An interesting item published by Inside the Air Force claims that the use of Show of Force flights is on the rise.
Ground troops in Iraq and Afghanistan are increasingly calling for low-level combat aircraft presence during combat operations, in an attempt to help quell violence and reduce the number of civilian casualties associated with bombing urban environments
The tactic — known as a show-of-force — has become such a vital tool in the Air Forces counterinsurgency operations that tactical air controllers preparing for deployment are practicing the technique during stateside training missions, officials both overseas and in the United States say.
The story jibes with what we reported last week concerning comments made by Air Force chief of staff, Gen. Buzz Moseley, who told us that air power is inflicting the most casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In our story we noted the latest Centcom airpower report at the time showed not a single lethal air strike, but chronicles several show of force flights. The Inside the Air Force story seems to buttress our observations.
The Air Forces May 1 airpower summary shows two air strikes executed with explosive effects, but about six show of force missions to disperse crowds or curtail attacks on coalition forces.
{ 15 comments… read them below or add one }
I’m gettting concerned that Iraq will become a Vietnam. They are already developing the cult of air power….
Maybe I’m no expert…. but the ‘cult of air’ I thought was a contributing factor to American’s defeat in Vietnam? They’re really not learning from their mistakes are they?
I’ll be the first to admit that I know Jack and Crap (and Jack left town) about fighter tactics, but how do the fighterjocks feel about these tactics? I mean they’re not in A-10s. They’re in fighter jets. Doesn’t flying low put them at a much higher risk? Is the US using more dangerous tactics to get the desired effect?
… and why does low flying aircraft scatter crowds? Do these people think we’re going to strafe or bomb them? Isn’t that having the opposite effect of “we are your friends.”
Well, Foreign Boy, i have a bad feeling too. Notice that the only war we lost was to an army using guerrila tactics. Note that in Iraq and Afghanistan, guerrila tactics are also used. We have the power, its just that they are being sneaky and deceitful. And if they are accuiring a somewhat formidable air power too, it only means trouble.
-BBS
I’m no expert, nor do I play one on TV, but it seems to me that “Show of Force” flights will work only as long as the enemy you are facing does not have anything useful to counter your air power. Show of Force flights would have been a completely useless tactic against, say, an invading Soviet horde.
It didn’t have the name at the time, but I believe helicopters used to serve the same function. Then the 1993 Battle of Mogadishu happened, where the enemy spent real time studying US tactics and came up with a way to bring down a helicopter with the tech they had at hand. As a result, both military leadership and insurgent enemies don’t see helicopters as intimidating in and of themselves.
I am sure that the best and brightest of the variety of enemies we happen to be facing are working on this problem feverishly. I hope the Air Force has a plan when one of the enemy solves it.
What’s the hubbub? If you had a big, scary noisemaker(which, if you’ve never experienced it, a low flying jet fighter is terrifying, even if you know it’s coming) that was good for silencing enemy fire, wouldn’t you use it?
In my mind it’s better than dropping bombs in populated areas. Someday “show of force” might stop working, but until it does, they should keep using it.
1: Flying low is only dangerous to a fighter if the opposition has some form of anti-aircraft missile, or an astonishing bit of luck to hit a 600mph target with an unguided (dumbfire) RPG.
2: Yes we are trying to befriend Afgh, Iraq, etc, but if a riot crowd forms, then apparently those crowds are not being our friends and our troops are under fire, so yes, we display “HI!!! WE COULD CRUSH YOU INTO DUST, BUT WE ARE TRYING TO PLAY NICE” and the crowd disperses, then we are better for it.
3: Comparing these operations using F15/16 flyby’s to what happened in Mogadishu is ridiculous. Hitting a hovering UH60 with a unguided rocket is not terribly difficult, hence why we are not doing this kind of flyover with a slow moving aircraft.
4: Eventually, yes, they may figure out that we arent doing strafing runs and may ignore the flyovers, but until then, it is a great tactic that hurts no-one. Once they offer more resistance, that’s what helicopter gunships like the AH1/AH64, and the Nighthawk (AH6 from the 160th) with their more precision weapons will most likely be called in. My brother flies the AH64 and said that a lot of his missions ended up being ‘sandblast’ missions where they drop the chopper to about 10-20 feet above and saturate the area with 160mph sand clouds… Crowds disperse quick in those situations.
I really wouldn’t get too wrapped up around the axle in regards to ‘show of force’ flights, how they impact the target audience is the most important factor, a low unexpected supersonic flight can have a tremendous psychological impact, but as in most everything else, too much exposure will simply innure the target audience and lessen the impact.
It’s arguable, but we never really lost militarily in Vietnam, the aforementioned guerilla battle supposedly lost – [from earlier post] it was a loss of political will brought about by public sentiment – currently political forces in this country (Democrats) are trying to ensure the we lose – I can’t remember where I read it but this sums it up quite nicely – to paraphrase – the president is fighting to win the global war on terror and the democratic party is fighting to beat the republicans.
I don’t know if it’s worth it to reply to fin0231 as this war isn’t Vietnam… but to say America didn’t loose Vietnam Is like saying loosing a Rugby match and saying you didn’t lose because you’re playing soccer…
America failed to defeat an asymmetrically enemy of superior numbers and failed to exercise its will onto its enemy and Vietnam became a communist whole.
Back to the main subject:
I can see how running sonic booms over and the screeching of the air craft and air pressure can really scare you… it’s not a question of if its scary or not.. it’s a question… is it smart to put so much faith in air power to win a war Scratch that.. to defeat an insurgency…
ITS ABOUT TIME WE CHANGE THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT.
LET OUR TROOPS DO ALL THEY HAVE TO DO TO DEFEAT THESE FANATICS.
LET THE BLEEDING HEART LEFT WING PEOPLE COMPLAIN ALL THEY WANT,THIS IS WAR & THE SOONER THEY FACE REALITY THE BETTER OFF THIS COUNTRY WILL BE.IREMEBER IN BASIC TRAINING WE WERE SHOWN A FILM CALLED KILL,OR BE KILLED
THESE FANATICS ARE NOT SOLDIERS, THEY ARE IDIOTS.
Where is the Air Force psychological (psy ops) warfare in this war. i.e speakers blasting from aircraft,leaflet drops, a few pigs dropped on villiges or enemy hideouts. Do we even have psy ops units anymore?
The war in vietnam was lost in the streets of America and not in the jungles and cities of vietnam.
Do whatever it takes to win this war. Just remember insurgents could be reading this article and be better prepared next time there’s a “show of force”
I’ll give you my opinion of “Shows of force” in theater. I’m a team leader in the Marine Corps 1st Air Naval Gunfire Liaison Company (ANGLICO) and we specialize in small teams that spot, observe, report and control all manners of firepower. In Iraq, where I’ve done 3 deployments, the Rules of Engagement are so strict that we are forced to ask for a Show Of Force since we are not able to request precision guided ordnance unless it is of the most dire situation. Each deployment it got worse.
More important than mere show of force is properly calibrating it for deterrent effect. Randomly overflying cities simply shows the civilian population that you are a damned occupier that flies overhead with impunity. That and eventually they’ll figure out a guy flying at Mach 1 is not going to accurately spot people planting IEDs and such.
Instead, more OV-10s to blanket the area, spot the enemy and then respond appropriately. UAVs are not getting the job done if half of them just decide to fall out of the sky on the first loss of signal.
Several Points:
Just like a plastic owl on a garden post……the crows figure it out in days and then ignore it.
Our own media isn’t helping one damn bit! The terrorists (i.e. non thinking, non uniformed sissy fighters that kill indiscriminately, including themselves)need to be portrayed as such by the media. Men are men, and as long as they “think” that what they are doing is honorable, they’ll keep doing it. Show the world that these terrorists are the pussies they really are and this whole thing will end. Shame them into stopping. It’s totally possible. Expose these jerks like the Wizard of Oz and see if the lion doesn’t get his courage back.
Something has to be done about COMSEC. I don’t know the answer, but we have to quit feeling like the public deserves or has a right to know everything we do, even before we do it…..duh! String me up if you want to, but vids and phones need to be banned or secured from battle zones. If what goes out can’t be controlled, then they don’t go in…..period!
In response to the post by : Delali at May 5, 2007 03:40 AM
I agree, I strongly believe if the politicians would worry about domestic policy and leave the fighting to the pentagon, we would be out of Iraq already. Everyone needs to get together on this thing or as a country we’re doomed. Leave the war to the Generals, tell the politician to ‘shut the f*** up’
Forgive me Lord,, and God bless those pygmies down in New Guinea… Larry the CableGuy