PDA

View Full Version : Iraqi Take-Out AC130 Specter Gunship


vailpass
08-29-2005, 03:09 PM
Score one for the good guys.

WHAT A PICTURE AT OVER TWO MILES AWAY. TURN SPEAKER UP

Click on "pictures." It shows what technology can do in a war zone.
The pictures:

http://lvlranch.com/images/iraqiinsurgents-takeout.wmv

were taken from an Apache gunship two and a half miles away. The guys in the picture are setting up a roadside bomb and planning to ambush an American convoy which followed a short while after the pictures were taken. They were setting up for the ambush and were pacing off the distance from the bomb to where the convoy was to pass by. Turn your sound up.

vailpass
08-29-2005, 03:15 PM
Smoke 'em!!!!

Amnorix
08-29-2005, 03:32 PM
Am I the only one wildly confused by the thread title? I thought the Iraqis took out the Spectre Gunship, and I was shocked.

Glad to see that it was the Iraqi's GETTING taken out. Impressive video. The gunship is an amazing weapon.

Question for anyone who knows -- it seems that the plane maintains a consistent position relative to the targets (i.e. not circling them). The spectre is a plane, and therefore can't hover, right? So was this video actually from a chopper, or...??? Anybody know.

vailpass
08-29-2005, 03:38 PM
Am I the only one wildly confused by the thread title? I thought the Iraqis took out the Spectre Gunship, and I was shocked.

Glad to see that it was the Iraqi's GETTING taken out. Impressive video. The gunship is an amazing weapon.

Question for anyone who knows -- it seems that the plane maintains a consistent position relative to the targets (i.e. not circling them). The spectre is a plane, and therefore can't hover, right? So was this video actually from a chopper, or...??? Anybody know.

Sorry I don't have an answer to your question. I received this in an e-mail from a friend who has a brother currently in theatre.
Chief Henry, Radar Chief, any of you other knowledgeable servicemen kno wanything about the Spectre's video capability?

DanT
08-29-2005, 04:28 PM
The video is from an AH-64 Apache attack helicopter (http://www.army-technology.com/projects/apache/), not an AC-130 (fixed-wing aircraft) gunship (http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=71).

You can find the video at several places on the web, by searching for "+apache +iraqi +insurgents +video" (http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=%2Bapache+%2Biraqi+%2Binsurgents+%2Bvideo&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-tab-web-t&fl=0&x=wrt), because the video is interesting and controversial. Here's a link that has the ABC News story that accompanied an earlier broadcast of what I think may have been an shorter version of the video.

http://www.goldmaniac.com/Helicopter_kills_article.htm

Rules of Engagement
Videotape Shows U.S. Helicopter Crew Firing on Suspected Iraqi Insurgents
By Martha Raddatz
ABCNEWS.com
Jan. 9 (2004)ó Graphic video footage from the gun camera of a U.S. Apache helicopter provides a window into the rules of engagement that often determine life and death in Iraq.


The video, obtained by ABCNEWS, shows grainy images of three Iraqis on the ground handling a long cylindrical object that the helicopter pilots believe is a weapon.
The pilots, from the Army's 4th Infantry Division, ask their commanders for permission to engage, then take the three men out one by one, using the Apache's devastating 30 mm cannons.

Nighttime Scene

The video opens with the helicopter tracking a man in a pickup truck north of Baghdad on Dec. 1, one day after the 4th Infantry Division engaged in the bloodiest battles with Iraqi insurgents since the end of major combat.

The pilots watch as the man pulls over and gets out to talk to another man waiting by a larger truck.

"Uh, big truck over here," one of the pilots is heard saying. "He's having a little powwow."

The pickup driver looks around, then reaches into his vehicle, takes out a tube-shaped object that appears to be about 4 or 5 feet long, and runs away from the road into a field. He drops the object in the field and heads back to the trucks.

"I got a guy running throwing a weapon," one of the pilots says. Retired Gen. Jack Keane, an ABCNEWS consultant who viewed the tape, said the object looked like a rocket-propelled grenade launcher, "or something larger than a rifle."

The pilots check in with their operational commander, who is monitoring the situation. When they tell him they are sure the man was carrying a weapon, he tells them: "Engage. Smoke him."

The pilots wait as a tractor arrives on the scene, near the spot where the pickup driver dropped the object. One of the Iraqis approaches the tractor driver.

Then, within minutes, the Apache pilots open fire with the heavy 30 mm cannon, killing first the Iraqi in the field, then the tractor driver. The pilots then fire at the large truck and wait to see if they hit the last of three men.

When he rolls out from under the truck, one of the pilots says, "He's wounded."

The other pilot says, "Hit him," and the Apache opens fire again, killing the man.

The Apache fires nearly 100 30 mm cannon rounds in all.



Engagement Called Justified

A senior Army official who viewed the tape said the pilots had the legal right to kill the men because they were carrying a weapon. He said there were no ground troops in the area and if the Apache pilots had let the three Iraqis go, the men might have gone on to kill American troops.

Keane agreed. "Those weapons were obviously not being pointed at them in particular, but they [the three Iraqis] are using those weapons in their minds for lethal means and they [the Apache pilots] have a right to interfere with that," he said.

Anthony Cordesman, an ABCNEWS defense consultant who also viewed the tape, said the Apache pilots would have had a much clearer picture of the scene than what was recorded on the videotape. He also said they would have had intelligence about the identity of the men in the vehicles. "They're not getting a sort of blurred picture. They have a combination of intelligence and much better imagery than we can see."

As to whether the Apache pilots could have called in ground troops to apprehend the men, Cordesman said: "In this kind of war, wherever you find organized resistance among the insurgents, you have to act immediately. If you wait to send in ground troops almost invariably your enemy is going to be gone."

Army officials acknowledged that the 30 mm cannons used by the Apache gunners were far bigger than what was needed to kill the men, but said it is the smallest weapon the Apaches have.

vailpass
08-30-2005, 10:59 AM
Thanks DanT.
Sorry for passing on an e-mail with an innacurate description.
Why do you say the video is controversial?

Bwana
08-30-2005, 11:00 AM
Sweet!

Amnorix
08-30-2005, 11:24 AM
The "controversy" is completely retarded. We're at war. Get a grip.

DanT
08-30-2005, 11:28 AM
Thanks DanT.
Sorry for passing on an e-mail with an innacurate description.
Why do you say the video is controversial?

You're welcome, vailpass.

To answer your question, if you click on the first hyperlink in the second paragraph of my reply (also see "yahoo.com ..." link below), it will bring up several sites that contain alternative interpretations of what it shows.

yahoo.com search results for "+apache +iraqi +insurgents +video" (http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=%2Bapache+%2Biraqi+%2Binsurgents+%2Bvideo&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-tab-web-t&fl=0&x=wrt)

vailpass
08-30-2005, 11:28 AM
The "controversy" is completely retarded. We're at war. Get a grip.

No doubt. It sounds like our guys ran through their progressions, properly determined that the targets were enemies, and acted accordingly.
What's controversial about that?

RINGLEADER
08-30-2005, 11:29 AM
Am I the only one wildly confused by the thread title? I thought the Iraqis took out the Spectre Gunship, and I was shocked.

Glad to see that it was the Iraqi's GETTING taken out. Impressive video. The gunship is an amazing weapon.

Question for anyone who knows -- it seems that the plane maintains a consistent position relative to the targets (i.e. not circling them). The spectre is a plane, and therefore can't hover, right? So was this video actually from a chopper, or...??? Anybody know.


I thought the same thing.

Warrior5
08-30-2005, 11:32 AM
Why do you say the video is controversial?

vailpass,
One of the original versions of this video aired by media and internet sites somehow "lost" the first minute, so Joe Livingroom saw a bunch of farmers trying to repair a tractor getting literally ripped to shreds by 30mm cannon shells from an Apache.

vailpass
08-30-2005, 11:33 AM
vailpass,
One of the original versions of this video aired by media and internet sites somehow "lost" the first minute, so Joe Livingroom saw a bunch of farmers trying to repair a tractor getting literally ripped to shreds by 30mm cannon shells from an Apache.

That certainly explains it. Why do some of our own media bend over backwards to f*ck our own troops?

chagrin
08-30-2005, 11:38 AM
Wicked awesome dude!!! I love this!

DanT
08-30-2005, 11:39 AM
This video and others are available as Torrent files at this site:

http://www.militaryvideos.net/

Warrior5
08-30-2005, 11:39 AM
That certainly explains it. Why do some of our own media bend over backwards to f*ck our own troops?

I won't generalize all media as anti-military. Media is business that profits from controversy and sensationalism. I recognize this, and teach/educate/train my Soldiers accordingly.

Thanks for finding the website that shows the entire video.

vailpass
08-30-2005, 11:40 AM
You're welcome, vailpass.

To answer your question, if you click on the first hyperlink in the second paragraph of my reply (also see "yahoo.com ..." link below), it will bring up several sites that contain alternative interpretations of what it shows.

yahoo.com search results for "+apache +iraqi +insurgents +video" (http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=%2Bapache+%2Biraqi+%2Binsurgents+%2Bvideo&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-tab-web-t&fl=0&x=wrt)

Thanks for the alternate interpretations. I think I'll believe my own soldiers and my own eyes on this one.

vailpass
08-30-2005, 11:42 AM
I won't generalize all media as anti-military. Media is business that profits from controversy and sensationalism. I recognize this, and teach/educate/train my Soldiers accordingly.

Thanks for finding the website that shows the entire video.

I was careful to say "some media" in order not to generalize. I agree there are certainly many credible news sources out there. Still, it sticks in my craw to see SOME American journalists deliberately painting the soldier as a villain instead of a man/woman doing their job.
Good on ya' for educating your soldiers accordingly.

MOhillbilly
08-30-2005, 11:51 AM
not a good day for jalil,habib& mustafa

Warrior5
08-30-2005, 11:55 AM
I was careful to say "some media" in order not to generalize. I agree there are certainly many credible news sources out there. Still, it sticks in my craw to see SOME American journalists deliberately painting the soldier as a villain instead of a man/woman doing their job.
Good on ya' for educating your soldiers accordingly.

Sorry...wasn't implying you were generalizing.

Yes, there are some journalists who actively attempt to portray Soldiers in the worst possible light. A few (very few) of our Soldiers don't need any help...and when they do stupid stuff, we crush their gonads.

This war stuff is hard. As humans, Soldiers will make mistakes. This video shows a good mission, with thinking warfighters, using checks and balances before pulling triggers. It is irritating when a journalist consistently attempts to create controversy involving Soldiers in combat. It really, well...it bugs me to the core.

vailpass
08-30-2005, 11:59 AM
Sorry...wasn't implying you were generalizing.

Yes, there are some journalists who actively attempt to portray Soldiers in the worst possible light. A few (very few) of our Soldiers don't need any help...and when they do stupid stuff, we crush their gonads.

This war stuff is hard. As humans, Soldiers will make mistakes. This video shows a good mission, with thinking warfighters, using checks and balances before pulling triggers. It is irritating when a journalist consistently attempts to create controversy involving Soldiers in combat. It really, well...it bugs me to the core.

Don't let the voacl minority get to you. The VAST majority of Americans understand and empathize with our troops and we are behind you all the way. We know a few bad apples don't spoil the barrel. There is no way a few random idiots in the media could tarnish the honor and valor the troops of the US have built up over the last two hundred years. F*ck 'em, the American public knows the truth.

NewChief
08-30-2005, 12:18 PM
vailpass,
One of the original versions of this video aired by media and internet sites somehow "lost" the first minute, so Joe Livingroom saw a bunch of farmers trying to repair a tractor getting literally ripped to shreds by 30mm cannon shells from an Apache.

Yeah, the one I saw originally didn't have all the set up. In all honesty, it was a more entertaining video though, because it skipped straight to the fireworks without such a lengthy setup. I honestly think that was probably the reason for the editing down, not an attempt to make the soldiers look bad. Of course, the people that tried to then use the video to say the soldiers didn't follow protocol had an agenda. Regardless, it's pretty sweet video.

Pitt Gorilla
08-30-2005, 12:32 PM
No doubt. It sounds like our guys ran through their progressions, properly determined that the targets were enemies, and acted accordingly.
What's controversial about that?Nothing; I probably would have pulled the trigger much sooner. Of course, I would have preferred a single rocket into the large truck.

Pitt Gorilla
08-30-2005, 12:35 PM
Yeah, the one I saw originally didn't have all the set up. In all honesty, it was a more entertaining video though, because it skipped straight to the fireworks without such a lengthy setup. I honestly think that was probably the reason for the editing down, not an attempt to make the soldiers look bad. Of course, the people that tried to then use the video to say the soldiers didn't follow protocol had an agenda. Regardless, it's pretty sweet video.
I'm pretty sure that was how it was intended.

Area 51
08-30-2005, 12:41 PM
My sound isn't the best,but it sounded like they were actually checking with "officials" prior to taking out the enemy. Verification on two or more fronts. If these guys were innocent they were sure acting guilty!!

I'd say it was a righteous shoot!

Radar Chief
08-30-2005, 12:42 PM
Nothing; I probably would have pulled the trigger much sooner. Of course, I would have preferred a single rocket into the large truck.

Yea, I like the big booms to.
Difference is the cost, all 100 of those 33mm rounds they fired added together probably donít cost as much as a single Hellfire.

Chief Henry
08-30-2005, 12:43 PM
Sorry I don't have an answer to your question. I received this in an e-mail from a friend who has a brother currently in theatre.
Chief Henry, Radar Chief, any of you other knowledgeable servicemen kno wanything about the Spectre's video capability?


I was not in the armed services. But my oldest brother was in vietnam.
He's in the air guard out of Sioux City,Iowa now...My dad was in the Navy. My wife has two great uncles that were in WWII. One was
a POW for seveal years, the other was shot up good and has a very bad leg because of it.


I did see this video over one year ago. It did have the lengthy conversation lead in with it at that time.

Fistmeme's cousins looked like ducks on a pond in that video.

Duck Dog
08-30-2005, 01:22 PM
I was trained to call fire with Specter and did call lot's fire with her. Learned prior to Operation Just Cause and attended other call for fire ranges with them in Saudi. They flew close air support for us in both theaters. I never flew in one, but did tour the inside.

The AC 130 fly's counter clock wise because it's weapons are side mounted. 105MM howitzer, 40MM Light Anti-Aircraft Gun, and two 20MM vulcan cannons (6000 rounds per minute). If you've never had the pleasure of hearing a vulcan or gatling gun fire, it sounds like someone farting into a microphone.

In Panama we used them to call in fire support. One example of their awsomeness is when we had an enemy soldier shooting RPG's from a hotel balcony. He was on the 4th floor of 7 story hotel. He would go inside reload, and come out and fire. Specter was called in and with a time delayed round, put a 105MM howitzer round through the roof and it blew the entire 4th floor apart.

I also personaly witnessed a Ranger company giving chase to a bunch jungle clowns who were shooting at them. About 15-20 enemy troops sought refuge in a shanty. Big mistake. One 105MM round reduced the entire building to ashes.

Specter is the Infantrymans guardian angel. Respect her.

Amnorix
08-30-2005, 01:33 PM
Puff the Magic Dragon indeed.

go bowe
08-30-2005, 01:35 PM
I was trained to call fire with Specter and did call lot's fire with her. Learned prior to Operation Just Cause and attended other call for fire ranges with them in Saudi. They flew close air support for us in both theaters. I never flew in one, but did tour the inside.

The AC 130 fly's counter clock wise because it's weapons are side mounted. 105MM howitzer, 40MM Light Anti-Aircraft Gun, and two 20MM vulcan cannons (6000 rounds per minute). If you've never had the pleasure of hearing a vulcan or gatling gun fire, it sounds like someone farting into a microphone.

In Panama we used them to call in fire support. One example of their awsomeness is when we had an enemy soldier shooting RPG's from a hotel balcony. He was on the 4th floor of 7 story hotel. He would go inside reload, and come out and fire. Specter was called in and with a time delayed round, put a 105MM howitzer round through the roof and it blew the entire 4th floor apart.

I also personaly witnessed a Ranger company giving chase to a bunch jungle clowns who were shooting at them. About 15-20 enemy troops sought refuge in a shanty. Big mistake. One 105MM round reduced the entire building to ashes.

Specter is the Infantrymans guardian angel. Respect her.another slow, relatively low tech, old plane that performs it mission brilliantly...

just like the a-10, the other guardian angel for troops on the ground...

here's to their crews... :toast:

NewChief
08-30-2005, 01:37 PM
I was trained to call fire with Specter and did call lot's fire with her. Learned prior to Operation Just Cause and attended other call for fire ranges with them in Saudi. They flew close air support for us in both theaters. I never flew in one, but did tour the inside.

The AC 130 fly's counter clock wise because it's weapons are side mounted. 105MM howitzer, 40MM Light Anti-Aircraft Gun, and two 20MM vulcan cannons (6000 rounds per minute). If you've never had the pleasure of hearing a vulcan or gatling gun fire, it sounds like someone farting into a microphone.

In Panama we used them to call in fire support. One example of their awsomeness is when we had an enemy soldier shooting RPG's from a hotel balcony. He was on the 4th floor of 7 story hotel. He would go inside reload, and come out and fire. Specter was called in and with a time delayed round, put a 105MM howitzer round through the roof and it blew the entire 4th floor apart.

I also personaly witnessed a Ranger company giving chase to a bunch jungle clowns who were shooting at them. About 15-20 enemy troops sought refuge in a shanty. Big mistake. One 105MM round reduced the entire building to ashes.

Specter is the Infantrymans guardian angel. Respect her.

Supposedly you can grid off a football field with 3" squares (or something, maybe it's 5") and do a flyby with the AC130 and it will put a bullet in every square in the area. True?

MOhillbilly
08-30-2005, 01:42 PM
Supposedly you can grid off a football field with 3" squares (or something, maybe it's 5") and do a flyby with the AC130 and it will put a bullet in every square in the area. True?

I dont know but my dad used to talk about em. He said not only were they a infantrymans best friend but that at night when the tracers were goin,it was a helluva show.

Duck Dog
08-30-2005, 01:54 PM
Supposedly you can grid off a football field with 3" squares (or something, maybe it's 5") and do a flyby with the AC130 and it will put a bullet in every square in the area. True?

Yes sir, very true. I'm not sure about how many rounds per square foot, but they will kill every target in that 100 yard area before they know what hits them. That's the great thing about the vulcan cannons rate of fire.

Night ranges were especially cool. We would call in coordinates and they would paint a football field size area with their IR. We could see it light up with our NVG's. We would also wear glit tape on our covers so the gunners could see us. it's like watching a 4th of July show in reverse.

Duck Dog
08-30-2005, 01:56 PM
another slow, relatively low tech, old plane that performs it mission brilliantly...

just like the a-10, the other guardian angel for troops on the ground...

here's to their crews... :toast:

I'll drink to that! :toast:

Calcountry
08-30-2005, 01:56 PM
The "controversy" is completely retarded. We're at war. Get a grip.That is why I respect you for a liberal. At least you know who's side you are on.

:thumb:

We need to "smoke" more of them mutha fuggas. If the truth were known, we probably are, but our hate Bush at all costs media won't let that get out. All they want to focus on is Mrs. Sheehan. So much so, that Bush is like a neutered Pit Bull. Totally useless.

DanT
08-30-2005, 01:59 PM
Here's a good page on the C-130's various missions throughout history. It includes this impressive time-lapsed photo of gunfire from an AC-130H Spectre:

http://www.talkingproud.us/Military071305A.html

http://www.talkingproud.us/ImagesMilitary/BlindbatLGB/AC130TracerPattern.jpg

This is a time lapsed photo of an AC-130 gunship flying a circular pattern over Afghanistan, with cannons and guns blazing. The shells are large, every fifth one is a tracer, so you can imagine how many live shells are raining down on the enemy. No one wants to be under this, no one. This is nearly as rough as sitting under a B-52 dropping its load.

Calcountry
08-30-2005, 02:01 PM
Yea, I like the big booms to.
Difference is the cost, all 100 of those 33mm rounds they fired added together probably donít cost as much as a single Hellfire.They were trying to be efficient with the taxpayers money. Lord knows how much people bitch about the "cost of the war".

Duck Dog
08-30-2005, 02:01 PM
another slow, relatively low tech, old plane that performs it mission brilliantly...

just like the a-10, the other guardian angel for troops on the ground...

here's to their crews... :toast:

The AC-130U Spooky, which is what we use today, is said to be the most complex aircraft weapon system in the world, with something like a million lines of software code in its computers and flight systems.

NewChief
08-30-2005, 02:13 PM
I've always had a soft spot for C130s, since that's what Little Rock AFB has stationed there. I've grown up with the things buzzing over our house at very, very low altitudes. I also got to go fly a C130 simulator with my Sunday School class when I was in jr. high.

CHIEF4EVER
08-30-2005, 07:07 PM
It is irritating when a journalist consistently attempts to create controversy involving Soldiers in combat. It really, well...it bugs me to the core.

Don't let it bother you bro. Those are just shitebirds who attended the Jane Fonda School of Journalism (who became journalists after being fired from their normal jobs because they kept burning the fries).

Keep up the good work.

MarcBulger
08-30-2005, 09:10 PM
Because they are Liberal and as there leader Hillary Clinton stated "I loathe the military". They are just like her.

go bowe
08-30-2005, 09:18 PM
The AC-130U Spooky, which is what we use today, is said to be the most complex aircraft weapon system in the world, with something like a million lines of software code in its computers and flight systems.oh, no doubt that the onboard systems are high tech, i was referring more to the airframe, propulsion, and the basic weaponry (even though that weaponry is controlled by the high tech devices, it's still a howitzer, a 40mm cannon and a 20mm cannon, not missiles or smart bombs)...

i was trying to say that the non-computer controlled components of the aircraft and physical weaponry are low tech, as compared to steath fighters and other high performance aircraft...

i really like the things, don't get me wrong...

i wish we had more of them to support our troops in iraq...

patteeu
08-31-2005, 06:58 AM
Because they are Liberal and as there leader Hillary Clinton stated "I loathe the military". They are just like her.

I'm no fan of Hillary, but you shouldn't put words in her mouth that she didn't say. Those are Bill's words, IIRC.