British Army and German Bundeswehr Joint Terminal Attack Controllers (JTACs) trained together at Kazlu Ruda training ranges in Lithuania on Exercise FURIOUS WOLF, alongside Typhoon aircraft from No. 6 Squadron Royal Air Force.

The British and German troops have been training alongside other NATO JTAC partners across the Baltic States to hone their skills in accordance with NATO standardised practices.

All NATO JTACs use the same procedure when working with alliance aircraft say the British Army.

A Royal Air Force Typhoon of No. 6 Squadron operates over Kazla Ruda training ranges during Ex FURIOUS WOLF. Image Crown Copyright 2020.

According to NATO, JTACs from Estonia, Denmark, Germany, Lithuania, Norway, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and the United States all worked together with air crews from the Estonian Air Force, the Royal Air Force as well as the Spanish Air Force.

“JTACs work together with fighter aircraft to support troops on the ground with precision aerial fire support. This capability requires a high degree of training and professionalism. Exercise Furious Wolf was another perfect opportunity for NATO Allies to further increase their interoperability and mutual understanding of tactics and procedures. Developing and maintaining highly trained ready forces that can integrate seamlessly is the keystone of NATO’s collective deterrence and defence.”
Soldiers from the NATO enhanced Forward Battlegroup Lithuania also participated.
George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

19 COMMENTS

    • Mate, are JTACs the same as the people in TACPs, which were allocated to Brigades? I’ve always assumed the role was the same.

      Also, are the TACPs still around? From memory 16AA had 2 or 3, all numbered 610 or something like that.

      • Yes mate they are a Brigade asset, but there’s been some evolution in the role. The TACP works be assigned to the COs party at Coy level, used to be an officer and SNCO, as FACs with a couple of lads to act as flaggies. However the role as an FAC, since around 2006 has been given to more SNCOs as there was never enough to go around when Officers got priority. Afghan saw the need for the FOO and MFC and OS support assets to operate closer and the FST name was decided on in order to get all these main players in the OS world more closely linked. The FST can and does have an FAC (JTAC) a FOO and an MFC each with a signaler.

        The JTAC role has made the FAC a more aware and efficient entity as you aren’t just controling an aircraft you are responsible for air deconfliction, airspace management and close liaison with other members of the FST as you could be having a paveway knocking on someone’s door, but with a GMLRS inbound from 70 clicks away, with a 105mm fire mission and mortars going in, and helps/troops/spectres etc all playing. Big job big responsibility and big reward. However mate the caveat being it may have changed somewhat as I’ve been out now 7 years and shit changes so fast. But during Herrick you could get JTACs working alone, a 7RHA Bdr on his own, FOO trained calling in guns and rockets, etc etc. was never enough to go around in the early days.

        All Battalions could get lads JTACd up, when Herrick was very kinetic but the main players now, post Herrick are 16Bde, PF, 473 Bty, 29, and RM Recce boys. But mate you are probably more up to date on the units and tasks than I am now. Hope I haven’t bored you to death as pulling up a sandbag and swinging the lamp can get tiring lol! Cheers.

  3. Hugely responsible job, that can be massive life savers, or life takers, depending on who is on the receiving end. Huge respect, top lads. ?

    • I’d say so, in the Harrier they had the perfect Platform to carry out CAS, but now you just have to use whatever is available be it Reaper, Protector or Typhoon. The Army can obviously chip in with Apache, and now the F35b can also be used, Gold Plated as it may be.

      • Thanks, i did wonder as it tended to always be USAF on station but then they have assets we can only dream of (Apache aside of course)

        • Any and all NATO assets on station mate. Yes mainly yanks but RAF Harriers, then Tornadoes, all top lads when things were very kinetic. But also used French Mirages, Dutch F16s, plus a few more. Even had the odd B52 on station with a full load, on a few patrols. However their was never enough assets to go around and you may be allocated 2 x Airframes, but guaranteed there would be a TIC elsewhere and they would be called away to deal! As for Apache, bloody hell yaaaaaaaawn! Would always opt for 105mm or 81mm from the FOB before having to wait up to half an hour for a rather slow Apache to turn up. If they weren’t already there, above you, I preferred not to bother with them. Cheers.

      • Sorry if my question was a little vague. I meant to ask RAF aircraft carried out close air support as it tended to be in USAF. Some little nuggets in that link though. Cheers

    • The only land based missile defence system we are investing in is Sky Sabre unfortunately. In a lot of respects Medium Extended Air Defence System (MEADS) is a step up from Sky Sabre, due it increased range. It uses the latest block of Patriot missiles and even includes IRIS-T for short range stuff. The system really requires 2 radars to work properly, one for searching and another for tracking, although it can use just the X-band tracking radar for both roles if required. It could almost be called a European clone of Patriot.

      Sky Sabre is more a local air defence system, unless we get the CAMM-ER missiles. It only uses the one SAAB Giraffe radar for searching and tracking. I have always said we require a medium range SAM system that can defend key infrastructure. The French and Italians use SAMP/T which uses the Aster missile in combination with the Arabel PESA radar. Both France and Italy specified that the system was to have a anti-ballistic missile capability. This begs the question why haven’t we got such a system?

      It is not outside the scope of possibilities for Aster to be used with a cut down version of Sampson, we know the pair work together. We also have a fixed development and training site in Portsmouth complete with S1850M, Sampson and the T45’s command and control infrastructure, so why couldn’t this be used?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here