 | The examples and perspective in this articlemay not represent aworldwide view of the subject. You mayimprove this article, discuss the issue on thetalk page, orcreate a new article, as appropriate.(August 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Air supremacy (as well asair superiority) is the degree to which a side in a conflict holds control ofair power over opposing forces. There are levels of control of the air inaerial warfare. Control of the air is the aerial equivalent ofcommand of the sea.
Air power has increasingly become a powerful element ofmilitary campaigns;military planners view having an environment of at least air superiority as a necessity. Air supremacy allows increasedbombing efforts, tactical air support for ground forces,paratroop assaults,airdrops and simplecargo plane transfers, which can moveground forces and supplies. Air power is a function of the degree of air superiority and numbers or types of aircraft, but it represents a situation that defies black-and-white characterization. The degree of a force's air control is azero-sum game with its opponent's; increasing control by one corresponds to decreasing control by the other. Air forces unable to contest for air superiority or air parity can strive forair denial, where they maintain an operations level conceding air superiority to the other side, but preventing it from achieving air supremacy.
The achievement of air supremacy does not guarantee a low loss rate of friendly aircraft, as hostile forces are often able to adopt unconventional tactics or identify weaknesses. For example,NATO forces which held air superiority overKosovo stilllost a stealth strike aircraft to aSerbian ground-based air defense system, despite it being considered "obsolete".[1] Several engagements have occurred inasymmetrical conflicts in which relatively poorly-equipped ground forces have been able to achieve aircraft kills despite working against overwhelming air supremacy. During both theIraq War and theWar in Afghanistan, insurgents found a greater degree of success in attacking coalition aircraft on the ground than when they were operating above them in the skies.
| Strong force | Weak force |
|---|---|
| Air supremacy | Air incapability |
| Air superiority | Air denial |
| Air parity | Air parity |
Although the destruction of enemy aircraft in air-to-air combat is the most obvious aspect of air superiority, it is not the only method of obtaining air superiority. Historically, the most effective method of gaining air superiority is the destruction of enemy aircraft on the ground and the destruction of the means and infrastructure by which an opponent may mount air operations (such as destroying fuel supplies, cratering runways withanti-runway penetration bombs and the sowing of air-fields witharea denial weapons). A historical example of this isOperation Focus in which the outnumberedIsraeli Air Force dealt a crippling blow to theEgyptian,Jordanian andSyrian Air Forces and airfields at the start of theSix-Day War, achieving Israeli air supremacy.
Disruption can be carried out through ground and air attack. The main role for which the BritishSpecial Air Service was formed was to conduct raids on German aircraft and airfields.[5] During operations in theWestern Desert the SAS are reckoned to have destroyed more than 400 enemy aircraft.[6] On 6 December 1944, theImperial Japanese Army Air Force Raiding GroupTeishin Shudan destroyedB-29 aircraft onLeyte. During theCold War, the Soviet Union claimed it could achieve air superiority despite the inferiority of its fighters, by over-runningNATO airfields and parking their tanks on the runways, similar to what they have done duringTatsinskaya Raid during theBattle of Stalingrad (note the Germans used parts of theirautobahn motorways as airfields during the last war). The Soviet Union planned to use itsSpetsnaz special forces in attacks on NATO airfields in the event of conflict.
Attacks by special forces have been seen by some commanders as a way to level the playing field when faced by superior numbers or technology. Given the disparity in effectiveness between their own and South Korean and US fighters,North Korea maintains a large force of infiltration troops; in the event of a war, they would be tasked, among other missions, with attacking coalition airfields with mortar, machine gun and sniper fire, possibly after insertion by some 300An-2 low radar-observable[citation needed] biplanes. This strategy has been practiced in active conflicts even in recent decades; during theasymmetrical warfare of theWar in Afghanistan, 15fedayeen destroyed or severely damaged eightUnited States Marine CorpsHarrier jump jets in theSeptember 2012 Camp Bastion raid, one result of which being pilots fighting as infantry for the first time in 70 years.[7] Similarly, during theIraqi War, four Apaches were destroyed on the ground in 2007 by insurgents armed withmortar, which were unintentionally aided by web-publishedgeotagged photographs taken by coalition soldiers.[8]
![[icon]](/mt/?noimg=&dark=on&url=http%3a%2f%2fen.wikipedia.org%2fwiki%2fFile%3aWiki_letter_w_cropped.svg) | This sectionneeds expansion. You can help byadding to it.(April 2016) |
TheFirst World War saw many firsts in the field of aerial warfare, including the deployment of aircraft armed with machine guns,[9][10] the first successful engagement involvingsynchronisation-gun-armed aircraft on the afternoon of 1 July 1915.[11] Throughout the conflict, air superiority on theWestern Front changed hands between theGerman Empire and theAllies several times. It became recognised that the worst losses was amongst new pilots, many of whom lasted just a day or two.[12][13] The emergence ofspecialised fighter units, which were typically led by highly experienced pilots, some of them survivors of theFokker Scourge period, greatly increased the effectiveness of fighter units.[14][15]
Early on, the Allies gained a lead over the Germans by introducing machine-gun armed types such as theVickers F.B.5 Gunbus fighter and theMorane-Saulnier L.[9][10] In response, Germany bolstered its own aerial development efforts; a major achievement of the era was theStangensteuerung (push rod controller), a genuinesynchronisation gear, developed by theFokker company.[16][17] The device was fitted to the most suitable Fokker type, theFokker M.5K (military designationFokker A.III), of which A.16/15, assigned toOtto Parschau, became the prototype of theFokker Eindecker series of fighter designs.[18][19] This subsequently contributed to a period of German air superiority known as theFokker Scourge, lasting between late 1915 and early 1916. A briefer period of German aerial dominance occurred in theBloody April of April 1917; paradoxically, the Germans were disadvantaged on paper during Bloody April in terms of numerical inferiority; their effectiveness was increased by confining themselves to mainly operating over friendly territory, both reducing the possibility of pilots being captured and increasing the amount of time they could stay in the air. Moreover, German pilots could choose when and how they would engage, effectively dictating the terms of combat.[20]
The ItalianCorpo Aeronautico Militare established air superiority over the Austro-HungarianImperial and Royal Aviation Troops at theBattle of Vittorio Veneto in late October 1918. The Allies operated roughly 600 aircraft (93 Anglo-French, including four RAF squadrons) to gain complete air superiority in this final offensive.[21] The defeat suffered by Austria-Hungary at Vittorio Veneto has been attributed with causing the dissolution of the empire.[22] In turn, the surrender of Germany's primary ally was another major factor in the German Empire's decision that the conflict was no longer viable and needed to end.[23][24]
In 1921, Italianaerial warfare theoristGiulio Douhet publishedThe Command of the Air, a book positing that future wars would be decided in the skies. At the time, mainstreammilitary theory did not see air power as a war-winning tactic. Douhet's idea was that air power could be a decisive force and be used to avoid the long and costlyWar of Attrition.[25] InThe War of 19, Douhet theorized that a future war between Germany and France would be settled in a matter of days, as the winner would be the one to gain air supremacy and destroy a few enemy cities with aerial bombs. He speculated that, while the targets would be announced ahead of time and all thepopulation evacuated, but that the event would terrorizecitizens into pressuring theirgovernment into immediatesurrender. At the beginning of theSecond World War, Douhet's ideas were dismissed by some,[who?] but it became apparent that his theories on the importance of aircraft were supported by events as the war continued.[citation needed]
In 1925, theRoyal Air Force (RAF) tested the ability of air supremacy in isolation from other warfare forms during their first independent action inWaziristan. The operation, that later came to be known asPink's War afterWing CommanderRichard Pink in charge, used onlyair warfare in a combination ofair attack andair blockade over 54 days to forcemilitant tribes to surrender.[26][27] The campaign was successful in defeating the tribes with two deaths for the RAF, but contemporary critics were not entirely convinced of its use in isolation;Commander-in-Chief, India GeneralSir Claud Jacob stated that "satisfactory ... the results of these operations have been, I am of [the] opinion that a combination of land and air action would have brought about the desired result in a shorter space of time, and next time action has to be taken, I trust that it will be possible to employ the two forces in combination".[28]
American generalBilly Mitchell was another influential air power theorist of the inter-war period. After the First World War I, then-Assistant Chief of Air Service in theUnited States Army Air Service under ChiefMason Patrick, Mitchell arrangedlive fire exercises that proved that aircraft could sinkbattleships (the largest and most heavily armed class ofwarships). The first of these wasProject B in 1921, in which the captured First World War-era German battleship,SMS Ostfriesland, was sunk by a flight of bombers in 22 minutes.[29][30]
Mitchell's ideas were not popular, with his outspoken opposition to Army and Navy resistance resulting ina court-martial that precipitated his resignation,[31] but he would prove prescient; his 1924 inspection tour ofHawaii andAsia culminated in a report (published in 1925 as the bookWinged Defense) that predicted future war with Japan, including theattack on Pearl Harbor.[32] He would also go on to influence air power advocates such as Russian-AmericanAlexander P. de Seversky, whose 1942New York Times bestselling book,Victory Through Air Power, was made into a1943 Walt Disney animated film that opened with a quote from Mitchell; the film is reported to have been influentially shown byWinston Churchill toFranklin D. Roosevelt in support of long-range bombing.[33]
Seeking to influence the outcome of theSpanish Civil War, various international powers tried to influence the conflict via a heavy reliance on air power. The French government provided aircraft to the Republicans covertly, such as thePotez 540 bomber aircraft (nicknamed the "Flying Coffin" by Spanish Republican pilots),[34]Dewoitine aircraft, andLoire 46 fighter aircraft being sent to the Republican forces,[35] along with a group of trained fighter pilots and engineers to aid the Republicans.[36][37] Also, until 8 September 1936, aircraft could freely pass from France into Spain if they were bought in other countries.[38] TheSoviet Union also covertly aided Republicans,[39] between 634 and 806 aircraft were supplied alongside various other armaments.[40] Both Italy andNazi Germany supplied large numbers of aircraft to the Nationalists while also deploying their own units, such as theCondor Legion and theAviazione Legionaria, to bolster the Nationalist's forces with their own.[41] While the Soviet aircraft were in current service with their own forces, they proved inferior to those supplied by Germany by the end of the conflict.[42] The use of aircraft, particularly by the Nationalists to continually pressure Republican forces and compel multiple withdrawals during theAragon Offensive, allegedly informed both the Germans and Soviets of the value of using aircraft to support infantry.[43][44]
At the beginning of theSecond World War, the opposing sides developed different views on the importance of air power.Nazi Germany viewed it as a helpful tool to support theGerman Army, the approach being dubbed "flyingartillery". The Allies saw it, specifically long-rangestrategic bombing, as being a more important part of warfare which they believed capable of crippling Germany'sindustrial centers.
After theBattle of France, theLuftwaffe (Germany's air force) achievedair supremacy overWestern Europe. TheBattle of Britain represented a concerted attempt by Germany to establishair superiority overGreat Britain, which it never achieved. Through home-territory advantage and Germany's failure to push home its strategy of targeting Britain's air defenses, Britain was able to establish air superiority over the territory – a superiority that it never lost. It denied the German military air superiority over theEnglish Channel, making a seaborne invasion (planned asOperation Sea Lion) impossible in the face of Britain'snaval power. Strategically, the overall situation at home and abroad at the end of the battle might be consideredair parity between Britain and Germany. After the air battle, known as theBattle of Britain, the Germans switched to a strategy of night bombing raids, which Britain echoed with raids over Germany.
DuringOperation Barbarossa, theLuftwaffe initially achieved air supremacy over theSoviet Union. As the war dragged on, the United States joined the fight and the combined Allied air forces gained air superiority and eventuallysupremacy in the West. (For example, the Luftwaffe mustered 391 aircraft to oppose over 9,000 allied aircraft onD-day.) Russia did the same on theEastern Front, meaning the Luftwaffe could not effectively interfere with Allied land operations. Achievingtotal air superiority[clarify] allowed the Allies to carry out ever-greaterstrategic bombing raids on Germany's industrial and civilian centers (including theRuhr andDresden), and to prosecute the land war successfully on both the Eastern and Western fronts. Following theBig Week attacks in late February 1944, the new8th Air Force commanderJimmy Doolittle permittedP-51 Mustangs to fly far ahead of the bomber formations instead of closely escorting them starting in March 1944. This commenced in March 1944 and was part of a massive "fighter sweep" tactic to clear German skies of Luftwaffe fighters. Allied planes went after the German fighters wherever they could be found and substantially lowered bomber losses for their side for the rest of the war over Western Europe.
.jpg)
The element of air superiority has been the driving force behind the development ofaircraft carriers, which allow aircraft to operate in the absence of designated air bases. For example, the Japaneseattack on Pearl Harbor was carried out by aircraft operating from carriers thousands of miles away from the nearest Japanese air base.
Somefighter aircraft specialized in combating other fighters, while interceptors were originally designed to counterbombers. Germany's most important air superiority fighters were theMesserschmitt Bf 109 andFocke-Wulf Fw 190, while theSupermarine Spitfire andHawker Hurricane were the primary ones on the British side. Performance and range made theP-51 Mustang the outstandingescort fighter which permitted American bombers to operate over Germany during daylight hours. They shot down 5,954 aircraft, more than any other American fighter in Europe. In thePacific Theater, theA6M Zero gave Japan air superiority for much of the early part of the war, but suffered against newer naval fighters such as theF6F Hellcat andF4U Corsair which exceeded the Zero in performance and durability. The Hellcat shot down 5,168 enemy aircraft (the second highest number), while the land-basedLockheed P-38 was third, shooting down 3,785 in all theaters.[45]
| This sectionneeds expansion. You can help byadding to it.(November 2015) |
During theCold War, between 1946 and 1991, the US, UK, and NATO allies faced theSoviet Union, theWarsaw Pact, and its allies. Both sides engaged in an arms race of improving radar and fighter intercept capability versus the threat of intercontinental strategic bombers carrying nuclear weapons. Initially, high altitude, later combined with high supersonic speeds, was hoped to keep nuclear bombers out of range of fighters and later surface to air missiles, both of which were sometimes equipped with nuclear warheads. In the1960 U-2 incident an American very high altitude spy plane was shot down over the USSR with aS-75 Dvina (SA-2) long range high altitude surface to air missile largely refuting the concept of high altitude as a refuge for high-performance bomber aircraft. US training changed to low altitude flight of bombers and unpilotedcruise missiles in the hopes of avoiding ground-basedair defense radar networks by hiding in with ground clutter and terrain, thwarting attempts at air supremacy over the enemy landmass.Ballistic missiles were also introduced and were very difficult and expensive to intercept even with nuclear-armed defensive missiles.
Airborne early warning and control flying radar aircraft as well aslook down shoot down radar in fighter and interceptor aircraft allowed engaging low flying invaders again tipping the balance though this was partly ameliorated by succeeding generations ofelectronic countermeasures. Ultimately the US led the way in first applying stealth technology to small strike aircraft like theF-117 and stealthy nuclear cruise missiles carried in conventional bombers for standoff release before the air defenses got too thick. The Soviet Union invested heavily in expensive to defeatintermediate andintercontinental range nuclear missiles and less on expensive to maintain patrol bombers, though they had to spend heavily on interceptors and surface to air missiles as well as radar sites to cover the huge landmass of the Soviet Union. The US joined withCanada to organize defense of the area ofAlaska, Canada, and thecontinental United States withNorth American Aerospace Defense Command or NORAD using both interceptors, some armed with the nuclearAIR-2 Genie, and a surface to air missile component, which was at one point partly nuclearized. Development for theB-2 stealth bomber was intended for, and in anticipation of, a nuclear war and it was the first fully mature stealth aircraft to enter service. TheF-22 Advanced Tactical Fighter was a stealth fighter and interceptor aircraft designed during the Cold War as a medium altitude air superiority fighter which was intended to destroy Warsaw Pact aircraft without ever being detected or engaged; both were introduced after the fall of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War.
Air superiority in the feared Cold War era WW-III European theater would include fighters intercepting or diverting nuclear and conventionally armed strike aircraft and ground-based air defences, some of which were developed into mobile systems which could accompany and protect armored and mechanized formations. While the Cold War never went hot directly between NATO and Warsaw Pact alliances, the US was engaged in two major limited air wars aiding allies who faced Soviet-supported enemies, with both sides using weaponry designed to fight such a conflict; the Korean and Vietnam wars.
TheKorean War represented a major turning point for aerial warfare, being the first conflict in whichjet aircraft played the central role in combat. Once-formidable fighters such as the P-51 Mustang,F4U Corsair, andHawker Sea Fury[46]—allpiston-engined, propeller-driven, and designed during the Second World War—relinquished their air superiority roles to a new generation of faster,jet-powered fighters arriving in the theater. In the initial months of fighting, theP-80 Shooting Star,F9F Panther,Gloster Meteor and other jets under the UN flag dominated theKorean People's Air Force (KPAF) propeller-driven SovietYakovlev Yak-9 andLavochkin La-9s.[47][48] By early August 1950, the KPAF was reduced to only about 20 planes.[49]
However, with the Chinese intervention in late October 1950, the KPAF begun receiving theMiG-15, which was one of the world's most advanced jet fighters at that time.[47] Equipped with not only jet propulsion but also aswept wing, the MiG-15 quickly outclassed the straight-wing United Nations fighters. In response, the United States dispatched three squadrons of its own swept-wing fighter, theF-86 Sabre, which arrived in the theatre in December 1950.[50][51] The Sabre reportedly claimed kill ratios as high as 10 to 1 against the MiGs, allegedly shooting down 792 MiG-15s and 108 other aircraft in exchange for 78 Sabres that were lost to enemy fire.[52][53] Meanwhile, theGrumman F9F Panther, a straight-wing carrier-based jet, became the mainstay of the USN during the period and had a relatively good showing, possessing a 7:2 kill ratio against the more powerful MiG-15.
During theVietnam War the US side, especially over the north, had restrictive rules of engagement often requiring visual identification nullifying the advantage they would have had using beyond visual range missiles though possibly avoidingfriendly fire due toIFF systems not being ubiquitous on US strike aircraft. In the 1950s, the United States Navy tasked theF-8 Crusader, known affectionately as the "Last Gun Fighter" as their close-in air superiority fighter. This role would be taken over by theF-4 Phantom, which was designed as a missile-armed interceptor. The USAF had developed theF-100 andF-104 as air superiority fighters, though by the Vietnam War had already phased out the F-100 from all but ground attack missions. The fast, but slow turning, F-104 allegedly deterred attacks, and despite losses scored no victories in air combat. The USAF replaced it with the Phantom by 1967. Especially under the rules of engagement imposed on them, the heavy and fastCentury Series aircraft struggled when engaged in within visual range combat by smaller, more agile Soviet-madeVPAF fighters, such as theMikoyan-Gurevich MiG-17 andMiG-21, the latter of which was formidable against the F-4 and traded range for very high performance. TheCentury Series was initially designed for intercepting heavy nuclear bombers, or delivering tactical nuclear weapons, and were found to be wanting when engaged over Vietnam. This imbalance lead to the USAF ordering variants of the F-4 with an internal 20mm gun, theUSN starting theTop Gun program, and both services sometimes flying with centerline gun pods on earlier Phantoms not equipped with an internal gun. The USN's Top Gun program, combined with significantly better training for weapon handlers onboard the aircraft carrier, resulted in a large increase in the Navy's Phantom capability.
In the 1960s, the limited agility of American fighters indogfights over Vietnam led to a revival of dedicatedair superiority fighters, which led the development of the "Teen Series"F-14,F-15,F-16 andF/A-18. All of them made close-combat manoeuvrability a top priority, and were equipped with guns absent from early Phantoms.[54] The heavyF-14 andF-15A/C were assigned the primary air superiority mission, because of their longer range radars and capability to carry more missiles of longer range than lightweight fighters.
From 1948, whenIsrael reestablished independence from a protectiveLeague of Nationsmandatory regime managed by the UK, the neighbouring countries have, to varying degrees, disputed the legitimacy of aJewish state in a majority Arab region. Some neighbouring states have in the last few decades recognized and signed peace treaties; all have ceased large scale conventional warfare to overrun Israel in large part due to an increasing ability to impose Israeli air supremacy over the region's airspace when required.
TheIsraeli Air Force formed in 1948 with the formation of the modern State of Israel. Israel was involved in the1948 Arab–Israeli War immediately after the end of theBritish mandate in Palestine. The air force initially consisted of mainly donated civil aircraft, a variety of obsolete and surplus ex-World War II combat-aircraft were quickly sourced by various means to supplement this fleet. Creativity and resourcefulness were the early foundations of Israeli military success in the air, rather than technology which, at the inception of the IAF, was generally inferior to that used by Israel's adversaries. In light of the complete Arab theater air supremacy, and the bombing and shelling of existing airbases, the first Israeli military-grade fighters operated from a hastily constructed makeshift airbase around the currentHerzliya Airport, with fighters dispersed between the trees of an orange orchard.[55][56] As the war progressed, more and moreCzechoslovak, American, and British surplus WWII-era aircraft were procured, leading to a shift in the balance of power.
In 1956, Israel, France, and the United Kingdom occupied theSinai Peninsula afterEgypt closed theStraits of Tiran to Israeli ships, sparking theSuez Crisis. Israel's new French-madeDassault Mystere IV jet fighters provided air cover for the paratroop transport aircraft. The Egyptian tactic was to use their new Soviet-madeMiG-15 jets as fighter escorts, while their older jets conducted strikes against Israeli troops and vehicles.[57] In air combat, Israeli aircraft shot down between seven and nine Egyptian jets[57] with the loss of one plane,[58] but Egyptian strikes against the ground forces continued through to 1 November.[59] After several sorties were launched by French and British aircraft, PresidentGamal Abdel Nasser ordered his pilots to withdraw to bases inSouthern Egypt. The Israeli Air Force was then free to strikeEgyptian ground forces at will.[citation needed]
In 1967, the Straits of Tiran were again closed and international peacekeepers were ejected by Egypt. Israel then initiatedOperation Focus. Israel sent nearly every capable combat aircraft out against the vastly largerEgyptian Air Force, holding only four for protection. Egyptian airfields were destroyed withanti-runway penetration bombs and the aircraft were mostly destroyed on the ground;Syria andJordan also had their air forces destroyed when they entered the conflict. This is one of the preeminent examples of a smaller force seizing air supremacy where Israel had complete control of the skies above the entire conflict area.
Following theSix-Day War, from 1967 to 1970, there were small scale incursions into the Israeli-held Sinai desert as Egypt rearmed. This evolved into large-scale artillery and air incursions in 1969, with Soviet pilots and SAM crews arriving to assist in January 1970. The strategy was to engage Israeli aircraft in surprise fighter encounters near theSuez Canal where Egyptian SAMs could be used to assist fighters. Syrian, North Korean, and Cuban pilots assisting also suffered losses in this period. In August 1970, a cease-fire was agreed on.
The first few days of the 1973Yom Kippur War saw major Arab ground breakthroughs, surprising Israel who, after its lopsided 1967 victory, considered its air supremacy sufficient to blunt or dissuade any conventional attack. Despite Egypt and Syria having rebuilt their air forces since 1967, Israel continued to deny them the airspace over the battle area; however, these Arab forces were able to control losses and shoot down Israeli air support aircraft by employing mobile surface to air weaponry which travelled along with invading units. Most of Israel's air power in the first few days was directed to reinforce the badly mismatched garrison overlooking the besiegedGolan Heights which was under attack by Syria. After weakening the Arab SAM cover with airstrikes, commando raids, and armored cavalry, the Arab armored units outran their mobile SAM cover and Israeli aircraft began to take greater control of Egyptian skies, permitting Israeli landings and establishing a beachhead on the west bank of the Suez canal. When Egyptian fighter aircraft were sent into the area of the Israelibridgehead, SAM sites were offlined which allowed Israeli air power to more safely engage and destroy many Egyptian fighters though taking some losses.
The1978 South Lebanon conflict was an invasion ofLebanon up to theLitani River, carried out by theIsrael Defense Forces in 1978 in response to theCoastal Road massacre. Israel had complete air supremacy.
In the1982 Lebanon War where Israel invaded up toBeirut, Syria intervened on the side of Lebanon and thePLO forces residing there. Israeli jets shot down between 82[60] and 86 Syrian aircraft in aerial combat, without losses.[61][62] A single Israeli A-4 Skyhawk and two helicopters were shot down by anti-aircraft fire and SAM missiles.[60][61][62] This was the largest aerial combat battle of the jet age with over 150 fighters from both sides engaged. Syrian claims of aerial victories were met with skepticism even from their Soviet allies.[63]The Soviets were so shaken by the staggering losses sustained by their allies that they dispatched the deputy head of their air defense force to Syria to examine how the Israelis had been so dominant.[64]
The Israelis have upheld substantial air superiority for most of this time with Israel able to operate almost unopposed; Israel held near air supremacy against targets anywhere within range in theMiddle East andNorth Africa until today. Regarding aircraft procurement, Israel started with British and French designs, then transitioning to indigenous production and then also design before moving again to purchasing to American designs. The Arabs directly participating in these battles against Israel except for Jordan and, to some extent, Iraq have commonly used Soviet designs.[citation needed]
In theFalklands War (2 April–20 June 1982),[65][66] the British deployedHarrier jets as air superiority fighters againstArgentina's Mach-capable Dassault Mirage IIIEA fighters and subsonicDouglas A-4 Skyhawk jets.[67] Despite the Sea Harrier's numerical and performance disadvantages, the British Harrier force suffered no air-to-air losses for over twenty Argentine aircraft shot down in aerial combat.[68][69] Argentine airpower targetedRoyal Navy ships during thelandings at San Carlos Bay, numerous British vessels were lost or moderately damaged.[70][68]: 59–77 However, many British ships escaped being sunk due to the Argentine pilots releasing their bombs at very low altitude, and hence those bombfuzes did not have sufficient time to arm before impact and thus many never exploded. The pilots would have been aware of this—but released at such low altitudes due to the high concentration of BritishSAMs,Anti-Aircraft Artillery (AAA), andSea Harriers, many failed to climb to the necessary release point. The Argentine forces solved the problem by fitting improvisedretarding devices, allowing the pilots to effectively employ low-level bombing attacks on 8 June.[71][72][73][74]
TheIraqi Air Force suffered almost complete obliteration in the opening stages of thePersian Gulf War (2 August 1990 – 28 February 1991). It lost most of its aircraft, as well as command-and-control capability, to preciseCoalition strikes or when Iraqi personnel flew their aircraft to Iran.[75][76] Iraqi Anti-aircraft defenses, including shoulder-launched surface-to-air missiles, were surprisingly ineffective against coalition aircraft, suffering only 75 aircraft losses in over 100,000 sorties, of which 42 of these were the result of Iraqi action while the other 33 were reportedly lost to accidents.[77] In particular, RAF and US Navy aircraft which flew at low altitudes to avoid radar were particularly vulnerable, though this changed when the aircrews were ordered to fly above the AAA.[78]
.jpg)
During the 1980s, the United States commenced work on a new fighter capable of gaining air superiority without being detected by an opposing force, approving theAdvanced Tactical Fighter program to develop a replacement for theUnited States Air Force's (USAF) agingF-15 fleet. TheYF-23 and theYF-22 were chosen as the finalists in the competition. During 2005, theF-22 Raptor, the subsequent result of the program, became operational. USAF officials have promoted the F-22 as being a critical component of the service's tactical air power. Its combination of stealth, aerodynamic performance, and avionics systems is said to enable unprecedented air combat capabilities.[79][80]
Anthony Cordesman wrote ofNATO's theater air supremacy during its 1999 intervention in theKosovo War of 1998–1999.[81] According to several reports, including reports by theCarnegie Endowment for International Peace andBulletin of the Atomic Scientists that quote Russian sources, theRussian Federation has in recent decades formulated explicit strategies for using tactical nuclear weapons. These new strategies have in part resulted from the assumption of obtaining air supremacy and use by the US Air Force of precision munitions with little collateral damage in theKosovo conflict in what amounted to quick mass destruction of military assets once only possible with nuclear weapons or massive bombing against fellow Slavic Serbians; it also assumed that Russia and its allies do not have the strategic economic capacity of current NATO and allied nations to meet this threat with conventional weapons. In responseVladimir Putin, then secretary of theSecurity Council of Russia, developed a concept of using both tactical and strategic nuclear threats and strikes to de-escalate or cause an enemy to disengage from a conventional conflict threatening what Russia considered a strategic interest. This concept was formalized when Putin took power in Russia in the following year.[82][83][84]
Throughout theSyrian Civil War of the 2010s, Israel was reportedly able to hold a general stance of air superiority over the Syrian forces, enabling offensive operations with relative impunity.[85] However, this was challenged during 2018 by the deployment of a Russian-suppliedS-400 missile battery to the Syrian theatre.[86] During theFebruary 2018 Israel–Syria incident, despite the loss of an aircraft, Israel has demonstrated their capability to operate without effective interference within the Syrian theater.[87] On 22 May 2018,Israeli Air Force chiefAmikam Norkin said that the service had employed their F-35Is in two attacks on two battle fronts, marking the first combat operation of an F-35 by any country.[88][89]
... Ludendorff wrote:In Vittorio Veneto, Austria did not lose a battle, but lose the war and itself, dragging Germany in its fall. Without the destructive battle of Vittorio Veneto, we would have been able, in a military union with the Austro-Hungarian monarchy, to continue the desperate resistance through the whole winter, in order to obtain a less harsh peace, because the Allies were very fatigued.
NATO forces rapidly achieved air supremacy in the theater by destroying Serb interceptor aircraft in the air and on the ground and by destroying or damaging their airbases.
Authority control databases: National |
|---|
