(Page 6 of 8)
Weeks later, out on another operation, I discover that the Marines can’t always count on air support. As we ground-pound up and down the steep Afghan hills on Operation Pil (“elephant” in the Afghan language Dari), the air above us is empty. Now, machine gun rounds zip over my head, splintering tree branches and pinging boulders at the patrol base, coming within inches of people in our group. Lieutenant Kinser directs the Marines to return fire at a ridge above us where he detected muzzle flashes. The grunts squeeze off bursts from M240G light machine guns, M16s, and M249s. The ambush quiets. We maintain our covered position, waiting for air to arrive.
Later that night some members of our attached scout sniper team reflect on the firefight. “No air on station. Safe for them to pop up and hit us,” team leader Sergeant Keith Eggers surmises.
No one understands why aircraft haven’t been sent to hit the ridge from where we were ambushed; nothing shows up for hours, long after the shooters have fled. We later learn that Rashman had immediately requested support, but an inbound C-130 with landing gear problems shut down the field at Bagram Air Base, grounding the A-10s.
Rashman is on the mission with us this time, and he seems always to be working his radios. Since the battalion has only two forward air controllers to support operations spread across hundreds of square miles, Rashman is called upon to clear air on targets he often not only can’t see, but isn’t even near—at all hours of the day and night. But he says that the chance to fight alongside infantry is why he chose to temporarily leave his career flying helicopters. “Ask any [Marine] aviator who has done a tour as a forward air controller what their favorite billet has been, and they’ll tell you the FAC tour,” he maintains.
In 2003, Marines got their first glimpse of a system that can receive images from aircraft, including unmanned aerial vehicles, and relay instructions using the system’s radio link. Designed originally for the Air Force and called Rover (for Remote Optical Video Enhanced Receiver), the system enables ground forces to see what pilots see through their targeting pods. Now real-time imagery can be fed across the battlefield to commanders, pilots, air controllers, and ground troops. That ability is considered vital when attacking fleeting targets or supporting friendly troops on the move across long distances. Future wars, like current ones, will no doubt require that kind of attack and that kind of support.
A Little Help From Above
Although the first close air support sorties were flown in the Italo-Turkish war of 1911-1912, World War I began without a formal doctrine for using aircraft to support troops on the ground. That was remedied by France in April 1916, when it became the first country to codify the mission.
The most famous U.S. display of the mission’s effectiveness was made in the summer of 1944, when General George Patton’s Third Army raced toward Germany through France. As Patton’s tanks advanced, the P-51 Mustangs and P-47 Thunderbolts of the XIX Tactical Air Command, led by General O.P. Weyland Jr., flew in front of them and struck opposing tanks, blew up tank barriers, and strafed troops, trucks, and gun emplacements. Control of the pilots in the air came not from trained infantry on the ground, but from P-51 and P-47 pilots stationed at the head of the advancing tank columns. The position of air liaison officer, as Weyland called the pilot directing the air strikes, was a coveted one: Pilots took pride in helping their airborne brethren get weapons squarely on the target. The speed of Weyland’s air strikes overcame an Army belief that aircraft should be used only when artillery couldn’t reach.


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