You sure they're dead?!
 

Is it just me, or does anyone else think that the chopper used a wee bit too much firepower on it's targets? By the looks of it, it seems to be a town or a city. :o

Apache firing missile on two suspected insurgents, comes around and fires another missile to a mortartube the two suspects were carrying. (Titty ad warning!!)
http://www.nothingtoxic.com/media/12...g_2_Insurgents

Now, I do understand that the 30mm isnt the most accurate weapon, but surely it does less damage to the surrounding area than a farking missile, ow sorry, 2 missiles.

Where was this? Afghanistan? It's good that they put up the pressure of the Taliban with this new offensive and all, but I must say, that was a wee bit overkill, wasn't it?

I find that a bit exaggerated as well. First there is no telling how many civilians are around and second just think of the costs of a guided missile.

What was the firing distance? The missiels took some time to reach the target. I see the possibility that they fired from a distance where the 30mm maybe was not reliable, and did not wish to put the gunship at risk when approaching that complex area with buildings (with maybe some nasty surprises waiting for them to come closer).

That second shot they were just shooting at corpses! Government waste at all levels:nope:

Actually, they destroyed the mortartube. But still, waste. :yep:

I found some of the comments on the linked site rather disturbing. :nope:

Looked like a thorough job to me :hmmm:

Good to see some insurgents getting what they deserve.

A missile hit its target a burst of 30mm some will hit some will keep going maybe hitting innocent people(it is very accurate 30mm but dont forget that the shells will keep going right through a human body and then hit someones house or what ever behind the hell fire will hit the tube blow it to bits and kill anyone within a few meters but no further.).What do you think is better?Also as FLIR quality is reduced by the military so that you cant see the true details there should be a read out on the screen somewhere a read out that shows the range someone with an anti-war view could also have scrubbed this out to further thier veiw.
Destroying the insurgetnts abilty to destabilze is worth the missile it damn sure would be if you might be on the reciving end of that mortor.

Take look at the 20mm of a SuperCobra here:(the clip name is wrong this is a SuperCobra gun sight):http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuHcI...eature=related
And some apache 30 mike mike(this clip is very clear but not what an un scrubbed viedo would look like also note that the chopper is hovering being a very stable gun platform):http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIjci...eature=related
This one at the end will show you that in a moving Apache the 30mm will have a high scatter:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzktR...eature=related

It's going to keep going all of about 3ft before it hits the ground at that angle.

I see little wrong with the use of missiles here.
I imagine that the 30mm would give enough time for at least one of the
targets to run, even if they didn't notice the heli after it closed in to use
the cannon.

The risk to civilians seams minimal. Especially in the case of the second
missile as I expect any one in the area has ducked or run after the first.

I see that you did not look at the clips in several it very clear that the 30mm shells go far past a mere 3 feet.
And you are not going to "duck" a 30mm burst come on.Run run run! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkODv...eature=related
As you can see stuff is not as accurte as hollwood will lead you to belive but they still got let down by ducking and running.

Check the last target he goes 30 ft in the air I bet!:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QnM8...eature=related

You are right the roofs in the area do have shell holes and such emplying that any civilains have vacated.Though if you look around you can find viedos
where Apache crew will not attack a knwon target if he should go into a structor to which occupancy is unknown.They have taken advantage of that in the past and forced people to stay in homes so we cant use airpower.

So was this before or after the long sought after directive from the US military about not blowing stuff up in built up areas with missiles even when there is a positive ID on insurgents.
By long sought after I mean from before the actual invasion of Afghanstan.
Ok this footage is from Iraq , but that is after the invassion of Afghanistan and the recomendation was before Afghanistan.
You gotta love those comments on that website though.
It makes you wonder if certain people on this forum have the same dictionary

Who might you be addressing? I and others are saying that the hellfire is actualy the weapon in some cases that is less likely to cause innocent people to get hurt.And the US military has had a goal to try to avoid collertal damage for some time well before any of the current wars but it does not mean that you dont fight the enemy at all. you seem to not know what you are talking about and just trying insult others who have posted if you dont like this threads topic dont post in it.I think the fact that we dont just blow some home to bits when there are innocent people inside to be a good thing you jerk.i was in the military and therefore went threw all LOAC and I dont know the exact ROE for the chpppers in these vids but as far as LOAC they are within the bounds.
Well this thread is going south see you guys.:salute:

Sorry Stealhead the last part was directed at someone who likes to use the word fact but doesn't seem to know what it means.
So onto your post, given the clan/tribal situation in Iraq/Afghanistan what are the recommendations about air strikes if there is any chance of collateral damage even when there is a clearly or almost positively identified target ?
Yes they do mean that you are fighting with one hand tied behind your back and it can and will be exploited by the enemy....but can you understand why the recommendations were made given the nature of the conflict?

that mortar tube will never fire on allied troops again.

no waste seen from my perspective.

OK then but a being a bit more specifc in the first post would been helpful as it came off as targeting all prior posters.Sure I agree with the "hand tied behind the back" anyone who seeks to use an innocent perosn as a sheild is not what I wwould classify as a human being.An Apache being pretty close within a mile or so of a given target would have a better idea what the situation was. What is not really shown in these videos is the level of contact with a unit on the ground who may be even closer than the Apache and providing the crew with a picture of what is going on.

As to the ROE question I cant answer that you would have to ask someone in an Apache or what ever other type aircraft might be hands unit. I would say if the likely damage where to be all to property he is dead and they would pay the owner for damages.(unless the target was the owner.) If there where known civilans such as his family thye would not attack.(of course they have to cleary know they where there and sadly for an innocent family member you cant always know everything.)What can be said is that the other side has 0 problem killing no matter who is in the way and they also expressly target civilans as well as soliders.

I have seen a clip though I cant find it now on youtube where you could here the ground troops raido and they tell the apache to come around to the target from a certain heading because the one the chopper was on would result in the rounds also hitting an Iraqi home the family was with the americans but they still did not want to damage it.

I assume the reason that the insurgents appear to be unaware is that the Apache could be over a mile away and not be making enough noise to get atteantion they can hear it Im sure but not well enough for them to be concerned do to more direct threats like ground forces very close by.

And what if the building right next to it would've been not so strong and would have collapsed from the 2 blasts, possibly burying civvies under it?

Would you still say it wasnt a waste?

and i suppose the two men carrying the mortar tube take the care to consider "civvies" in their exploits?

It matters not how you classify the actual target , what matters is that in a tribal/clan society it matter as a hell of a lot who actually kills the "shield".
The Taliban were on the way out in Afghanistan prior to the invasion , they had little popular support , they had very much outstayed their welcome ....but now they are back in bigger numbers with lots of local support.
While in Iraq the big change came about with the fiasco in Fallujah, the supposed targets melted away and you ended up with a hell of a lot more locals out for blood.
A few Hellfires are relatively inexpensive in the short term big picture , but the fallout from their use in a residential area can be very expensive in the long run.

Still on the positive side, at least the use of the AC-130 in residential ares is not really an issue anymore.