15 replies to this topic

[David P]

14,000 athletes
24,000 security staff

Reasonable? Paranoia? Propaganda?

[Eaton]

It was my understanding that they hadn't employed enough security staff and were bringing in the army/territorial army or have I got that wrong?

[147]

14,000 athletes
24,000 security staff

Reasonable? Paranoia? Propaganda?

Hype is the word you are looking for David.
I'm convinced the paranoia has been overplayed so that when the Olympics go without a hitch, Mr Cameron and his cronies can all pat themselves on their backs.

[Eaton]

Hype is the word you are looking for David.
I'm convinced the paranoia has been overplayed so that when the Olympics go without a hitch, Mr Cameron and his cronies can all pat themselves on their backs.

and if something does go wrong and they didn't have enough security (although how much is enough or too much?) can you imagine the furore...

[MichaelHooley]

Slightly departing from David P's point, I was surprised to read of military leaders complaining that it's "demeaning" to deploy troops on Olympic security detail. Have we become so immersed in regime-changing activity that defence (against terrorism) is no longer considered within the army's brief?

[DeeJay]

.
I'm convinced the paranoia has been overplayed so that when the Olympics go without a hitch, Mr Cameron and his cronies can all pat themselves on their backs.

All we need now is for those nice Tube drivers not to strike to make it a success!!!!!

[147]

All we need now is for those nice Tube drivers not to strike to make it a success!!!!!

don't worry Dom . I'm quite happy to take what has been offered for doing my job. But then I'm in the drivers union, not the mickey mouse RMT.

[PaulEden]

Slightly departing from David P's point, I was surprised to read of military leaders complaining that it's "demeaning" to deploy troops on Olympic security detail. Have we become so immersed in regime-changing activity that defence (against terrorism) is no longer considered within the army's brief?

Meantime, it's not demeaning to drive around Afghanistan in open Land Rovers, wearing no body armour while the Taliban shoot at you and back at base, you have to do your number twos in a pit, which is burned once a week. For £17,000 a year.

And now the MOD says that as a last resort, it will shoot down aircraft that transgress the 30 mile exclusion zone. Now, I know Stratford reasonably well, but even I think it'd make a mess having burning aircraft falling on it.

[Fran]

14,000 athletes
24,000 security staff

Reasonable? Paranoia? Propaganda?

Giving the number of security staff in relation to the number of athletes is... if not paranoia or propaganda, somewhat provocative.

There will be vast numbers of spectators, journalists and all sorts of other people on site as well. If we had those numbers, the security headcount might seem relatively modest.

And then there is today's story about how incompetent and under-prepared many of the civilian security staff are...

[David P]

It seems I forgot the police. With them it's over 30,000 security staff!

There was a bit on the TV news a couple of days ago about what the procedures would be. First they will intercept the rogue flight with a helicopter. The crew will communicate with the rogue flight and ask him to wiggle his wings if he has heard them. Then a man will hang out of the side of his helicopter with a big 'Follow Me' sign, to lead the rogue out of the secure zone. This reminds me of the signs they used to have in the back of police cars 50 years ago . Can a fast jet follow a slow helicopter?
If they don't 'follow me' then the snipers in the helicopter will be brought into action, but they weren't telling what they would do. Shoot the pilot? Shoot the engines? They can't very well just shoot the tires out.
If that fails then they will call on the anti-aircraft batteries, which will be authorised to fire only at the highest level. So now we hang around waiting for them to get hold of Cameron (probably sipping champagne in one of the sponsor's hospitality suites) before they can shoot it down, by which time it may well be too late.

It occurred to me later what this is all about. Maybe they really are prepared to shoot the plane down. If the debris lands and kills a couple of hundred east Londoners, then what does that matter compared with breaking with the contract they have with the sponsors, or upsetting the fun of the Olympic committee and visiting VIPs?

[PaulEden]

It seems I forgot the police. With them it's over 30,000 security staff!

There was a bit on the TV news a couple of days ago about what the procedures would be. First they will intercept the rogue flight with a helicopter. The crew will communicate with the rogue flight and ask him to wiggle his wings if he has heard them. Then a man will hang out of the side of his helicopter with a big 'Follow Me' sign, to lead the rogue out of the secure zone. This reminds me of the signs they used to have in the back of police cars 50 years ago . Can a fast jet follow a slow helicopter?
If they don't 'follow me' then the snipers in the helicopter will be brought into action, but they weren't telling what they would do. Shoot the pilot? Shoot the engines? They can't very well just shoot the tires out.
If that fails then they will call on the anti-aircraft batteries, which will be authorised to fire only at the highest level. So now we hang around waiting for them to get hold of Cameron (probably sipping champagne in one of the sponsor's hospitality suites) before they can shoot it down, by which time it may well be too late.

It occurred to me later what this is all about. Maybe they really are prepared to shoot the plane down. If the debris lands and kills a couple of hundred east Londoners, then what does that matter compared with breaking with the contract they have with the sponsors, or upsetting the fun of the Olympic committee and visiting VIPs?

It's mostly crazy talk David. We do have some fast helicopters available, but oddly, only our slowest, the Sea King is being deployed in London. The Lynx and Merlin are very fast indeed for a rotorcraft, but as you say, a helicopter flat out is still slower than some jets at stall speed.

Snipers in helicopters? Fantasy world. If the MoD are being accurately reported, they aren't doing themselves any favours.

[hyposmurf]

and if something does go wrong and they didn't have enough security (although how much is enough or too much?) can you imagine the furore...

Exactly, dammed if they do dammed if they dont.Alot of it is show though, with fightr jets,battle ships and tanks.Hardly going to be using those in such a populated area,they're scared enough in this contry to use water jets and plastic bullets to control riots.

[echinosum]

How many would there be at an Elton John concert, with only 1 Elton John performing?

I don't think comparing the number of security staff to the number of athletes is a very sensible comparison. The town will also be full of an enormous number journalists (I think more than the athletes), foreign dignitaries, and Olympic Gravy Train Riders, not to mention inordinate numbers of spectators.

[Zoom]

By my reckoning, with the venues on the Olympic site itself, there are likely to be anything up to 250,000 people on the Olympic site on any particular day. Plus there are the other sites around the country. And there are the 14,000 althetes living in the village. And there are the IOC officials, the journalists, the number of heads of state and overseas government and sporting officials.

Anyone involved in any shift rostering will know that you need around 3 times as many people as you want to have on duty at any particular time to provide 24x7 coverage (their hours will be limited and they don't work 7 days a week - and they have to cover 24 hours not just an 8 hour working day) so you're probably only talking about a peak of 10,000 security staff being on duty at any one time across the whole country... maybe 7,000 on the Olympic site itself.

Putting it like that... 24,000 security staff doesn't sound unreasonable.

[PaulEden]

Putting it like that... 24,000 security staff doesn't sound unreasonable.

Until you take the cheapest security contract from the bidding suppliers, who then turn out to be thoroughly and utterly incompetent.

[MichaelHooley]

I read this morning that the Beeb's D-G has told broadcast staff to "tone down" it's patriotic and jingoistic enthusiasm, in order to present a more balanced view to the world.

It strikes me that if "the world" doesn't care for our broadcast tone ..... too bad! We're hosting the games, we listen to "French First" from the games, we're paying for the games, we pay for the BBC ...... why should we not officially enthuse over our athelete's performance?!

I fully expect fair and balanced coverage from Brazil in four years time. Ha.