(Page 5 of 8)
It wasn’t that the air controllers and pilots weren’t speaking the same language. The military has made certain that training in every service is based on the same set of protocols. “The air controller course I went through is virtually identical to those of other branches,” says Rashman. “Upon graduation we’re all Joint Terminal Attack Controllers—JTACs.”
The problem in Anaconda came from the mission’s planning staff. In a study of joint operations conducted for the Naval War College, Marine Colonel Norman Cooling blames the disarray during the battle on the failure to integrate command. Special operations forces in the area reported to U.S. Central Command instead of to Army Major General Franklin Hagenback, the joint task force commander to whom all other participants in the battle reported. “Failures in integrated planning and intelligence sharing produced highly publicized fratricide incidents and situations such as that on ‘Roberts’ Ridge’ where a Ranger Quick Reaction Force inserted into a known enemy kill zone,” Cooling wrote. (In the Roberts’ Ridge incident, Navy Petty Officer First Class Neil Roberts was killed by enemy gunfire. Six more Americans died trying to rescue him.)
Military leaders analyzed the deficiencies in integrating air power with ground forces and proposed twin corrections: First, insist on unity of command. In Afghanistan, two different commands, one controlling special forces, the other controlling conventional forces, had produced an us-and-them culture, similar to the division that had characterized the Army and Air Force approaches to air power since the services separated in 1947 (see “A Little Help From Above,” p. 56). Second, make close air support a part of the original battle plan instead of an emergency call. “We need to quit using CAS to save lives and start using it to win battles,” says Colonel John Allison, former chief of the close attack branch in the Air Force joint air-ground division, tasked with integrating ground and air operations. “We have grown an entire generation of Army officers who think there will always be airplanes overhead. It is an airpower buffet, hot and ready 24/7. You get hungry and go eat—no planning required. The Air Force is quite good at doing close air support…but if the Army doesn’t incorporate air into its maneuver and fire plans from the beginning, it will always be the 911 call.”
Combat CAS
On Operation Valdez, the mission runs as smoothly as the training I witnessed at Twentynine Palms. The two Chinooks land side by side and lower their loading ramps on a flat, grassy section of the target ridge. Motivated by a stiff tug by Corporal Justin Bradley, a 6-foot-5, 270-pound squad leader, I bolt down the loading ramp and immediately gaze skyward to see one of the most soothing views of my life—Apaches roving the airspace high above nearby ridgelines and A-10s soaring above them.
“Show-of-force CAS!” Bradley yells over the shriek of the Chinooks’ engines. “Just the sound of those A-10s keeps the bad guys down. Everybody says the A-10s are ugly. Betcha never seen such a beautiful sight in your life though.”
They are a reassuring sight, but I don’t gaze upward long. I’m busy finding a rock to take cover behind.
Apaches, A-10s, and even an AC-130 gunship (at night) fly support missions throughout the next four days—never firing, but remaining on station and ready to provide support at a moment’s notice as the Marines run patrols, looking for the mortar position. The roar of the Warthogs and the whine of lower flying Apaches echo through the steep valleys of the Hindu Kush. Throughout the operation, our interpreters and attached Afghan fighters pick up Taliban radio chatter and alert us of impending ambushes. But none comes. During a day patrol led by Bradley, the Marines on his squad discover signs of a mortar position and note its coordinates, then blow up a small cave complex where they determined the enemy had hidden munitions. That done, we hike back to Camp Blessing.


Comments
As long as there are wars there will be a need for Close Air Support, and Naval Gunfire Support. God Bless All ANGLICOS of The Marine Corp. Keep up the good work. Thank All of you for your service.
Posted by George Walker USMC RETD. on December 25,2008 | 09:01AM
With all due respect to Air Corps in Europe the tactical use of CAS was developed extensively with aircraft from Marine squadrons at Cherry Point working with infantry from Camp LeJeune in preparation for landings in Japan. As a FAC my training for Korea was similar to that of today plus cold weather at Pickle Meadows. Serving with the grunts was an enlightening experience for all of us. I was part of the Commander's supporting arms center: artillery, heavy weapons, Naval gunfire and air. In the Marines, coordination was key. We spent our time in the field the same as the rest of the battalion and kept plenty busy. As reported in the article, it was the times I was most proud of.
Posted by Ed Law on December 25,2008 | 02:52PM
The continuing and increased use of UAVs merely reflects the style of warfare that has evolved on the ground in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Gaza. But there may come a time when the deployment of large numbers of UAVs will be necessary. Although cruise missiles are faster, there are single purpose. Using drones offers reuse ability and the ability to dwell over combat areas. But drones like any aircraft must take off and land. By using cargo planes as airborne aircraft carriers,they can be brought close to a target area conserving fuel. By having the carrier launch the drones while traveling established air routes the element of surprise can be kept by "hiding the tree in the forest. " An additional benefit may be gained by making using of the carrier's airspeed and the downfall of the drone as it's pushed out the back. This would allow use of ramjets or other engine technology that doesn't require costly turbines and their attendant maintenance costs. Use of a retractable system to retrieve drones in flight may prove problematic. But having drones land where carrier landed would allow refueling and rearming thereby allowing a shuttle system to be put in place allowing for greater coverage over hostile areas where missile armed drones could substitute for fighter support.
Posted by david korkia on January 5,2009 | 05:00PM