RFA take down Pirates

#4
Why did they have to "permanently disable" the new outboard engine? I would have paid good money for it if they could have got it onto E-Bay
 

Seadog

War Hero
Moderator
#7
From the MoD link I do like this

.........the Royal Marines permanently disabled their brand new outboard engine and handed them
oars
.
:D

I bet Royal felt very, very smug, and so they should.

However;

Suspecting that they may have found a Pirate Action Group (PAG), Fort
Victoria was granted approval to conduct a boarding by the CTF 151
Commander, Rear Admiral Sinan Ertugral, Turkish Navy.
What happened to Mission Command? Maybe the Turks don't approve of allowing local commanders to act on their own initiative in accordance with the higher commander's intent, get in the face of pirates and those suspected of being pirates.

Hermes R 12, I don't think that your link to some (different ship's) old deployment snaps of a few hugging chums coupled with a gay sound track is relevant to Fort Victoria's action or Current Affairs. It doesn't even makes the RFA look cool or steely.
 

R12_CV

Lantern Swinger
#8
...were carrying six AK47s, a rocket propelled grenade (RPG) launcher with four warheads and six RPG booster charges, and a number of supplies, two hand-held GPS units, three make-shift ladder sections and four mobile phones.
Reads like a random car boot search in Sheffield..! 8O

BZ to them and our lass onboard from Barnsley :thumbright:
 
#9
Seadog - the RN doesn't operate on Mission Command any more. The "political dynamics" and "legal sensitivities" in each case, when combined with Fleet wishing to "ensure Full Command responsibilities" mean that the CO has to go up the chain in every instance......
 

Seadog

War Hero
Moderator
#10
MOD hat on: one deletion of a purile (in context) addition. Wilf, there is something you should know about the Current Affairs forum.

Poster hat.

Alfred the Great, I haven't heard that Mission Command has been replaced as

"....... the fundamental Service organisational philosophy in an age of centralisation enabled by real time communications" *

but I share your implicit dismay at the overuse of the so-called long screwdriver. I've seen 'Mission Command ' in CO's orders from UKMCC recently. Alive but not very well perhaps or has it really been binned?

* unreferenced. You may recognise its source.
 
#11
Dr Jim Storr makes the case we've never done Mission Command in HM Armed Forces, and I'll be honest, as soon as we step outside of the SCXA's and into something a little more "grown-up", I've never seen it either.

I have however feigned comms difficulties and cracked on anyway, wearing the bollocking afterwards....
 
#12
alfred_the_great said:
Dr Jim Storr makes the case we've never done Mission Command in HM Armed Forces, and I'll be honest, as soon as we step outside of the SCXA's and into something a little more "grown-up", I've never seen it either.

I have however feigned comms difficulties and cracked on anyway, wearing the bollocking afterwards....
Sandy Woodward gave it a good go in '82 when he tried to push the ROE and give the green light for Conqueror to sink the Belgrano earlier than she did without going through the "proper" chain of command.

The stupid thing is that if he had got away with it, all the subsequent irrelevant nausea about whether or not she was going in the wrong direction at the time she was torpedoed would have been avoided.

UKMCC Bahrain, from my experience, actually seem to have been pretty switched on wrt the principle of Mission Command (but I have been out of the loop for a while now so no longer "current")
 

Similar threads