US denying UK access to Blue Force Tracker?

#3
This is actually a pretty complex issue. The cryptology in Blue Force Tracker is not accredited (by the US NSA) at NATO CONFIDENTIAL, and understandably so. If so it would be open to all of NATO, and maybe also the forces comprising ISAF/KFOR/EUFOR. Uncle Sam obviously doesn't want all those nations having access to US force deployments.

There is no reason why BOWMAN, EADS' Force Tracking System, cannot interoperate with the US BFTS, if they use what is known as a Gateway. There is a raft of NATO experimentation going on at the moment at ACT. The main problem is getting them to integrate with the NATO or US C2 tools to create a Recognised Ground Picture.

Anyone interested can PM me - I won't hold my breath. Don't believe all you read from the Guardian Defence correspondent.
 
#4
On Telic 1 i had to take a Sultan to a US camp in Kuwait to get BLUE FORCE TRACKER
fitted . There was a large row of vehicals(many British) waiting to get it fitted . Whilst waiting
to get it fitted several of us brits were loaded on a BFT operators course held at the same
camp . The americans could not do enough to help us .
It took about 2 days in total to fit us the power supply to British vehicals was different
to those of the US. We even left there camp (called camp Marigold) with a wagon full of
camp cots and MRE's .
I actually used BFT in operations on Telic 1 , it was a great piece of kit however the
different voltage supplies on British wagons affected its use . Seems like that left wing student
newspaper is spouting more anti- US cr@p . The yanks could'nt of been more helpful .
 
#6
I have no idea where you're getting BFT out of that article. As mentioned above, the Brits already have it, I was able to see them roaming around on my screen.

Fixed-wing aircraft are not equipped with BFT.

NTM
 
#7
California_Tanker said:
I have no idea where you're getting BFT out of that article. As mentioned above, the Brits already have it, I was able to see them roaming around on my screen.
I'm supprised you didn't have to shoe your gunner to remind him not to engage that roaming dot on your screen.

:lol:
 
#8
The spams should realise that the Blue Force Tracker is not to be used for targetting purposes..........
 
#9
Cal tanker , ignore manc rogue he seems to have a problem with the US , probably from
other peoples expierences. I dont recall a US vehical taking out a British vehical . Maybe
brit on brit .
 
#10
Manchester_Rogue said:
California_Tanker said:
I have no idea where you're getting BFT out of that article. As mentioned above, the Brits already have it, I was able to see them roaming around on my screen.
I'm supprised you didn't have to shoe your gunner to remind him not to engage that roaming dot on your screen.

:lol:
I asked him if he thought he could make the shot, but even firing indirect and breaking out the gunner's quadrant and firing tables, 150 km was just too far out of range.

NYM
 
#11
California_Tanker said:
Manchester_Rogue said:
California_Tanker said:
I have no idea where you're getting BFT out of that article. As mentioned above, the Brits already have it, I was able to see them roaming around on my screen.
I'm supprised you didn't have to shoe your gunner to remind him not to engage that roaming dot on your screen.

:lol:
I asked him if he thought he could make the shot, but even firing indirect and breaking out the gunner's quadrant and firing tables, 150 km was just too far out of range.

NYM
"We'll get 'em on the way back!"

paveway_3 stop yer yappin, you sissy. I'll decide when I have a problem with the US... and you'll know it because I'll take my shoe off and give yer a good foockin wolloping.

:lol:
 
#13
California_Tanker said:
I have no idea where you're getting BFT out of that article. As mentioned above, the Brits already have it, I was able to see them roaming around on my screen.

Fixed-wing aircraft are not equipped with BFT.

NTM
Could you substitue " roaming around " for " moving forward purposefully and in an efficient tactical manner ". It just sounds better :wink:
 
#14
California_Tanker said:
I have no idea where you're getting BFT out of that article. As mentioned above, the Brits already have it, I was able to see them roaming around on my screen.

Fixed-wing aircraft are not equipped with BFT.

NTM
Is'nt that part of the reason why a RAF Tornado from 9sqn got shot down?I seem to remember reading that somewhere....
 
#16
Spike,
No. Western military aircraft use an ID Fried or Foe (IFF) system which is completely different to BFT consisting of 5 types. Mode 1 and 2 are unencrypted systems for military use only. Mode 3 and Mode C are also unencrypted but and are used by both civvy and military aircraft (Mode C providing height info). Mode 4 is an encrypted military system and is the prime method of ID in wartime. Western Navies use an identical Mode 1,2,3/C,4 IFF system.

Sadly, the Mode 4 on the Tornado GR4 in question had failed and the crew didn't realise it (there is no warning indication in the cockpit to this effect, like many other mil aircraft). When the GR4 was returning from a mission, it was engaged by a US Patriot, killing both crew. This was despite:

1. The Tornado flying in formation with another GR4 whose Mode 4 was operable.
2. Having already crossed the 'FLOT' and not having attacked anything.
3. Having passed close to several 'high value assets' (such as an E-2C) and not having engaged them.
4. Flying in a manner which in no way resembled an anti-radar missile (ARM) or even a threat aircraft.
5. No Iraqi flying activity having taken place in the days prior to the incident.

In the subsequent US/RAF enquiry, the US crew were found to be highly inexperienced, poorly supervised, and had not received some data link equipment at the time. They stated that they believed that they were under attack by an ARM.

As someone who flew AWACS during the conflict, I can tell you that many (including US) aircraft crossed back over the FLOT without Mode 4 IFF selected for a variety of reasons (battle damage and the sheer 'pukka' factor of having been shot at to name but 2). Indeed, some US assets don't even have Mode 4!!! Others don't select it on in spite of theatre requirements. If I'd authorised engagement on every aircraft not wearing Mode 4 durin TELIC 1, I reckon we'd have had dozens of blue on blues. The RAF investigation report was very diplomatic. In my opinion the incident occured because the US Patriot crew were poorly trained, poorly led and unprofessional. They wanted a kill. They got one. Unfortunately, it was a friendly. Sadly, later in the conflict other (US) aircrew were killed by Patriots and they were probably the biggest concern we had during the entire campaign. Sadly, this also reflects my experiences over Bosnia, Kosovo and Afghanistan where a considerable amount of effort is spent trying to reign in aggressive US aircraft and other assets who are all desperate for a shot.

Sorry for the rant, but the incident in question still rankles now.

As far as BFT is concerned, California Tanker is incorrect. A very small number of aircraft do have it.

Regards,
MM
 
#18
Magic_Mushroom said:
Spike,
No. Western military aircraft use an ID Fried or Foe (IFF) system which is completely different to BFT consisting of 5 types. Mode 1 and 2 are unencrypted systems for military use only. Mode 3 and Mode C are also unencrypted but and are used by both civvy and military aircraft (Mode C providing height info). Mode 4 is an encrypted military system and is the prime method of ID in wartime. Western Navies use an identical Mode 1,2,3/C,4 IFF system.

Sadly, the Mode 4 on the Tornado GR4 in question had failed and the crew didn't realise it (there is no warning indication in the cockpit to this effect, like many other mil aircraft). When the GR4 was returning from a mission, it was engaged by a US Patriot, killing both crew. This was despite:

1. The Tornado flying in formation with another GR4 whose Mode 4 was operable.
2. Having already crossed the 'FLOT' and not having attacked anything.
3. Having passed close to several 'high value assets' (such as an E-2C) and not having engaged them.
4. Flying in a manner which in no way resembled an anti-radar missile (ARM) or even a threat aircraft.
5. No Iraqi flying activity having taken place in the days prior to the incident.

In the subsequent US/RAF enquiry, the US crew were found to be highly inexperienced, poorly supervised, and had not received some data link equipment at the time. They stated that they believed that they were under attack by an ARM.

As someone who flew AWACS during the conflict, I can tell you that many (including US) aircraft crossed back over the FLOT without Mode 4 IFF selected for a variety of reasons (battle damage and the sheer 'pukka' factor of having been shot at to name but 2). Indeed, some US assets don't even have Mode 4!!! Others don't select it on in spite of theatre requirements. If I'd authorised engagement on every aircraft not wearing Mode 4 durin TELIC 1, I reckon we'd have had dozens of blue on blues. The RAF investigation report was very diplomatic. In my opinion the incident occured because the US Patriot crew were poorly trained, poorly led and unprofessional. They wanted a kill. They got one. Unfortunately, it was a friendly. Sadly, later in the conflict other (US) aircrew were killed by Patriots and they were probably the biggest concern we had during the entire campaign. Sadly, this also reflects my experiences over Bosnia, Kosovo and Afghanistan where a considerable amount of effort is spent trying to reign in aggressive US aircraft and other assets who are all desperate for a shot.

Sorry for the rant, but the incident in question still rankles now.

As far as BFT is concerned, California Tanker is incorrect. A very small number of aircraft do have it.

Regards,
MM
Cheers MM.
I know the RAF use IFF (I'm a ex-RAF Weapons fitter on Tornado's at Bruggen)
but I had'nt seen the AAB report over the incident.I think I read the bit I refered to on a Aircraft Hobby website.And I too was very angry & sad when I heard the bad news.I have a feeling I have 'worked' with eithe the Pilot or Nav on a Squadron.
Spike
 
#20
From what I know of Aircraft missiles,the are basically 2 types, Radar & Heat guided.These missiles are self guided after launch from the attacking aircraft.The Tornado's RHWR (Radar Homing Warning Reciever) will alert the crew of any attack.
SAM missiles such as Patriot use a ground base to 'lock on' to the jet & these are normally taken out by SEAD jets armed with missiles like the RAF's ALARM & the US's HARM missiles.
From what I understand the Tonka crew did'nt have time to eject & did'nt believe they would be attacked returning from a sortie.
 

Similar threads


New Posts

Latest Threads

Top