Scrapdog

Jesus christ - I obviously know of all these. I've been flying in the Air Force for 8 years...and very damn proud to do so. This has nothing to do with Canadians or other allied forces, it has to do with if the guy can back up what he says. He has some valid cases, and for that I respect him. However, I will stand by what I said earlier since I've witnessed both the Active Duty as a fighter pilot as well as being an aviator in the Air National Guard. On average, the ANG has much more experience per pilot. Looking at each unit's hours in respect to a similiar AD unit, that is complete factual data. Also, spinning up an ANG unit for war typically takes less time and less resources since most of their pilots have been to combat/the AOR mulitiple times before in their career. Again, I've witnessed both of those cases first hand. It is a horrible thing when fratricide occurs - and that could happen to any flyer anyday of the week - active duty or ANG/Res. Everybody is human - from the weapons school grad to the brand new leiutenant wingman. There are outstanding flyers on both sides of the fence, and there are some crappy ones as well. Again, I've witnessed both first hand. And that was my point in the first place.

PS - Elmendorf now has a handful of F-22's and are doing well. Both the AD flyers as well as the Reserve guys are working hard at standing up the base in respect to the F-22. And Langley is plugging away - again doing great work with the integrated active duty and ANG aspect.

Expat Canuck

If you know about the examples why did you ask for examples? Seems like you're stirring the pot to me.

I'm sure you're good at what you do it's just that it's odd for most other countries to let reservists use the best gear. My example is that I saw a Coyote parked in our reserve barracks for a whole day and that was the last we saw of that.

Bluesman

'Reserves' just doesn't mean the same thing that you're used to. In the United States, the Air Force embraced - really internalized - the concept of the Total Force, which includes ALL units wearing an Air Force uniform. Like I said before, the concept of the weekend warrior, the old-age or disqualified 'out-to-pasture' paradigm that almost every other country uses when it speaks of their 'reserve forces', the kind that get called up when the country is on a last-ditch crisis footing...no.

The reason that first-line equipment and highly-trained personnel are used in Air National Guard and Reserve units is simply that it allows for an alternative to the OLD way of doing things: full-timers are active-duty, and if you don't want to do that for whatever reason, you can be in the 'joke' Air Force that's only used for 'second-tier' missions, and isn't really supposed to, you know, PRODUCE. So, you get a LOT more bang for your buck, and you can hang onto that fighter jock that wants to fly airliners, or that intel guy that sells real estate. Your force is WAY bigger and LOTS better than if you thought about and used your reserve forces like they were just aerial militia, all but useless in anything like an actual war.

As to the friendly fire thang, I know a bit about that, too. I consider myself extremely lucky - LUCKY, folks, not particularly talented - to have never caused anything like that with my work. Was I careful? Bet your ass, I was, because I lived in terror that it WOULD happen to me someday. I know a guy that called in a bad target, and got a whole pile of innocent people killed. It hurt him BADLY, and he almost didn't come back from it. Well, it could have been ME, because this is the truth that I had to try to live with as I did my job: sometimes, you are just playing the odds, and conditions and circumstances are such that you're hoping that The Breaks are going to fall your way. Because a decision has to be made, and that 75% probability that you're going to be right will have to be good enough to go ahead and release hell onto SOMEbody, because NOT shooting will get somebody - probably OUR guys - killed, too. So you make your call, eat a Tums, chew off your fingernails to the second knuckle, and hope like almighty that you haven't committed the evening news' lead atrocity story. (I'm not asking for anybody's admiration here, but THAT is PRESSURE, folks, and while I do not consider myself to have any insight into combat stress, having never heard a shot fired in anger, I have felt ENORMOUS responsibility while I weigh my decision and wait to hear what happened, and relief when it comes out right - again.)

I wrote this recently:

When you're pressed for time (and you always are) and you're exhausted (and you usually are), it's WAY too easy to screw up, and that's why we demand such professionalism from our people. I was purty dam' hard on doing the little stuff right, and my people were expected to meet or exceed all the standards in All Things Air Force, whether it was lethal or not. Because I wanted their minds trained to think about DETAILS, because that is where the mistakes lie in wait for the careless, and they can kill you, or cause you to kill somebody else. But sometimes, all control is removed from your hands, and you have to do your best, and prepare yourself for the fact that not everybody is as lucky as Sgt Bluesman was.

With the version of the combined air and land forces doctrine that the US military trains for and stresses, it may seem to a Brit unit commander that USAF pilots aren't taking proper care. But the speed and personal initiative and decentralized decision-making that the doctrine stresses and that also makes battlefield success seem effortless and irresistable, the friendly-fire losses that seem so high are actually replacing battle casualties that would be WAY higher, should a more 'careful' approach be adopted. And I would tell that furious commander that he got to BE furious about his losses to Yankee cowboy fighter jocks because he wasn't dead from enemy ambushes, artillery strikes, days-long breaching ops through obstacle belts, etc.

Long post. Sorry.

__________________
"The quickest way of ending a war is to lose it, and if one finds the prospect of a long war intolerable, it is natural to disbelieve in the possibility of victory."
- George Orwell

VarSity

Long post. But a very good one.

Bluesman

I don't think it says it well at all. He is understandably upset, but he has no real idea what 'proper care' is to a fighter pilot. Dropping bombs and trying to live through it isn't the same as shooting the tank gun. Like I already said, having a VERY rapidly-moving friendly force that is busting its own timetables for advance is just asking for these kinds of things. But the answer isn't to slow 'em down, nor is it to forego using our best advantage (airpower). We do the best we can with target ID, intel target sorting, deconfliction of the battlespace, and other techniques that will remain imperfect, no matter how hard we try to reduce blue-on-blue to zero.

I had an intel officer tell me about debriefing an exasperated RF-4 pilot in Korea once. The No-gun Shogun (nickname of the recce pilots in the Far East) had just about had it with the fresh questions from this know-it-all chairborne warrior, and he said, 'You're coming with me on tomorrow's hop.'

After the flight through some of South Korea's mountains at 450knots and 1500 AGL, the fighter driver turned the tables, and 'de-briefed' the intel bubba. "How many tanks in the column on the road on our left?'

'Ummm...there was a road on our left?'

'Okay, as we passed over the bridge, and came around to the east, what defenses could engage us in the turn?

'I think I saw that river...'

'Before I turned off the camera and pulled up to clear the RoK Army's satellite dishes, where did our escorts go?'

'I think that's when I was getting the SicSac out of my flightsuit...'

'STOP ASKING STUPID QUESTIONS when you don't have any IDEA what it's like flying missions like this! We'll get you the best recon we can, but we have to live long enough to actually land the airplane, and sometimes that means we're too busy to see if the first and second roadwheels on the tanks were evenly-spaced, OKAY?'

'okay.'

My point (and I do have one), is that tactical air warfare is difficult and dangerous and absolutely decisive. BUT - it is prone to inherent limiting factors, and because of the missions that the Air Force is charged with that naval aviation doesn't do, those factors will sometimes seem to somebody that's been struck by 'friendlies' as carelessness. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Bluesman

Scrappy, how'd I do?

Officer of Engineers

MSgt,

Then there are those like Maj Harry Schmitt who to this day cannot admit he did wrong. I don't know whether that is a self-defence mechanism so that he could live with himself or actual arrogance. And I am not about to start on a man who has to live with demons for the rest of his life. The man threw up after learning he killed Canadians.

Still, while his mistakes are understandable, they should not have occurred. He did not check his data the 1st time around, never mind checking them the 4th time as you indicated.

I cannot say I'm sorry that he lost his flight status because of the incident. He gets to go home to his wife everyday. Four families will never see their loved ones again. But I do hope that he teaches his lesson to everyone he can.

And I do hope that God will guide him through his demons.

__________________
Chimo

Bluesman

I agree with everything in that post.

I saw a guy pass out on a watch floor once, because he passed the wrong code groups to a recon mission going along an East China Sea route, and he thought he'd just ordered the mission to abort. Wouldn't have killed anybody if he had (he'd actually sent a dummy group; not a Good Thing, and it definitely got him fired, but not a LETHAL thing, either), but the pressure is so immense that when something Not Perfect has just happened, and it's your fault, baby, it seems like the whole Earth is riding on your shoulders.

It's a miracle that we don't all look like we're 100 years old by the time we retire.

Gun Grape

But blues, You are comparing planned targets, and targetting to CAS. Apples and Oranges.

You don't release unless you are sure you have the target, as defined by the TACP, in your sights.

Well, at least thats how Marine and Navy pilots do CAS. As do most of the AF pilots.

I've had CAS missions,(real life) that the pilot didn't drop because on pop-up
he didn't get a good picture of where we were. So we recocked and got the situation right before any ord was dropped.

As lethal as modern munitions are, you cannot afford to be 75% sure. And I don't want pilots that are flying missions in support of my unit to accept that.

There is NO EXCUSE for a pilot to shoot at an AAV. Or LAV-25s or Warrior and other British vehicles that they have.

I read somewhere that CentCom has stated that by AF regulations, pilots
are not obligated to visually confirm their targets before engaging. I know for a fact that N/MC pilots do. And what a piss poor excuse to tell some 19 yr old Marines widow. "Wasn't the pilots fault. By AF regs he didn't have an obligation to ID his target."


When a group of vehicles are in a no engagement zone and the pilots talk themselves into believing that the orange ID panels are Orange Missiles. There is something wrong. Whep the pilot decides to engage without permission from the FAC And for the conversation following the incident is all about how "We are in Jail, Dude."

Then DoD clears both pilots of wrongdoing. The British Cdr has EVERY right to feel the way he did in his statement.

It also leads to statements like this from a US Commander

Gun Grape

Then maybe the AF needs to give up the CAS mission since they are so overwhelmed with the other stuff they cannot do the mission right. Let the Army fly fixed wing and do their own CAS

Or maybe they can quit making excuses and fix the problem.

You are a perfect example, The Air Force has "missions" that those Naval Aviators don't do. (implied "more important) So we get a pass on killing friendly troops.

And what are these "Other missions" that the A-10 squadrons are charged with?

I don't accept, "Its the cost of doing the high speed warfare. Seems the other 2 services doing CAS worked through all that "Fog of War" crap excuses. Why does the USAF get a pass?

Maybe, I just need to step back. I lost a good friend to a A-10 in Kafji during Desert Storm. And I retired from 1/2 in 2002. I knew a lot of the guys at An Nasiriyah. Those were MY Marines that got strafed 8 times by another reserve A-10.
So yea, maybe I do hold a grudge

wabpilot

Nor do I. Having BTDT on CAS missions, I can say that with the way we do air dominance, we do not need to make excuses.

War Story. Back in the day when I was but a nugget, we got a hot pad mission, army troops in contact, an infantry company facing what they thought to be a battalion of NV regulars. We launched two super bombers loaded for bear. The company commander, whom I later learned had assumed command from his CO the night before when the CO was killed, was working as his own forward air controller. He called for us to drop on his position. Anyone in the infantry knows how tough a call this is. My lead set up the strike and confirmed to drop on the company position. I confirmed that the Gunny had said we were loaded with short fused Mk.82s. Just to be sure, I told the lead I thought we should arm nose and tail. That way we would be sure to get air bursts rather than risking one MK.82 digging in to the fighting holes where our guys were, hopefully, hanging on for dear life. Lead concurred.

We had bombs and fuel for at least three passes. We ID'd the position on the downwind. I confirmed with my RIO that we were dropping armed nose and tail. Rolling in, the company said they would mark with white smoke. We double and tripple checked the smoke, said a little prayer for the guys below and rippled off six Mk.82s each. Pulling off the target, I rolled inverted so my RIO could check for BDA. He said it looked like we got solid hits inside the wire and no dirt clouds, so we probably got all twelve bombs to airburst.

Turning cross wind, a new voice called in and said we should aim 300 yards northeast of his position as we had killed a bunch of NVs and he wanted to seal off a retreat. We did as asked. Again arming nose and tail to assure airbursts. On the final pass, the company asked us to hit the NVs about 150 yards northeast of his original position. We did.

By the time we got back to the boat, we were wondering what happened to the first voice. The intel weenie said the company commander who had just assumed command had been KIA by the NVs and a platoon leader, a 2LT fresh from the states, had assumed command. The 2LT decided that he had so many KBA on our first pass that he should take the offensive. Thus he called in the second airstrike in the path of the NV's retreat. The third pass he wanted on the NVs. The preliminary tally was 300 KBA. Not only did we break the attack, but allowed the infantry to take the offensive. Even though the situation was grave, we took the time to do the attack right and got the right result.

Jimmy

Frankly I think you guys are making a systemic problem out of a handful of guys who F-ed up. The Army kills more of its own than the Air Force does. They kill people in training...they PLAN FOR IT for crying out loud. Maybe they should just back off and let the Marines handle it.

Pilots are not supposed to release unless they can appropriately target an enemy position (requirements vary based upon weapon to be used and launching platform). Unless CENTCOM has made up their own rules (unlikely) that spokesperson was wrong/misspoke/F-ed up as well.

Gun Grape

Maybe in the old Soviet Army. The US Army does not plan on killing soldiers in training. Nor do they train to do it. Don't know where you got that from.

The acceptable number of deaths in a training evolution is ZERO.

Oh, OK we will just ignore those few that the AF kill. You guys carry on. Great job.

Once again, typical AF response. "They have a bigger problem than us." Shift the blame, minimize your involvment."

Back in the day the saying about surviving Capts Mast/NJP was "Deny, Deny, Deny and make counter accusations." See its still being used. At the Service level.

Jimmy

Or you can take a realistic view of it. It happens. We take the lessons learned, and do our best to apply them to ensure that it doesnt happen AGAIN. When some guy in the cockpit decides he knows better, we have another occurrence. So what do we do? We figure out what caused the problem and AGAIN we tell everyone to follow procedures. Do you have a better solution? There's no systematic fault here, unless you count having a human in the cockpit a systematic fault.

I didnt say they train to it. I said they plan on it. The Army does not make a large issue when some private sticks his head up too high in a live-fire, or gets run over by a tank. Maybe his squad leader gets in deep **** for not training him properly. There's no systematic review of the entire exercise, putting it on hold until the cause is sorted out. You can take your interservice rivalry and shove it. There's a time and a place, and the best of both is when there's beer in the room.

Scrapdog

Blue - outstanding brother. Your post was very informative and very accurate. As you said, in today's force - it's a total force concept - and it's being embraced immensly as we speak over in the ME. You look at F-16 or A-10 units deployed over there and you'll see as much or more ANG/Res units right next to their AD counterparts out on the ramp. And even more so, you'll see AD folks flying ANG fighters and vice versa. The days of the black and white AD vs. ANG/Res equipment, manpower, and logistics are long gone. The experience that comes from experienced flight leads/instructors that are more prevalent in the ANG/Res are highly sought after by the AD. On the same token, the energitic pace of the AD complements the ANG/Res guys as well. And the experience the ANG/Res maintenance folks bring to the fight is worth its weight in gold.

Again bluesman - outstanding post and I hope it educates the fuzzy foreigners and how very integrated the USAF's ops really are...especially in wartime.