U.S. 'friendly fire' pilot won't face court martial

[DeepThaut]

Read this, I cannot believe this!!  

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/06/24/world/schmidt040624

NEW ORLEANS - The U.S. pilot who bombed and killed four Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan struck a deal on Thursday to avoid a court martial.

Maj. Harry Schmidt will now face a non-judicial hearing by his unit's commanding officer, in which the worst outcome could be 30 days of house arrest or a loss of one month's pay of $5,600.

Maj. Harry Schmidt and wife arrive for court (file photo)
In a court martial, he could have lost his flying privileges, could have been kicked out of the military, and could have faced prison.

His hearing with his commanding general is scheduled for Canada Day.

The mother of one of the Canadian soldiers killed in Afghanistan says she is saddened by the conclusion of the case.

Cpl. Ainsworth Dyer was 25 when he died in the bombing. His mother Agatha Dyer said on Thursday from her home in Montreal that her heart is broken, and she believes the pilot involved in her son's death should pay.

The other three Canadians who died in the bombing were Sgt. Marc Leger, Pvte. Nathan Smith and Pvte. Richard Green.

Schmidt was facing four counts of dereliction of duty for dropping a laser-guided bomb on Canadian soldiers taking part in night exercises in Afghanistan in April 2002. Four soldiers were killed; eight were wounded.

He accepted an air force offer to face administrative punishment in exchange for the dismissal of all charges, according to a U.S. air force statement on Thursday.

Schmidt's lawyer said the air force had agreed to allow his client to remain employed with the Air National Guard, but not as a pilot.

He said Schmidt â “ who had a decorated career as a Navy pilot and an instructor at the Navy's "Top Gun" fighter pilot school â “ did not want to fly for the Air Force anymore.

Schmidt felt he had been "second guessed in a combat situation by people sitting back in the air-conditioned comfort of the Pentagon," the lawyer said.

Schmidt had originally opted for a court martial over a non-judicial hearing, saying he wanted to clear his name.

The air force in June 2003 dropped the initial charges of involuntary manslaughter and aggravated assault â “ which could have carried sentences of up to 64 years in prison â “ against Schmidt and his flight leader Maj. William Umbach.

Umbach thereafter quietly agreed to accept a reprimand and retire from the air force.

Schmidt and Umbach, both with the Illinois Air National Guard's 170th Fighter Squadron, believed the enemy was firing at them when they dropped the bomb on members of the then Winnipeg-based Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry.

They were flying near Kandahar Airport in the early morning hours of April 18, 2002, when they detected ground fire. They thought it was directed at them and dropped a 225-kilogram laser-guided bomb, even though they had been ordered to hold their fire.

The soldiers on the ground, who were conducting live fire exercises, were the first Canadians to die in combat since the Korean War.

-Nordwind  

 

[Military Brat]

I think the incident was an honest accident on the part of the pilot.

At the time, it was an active warzone, there were bullets flying and the pilot believed he was under attack from the enemy. That is an understandable concern when you think about it, this pilot didn't even know there were friendlies in the area.

Sure, he was probably a little trigger happy, pulling the trigger before he heard back from HQ, but war messes with your mind. Also, from what I have gathered the USAF pumps their pilots full of all sorts of drugs (speed, etc.) to keep them awake for their long missions, so that could also have played a part.

I don't think punishing this pilot with house arrest or a fine will really do anything. Those kinds of actions are meant to correct someone, to make sure they don't repeat their crime. I don't think this pilot took off that night wanting to bomb Canadian soldiers in the area.

But with that said, it doesn't downplay the loss of the Canadian soldiers. I just think the blame is misplaced, in fact we might not even be able to place the blame on anyones shoulders.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I thought the use (or non use) of ground to air IFF equipment was also an issue, but remain murky on the details of the case.  Perhaps one of the Afghanistan vets can clarify.

 

[Goober]

They were under orders not to fire, then they fired, and four of our soldiers died because of it.

 

[Scratch_043]

I heard about the dropping of the criminal charges earlier tonight on the CBC.

It was also said that this same kind of thing has happened twice since then, in Iraq, involving US troops. This shows that there is something going horribly wrong in the chain of command, and that Pilots are not being properly breifed on friendly troop activity on the ground before patrols. This cannot be blamed on miscomunication between the Canadians and the Americans, because other incidents, as I stated above, have since occured in Iraq involving members of the same Military, pointing to a communications breakdown  the airforce end (ie. pilots not getting info in breifing before deployment)

 

[Jarnhamar]

Is what goober said true? Were the americans actually under orders not to fire?
Then fired in "self defense"?

 

[Tebo]

I am also curious what sort of threat small arms fire poses to an F-16 fighter patrol however many kilometers up.   With the speed they travel at you would think flight instead of fight a more prudent method for dealing with a pittance of tracer fire.   I have a very difficult time believing they had grounds to fire on impulse when they took the time to loiter over the target, receive and then disobey orders to hold fire.

Just my very uneducated rant.

 

[1feral1]

There I was on a cold cloudy April's autumn day, deep in the field at the trg areas of Puckapunyal in southern Victoria when one of the Lads said 'did you here on the news about those Canucks killed in Afghanistan?'

My heart sank....    


Wes

 

[Goober]

Ghost: Yea at the bottom of the acticle posted it states that, but I've read it in a few others as well.

...They were flying near Kandahar Airport in the early morning hours of April 18, 2002, when they detected ground fire. They thought it was directed at them and dropped a 225-kilogram laser-guided bomb, even though they had been ordered to hold their fire.
....

 

[ags281]

Here's a question: has this guy ever issued an apology to the four families and also to Canada? I may have forgotten, but I can't recall hearing about one.

Regardless of how the legal stuff plays out I'd say one is in order.

 

[clasper]

The transcript of the pilots conversations can be found here:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/friendlyfire/pdf/ff_transcript.pdf

The pilots reported they were being shot at (which turned out to be Canadian small arms fire ricocheting off a burned out tank they were using as a target).   AWACS told them to hold fire while they checked it out.   The pilots then invoked self defence, and dropped their bomb.   8 seconds after reporting bombs away, AWACS told them that friendlies were in the area.

Speaking as a Monday morning quarterback, the two US pilots exercised poor judgement.   I personally don't know how hard it is to tell the difference between AAA fire and small arms tracer rounds ricocheting off an armoured hull at night.   There are a lot of mitigating factors, including lack of pre-flight briefings, "go-pills", and various other factors which aren't in the public domain.   It's pretty hard for me to decide if their actions were criminal, or negligent, or merely part of the "fog of war".   But I do know (as a Monday morning quarterback) that the pilots screwed up big time, and should not be put in a position to screw up similarly again.   And this is the case- one pilot accepted a reprimand and retired, and the one who just escaped the court martial has asked for a non-flight assignment, and doesn't want to fly again.   While my sense of vengeance demands more, my sense of justice is satisfied that these two will never be in the "fog of war" again.

What I find truly appalling is the fact that the US military hasn't apparently learned from this tragedy (do you have a source on that Torn?)

 

[Lance Wiebe]

The blame should lay a lot higher than the pilots.

Who briefed the pilots?  They obviously left out the "Situation Enemy/Friendly" part of the briefing out.

Who briefed the AWACS crew?  They, who coordinate all aircraft actions, should have known friendly dispositions, obviously!

Not being a pilot, I would have to guess that, not being able to see down, he initially glimpsed tracer fire climbing in to the air, and reported it.  Eight seconds is a long time when you think you're going to possibly get shot down, or even die.

I'm not saying the pilots are totally blameless, but I am saying that, once again, it is the men at the pointy end getting all of the blame, when the blame should be starting a lot higher.

 

[Northern Touch]

The transcript of the pilots conversations can be found here:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/friendlyfire/pdf/ff_transcript.pdf

The pilots reported they were being shot at (which turned out to be Canadian small arms fire ricocheting off a burned out tank they were using as a target).  AWACS told them to hold fire while they checked it out.  The pilots then invoked self defence, and dropped their bomb.  8 seconds after reporting bombs away, AWACS told them that friendlies were in the area.

I'll be the first to admit I know little to nothing about small arms and tracers, but exactly how threating can a ricocheting C7 or C6 round look when you have the ability to reach 20 000 feet in seconds? 

I remember it being in or on the front page of the Toronto star, and the F-16's actualy stayed over the target.  So, they stayed over the target from which they were being shot at by small arms, and having their life put in danger?  Then disobeyed a direct order to hold fire?

The blame lays with the pilots and the pilots alone.  It wasn't their commander who ordered them to drop those bomb, they choose to themselves..  As fas as I'm concerned, they got off far to easy for killing 4 soldiers.

 

[Guardian]

I read somewhere (and, please correct me if I'm wrong) that Schmidt requested, at one point, permission to drop altitude and conduct a strafing run. If so, that's extremely odd behaviour on the part of a man who's now claiming he perceived a direct threat to his aircraft - why ask for a strafe if you have a bomb available, and the bomb would be safer?

But, I could be wrong, since I can't for the life of me remember where I saw that quote. Anyone?

 

[clasper]

But, I could be wrong, since I can't for the life of me remember where I saw that quote. Anyone?

Guardian-

It's in the transcript I posted.  Schmidt requested to engage with 20mm cannon, but then switched to a GBU 12 when he invoked the self defence aspect of the ROE.  It was approximately 2 minutes between the first report of SA fire and bombs away.  They estimated the ceiling of the SA fire as 10000 ft.  If we assume the planes had to travel 10000 ft to escape the range of the SA fire (which is a guess since I don't know their altitude), it would take an F-16 about 11 seconds at the rated cruising speed of 577mph.

 

[Korus]

From the CBC: http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/friendlyfire/reports.html

"The pilot then stated that he was "rolling-in in self-defence," dropped down to 10,000 feet and dropped a 250-kilogram laser-guided bomb on the target, killing four Canadian soldiers and wounding eight others.

 

[Jarnhamar]

The American pilot is full of shit.
You can do a lot with a self defense clause. I'm very glad they(we)  have it but it can also be abused.
My little opinion - the pilots saw the groundfire and said screw it, they dropped the bomb and tried to cover their ass with the self defense line. I'm no pilot nor do i claim to know a lot about their tactics. I hate to use a video game as a reference so take it at whatever value you want but if I'm playing a flying video game and i am taking fire from an unknown ground target the last thing I'm going to do is try to strafe it with guns.

This guy asked to fire, was told  no, then by accident or design, put himself in a position where he can engage them without permission through the self defense act.
Thats bullshit.
Theres blame to go around from him and his wingman to whoever was responsible for informing the American chain of command that friendlies were in the area. Why is it so hard to just admit they screwed up, punish who was responsible and get on with it?

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

I've been told that you can see the lights of the base from the range.  That alone should have been a signal.  The AWACS told them to hold fire until they could straighten everything out.  Also a jet can fly higher then and small calibre round as well as reach a safe distance much faster.  No reason to drop.  The dude wanted to get his groove on.  Reminded me of the Apache pilot that had a FF incident in the first Gulf War.  He was ordered not to fly prior to the incident.