Des nouvelles de la British Army

[P4]

Comme d'habitude le Mod en prend plein la tete. :lol:

http://defenceoftherealm.blogspot.com/2009/05/not-that-important.html

http://defenceoftherealm.blogspot.com/2009/06/invisible-scandal.html

[g4lly]

Ca continue ... avec le "Jackal", le camion tout terrain typé raid force spécial dans le désert.

Visiblement il sert a patrouiller sur les pistes afghane et s'expose donc aux IED... contre lesquels il n'est d'aucune protection.

The lightly armoured Jackal, writes Smith, was designed for open terrain but is increasingly being used on Afghanistan's roads, where it is highly vulnerable to bomb blasts. The Taliban has turned to the roadside bomb as its main weapon against Nato forces, with three quarters of the 32 British troops killed this year dying in explosions, the Jackal being a prime target.

Probablement un bon véhicule mais utilisé à contre emploi ...

That the vehicle was being targeted was highlighted by Thomas Harding in The Daily Telegraph on 1 June, when he reported that perhaps a quarter of the 100-strong fleet so far delivered to Afghanistan had been wrecked or badly damaged by Taleban attacks.

...

According to Smith, commanders say the Jackal is well suited to its original role of driving across rough terrain in a reconnaissance or attack role, but is not suitable for Afghanistan's roads. However, a lack of helicopters and the vulnerability of the two other light vehicles, the Snatch Land Rover and the lightly protected Vector troop carrier, forces the use of Jackals on the road.

This is exactly what we feared would happen when the vehicle was first introduced. Originally procured for the special forces, the lack of protection was justified for its specific role, where troops can rely on surprise and speed, but where they are being tied down to routine operations the dynamic changes.

Thus says Richard North, author of Ministry of Defeat, a new book on the MoD's failures, "The Jackal is fundamentally flawed ... The driver and commander are positioned over the front wheels, making them vulnerable to mines."

Needless to say, the MoD misses the point. "The Jackal's great strength is that it can go anywhere – across the most difficult terrain. It is a superb vehicle but could not do what it does were it laden down." The inference is that the vehicle should carry more armour. But, at seven tons, a vehicle of that weight – equivalent to the RG-31 – could be adequately protected if it had been designed properly.

Such is the mindset of the MoD, however, that protection equals weight rather than good design. Its idea of conferring protection is to bolt on armour – of which there are now over two tons on the Jackal – rather than get the design right in the first place.

Now troops are paying the price – as we predicted all along, first warning of this almost exactly two years ago. Perhaps now we will see yet another MoD procurement disaster exposed. But, so committed is the Army to this deathtrap that it will be some time before the Jackal goes the same way as the Vector and is taken out of service.

With ten dead already, though, it must surely only be a matter of time.

http://defenceoftherealm.blogspot.com/2009/06/and-then-there-were-ten.html

[g4lly]

AVA-2

Pour compenser le manque de camion blindé sérieux de la British Army ...

Dare-Bryan's latest creation is the Advanced Vehicle Architecture (AVA) family of vehicles. The 4x4 AVA-1 appeared at Millbrook last year and was back this year, looking more like a real prototype and less like a dressed-up mockup. It was joined by AVA-2, the 6x6 configuration and a candidate for the UK's Offensive Utility Vehicle System (OUVS) requirement, and a bodywork mock-up for what Lockheed Martin calls Jackal 3, and what Dare-Bryan calls "a land gunship". Even ambling around the showgrounds, AVA drew some stares, because it really doesn't look like a truck.

Dare-Bryan started designing military vehicles 12 years ago after a long career in Formula 1. Like the Lotus, McLaren and Porsche cars he designed, Dare-Bryan gave the military vehicles a space-frame chassis, mid-engine and double-wishbone suspension. On the AVA, the space-frame also carries the mine-protection hardware, including an armored floor that forms the top of the chassis box.

AVA is designed to be highly modular. Different upperworks with different levels of ballistic protection (Israel's Plasan is working on the AVA team) can be attached to the flat-topped chassis. Depending on configuration, the engine can be installed behind the front wheels or ahead of the rears. The chassis can be converted from 4x4 to 6x6 in an hour by bolting on a rear module.

The F-117-like body shape is not for show. The idea is that, in a mine blast, the front wheels will pass to either side of the cabin - and there is no need for more than two front seats.

I did not go offroad in the AVA - the prototype is at too early a stage - but did run around the course at remarkable speeds, strapped into the rear-facing open seats of a Jackal. It was (given the speed and the terrain) not a bad ride at all. 

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a71513c6a-c9d0-4d7d-a3a7-91a0a42f7f44

[g4lly]

http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/RevolutionaryArmourUnveiledAtDefenceEquipmentEvent.htm

The DVD event also saw the unveiling of the Wolfhound, Husky and Coyote Tactical Support Vehicles (TSV), the first time these newly-purchased trucks have been seen in public.

More than 400 of these brand new vehicles are currently being manufactured across the UK, with delivery to training units expected later this year.

The new TSV fleet will be used to accompany front line patrols and carry essential combat supplies such as water and ammunition.

Minister for Defence Equipment and Support, Quentin Davies, said: "Troops on the front line have high-quality, versatile equipment that gives us the battle-winning edge in Afghanistan. We are working tirelessly to ensure they have the right equipment for the right job and ensuring that we respond quickly and innovatively to equipment requests from the front line.

"The new TSVs and TARIAN armour system are just two examples picked out from the vast array of kit and equipment that is on show. The number of items on display clearly demonstrates that we have many more success stories to tell about our flexibility in delivering equipment to where it is needed."

The DVD event also saw a taste of combat action as soldiers from 1st Battalion The Rifles and 29 Commando Regiment Royal Artillery simulated a battle group in action on the front line.

They were fully equipped with personal body armour, rifles and the new Husky and Ridgback vehicles and even called in air support from Apache and Merlin helicopters.

Both units have recently returned from front line operations, with 1st Battlion The Rifles helping to mentor the Afghan National Army and 29 Commando Regiment Royal Artillery based at Musa Qaleh.

DVD is a two-day equipment showcase which highlights the importance of diverse areas such as fuel delivery, clothing, food and vehicles that have been bought or upgraded under the Urgent Operational Requirements programme.

The event is organised by Defence Equipment and Support, the part of the MOD which equips and supports the UK's Armed Forces.

[Service de semaine]

Un film sur les nouveaux casques et pare-balles qui entreront bientot en service dans la BA:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8115327.stm

[Dadou]

Une petite présentation à DVD 2009

Casque MK7 et gilet OSPREY

[g4lly]

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a7da98eaa-e8e2-4127-b02e-2f549a8d4415

Left-of-center think-tank the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) is the latest body to lend its weight to the Greek chorus calling for a UK defense review – or in the case of the IPPR a “Strategic Review of Security.”

It’s final report resulting from its “Commission on National Security in the 21st Century” includes a raft of recommendations over and above a security review, many of which are contentious.

The report is given weight  – however – by those involved, including co-chair George Robertson, a former Sec. Gen. of NATO, and a previous UK Secretary of State for Defense. Gen. Charles Guthrie, a former chief of the defense staff, and David Omand, a former security and intelligence coordinator in the Cabinet Office.

Robertson was the government’s senior defense minister during the 1998 Strategic Defense Review.

The IPPR suggests considering swathing cuts in navy procurement, while also casting open the question of a replacement for the Trident strategic nuclear deterrent. The report also echoes several of the arguments made last week by Gen. David Richards, the British Army’s next chief of the general staff.

“The UK government has been clear in recent defence documents that it would only envisage engaging in major combat operations as part of a coalition operation most likely led by the United States,” states the report. “If savings are needed, and they are, we should therefore look to make them in areas where we are members of an alliance that already possesses the relevant capabilities in abundance, relative to any potential adversary, and where additional UK capability would therefore be adding little of extra value to the overall alliance effort.”

blog post photo

With this in mind it suggests: “This analysis and approach puts certain capabilities in the frame for reconsideration. For illustrative rather than comprehensive purposes, these might be said to include: The Future Carrier Program… The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter……The Type 45 Destroyer… The delayed Astute class hunter-killer submarines.”

Elsewhere in the report the IPPR argues the UK should bolster European defense and security cooperation. The ability for naval power projection, however, is a distinct European weakness – both in terms of carrier capability, and fleet air defense.

Even if just for “illustrative…purposes” those in dark blue (the Royal Navy) ought to feel rather picked upon. Those “capabilities in the frame for reconsideration” form the heart of the navy’s re-equipment program, and are a key element of the UK’s envisaged force projection and expeditionary warfare capability.

It also adds; the “Government should look to explore the options for retiring some other already existing capabilities early. In this category, there is a case for focusing on: reductions in the number of our Challenger 2 Main Battle Tanks… Quicker reductions in the number of Tornado fighter and ground attack aircraft, especially given the recent decision to buy Tranche 3 of the Typhoon (Eurofighter), reductions in anti-submarine warfare capability, reductions in the scale of our air defences.”

In the case of the Tornado F3s air defense aircraft, the last of these will be withdrawn from service by March 2011, although the GR4 strike variant is presently due to remain in service until 2025. Were, as the IPPR suggests, the F-35 procurement to be reconsidered - and no alternative acquired - then this could leave the air force with the Typhoon as its only manned air combat platform in the medium term. The Harrier GR9 is presently due to be withdrawn from service in 2018.

The UK Tranche 3 decision also amounted to a total – in reality – of 16 aircraft, not the full commitment of 88. Out of the 40 listed as part of the UK’s Tranche 3A off-take, 24 were actually a carry-over from Tranche 2 aircraft diverted to Saudi Arabia.

In terms of alliance relationships the commission considered a number of options, but favors the UK pursuing: “a major strengthening of European defence and security cooperation, not as an alternative to NATO but as a route to reducing absolute dependence on the United States while continuing to build more effective multilateral institutions as a longer-term project.”

Procurement areas worthy of more funding according to the IPPR include: “tactical air to ground support, especially helicopters, intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance assets…heavy lift aircraft,” as well as possibly increasing the size of the army.

[P4]

2 morts et six bléssés.

Two British soldiers were killed and six injured in a bomb blast in southern Afghanistan, the Ministry of Defence said today.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article6622953.ece.

big sh!t.

[murena]

ils perdent pas mal de monde ces dernières semaines.

[P4]

il s'agit d'un Viking, un des deux  mort avait le grade de Lt-Co, faudrait savoir si c'est un hasard ou suite à du renseignement.

[murena]

ils font du rens comment les insurgés? ils filent un portable à un gamin à l'entrée de la FOB en lui demandant de repérer un gradé? jvois mal comment ils se démerdent de ce côté-là mais c'est intéressant; je pense au soutien (forcé ou non) de la population.

Sinon, quand on voit que c'est un des 2 véhicules qui morfle le plus en A-stan avec le Jackal...la faute à barbu, mais sans ciblage particulier, ou alors déclenchement d'IED (jsais pas si ils font déjà comme en Irak)sous le véhicule connu pour être le plus vulnérable d'un convoi par exemple.

[g4lly]

ils font du rens comment les insurgés? ils filent un portable à un gamin à l'entrée de la FOB en lui demandant de repérer un gradé? jvois mal comment ils se démerdent de ce côté-là mais c'est intéressant; je pense au soutien (forcé ou non) de la population.

Sinon, quand on voit que c'est un des 2 véhicules qui morfle le plus en A-stan avec le Jackal...la faute à barbu, mais sans ciblage particulier, ou alors déclenchement d'IED (jsais pas si ils font déjà comme en Irak)sous le véhicule connu pour être le plus vulnérable d'un convoi par exemple.

En fait les FOB sont pleine d'afghan ... des militaires des policiers et aussi plein de civils qui viennent bosser a la construction et a l'aménagement ainsi que pour livrer de la bouffe etc. Il est tres facile pour eux de donner des infos via GSM sur les mouvements au sein de la base. Il est pas super évident d'identifier qui appel meme avec du matériel d'écoute, ca grouille une FOB, donc a part prendre le mec en flag le téléphone a l'oreille ...

Quant a la destination de l'appel c'est essentiellement des numéro de GSM au Pakistan dans des zone peut controlé et donc la pareil peut de chance d'attraper le correspondant en flag.

Le matériel d'écoute GSM est peut disponible la bas meme s'il y en a qui tourne ... et les FOB passe souvent de longue semaine certaine d'etre surveillée de l'intérieur mais sans moyen d'intercepter in situ.

Pour les raison qui pousse a espionner ... l'argent, les convictions, ou la menace ...

[g4lly]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601102&sid=atO_TXRwbWvU

Britain’s War Costs in Iraq and Afghanistan Triple

July 2 (Bloomberg) -- The annual cost of U.K. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan has more than tripled in the last four years as the extra troops deployed to fight the Taliban outweighed the drawdown of Britain’s presence in Basra.

Total spending for both wars will reach 4.37 billion pounds ($7.15 billion) in the current fiscal year, which ends in March 2010, compared with 1.56 in the year ended March 2006, according to Ministry of Defense figures published by the House of Commons Defense Committee. The cost of the wars will slip 3.2 percent from a high of 4.52 billion in the year through March.

“There is no likelihood that the cost for operations in Afghanistan will fall over the short to medium term,” said James Arbuthnot, a lawmaker from the Conservative opposition who leads the panel comprised of members from all parties.

The costs of the war are adding to the strain on the Treasury, which expects to sell a record 220 billion pounds of gilts this year to finance Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s spending.

With the government budget deficit projected to top 12.4 percent of gross domestic product this year, the most in the Group of Seven nations, both Brown’s Labour Party and the Conservatives are saying they’ll have to keep a lid on spending in the future.

Cuts Ahead

The defense ministry will have to cut spending by up to 15 percent, or about 6 billion pounds a year, as the government imposes “a period of prolonged austerity” on state services, according to Malcolm Chalmers, who wrote a paper on the issue for the Royal United Services Institute.

The military consultant says the government will have to impose a “radical scaling-down” of the war effort in Afghanistan and cuts to major procurement programs. It said the F-35 fighter program and orders for aircraft carriers, Trident nuclear missile submarines and future surface ships are vulnerable. Eurofighter orders are too far along to be affected, the report said.

Britain is the second-largest contributor of foreign troops in Afghanistan, with 8,300 stationed in Helmand province. Peak involvement in Iraq came in 2003, with 46,000 troops stationed in the south of the country.

Afghanistan Costs

The panel estimated the Afghanistan war cost at 3.5 billion pounds in the current fiscal year, up from 2.6 billion pounds last year and 199 million pounds in 2005.

In Iraq, the U.K. expects to spend 877 million pounds in the current year. It’s finishing the troop withdrawal this month. Last year it spent 1.96 billion pounds, up from 957 million pounds in 2005.

The Defense Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the spending and administration of the Ministry of Defense. The report published in London today gives Parliament for the first time the chance to examine figures for operations in both countries.

The panel recommended that lawmakers approve the department’s 39.7 billion-pound budget.

[murena]

d'accord...je pensais que l'intérieur de la FOB était exclusivement réversé aux forces ISAF, et que les échanges avec les intervenants afghans que tu as cités se faisaient à l'extérieur. bon et bien ça me paraît bien plus plausible déjà.

[Invité]

75 véhicules springer vont être acquis auprès de EPS UK.

Dans la cadre de l'UOR LPPV (véhicule léger de patrouille protégé), remplacement des land rover snatch avec un niveau de protection équivalent au MAstiff. Les industriels ont montré leurs offres:

* zéphyr SRV

* Sherpa

* chassis modifié du LMV d'iveco

* variante du SandCat

[Service de semaine]

Un excellent reportage avec de tres belles photos prises en plein combat

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1197946/A-hero-led-Hours-inspiring-troops-Major-Hill-lies-wounded-comrades-dead.html

[max]

75 véhicules springer vont être acquis auprès de EPS UK.

Dans la cadre de l'UOR LPPV (véhicule léger de patrouille protégé), remplacement des land rover snatch avec un niveau de protection équivalent au MAstiff. Les industriels ont montré leurs offres:

* zéphyr SRV

* Sherpa

* chassis modifié du LMV d'iveco

* variante du SandCat

Etonnant cette garde au sol réduite et ces passages de roues si près des … roues. Ne nous cacherait-on une suspension oléo’quelque chose ?

Pour le reste les moulistes de chez Solido vont aimer ! ;)

[Service de semaine]

Un diaporama sur le 1 Welsh Guards au combat en Afghanistan.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/global/article6625388.ece?slideshowPopup=true&articleId=6625388&sectionName=World

Cette unite a perdu son chef de corps et l'un de ses CDU au combat....

[Tancrède]

Je suis retombé dans mon mode DUO-obsession et me suis penché sur le cas particulier de la British Army et de l'organisation de ses unités de combat, particulièrement l'infanterie, la cavalerie et l'artillerie.

En matière d'infanterie, je m'étonnais de voir que la BA disposait de 37 bataillons d'active. Je savais que leurs bataillons sont ternarisés et leurs compagnies plus petites, mais je savais pas dans quelles proportions. M'étant penché dessus, j'en ai fait un bilan préliminaire et essaie de comparer la pertinence de leur modèle et celle du nôtre, surtout à une heure où, de fait (et sans doute bientôt de jure), notre rythme opérationnel imposera de revoir sérieusement le cycle quaternaire des 16 mois, ce qui impactera l'organisation des unités.

Le bataillon britannique est fait de 3 Rifle Companies, 1 Support Company (CEA) et 1 Cie d'Etat Major. La Rifle Company est vraiment toute riquiqui à côté de nos CC: 3 platoons de 27h et un platoon de commandement de 15-20 hommes, soient autour de 100h. La support company est un poil plus petite, mais du même ordre. La Command Company est plus petite, mais elle se voit attribuer un Light Aid Detachment des Royal Electrician and Mechanical Engineers (le Mat, essentiellement) de 60h: les bataillons n'ont pas de composante organique de ce côté. 30 sont dispatchés dans les Cies de combat, 30 restent à la HQ Company. Total, le bataillon d'infanterie, au mieux, doit peser dans les 500 à 550h.

La Support Company  est comme la CEA: mortiers, mitrailleuses lourdes, ATGM et éléments de reco sont dans la panoplie. Mais elle héberge aussi un platoon de 27 sapeurs de combat (assault pioneers) totalement organique, ce qui est vraiment un bon truc.

Au final, je peux pas vraiment modéliser mathématiquement la pertinence de ce choix de répartition des unités par rapport à notre modèle plus concentré; il est clair que la leçon en la matière de la Première GM fut que la puissance de feu totale de l'infanterie augmentait nettement en réduisant la taille des unités pour en accroître le nombre. Ce n'est pas un jeu à somme nulle, mais je ne sais pas par quel facteur. Et il faut dès lors pouvoir comparer cette augmentation avec la réduction subséquente de la dispo moyenne des bataillons, l'effectif n'étant jamais complet, et le taux de dispo étant dès lors encore plus crucial dans une unité plus petite.

Dernier aspect: il y a de facto nettement plus de formations d'infanterie dispo, et une puissance de feu générale accrue. Le combat articulé y gagne sans doute nettement.

Au total, l'infanterie d'active anglaise est du même ordre que la nôtre en effectif total, soient autour de 20-22 000h, mais répartis en 37 bataillons, ce qui implique, outre l'armement en moyenne plus lourd (plus de minimis dans chaque GC), un nombre nettement plus grand d'armes collectives et donc une plus grosse puissance de feu globale, le moindre nombre d'armes individuelles ne compensant pas, et de loin, ce différentiel. Qui plus est, cette puissance de feu est plus articulée, elle repose sur plus d'éléments opérationnels "pensants", ce qui est l'essence du combat "civilisé" et de la démultiplication de l'efficacité: ça veut dire plus de sergents expérimentés employés comme responsables opérationnels.

Ce que je ne peux mathématiser est la mesure d'indisponibilité et l'impact du taux moyen de dispo sur chaque bataillon, ce qui est la limite de pertinence du modèle: de facto, les unités déployées sont petites, vraiment petites. Est-il possible de faire un bilan avantages-inconvénients des 2 modèles?

[g4lly]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/8150791.stm

La vidéo http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8150348.stm

[Service de semaine]

Soldier Magazine fait un numero tres Gay ce mois ci....avec un soldat Gay en couverture et plusieurs articles sur ce qu'on nomme tres elegamment des "schmoules" a la Legion Etrangere....

JUST ten years ago it was illegal to be gay in the UK Armed Forces.

But since 2000, following a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights, homosexual men and woman have been able to proudly serve – without hiding their sexuality.

In an interview with Soldier, Tpr James Wharton (The Household Cavalry Regiment) explained that instead of being oppressed, gay and lesbian Army personnel are now given full support.

“I came out to the Army before I told my parents, so that says a lot for the Armed Forces,” said the 22-year-old.

“I told the Army in March 2003, after all my initial training was over – I was 18. I have always known I was gay but it wasn’t until then that I told anyone.”

The decision to lift the ban on gays in the Army came after two landmark cases heard at the European Court of Human Rights, which found that the MoD’s policy was not sustainable.

Despite the change, the other half of the UK’s “special relationship” – the United States – has not relaxed its attitude towards homosexuals in  the Forces.

Evidemment, le Tpr en question appartient au Household Cavalry Regiment, une unite connue pour etre un repere Gay depuis des lustres au sein de la BA....le HCR n'aq pas fini de s'en prendre plein la tete !

http://www.soldiermagazine.co.uk/mag/feature1.htm

https://www.soldiermagazine.co.uk/mag/feature2.htm  (un couple de militaires lesbiennes)

[Borisdedante]

http://www.lemonde.fr/carnet/article/2009/07/18/l-un-des-derniers-survivants-de-la-premiere-guerre-mondiale-est-mort_1220542_3382.html#xtor=RSS-3208

L'un des derniers survivants de la première guerre mondiale est mort

Le Britannique Henry Allingham, considéré comme le doyen de l'humanité et qui était l'un des derniers survivants de la première guerre mondiale, est mort à l'âge de 113 ans, a annoncé samedi 18 juillet la maison de retraite où il vivait près de Brighton, sur la côte sud de l'Angleterre.

M. Allingham, qui avait un jour expliqué sa longévité hors du commun par "les cigarettes, le whisky et les femmes très, très sauvages", s'est éteint dans son sommeil. "Il est mort de manière tout à fait apaisée", a expliqué une porte-parole de la maison de retraite de St. Dunstan.

UN ARRIÈRE-ARRIÈRE-ARRIÈRE-PETIT-ENFANT

Né en 1896, il s'était marié avec Dorothy en 1918, était veuf depuis 1970. Ses deux fils sont morts avant lui. M. Allingham, qui avait accédé en juin au rang de doyen de l'humanité après le décès du Japonais Tomoji Tanabe, avait cinq petits-enfants, douze arrière-petits-enfants, quatorze arrière-arrière-petits-enfants et un arrière-arrière-arrière-petit-enfant.

Lors de la première guerre mondiale, il avait servi dans le Royal Naval Air Service puis avait rejoint à la fin du conflit la Royal Air Force, tout juste créée. "J'ai eu le privilège de rencontrer Henry plusieurs fois. Il avait un caractère extraordinaire, c'était l'un des derniers représentants d'une génération de caractères extraordinaires", a déclaré dans un communiqué le premier ministre britannique, Gordon Brown.

[Service de semaine]

UK Sea King Mk 7 helicopters achieve IOC in Afghanistan

UK Royal Navy (RN) Sea King Mk 7 airborne surveillance-and-control (ASaC) helicopters from 854 Naval Air Squadron deployed to Afghanistan as part of Operation 'Herrick' have achieved initial operating capability (IOC) in support of Task Force 'Helmand'.

Based at Kandahar, an initial pair of the aircraft have arrived in theatre to bolster the ground moving target indication (GMTI) capability available to land component commanders. A third is expected to arrive in the third quarter of 2009.

http://www.janes.com/news/defence/jni/jni090722_1_n.shtml

Je sais c'est la Royal Navy et c'est un helicoptere mais ce sont avant tout les squaddies de l'Army qui en profiteront alors je met cette info sur ce fil de discussion...

[collectionneur]

Un premier classe déserteur depuis 2007 adresse une lettre au PM anglais en se déclarant contre la guerre ''ingagnable'' en Afghanistan juste avant son procès... :

http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2009/07/31/01003-20090731ARTFIG00010-afghanistan-l-appel-d-un-deserteur-a-gordon-brown-.php

[Coriace]

Un premier classe déserteur depuis 2007 adresse une lettre au PM anglais en se déclarant contre la guerre ''ingagnable'' en Afghanistan juste avant son procès... :

http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2009/07/31/01003-20090731ARTFIG00010-afghanistan-l-appel-d-un-deserteur-a-gordon-brown-.php

Dans sa position c'est sa seule défense .