 [Back] |
 [Index] |
 [Next] |
Operation Desert Storm:
|
WEIGHT OF EFFORT AND TYPE OF EFFORT ANALYSIS
Appendix VIIIThe weight of effort and type of effort indices permitted us to examine the relative contributions of the air-to-ground platforms and revealed the overall magnitude of the weight and type of effort that was expended against the strategic target sets established pursuant to the military objectives of the Persian Gulf War. In this appendix, we report results not included in appendix I. WOE PLATFORM COMPARISONS ------------------------------------------------------ Appendix VIII:1 Collectively, military industrial base, offensive counterair and kill box target sets received most of the weight of effort from the air-to-ground platforms reviewed here, and KBX targets received by far the most strikes, the most bombs, and the most bomb tonnage. BE-numbered targets in the KBX target set received at least 9 times more strikes, 5 times more bombs, and 5 times more bomb tonnage than the next highest ranking strategic target set in this regard. The comparisons indicate that the F-111F and the F-117 accounted for the majority of the guided bomb tonnage delivered against strategic targets, while the B-52 and the F-16 accounted for the majority of the unguided bomb tonnage delivered. The B-52 and the F-16 accounted for the majority of unguided ordnance delivered against KBX targets. Respectively, they delivered approximately 32 million and 31 million pounds of bombs on KBX targets. The F-15Es participated most exclusively against Scud targets. Of the PGM tonnage delivered on C\3 , NBC, and MIB targets, the F-117 accounted for most of it. Weight of effort on NAV targets was almost exclusively the domain of Navy platforms, where the A-6E accounted for much of the weight of effort. The Navy platforms did contribute a considerable WOE against KBX targets. The only non-U.S. coalition platform reviewed here--the British Tornado, GR-1--did not contribute a majority of WOE on any of the strategic target sets. Figure VIII.1 shows the number of strikes by each platform against all 12 target categories. Relative to other platforms, the F-16 was a predominant force against KBX targets, accounting for at least 51 percent of the total strikes. The number of strikes conducted by the F-16s, F/A-18s, F-111Fs, A-6Es, F-15Es, and the B-52s on KBX targets was the largest number of strikes that each conducted compared to other strategic target categories. Figure VIII.1 also shows that the majority of the Desert Storm platforms expended more of their strike efforts on KBX targets than on any other strategic target category. Figure VIII.1: Target Category Strikes, by Platform (See figure in printed edition.) Figure VIII.2 depicts strike data for the selected platforms against the target categories, excluding KBX targets. Figure VIII.2: Target Category Strikes, by Platform, Excluding KBX Targets (See figure in printed edition.) When KBX strikes are removed, figure VIII.2 more clearly shows other patterns, particularly that more strikes were expended on the MIB and OCA target categories relative to other target categories. In addition to being one of the strategic target sets, MIB targets often served as "dump" targets or secondary targets, while the OCA target set was associated with the Desert Storm objective of achieving air supremacy and would be expected to be given a considerable weight of effort. Similar to F-16 strike data against KBX targets, the F-16 stands out in terms of the number of strikes conducted against OCA, MIB, ELE, and OIL target sets. One factor that can account for this is that more F-16s were deployed to the Persian Gulf theater than any other aircraft. Compared to other target sets, the F-111F delivered more strikes on the OCA target category. This coincides both with the stated mission capability of the F-111F, as well as the Desert Storm plans for the F-111F, which focused predominantly on an air interdiction role. The F-15E conducted the largest number of strikes against Scud targets. In contrast to other platforms, the F-15E was not a significant part of strike efforts on any other target category. The F-117 conducted the most strikes on the C\3 target category, the GVC target category, and the NBC target category. Figure VIII.3 shows the number of bombs delivered by air-to-ground platforms against the strategic target sets. Figure VIII.3: Bombs Delivered, by Platform (See figure in printed edition.) Figure VIII.3 shows that the number of bombs delivered on KBX targets was at least four times as great as the number of bombs delivered on the MIB target set, the next highest. Figures VIII.3 and VIII.4 show that the B-52 delivered more bombs against 7 of 12 target categories (ELE, KBX, LOC, MIB, NBC, OCA, and OIL). The F-16 was second only to the B-52 in bombs delivered against MIB and OCA strategic targets. Together with the data from the KBX target category, the F-16 is second to the B-52 in number of bombs delivered against the KBX, the MIB, and the OCA strategic target sets. The A-6E dominated strategic targets in the NAV target set, and the F-15E delivered substantially more bombs on Scud targets compared to the other platforms. Figure VIII.4: Bombs Delivered, by Platform, Excluding KBX Targets (See figure in printed edition.) Similar to the number of bombs delivered against target categories, figure VIII.5 shows that the most bomb tonnage was delivered on the KBX, MIB, and OCA target sets. Figure VIII.5: Bomb Tonnage Delivered, by Platform (See figure in printed edition.) B-52s delivered more bomb tonnage, relative to the other platforms against strategic targets in the ELE, KBX, MIB, OCA, and OIL target categories. The F-16 delivered in excess of 31 million pounds of bombs on KBX targets. This is second only to the B-52, which delivered approximately 32 million pounds of bombs. (See fig. VIII.6.) Figure VIII.6: Bomb Tonnage Delivered, by Platform, Excluding KBX Targets (See figure in printed edition.) Figure VIII.6 shows that the F-16 delivered more bomb tonnage on C\3 and NBC targets than on the other platforms. The F-15E delivered more bomb tonnage on Scud targets than on any other strategic target set. With regard to F-15E efforts against Scud targets, all of the WOE indices (number of BEs, number of strikes, number of bombs, bomb tonnage) converge to indicate that the F-15E was the predominant force on Scud targets and was not a principal part of the weight of effort on other strategic target categories. Figure VIII.6 does not indicate that among the various platforms tasked to C\3 , LOC, NAV, NBC, OCA, and SAM targets, a single platform is distinctive in terms of the bomb tonnage delivered. The data show distinctive variability in sources of bomb tonnage delivered against ELE, MIB, OIL, and to some degree, SCU targets. B-52 bomb tonnage accounts for this distinction against all these target sets except for Scud targets, which were accounted for by the efforts of the F-15E. TOE PLATFORM COMPARISONS ------------------------------------------------------ Appendix VIII:2 The type of effort measures indicate the quantity of guided and unguided bomb tonnage delivered by the selected air-to-ground platforms. Figure VIII.7 shows PGM tonnage delivered by platforms. The most PGM tonnage was delivered against OCA targets. A factor that can account for this is that many OCA targets were hardened aircraft shelters and were attacked with LGBs. F-111Fs delivered in excess of 1.7 million pounds of bombs on OCA targets. F-111Fs also delivered the most PGM tonnage on KBX targets, which largely reflects F-111F tank-plinking efforts using LGBs. Compared to the other platforms, the F-117 accounted for the bulk of the PGM tonnage delivered on C\3 , NBC, and MIB targets. Figure VIII.7 shows that the F-15E delivered a majority of guided bomb tonnage on Scud targets and that this was the only strategic target category in which the F-15E contributed the majority of the PGM tonnage. This pattern is expected because the F-15E received most of its tasking to Scud targets and because the wing had limited PGM capability. Figure VIII.7: PGM Tonnage Delivered, by Platform (See figure in printed edition.) Figure VIII.8 shows that not only were very sizable amounts of unguided bomb tonnage delivered against BE-numbered KBX targets, but the unguided bomb tonnage delivered against KBX targets, relative to the other strategic target categories, was immense. Figure VIII.8: Unguided Tonnage Delivered, by Platform (See figure in printed edition.) Approximately 78 million pounds of unguided bombs were delivered against ground targets located in kill boxes. Comparatively, F-16 and B-52 are the two platforms that accounted for the preponderance of unguided bomb tonnage delivered here. B-52s accounted for approximately 32 million pounds; F-16s approximately 31 million pounds, at least two-thirds of the total unguided bomb tonnage delivered on BE-numbered KBX targets. Figure VIII.8 also shows that the B-52 accounted for the majority of unguided bomb tonnage delivered against MIB targets. Figure VIII.9 indicates that more unguided bomb tonnage was delivered against targets in the MIB and OCA strategic target categories than in the other strategic target categories. The F-16 delivered more of the unguided bomb tonnage against strategic targets in the C\3 , GVC, NBC, and OCA categories, and it was second to the F-15E in unguided bomb tonnage delivered against targets in the SCU category. Summing across all target categories and comparing to other platforms, B-52s and F-16s accounted for the preponderance of bombs delivered against strategic targets. Figure VIII.9: Unguided Tonnage Delivered, by Platform, Excluding KBX Targets (See figure in printed edition.)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
