Re: Utility of airpower between comparable opponents

On Mar 8, 2:23�pm, Ed Rasimus <rasimusSPAML...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 22:05:17 GMT, Herbert Viola <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

In article <i3fuu2dk5rnk7otdvjuvojjgcomp00g...@xxxxxxx>,
Ed Rasimus <rasimusSPAML...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Airpower will be essential to any ground campaign and even more
critical if the battle is between near equals.

A judgement has to be made as to how effective air defenses will be against near
equals. My opinion is that between near equals air defenses behind static lines
will be effective enough to prevent the enemy air force from making important
contributions through interdiction, etc. Look at the Iran-Iraq war, neither side
was able to do much within enemy airspace. The big problem here is that airpower
is fairly new, rapidly evolving, and there are few examples of air power
conflicts between near equals in technological terms outside of WW2.

That raises an interesting discussion. The Soviet Union and clients
invested quite heavily in layered air defense systems. The US and
allies have generally minimized air defenses with only small (but
fairly sophisticated) point defense systems.

In all of the conflicts since Vietnam, the enemy air defenses have
been largely ineffective in denying air superiority to the US and our
clients. Each generation of SAMs seems to be potentially the
break-through weapon that will handle attacks, but ever since SA-2
we've managed to counter and overcome the new missiles.

My suspicion is that air defenses will become increasingly irrelevant
in terms of denial of the airspace to attackers.

Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
 www.thunderchief.org
 www.thundertales.blogspot.com

I wonder if that still holds up as the Russians have both anti-stealth
radar and interlinked anti-stealth missile systems in additioned to a
heavily layered air defense system?

Also, factor in that in most airpower engagements in the past US
Carrier Battle Groups contributed hundreds of a/c offshore. No
opponent was firing nuke-tipped cruise missiles at them. But Russia
and China certainly can and WOULD in a violent conflict. China has
already threatened the US with nuking our carriers if we interfere
with Taiwan. In such a conflict we probably would have at least 2
carriers in the Straight and a loss by nuke would be catastrophic:
10,000 lives lost plus almost 200 a/c in a flash. Those good old days
of guaranteed airpower are over both for Israel and the US. Iraq and
Lebanon should have sent that message- airpower nullified in both
conflicts.

Rob

.