Think Defense Blog slams RAF Operations against ISIS.

via TD...

Just shy of a months worth of operations and the RAF has expended;

• Hellfire; 20

• Brimstone; 5

• Paveway IV; 12

The target descriptions are equally interesting, a truck, a heavy machine gun position, an armoured personnel carrier and excavator. These targets fall definitely into the ‘tactical’ column rather than attacking ‘strategic’ targets.
What conclusions can we draw (if any) from the number of targets, types of target, launch platform and weapons expended?

• Reaper is doing just as much of the heavy lifting as Tornado without the massive logistic effort involved with refuelling Tornado?

• Paveway IV seems to be the referred option for those sorties flown by Tornado?

• How many Reapers can we buy for a single F35?

• The effect delivered (destroying an excavator or trucks in singles) are insignificant compared to the cost?

• Air power used in this manner satisfies the ‘something must be done’ brigade but not much else?

• Any others?

Now you know why the effort against ISIS is .... a joke.

The US, UK and our allies are all involved in tank plinking.  This air campaign is NOT designed to provide a decisive outcome to the war.  Its just a political game being played with peoples lives.  Why commit a pilot to combat if you're not serious about winning the war?

An interesting sidenote for me is the use of Hellfire vs. Brimstone.  Hellfire is much more popular it seems.

My guess for the ISIS conflict?  Someone in leadership is hoping that they burn themselves out and then attempt a political resolution.