British, American, and Australian air crews have participated in Exercise Bamboo Eagle 24-3, a multinational training event designed to enhance cooperation and operational readiness in preparation for potential high-end conflict.
The exercise integrated airmen from the Royal Air Force (RAF), U.S. Air Force, and Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) in a series of live, virtual, and constructive operations conducted in the eastern Pacific.
Exercise Bamboo Eagle focused on Agile Combat Employment (ACE) concepts, where forces from all three nations operated across multiple locations under a centralised command and control (C2) structure. The exercise aimed to address various operational challenges, including distributed command and control, communication, logistics, and sustainment, simulating scenarios that could arise in future conflicts.
According to Lt. Col. Michael Power of the U.S. Air Force, the exercise covered a large synthetic battlespace of more than 850,000 square miles, offering a unique training environment. He noted, “The exercise prepares both tactical and operational warfighters for competition.” This iteration also introduced the deployment of a fully resourced Air Operations Centre (AOC), adding an operational-level dimension to the training.
RAF Wing Commander Richard Kinniburgh highlighted the level of integration between the participating forces, saying, “Our partners were able to lead AOC shifts and fill key leadership roles.” RAAF Squadron Leader Sean Bedford also commented on the cooperation, stating, “The opportunity to integrate into the U.S. AOC was a valuable aspect of the exercise.”
Exercise Bamboo Eagle provided opportunities for personnel from the UK, US, and Australia to train together, further developing their collective operational capabilities and strengthening cooperation across air forces, all with an eye on future readiness for potential conflict scenarios.
So, we are still training with allies for conflict outside the NATO area. I wonder if that will change when SDR is published? HMG is so focussed on NATO you sometimes wonder if they still want to do Global Britain, militarily.
Morning Graham it really is baffling 🙄
It’s very much a question of priority I suppose, where are we most likely to wind up in a conflict next? To be fair to NATO, the area of influence covers our back yard, all the way down from the arctic ice, and all the way down and round to the Suez canal, essentially. That covers a number of our national interests- both military and otherwise, non-NATO security commitments, etc. I can understand why we may prioritise it. But I think the whole AUKUS thing does underline how we view our partnerships in that part of the world- even if… Read more »
To be honest Graham, there would be a pretty good chance that any sino/US war would end up a NATO conflict anyway..infact I would say it would be almost inevitable. The U.S. would have to strike mainland china to have a hope of winning any campaign in the china seas and china would probably then strike back. Also it’s whole warfighting doctrine is about linking political warfare with making a population and body politic suffer until they come to the peace table..( very different to the western paradigm, which is about defeating an nations militarily infrastructure). So I would give… Read more »
I think you’re overestimating China’s abilities. What will China attack the continental US with? How will they get there? They are half the world apart. And the US controls everything in between. China might be a beast in its own backyard but it’s no superpower. It doesn’t have the experience or assets to attack any NATO territory to trigger article 5 and even if it did it would be the stupidest thing it could do.
China will not go to war with The US – they are to smart for that. On current force levels they’d loose badly – considering the abundance of natural US allies . China would be overwhelmed and they know it.
Their strategy remains timeless throughout the ages. double downed by the politburo “let our enemies destroy themselves from within”.
Hi Jonathan China will not deliberately go to war with The US – they are to smart for that. On current force levels they’d loose badly – considering the abundance of natural US allies (re your comment on triggering article 5). I think it’s likely well see AUKUS expand to include Japan and S.Korea maybe India, China is a big concern here in the Antipodes and it seems AUKUS has universal political support across the spectrum. China would be overwhelmed and they know it I recall your piece on a possible Taiwan invasion which was petty much spot on IMO.… Read more »
Excellent. Apart from the fact that UK forces are about as far as possible from being prepared for a prolonged high end war, even as a minor ally. Far too small for benign peace, let alone supporting the US, Aus & friends in the Far East. Though I think it is very much in our interests to support them & help Taiwan deter/defeat a CCP invasion.
Hhhm. I note my country (NZ) is not participating?