Sunday, 30 August 2009

Chinook "Damaged" in Afghanistan

Note the spin on this story: the headline says the Chinook was damaged, which it was. But then it was deliberately destroyed in order to render it useless to the enemy...

So why wasn't the headline "Chinook Destroyed in Afghanistan"? Was it because destruction instantly makes the public know we're another helicopter short? As opposed to damaged, which signifies an ability to repair the helicopter.

Note the report goes on to say another Chinook suffered the same fate previously, so we're two Chinooks down.

The price of those cheap American Black Hawks we were offered a while back might start going up soon. Once we become desperate and will pay anything to replace our helicopter fleet, whats to stop the price going up?

UPDATE:

Defence of the Realm has the story too and basically agrees with my comment to Pavlovs Cat that its an indicator of how hostile the environment our forces are working in in that area. Although I'm not convinced the options DOTR promote for replacements are up to scratch.

6 comments:

  1. That does look indeed like blatant MOD /BBC spin, the eventual result was the machine was destroyed, so why not say so.

    It will be interesting to see what Defence of the Realm can dig up on this.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I too would be interested if DOTR picks up on the technical aspects of this. It does seems to be an indicator of how hostile an environment our forces are working in.
    Its just a shame the MSM apart from a handful of journalists don't put that across, I assume in order not to spook the population at large.
    Which sadly is the main reason for the disconnect between soldier and civillian: the majority of civillians have no idea of the treacherous and deadly environment our troops work in.

    ReplyDelete
  3. DOTR has the story now, I just checked. They add that we might have recovered the Chinook had that Ukrainian Mi-26 not been shot out of the sky.
    They do note that the destruction of the Chinook is an indication of how bad security is in that area at the moment.
    I'm sure there are some second hand helicopter salesmen getting rather excited about now. Especially as they've just added 30-50 percent to the price of their wares.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It is indeed a hostile situation , but I think it begs the question that were not enough troops or helicopters available to fly in and secure the site long enough to recover a £40 mio machine before the turbans would have got to it even though there were two other Chinooks on the mission apparently.

    It's a command decision, but they have excellent air cover, drones , fast-movers and apaches, it always seems the problem that we can't move the grunts ( no offence) quick enough or in enough numbers to make a difference and it comes back to helicopters.

    and as you say Delphius those Black Hawks have got to be looking better, but the MOD will not countenance it and DotR has covered the reason in much depth.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think before its lifted, there has to be quite a lot of work done on a dead Chinook before it can be lifted by a secoond one.

    It says volumes for the situation in that area that our troops are working in that the wreck couldn't be secured long enough for that to happen and for another chinook to come and lift it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. As for the Black Hawks, watch for government spin get to work on the situation. I just wonder if the promotion of this story by the BBC is paving the way.

    Don't forget Dannatt has now gone and possibly along with him his objection to Black Hawks.

    Sir David Richards who has taken over, spent time as commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, so should know whats needed to get the job done.

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.