Random Thoughts on the Mighty Hog - Page 10

Shipwreck · 10-08-2006, 03:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

ODS is the closest thing to the central european front WWIII fight we were planning as we've ever seen- and probably as close as we'll ever see. The Iraqis used several modern soviet systems set up according to soviet doctrine, and augmented with western comms, sensors, and missiles.

Quote:

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

Contrast this with the A-10s who were flying in high threat environments that pilots invariably descirbed as "the fourth of july".
(...)
In Iraq A-10s (and other coalition jets) were coming under fire by DOZENS of missiles at a time sometimes, some of which were much bigger than MANPADS.(and huge quantities of AAA at the same time)

Quote:

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

For the most part, the Iraqis knew when we were coming, and where...even late into the war(and often by the things that they COULDNT see- ie, we blow open a corridor to attack a specific kill box, they put all the shooters in said kill box on alert and pointing in the right direction and get them firing barrages.

Iraqi IADS Capabilities during ODS :

1. IADS Could Only Track a Limited Number of Threats
2. IADS Design Made the System Easy to Disrupt
3. IADS Design Was Known in Detail to U.S. Intelligence
4. Iraqi SAMs Were Old or Limited in Capability
5. AAA Guns Were Not Radar-Guided
6. The Iraqi Air Force Failed to Play a Role
7. Level of Training and Preparation among Iraqis Was Low

From GWAPS :

Quote:

Beyond its aircraft, Iraq depended on a complex air defense network. The Iraqi system was highly centralized; four sectors, each with a Sector Operations Center (SOC), controlled air and air defense assets. The focus of that network was on meeting two threats: long distance Israeli air attacks or that posed by the Iranian Air Force, what little remained after the war. Under each SOC, Intercept Operation Centers (IOCs) ran ground control intercepts and SAM defenses and coordinated the flow of information from individual radar stations and visual reporting sites to the SOCs. Information collated at the center then flowed back down to antiaircraft units, air bases, and SAM sites.

At the center, the Air Defense Operations Center (ADOC) in Baghdad made the crucial decisions, while a French-designed computer system (KARI, Iraq spelled backwards in French) tied the network's diverse pieces together. KARI also possessed “land line and/or microwave (either troposcatter or line-of-sight)” to lower levels of command. Redundant land lines tied the section centers to the national command level, while the Iraqis placed the intercept centers near existing telecommunication trunks capable of carrying both voice and data communications. The French designed system modems so that each node could easily switch from one form of communication to another. The Iraqis also provided extensive protection to both types of centers by placing them in hardened shelters.

Not surprisingly, the Iraqis tied the SAMs closely to computer KARI. However, antiaircraft artillery, relied on barrage firing on preset azimuths to hit attacking aircraft. The Iraqis believed that a combination of SAMs and antiaircraft artillery would impose sufficient attrition on attacking forces; at medium to high altitudes SAMs would shoot down many Coalition aircraft; should the attackers go low, then antiaircraft guns would inflict heavy casualties. Finally, Iraqi aircraft, protected by hardened aircraft shelters, could intervene at selected moments to add to Coalition losses.

Unfortunately for the Iraqis, KARI possessed a number of weaknesses. French experts oriented the system to protect Iraq from attack from the east (Iran) and west (Israel). Coverage towards Saudi Arabia was weak. SAM and antiaircraft defenses were strong in some sectors; admittedly, Baghdad was an extraordinarily heavily defended target. Strong air defenses also protected Basra, Scud-launching sites in western Iraq, and Iraq's northern oil fields. But much of the rest of the country lay open - a factor that allowed allied aircraft to approach targets from different directions. Moreover, the layout of the western and central sectors created a dead zone pointed directly at Baghdad from Saudi Arabia. Not surprisingly, Iraqi defensive systems could only handle threat levels consistent with Middle Eastern force structures. Indeed, to the Iraqis, the system's capacity to track targets seemed more than sufficient.

But what Coalition air forces could throw at the Iraqis was something well beyond the capacity of Iraqi information, command and control, and weapons system capabilities. The largest weakness, however, lay in the fact that Iraqi operators and pilots could not handle either the technological or tactical competence of Coalition forces. Exacerbating their deficiencies was the low level of training and preparation among Iraqis in comparison to the levels of their opponents.

From the GAO :

Quote:

Contrary to widespread prewar and postwar claims, the Iraqi IADS was not “robust” or “state of the art.” Rather, its computers were limited in their capacity to monitor incoming threats; the system was vulnerable to disruption by attacks on a relatively few key nodes; and its design was known in detail to US Intelligence. IADS had been designed to counter limited threats from the east (Iran) and west (Israel), not an attack from a coalition that included nearly 1,600 U.S. combat aircraft primarily from the south, hundreds of cruise missiles, and the most advanced technologies in the world.

(...)

On paper, Iraq’s air defense system appeared to be formidable to many observers before the air campaign. Iraq had purchased what was widely described as a state-of-the-art integrated air defense system (IADS) from France, which linked 17 intercept operations centers (IOC) to four sector operations centers (SOC). The IOCs were linked to air bases with interceptor aircraft, as well as to dozens of surface-to-air missile and antiaircraft artillery sites. With multiple and redundant communication modes, the system could, in theory, rapidly detect attacking aircraft and direct antiaircraft defenses against them.

However, the Iraqi IADS had been designed to counter limited threats from either Israel, to its west, or Iran, to its east, not from the south and north, nor from a massive coalition force to which the United States alone contributed more than 1,000 combat aircraft. As the Navy’s Strike Projection Evaluation and Anti-Air Research (SPEAR) department reported before the war:

“The command elements of the Iraqi air defense organization (the . . . interceptor force, the IADF [Iraqi Air Defense Force], as well as Army air defense) are unlikely to function well under the stress of a concerted air campaign.”

Similarly, on almost every performance dimension, the Iraqi IADS was remarkably vulnerable to massive and rapid degradation. Evidence from the Air Force, DIA, GWAPS, SPEAR, and other expert sources shows that the principal deficiencies of the Iraqi IADS were that (1) it could track only a limited number of threats, and it had very limited capabilities against aircraft with a small radar cross-section, such as the F-117; (2) its design was easy to disrupt, and the key IADS nodes were easy to target; and (3) many of its SAMs were old or limited in capability, and the Iraqi air force played almost no role in the conflict, although it had been intended to be a major component of air defenses.

(...)

The fact that the coalition knew which IADS nodes to hit to inflict the most damage, the most quickly, was critical to its rapid degradation, and to the achievement of a form of air supremacy—elimination of an integrated, coordinated air defense.

Goatboy · 10-08-2006, 03:24 AM

I hear riding in one is a unique experience, I think the A-10 has an inner beauty, sorta like how the lead singer of Eurythmics is hot lol, it's uniqueness gives it character

Anon · 10-08-2006, 12:07 PM

Shipwreck, didn't Tophatter warn you to STFU already?

Twice now?

Three times'll get you a cupie doll, and a swift boot in the ass out the door. Which you almost got last time anyway. Which is fine, because if you want to talk A-10s the place to do it is here: www.a-10.org

STFU and move on already, i'm sick of your trolling.

Your Hog battledamage list is flat BS, which many posters and C.Horner will tell you is a fact(Horner has been quoted as stating 23 hogs were in for BD repair at one point which helped to guide his decision making wrt instituting altitude restrictions). If you want to talk A-10s go talk to the people on my site that flew and fixed and fought them in the "Sand Box", and they'll happily tell you you're WRONG(again). As for what type of shells hit Efferson's Hog, he says it was four 57mm, i have no reason to doubt him. Even if it was 37mm, i fail to see the difference. As for the A-4, it was one of the most vulnerable US jets ever to fly in combat, and suffered HORRIBLE losses over Nam...

PS: What is your background?

Anon · 10-08-2006, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shipwreck

Stuff that doesn't really need to said in public...

There is NO REASON to be posting that nature of information on the internet.

WTF is wrong with you? Are you some kind of fuccking treasonous dicckhead?

Shipwreck · 10-08-2006, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

Your Hog battledamage list is flat BS, which many posters and C.Horner will tell you is a fact(Horner has been quoted as stating 23 hogs were in for BD repair at one point which helped to guide his decision making wrt instituting altitude restrictions).

ODS : Type of Coalition Aircraft Lost or Damaged and Attributed Cause
(source : GAO)

**TopHatter** · 10-08-2006, 12:31 PM

Shipwreck, what is your problem? Why must you complicate my life?

Tell you what. You are obviously an A-10 expert. Unquestionably.

We are also quite obviously complete neophytes when it comes to the A-10 here at our humble - and general topic - message board.

If you want to discuss the A-10 any further, how about if you go to a-10.org?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shipwreck

Stuff that should have been PM'ed maybe?

Oh please tell me that's from an open source...

Quote:

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

PS: What is your background?

Wasting your breath. That's part of his "charm"...anonymity.

Time to put this one to bed.

10-08-2006, 12:07 PM	#138 (permalink)
Anon New Member Join Date: 08-03-03 Posts: 0	Shipwreck, didn't Tophatter warn you to STFU already? Twice now? Three times'll get you a cupie doll, and a swift boot in the ass out the door. Which you almost got last time anyway. Which is fine, because if you want to talk A-10s the place to do it is here: www.a-10.org STFU and move on already, i'm sick of your trolling. Your Hog battledamage list is flat BS, which many posters and C.Horner will tell you is a fact(Horner has been quoted as stating 23 hogs were in for BD repair at one point which helped to guide his decision making wrt instituting altitude restrictions). If you want to talk A-10s go talk to the people on my site that flew and fixed and fought them in the "Sand Box", and they'll happily tell you you're WRONG(again). As for what type of shells hit Efferson's Hog, he says it was four 57mm, i have no reason to doubt him. Even if it was 37mm, i fail to see the difference. As for the A-4, it was one of the most vulnerable US jets ever to fly in combat, and suffered HORRIBLE losses over Nam... PS: What is your background? Last edited by Anon : 10-08-2006 at 12:18 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Random Thoughts on the Mighty Hog - Part 2	Shipwreck	Military Aviation	148	10-05-2008 21:44 PM
Interview with PLAAF LGen Liu Yazhou	Officer of Engineers	The Field Mess	34	05-10-2007 15:44 PM
Your Thoughts on David Icke?	joey2	World Affairs Board Pub	12	12-29-2006 07:55 AM
Zogby poll of US service members in Iraq	Shek	Political Discussions	43	03-12-2006 11:38 AM
Mighty mice for sale -- mighty expensive at least	Jay	Science & Tech	0	03-08-2006 00:03 AM

10-08-2006, 03:24 AM	#137 (permalink)
Goatboy Patron Join Date: 05-07-06 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 217	I hear riding in one is a unique experience, I think the A-10 has an inner beauty, sorta like how the lead singer of Eurythmics is hot lol, it's uniqueness gives it character

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)