilots aloft.  There are still primary FACS although I think they now call them TACPs, typically about 1 per BG, they are officers, army or RAF Regt and presumably RM in 3 Cdo Bde.  However, most FACs are now army or RM (not sure about RAF Regt) NCOs who operate under the tactical control of the artillery observation officer with each cbt team (who is responsible for orchestrating all fire support - air, guns, mortars, NG (a bit sparse in Afg)).  Some NCOs/WOs are also AH controllers, in other cases AHC and FAC may be different NCOs in the same team.  FACs, etc, are trained in the US before deployment (mainly because there is more space and weapons like Hellfire from WAH-64 cannot be used in UK due to range safety restrictions) and qualified to 'NATO standards'.  There are also NCO/WO FAC/AHC who operate independently with smaller elements than cbt team.
 
It appears that in Afg if its an urgent request for CAS then its first available aircraft, which could be from any nation and carrying whatever weapons it happened to be loaded with.  There is no time to deploy a FAC of the 'right' nation, even if they wanted to.  Last year in Afg a RAF Regt FAC was awarded a MC, jumped 10 ft out of the back of a Chinook into a fairly hot LZ controlling attack aircraft as he went.
 
Quote    Reply

eldnah       8/26/2007 8:17:10 AM

do you really think that if the raf was the sole cas supplier for the british army blue on blues would never happen.

 

No, but I think they would be probably be less frequent because of more uniformity of national doctrine, tactics  and equipment despite NATO standards and trainng.  Also also a lot of intra-allies animosity would be avoided. I wonder about the percentage of CAS sorties for the Brits flown by the Yanks and vice-versa.

 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics