Why are the Syrian airstrikes being done by planes rather than drones?

Is it because we have a lot more planes and large, easy to find targets as opposed to a surveillance operation that may result in a missile being launched?

They don’t have a biscuit tin large enough to charge the batteries at the moment. Wait until they polish off the Fox’s Assortment on Boxing Day.

As its an exercise in being seen to be doing something, Sky News needs its shots of Tornado’s taking off, with big scary missiles on board, crewed by our brave boys, so that the war pornographers can thwap off to them.

Drones don’t tick the same boxes so can’t be used to drum up brainless xenophobic jingoism

Because there’s little risk (to the pilots) of anyone fighting back.

Because we’ve been flying our reapers over Syria for ages already running recon missions.

https://rusi.org/commentary/brimstone-ii-tornado-gr4-and-isr-%E2%80%93-uk%E2%80%99s-technical-contribution-syria-strikes

I assume drones dont carry enough weapons to be seen to be a powerful statement of how we will change things effective

Apparently our strikes were the first to hit IS oil supplies!

I find some of the statements made about this conflict really dubious, is there actually ANY reliable source of information on whose doing what?

Apparently our strikes were the first to hit IS oil supplies!

I find some of the statements made about this conflict really dubious
If true, it’s certainly rather odd.

bloke on R4 last night: our airstrikes were not the first to target the oil fields.

different bloke on R4 this morning: our airstrikes were the first to target the oil fields.

“BBC R4 spouting shit” shocker.

They are using drones too.

Drones do a lot of reconnaissance, its common to have drones circling an area spotting targets / gathering intelligence and then scramble the jets. Drones are slow and carry few weapons. Jets are fast and carry more / bigger weapons. Drones are cheap. Jets are expensive and risk pilots,

When did radio 4 become responsible for the guests on different shows contradicting each other?

NY times suggests ‘Murica been bombing oil fields since mid November.

When they invited them on.

As well as above.

Possibly a rules of engagement issue, pilots can fully identify the target.

We definitely aren’t the fist to hit oil fields, but the ‘allies’ have changed tack recently and this is now part of Operation Tidal Wave II.

Drones are better able to identify targets than fast jets. Loitering at 35,000ft and 100mph with little threat gives you a lot more time to assess this situation than hurtling along in a Tornado with every local throwing sticks at you. ‘If’ special forces were in country marking the targets then that changes a bit.

On the other hand, the largest weapon our drones have are Hellfires so not ideal for the application. Give it time though…..

People seem more squeamish about drones, offends our sense of sportingness. Seems pretty daft as by most accounts they’re safer for civilians etc. I think maybe more legitimately there’s concerns about it being more abstract and operators being desensitised by the lack of connection and risk.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/18/life-as-a-drone-pilot-creech-air-force-base-nevada

But tbf if someone blew up my family I don’t think I’d be too fussed whether it was a drone or a jet.

I think binners has it. The politicians seem to think the public wants to see Tornados loaded with tonnes of death hurtling down the runway with flaming afterburners.

Plus, manned jets can carry more death than drones.

Sky News needs its shots of Tornado’s taking off, with big scary missiles on board, crewed by our brave boys, so that the war pornographers can thwap off to them.

I’ll add to what binners posted above

The independant media is provided images that promote a strong emotional response such as our brave airmen climbing into/taking off in fast jets (there is zero bravery in their current role) , images of faceless grey drones piloted by geeks sitting in chairs 9000miles away do not engender reverence from the public, along with the above we are constantly bombarded by soundbites informing the viewer that ” our prayers and thoughts are extended to the brave families and children of the brave airmen….(for gawds sake don’t forget to mention the **** brave children!). Errrh?…….they’re not on my part…prayer does absolutely **** all and my thoughts are with those caught up in the conflict due to being born in the wrong country in the wrong era and believing in the wrong god.

The more i hear of the current situation (say that in a northern irish accent – amusing for those in the know) the more I’m developing a disdainful permanent sneer across my face.

****…the lot of them

The politicians seem to think the public wants to see Tornados loaded with tonnes of death hurtling down the runway with flaming afterburners.

Not just political capital though – think about how rubbish Top Gun would have been if it had featured pilotless drones…

you do get the feeling that the uk press felt “left out” because we weren’t bombing Syria.

(there is zero bravery in their current role)

You can **** right off

End of the day it comes down to using the right tool for the job. ITV news on Wednesday had clear footage of US A-10s attacking positions in support of Kurdish troops.

I thought they’d planned to retire the A-10 after the last conflict, however as that was so recent I guess a minor delay won’t make that much difference

ITV news on Wednesday had clear footage of US A-10s attacking positions in support of Kurdish troops.

Which is great if those Kurds were freeing Kurds or Shias from Sunni tyranny.

I suspect they weren’t. I suspect they were helping Kurds take over Sunni areas with all the repercussions that has.

Was reported that they were fighting ISIL.

I also though the A-10 was due for retirement, but turns out that the US don’t have much new that performs better in the ground attack role, so it is A-10s and C-130 gunships for now.

Was reported that they were fighting ISIL.

Yes, but we don’t know if ISIL were protecting Sunnis or enslaving Kurds/Shias that that point.

Will do dave

(there is zero bravery in their current role)

I suspect there is a moderate amount of bravery in their role, misguided or otherwise. I certainly wouldn’t relish the thought of flying a tin box of rapidly reciprocating parts with two continuous controlled explosions going on inside them over ISIS territory. I wonder where SAR would come from if they end up ejecting over Syria? Now THERE would be a ‘brave’ role…

there is zero bravery in their current role)

Tell that to the Jordanian pilot’s family

I’m all for them hitting the oil fields to cut of their finance channel..

That’ll definitely stop them from affording a couple of AKs and a bag of fertilizer…

oh wait…

The USAF tried to retire the a-10 but congress blocked it, much to the armies relief as it’s by far the best CAS aircraft.

think about how rubbish Top Gun would have been if it had featured pilotless drones…

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cP-TU0P2Lw4[/video]

The noise of the gun alone will be enough to send folk scurrying back to their caves!

Is my mind playing tricks on me or did I see cockpit cam from Russian jets attacking oil fields and tankers last week?

I’m not sure but the site “global security” seems to have updates directly from the MOD/DOD so cutting out the political/media BS.

3 December 2015

British forces have continued to conduct air operations in the fight against Daesh

Latest update

Following the vote in the House of Commons last night, Royal Air Force Tornado GR4 aircraft flew their first offensive operation against Daesh terrorist targets inside Syria.

The mainstay of Daesh’s financial income is derived from exploitation of a number of oilfields that they hold. These are overwhelmingly located in Daesh’s heartlands in eastern Syria. Several of these oilfields have already been effectively targeted by other coalition partners; RAF aircraft and precision weaponry are well suited to attacking, with low collateral risk, this type of target.

Overnight, RAF Tornado GR4s, supported by a Voyager air refuelling tanker and a Reaper, and operating in conjunction with other coalition aircraft, employed Paveway IV guided bombs to conduct strikes against six targets within the extensive oilfield at Omar, 35 miles inside Syria’s eastern border with Iraq. The Omar oilfield is one of the largest and most important to Daesh’s financial operations, and represents over 10% of their potential income from oil. Carefully selected elements of the oilfield infrastructure were targeted, ensuring the strikes will have a significant impact on Daesh’s ability to extract the oil to fund their terrorism.

Coalition air operations have already degraded Daesh’s front-line military capabilities and have assisted the Iraqi ground forces in liberating some 30% of the territory that the terrorists initially seized in that country during the summer of 2014. By extending RAF offensive operations into Syria, our aircraft are now able to help dismantle the means by which Daesh plan, direct and sustain their campaign of terror.

Before our aircrew conducted their attacks, as is normal they used the aircraft’s advanced sensors to confirm that no civilians were in the proximity of the targets, who might be placed at risk. Our initial analysis of the operation indicates that the strikes were successful.

Is my mind playing tricks on me or did I see cockpit cam from Russian jets attacking oil fields and tankers last week?

No mind games, Russians have been attacking Oil fields. No coincidence they have been publisizing Turkish purchases of cheap oil from IS either.

they used the aircraft’s advanced sensors to confirm that no civilians were in the proximity of the targets

That is a damned impressive sensor that can distinguish civilians from ‘bad guys’

It’s highly classified.