The kind of threats I'm talking about are can be found today in Serbia, Algeria and Iran. On the higher end of the threat spectrum but a bit less likely would be Pakistan and Russia. These are just the obvious threats. Leaving out the latter two which have a much more effective system and advanced weapons the challenges are these.
Well my point is that Europe won't fight against most of these countries alone. Iran for example seems to be much more in the interest of the US and Israel than it actually does in Europe. The same is with Pakistan. Russia is unlikely and I doubt it's in the US interest at all. Serbia is still very much weakend from OAF and I currently see no reasons for a campaign in Algeria. Of course no one can predict what the future will hold, but we should stay realistic.
- Without the ISR/ELINT capabilities of the USA, Europe's targeting processes and EOOB would have more fog of war.
- Without the same level of offensive EW capability and LO/VLO European aircraft will find themselves more vulnerable to radar guided threats and fighters(even the F-35 to some extent).
- Without the tanking assets of the U.S. Military European airforces will not have the same ability to strike repeatedly deep at enemy centers of gravity which can benefit from strategic depth. Also the decreased frequency of deep strike and flexibility of more range means IADS can focus and coordinate on more predictable air avenues of approach(principle of mass).
- The reduced capability to penetrate deep into the interior and persist means that the enemy war making infrastructure will function longer.
- Forward basing means more European aircraft could be in range of offensive red systems. Limited ramp space will also reduce flexibility.
- Parallel chains of command could violate the principle of Unity of Command in European coalitions.
- Lack of stand off and escort jamming will make penetrating aircraft more vulnerable either by exposing them to radar guided threats or forcing them to fly low altitude flight profiles reducing range and placing them in range of autonomous SHORAD/MANPADS/AAA which have historically been more dangerous and cannot be "kicked down". This has caused U.S. and Allied airforces to operate at medium to high altitude for force protection which in this case due to all of the above could put European fighters back into view of radar guided threats.
- Limited precision strike capability compared to the U.S. Military will mean more sorties per target and repeat strikes which expose more aircraft to hostile fire. In the same category would be limited hard target capability.
- Possible OPSEC issues due to differing communications capabilities within a coalition.
- Limited logistics could also limit the number of platforms that can be deployed.
Well I widely agree with you. But the reality is that there is no real European defence policy. Different nations, different interests you simply can not expect that Europe will become a community of states similar to the US. The US is one country, the EU just a community of various countries. No single european country is going to become a sole major power on its own again. The different european countries are closing up to each other, but you can simply not achieve this goals in a short time. There're more important issues than preparing for war, let alone that wars aren't very popular here in Europe at all. The media in Europe is much more open than in the US and it is way more difficult to "convince" the people to go to war or even just to support it.
If there is really a war we are forced to fight alone it has to have a very good reason behind and then looses are more likely to be accepted. Many people just don't see the reasons behind OIF for example and such kind of conflicts are that where no looses are accepted at all, not even participation.
Russia and Pakistan are less likely and much higher on the threat scale so we can address them separately. But Algeria, Serbia and Iran would certainly bring these issues. Granted I believe Europe would likely succeed in an airwar with these countries. But being able to address the issues above are what has made Iraqi and Serbian IADS so ineffective for us in the past. In the case of a European only military action considering the issues above it's logical that threat IADS would operate more effectively. Even a marginal increase in IADS effectiveness will see more European aircraft shot down over time.
Well it is unrealistic to fight any wars against a halfway equipped enemy without any looses. Stealth aircraft alone won't change that fact, not even with the best intelligence and support you can get there will ever be looses. Just look at the casulties in Iraq we cna see nowadays. The main problem is what is going to happen after the military conflict officially ended?
The solution is better balance of capability, better logistics, better Unity of Command for coalition operations and increased survivability through LO platforms such as the F-35 which can offset some of the capability gaps through force compression.
-DA
Well Europe is working on that, but I don't see it going be completed anytime soon. Europe is unlikely to ever become a real counterpart to the US. I could imagine that it is more difficult to understand for an US citizen but that's the way it is. What would be nice to have and what is realistic to have are to different pairs of shoes.
nfloorl: contradicting who’s prev comments? you mean the "the F-117 is being replaced because they have F-22A" ...that comment? It wasn’t mine.
