FARP mobility?

[Kirkhill]

“We need to be more mobile and tactically-minded to survive,” Staff Sergeant Steve Tymms was also quoted as saying.

“We can’t just set up in a fixed location, so we’ve split down to small, self-sufficient teams that work to a matrix of locations and times. We’re basically making appointments and if an aircraft turns up we’ll give it fuel and weapons, but if not then we pack up and go to the next location. It keeps us moving and we can do it without radio comms, so we’re much harder to target.”

New British attack helicopters train with lessons of Ukraine

One of the elements integrated into the training of Apache crews from the war in Ukraine is how to counter threats like air defence, drones, and electronic warfare.

ukdefencejournal.org.uk

New Apache trains to fight on the modern battlefield​

09 JANUARY 2023

SHARE THIS STORY​

twitter WhatsApp Facebook Linkedin
3 AAC train with the new Apache AH-64E on Exercise Talon Guardian.
Next
1 / 6












The soldiers who operate the British Army’s Apache AH-64E Attack Helicopter are adapting their tactics to face the challenges of the modern battlefield and maximise the capabilities of the state-of-the-art aircraft.
Among the key lessons from the war in Ukraine, countering the threats presented by air defence, uncrewed aircraft systems (UAS) and electronic warfare are important for aviation units to learn.
3 Regiment Army Air Corps is reflecting these new realities as it brings the AH-64E into frontline service, as could be seen on the recent Exercise Talon Guardian.
Apache pilot Captain ‘H’ said: “We’re tailoring what we do based on the lessons of the modern battlefield and the requirements of our role, which is to provide aviation deep attack as part of the Army's warfighting division.

We’re tailoring what we do based on the lessons of the modern battlefield and the requirements of our role, which is to provide aviation deep attack as part of the Army's warfighting division.CAPT 'H'
3 REGT AAC

We’ve had to completely change how we operate both in the air and on the ground, to best exploit the AH-64E's improved sensors, weapons and communications systems, as well as its better flying performance.”
For pilots, being ready to fly against air defence systems has been a significant change from the uncontested operations flown by the previous Apache Mk 1 in Afghanistan
Capt ‘H’ said: "We’ve had to change from flying hard and fast - when sometimes showing our presence did what troops on the ground needed from us - to a more cautious approach. To avoid detection and being engaged by air defence, we’re flying low and using the contours and features, like woods, to get close enough to attack our targets.”
To operate in the deep, attacking enemy weapons before they can target friendly troops, means that the Apaches need to be sustained out in the field. How these Forward Arming and Refuelling Points (FARPs) operate has had a rethink, to prevent the vital support teams from being located by drones or by having their communications intercepted.
“We need to be more mobile and tactically-minded to survive,” Staff Sergeant Steve Tymms said. “We can’t just set up in a fixed location, so we’ve split down to small, self-sufficient teams that work to a matrix of locations and times.
“We’re basically making appointments and if an aircraft turns up we’ll give it fuel and weapons, but if not then we pack up and go to the next location. It keeps us moving and we can do it without radio comms, so we’re much harder to target.”

We’re basically making appointments and if an aircraft turns up we’ll give it fuel and weapons, but if not then we pack up and go to the next location.SSGT STEVE TYMMS
3 REGIMENT AAC

Arming and loading point commander Corporal Oliver Kenyon said: “Once an aircraft is at a FARP, then we’re an obvious and high-value target. The clock’s ticking and we must fuel and rearm it quickly, get it back in the air and then move ourselves before we get fired on.
“Working like this makes us more survivable, so we can continue to service the aircraft, so they can keep doing their job attacking the enemy.”
Countering the enemy’s own deep strike capabilities means maintenance and staging areas far from the frontline must keep a similarly low profile and be mobile. Across the two-week exercise, 3 Regt AAC travelled 1,500km across England to set up three separate forward operating bases.
A key change has been Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineer soldiers who maintain the aircraft working on individual aircraft from concealed and dispersed positions, rather than a centralised position.
Aircraft technician Lance Corporal Chris Voller said: “We can’t expect to have the luxury of a well-established and secure base. Dispersal is about survivability, by presenting the enemy with lots of smaller targets rather than having all the aircraft parked together. Working like this is more challenging and needs good communication and planning to think about the kind of jobs we’ll be doing and the tools and spare parts that we’ll need.”

 

[FJAG]

Everything old is new again. FARPs were standard operating concepts in my day. I'm only presuming that our TacHel sqns bever gave that capability up.

 

[Kirkhill]

I think the point being made is that the FARPs are having to stay on the move and relocate as quickly as your guns @FJAG

 

[FJAG]

Gotcha. I originally took it as FARPing having gone out of practice with all those years of working out of fixed camps and FOBs. That's what I get for skimming.

Having said that one of the lessons for guns which deployed small 30 man, two-gun troops out in AMAs in Afghanistan was that security was up to you. No one sent out infantry to help. Local defence is easier if you have two howitzers, four mortars, armoured vehicles and machine guns. Fuel trucks and bladders and pallets of ammunition make nice attractive targets for Spetsnaz and others of that ilk with their own drones etc. Life is getting rougher in the rear area. Not sure if these guys are on the RAF Regiment's priority list.

 

[Good2Golf]

…and FAT COW ops using a 47 to supply to fuel point, which doesn’t even rely on the Svc Bn…

 

[brihard]

Not sure if these guys are on the RAF Regiment's priority list.

Aren’t they army? Pretty sure the British army still has angry spinny things.

 

[ArmyRick]

I was an instructor on some of the earliest regular force SQ (Soldier qualifications) and in my opinion, they were excellent courses for all non-infantry soldiers in the CA. It was originally a 7-week course and covered C7 review, C9 LMG, C6 GPMG Light Role, Hand Grenade and originally 84mm CG for small arms. It covered section hasty atacks, recconnaissance patrolling, defensive operations and a walk through platoon attack. True, it was probably a bit more than what most Veh techs, clerks or supply techs needed but better a little over training than under.

The course was shortened and became the BMQ (L). And I heard it was shut down altogether. Anyone give me input as to current?

I see stuff like this making universal courses like the old SQ very relevant. It reinforces the concept that EVERYONE is a soldier and must be prepared to fight.

 

[GR66]

I think the point being made is that the FARPs are having to stay on the move and relocate as quickly as your guns @FJAG

I think another point made was that there were multiple FARPs being set at any one time giving options for the pilots (and presumably alternatives should one of the FARPs be detected and taken out). That suggests quite a bit of redundancy in CSS units. I imagine such dispersed ops are quite beyond what our current support capabilities could manage and sustain in high tempo combat operations.

 

[brihard]

I was an instructor on some of the earliest regular force SQ (Soldier qualifications) and in my opinion, they were excellent courses for all non-infantry soldiers in the CA. It was originally a 7-week course and covered C7 review, C9 LMG, C6 GPMG Light Role, Hand Grenade and originally 84mm CG for small arms. It covered section hasty atacks, recconnaissance patrolling, defensive operations and a walk through platoon attack. True, it was probably a bit more than what most Veh techs, clerks or supply techs needed but better a little over training than under.

The course was shortened and became the BMQ (L). And I heard it was shut down altogether. Anyone give me input as to current?

I see stuff like this making universal courses like the old SQ very relevant. It reinforces the concept that EVERYONE is a soldier and must be prepared to fight.

Agreed. Anyone deployable in a land environment needs some fighting skills. Whether it’s your convoy getting hit, a rear area being raided, or protecting a small logistics footprint pushed forward to refuel/rearm, there needs to be at least a basic ability to defend against a threat. You cannot depend on there being a CBTA platoon available for force protection.

 

[FJAG]

Aren’t they army? Pretty sure the British army still has angry spinny things.

It's a mixture. Some helicopters like the CH 47 are RAF while others like attack helicopters are part of the Army.

 

[brihard]

It's a mixture. Some helicopters like the CH 47 are RAF while others like attack helicopters are part of the Army.

Yeah but the spicy ones are army.

 

[rnkelly]

FARP is bread and butter stuff. So many options now with the 47. Not to say we can’t improve though.

When we were operating in Mali, which was surprisingly similar to northern ops wrt distances/available support/hospitable climate (just take the negative off of the temp), we were able to effectively increase our combat radius with good ole fuel barrels. There’s better options but something to keep in the quiver.

 

[Good2Golf]

FARP is bread and butter stuff. So many options now with the 47. Not to say we can’t improve though.

When we were operating in Mali, which was surprisingly similar to northern ops wrt distances/available support/hospitable climate (just take the negative off of the temp), we were able to effectively increase our combat radius with good ole fuel barrels. There’s better options but something to keep in the quiver.

@rnkelly Don’t know if you ever saw some of the MHLH program briefings, but there was one slide that showed a few op vignettes and the Arctic, the Sahel and the Sudan all showed the challenges to ops of significant time and space factors - they all looked remarkably similar in the ranges and austerity between key activity points in the AOs.

Little birdies say the original plan to procure Robby ERFS is getting closer to execution. 147F with max internals and 2-3 ERFS is a flying refinery/fuel depot.

 

[Furniture]

I was an instructor on some of the earliest regular force SQ (Soldier qualifications) and in my opinion, they were excellent courses for all non-infantry soldiers in the CA. It was originally a 7-week course and covered C7 review, C9 LMG, C6 GPMG Light Role, Hand Grenade and originally 84mm CG for small arms. It covered section hasty atacks, recconnaissance patrolling, defensive operations and a walk through platoon attack. True, it was probably a bit more than what most Veh techs, clerks or supply techs needed but better a little over training than under.

The course was shortened and became the BMQ (L). And I heard it was shut down altogether. Anyone give me input as to current?

I see stuff like this making universal courses like the old SQ very relevant. It reinforces the concept that EVERYONE is a soldier and must be prepared to fight.

My understanding is that the BMQ(L) materiel is being incorporated into trades training for those that require it, otherwise the basics will be done as unit level training, or on pre-deployment training.

The problem with SQ/BMQ(L) is not what it taught, but how it was done. Apparently the course was treated as an extension of BMQ, which was a major dissatisfier when Cpls waiting for PLQ/promotion were sent back to "basic training".

 

[Good2Golf]

Yeah but the spicy small, slow ones are army.

FTFY

 

[Sf2]

…and FAT COW ops using a 47 to supply to fuel point, which doesn’t even rely on the Svc Bn…

Or ADGR from c130s

 

[KevinB]

No idea how the Brit’s do it, but FARP’s down here on the SOCOM side of the house use Ranger Platoons ( and sometimes companies) for D&S. Regardless of what assets you’re using for the FARP be it a 47 or 130 (or multiple of each) they aren’t cheap and need a robust security element.

 

[Good2Golf]

No idea how the Brit’s do it, but FARP’s down here on the SOCOM side of the house use Ranger Platoons ( and sometimes companies) for D&S. Regardless of what assets you’re using for the FARP be it a 47 or 130 (or multiple of each) they aren’t cheap and need a robust security element.

Canada could include a detachment of highly skilled convenors…

 

[Kirkhill]

The only problem I see is that moving all that kit ( to protect r

I was an instructor on some of the earliest regular force SQ (Soldier qualifications) and in my opinion, they were excellent courses for all non-infantry soldiers in the CA. It was originally a 7-week course and covered C7 review, C9 LMG, C6 GPMG Light Role, Hand Grenade and originally 84mm CG for small arms. It covered section hasty atacks, recconnaissance patrolling, defensive operations and a walk through platoon attack. True, it was probably a bit more than what most Veh techs, clerks or supply techs needed but better a little over training than under.

The course was shortened and became the BMQ (L). And I heard it was shut down altogether. Anyone give me input as to current?

I see stuff like this making universal courses like the old SQ very relevant. It reinforces the concept that EVERYONE is a soldier and must be prepared to fight.

I would use this as another argument for increasing the supply of soldiers with rudimentary training so that they can take on the burden of security, gate-guards, D&S, LOC patrols and leave the highly qualified technicians to get on with their jobs. The techs are few and far between and shouldn't be tied up with fighting. They are going to be busy enough doing their jobs while dodging bullets, tearing down and setting up, relocating and repairing.

And if GR66 is right about the system of redundancy, based on multiple nodes, with each node (logistics or command or sigs) needing a platoon of security guards and strong backs, then there is going to be ample work for SQ/BMQ(L)/YTEP trained reservists. 6 weeks of marksmanship and making loud noises.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Agreed. Anyone deployable in a land environment needs some fighting skills. Whether it’s your convoy getting hit, a rear area being raided, or protecting a small logistics footprint pushed forward to refuel/rearm, there needs to be at least a basic ability to defend against a threat. You cannot depend on there being a CBTA platoon available for force protection.

Back in the 80's I was attached to 1 Svc Battalion in Germany for Reforger Exercises. At that time I would say half their people were ex-Infantry/armour/artillery who move to SVC Battalions to ease the strain on their bodies. My opinion of Svc Bat went up considerably and doing tactical hides and resupply was a common occurrence.