Previous page | Contents | Next page
14.1  |  Military equipment (post-conflict)
represents the most significant capability shortfall on Operation TELIC Phase IV and
is likely to remain an enduring requirement, particularly for asymmetric warfare.”
920.  The report stated:
“UK forces lack sufficient ISTAR capability to provide persistence and the ability
to stream imagery in real time and cross‑component, over a wide range of
climatic conditions … This capability shortfall has been highlighted on all recent
UK operations … Some rotary platforms have proved too vulnerable to ground
attack, and whilst the covert characteristics of UAVs make them well suited to the
ISTAR role, the Phoenix UAV can only operate for half the year in‑theatre due to
temperature restrictions.”
921.  The report highlighted that use of US Predator and “several UORs” to increase
manned airborne surveillance capabilities had helped to alleviate the capability gap.
922.  The Chiefs of Staff discussed the DOC Report on 22 February.486
923.  The minutes recorded that “connectivity was key to bridging the ISTAR capability
gap and enhancing the overall operational agility”. Lt Gen Fry had advised that “a
layered review” had already been undertaken to assess the overall ISTAR programme.
ACM Bagnall undertook to arrange an ISTAR update for the Chiefs of Staff.
924.  The ISTAR update was provided to the Chiefs of Staff on 22 March, with two
presentations: one about the UK’s existing assets and one about the capability gap and
ISTAR strategy to 2020.487
925.  The minutes recorded:
“… it was emphasised that the ISTAR architecture that had been illustrated …
represented a significant step forward in connecting the many previously stove‑piped
collection assets into a coherent ISTAR plan. Much work was still required and three
key investment decisions were identified:
The balance of investment between ISTAR and other military capabilities.
The apportionment of investment between collection, data management and
dissemination of information.
The degree of overlap required from different ISTAR assets in order to provide
multi‑source verification.”
926.  Sir Kevin Tebbit “highlighted the importance of investment decisions in EP07
and emphasised that given the uncertainty surrounding the availability of resources
in the future, the ISTAR architecture would need to be sufficiently robust to develop
incrementally as resources became available”.
486  Minutes, 22 February 2005, Chiefs of Staff meeting.
487  Minutes, 22 March 2005, Chiefs of Staff meeting.
157
Previous page | Contents | Next page