Previous page | Contents | Next page
14.1  |  Military equipment (post-conflict)
We shall continue to seek out opportunities to improve and enhance our deployed
helicopter fleets … but I believe that we are on the right path towards an enduring
and sustainable capability which will allow us to fulfil our key tasks, delivering upon
our important commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan.”
1272.  A report of Mr Ainsworth’s visit to Iraq in December 2007 stated:
“Concerns were raised with regard to ISTAR provision, which had decreased over
recent months, but which would become increasingly important in the overwatch
posture; there had been successes – such as Hermes 450 – but the withdrawal
of capabilities such as the Danish … helicopter and Scan Eagle were significant
losses.”665
1273.  Mr Ainsworth was briefed by key personnel involved in manning and operating the
C‑RAM system:
“He was reassured to hear that its success rate in interdicting IDF rounds continued
to improve although he noted that there was still some way to go. He was
particularly struck by the extent to which the general perception of C‑RAM’s
capability had turned around since his last visit, with personnel at all levels praising
its hugely positive impact on morale.”
1274.  On 9 January 2008, a junior officer in MND(SE) produced a review of ISTAR
capability within MND(SE) for PJHQ.666 He explained that the move to Provincial Iraqi
Control (PIC) in the UK’s AOR had:
“… necessitated a wholesale review of ISTAR capability to support the MND(SE)
mission. This has occurred at a time when there is a noticeable reduction in
the ISTAR assets and capabilities provided by organic and MNC‑I/Theatre
platforms. This is now affecting MND(SE)’s ability to prosecute operations against
irreconcilable Shia extremists and will constrain MND(SE) in delivering its missions
and tasks …”
1275.  The officer made a number of recommendations including bringing forward the
Astor and Raptor programmes, introducing an aircraft such as Defender to enable
low‑level support to ground forces and the introduction of a weaponised UAV capability.
1276.  The officer stated that MND(SE) could find no record of “a formal ISTAR
Estimate” having been conducted and “rather an iterative approach” had been adopted,
“resulting in a fragmented approach to ISTAR” that had led to capability gaps.
1277.  Considering the FMV capability, the officer explained that there were “a number of
Corps assets” but MND(SE) was having “less success in securing these” and two assets
665  Minute PS/Min(AF) to APS/SofS [MOD], 10 January 2008, ‘Minister(AF)’s Visit to Iraq
17‑21 December’.
666  Minute COS MND(SE) to ACOS J2 PJHQ, 9 January 2008, ‘Review of ISTAR Capability Within
MND(SE)’.
215
Previous page | Contents | Next page