14.07.2014 Views

Archie to SAM: A Short Operational History of Ground-Based Air ...

Archie to SAM: A Short Operational History of Ground-Based Air ...

Archie to SAM: A Short Operational History of Ground-Based Air ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

GROUND-BASED AIR DEFENSE SINCE 1990<br />

“one shot, one hit” accuracy, which meant that a few aircraft<br />

could exact significant damage on the defender. Great fleets <strong>of</strong><br />

attack and support aircraft were no longer needed <strong>to</strong> inflict<br />

critical damage on an opponent. 10<br />

The coalition had significant intelligence advantages. Certainly,<br />

the American fleet <strong>of</strong> sophisticated pho<strong>to</strong>graphic, infrared,<br />

and electronic surveillance satellites was crucial. <strong>Air</strong>borne<br />

platforms added <strong>to</strong> this capability. In addition, the<br />

coalition contacted and received information from the companies<br />

that had built and installed equipment in potential targets.<br />

The <strong>Air</strong>men also utilized agents on the ground. 11 On the other<br />

side, the Iraqis had a good idea <strong>of</strong> US reconnaissance capabilities<br />

because <strong>of</strong> US intelligence assistance <strong>to</strong> the Iraqis during<br />

the Iran-Iraq War. Therefore, they employed various methods<br />

<strong>to</strong> deny US overhead capabilities. In the end, however, seldom<br />

has one force so well informed fought another so ill informed.<br />

Perhaps the greatest advantage the coalition forces had over<br />

the Iraqis was in the quality <strong>of</strong> personnel. The allied airmen were<br />

competent and highly trained. Not only did they have more flying<br />

experience than their opponents, but also many (certainly<br />

from the NATO forces) had trained in the highly realistic flag<br />

exercises. Even had the two combatants exchanged equipment,<br />

the coalition would have won—albeit at a greater cost.<br />

The coalition planned <strong>to</strong> use its overwhelming air power <strong>to</strong><br />

simultaneously attack both air defense and strategic targets. 12<br />

The initial plan called for the F-117s <strong>to</strong> attack key air defense<br />

centers, cruise missiles <strong>to</strong> hit the electric power grid, along with<br />

attacks on command and communications facilities. These assaults<br />

would be followed by flights <strong>of</strong> American F-14 and F-15<br />

fighters <strong>to</strong> counter any Iraqi intercep<strong>to</strong>rs. Later, massive coalition<br />

air attacks supported by drones, jammers, and aircraft equipped<br />

with radar-homing missiles would overload, neutralize, and<br />

destroy the Iraqi air defense system. 13<br />

The strategic plan called for a four-phase operation <strong>to</strong> achieve<br />

the coalition’s military and political goals. The <strong>Air</strong>men’s target<br />

list grew from 84 in August 1990 (Instant Thunder) <strong>to</strong> 481 by the<br />

start <strong>of</strong> the shooting on 15 January 1991. At the same time, the<br />

number <strong>of</strong> targets in the target set “Strategic <strong>Air</strong> Defense” grew<br />

from 10 <strong>to</strong> 56, and those in “<strong>Air</strong>fields” grew from 7 <strong>to</strong> 31. 14<br />

221

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!