← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · xmetalhead
Thread ID: 18897 | Posts: 23 | Started: 2005-06-29
2005-06-29 15:41 | User Profile
[I]Why is it whenever BushCo says "we're winning the war against murderers and terr'rists" spectacular violence ensues?[/I]
[COLOR=Red][SIZE=4]Hostile fire likely downed U.S. helicopter[/SIZE][/COLOR] [B]Fate of 17 troops on board in Afghan mission still unknown, military says[/B]
NBC News and news services Updated: 10:35 a.m. ET June 29, 2005
KABUL, Afghanistan - A U.S. Chinook helicopter that crashed in Afghanistan on Tuesday was likely shot down by hostile fire, and the fate of 17 American service members aboard was unclear, the U.S. military said Wednesday. Other reports indicated that the Taliban had attacked the aircraft.
The helicopter took indirect or direct fire from the ground, U.S. military spokesman Col. James Yonts told a news conference. ââ¬ÅWhether or not that caused it to crash, we do not know yet,ââ¬Â he said.
Pentagon sources told NBC News that aircraft using infrared surveillance had detected movement just after the crash but that due to darkness couldn't tell if those were survivors or the enemy.
The 17 service members included eight Navy SEALs, the sources added.
The troops were on a mission against al-Qaida fighters when the helicopter went down in a mountainous region near Asadabad, in Kunar province.
ââ¬ÅInitial reports indicate the crash may have been caused by hostile fire. The status of the service members is unknown at this time,ââ¬Â a U.S. military statement said.
[URL=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8391112/]Whole Report[/URL]
2005-06-29 17:55 | User Profile
[QUOTE=xmetalhead][I]Why is it whenever BushCo says "we're winning the war against murderers and terr'rists" spectacular violence ensues?[/I]
[COLOR=Red][SIZE=4]Hostile fire likely downed U.S. helicopter[/SIZE][/COLOR] [B]Fate of 17 troops on board in Afghan mission still unknown, military says[/B]
NBC News and news services Updated: 10:35 a.m. ET June 29, 2005
KABUL, Afghanistan - A U.S. Chinook helicopter that crashed in Afghanistan on Tuesday was likely shot down by hostile fire, and the fate of 17 American service members aboard was unclear, the U.S. military said Wednesday. Other reports indicated that the Taliban had attacked the aircraft.[/QUOTE]I wonder if the Arabs now have their hands on missiles. If so, the entire war may change.
2005-06-29 18:07 | User Profile
[QUOTE=edward gibbon]I wonder if the Arabs now have their hands on missiles. If so, the entire war may change.[/QUOTE]
Edward, I wondered the same thing. This isn't the first helicopter shot down in theater. I think the insurgents wait for George "Bring it on" Bush, Dick "Last Throes" Cheney, or Donald "12 Years" Rumsfeld to say something stupid, take out a missle, and then proceed to make our soldiers pay the price for their stupid remarks.
I hate this war so much.
2005-06-29 19:35 | User Profile
[QUOTE=edward gibbon]I wonder if the Arabs now have their hands on missiles. If so, the entire war may change.[/QUOTE]
My question is who supplied them with the missiles. China? Russia? Saudi Arabia? Iran?
2005-06-29 20:56 | User Profile
[QUOTE=skemper]My question is who supplied them with the missiles. China? Russia? Saudi Arabia? Iran?[/QUOTE] Who supplied the missles? Most likely WE (the United States) did. When we were backing the Taliban when the Russians were fighting Afganistan, we supplied countless missiles, RPGs, and rifles to the soldiers led by Osama Bin Laden. This is just one of our bad decisions from the past coming back to bite us.
_
2005-06-29 21:01 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Jess David Peterson]Who supplied the missles? Most likely WE (the United States) did. When we were backing the Taliban when the Russians were fighting Afganistan, we supplied countless missiles, RPGs, and rifles to the soldiers led by Osama Bin Laden. This is just one of our bad decisions from the past coming back to bite us.
_[/QUOTE]
If so, then why are they waiting so late to use them?
2005-06-29 21:19 | User Profile
[QUOTE=skemper]My question is who supplied them with the missiles. China? Russia? Saudi Arabia? Iran?[/QUOTE]
We did, in order to fight the Ruskies.....those ground to air missiles have a life span of eigtht months before they have to be refited, I believe that some hasve been used against the US copters and planes but not all of them went off because of age.
2005-06-29 22:42 | User Profile
Prolly just a lucky RPG shot. I believe helicopters are very vulnerable to them
If the rebels [I]do[/I] have missiles, the source is anyone's guess: Russia, China, Pakistan, Iran all have both means and motive
I'd agree though that we're probably not dealing here with 25 year-old US-supplied gear from the first Afghan war. That's just way too long to keep this kind of stuff in good working condtion
2005-06-30 02:48 | User Profile
Looks as if we're "winning" in Afghanistan too. Yessir, the Taliban insurgency is in its "last throes."
Which reminds me, anyone see The Beast? Excellent film. :thumbsup:
2005-06-30 14:49 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Stuka]Looks as if we're "winning" in Afghanistan too. Yessir, the Taliban insurgency is in its "last throes."
Which reminds me, anyone see The Beast? Excellent film. :thumbsup:[/QUOTE]
Highly underrated war movie indeed... recently released on DVD, finally.
2005-07-01 13:40 | User Profile
It may well have been a planned ambush. The Afghans attack a group of soldiers knowing full well more troops would sent by helicopter. I think they must have been waiting ready to fire the rocket at just the right time it. They most likely still have some Stinger missiles left. But this helicopter was most likely taken out by an RPG, it would be a waste to use a Stinger.
[QUOTE]Helicopter hunting
While the RPG was designed to kill tanks and other combat vehicles, it has brought down a number of helicopters as well. During the fighting in Mogadishu, Somalia in October 1994, the two US Army Blackhawk helicopters shot down were by the RPG. In Afghanistan, the Mujahideen found that the best anti-helicopter tactics were anti-helicopter ambushes. The first variant was to identify likely landing zones and mine them. Then the Mujahideen would position machine guns and RPGs around the landing zone. As the helicopter landed, massed RPG and machine gun fire would tear into the aircraft.(14)
If the Mujahideen could not lure helicopters into an ambush kill zone, the RPG could still engage helicopters. The Mujahideen found that a frontal shot at a range of 100 meters was optimum against an approaching helicopter.(15) As before, the more RPGs firing simultaneously, the better chance of a hit and escape from an avenging wingman.(16)
Should the helicopters be flying further away, it was better to wait until the helicopter was 700-800 meters away and then fire, trying to catch the helicopter with the explosion of the round's self-destruction at 920 meters distance. Chances of hitting a helicopter at this range by the self-destruct mechanism were very limited, but they served to discourage reconnaissance helicopters and air assault landings, particularly if a SA-7 Strela or a Stinger shoulder-fired surface-to-air missile was also firing.(17)
[url]http://www.g2mil.com/RPG.htm[/url][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE] FIM-92A Stinger Weapons System: RMP & Basic [url]http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/stinger.htm[/url][/QUOTE]
2005-07-01 14:26 | User Profile
I see the Stinger is battery-operated
Anyone know if this battery is rechargable, and if so, how many charges it can work for?
2005-07-01 14:29 | User Profile
Faust, It seems you're theory is backed up by reality.
[SIZE=4][COLOR=Red]U.S. unable to find team after Afghan crash[/COLOR][/SIZE] [B]Ill-fated helicopter was sent to support missing reconnaissance group[/B]
MSNBC News Services Updated: 9:11 a.m. ET July 1, 2005
KABUL, Afghanistan - U.S. forces remain unable to locate a small U.S. reconnaissance team that a Special Forces unit was going to support when their helicopter was shot down, killing all 16 troops aboard, the U.S. military said on Friday.
ââ¬ÅWe are using all available assets to find our missing,ââ¬Â U.S. military spokesman Lt. Col. Jerry Oââ¬â¢Hara told reporters.
While U.S. forces do not know the whereabouts of the team, they have no reason to believe that its members, last heard of shortly before Tuesday afternoonââ¬â¢s crash, had been killed or captured, U.S. spokesman Colonel Jim Yonts said.
Yonts said he could ââ¬Ånot confirm or denyââ¬Â a claim by Taliban spokesman Abdul Latif Hakimi that the insurgents executed seven U.S. ââ¬Åspiesââ¬Â before the MH-47 helicopter was shot down in Kunar province bordering Pakistan.
ââ¬ÅWe do not have eyes on them right now, but there is no reason to believe that they are dead. If there was proof that they were killed they would be classified as killed,ââ¬Â he said.
[URL=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8391112/]Whole Story[/URL]
[B]And for my own research below.....[/B]
For the calendar year 2004 52 US Servicemen were killed in Afghanistan. For the 6 months of the calendar year 2005, 55 US Servicemen have already been killed in Afghanistan.
2005-07-01 15:36 | User Profile
It's too bad that a team of Navy Seals, and their support group died on a mission that they couldn't have completed (as the group that they were supposed to be rescuing is nowhere to be found).
_
2005-07-01 16:36 | User Profile
We do not have eyes on them right now, but there is no reason to believe that they are dead.
They'd better hope the team's dead. Afghans aren't known to do nice things to prisoners. Ref. the Soviet invasion and Kipling.
2005-07-01 21:13 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Marty]I see the Stinger is battery-operated
Anyone know if this battery is rechargable, and if so, how many charges it can work for?[/QUOTE]
Marty? as I read elsewhere the heat sensor that guides the Stingr to its target has to be retrofitted with a fresh whatever is needs in order for it to work as a target heat sensor.
2005-07-02 04:16 | User Profile
Marty,
I do not know anything about the Stinger's battery, but I am sure it could be fairly easily rewired to use a different one if needed in the event you could not get the right battery.
MadScienceType and xmetalhead,
It is seems almost certain the members of that reconnaissance team are dead. If they were still alive they would have called in by radio by now. Is seems they were finished off before the helicopter came. This puts the number dead at 24.
2005-07-02 06:49 | User Profile
The Chinook was shot down by an RPG, not a Stinger. The Afghans shot down a fair number of Soviet helicopters with RPG's. I have seen one shot going over 700 yards and hitting one dead center.
Stingers likely do not work any more, they had batteries and no spare parts available either.
Another Afghan tactic was to have a .50 caliber machine gun emplacement in a mountain above the places where helicopters would be flying in to land troops.
The upper part of the helicopter is far more vulnerable to bullets than the bottom.
2005-07-26 04:28 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AGAviator]The Chinook was shot down by an RPG, not a Stinger. The Afghans shot down a fair number of Soviet helicopters with RPG's. I have seen one shot going over 700 yards and hitting one dead center.
Stingers likely do not work any more, they had batteries and no spare parts available either.
Another Afghan tactic was to have a .50 caliber machine gun emplacement in a mountain above the places where helicopters would be flying in to land troops.
The upper part of the helicopter is far more vulnerable to bullets than the bottom.[/QUOTE] I don't doubt that the Chinook was shot down by an RPG. They have been effectively employed by both the Somalies and Afghans in the AA role. However, I would not underestimate the Afghan ability to reverse engineer parts for the stinger. They have made knock offs of many other weapons.
2005-07-26 04:49 | User Profile
Missiles aren't mechanical, a primitive society like that won't ever be able to reverse-engineer it. Let alone restore them to working order, if broken.
2005-07-26 06:05 | User Profile
Well, the Jews did it with the secret US misseles that they later sold to China in order for them to fight the US at a later date, anything is possible.
The longer we stay in Afgha and Iraq the more chances the rebels will have to obtain more modern weapons in order to fight the invaders.
2005-07-26 06:16 | User Profile
[QUOTE=madrussian]Missiles aren't mechanical, a primitive society like that won't ever be able to reverse-engineer it. Let alone restore them to working order, if broken.[/QUOTE] Didn't the Chinese reverse engineer and produce their own copy of the Stinger after getting their hands on some from Afghans in the 1980's? If so, it would not be hard for them to sell parts and knowhow to Afghans today to get their old Stingers back up and running. Replacing a battery isn't that hard, after all, especially if someone else is making the battery for you.
Just speculating out loud, though. My own guess would be that an RPG did it.
2005-07-26 12:28 | User Profile
If you read some googlings on such missiles, there are occasional references to "shelf-life". I don't think it's just battery. What about solid fuel, for example? Or sensors? If chinks can supply parts, they may as well supply the whole thing, as the parts that go bad are probably most critical ones.