Opinion: Figuring European Rivalries Into NATO's Libyan Air Campaign
Contributor: Keith Mallon
Posted: 08/31/2011 12:00:00 AM EDT | 0
http://www.defenceiq.com/air-forces-and ... ent=9/1/11
“
I dropped more bombs than you did.”
And so begins the playground one-upmanship that invariably follows a multi-nation, multi-organisation operation. This time it’s Libya and the NATO allies are getting their measuring tapes out to decide who was the most potent force during the months-long campaign to oust Gadaffi.
Breaking down the numbers
Aviation Week’s Ares blog ran a piece citing the first break down of sorties launched and strikes carried out. Unsurprisingly, France and the US top the list, contributing 33% and 16%, respectively, of the 6,745 sorties (through to 4 August). What the data does not show is the combat support sorties made principally by the US that enabled the operation to continue. These included vital tasks such as air-to-air refuelling, airborne early warning and ISR missions. That issue, alone, ought to fuel much soul searching over how effective the European elements of NATO actually are.
But stepping away from that question for now, there’s a curious element of unrest brewing between French and UK air forces. As Robert Wall points out, the RAF has been very defensive about the contribution it has made as part of Operation Ellamy. One interpretation of this touchiness: that the service is playing to the domestic political audience, eager to prove it is still a capable and relevant force that has not been effectively defanged by the SDSR.
The RAF’s argument ties into an oft-overlooked, but utterly crucial element of combat aircraft: their serviceability and availability rates. Pilots and ground crews have expressed satisfaction with the performance of the new Typhoon that made its combat debut over Libya. Although hard data on the actual availability of the aircraft is hard to come by, operators have described it as “superb”. The French Rafale, also making its debut, is not short of cheerleaders either. Flight Global reports that, by the end of May, the Rafale had achieved 2,200 flight hours with “zero no fly days”.
Interpreting the statistics
What the RAF is keen to point out, though, is that their complement of 10 Typhoons and 16 Tornado GR.4s, was able to complete 801 strike sorties. France with 18 Rafales, 6 Super Etendards, and 16 Mirages (various types) were able to carry out 2,225 strike sorties. Bearing in mind that 6 of the French Rafales and their Etendards were able to operate from the Charles de Gaulle carrier just off the coast of Libya whilst the Tornado GR.4s were initially flying from RAF Marham, the UK rate does compare well – despite the mean strike rate per UK airframe being lower than the French. Ultimately, the statistics are still inconclusive, with RAF suggestions that its aircraft delivered greater effect being unverifiable until bomb damage analysis figures are released.
What is clear, however, is that the airborne capability of each type is redundant unless its actually flying and that the ground support structures for each air force were put to the test by the recent campaign.
As to the origins of the posturing, two possible sources could be identified. The first is a growing sense that the French military now views itself as the pre-eminent European military. But, as Defence IQ has already discussed, the financial foundations of that “pre-eminence” is on less than solid ground.
The other major factor to consider when comparing the Typhoon and Rafale is that both are currently competing for the big ticket prize: India's MMRCA contract. This may be fuelling the nationalistic overtones about that their respective aircraft being proven the more capable. Certainly, India will be scrutinising the availability rates of both aircraft as a key criteria in her final decision.
![8-]](./images/smilies/icon_cool.gif "Cool"){kind=icon}
![[009]](./images/smilies/009.gif){kind=small}
... Retirar o Harrier de Serviço foi uma burrada sem tamanho.
