|
Author
|
Topic: If I may ask a modern question . . .
|
3dp
Pilot
|
posted 10-01- 09:55 PM
   
I had heard that the RAF no longer used the JP233 runway denial submunition dispenser a while back. Now I just got my RAF Yearbook 2001 and it has a note in its RAF Year 2000 section about the last JP233 being destroyed as it was banned by the Ottawa Treaty. Anybody know anything about this? I'm just curious.My guess for its demise would be because of the repair work deterring anti-personnel mines it scattered with the runway cratering munitions. If it is, it seems a shame to lose the use of such a potent system when you consider that the "mines" it scattered would certainly not qualify as being a long term threat to civilian populations like those hidden and buried throughout the world. ------------------
Be seeing you,
3dp
Visit RAF Harkness! IP: Logged |
Spanky the Mad Dog
Pilot
|
posted 10-02- 03:06 AM
That depends, in this city the military and the civil airport share the runways. I don't think that happens all to often though. Maybe someone saw landmines and just though BAD, BAN IT. It does seem like a good solution to me too. IP: Logged |
Sunray
Pilot
|
posted 10-02- 09:03 AM
That treaty was just another example of our socialist f**ks wasting MY tax money. God knows how much it cost. They did the same thing when the CF changed the the M-16. The socialist f**ks destroyed our FN's and a lot of the old Enfields rather than sell them and get some money for them. Waste of MY tax money. IP: Logged |
Werner Molders
JAG
|
posted 10-02- 09:26 AM
Amen, Sunray.  On a somewhat different note, in view of the possibilities of such munitions needing to be used against Afghanistan, there is a very easy loophole to use - get American planes to drop the runway denial bombs. The US isn't a signatory to the Ottawa Treaty because of its role in the buffer zone between N/S Korea. Werner ------------------
Abbeville Field: Dedicated to the SDOE Experience. IP: Logged |
3dp
Pilot
|
posted 10-02- 10:16 PM
The real downside to it is that I don't think there's another weapon like JP233 around. Durandal just doesn't pack the same punch.Speaking as an American, it has always bothered me that our military thinking always seems to assume things like there will always be a big strike package with supporting aircraft, fighters, etc. No allowance seems to be made for the possibilty of smaller forces having to get along in less than ideal situations. I think it's always been one of my draws to the RAF that the planning always seems to be for a rough conflict where you might have to put enemy airfields out of commision since you may not have all the fighters in the world to deal with the enemy if he gets into the air. Consequently, we (the US) don't have a JP233 equivalent, do we? Our doctrine seems to assume we'll just shoot 'em down if they get into the air. But what if a situation arises where our forces aren't covered by an umbrella of fighters? Food for thought in these dangerous times . . . ------------------
Be seeing you,
3dp
Visit RAF Harkness! [This message has been edited by 3dp (edited 10-02-2001).] IP: Logged |
Nat
JAG
|
posted 10-03- 05:31 PM
3dp, I'd never thought of things that way, but infact you're spot on, we never assume air superiority, and so develope weapons and methods on denying the enemy that luxury, we train for rough low level fighting with the odds against not for, you thoughts are worth listening to as no one should ever assume they will simply swamp an enemy, you must always make sure you have what it takes to do that, not just expect it.I have to admit though, I didn't ealise that the JP233 had been banned, we used it as anti infantry in the gulf and it worked a treat  (maybe that helped get it banned lol) hell for that matter we also used the Viper mine clearance system for anti infantry (trench/berm destroying) in the gulf, now that was something to see. IP: Logged |
3dp
Pilot
|
posted 10-03- 10:19 PM
The nice thing about training for the worst is that it's much easier to adapt to less demanding work like the Tornado/Buccaneer combos did in the Gulf when they went to medium/higher altitudes with LGBs. There were problems, but nothing major. By contrast, I pity any aircrew who would have to rapidly adapt in the opposite direction.------------------
Be seeing you,
3dp
Visit RAF Harkness! IP: Logged |
FSIC Messageboard
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
