USASOC Flight Detachment

[JiJoMacLE45]

:D

[Chops]

Hi JiJo

Yes very intriguing. I've not come across them before. It would not surprise me to find that they are either a modern incarnation of Seaspray or CAG's in-house air. The Brits run a small RAF unit called S&D Flight which operates a Hercules, a Puma, and I now believe, a Chinook which has a similar role to Seaspray (ie covert air for MI6 and the 22/SBS unit known as the Increment).

I'll have a poke around too. Let's compare notes shall we?

PS Actually just read that piece on nightstalkers.com. I kinda now half suspect that it sounds like a development unit for perhaps improving the MH-60? It states Frampton was back with SOAR when he died and that he "quickly progressed again to Fully Mission Qualified status and deployed on numerous training exercises and in support of Operation ENDURING FREEDOM".

So maybe we're looking at a technical unit here- "In April 1999, he was assigned to the USASOC Flight Detachment, Fort Bragg, North Carolina, where he held the positions of UH-60L Blackhawk Flight Instructor, Technical Inspector and Production Control Non-Commissioned Officer".

Rgds

Chops

[JiJoMacLE45]

:roll:

[Chops]

Hey JiJo

Yep I remember ISA using C-12s too now that you mention it. I'll keep digging.

Out of interest, globalsecurity.org lists JSOC as comprising:

1st Special Forces Operational Detachment - Delta
Intelligence Support Activity (ISA)
Naval Special Warfare Development Group (SEAL Team Six)
24th Special Tactics Squadron
Joint Communications Unit- (JCU)
Joint Aviation Unit
Technical Intelligence Unit
Task Force 11

Joint Aviation Unit? Hmmm could be our boys...

Rgds

Chops

[USMA Pistol]

Chops/JiJo, any info on TF Sword (comprised of JSOC and UK SF units operating in A-stan)?

[JiJoMacLE45]

:slap:

[Chops]

Yep JiJo is spot on. TF11 is staffed by elements fron DEVGRU, CAG, AFSOC, 22SAS, 1SBS and, until December 02, a squadron grouping from Australian SASR. Not sure if KSK etc were attached or not. They are still in theatre- these were the guys ("allegedly" ;) ) carrying out the raids in the last coupla days.

JiJo- have Moore's book ordered from amazon.com. Arrives next week. Looking forward to it; the UK edition is not out until June but does feature an extra chapter on Brit SAS so I'll guess I'll pick up that version too! :D

Rgds

Chops

[PSYWAR1-0]

They are Army Aviation type People. What else do you truly NEED to know, without which you will die lonely and disgruntled?

[Chops]

Hey PSYWAR1

Chill out. Neither myself nor JiJo have committed any OPSEC violations if that's what you're worried about. We're big boys having an adult conversation. That's it.

Rgds

Chops

[ODB000]

Hey Chops,

You're pretty defensive when people bring up Opsec. How do you know whether you should/shouldn't be talking about these things? Maybe Psywar's right. Why is Psywar wrong?

[PSYWAR1-0]

Hey PSYWAR1

Chill out. Neither myself nor JiJo have committed any OPSEC violations if that's what you're worried about. We're big boys having an adult conversation. That's it.

Rgds

Chops

No, not worried about OPSEC per se. If I saw anything that was even close to correct and not SWAG I would have done something about it. And just for the record, the Flt Det is nothing more than a taxi service. Its considered a good assignment because of all the face time you get with the folks in the head shead. The closest they get to doing anything tactical is doing elavators so no one in ASOC becomes a pay hurt or providing a platform for someone to HALO into a Change of Command.

[JiJoMacLE45]

:D

[PSYWAR1-0]

SO CALM DOWN. You guys take yourselves way to seriously with this backyard commando bull****. Simmer down, enjoy the site.


Im calm as can be. You have to admit that it can look pretty funny from the inside looking out to see all this bandwidth devoted to SWAGs about a taxi service. :D Now as to the backyard commando comment, care to compare DD214s and VA Disability Ratings?

[Apogee]

Not to be the asshole of the group, but if you're comparing discharge records, i think that still qualifies you as a backyard commando. All be it a decorated one. Just my thoughts....

[JiJoMacLE45]

:(

[PSYWAR1-0]

Not to be the asshole of the group, but if you're comparing discharge records, i think that still qualifies you as a backyard commando. All be it a decorated one. Just my thoughts....

Point taken. I guess what intrigues me about sites like this, and why Im here, and the tone of my posts is the devotion to finding out the little details that people here are so interested in. Im a life long 18th century reenactor, so I kinda understand it. I want my uniforms to be as exact as possible, but I do it for teaching the public about history. I get the feeling that alot of folks here are putting together facsimile copies of uniform and equipment to play DF2 on the computer or Airsoft. They are living vicariously thru what I and others much more High Speed than I did for so many years. If more folks were writing books to be published, or updating the displays in the ASO Museum, I could understand it better.

[Chops]

PSYWAR

I'm none of the things you mentioned- althougth I'm a bit hazy on what DF2 is. I'm an 'interested observer'. That's it. Yes I do write things occasionally but mainly for work.

Number one; personally, I find it incredibly rude for you to leap in with a smart arse comment about a conversation myself and JiJo were having. If you want to join in, please do so but don't be a smart arse and actually contribute something intelligent.

Number two, don't try to cover your rudeness by then claiming you're conducting some sort of psycho-social survey of why people are interested in spec ops. If you're interested in asking that question, ask politely and people may answer you.

I couldn't care less whether you're serving, discharged, a wannabe or whatever. If you want to discuss your service or your little social project, start a thread. Don't interrupt conversations with smart arse comments.

Rgds

Chops

[Chops]

ODB000

I mentioned OPSEC because many serving or former Americans think that 'civies' shouldn't discuss black/grey units which are not commonly known. I believe that anything mentioned in the public domain can be discussed. As Ji Jo says, if the outfit's that black, they will take steps to ensure public disclosure is minimised. Sometimes people don't know what's in the public domain and thus that's why I mentioned OPSEC.

Now PSYWAR thinks that he could actually do something about it if we were that stupid to violate US OPSEC. Sounds like another of those MIBs who so plagued Hood over the Spectre video...

Rgds

Chops

[Trigger]

why am I continually having to respond to these tools?

Because you are a truly caring human being (and a hell of a table dancer if I recall) and, oh yeah, because the guys who try to wave their DD214s around and point at all their surplus store medals and wag their little know-it-all/OPSEC fingers are such humongous geeks that you are their only thread to the real world.

cheers!

[Chops]

Hey Trigger

Me cheap cheap GI. Me sooo horny. Beacoup boom boom GI...

and I agree totally with ur comments.

Take care mate

Chops
The Spec Ops Private Dancer and inventor of the Chops CQB Method (tm)!

[PSYWAR1-0]

Why do you have to deal with Tools Like ME? Cause the Military aint a spectator sport! You want to be a military groupie then get a tit job and work on your pole tricks! If you are constantly having to deal with Vets and folks still serving having a case of the butt about what they see here, shouldnt that tell you something?

Am I a MIB? Not at all, would I contact the board administrators if I saw something I thought was an OPSEC Violation and attempt to get it deleted? dam straight I would. If it wasnt taken care of would I contact some of my buds still serving, Yes I admit I would, but I doubt they would hve the time to take care of it, they have much more important things to do these days than worry about the internet. There was a short fury of action about the photos that were going around awhile back that were suposedly "50 Cal head shot" the photos were not of a sniper vic, and somehow made it into the public domain, the guy who took the photos is now dead so not much can be done to determine how they escaped MIL control.

The only point I want to make is that behind all these photos are real people, not movie actors. This isnt an academic discussion about Waterloo and the effects that military fashion of the time on the effectiveness of the common troopie. Its about real people who are in harms way. If they dont like the fact that they are being talked about then you should respect that!

[Chops]

"If you are constantly having to deal with Vets and folks still serving having a case of the butt about what they see here, shouldnt that tell you something?"

One guy mentioned OPSEC to me. I didn't agree with him as the topic we were discussing was widely known both in military literature and the web. So "hardly constantly having to deal"...

Most of the better informed jokers who contribute intelligent, discussion worthy, material to this forum understand the notion of US OPSEC and would never post anything which could endanger US or allied service personnel. Hood is likewise a very switched on moderator who would bin anything that genuinely looked like it was impinging OPSEC.

I certainly realise as I'm sure most folks here do that there are guys out there on ops right now from the units we often discuss and respect that fact. I hadn't heard that "If they dont like the fact that they are being talked about then you should respect that". Huh? News to me.

Anyway I for one am going to continue to have intelligent conversations with other intelligent adults on this forum. I am sick to death of responding to folks who have an axe to grind about something. It's a military discussion forum, nothing more, nothing less. Deal with it.

Rgds

Chops (working his pole) ;)

[ODB000]

Unless Hood lied, he's a civilian.....thus doesn't know what would be an Opsec issue. But why argue for Opsec on US topics with a guy from the UK?

[SHOOTERB]

The USASOC FD is simply VIP ferrying unit. The reason why most if not all of the det is from SOAR is because SOAR belongs to USASOC.

[warchild1/27scout]

lets all get along.atleast these people arnt out in the street burning flags.i thought it was funny that one guy pulled the opsec card in one of these forums on a dude and the dude said"hey buddy,im just a 16 yr old kid.lol :lol:

[hood]

"Unless Hood lied, he's a civilian.....thus doesn't know what would be an Opsec issue."

:) nope, didn't lie. I wish I could say that I was though. I think it's pretty obvious what an opsec issue would be. If I can do a search on google.com or watch a television show and see info about the subject you're talking about, it's not an opsec issue. Concerning talking about military guys who don't want to be talked about, they're out of luck to an extent. Like any other celebrity, being in the military where you're the ambassadors of your country, you live life in the spotlight and you're bound to have a fan club, which is a simplistic but accurate description of this site.

[100%Marine]

Im just going to try to help by defining the word detachment in military terms. A detachment is a unit assigned to another unit under a different command structure. For example, at the Naval Flight School there's an Army Aviation Detachment and at Benning there's a Marine Det. In my experience, I have observed a 160th Army rotor instructor at Camp Lejune. Technically, he was detached.
In this case the Army's Special Operations Command is detaching aviation units to other units and who knows where the SSG was assigned.
Also, I know personnel in interservice detachments are outstanding and motivated. You dont want buffoons representing you out there among the other services.
Semper Fi, Mac

[Chops]

ODB000

I am not from the UK. I am Australian but working currently in the UK. And perhaps surprisingly we have OPSEC in the ADF and in the UK military. UK mil is even more stringent in some cases than US.

Welcome back to Shooter B. Nice to have you on board again.

Rgds

Chops

[100%Marine]

On Security:

Last month I wrote a letter to the editor of a national magazine in response to an article about black op units. This article disclosed the location of ISA. Before I start let me add that I am the grandson of an Army Intelligence Officer and son of a Combat Engineer. This combination let me in on the location of the ISA, where I grew up. When I read this piece I was fuming mad. Since I was a kid I thought I was privy to a national secret. The magazine blew this all away. OPSEC is incredibly important in a 9/11 context. The ISA HQ is an open source intel, but very difficult to attain and its not in Arlington. My point is that this mag outed the ISA HQ in a national magazine, and now any UBL wannabe may target the installation.

[ODB000]

"I think it's pretty obvious what an opsec issue would be. If I can do a search on google.com or watch a television show and see info about the subject you're talking about, it's not an opsec issue. Concerning talking about military guys who don't want to be talked about, they're out of luck to an extent. Like any other celebrity, being in the military where you're the ambassadors of your country, you live life in the spotlight and you're bound to have a fan club, which is a simplistic but accurate description of this site."

Hood, you are wrong on this point. Just because something has been discussed on TV or been posted on the internet, does not mean it is not an Opsec issue. Information that has been cleared for release by DoD is fine, period. Just because a book has been written does not mean it's ok, or been cleared. There is plenty of information published in books that is still classified. Ok, if you discuss the book, that's one thing, but if someone in a position to verify the information does so, they're wrong, unless they've been cleared to do so. As for military being similar to a celebrity, thus open for discussion, again wrong. We have something called National Security....and these people you equate to being celebrities are in harms way....are you? Respect that and respect them If someone suggests there is a problem discussing certain issues.....respect that....don't immediately dismiss it. Perhaps exchange some PMs to see if they have a reason for asking you to appropriately moderate the thread. You are the moderator...but you truly are not in a position to know for sure whether something is truly an Opsec issue. Why not enlist some folks who are in a position know what's what to help, you'll be more successful, have less headaches and gain more respect from AD folks who will see that you take their security and safety seriously. If you really do respect-admire the military, then do us a favor and err on the side of caution.

[hood]

I don't disagree with what you said, but so far, every time someone has come on here and said that we shouldn't be discussing something, they don't give any reasons. So far every time it's happened, it's been proven that the reality is exactly the opposite, such as the ac-130 video. I have no problem with someone pointing something out and giving a valid justification. The point that I'm trying to make is, so far that's never happened and all we've had here are annoying people. A perfect example of this, is warhorse (the user) asking me to turn off his account because the admin (me) doesn't observe opspec here and I'm not limiting the users here. Yet at the same time, he gives no specifics of things that he feels violate it. He's hardly the first to try this strong arm tactic, and I refuse to let it work on me so they can fulfill some strange ego complex that they have going on.

[snake6264]

How can something be OPSEC if its already on the web.
The folks over at SOCNET go way overboard on that crap hell like they know more than everyone else
Any how.....Even if the Iraqi's knew the war plans they could not do much about it.
I have yet to see anything on the web that would violate OPSEC
we are not talking about troop locations and such let alone most docterine used today is years old
One other thought is hell we teach our so called "allies" the same classes so where is the OPSEC in that????

Via La F*CKING France!!!!! NOT!!!!!

Snake6264