What tape

[Ivan]

Probably tried to keep this away from the public to prevent:
1: huge US embarassment
2: US paying damages to the survivors of the attack because they will almost certainly get lung cancer or worse

But the area controller was in error also... only AFTER they ID-ed and shot the vehicle he discovers that in said position there could be friendly vehicles.

[expat]

Leak? The MOD and DOD are like sieves

Sieves.............more like a weir at times  ;D

Matt

[Craig.]

Leak? The MOD and DOD are like sieves

I thought it was an open door policy.

[C]

Accidental or not, the only thing I will add, having read the transcript, is one has to wonder what degree of negligence was shown in the continual ingorance of the orange coalition ID marking, which are referenced several times. Not as bad as the F-16/Canadian incident in A-ghan, but still interesting again to note that they appear to have been ANG A-10s.

[Craig.]

my only question about the orange markings, with it being widely known anyway, isn't it easy for the enemy to just put it on their armor and vehicles? Or is there a specific setup thats not widely known?

[Woodlouse2002]

my only question about the orange markings, with it being widely known anyway, isn't it easy for the enemy to just put it on their armor and vehicles? Or is there a specific setup thats not widely known?

I should think when the enemy finds out that they're using orange markings, and starts using them themselves, then you stop using them and thank the enemy for making themselves painfully obvious to air attack.

[Chris_F]

my only question about the orange markings, with it being widely known anyway, isn't it easy for the enemy to just put it on their armor and vehicles? Or is there a specific setup thats not widely known?

I should think when the enemy finds out that they're using orange markings, and starts using them themselves, then you stop using them and thank the enemy for making themselves painfully obvious to air attack.

I think there would be a couple of hours or days in between there where the enemy could take advantage of the confusion.  I've not read the transcript but put yourself in a theoretical scenario in the pilot's shoes.  You're called in to fly CAS for friendlies under fire.  You come on scene and ID your target.  You note the markings.  You radio down and get confirmation that it is your target.

Why wouldn't you fire?  Not firing could mean the enemy can engage friendlies.

[Woodlouse2002]

They wern't told that that was their target.In fact, the first words in the video would have you believe that they'd already attacked the vehicles they were called in to deal with. They saw the orange identification markings, asked several times whether there were any friendlies in the area, then started to presume that what they could see were orange rocket launchers and then attacked without permission from the forward air controller.

[Craig.]

thing is chris, these wern't actually their targets.
From what I can tell they were returning from a mission and happend to see these guys. They wanted to destroy them before RTB. Sadly the problems them started because the guys handling battlefield watch or whatever you call it, told the pilots there were no friendlies in the area, either through incorrect position communications or poor communication between armies.
Personally this is why I am not a big fan of non pre-mission target engagement, accidents like this happen.
I cant really fault the pilots, they went through what appeared to be proper procedure, and were given assurances there were no friendlies in the area. After this you've really only got seconds to react.

[Hagar]

The whole point of this is not to apportion blame. The official enquiries will decide that. The question is; why was the existence of this evidence denied for so long & why was it ever classified as Top-Secret? This is not uncommon & can only be regarded as a deliberate cover-up by someone in authority for whatever motives.

[Chris_F]

The whole point of this is not to apportion blame. The official enquiries will decide that. The question is; why was the existence of this evidence denied for so long & why was it ever classified as Top-Secret? This is not uncommon & can only be regarded as a deliberate cover-up by someone in authority for whatever motives.

I've seen all sorts of burocratic reasons for something like this that have nothing to do with cover-up.  Perhaps the earlier parts of the mission were classified and therefore the entire tape had to be considered classified?  Perhaps one month prior a mission the pilot flew was classified therefore the tape machine was "contaminated" and every tape needed to be considered classified.  Heck, if I take a music CD in to the area where I work that CD automatically is considered contaminated and needs to be shredded.  There are lots of silly rules regarding classification any one of which could kick off some burocratic nightmare that results in something like this.

[C]

Ignoring the rest of the tape, I think the mindset of the aircrew may have been revealed by the wingman on the tape - bearing in mind he was the one prompting the other aircraft about the ID markings several times on the tape.

"We're going to jail for this"

It will be interesting to see the entire tape in it's entirity in real time. The other issue the papers we're picking up on may have been either one of pilots of the FAC having a north/south faff.

[F3Hadlow]

"We're in jail dude". Well, if they go then make sure the controller(s) who advised them there were no friendlies in the area joins them...