Thread: 'More helicopters are not the answer in Afghanistan'

we need these.... lots of these....



Could we get a couple of mini-guns on board?

So Germany should provide helicopters because the PM of the UK decided they would?
Enough people in this country complain about Brown being unelected, I think the Germans may have more of a case for complaint.

For a bit of perspective this is the summary written by the Defence Committee after scrutinizing MoD plans for the UK Deployment to Afg 2006.

Note the bits in bold;

Summary
Building stability and security in Afghanistan and checking the narcotics trade, are vital
objectives both for Afghanistan and for the stability of the Central Asia region.
The UK is currently involved in two military operations in Afghanistan: the US-led
coalition Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) with a counter-terrorism mission; and the
NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) with a security and stabilisation
mission which will extend into the Western and Southern provinces during 2006. In due
course, the ISAF and OEF missions will merge so that ISAF’s authority will cover the whole
of the country.
The UK is at the centre of these developments. The UK-led HQ Allied Rapid Reaction
Corps (ARRC) will command ISAF from May 2006 to February 2007, a period coinciding
with the expansion of ISAF’s presence. This will be a crucial time for ISAF. The Southern
provinces will be a testing security environment and it is vital for the future of Afghanistan
and the credibility of NATO that the mission is successful. We were impressed by the
professionalism of the people in the ARRC and we are confident that the ARRC will meet
the challenges it faces.
From June 2006, the UK’s 16 Air Assault Brigade will deploy to Helmand province as part
of ISAF’s stage 3 expansion. Its mission is to bring increased security and stability to the
province and to check the narcotics trade. It faces significant obstacles, and the security
situation is fragile. The opium trade flourishes and the livelihoods of many people rely on
it. There is therefore real tension between the tasks of achieving security and reducing the
opium trade. The role of UK Services in the dangerous counter-narcotics mission should
be clarified.
We are deeply concerned that the UK airlift and close air support capability may not be
sufficient to support the Helmand deployment. The MoD should ensure that close air
support should continue to be available in Helmand, if necessary by keeping the Harrier
GR7 squadron at Kandahar. We also have concerns about the effect the Helmand
deployment might have on the overstretch of our Armed Forces, particularly on
pinchpoint trade personnel, and we will monitor this and the other matters which have
caused us concern, very closely.

Pity Def Com doesn't have more teeth, they correctly identified the problems ignored by Army Generals, senior MoD CS and Govt Ministers.

Originally Posted by ottar

So Germany should provide helicopters because the PM of the UK decided they would?
Enough people in this country complain about Brown being unelected, I think the Germans may have more of a case for complaint.

Uh, no…

Germany, like a number of our 'allies' were quick to stick their hands up and say 'Please Sir, we'll help', but seem to be rather backward at actually following through with the help…

Originally Posted by chocolate_frog

we need these.... lots of these....



Could we get a couple of mini-guns on board?

"Guns-a-Go-Go" was reckoned to be a waste of resources in Vietnam, why would it be resurrected?

http://www.chinook-helicopter.com/ch...gunsagogo.html

Only three were ever used in action.

Originally Posted by Oil_Slick

Originally Posted by whitecity

Originally Posted by The_Cheat

Originally Posted by baboon6

You mean 96 in service, mostly in Germany. He means 12 in Afghanistan.

I think that's the point. If Germany wants to be a player in NATO then they need to have more than 12.5% of their Airframes involved.

Why?

Because the One Eyed Cvnt said that our gallant allies were providing us with lift in Afghanistan, QED, no need for more UK Helos.

UK operational heavy lift helos: 30 Chinooks - 8 deployed
Geerman operational heavy lift helos - 82 CH-53's - 6 deployed but they only seem to fly if the natives are not being grumpy.

Why should the German Army and the German taxpayer provide helicopters to the UK Army when the UK government is not prepared to do so?

For the record:
UK has 48 Chinook - 8 in theatre; 28 Merlin - 0 in theatre; 55 Sea King - 6 in theatre.

Originally Posted by tropper66

Do what the Canadians did, Hire the Airframes with crew from a former Soviet Republic

I believe we already hire Antonovs' (and we may have a couple of Hinds')so not a stretch of the imagination.

In response to Oil Slick, I read it was that conceited knob Milliband who alluded to that fact that more helicopters/equipment/troops are not the answer, not Ainsworth.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6698010.ece

Whilst it's substituting one tw*t for another it makes it even worse.

The Foreign Seretary makes defence policy now?

I agree with Fallschirmjager though that helicopters aren't the answer to Afghanistan though they will go a long way in helping us achieve our mission and probably reduce casualties.

With regards to the 8 SF Chinooks the government have had 10 (12) years to fix the problems.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle5848033.ece

and reduced the budget for helicopters in 2004

The Ministry of Defence lacks further decent helicopters to send to Afghanistan, largely because in June 2004 Brown insisted it was spending too much on them. He slashed the budget from £4.5 billion to £3 billion.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...fset=24&page=3

Edited to add stuff

Originally Posted by Oil_Slick

Uh, no…

Germany, like a number of our 'allies' were quick to stick their hands up and say 'Please Sir, we'll help', but seem to be rather backward at actually following through with the help…

Germany has provided, and does provide help. If I gave you £10 would you say thanks or complain that I didn't give you £20?
Why should Germany provide more help in Afghanistan in order to free up American and British resources for another war Germany didn't agree with? We chose to go gallivanting across the Middle East, they didn't. Why should they take up the slack and share in the punishment of our stupidity?

Originally Posted by stinker

Originally Posted by tropper66

Do what the Canadians did, Hire the Airframes with crew from a former Soviet Republic

I believe we already hire Antonovs' (and we may have a couple of Hinds')so not a stretch of the imagination.

In response to Oil Slick, I read it was that conceited knob Milliband who alluded to that fact that more helicopters/equipment/troops are not the answer, not Ainsworth.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6698010.ece

Whilst it's substituting one tw*t for another it makes it even worse.

The Foreign Seretary makes defence policy now?

I agree with Fallschirmjager though that helicopters aren't the answer to Afghanistan though they will go a long way in helping us achieve our mission and probably reduce casualties.

Last year NATO signed a contract with a civil firm to provide helicopter logistic support in Afghanistan. The UK pays into this pot and benefits from the service.

Separately, in August last year, the Canadians decided to build an airwing in Kandahar from scratch. From a standing start - ie owning nothing - within 12 months they have stood up 6 Mi-17 under civi contract and 6 Chinooks. Now online and providing support to UK forces via the RCS pooling agreement.

Originally Posted by whitecity

Originally Posted by Oil_Slick

Originally Posted by whitecity

Originally Posted by The_Cheat

Originally Posted by baboon6

You mean 96 in service, mostly in Germany. He means 12 in Afghanistan.

I think that's the point. If Germany wants to be a player in NATO then they need to have more than 12.5% of their Airframes involved.

Why?

Because the One Eyed Cvnt said that our gallant allies were providing us with lift in Afghanistan, QED, no need for more UK Helos.

UK operational heavy lift helos: 30 Chinooks - 8 deployed
Geerman operational heavy lift helos - 82 CH-53's - 6 deployed but they only seem to fly if the natives are not being grumpy.

Why should the German Army and the German taxpayer provide helicopters to the UK Army when the UK government is not prepared to do so?

For the record:
UK has 48 Chinook - 8 in theatre; 28 Merlin - 0 in theatre; 55 Sea King - 6 in theatre.

My bad, we do indeed have 40 operational Chinooks… the 8 HC3's are not operational.

Neither Merlin or Sea King are heavy lifters, especially so the Sea Kings.

Folks, we can theorize about the right kind of airlift, uparmouring, extra troops, capabilities of other TCNs etc, but fundamentally, it's all about cash, and the Treasury.

The deployment to Afghan has been limited by money, so much so that commanders were having to justify every last bum on a seat to stick within a spending limit imposed by HMT. So, our bosses had to make some pretty difficult choices - ones I would not want to have to make. Sadly, our public do not want lots of shiny new bits of kit for the Armed Forces, but would rather carry on their otherwise unexciting existence, giving the odd nod of approval to a squaddie who's lost a leg and is now wheeling himself around Sainsbury's in Selly Oak. Especially if it means an increase in taxation, or less income support, or health service cuts. Our govts are also conscious of this fact - defence doesn't win elections, but health, schools and social security do!

However, if we were to get well and truly spanked by some natives with sharpened pieces of mango (and a mean line in IEDs), things might change, but probably not enough to get some overweight arses off the sofa and down to the polling booths, or even better, into a recruiting office to volunteer to actually do something for the country.

Secondly, it will take serious terrorist action in the UK to convince people of the merits of us actually being in Afghan in the first place, and I personally don't want to see that happen.

Basically, damned if we do, and damned if we don't. Kipling wrote a poem about it, it's called "Tommy" - and it rings true today as it did many years ago.

Originally Posted by stinker

and reduced the budget for helicopters in 2004

The Ministry of Defence lacks further decent helicopters to send to Afghanistan, largely because in June 2004 Brown insisted it was spending too much on them. He slashed the budget from £4.5 billion to £3 billion.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...fset=24&page=3

Edited to add stuff

£1 Billion reduction

… Hmm, about 30 Chinooks worth.

Originally Posted by baboon6

Originally Posted by chocolate_frog

we need these.... lots of these....



Could we get a couple of mini-guns on board?

"Guns-a-Go-Go" was reckoned to be a waste of resources in Vietnam, why would it be resurrected?

http://www.chinook-helicopter.com/ch...gunsagogo.html

Only three were ever used in action.

Actually ALL FOUR were used in action.

One was destroyed in a airfield crash, one was damaged in action and forced down (later destroyed), one was brought down by a weapon malfunction.

The fourth was converted back to a cargo hauler... not because of any problem with the design (bear in mind they went straight in at the deep end, and huey losses (for gunships) were high too) but because the yanks needed every cargo hauler they could get hold of.

It was not seen as feasible to use one on its own, and the yanks needed cargo carriers.

It was just seen aa a better use of resources to convert the ACH-47 in to a CH-47. Load wise. Gun ships were still used esp the Hueys and of course teh Spooky gun ship (which became the AC130 Spectre eventually).

Originally Posted by Oil_Slick

Originally Posted by para_medic

Originally Posted by Oil_Slick

The only Euros with a good number of helos are the Germans. They have shitloads of CH-53's but won't play with the rough boys so they're as much use as tits on a bull.

O_S, nope. The Germans had 12 (twelve) CH-53GS beginning of 2008 and 6 were flying out of Mazar. I am not aware of them reinforcing any of the CH-53G so - they have even less.

The German Army have a total of 82 operational CH-53's in their inventory

65 CH-53G
15 CH-53GS

As per my point, the Germans have the largest fleet of heavy lift helos in the EU.

Only the GS version with external fuel tanks, automated navigational equipment and light armour can be deployed to Afghanistan. Germany does have 20 of those and any additional ones are not believed to be finishing conversion till 2011.
Out of those 20 8 were awaiting inspection (ie 200h sandy place flight time check-up) etc at the time a parliamentary committee asked this very question in 2008.
So to recap: Germany has 20 deployable CH-53GS, out of which 6 were in Stan and 8 in the garage. I take that to be a rather typical scenario. So, borrowing from the Germans is still out of the question I think.
http://dip21.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/16/077/1607724.pdf

Originally Posted by Oil_Slick

My bad, we do indeed have 40 operational Chinooks… the 8 HC3's are not operational.

Neither Merlin or Sea King are heavy lifters, especially so the Sea Kings.

We do not have 40 operational Chinooks. We have 48 in the inventory and give or take 26 operational at any one moment. The fact that the 8 HC3s have been mothballed for 8 years is irrelevant and we only have ourselves to blame.

If you are going to use the German Army total inventory as your start point, then you should do the same for the UK. How many of the German CH-53s are inoperable and able to be discounted in the same way you discount RAF Chinooks?

And why only stick to heavy lift helicopters? Are you saying medium lift (Merlin 24Y and Sea King 27Y) is irrelevant but a Heer CH-53G with 36Y is?

I'm still interested to understand why you think the German Army and taxpayer is responsible for supporting Gordon Brown's failure to resource UK helicopters for UK troops.