Air Force railroading its own pilots?

Lately, if you've been paying close attention, you will have noticed minor news coverage of two US pilots, involved in a friendly fire incident in Afghanistan, which resulted in the unfortunate deaths of four Canadian soldiers, being hung out to dry by their/our own US government.

First, where the heck is the outrage? I mean, for God's sake, does anyone honestly believe that these two US pilots intentionally bombed their comrades-in-arms on the ground? The guys who were keeping the Mad Mullahs with leftover sidewider missiles from shooting one up their own tailpipes? If the US were not the laughing stock of the sane world before then we certainly are now!

Second, exactly what must be going through the minds of our pilots who have been deployed to the Persian Gulf today? Should we have new seats installed on all our military aircraft in which designated lawyers must sit in order to pre-approve all bombs dropped?

Third, why have our leaders allowed one minute of this farce to take place? Do we need new leaders?

This issue desperately needs to be discussed on all the talk radio programs and, if we have one grain of gratitude for the risks that our military people are taking right now today, and for the sactifices they are making, then we'll all call our representatives and make our voices heard in support of two highly trained, professional Air Force warriors, who are being railroaded to satisfy the sanctimonious, character-less, hand-wringing ninnies living to our north!

I'm USAF, a WSO, and I've been the package commander. I've also flown with the Navy - and the Navy DOES treat NFOs better than the USAF treats WSOs.

All ROE is strict. I was emphasizing the need to follow ROE - they are orders, not suggestions to lightly set aside.

Let's suppose there was a AAA site with a couple of 57s pumping out rounds. Altitude + horizonatal distance = slant range. At their altitude, moving 2 miles should have put them outside of the horizontal range. At 540 kts, that would take 13 seconds. By the time they saw the AAA & made their radio call, they were out of range - even if there were big guns firing.

In addition, it was night. Turn out your position lights (they did), and no one on the ground will see you. There are no claims of radars - so there was no aimed fire.

Self defense trumps ROE - but ends the moment the immediate threat has been dealt with. In this case, turning out your lights and flying for 10-15 seconds deals with the threat. Now it is no longer self-defense. It is retaliation. Track the folks with your pod and check. Why?

Possibilities:
1. Good guys training.
2. Good guys engaging bad guys.
3. Bad guys shooting in the air.
4. Wedding celebration by civilians.

In one of the 4 possibilities, dropping immediately is an advantage. In 3 of the possibilities, dropping immediately is a crime. Those are bad odds for dropping immediately.

I'll admit this is a pet peeve of mine. In the 80s, we were trained to think. If you are lit up by a radar in clear air, do you dump your ordanance & tanks and do a GLIB 2 (the way an F-15E did over Iraq)? NO - otherwise the bad guys can disarm a hundred planes by firing up one radar site. Do you respond because you see a missile trail? NO - because the missile may not be on you. Is there movement on the canopy? If not, react. If so, it isn't going after you (not a player of course for an SA-8 or other short range missile). I've seen 8 HARMs fired in Iraq for no earthly reason by guys who don't seem to understand this isn't a game. That's why, when I was the package commander, I emphasized discipline and ROE. Drop at the wrong time, and you can kill good guys or give the bad guys a propoganda coup (consider a rushed drop hitting a school or hospital - which the bad guys DO position close to their SAMs and AAA).

If the guy who dropped was a 1LT, I'd call it an accident and blame the flight lead. These guys had a ton of experience - so they have no excuse. At their experience, this should be instinctive. And the guys on the ground SHOULD be able to count on our professionalism!

Thanks for the reply.

I am unaware of any USAF WSO ever serving as a package commander, at anytime, in my fighter pilot career (80-00).

>>Navy DOES treat NFOs better than the USAF treats WSOs.<<

Except they don't give them a stick ;-)

I reject your strawman options, as they are contrived, unrealistic and a bit skewed. For example, you write:

"Possibilities:
1. Good guys training.
2. Good guys engaging bad guys.
3. Bad guys shooting in the air.
4. Wedding celebration by civilians."

Now, in real life, options are 2 and 3 maybe, but I'd amend 3 to read, "Bad guys shooting at YOU."

See the difference?

The bad guys are shooting at YOU, not merely "in the air."

Ever consider a career parsing words for the ol slickmeister?

Option 1 is a non-player because the pilots were not told in their pre-step brief about the range being hot. Therefore, 1 is outta there.

4 is a non-player from the git go.

So, the options really are:
1. Bad guys shooting at you
2. Bad guys shooting at good guys.

If the good guys were engaged on the ground then you can bet the word would have been passed quickly through the AWACS (ground CAS controller).

So, absent any words otherwise, the only remaining option is bad guys shooting at you.

So now the question is to engage or not to engage.

If you are shot at, do you
a) run away
b) shoot back

Running away is not the warrior ethos.

The question becomes how do you fight back?

Immediately?

10-minutes from now?

The next day (and find out that Mullah Omar/OBL has done it again and escaped).

>>In addition, it was night. Turn out your position lights (they did), and no one on the ground will see you. There are no claims of radars - so there was no aimed fire.<<

NVG's, the bad guys have them. Hot engines can be seen.

No radar, but who cares? I mean, surely, you must know that most all (over 80%) of our aircraft losses in VN were due to unaimed AAA.

>>In this case, turning out your lights and flying for 10-15 seconds deals with the threat. Now it is no longer self-defense. It is retaliation.<<

Okayyyyy. . .so according to your rationale, once they stop shooting at you and are no longer a threat, then you are not supposed to shoot at them. According to your logic, once they stop shooting at you, you can't shoot them.

You bet we shoot them, anyway we can, from ambush, in the back if necessary, but we do shoot them. It is retaliation, as that is permitted during war. The Just War concept of retribution is not allowed, but retaliation certainly is.

>>If you are lit up by a radar in clear air, do you dump your ordinance & tanks and do a GLIB 2 (the way an F-15E did over Iraq)?<<

What? What example are you referring to? (I'd be careful with the backhanded insults towards pilots, as we can start this fight all over and talk about the very high number of pilot washouts and pilot wannabe's that make up the WSO community. Many of these WSOs make fine WSOs, but some are a true study in anger and envy. Let's just leave that out.)

>>I've seen 8 HARMs fired in Iraq for no earthly reason by guys who don't seem to understand this isn't a game.<<

Perhaps they did understand it isn’t a game and they wanted to a) kill the SAMs before they were killed, and b) by killing the SAMs they helped the package stay alive. Oh, and you were in their jet? Besides, HARMs are known to be less than accurate.

>>That's why, when I was the package commander, I emphasized discipline and ROE.<<

What squadron used WSO's as a package commander? I'd really like to know that one, as I've a few friends that need to know about this--if true.

BTW: I've never known any flight lead or package commander not emphasize ROE and in-flight discipline.

>>Drop at the wrong time, and you can kill good guys<<

Yup, and not shooting the bad guys when you have the chance means they can get away and kill good guys.

>>or give the bad guys a propaganda coup (consider a rushed drop hitting a school or hospital - which the bad guys DO position close to their SAMs and AAA).<<

LOAC is clear on this, approved to drop. Just make sure you deliver it accurately--don't want to go back.

Perhaps I’m getting the wrong impression, but you seem to endorse only shooting at bad guys that can actually hit you? You seem to endorse not shooting at bad guys that stop shooting or (through lack of discipline) try to shoot at you with ordinance that can’t hit you.

Is this correct?

We will likely never see eye-to-eye on this, as this issue has polarized many people. Great. Let the process work itself out, I’d only wish the political side of the issue was left out.

Have a nice day.

Okayyyyy. . .so according to your rationale, once they stop shooting at you and are no longer a threat, then you are not supposed to shoot at them. According to your logic, once they stop shooting at you, you can't shoot them.

Actually, once they stop shooting at you, self defense no longer applies. Therefor, you take the time to make sure your retaliation is appropriate. For example, in Iraq we would double check for civilians in the area. Or check to make sure friendlies hadn't just engaged bad guys (to answer another pooint you made). It costs nothing to wait 2-3 minutes. You can monitor the troops on the ground, make sure no friendlies are nearby, make sure no civlians are having a wedding celebration (happens in Afghanistan) - and then stomp 'em good! In this case, a delay of less than 2 minutes would have suffice. Being aggressive is good; being smart is better!

No radar, but who cares? I mean, surely, you must know that most all (over 80%) of our aircraft losses in VN were due to unaimed AAA.

In Vietnam, they flew low level. At 30K feet, it requires barrage AAA from big guns to have an effect. And that effect is limited to within a couple of miles of the ground site. Again, they were not under immediate danger - and we owe the guys on the ground a chance for a double check.

If you are lit up by a radar in clear air, do you dump your ordinance & tanks and do a GLIB 2 (the way an F-15E did over Iraq)?
What? What example are you referring to?

Happened during the summer of 99 over norther Iraq. Actually, the F-15E continued to guide the bomb it had already dropped (did a great job in that!) while dropping tanks and doing a GLIB 2 in response to a missile fired - fired from a LONG way away. The missile was unguided and IMHO was an SA-2 - I could see the trail & I was probably 35 miles away. But we were taught in the 80s not to over-react by dropping ordanance early - something a few guys I knew did the first couple of days of Desert Storm until they learned better.

I've seen 8 HARMs fired in Iraq for no earthly reason by guys who don't seem to understand this isn't a game.<<

Perhaps they did understand it isn’t a game and they wanted to a) kill the SAMs before they were killed

Actually, QC'ing their shot would have revealed the radar site was at twice the range of a HARM. I was in a Navy Prowler at the time, and DIDN'T shoot because the only thing I saw was grossly out of range. (The Prowler has pee-poor ranging, but the unusual radar parameters matched a known site a LONG way away). In debrief, other platforms confirmed no radars were operating anywhere close. For the remainder of the mission, I was the only one with a HARM left in the AOR.

What squadron used WSO's as a package commander?

In peacetime, both F-4G & F-111 squadrons used to. I was too young while in WW, but did a few Red Flags in 111s. In combat, I've got to admit I only was package commander while flying in a Navy Prowler squadron. I've got no idea if F-15Es allow WSOs to be package commanders - if not, the Mud Hens are screwing up. It is easier to keep track of things as a WSO than as a pilot who needs to fly the jet.

Many of these WSOs make fine WSOs, but some are a true study in anger and envy. Let's just leave that out.

Agreed. When DeBellvue (sp?) came back from Vietnam & was forced to become a pilot, the folks I knew who flew with him said he was pissed - that he remained a great WSO & a pee-poor pilot. Personally, I've been a pretty damn good WSO (I find it easy to switch between 2-dimensional radars and 3-dimensional reality), but I would have sucked as a pilot. The skills are different, and not always interchangable.

We will likely never see eye-to-eye on this

I'm sure this is true - but I've enjoyed the exchange! Best wishes to you. I've just accepted the new nav bonus, so I'm in for at least 4 more years...

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.