Was it British?

[RAENORTH]

From here>, speculation that ER-MCV was under contract to the MoD as an asset not declared to Nato. It was, therefore, working solely for the British. The contract, according to this source, was for logistical resupply only. UK and Nato troops were not authorised to fly on the aircraft without ballistic protection and self protection suites. This asset strictly moved cargo, supplied largely by British Forces.

View full article here

[gareth]

Either way, the information emerging seems to point to this being a British supply helicopter (in the sense that it was working for the British), which was shot down on its approach to a British base, possibly in circumstances that the Taleban were trying for an RAF Chinook.

That the Taleban presence was such that they were able to mount (an apparently successful) attack on a helicopter under the noses of the British suggests a degree of strength, one the one hand, and a degree of vulnerability on the other, that should inform the current debate on helicopter usage in Afghanistan.

And let's not forget the Taleban nearly got an actual Chinook last year.

They've gone from choppers that could legitimately be armed to the teeth and equipped with defensive aides to (presumably) unarmed civillian helicopters they won't let troops fly on without specific protection, would rather we didn't talk about and doesn't put serving British lives in direct peril. I would say they have given up making the case for our presence in Afghanistan if they are not actually prepared to put appropriate amounts of Britsh troops and resources into the region. If we are there for a good reason and have a coherent strategy then the politicians should have the balls to make it known and see that it gets done.

[fitaloon]

I'm also hearing that another company may be supplying further helicopters but the name doesn't help, Balmoral Air, and the possible owner Robin Reid is proving tricky to find info on.

[RAENORTH]

I'm also hearing that another company may be supplying further helicopters but the name doesn't help, Balmoral Air, and the possible owner Robin Reid is proving tricky to find info on.

Keep up the great work ... between us, we'll crack it!

[permanentexpat]

But the questions also remain as to why the British were relying on an aircraft operated by a company which had been banned from flying in EU member state airspace on safety grounds, and which has been associated with arms trafficking.

Come on!...you need urgent supplies...but your own miserable logistics don't have the means of delivery.
What is one supposed to do?
Somebody seems to have remembered that word improvise...which, it is true, sometimes goes pear-shaped...so?
A question might be asked as to why those awaiting the supplies didn't secure safe approach & landing conditions for the 'gun-runners'. Could it incredibly be that because the delivery truck was 'unofficial' they were prevented from doing so?

The Tory view is that all effort should be provided by the RAF with MoD-owned assets.

Schoolfriends of Onan.

[RAENORTH]

But the questions also remain as to why the British were relying on an aircraft operated by a company which had been banned from flying in EU member state airspace on safety grounds, and which has been associated with arms trafficking.

Come on!...you need urgent supplies...but your own miserable logistics don't have the means of delivery.
What is one supposed to do?
Somebody seems to have remembered that word improvise...which, it is true, sometimes goes pear-shaped...so?
A question might be asked as to why those awaiting the supplies didn't secure safe approach & landing conditions for the 'gun-runners'. Could it incredibly be that because the delivery truck was 'unofficial' they were prevented from doing so?

The Tory view is that all effort should be provided by the RAF with MoD-owned assets.

Schoolfriends of Onan.

This machine operator seems to have been a subcontractor, who may even have subcontracted its operation to another outfit .. so we have a US company as the prime contrator, subcontracting to a Moldovian company which, in turn, seems to have subcontracted to a Ukrainian company for crew and operation, with both subcontractors having a rather murky reputation for cutting corners. And what would be the result if the machine had crashed on the base, killing soldiers, rather than crashing on the town, killing one child and injuring a man? Would we then have been looking at safety equipment and certification? And what about the cost of the supplies lost, plus the fact that we are now short of 20 tons of lift capacity?

[gareth]

The good lady Ann Winterton asked this on 25th March 2009:

Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether proposals have been made to his Department for the lease of medium and heavy lift helicopters for use in Afghanistan. [264144]

Mr. Hutton: The Ministry of Defence uses helicopters provided by SkyLink Aviation through the NATO ISAF Contracted Air Transport (ICAT) contract to move freight. During periods of peak activity the UK supplements the NATO ICAT with a national contract providing medium and heavy helicopter lift.

A later question (20th April) confirmed that the 'national contract' is with Skylink Aviation.

[RAENORTH]

The good lady Ann Winterton asked this on 25th March 2009:

Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether proposals have been made to his Department for the lease of medium and heavy lift helicopters for use in Afghanistan. [264144]

Mr. Hutton: The Ministry of Defence uses helicopters provided by SkyLink Aviation through the NATO ISAF Contracted Air Transport (ICAT) contract to move freight. During periods of peak activity the UK supplements the NATO ICAT with a national contract providing medium and heavy helicopter lift.

A later question (20th April) confirmed that the 'national contract' is with Skylink Aviation.

Good spot. The silly thing is, I'd asked Ann to put that question ... and then forgot about it.

[fitaloon]

Looks like Ann asked some questions yesterday as well and was fobbed of by Miliband and Ainsworth, Why are they hiding this. More details http://diack.co.uk/fitaloon/2009/07/er-mcv-update-on-status-why-all-the-secrecy/
Yesterday in Parliament Ann Winterton (Congleton) (Con): asked

Will the Secretary of State confirm whether the helicopter that is believed to have been shot down earlier this week, with the loss of eight lives, was a NATO helicopter, or was directly leased, if that is the right word, by the United Kingdom? I understand that it was a supply helicopter, and the insurgents may well have believed that it was a Chinook.

David Miliband: replied

I think that the hon. Lady is referring to the six Ukrainians who lost their lives when their helicopter was shot down earlier this week. I do not want to trespass on to operational details. I think that it would be better if we considered what we are able to say publicly about that incident, and then referred to the matter at the end of the debate. There is some information, but it does not quite tally with what she suggested. I suggest that we seriously take on board her inquiry, but right hon. and hon. Members will know that there are good reasons why we do not go into details here.

Onto the end of the debate. Ann Winterton: asked

Is the right hon. Gentleman able to answer the question that I posed to the Foreign Secretary at the outset of this debate about the helicopter that had been contracted to the British?

Mr. Ainsworth: replied

We suffered the loss of a contract helicopter in the north of Helmand province and there were deaths as a result of that. I will write to the hon. Lady and give her more detail on it if she wants. I know that she often raises the issue of vehicles and that she has had a long-standing interest in the subject. People continue to say that there is a huge problem with vehicles. We have a suite of vehicles now, including Mastiff, Ridgback and Jackal. We also have the new tactical support vehicles—Wolfhound, Husky and Coyote—coming into province. It is cruel to pretend to those who have lost their lives that we will be able to stop our people dying by providing more helicopters or a suite of vehicles. Many Members have said that this afternoon, however. Even if we can get to the point where every single vehicle is available in every single location the length and breadth of the Helmand province for every operation, from time to time people will have to get out of those vehicles. They have to make contact with the people; they have to walk among them and win them over. That is dangerous work and it is cruel to pretend that we can remove the danger from the job that we ask our people to do.

[RAENORTH]

Looks like Ann asked some questions yesterday as well and was fobbed of by Miliband and Ainsworth, Why are they hiding this.

This is a brown envelope job ... red faces all round.

I was going to do that this morning ... you've saved me a job ... I'll lift and link.

[SandyRham]

This is a brown envelope job

Who is dumping cash on whom?

[RAENORTH]

This is a brown envelope job

Who is dumping cash on whom?

Sklink is an aviation company with no aircraft. It buys contracts at top dollar with brown envelopes and then subs out the work to the cheapest bidders - such as dodgy Moldavian gun-runners and shady Ukranian corner-cutters - and creams off the difference. The deal was negotiated in Brussels with Nato, on a recommendation from the EU ... need I say more?

[SandyRham]

Ah, Mandy and the Oligarchs definitely aren't involved, ....

[RAENORTH]

Ah, Mandy and the Oligarchs definitely aren't involved, ....

Wouldn't bet on it.