Smarter Weapons for a New Gulf War

Feb. 26, 2003 -- On Jan. 17, 1991, a small squadron of U.S. Army Apache attack helicopters, dozens of cruise missiles from naval vessels, and a number of F-117 stealth fighters launched the opening salvo of what became known as Operation Desert Storm.

It rapidly became apparent in that conflict with Iraq that high-tech weapons could greatly change how wars were fought. Microchips used in everything from cruise missiles to stealth planes "invisible" to enemy radar helped allied forces conduct a round-the-clock war of precision previously unseen.

Now, fast forward to the current day, where experts expect any potential conflict with Iraq will see even more intelligent high-tech weapons — some of them still experimental. And, they predict, today's technology will once again dramatically change how war will be waged.

-->

Rather than wait for an "air war" to soften up targets, for instance, soldiers will spot and avoid areas of heavy resistance. Or using helicopters, troops will be ferried deep into Iraq to capture key areas — oil fields, airports and other staging bases.

Both air and land forces will work in conjunction and simultaneously attack key targets including military headquarters, suspected chemical weapons sites, air and military bases. Some hostile forces will be kept in check from weapons that will automatically watch and attack as needed.

Surveillance and information — live video and pictures, target data — will be widely available to commanders and soldiers alike. Such information-sharing capabilities will allow allied forces to react to strategic and tactical changes in a few minutes, rather than hours as in Desert Storm.

The goal, say analysts, is to completely overwhelm Iraqi troops with rapid and decisive action so that they cannot or will not fight. And instead of Desert Storm's 40 days, U.S. military leaders expect today's weapons could help forces fight and win an Iraqi war within a month or even as little as 10 days.

War of Information Revolution

The key to a delivering a quick knockout blow will be U.S. predominance in information technology, explains John Pike, an analyst with military think-tank GlobalSecurity.org in Alexandria, Va.

"Think about the digital cameras and laptop computers and wideband communications and personal digital assistants and cell phones and cable TVs and all of the Information Revolution things that many people experience over last dozen years," says Pike. "Basically, all of that has had an impact on the military, too."

According to Pike, "the military is now linked together by e-mail, internal Web sites, chat rooms and video conferencing." And just as such digital connectivity has helped the corporate world conduct business more efficiently, it will help U.S.-led forces wage war faster.

War of Information Revolution

The key to a delivering a quick knockout blow will be U.S. predominance in information technology, explains John Pike, an analyst with military think-tank GlobalSecurity.org in Alexandria, Va.

"Think about the digital cameras and laptop computers and wideband communications and personal digital assistants and cell phones and cable TVs and all of the Information Revolution things that many people experience over last dozen years," says Pike. "Basically, all of that has had an impact on the military, too."

According to Pike, "the military is now linked together by e-mail, internal Web sites, chat rooms and video conferencing." And just as such digital connectivity has helped the corporate world conduct business more efficiently, it will help U.S.-led forces wage war faster.

"We were zero for 96 in getting the Scuds [during Desert Storm]," recalls Stephen Baker, a retired U.S. Navy admiral who was in charge of air operations for the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt during Desert Storm. "We saw the launch plumes, but we just couldn't get to them in time," says Baker, now an analyst with the Center for Defense Information in Washington.

But with real-time video from unmanned spy planes such as Predator and Global Hawk — capabilities that were unavailable during Desert Storm — Baker says the time to get valuable targeting information to the appropriate forces is cut down to minutes.

"The sensor-to-shooter time frame — the amount of time it takes to detect a launch or a target and send that information to a weapon platform like an AC-130 gunship or other asset — can be inside of 10 minutes," says Baker.

And in addition to the information gleaned by central commanders from the Predators and Global Hawks, automated remote sensing capabilities could be coming down to field commanders directly through another new technology.

Smaller unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs, such as the experimental Dragon Eye that can be carried by a soldier into battle in a backpack, may already be deployed among U.S. Marines already stationed in the Gulf area, some analysts believe.

"The intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance portion of our forces is certainly something quantum leaps ahead in technology," says Baker. "[Central Forces Commander] Gen. [Tommy] Franks, field commanders, Special Forces operators on the ground, or a general in U.S. headquarters in Tampa, Fla., will all have the ability to have the same picture of what's going on."

A Network of Tanks and Helicopters

The improved ability to gather and share information has gone far beyond just spy planes. Even "conventional" weapons fielded in the first Gulf War have been upgraded to this "network-centric" fighting style.

For example, many of the Apache attack helicopters being sent to the Gulf region have now been upgraded to so-called "Longbow" versions. Equipped with a better radar system, the Apache Longbow can track up over 128 tanks and other ground targets more than 5 miles away.

Since the Longbow carries only a limited amount of rockets and munitions, it shares this targeting data with other Apaches or anti-tank units nearby.

The U.S. Army's other main anti-tank weapon, the M1 Abrams battle tank, has also entered the Information Age. A new inter-vehicle information system, or IVIS, allows tank commanders to wirelessly share targeting information to other nearby M1 tanks and armored infantry vehicles equipped with IVIS, giving every vehicle commander an overall view of the battlefield around them.

"That type of connectivity increases a fighter's 'situational awareness,' " says Baker. And being aware of the dangers around them — even the ones they personally cannot see — greatly increases tank commanders' effectiveness and odds of survival, he adds.

New and Improved Munitions

Increasing the effectiveness of the U.S.-led fighting force is a key factor this time around, since there won't be a huge coalition of allied forces arrayed against Hussein.

During Desert Storm, there were approximately 500,000 allied troops joining U.S. forces. Now, by most experts' estimates, there are fewer than half of that number currently stationed in the Gulf.

To make up for numbers, the U.S. military will rely increasingly on even smarter, more precise bombs, such as the satellite-guided joint direct attack munitions, or JDAMs.

"Most of the aircraft currently in the coalition forces — F18s, F-15 Strike Eagles, F-14s, B-52s, B2s — can drop JDAMs," says Baker. "Eight airplanes — say, like the Navy's F-18s or F-14s — can now take out 30 targets in one flight. Now, what you're capable of achieving with one mission in 2003 was barely achievable in one day of round-the-clock bombing during Desert Storm."

Also increasing that destructive capacity could be newer versions of satellite-guided weapons such as the joint stand-off weapon, or JSOW. Like JDAMs, JSOWS can be launched from nearly any aircraft in the U.S. arsenal. But JSOWs have wings that fold out which help glide the bomb to targets up to 40 miles away. That allows the planes and pilots to remain completely out of harm's way.

Even the old Tomahawk cruise missile, which made its wartime debut in Desert Storm may get a reprised — and updated — role in the upcoming conflict. A new version in development over the last few years, called the Tactical Tomahawk, allows the missile to act almost like a spy plane.

Like previous versions, the Tactical Tomahawk can be launched from ships thousands of miles away from its intended target. But rather than flying directly to the target and automatically destroy it, the new version can be programmed to fly around the target area, give commanders a bird's eye view of the battlefield and then be re-programmed for new instructions.

That capability will allow commanders to divert the missile as needed — say to a more urgent target or an unexpected objective (so-called "targets of opportunity" in military jargon) such as a newly uncovered Scud launcher.

More Tech, Less Blood

How well such weapons will help deliver the faster, more decisive blows hoped for by the U.S. military is still up in the air. But analysts such as Global Security's Pike say using more advanced weapons than the enemy has become an irreversible doctrine among planners.

"The American way of war has always been to substitute treasure for blood, to substitute technology for soldiers," says Pike. "And as we've seen over last dozen years, the U.S. has been spectacularly successful in doing that."

But advances in technology doesn't necessarily guarantee battlefield success. Despite all the high-tech weapons used in Afghanistan, for example, the military has yet to capture suspected terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden.

Will technology prove any more or less effectual in Iraq? "That's what we're going to find out," says Pike.

A Network of Tanks and Helicopters

The improved ability to gather and share information has gone far beyond just spy planes. Even "conventional" weapons fielded in the first Gulf War have been upgraded to this "network-centric" fighting style.

For example, many of the Apache attack helicopters being sent to the Gulf region have now been upgraded to so-called "Longbow" versions. Equipped with a better radar system, the Apache Longbow can track up over 128 tanks and other ground targets more than 5 miles away.

Since the Longbow carries only a limited amount of rockets and munitions, it shares this targeting data with other Apaches or anti-tank units nearby.

The U.S. Army's other main anti-tank weapon, the M1 Abrams battle tank, has also entered the Information Age. A new inter-vehicle information system, or IVIS, allows tank commanders to wirelessly share targeting information to other nearby M1 tanks and armored infantry vehicles equipped with IVIS, giving every vehicle commander an overall view of the battlefield around them.

"That type of connectivity increases a fighter's 'situational awareness,' " says Baker. And being aware of the dangers around them — even the ones they personally cannot see — greatly increases tank commanders' effectiveness and odds of survival, he adds.

New and Improved Munitions

Increasing the effectiveness of the U.S.-led fighting force is a key factor this time around, since there won't be a huge coalition of allied forces arrayed against Hussein.

During Desert Storm, there were approximately 500,000 allied troops joining U.S. forces. Now, by most experts' estimates, there are fewer than half of that number currently stationed in the Gulf.

To make up for numbers, the U.S. military will rely increasingly on even smarter, more precise bombs, such as the satellite-guided joint direct attack munitions, or JDAMs.

"Most of the aircraft currently in the coalition forces — F18s, F-15 Strike Eagles, F-14s, B-52s, B2s — can drop JDAMs," says Baker. "Eight airplanes — say, like the Navy's F-18s or F-14s — can now take out 30 targets in one flight. Now, what you're capable of achieving with one mission in 2003 was barely achievable in one day of round-the-clock bombing during Desert Storm."

Also increasing that destructive capacity could be newer versions of satellite-guided weapons such as the joint stand-off weapon, or JSOW. Like JDAMs, JSOWS can be launched from nearly any aircraft in the U.S. arsenal. But JSOWs have wings that fold out which help glide the bomb to targets up to 40 miles away. That allows the planes and pilots to remain completely out of harm's way.

Even the old Tomahawk cruise missile, which made its wartime debut in Desert Storm may get a reprised — and updated — role in the upcoming conflict. A new version in development over the last few years, called the Tactical Tomahawk, allows the missile to act almost like a spy plane.

Like previous versions, the Tactical Tomahawk can be launched from ships thousands of miles away from its intended target. But rather than flying directly to the target and automatically destroy it, the new version can be programmed to fly around the target area, give commanders a bird's eye view of the battlefield and then be re-programmed for new instructions.

That capability will allow commanders to divert the missile as needed — say to a more urgent target or an unexpected objective (so-called "targets of opportunity" in military jargon) such as a newly uncovered Scud launcher.

More Tech, Less Blood

How well such weapons will help deliver the faster, more decisive blows hoped for by the U.S. military is still up in the air. But analysts such as Global Security's Pike say using more advanced weapons than the enemy has become an irreversible doctrine among planners.

"The American way of war has always been to substitute treasure for blood, to substitute technology for soldiers," says Pike. "And as we've seen over last dozen years, the U.S. has been spectacularly successful in doing that."

But advances in technology doesn't necessarily guarantee battlefield success. Despite all the high-tech weapons used in Afghanistan, for example, the military has yet to capture suspected terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden.

Will technology prove any more or less effectual in Iraq? "That's what we're going to find out," says Pike.

To make up for numbers, the U.S. military will rely increasingly on even smarter, more precise bombs, such as the satellite-guided joint direct attack munitions, or JDAMs.

"Most of the aircraft currently in the coalition forces — F18s, F-15 Strike Eagles, F-14s, B-52s, B2s — can drop JDAMs," says Baker. "Eight airplanes — say, like the Navy's F-18s or F-14s — can now take out 30 targets in one flight. Now, what you're capable of achieving with one mission in 2003 was barely achievable in one day of round-the-clock bombing during Desert Storm."

Also increasing that destructive capacity could be newer versions of satellite-guided weapons such as the joint stand-off weapon, or JSOW. Like JDAMs, JSOWS can be launched from nearly any aircraft in the U.S. arsenal. But JSOWs have wings that fold out which help glide the bomb to targets up to 40 miles away. That allows the planes and pilots to remain completely out of harm's way.

Even the old Tomahawk cruise missile, which made its wartime debut in Desert Storm may get a reprised — and updated — role in the upcoming conflict. A new version in development over the last few years, called the Tactical Tomahawk, allows the missile to act almost like a spy plane.

Like previous versions, the Tactical Tomahawk can be launched from ships thousands of miles away from its intended target. But rather than flying directly to the target and automatically destroy it, the new version can be programmed to fly around the target area, give commanders a bird's eye view of the battlefield and then be re-programmed for new instructions.

That capability will allow commanders to divert the missile as needed — say to a more urgent target or an unexpected objective (so-called "targets of opportunity" in military jargon) such as a newly uncovered Scud launcher.

More Tech, Less Blood

How well such weapons will help deliver the faster, more decisive blows hoped for by the U.S. military is still up in the air. But analysts such as Global Security's Pike say using more advanced weapons than the enemy has become an irreversible doctrine among planners.

"The American way of war has always been to substitute treasure for blood, to substitute technology for soldiers," says Pike. "And as we've seen over last dozen years, the U.S. has been spectacularly successful in doing that."

But advances in technology doesn't necessarily guarantee battlefield success. Despite all the high-tech weapons used in Afghanistan, for example, the military has yet to capture suspected terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden.

Will technology prove any more or less effectual in Iraq? "That's what we're going to find out," says Pike.

"The American way of war has always been to substitute treasure for blood, to substitute technology for soldiers," says Pike. "And as we've seen over last dozen years, the U.S. has been spectacularly successful in doing that."

But advances in technology doesn't necessarily guarantee battlefield success. Despite all the high-tech weapons used in Afghanistan, for example, the military has yet to capture suspected terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden.

Will technology prove any more or less effectual in Iraq? "That's what we're going to find out," says Pike.