Previous page | Contents | Next page
14.1  |  Military equipment (post-conflict)
being asked to do (expeditionary Land based operations) rather than what they
might have to do (force on force operations across all three environments).”552
1044.  On 29 June, Air Commodore Brian Bates, Director Directorate of Joint Capability,
produced two papers for Gen Granville‑Chapman; one on rotary wing operational
shortfalls and one on ISTAR operational shortfalls.
1045.  The paper on rotary wing shortfalls stated:
“The Department’s BH [battlefield helicopter] capability is a finite resource that is
required to support a number of concurrent Military Tasks overseas and a variety
of Standing Home commitments. Currently the BH force is heavily committed on
operations and is recognised as a Defence pinch point …”
“A range of factors have contributed to the current pressures on the BH force; not
least, a legacy of underinvestment in BH sustainability and the fact that a significant
proportion of BH fleets are operating in excess of DPAs [Defence Planning
Assumptions]. The enduring nature of today’s operations, allied to a presumed need
for BH during any drawdown or overwatch period, suggests that this situation is
unlikely to change in the medium term. Other complicating factors include: … the
increased IED threat that had led to a tendency to revert to the use of helicopters as
the default option for protection where other means, such as properly protected road
moves, may be possible; and, a paucity of ISTAR assets, leading to an increased
demand on BH platforms.”553
1046.  The paper went on to summarise the operational requirements in each theatre.
For Operation TELIC it stated:
“Five Merlin …, three Sea King .., four Lynx …, and 3 [Helicopter] (Broadsword
[ISTAR]) are currently deployed on Op TELIC. The CABHWG [Capability Area
Battlefield Helicopter Working Group], drawing on PJHQ‑led AFLRs [Aviation
Force Level Reviews], has established that current support is sufficient for the
task. This was subsequently confirmed by CJO, although circumstances that could
necessitate an increase in BH have been identified. The early stages of transition to
Operational Overwatch (OOW) may free up some lift but this is likely to be absorbed
by emerging tasks in support of OOW forces, OGDs and the need to maintain
situational awareness …”
1047.  The ISTAR paper stated that the key shortfall in FMV was “likely to increase
rather than diminish” with the move to Operational Overwatch and the evolving concept
of operations in Afghanistan.554 Without additional resources, the opportunities to
make substantial improvements to the delivery of ISTAR on operations were limited
to “process enhancements” or securing greater access to coalition assets.
552  Letter Jackson to Dannatt, 21 June 2006, [untitled].
553  Minute DJtCap to MA/VCDS, 29 June 2006, ‘Rotary Wing Operational Shortfalls’.
554  Minute DJtCap to MA/VCDS, 29 June 2006, ‘ISTAR Operational Shortfalls’.
177
Previous page | Contents | Next page