Top Gun

Author
Discussion

shoehorn

686 posts

144 months

Sunday 7th September 2014
quotequote all
sherbertdip said:
Why are you making this crap up?
All I can see is his statement of liking the tale.
I like the tale of the wolf that destroys pigs houses,although it`s probably not true either.
And I certainly would not expect to be accused of making it up just because I expressed a preference to it.

Roverload

850 posts

137 months

Sunday 7th September 2014
quotequote all
Don't know if it's true or not but the officer who so kindly gave me my 3 points told me he got a major bking for pointing his gun at HMS Cornwall, the admiralty were apparently not impressed! True or not? I leave it to you but I'd like to believe an officer of the law would be honest....

Red Devil

13,067 posts

209 months

Monday 8th September 2014
quotequote all
Osinjak said:
Breadvan72 said:
I think that we are both in the same page.
Absolutely. I have never heard a story about a tank shooting down an A10 because frankly it's impossible (and didn't happen) so I'm curious to know where this story exists. Who me? says, 'I personally love the story...' so I'd like to see this story (that's not a dig at Who me? by the way but if he's read this story I'd like to read it too).
The max elevation of the L11A5 gun fitted to British Challenger tanks used in the Gulf War is +20 degrees. I reckon it would be physically impossible for such a weapon to down an A10 (or any other military aircraft for that matter). Any kill would have to be from the 7.62 machine gun. Quite a feat (if it ever happened).

anonymous-user

55 months

Monday 8th September 2014
quotequote all
It appears safe to conclude that the incident referred to never happened. The story perhaps sprung up as a response to the unfortunate strafings of UK vehicles by US aircraft.

DoubleSix

11,718 posts

177 months

Monday 8th September 2014
quotequote all
Red Devil said:
The max elevation of the L11A5 gun fitted to British Challenger tanks used in the Gulf War is +20 degrees. I reckon it would be physically impossible for such a weapon to down an A10 (or any other military aircraft for that matter). Any kill would have to be from the 7.62 machine gun. Quite a feat (if it ever happened).
Tank sitting on an incline?



wink

TheConverted

2,227 posts

155 months

Monday 8th September 2014
quotequote all
Red Devil said:
Osinjak said:
Breadvan72 said:
I think that we are both in the same page.
Absolutely. I have never heard a story about a tank shooting down an A10 because frankly it's impossible (and didn't happen) so I'm curious to know where this story exists. Who me? says, 'I personally love the story...' so I'd like to see this story (that's not a dig at Who me? by the way but if he's read this story I'd like to read it too).
The max elevation of the L11A5 gun fitted to British Challenger tanks used in the Gulf War is +20 degrees. I reckon it would be physically impossible for such a weapon to down an A10 (or any other military aircraft for that matter). Any kill would have to be from the 7.62 machine gun. Quite a feat (if it ever happened).
what if its been dropped out of a plane, and using its main gun to control its free fall into a lake?


anonymous-user

55 months

Monday 8th September 2014
quotequote all
Yeah, I pulled that move in Call of Duty 12 Operation Desert Wellies just the other day.

TheConverted

2,227 posts

155 months

Tuesday 9th September 2014
quotequote all
Breadvan72 said:
Yeah, I pulled that move in Call of Duty 12 Operation Desert Wellies just the other day.
Look I know your a one of those legal types, but it was in that documentary about the A team. so don't take the Micky do you're research!

anonymous-user

55 months

Tuesday 9th September 2014
quotequote all
I saw it on Ultra Force Commando Recon Stealth Team Alpha Handjob Wannabes on Dave, so you're right.

Osinjak

5,453 posts

122 months

Tuesday 9th September 2014
quotequote all
TheConverted said:
what if its been dropped out of a plane, and using its main gun to control its free fall into a lake?
Too expensive. Simply reverse it into a deep ditch and hey presto, instant anti-aircraft gun.

Red Devil

13,067 posts

209 months

Tuesday 9th September 2014
quotequote all
DoubleSix said:
Red Devil said:
The max elevation of the L11A5 gun fitted to British Challenger tanks used in the Gulf War is +20 degrees. I reckon it would be physically impossible for such a weapon to down an A10 (or any other military aircraft for that matter). Any kill would have to be from the 7.62 machine gun. Quite a feat (if it ever happened).
Tank sitting on an incline?



wink
Osinjak said:
TheConverted said:
what if its been dropped out of a plane, and using its main gun to control its free fall into a lake?
Too expensive. Simply reverse it into a deep ditch and hey presto, instant anti-aircraft gun.
Get real guys. The current Challenger 2 tank has a 10 shot per minute effective RoF.
The limiting factor is the laying of the gun not reloading time.
In lateral flight how far do you think an A10 can travel in 6 seconds?

As I said, the anti-aircraft component is the pintle mounted L37A2 7.62mm GPMG.

DoubleSix

11,718 posts

177 months

Tuesday 9th September 2014
quotequote all
errrrrm see my winking smiley?

In lateral flight how far do you think a parrot can travel in 6 seconds?



Edited by DoubleSix on Tuesday 9th September 23:48

yellowjack

17,080 posts

167 months

Wednesday 10th September 2014
quotequote all
Red 4 said:
Breadvan72 said:
Alas, Red, nine soldiers died in the 1993 incident. Many others have died in other US vs UK incidents. To be fair, UK vs UK incidents have also resulted in deaths, and US vs US too.
1991.(2 Warriors destroyed by an A-10).

24% of US troops killed in the first Gulf War were due to "friendly fire".


Edited by Red 4 on Wednesday 3rd September 13:55
Nine young men, in their teens/twenties were killed that day, and eleven were injured. Here's the written answer to a question asked in Parliament regarding 'friendly fire' casualties in 1991... http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/written_answers...

The list of the men who lost their lives on 26 February 1991...

Fusilier Lee Thompson, 19, 3rd Battalion Royal Regiment of Fusiliers.
Fusilier Stephen Satchell, 18, 3rd Battalion Royal Regiment of Fusiliers.
Fusilier Conrad Cole, 17, 3rd Battalion Royal Regiment of Fusiliers.
Fusilier Martin Ferguson, 21, 3rd Battalion Royal Regiment of Fusiliers.
Fusilier Richard Gillespie, 3rd Battalion Royal Regiment of Fusiliers.
Fusilier Kevin Leech, 20, 3rd Battalion Royal Regiment of Fusiliers.
Fusilier Paul Atkinson, 19, 3rd Battalion Royal Regiment of Fusiliers.
Private Neil Donald, 1st Battalion Queen's Own Highlanders.
Private John Lang, 19, 1st Battalion Queen's Own Highlanders

I served with the 3RRF battle group, as part of 39 Field Squadron RE. There was a lot of confusion on the radios during the 'contact' and subsequent reports were full of conjecture and speculation about what kind of weapon system had inflicted the casualties. I don't know who it was, but a senior "Zero" callsign put a lid on it when the truth started to unfold, and units were tasked to respond appropriately in the immediate aftermath. I had 'Battle Group Net' in one ear, and our own 'Squadron Net' in the other, and had as good a grasp of what was happening as anyone, I think.

We (an Engineer section) in an FV432 APC, and one of the troop's recce sergeants went forward with our troop commander (2 x Spartans). As we arrived on the scene, from a distance I mistakenly thought that the two destroyed vehicles were enemy tanks, due to the smoke still emanating from c/s 22, and the generally poor quality of the light at that point. It was only as we closed in and viewed the scene from a different angle that the distinctive shape of the Warrior IFVs became clear in silhouette, and closer still we could make out the inverted 'V' recognition mark on the side of the wagons.

Friendly fire isn't anything new. Throughout history, there have been massive numbers of casualties caused by friendly forces. It's just that with relatively low casualty rates in modern actions, those who are killed by their allies stand out rather more obviously within the lists.

anonymous-user

55 months

Wednesday 10th September 2014
quotequote all
It must have been very unpleasant to encounter that grim scene.

I suppose that at least nowadays we read the names and backgrounds of each individual who dies in action, rather than seeing long lists of anonymous casualties posted day in day out, and the public are rightly (extra) concerned when these named service men and women die through mistakes, bad equipment and so on, but reading of incidents like this is never fun.