https://web.archive.org/web/20031229125 ... D=62.topic
Subject: "When The Hunter Becomes The Hunted..."
Posted By: Mike Kozlowski (BUFF Fan)
Posted At: 12/16/02 1:22
Reply
NOTE: I had thought that this article - written for the late lamented Red Team - was long since lost in the electronic wreckage of my old Acer 100. However, it turned out that I had a copy stashed in an e-mail file, so I respectfully present it to the board. It was written in February of 1999 and was linked to by www.worldnetdaily.com - not such an honor, as I've since discovered, but what the heck, it was the first thing I'd ever had published.
I'd also like to mention that this was written before I had joined the board here, so I ask one and all to please forgive any errors of fact or content that are within. Comments and opinions are encouraged and welcome.
Mike
WHEN THE HUNTER BECOMES THE HUNTED
By Mike Kozlowski
It's a good-news/bad-news joke. First the good news: the United States Air Force is capable of beating any other air force in the world for the foreseeable future. Although the F-15 and F-16 are getting a little long in the tooth and both the Russians and Europeans are working on aircraft more advanced than ours, no one else has the training or numbers or technical capability needed to beat them or their anointed successors, the F-22 Raptor and the Joint Strike Fighter. In the Persian Gulf, Korea, or even the old Central European Theater, the USAF is ready and able to take on and defeat any aggressor.
Now the bad news: the USAF is not prepared to defend the airspace of the continental United States (CONUS) from a surprise air or cruise missile attack. And lest my former brothers-in-arms believe I?m picking on them, let me point out that the US Army - responsible for ground-based anti-aircraft systems - has no way to defend our homes, either.
The root of this problem goes back to the late '60s, when the old Aerospace Defense Command could put up hundreds of F-89s, F-101s, F-102s, and F-106s while the Army had more than 200 Nike missile sites across the country. As Cold War gave way to détente, the aerial threat dropped down the list of priorities. At present, the radars that guard the continental United States are primarily intended to protect against ballistic missile attack. What's more, fewer than 25 aircraft are on dedicated intercept alert, and not a single anti-aircraft weapon covers North America. Although the Russian threat is dormant, realistic threats do exist, particularly if the enemy knows our weaknesses.
In the following sections, I posit three scenarios that demonstrate what a potential enemy could do with existing equipment and capabilities.
SCENARIO 1- PRC/US:
During a Korean conflict, the People's Republic of China (PRC) warns the United States that the defeat or surrender of North Korea is not an option. However, the North Korean attack that launched the war caused heavy casualties, and U.S. political leaders are in no mood to hear such warnings. The Chinese therefore decide that the United States needs to learn that the PRC, too, has a long arm with which to defend its friends.
A single Xian H-6 - a reverse engineered Tu-16 Badger bomber - carrying one C-601 anti-ship missile and ferry tanks launches from a base in the Shenyang Military District of NE China. Its target is the U.S. naval base at Bremerton, WA. A mission like this would seriously stretch the capabilities of the old Badger, but it is not outside the realm of possibility, especially to a government wishing to make a point. Utilizing a great circle route, even the basic Chinese in-flight refueling capability of the would be enough to extend the H-6's range to the West coast. The distance is considerable, but not out of the question for a reasonably competent navigator.
Why not go after closer U.S. bases - Okinawa, Misawa, or Guam? The answer is simple: those bases are defended by both the best fighter aircraft in the world and state-of-the-art surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems - attacking them would be dangerous. But consider ?no dedicated interceptors are to be found anywhere near Bremerton; the units that are capable have been deployed to the Korean Theatre to backstop shorthanded Air Force units. No SAM or anti-aircraft artillery (AAA) units have existed in Washington State for over a quarter century. Getting in could be surprisingly easy. Just slip into the air traffic lanes and follow a 747 bound for Seattle or Portland. After all, our RC-135 surveillance aircraft used to do it all the time to the Soviets, one of the things that led to the Korean Air 007 shootdown in 1983.
So, assume our intrepid People's Liberation Army (PLA) Air Force crew has no mechanical or navigation failures and gets within sight of the Washington coast. They light off their radars, lock onto a warship at Bremerton - or more likely, a container ship in Puget Sound - and fire, then turn around and head home. Since we are not at war with an enemy who can strike us, even if some Air National Guard (ANG) aircraft have remained behind, it is unlikely they are flying active patrols.
The C-601 heads for its target, utterly unconcerned about electronic countermeasures (ECM) or AAA fire because there is none. It blows a Japanese car transport into eternity, within sight of warship crews at Bremerton and news crews in Seattle. China has just executed the first successful air attack on the continental United States since 1942. Plenty of radars will have seen it, but no one will be able to do a thing about it, even if they realized what had happened. The Chinese will have made their point, all the more forcefully because no one will have been expecting it. The result will probably be the ?Doolittle Effect? - an immediate demand to bring home troops and aircraft with which to defend the United States. And almost certainly no U.S. political leader will suggest armed conflict with China.
SCENARIO 2: CUBA/US:
Poor economic conditions and a renewed political crackdown lead to another ?boatlift? from Cuba. This time, however, the U.S. President -- mindful of the political beating his predecessors took on the same subject - decides to turn the boats around, simultaneously sending reinforcements to Guantanamo Bay. From his point of view, Castro has now lost his ?safety valve.? He sees U.S. ships in what looks mightily like a blockade and U.S. troops landing on what he considers to be his soil. He resolves that if the Yanquis are coming, they will at least know they?ve been in a fight. Using written orders to avoid the net of communications surveillance the U.S. has woven around him, Castro orders his air force to load up, head as far north as they can, drop their weapons, and return.
Consider that dictators do not always do what is rational. And remember, Castro seriously considered airstrikes against Florida following the 1983 Grenada invasion, even though his nation was in no way threatened by the U.S. operation. If he thinks that the end might finally be coming, he will do his best to give us a bloody nose.
For practical offensive purposes, the Cuban Revolutionary Air Force consists of 29 MiG-29s (Fulcrum-A?s) and 65 MiG-23s (Flogger-B/E/H). Theirs would be an aerial attack the old-fashioned way, with bombs and bullets rather than even first-generation precision guided munitions (PGMs). Assuming for the sake of argument that the order was given in the early morning hours - say around 0400 - it would take about 12 to 14 hours for the Cubans to get their aircraft fueled and armed. In the meantime, pilots are getting their orders. They can be confident on at least two counts. First, on several occasions in the past, defecting Cuban aircraft easily made it past U.S. radars, landing in Miami without ever being spotted. Second, they know that even if a stray radio test or on-the-ground spy were able to warn the Americans, it would take hours for the information to work its way high enough up the chain -- hours the Americans do not have.
At approximately 2045 hours EST, the Cubans launch. US radars stand a good chance of spotting them at altitude, but down low - the preferred zone of most aerial attacks - coverage is degraded. Even if they were spotted, interceptors will not be launched until the Cuban aircraft cross the 24th parallel, and only 12 to 16 U.S. aircraft are on alert at any given time. It will take hours to recall the U.S. aircrews and maintenance specialists and load additional aircraft, but only a few minutes for the first Cuban aircraft to reach their targets.
Assuming Castro limits his attacks to military targets, the first hits will be at Naval Air Station (NAS) Key West and Homestead Air National Guard Base (ANGB). It is just before 2100 hours EST and the bases are on their usual swing-shift manning, with only about one-third of their troops on duty. Their aircraft are lined up quite neatly, wingtip to wingtip, fueled and armed for the next day's flying. It will take only one to turn the entire ramp into an inferno. The run will be ridiculously easy, with nothing but the sounds of civilian radars in the pilots? threat warning receivers and no SAM or AAA fire to dodge. (I should note that USAF Security Forces personnel are equipped with and train on the Stinger SAM, but these are reserved for deployment situations and are unlikely to be available in time.)
Once these first attackers have left, they will be the easiest to track. The others, once they disappear behind the coastal radars, will be almost impossible to find. Civilian radars may be able to track them, but they will have no time to contact anyone. Bases like Barksdale - home to an appreciable fraction of our strategic bomber force - and Warner Robins, a major repair and refit facility, will be under the gun.
It is possible that some aircraft may be loaded and in the air in time to intercept the returning attackers, but it is unlikely. By midnight, several USAF bases and USN installations are ablaze, with possibly hundreds of military aircraft destroyed. By dawn, U.S. aircraft will most certainly be on their way to Cuba in retaliation, but it will be retaliation that should never have been necessary.
SCENARIO 3:TERRORISTS/USA:
A terrorist group has recently seen its Middle East headquarters wiped out by a U.S. cruise missile strike and decides what's sauce for the goose...
Admittedly, Osama bin Laden and his merry men are unlikely to come up with a brace of Tomahawks anytime soon. However, there is a weapon readily available that can meet their needs: the SS-N-2 Styx, used by several nations and sold openly by the Chinese as the C-601 (see Scenario 1, above). The Styx is not a sophisticated weapon by any means - it was designed to be reliable, robust, and easy to use. For nearly four decades now, they have served as the primary armament of the Osa and Komar missile boats, staples of most Third World navies. Obtaining a trawler or small freighter and rigging it to fire two SS-N-2s would be extremely easy and could probably be done without anyone ever being the wiser; after all, who'd notice one more fishing boat off the Grand Banks? And these are ?50s-era surface-skimming missiles, much easier to fit with a chemical or biological warhead than a Scud. Two SS-N-2s, with anthrax warheads, lobbed into New York harbor, would put a terminal crimp into that city for decades. And unless the USN and the Coast Guard were going to stop and search every ship at sea - immediately - they would probably never find the vessel. This would be an easy one for the bad guys - no air patrols, AAA, or SAMs to try and bring the missile down. The genuine tragedy here is that the SS-N-2 is so old that our target drones have better performance - the Styx would be easy meat for an air patrol or even a HAWK battery. The trouble is, there aren?t any.
CONCLUSION
One thing the Air Force taught me is that you never complain about a problem unless you have a solution ready. I?m not going to suggest that we go back to the glory days of Aerospace Defense Command and ring the country with Nike-Ajax sites again. We can?t afford it, and the threat, though real, is not that big.
These, then, are my modest proposals:
1. Task every USAF, USAFR, ANG, USN, and USNR/Marine Reserve fighter unit in a coastal or border state as an Air Defense Unit, dedicated to the defense of CONUS. With the exception of dedicated ground support units - for all practical purposes, the Air Force's A-10 squadrons - we are talking about F-14, F-15, F-16, and F/A-18 units, all of which were either designed as air superiority fighters or are multi-role fighters quite capable of taking on the best any enemy could throw against CONUS. They could still practice their primary mission, be it Wild Weasel or Close Air Support, but as part of their mission, they would be flying live air defense patrols as part of their daily mission.
Admittedly, this could be decried as simply boring holes in the sky, but one should consider its deterrent value - both in military and criminal terms - plus the fact that such hole-boring may be of a more productive sort than that practiced over, say, southern Iraq. The USN can further contribute by having a carrier on patrol in the Gulf. This wouldn?t be a ?station? type assignment, but a carrier worked up for deployment or routine training. It could be there with two dozen Tomcats and Hornets, plus the Vikings and Hawkeyes to keep an eye on things. Cost: effectively zero.
2. This one is a little bit more expensive, but doable: take the US Army/Army Reserve/National Guard units in border and coast states and make at least one in each state an Air Defense Artillery (ADA) unit. After all, does it make any sense for U.S. Army ADA headquarters to be in Texas? A single Patriot battery in each border state would put up an almost solid wall of radars -- radars specifically designed to detect and track small, fast, low-flying targets, exactly the kind of thing that would come after us. And for crying out loud, would it kill us to have a HAWK or Patriot battery in areas where with a major city and base adjacent to each other (Charleston, SC, and Seattle come to mind.), or for that matter, high-risk cities like New York, Washington, or Los Angeles? We would also have the benefit of having ADA units - among the first to deploy in crisis - much closer to their ports of embarkation.
Don?t forget that one of the more common scenarios these days is a small plane scattering a chemical or biological weapon over an unsuspecting populace. Would we rather have the plane brought down and contaminate only the immediate crash site, or would we prefer to let the pilot circle the Beltway a couple of times before escaping?
Admittedly, this second proposal would cost some money; we'd be talking about transferring men and equipment, plus the cost of training and new storage and maintenance facilities, plus a serious beefing up of Army ADA. On the other hand, we spent far more on other deterrent weapons we never used. And for that matter, it wouldn?t have to be Patriot or HAWK - depending on what it is we?re defending against, the Chaparral (ground based AIM-9) or the Avenger (a HUMVEE with a Stinger turret) may fit the bill quite nicely.
In each of the scenarios I have posited here, even the most rudimentary form of air defense would have stopped or entirely deterred the attack. With a Patriot or HAWK battery positioned around the Puget Sound area, the Chinese C-601 would have had a far smaller chance of getting to a target, even assuming that all available aircraft had been deployed to a Korean conflict. Constant Combat Air Patrol (CAP), backed up by more alert aircraft and even an austere SAM or AAA belt across the Gulf Coast would attrit even a maximum-effort Cuban attack far enough out that damage could be kept to a minimum or completely deterred. And finally, terrorist cruise missiles could be brought down by even a single battery of SAMs deployed around a major target.
By no means do I wish to suggest that at any moment now, hordes of adversary aircraft will come hurtling across our borders. Indeed, I believe that acts such as these posited here would be acts of reckless or desperate governments or groups. However, we cannot rule out the possibility that if a reckless or desperate government or group has the means to do so, it will strike if it sees even the slightest advantage in doing so. It is quite possible that after more than 50 years of unbroken aerial victories, the hunters could finally become the hunted, and in our own back yards. After all, we showed the world how to use air power in some very unconventional ways. Someone out there may have been paying attention.
Mike Kozlowski is a retired Munitions Specialist with the United States Air Force.
Si vis pace, para bellum
===================================================
Subject: Re: "When The Hunter Becomes The Hunted..."
Posted By: James1978 Old Friend
Posted At: 12/17/02 0:40
Mike, I actually remember reading this on Red Team. I'm glad you were able to find it. It provides some real food for thought.
James
===================================================
Subject: Re: "When The Hunter Becomes The Hunted..."
Posted By: Grey Havoc New Guy
Posted At: 9/30/03 16:56
Would you be in favour of a new, lightweight air defense fighter?, at least untill such time as a air defense variant of say, the F-22, or even the F-16XL is available. (And no, I do not think the F-18 would be suitable,at least if they designed/ built it the same way as the Super Hornet.[shudders]).
===================================================
Subject: Re: "When The Hunter Becomes The Hunted..."
Posted By: Mike Kozlowski BUFF Fan
Posted At: 10/12/03 4:29
Grey-
My apologies for not checking in here sooner.
I would not be in favor of a all new lightweight ADF - the F-16 is actually capable of handling just about any threat we could face here, though if I were king for a day, I'd love to see an F-16XL/ADV with upgraded radars and 6-8 Slammers on it.
I know - as long as I'm dreaming, I'd like a pony.
Mike
"...Cry Woe, Ruin, and Decay - but the worst is Death, and Death shall have His day."
--Shakespeare, Richard III, Act II, Scene II
===================================================
Subject: Re: "When The Hunter Becomes The Hunted..."
Posted By: Grey Havoc Regular
Posted At: 10/13/03 11:42
No problem, I've been falling behind on my own threads.
I'm not so sure about the F-16, I think it's it may be soon on it's way out, despite all the money and effort spent on the latest versions (especially in selling them!). I could be wrong though. Maybe I'm biased towards twin/ multi- engined designs.
Death Before Dishonour!.
===================================================
Subject: Re: "When The Hunter Becomes The Hunted..."
Posted By: David Newton The English Adminstrator
Posted At: 10/13/03 19:00
The F-16 is to be replaced by the JSF. That is at least 10 years off.
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with mustard.
===================================================
