Libya is one and its capital is Tripoli. Today we ask you to join and to take the right and wise decision. Join our revolution. Let’s build Libya away from Gaddafi. A unified, free, democratic Libya.

The mission was planned by the COI (Comando Operativo di vertice Interforze – Italian Joint Operative Command) and was conducted by personnel belonging to both the 28° Rgmt “Pavia, based in Pesaro and specialized in “operative communication”), the ItAF and the Intelligence Service. The airdrop took place from 7.000 mt (20.000 ft – the crew had to wear oxygen masks to operate at that altitude) from a position that was calculated taking into consideration many factors, among which the air temperature and humidity, the aircraft airspeed, the wind direction and intensity etc. Leaflets took up to 3 hours to touch the ground in Tripoli and surrounding areas.
The PSYOPS sortie was an Italian mission, not part of Unified Protector, even if NATO was obviously informed about the operation and supported it.

Even if Italy has conducted similar missions in Afghanistan using helicopters, this was the first time that the ItAF performed a PSYOPS mission dropping leaflets over a foreign capital since 1918 raid over Wien by Gabriele D’Annunzio (Aug. 9, 1918).

From a simple meeting of flying units sharing a Tiger (or feline) emblem, the NTM has become a multi-national mid-size exercise offering a two-week program that includes all types of air-to-air and air-to-ground and a wide variety of support missions, comprising CSAR and large COMAOs. The 2011 edition was to be the biggest ever organised; unfortunately, many units cancelled their participation because of their commitment in “Unified Protector” the NATO led air campaign in Libya.

Nevertheless the NTM lived up expectations with some interesting participants: the F-16 Block 52 of the Polish Air Force’s 6 Sqn from Poznan, equipped with AIM-120, AIM-9X, JHMCS (Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System) and Sniper pod, at their first appearance at the Tiger Meet; the Spanish Air Force EF-18s carrying the IRIS-T air-to-air missile at wingtips; the Swiss Hornets with AIM-9X coupled to JHMCS.

The ItAF took part to the NTM11 with the 21° Gruppo of the 9° Stormo based at Grazzanise, a Sqn with many Tour of Duty in Afghanistan, whose AB.212ICOs performed CSAR and Combat Recovery missions as well as Special Forces support and Non-Combatant Evacuation operations. As usual, there was also a certain number of eye-catching Special Colours or Tiger markings:  an operational nonsense, since they only increase visibility of the aircraft whose deleterious effects are however mitigated by the fact that future air-to-air scenarios are BVR (Beyond Visual Range) rather than WVR (Within Visual Range), meaning that the enemy will hardly get so close to see the special colour scheme….

Not so many things have happened on the battlefield during the last days, when media were focused on the Osama Bin Laden raid and the famous Stealth Black Hawk. For sure, the most significant event occurred on May 11, when rebels claimed to have captured the airport in the besieged western city of Misratah, Libya’s third-largest town. The city has been surrounded for weeks from Gaddafi’s forces and split roughly along an east-west road with loyalist controlling the areas south of the road, including the airport, located around 5 Km from the city centre and Tripoli Street, the avenue that has been the scene of heavy street fighting. According to some sources, rebels have not yet taken full control of the military part of the airbase, because pockets of residual fighting were reported in the area.

Credit: Reuters

The achievement is extremely important as it gives the rebels a new outpost from where a new advance towards Tripoli, that is only some 200 km away, can start. For this reason, Gaddafi’s forces have shelled the town with rockets and heavy artillery fire for weeks. Loyalists repeatedly tried to mine the port using small vessels and, on May 6, they used helicopters bearing the Red Cross emblem to drop mines in the harbour (even if this was not confirmed by NATO, read below) while, on the following day, aircraft reported to be a “crop dusters” (small aircraft used for spraying pesticides) dropped bombs on oil storage tanks in Qasr Ahmed neighborhood, in the easter part of the town. Even if it is not clear whether the aircraft involved were actually surviving LARAF (Libyan Arab Republic Air Force) SF-260s from Misratah airport or other type of aircraft, noteworthy, these violations of the No-Fly Zone raise questions about the effectiveness of the NATO combat air patrols in one of the most important towns in Libya. In fact, even if small planes and helos, flying at extremely low level in the ground clutter can be difficult to detect even for an E-3 AWACS orbiting nearby, if fighters are CAPping not far from the airport they will still be able to detect visually detect such “slow movers” visually, at least during daylight. At night it is probably more difficult but, since many interceptors involved in DCA (Defensive Counter Air) role fly with Litening targeting pods as explained many times in previous Debriefs, I assume they use the pod also to look for possible aerial targets of opportunity in the vicinity of airports and urban areas even small planes should be clearly visible by means of the high-resolution, FLIR (Forward-Looking Infrared) sensor of the pod.

Furthermore, on May 5, NATO destroyed two or three helicopters carried by big trucks heading towards Tiji, a small town near Libya’s border with Tunisia. It is not clear if the helos were being moved to be hidden from NATO warplanes or were being relocated for use against rebels in the area of Zintan, however this activity suggests that Gaddafi has some surviving aircraft and he’s willing to use them. Therefore, there are some concerns that he could use them to drop dirty bombs.

How’s NATO performing?

This question is open to debate. In the last days criticism was caused by reports of migrants from Libya dying at sea: Gaddafi is forcing people out of the country by boat using them as a sort of retaliatory attack against European nations supporting Unified Protector, that are now facing a humanitarian crisis. NATO was blamed for not doing enough to prevent several boats filled with migrants from sinking causing hundred deads.

The answer came from NATO Deputy Spokesperson, Carmen Romero on May 10 Press Briefing:

We have also been asked what action NATO is taking to protect such migrant ships at sea. Let me be clear: NATO’s mission is to prevent attacks on civilians and civilian populated areas in Libya. That is what the United Nations Security Council mandated.

But while they are carrying out that mandate, ships under NATO command will always respond to calls from ships in distress. This is their duty under the law of the sea, and to suggest that our ships’ captains would do otherwise is unfair and disrespectful.

For example, on the 26th of March NATO ships responded to information that two migrant ships, with over 500 people on board were in difficulty, who were then provided direct assistance by the Italian authorities. That included a NATO ship using its helicopter to airlift two women and a newborn child to medical help.

Dealing with the air campain, ItAF Brigadier General Claudio Gabellini (Chief Operations Officer, Operation Unified Protector) explained that, in the last week alone, NATO has engaged multiple rocket-launcher systems, command-and-control facilities, anti-aircraft weapons, military bunkers and ammo facilities, tanks and armoured fighting vehicles, undelining once again that the coalition is diminishing Gaddafi’s capacity to issue orders, to field troops and to fly his planes.

For what concerns Misratah port he said:

At sea we have cleared sea mines laid by pro-Gaddafi forces in the approaches to the port of Misrata on April the 29th. Two of the mines were destroyed by NATO mine countermeasures vessels and the third, which has not been found, is no longer considered a serious threat.

We’ve also swept the approaches of Misrata harbour and consider that there is no immediate mine threat for the timing being. Our maritime forces are prepared to respond to any similar threat.

We fully recognize how important the port is to the citizens of Misrata. While the decision to open and close the port rests clearly with Misrata port control, we note that since NATO vessels destroyed the mines and cleared the areas more than 15 vessels have entered the port.

Answering to a question about the use of military helicopters with Red Cross insigna, he explained that:

we have lots of reports talking about helicopters wearing the red cross on them, but we have no, absolutely we have no evidence at all. What I can say it’s been five days since we last had the last report talking about helicopters overflying Libya

Many questions of the Q&A part of the Press Briefing focused on the possibility that NATO is targeting individuals (Gaddafi in particular, who appeared again in TV for the first time in two weeks on May 11 denying rumours/speculations according to which he was killed by an allied raid). Here’s how Brig. Gen. Gabellini answered:

All NATO targets are military targets. Which means that the targets we’ve been hitting, and it happened also last night in Tripoli, are command-and-control bunkers. And again, just to make clear the stuff that NATO is not targeting individuals. It’s not in our mandate. Our mandate is to protect civilian population from attacks or from the threat of attacks by Qadhafi regime forces

[...]

We have no evidence about what Mr. Gaddafi’s doing right now. And I tell you the truth, we’re not really interested in what he is doing. Our mandate is to protect civilians from the attacks and from the threat of attacks so we’re not looking after individuals.

[...]

No individuals are a target for NATO. We only look after command-and-control centre because we want the targets we’re after is to stop Mr. Gaddafi to give orders to his troops to keep slaughtering the civilians and to prevent humanitarian aid to enter the country.

Let’s have a look at Unified Protector’s figures. Since the beginning of the NATO operation (31 March 2011, 08.00GMT) a total of 6232 sorties, including 2460 strike sorties have been conducted.
During the last 24 hours, 141 sorties were flown comprising 46 strike sorties. The key targets were: 4 Ammunition Storages, 4 Command & Control Facilities, 2 SAM Launchers, in the vicinity of Tripoli; 4 SAM Launchers, in the vicinity of Surman; 1 SAM Launcher, in the vicinity of Misratah. I would be curious to know which SAM sites NATO is still targeting (are there remaining mobile launchers?) and which ammunition depots, since there are so many in Libya (according to various sources around 3 and 4.000) that it will take months, if not year, to hit them all….

Here’s the usual sorties breakdown

Graphs below, clearly show that the number of air strikes is still slightly decreasing.

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) Some updates from the involved air forces. The last news release by the Italian MoD reports 53 missions flown by the Italian contingent (should be 106 sorties at least). No further words on weapons, targets etc. Aircraft involved in the air strikes are Tornado IDSs and ECRs of the ItAF and AV-8Bs of the Italian Navy from Garibaldi aircraft carrier. Pictures and videos published on the ItAF website show the Tornado IDSs loaded with 3 GBU-32s or 1 or 2 LGBs (GBU-24 or 12). Noteworthy, the enforcement of the NFZ is not only performed with F-2000 Typhoons but once again also by F-16ADFs of the 18° Gruppo.12 aircraft and 4 ships were trasferred under NATO command by Italy.

Dealing with the RDAF, the latest update reports 176 missions flown since Odyssey Dawn began and 376 PGMs dropped.

The Canadian contingent at 23.59 hr UTC on May 11 had flown 248 sorties with the CF-188s; 95 with the CC-150 POLARIS and 39 with the CP-140 AURORA.

RNoAF on May 7, had flown 275 missions with 247 dropped bombs, however its F-16s could return home by the end of June according to Government sources. It is still not clear though whether the aircraft will continue contributing to Unified Protector or will be reduced in numbers or simply replaced by other assets (thanks to Aksel Magdahl for keeping me updated with Norwegian news).

2) Karl-Johan Norén sent me some interesting news about the Swedish Air Force Libyan ops. First of all, on the SweAF website an interesting picture of a crakled canopy of a Gripen was published (see below). Two aircraft were returning from a mission over Libya when the front window of the aircraft was damaged. Even thought investigation is in progress sandstorm or electric discharge may have caused it.

Furthermore, a report from Swedish channel TV4 was aired on May 5. It’s an interview given by flygvapeninspektör (Air Force Inspector, in effect commander of the Swedish AF) Anders Silwer covering the following topics (Karl-Johan provided the following abstract):

• The Swedish mission is going well. Most common mission is tactical reconnaissance to within 100-200 kilometers from the Libyan coast. He estimates the Swedish AF covers about 1/3 to 1/2 of the tactical
  reconnaissance resources within Unified Protector.
• They do four “flygplansföretag” (sorties) daily, and plans to increase it to six.
• They photograph AA positions, command centrals, etc. They have not been attacked, as far as they can tell. They have been locked by radar a few times. No Swedish aircraft has fired a shot in anger.
• Mentions that they could do more tactically for the situation on the ground, but says that this is a political question, not a military one.

3) One of the most interesting thing of the last weeks is that UAE AF has joined the bombing campaign in Libya along with the other partners involved in the air strikes (US with drones and SEAD assets, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, Italy, UK, France and Canada) even if the news has not been made public yet. The following pictures were taken on May 1, 2011, at 14.06Z by Antonio Di Franco, from his home, located a few kilometres to the south east of Sigonella airbase. The images show two UAE Air Force Mirage 2000s carrying a Damocles targeting pod and an MBDA PGM-500 500lbs guided bomb (“Hakim”) along with two MICA air-to-air missiles.

Below, two more pictures taken on May 7 once again by Antonio Di Franco.

4) On Apr. 30, an attack performed in a bunker in Tripoli killed Gaddafi’s youngest son, Saif al-Arab Gaddafi, with three minor grandchildren. Even if the Guardian immediately suggested that the raid was conducted by the Royal Danish Air Force, there were no proofs (and maybe there are still none) that Denmark was involved in the raid. However, basing on images of an unexploded warhead in the ruins of Gadhafi’s house, it was possible to try to determine which country performed the strike. In fact the bomb shown in the Guardian and also on Al Jazeera English footage is a part of the JDAM: in particular, it is a BLU-109 penetrator warhead. Warhead + GPS guidance kit is known as GBU-31(V)3/B in USAF (RDAF call the bomb using BLU-109 GBU-31B while the one with Mk-84 warhead is known as GBU-31A). Many air forces use the GBU-31 with BLU-109 however, Andreas Lindqvist, a journalist of the Politiken newspaper, with my advices,  investigated the facts, contacted the various countries involved in the air strike and one by one virtually eliminated all the other seven countries that drop bombs on Libya coming to the conclusion that, as suggested by the Guardian, the compound was probably hit by a Danish strike.

Images credit: Reuters / AJE

Eight countries were involved in air strikes within Unified Protector at the time of the raid: Denmark, Norway, Italy, Belgium, France, Canada, UK and the US. UAE could be added to the list but there’s no official confirmation and aircraft don’t carry that type of bomb.

• Denmark: did not want to comment.
• Norway: No. They deny that they were involved in the specific raid. Interestingly, RNoAF used BLU-109/GBU-31 on Apr. 25 attack on the Gaddafi compound.
• Italy: Unknown, but most probably not involved since Tornado are flying with GBU-32s and LGBs. Not sure GBU-31 with BLU-109 were ever tested on Tornados.
• Belgium: No. They didn’t fly that day.
• France: No. They deny using that type of bombs in Libya
• Canada: No. They use none of the technologies.
• UK: No. They have the Paveway, but not the GBU-31.
• US: Unknown, but probably no. They have the technology and experience but they were officially not flying as they only fly support missions. They also fly the presdator drones, but the current generation cannot carry that bombs.

Basing on the above elements, Andreas asked me how likely I think it was Denmark to perform the strike. As he mentioned in the article published on May 12 on the Politiken website, basing on basing on the information available, on the replies he received and above all considering that RDAF is doing a great job in Libya flying lots of missions and
dropping many bombs; that it didn’t deny it but just didn’t comment it and finally, that diplomatic sources reported by the Guardian suggested the strike was one of the many performed by RDAF, I think it is extremely likely. Obviously denying or not something doesn’t prove or not an involvement. But I agree with Andreas Linqvist when he says that such organisations do not lie directly. “Its too dangerous in the long run”.

Italy has announced that it will join NATO forces in bombing Libya. It’s done that before:

“Libya 1911: How an Italian pilot began the air war era,” Alan Johnston, BBC News

Image (“da Vinci Anticipates Aviation”) by Mike Licht. Download a copy here. Creative Commons license; credit Mike Licht, NotionsCapital.com

Comments are welcome if they are on-topic, substantive, concise, and not boring or obscene. Comments may be edited for clarity and length.

Add to: Facebook | Digg | Del.icio.us | Stumbleupon | Reddit | Blinklist | Twitter | Technorati | Yahoo Buzz | Newsvine

Even if analysts have defined it as a “stalemale”, the situation on the ground in Libya is far from being completely static as Gaddafi troops have stretched westward the front line and spilled over the Tunisian border: on Apr. 29, loyalist forces fought a gun battle at Dehiba, a frontier town, with Tunisian troops. Government forces shelled the town damaging some buildings and in the attempt to protect both the Tunisians and Libyan refugees in the area, the Tunisian Army opened fire. As a result, Tunisian security forces have disarmed the Libyan soldiers and driven them back across the border handing the confiscated armament and ammo over to the Libyan rebels.

Misratah, is still under siege in spite of an increasing number of NATO air strikes concentrating on the third largest Libyan city. For instance the first Italian air strikes in Libya after Italy decided to join the bombing campaign were performed in the Misratah area even if it is not clear if the Tornado IDSs dropped their bombs on ground targets or returned to Trapani with their weapons still attached to their “underfuselage stations”.

In my last Debrief I wrote:

There have been also some unconfirmed reports of Scud attacks on Misratah on Twitter, even if I didn’t find any (photographic) evidence yet. I’ve been told that Al Jazeera reported of a 5-meter wide crater however, if that is the diameter of the hole, it is not as significant as a Scud one would be. Even if I’m not an expert in missiles, I know Scuds have a very high terminal speed (1,4 km per second) and the typical damage on the ground is a crater 1.5 – 4 meters deep, 12 mt wide, according to “Scud Ballistic Missile and Launch Systems 1955-2005″ from Steven J. Zaloga (Osprey Publishing). Therefore, if the crater is 5 meter deep, then it was most probably a Scud, otherwise, the hole was caused by another piece of heavy artillery. For some more info about Scud hunt read the Day 24 debrief.

Both on this blog and on Twitter, many suggested the crater was caused by a 9K52 Luna-M (NATO designation FROG-7 – Free Rocket Over Ground) missile. Although I haven’t seen the crater’s picture yet, basing on the average hole created by a SCUD missile, that is heavier, carries a more powerful warhead and travels at slightly higher speed (1.4 Km/s vs 1.2Km/s),  a FROG-7 crater perhaps is compatible with the one described by AJ. Anyway, dealing with the ordnance used by the pro-Gaddafi’s forces against civilian areas of Misratah and Zintan, along with the Spanish-made cluster bombs I’ve already talked about, loyalist fired Russian-made Grad rockets. Furthermore, to block humanitarian access to the city, Gaddafi’s forces have tried to lay mines in Misratah harbour. The sea-mines were being laid 2 to 3 km offshore and in the approaches to the harbour by deliberately sinking the inflatable boats on which they were being carried. Three mines have been found and are being disposed of in situ. NATO warned the Misrata port authorities who temporarily closed the facility resulting in two humanitarian ship movements being cancelled. According to the French MoD the Frigate Courbet took part in the operation and one AS565 Panther, operating out of the naval unit was seen overflying the port as the following video shows (thanks to @SteveMcCluskey).

As I’ve already written in the past debriefs, many PSYOPS messages broadcasted by the EC-130J Commando Solo “Steel 74″ in the last few weeks were addressed to the sailors of the Libyan ships operating around the Misratah port and maybe also those recorded by radio hams in the last days were sent to those involved in the mining attempt.

Furthermore, Gaddafi’s forces are being encouraged by their commanders to engage in rape to terrorize the population in those areas supporting the rebels. This is what the Viagra impotency drug being issued to the troops would show, according to the US envoy to the United Nations.

While continuing to hit targets around Misratah, Tripoli and Sirte, recent air strikes have reached Brega, Zintan and the desert town of Kufra, where loyalist clashed with rebels on Apr. 28; generally speaking, NATO officials have affirmed the alliance is planning to concentrate air strike on large urban areas which have not recently been top priority targets so far. Noteworthy, a significant amout of “key engagements and targets” (as NATO calls them) were ammunition depots across Libya: as there are around 4.000 such installations in the country, I wonder if NATO has a strategy about them (for example, to destroy them one by one to claim a key target for the next months….). Anyway, according to the British Brigadier Rob Weighill, NATO’s director of operations in Libya, the alliance has struck some 600 targets, including 220 government tanks, 70 surface-to-air systems and 200 ammunition facilities. In the meanwhile, the number of strike sorties is, on average, stable (or slightly decreasing) as the sorties breakdown and the updated graphs below show.

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) On Apr. 28, the Italian Air Force was involved for the first time in an air strike in Libya. Unlike other contingents, that are providing much details about the number of flown sorties, the number of PGMs dropped and the type of target hit, after releasing a daily pretty boring bulletin detailing only the number of missions flown by the Italian Tornados, Typhoons and AV-8B+ Harriers (the assets under NATO command), as Italy has joined the bombing campaign, the MoD has “switched” to a weekly summary, that gives only an idea of the overall count of sorties: 38. There’s no detail on how they were shared among the three aircraft types, nor news about the eventual use of bombs. This is once again caused by the usual controversial Italian approach to the war: the country has to contribute to a coalition, it does effectively with some of its most important and advanced assets, but it’s better not advertising this too much, as if it is a shame to be actively involved in a military operation under UN flag. Just think to what happened in 1999, when the ItAF Tornado ECRs from the 155° Gruppo were involved in SEAD strikes since the very first day of Allied Force although nobody knew that and the news that even Italian planes were conducting bombing missions in Serbia and Kosovo was given “gradually”.

Initially the Italian colonial past (as I’ve already explained in one of the previous debriefs, the first bombing mission ever flown in the history of aviation dates back to 1911 and was carried out by the Italian Air Force in Libya) has raised doubts about the opportunity to participate in the air strikes but even after authorizing the Italian planes to drop bombs on targets, internal struggles among the Government forces are putting the continuity of the Berlusconi’s coalition at risk.  Another thing which tells us much about the controversial, ambiguous and somehow hypocritical Italian approach to the war: ItAF planes are flying air strikes in Libya but AMXs deployed in Afghanistan from a few years are not allowed to fly with bombs to support the thousands Italian military on the ground (that have to rely on US and other allied planes for air cover). For sure a more active role in Unified Protector is going to cost Italian taxpayers a lot: a single Eurofighter Typhoon flying hour costs 63K Euro while a Tornado (or AMX) one costs around 30K Euro. From Mar. 19 to Apr. 24, the Italian contingent flew 3.500 flying hours, that have cost about 45 Milion Euro. Now that the use of ordnance was authorized, the cost of the war is going to raise, because weapons cost a lot: for instance, according to the Corriere della Sera newspaper a Storm Shadow cost little less than 200K Euro, an AGM-88 HARM cost 136K Euro while a PGM, on average, cost 40K Euro. If Italian planes drop as many bombs as the most active contingents are doing from more than one month, the Italian Air Force is going to use its entire annual budget in a few months.

Back to the operative details, unfortunately besides the fact that the first air strikes were performed by Tornado IDS in the area of Misratah, we don’t know anything about the eventual target stuck, the armament used etc. What we know is that once again it was a Tornado (in this case in the IDS variant of the 6° Stormo, after the ECR of the 155° Gruppo flew the first Odyssey Dawn sorties accompained by 156° Gruppo’s buddy tankers, later involved in recce missions) to drop the Italian bombs in war as happened during the Gulf War in 1991 and in 1999, during Allied Force (in that case they were ECRs). Some may have forgotten that in the mid-’90s the IDS was also the first type of aircraft the 155° Gruppo flew with the AGM-88 HARM before the Sqn received the Tornado ECR. For those interested in some exclusive pictures dating back to that period (’95-’96) a suggest visiting the following link with images provided by “Gator46″, a former member of the “Panthers”: Tornado IDS in action.

2) On Apr. 26 the UAE AF contingent began repositioning with 6 Mirage 2000s leaving Decimomannu to Sigonella, their new forward operating base. It seems that operating from Sigonella the UAE fighters will reduce the transit time to the loitering areas saving some fuel (and money). On Apr. 27, the Mirages were followed by the remaining 6 F-16s.

Unfortunately, on landing at Sigonella one of them overran the runway on landing forcing the pilot to (successfully) eject from the plane. Following the mishap, Sigonella’s main runway was closed. However some aircraft were cleared to operate from the secondary runway: since the latter is not equipped a Barrier Arrester Kit (BAK-12), among the tacair planes operating from Sigonella, only Swedish Air Force Gripens could use the reserve strip, while the F-16s, which require the arresting system (that can be engaged with the on-board tailhook), had to wait until the recovery operations of the damaged UAE F-16 were completed and the main runway re-opened. In order to be able to continue flying daily missions over Libya, the RDAF contingent (that has conducted 138 missions and dropped 307 bombs since the beginning of the air campaign) moved 4 F-16s to Trapani.

Photo: Kurt Hansen from RDAF website

For what concerns the Swedish Air Force (that is providing weekly updates as most air forces are doing lately), Karl-Johan Norén sent me an overall count of 64 missions with a little more than one half flown by the TP-84 tanker. There was a rumour that with the UAE AF moving to Sigonella the SweAF would move to Decimomannu. For the moment the JAS-39 Gripens are still operating from Sicily while the Sardinian airbase, with some more space available for eventual deployments, is still hosting the RNlAF and the Spanish Air Force detachments.

Dealing with the Canadian Air Force, total sorties as of 23.59 hr UTC, Apr. 27: CF-188 Hornets have flown 178 sorties; CC-150 Polaris 68 and CP-140 Aurora 26 sorties (thanks to Peter Dee @3PDee)

Noteworthy, three of the above mentioned aircraft types (F-16, Gripen and Hornet, although in the Super Hornet variant) were excluded by the Indian MMRCA competition leaving other two fighters currently involved in Unified Protector, the Rafale and the Typhoon, shortlisted in the “mother of all tenders”. I bet we will hear some more news about the combat performance of the two European multi-role fighters in the days to come, even if I hope this would not lead to some weird kills (like those explained in the Pt. 2 of Day 36 – 37 – 39 Debrief).

3) Even Trapani main runway had to be closed for 90 minutes on Apr. 28, following a failure experienced by an Italian Air Force F-16 taking off for a mission (most probably a training mission, as the F-16s are currently not officially taking part in Unified Protector).  Departing as number 2 in a two-ship formation, the pilot of an F-16ADF came out of the AB immediately after rotation (I think intentionally, for some kind of engine failure), landed the aircraft and tried to stop it before the end of the runway (not easy with an aircraft loaded with fuel and already fast enough to take off).  The below footage recorded by the RAI (Italian State TV) shows the event very well from 00.47s.

Below a few screenshots (click to enlarge):

4) I’ve often explained how coordination of air strikes between NATO and rebels is important but I’ve always talked from the alliance’s perspective. The article “With NATO Silent, Libyan Rebels Rely on Civilian Radar to Track Air Strikes” written by Greg Campbell and published on Apr. 27 gives the insurgents point of view about the lack of communication with NATO:

BENGHAZI, Libya — Every time a NATO jet comes within 240 miles of the Libyan rebel stronghold of Benghazi, a group of men in a large smoke-filled room on the edge of the city gather around a screen to watch it happen in real time. They just don’t know what they’re actually seeing until it’s reported later in the media.

Benghazi’s civil airport, though closed for business, is still operating its aviation radar, picking up everything above 1,000 feet that comes into its range. But because of a United Nations-imposed no-fly zone over Libya, all of the traffic it detects is military. With no commercial airliners taking off or landing at the Benghazi airport, the air traffic controllers report to work only to watch their country’s civil war rendered in blocky, flickering pixels, as if it were a video game from the early 1980s.

“During the last two weeks, we’ve seen a lot of aircraft, but not striking,” said one controller who, like everyone else in the tower, refused to be identified because my visit in mid-April was not authorized by the transitional government. They were afraid of losing their jobs. “Now [the rate of airstrikes] is getting better. We just sit here and watch.”

Of course, the men are just guessing as to whether an aircraft on the screen may be attacking or simply reconnoitering the positions of troops loyal to Muammar Qaddafi and the rebel forces arrayed against them. NATO doesn’t communicate with the control tower, though it could help the rebels coordinate attacks on Qaddafi’s forces, and the radar displays no terrain features or live satellite view.

Instead, the monitor is filled with white diamonds silently moving across a black background. The planes fly across colored lines indicating Libya’s coast and purple four-letter abbreviations of cities. Numbers indicating speed and altitude accompany the diamonds on their flight paths.

Typical aviation codes that tell controllers the type and origin of airplanes in Libya’s airspace have been replaced with numbers unique to NATO. The men, civilian air traffic controllers unfamiliar with the military jets, can’t tell what types of planes they’re watching.

But they can guess when they might be attacking. If a plane’s airspeed suddenly slows and its altitude plunges, it’s probably striking something.

“Whenever an aircraft is going down to the lower level, we presume the aircraft is going to strike,” said the air traffic control supervisor as he puffed on a cigarette. At another terminal, three men with Kalashnikovs, the facility’s security guards, watched the screen with fascination.

Another clue that a strike may be underway is when a plane turns off its transponder, which broadcasts aviation information to the control tower. In that instance, the diamonds turn to circles, with no information about their speed or altitude.

“We presume that that has indicated the aircraft has gone down to strike,” the supervisor said.

Around noon that Monday, most of the NATO traffic was over the Mediterranean, cruising at altitudes above 30,000 feet. But there were also aircraft flying lower around the besieged rebel enclave of Misurata, the government stronghold of Surte, and along the eastern front between Ajdabiya and Brega, where airstrikes took out a column of government vehicles the day before. The airstrike — and others throughout the mid-April weekend — aided rebels in regaining control of Ajdabiya, the critical crossroads city on the rebel frontier, which they still hold.

Like much else related to the two-month old rebellion, members of the opposition government aren’t sure how to capitalize on the real-time intelligence gleaned from the civil radar. Air traffic controllers say their former military counterparts — with whom they worked side by side in peacetime, as the airport also handles military air traffic — sometimes use cell phones to call rebel commanders in the field to tell them when it seems an airstrike might be underway. On most days, a high-ranking member of the Transitional National Government also spends the day observing the radar.

But any link between NATO and the rebels ends there. One controller said NATO has never called or contacted the tower — not to coordinate with rebel field units or to tell them to switch off the radar, and not to at least control access to it by outsiders, to prevent sensitive information about NATO aircraft being leaked to government forces.

In fact, the latter sensibility seemed to be reached in unison by the controllers during my visit. Increasingly uncomfortable answering detailed questions posed by a stranger, I was finally asked to provide identification and eventually, politely, to leave.

The Easter weekend was characterized by some interesting updates about Unified Protector operation in Libya. First of all, Gaddafi’s forces withdrew from Misratah, even if insurgents’ celebrations turned out to be premature. In fact, despite they have inflicted significant losses on loyalist forces, “victory” in the disputed third largest Libyan town is far from being achieved, as the violent attack from pro-Gaddafi forces following the withdrawal shows. There have been also some unconfirmed reports of Scud attacks on Misratah on Twitter, even if I didn’t find any (photographic) evidence yet. I’ve been told that Al Jazeera reported of a 5-meter wide crater however, if that is the diameter of the hole, it is not as significant as a Scud one would be. Even if I’m not an expert in missiles, I know Scuds have a very high terminal speed (1,4 km per second) and the typical damage on the ground is a crater 1.5 – 4 meters deep, 12 mt wide, according to “Scud Ballistic Missile and Launch Systems 1955-2005″ from Steven J. Zaloga (Osprey Publishing). Therefore, if the crater is 5 meter deep, then it was most probably a Scud, otherwise, the hole was caused by another piece of heavy artillery. For some more info about Scud hunt read the Day 24 debrief.

Source: Reuters

Other important news were the first Predator strikes in Libya. The very first one was conducted on Apr. 23, at approx. 11.00GMT, when a MQ-1 hit a Multiple Rocket Launcher (MRL) in the vicinity of Misratah. On the same day, at 20.40 GMT, another Predator UAS (Unmanned Aerial Surveillance) destroyed an SA-8 SAM. As the NATO press release underlined: “the operators of the Predator were able to detect a number of civilians playing football near the missile and firing was delayed until the people had dispersed”. Therefore:

“This Predator strike is a perfect example of the complex and fluid situation that NATO air forces are facing every day as part of Operation Unified Protector. NATO will continue to do everything in its power to prevent harm to the civilian population,” said Rear Admiral Russ Harding, Deputy Commander of Operation Unified Protector. “Predator drones enhance NATO’s ability to strike with care and precision.”

“These strikes will continue and we ask civilians in the affected regions to distance themselves from Qadhafi regime forces, installations and equipment whenever possible so we can strike with greater success and with the minimum risk to civilians,” said Rear Admiral Harding.

These Predator strikes teach us that UAV attacks count more than “conventional” ones, or at least seem to give the public opinion the idea that they are more “surgical”. For sure, although their involvement was much advertised, becoming a sort of marketing tool in the  Predators have some advantages: they fly at lower speed, (sometimes) they can descend to lower level than manned planes and, above all, they have such an endurance that they can wait the right moment to fire their AGM-114 missiles, because they can stay airborne for up to 20-24 hours. As I had the opportunity to explain to the Corriere della Sera’ special correspondent from Washington Guido Olimpio, they save some 4 – 5 conventional sorties and even after declaring “Winchester” (the typical codeword that is used to inform the control agency that the aircraft as no ordnance remaining) it can direct other air strikes or perform ISR duties.

Then, the news of the first strikes provide the confirmation that there are two CAPs: one near Misratah, the other one near Tripoli.

Another interesting news arrived in the evening of Apr. 25, when Italy’s PM Silvio Berlusconi announced that Italy would the bombing campaign in Libya in the following 72 hours. Italian planes, initially performing SEAD strikes (still unclear whether they had the clearance to fire if they detected a radar site or not), reconnaissance and Defensive Counter Air missions, will be involved in targeted actions against specific military objectives in Libya within the strict confines of NATO’s mandate and of UNSCR. The decision to change the role, initially limited for many reasons (Italian colonial history in Libya, internal political struggles, strong national interests in the region, etc.), came after growing pressures from NATO partners and US in particular. The aircraft involved in the new phase of the Italian mission, were not disclosed, despite many media reported Tornado IDS, AMX and AV-8B+ Harrier will perform strike sorties over Libya. The Minister of Defense Ignazio La Russa, in an interview given to La Repubblica referred only to the Tornado IDS. The attack aircraft belonging to the 6° Stormo based in Ghedi are already deployed to Trapani (as I personally witnessed on Apr. 12) and were involved in reconnaissance missions over possible targets from weeks. They will simply carry the CLDP targeting pod instead of the Reccelite, and some PGMs to strike targets “outside towns, in order to avoid collateral damages”. I don’t know if the Aeronautica Militare, as the RAF, will use the MBDA Storm Shadow stand-off missile, but I can’t rule this possibility out. The most recent weapons introduced on the Tornado fleet along with the Storm Shadow are the GBU-32 JDAMs and the EGBU-24 Paveway III even if the Italians will probably carry the GBU-12s or 16s (respectively 500 and 1.000 lbs).

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) Latest NATO update:
Since the beginning of the NATO operation (31 March 2011, 08.00GMT) a total of 3.858 sorties and 1.606
strike sorties have been conducted.
Sorties breakdown in the last few days:

Apr. 23: 144 sorties – 56 strikes
Apr. 24: 143 sorties – 62 strikes
Apr. 25: 133 sorties – 56 strikes

The above figures show the optempo has not changed in the last few days. Let’s see what happens with another partner (Italy) joining the bombing campaign.

2) On Mar. 26, as reported in the Day 8 debrief, French aircraft carried out several strikes around Misratah and according to the French MoD, pending a more accurate battle damage result (BDA), I wrote that initial observations:

“would indicate the destruction on the ground at Misratah of at least five Soko G-2 Galeb combat planes and at least two combat helicopters MI-35 who were about to conduct operations in the region. Needless to say, in spite of the various news reports claiming “7 aircraft shot down” or “Gaddafi’s war planes downed”, these can’t be considered air-to-air victories; what is somehow surprising is that the aircraft were “about to conduct operations in the region” considering the number of coalition aircraft enforcing the No-Fly Zone and the immediate consequences of any attempt to use them to attack rebel forces or simply to disperse them to other bases. I’m curious to know where if they were parked, as usual, next one another in the large apron located next to the RWY15 threshold: in this case, an LGB could destroy or at least damage more than one aircraft at a time.

Anyway, recent disclosed satellite imagery shows not only FAF did not shot down any aircraft, but those destroyed on the ground were far from being prepared for a sortie in the region as the French MoD press update explained:

L’opération Harmattan a été marquée lors de ces dernières 24 heures par la poursuite des missions aériennes dans le cadre de la résolution 1973. Au cours de ces missions, les avions français ont réalisé plusieurs frappes dans les régions de Zintan et Misrata. Dans l’attente d’une évaluation plus précise des résultats, les premières observations permettent de constater la destruction au sol à Misrata d’au moins cinq avions de combat Galeb et d’au moins deux hélicoptères de combat MI-35 qui se préparaient à mener des opérations dans la région.

The images, rendered available by the AAAS website at the following link clearly show 5 Mig-23s (originally captured by the rebels on Feb. 24 and then sabotaged, with the removal of their nose before the regime counterattack, few days later according to Tom Cooper) and 2 Mi-35s before and after being struck by the French Air Force. So, they are neither Su-22 as the AAAS reports (they were probably deceived by the missing noses) nor aircraft about to take off……Better intelligence would prevent allies from wasting LGBs.

At this respect, Kurt Schneckenburger pointed me to an interesting Defense News article about the presumed NATO bomb shortages. In the article, some more information about French stocks are provided:

The French government last year ordered Paveway II and Enhanced Paveway II kits to adapt GBU 12 and 49 “dumb bombs” into guided weapons, an industry source said. Deliveries of the Raytheon-built kits were made before the Libya campaign started.

The Mirage 2000D, Super Etendard and Rafale are certified for the Paveway II, while the Rafale has not yet been certified for the improved version.

In February 2010, France ordered 680 armement air-sol modulaire (AASM) guided bombs from Sagem, following an initial order of 750. The AASM kit comes in three versions: GPS/INS, GPS/INS and infrared, and GPS/INS and laser.

In 2009, the government cut the total purchase of AASMs to 2,348 from a planned 3,000 units including 1,200 with laser guidance, according to a 2010 French parliamentary report cited by newsweekly Le Point. At a total budget of 846 million euros ($1.2 billion), that implied an average unit price of 350,000 euros for the AASM, the parliamentary report said.

French warplanes have fired about 10 MBDA Scalp EG air-launched cruise missiles against Libyan ground targets, Burkhard said.

3) Here’s a weekly update on the French contribution to Unified Protector. Since Apr. 14 the French military continues to provide an average of almost four sorties (only? most probably, these should be “missions”) per day (representing about 120 flight hours), half of which are strike missions. These figures still represent about 20% of all NATO sorties and 25% of ground attacks.

Between April 14, 2011 6:00 ET April 21, 2011 0600, France has made:

• 135 air strike sorties ( Rafale Air, Mirage 2000-D, Mirage F1 CR / Rafale Marine and Super-Etendard Marine)
• 52 reconnaissance sorties ( Rafale Air, Mirage F1 CR and Rafale Marine / Reco NG)
• 26 DCA sorties (Mirage 2000-5 from Souda Bay in cooperation with Qatar
• 18 airspace control and management sorties (E3F and E2C)
• 44 AAR sorties (C135 and Rafale Marine / Super Etendard Marine)

Furthermore, since Apr. 14, the strike of the French aircraft have hit the following targets:

• a dozen military vehicles and two armored vehicles carrying ammunition and shells in the areas of Misratah, and of Ajdabiya;
• three missile sites in areas of Tripoli and Misrata;
• a multiple rocket launcher near Ajdabiya;
• ammunition depots and storage areas in the Sirte and Tripoli;
• communication and command installations in theareas of Tripoli, Sirte and Ras Lanuf.

Source: French MoD

Guido Olimpio pointed me to the following interesting French Air Force footage. It shows what seems to be an SA-8 hit just after launching some SAMs against NATO aircraft. At the beginning of the video there’s also some footage of a Mirage F1 departing from Malta: interestingly, once again, on Apr. 23, two French Mirage F1s were compelled to perform an emergency landing in Malta before being refuelled and proceed to their destination (Solenzara, Corsica).

4) Loosely related to the Libyan war: on Apr. 24 a Kazakh named Valeriy Tolmashev tried to hijack Alitalia flight AZ329 from Paris to Rome and to divert it to Tripoli by threatening a female flight attendant. The episode occurred at around 19.30 GMT as Tolmashev approached the hostess with a small knife saying he wanted to hijack the Airbus A321 with 131 passengers on board to the Libyan capital. However he was quickly overpowered by four stewards and passengers who forced him back to his seat where a doctor was able to administer him a sedative.
The flight arrived in Rome Fiumicino at 20.05 GMT and the 48 years old Kazakh was handed over to police. Although such episodes urge a reaction by the Air Defense that usually scramble the QRA (Quick Reaction Alert) planes to intercept the plane, it seems that the Alitalia flight was not “shadowed” by Italian Air Force planes to landing.
Noteworthy, the cabin staff’s intervention was so quick at the front of the plane that those passengers travelling at the back did not notice anything until the pilot announced that everything was ok and the flight was going to land safely.

5) The 18° Gruppo, that took part to the first Italian Odyssey Dawn sorties has made a special patch to celebrate the participation in the air campaign in Libya (read the very first debrief for details about the Italian F-16s involvement). The Sqn’s F-16s belonging to the 37° Stormo were replaced by the 4° and 36° Stormo’s Typhoons in Unified Protector and are currently involved in ensuring the QRA service from Trapani airbase.

Notice for my readers: please don’t expect the usual daily updates for the next few days. For sure, I’ll provide new updates after Easter but I’m still deciding if the next will be daily, weekly or random updates every two or three days. Most probably there will be a mix since I think the best way to provide useful and interesting reads is to write a recap or to give an explaination or my point of view when/as soon as there’s something interesting to say or to analyse. Please keep sending me updates, links, pictures and everything you consider interesting and I will try to enrich my debriefs with them.

Day 35 recap

After all the rest of the world had noticed it from a few weeks, on Apr. 22 even the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen has officially acknowledged that the war is moving towards (I would rather say, “has reached”) a stalemate. Even if NATO has destroyed 30 – 40% of Libya’s ground forces nothing so far has proved effective to break the deadlock: neither the Milan ATGMs supplied by Qatar to the rebels (along with some body armour) nor the drones that the US has decided to actively use in theatre. Although important under a military point of view because they ensure that “persistence” on the target area that sometime NATO seemed to be unable to provide, the use of MQ-1 Predators within Unified Protector are even more important because they represent the first sign of a renew American involvement in a difficult war.

Sec. Def. Gates said the aircraft performed their first mission on Thursday but were compelled to return back (to Sigonella) because of bad weather conditions over the target area. Some media speculated that was the very first mission but, as already explained on this blog, it was from more than a week that US Predators had joined US Global Hawks in daily reconnaissance sorties over Libya.

The involvement of US armed Predators over Libya arrived few hours before the news hat two UAVs (most probably MQ-1 Predator, similar to those currently patrolling Misratah skies) had fired 4 missiles against a compound in Spinwam, North Waziristan, Pakistan, killing at least 25 people, including 5 women and 4 children in a nearby house. Although details of such attack were not disclosed (actually, there are no official confirmations of the strike) the unlucky episode, unfortunately not the first to occur along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border where CIA fights militants with drones, sounded as ominous as that “Odyssey” chosen for the Libyan operation name, which foreshadowed a long and difficult campaign. However, it’s worth reminding all those worrying about the accuracy of the “lethal drones” that reports coming from Pakistan’s tribal areas are somehow inaccurate because they are also influenced by the difficulties in distinguishing a civilian from a militant or an extremist, and the dead ones are all referred to as “civilians”. Therefore, not all the Predator attacks in Pakistan kill tens civilians even if, for sure, they can harm civilians in the vicinity of the target, as conventional planes do.

Photo: USAF

That’s what Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. James Cartwright said during the Press Briefing with Sec. Def. Robert Gates:

They’re uniquely suited for areas — urban areas where you can get low collateral damage.  And so we’re trying to manage that collateral damage obviously, but that’s the best platform to do that with; their extended persistence on the target — they’re out there for a full day working the targets.

And so you have those capabilities, in addition to being able to get in targets where — out in the open where collateral damage is a worry, for instance, around ammo depots and things like that, that you want to hit — particularly a vehicle but you don’t want to hit the depot and have the secondaries.

By analysing the transcript of the Press Briefing, I’ve noticed that:

We have two CAPs, so two birds would be in the country at any given time, a max of two. They have the capability of being there 24 hours a day. So we can maintain two birds for 24 hours a day, is the capability that’s there.

If 2 Predators will be constantly orbiting over Libya more than 2 birds are actually deployed to Sigonella as reported by some media. To have 2 Predators CAPping for 24 hours, at least 5 Predators are required at Sigonella airbase.

By the way, Guido Olimpio, the Corriere della Sera’ ( most important Italian newspaper) special correspondent from Washington, expert in international terrorism and Middle East crises, and author of many publications, mentioned me in his article “Usa: useremo i droni armati in Libia”.

The uprising has reached some of the most western villages of Libya. Rebels took over the Wazin crossing near the Tunisian border forcing Gaddafi’s brigades to flee into Tunisian territory. Minor gains have been reported also in the disputed Misratah. Are loyalists suffering supply shortages? Are they preparing some surprise action or is this the effect of the stalemate?

Some tweets on Twitter speculated Gaddafi’s forces were preparing an attack by sea at Misratah, using small boats capable of carrying 15 people. Noteworthy, a new PSYOPS message was recorded on Apr. 22 across Europe, with the usual message inviting, in both American and Arabic languages, sailors and naval officers of a Libyan ship to leave the vessel and return to their families. As explained in Day 11 Debrief that message was heard also before a P-3 attacked and destroyed a Libyan ship (along with A-10s) the were threatening some merchant ships in the vicinity of Misratah port. In this respect, Libyan jamming of the NATO message was recorded by many radio hams: this proves Gaddafi’s forces retains some EW capabilities that, for some reason, NATO has not rendered harmless yet.

Dealing with the air strikes since the beginning of the NATO operation (31 March 2011, 08.00GMT) a total of 3.300 sorties and 1.373 strike sorties have been conducted. On Apr. 21, 152 sorties comprising 62 air strikes. Among targets hit on Apr. 21: 8 ammunition storage bunkers near Tripoli; 1 tank, 1 anti-aircraft gun, in the vicinity of Misratah; 1 military vehicle, near Zintan; 4 tanks, 5 military vehicles near Ajdabiya; 2 tanks, 1 multiple rocket launcher, near Brega; 5 ammunition storage bunkers, near Mizdah; 4 military trucks, around Sirte.

Furthermore, in the last couple of days, France, UK and Italy have decided to despatch small teams of military advisers that don’t constitute “boots on the ground” as their intention is not to be involved in a ground campaign with combat troops but to turn the rebels, that have shown so far limited military capabilities, into a more effective combatant force. Libyan Government has reacted to the decision of Paris, London and Rome’s governments with threatening statements.

Source: Reuters

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) Guido Olimpio, as already explained above, one of the most authoritative Italian journalists, sent me the links to a series of interesting videos, some of which raise questions about the way NATO has conducted the air campaign so far.
The following video, dated Apr. 17, Al Zintan, shows Gaddafi’s forces shelling rebels almost undisturbed. They are neither hidden nor camouflaged nor operating under the covered provided by bad weather. I checked NATO press releases archive, because I could not remember how many vehicles or rocket launchers were hit by allied planes on Apr. 17: unfortunately, no data was released by NATO for that date….

The following video shows the column moving towards Benghazi on Mar. 18, 2011. This could be the one that was attacked by the French Air Force on Mar. 19 in the beginning stages of Odyssey Dawn. A nice parade of Libyan military equipment.

2) In the last 24 hours, the Italian contingent has launched 7 missions (14 sorties): 3x AV-8B Harriers, 2x Tornados and 2x Typhoons. Most probably Italy has no one available since they are heavily involved in Afghanistan, but what about using one or two of its Predators (based in Amendola) or Predator B (Reaper) to perform some ISR sorties over Libya (saving fuel and flying hours of its tacair fleet that is simply flying orbits to enforce the NFZ)?

3) A RAF Tornado GR4 returning from a Unified Protector mission over Libya was compelled to jettison its fuel tanks before landing in emergency at Gioia del Colle airbase on Apr. 21. The drop were dropped in a field located 500 meters from the runway threshold. Even if the type of failure experienced by the British “Tonka” was not disclosed, many emergency procedures require the pilot to drop the external stores to reduce the aircraft gross weight so it can be landed safely. Tanks are usually dropped also when cockpit instruments indicate an engine fire.

4) Mike, a reader of this blog, sent me the following interesting comment to provide more details about the famous Falcon 900 registered “5A-DCN” used by the Libyan Government (for some background information, read here: “Libyan airspace most interesting movements of last week”).

Hi,
I thought I would give a little background as I formerly worked as a pilot for United Aviation, Libya, the operator of 5A-DCN and others.

United Aviation is a Libyan VIP air charter company based in Tripoli. The aircraft are all based at Mitiga, HLLM. Crews are a combination of Libyan and expats, with most of the Captains being expats from the US. When I was last there almost a year ago, they operated 2 BD-700 Global Express, 1 CL-850 (CRJ200), 1 CL-300,the DA-900 referenced above, and a leased Boeing 707. They may also operate at Lear 60XR and Challenger 605 at this time.

The company is operated as a subsidiary of Afriquiya Airways, the Libyan state-owned airline. They have an operating certificate allowing for worldwide operations under ICAO regulations.

We flew a combination of Libyan cabinet members and African dignitaries to a variety of worldwide destinations. The only thing interesting about the above flight is that 5A-DCN was reserved for the exclusive use of military leaders when I was there. It was crewed exclusively by former Libyan Air Force pilots, and to my knowledge did not participate in the charter operations that the rest of the aircraft were used for.

One of the most frequent questions I have received in the last days is: “how many aircraft are needed to provide a 24-hour cover of Libya?”. Obviously, who has asked the question was not interested in fighters needed to enforce the NFZ but in bombers for interdiction and CAS.
It’s not easy to answer this question, since there are many factors to be considered. Indeed, it is not only important to determine how many assets, but where the CAP/loitering areas must be established, how long the aircraft have to maintain the AOR (Area Of Responsibility), etc.
Basing on the information issued in one of the first press briefings by Pentagon, we know that 4 loitering areas for interdiction planes have been established in norther Libya (actually, over the sea in front of it). Most probably, they haven’t changed since NATO took over the command of the operations.

If we consider an “on station” time of  3 – 4 hours, on a daily basis, between 48 and 64 sorties are required to provide a continuos cover of the assigned areas. Let’s consider an average 56 sorties. Obviously, if a flight of 2 bombers is called to perform an air strike their area remains vacant and another flight must be moved to replace it (if not already flying, some assets could be kept in stand by and scrambled if needed) even if achieving a constant presence is almost impossible.

Since the sound of aircraft orbiting above the enemy troops or performing “show of force” flybys is an important deterrent (as shown in Afghanistan), first of all I’d move the loitering areas and repositiong them over the disputed cities (provided that they are still positioned above the sea). This would also reduce the transit time from the orbits to the target area.

That said, to strengthen NATO presence, just to make an example, NATO could add 2 more orbits to the 4 already used, placing them near Misratah (bringing the total in the area to 3) and in the Gulf of Sirte, off Brega, Ras Lanuf and Ajdabiya (bringing the total in the area to 2). On a tactical basis, aircraft patrolling on a certain area could be quickly moved to reinforce presence elsewhere.  If we “translate” the new set up in number of sorties, to keep 6 orbits for 24 hours, NATO would need from 72 to 96 daily sorties. As said, this would not ensure a constant presence on the target area but at least it would improve the possibility to have the asset where and when needed.  Obviously, all what I’ve written so far, makes sense if NATO is willing to use those additional planes to hit the Libyan troops hard, before it is too late. Otherwise it is not worth the effort: to set up 2 more H24 orbits more aircraft, more tankers and more support personnel are required.

On Apr. 21, President Barak Obama authorized the DoD to use armed MQ-1 Predators in Libya. This marks the end of the support role played since Apr. 4 by the US. The Predators were already operating over Libya but they flew reconnaissance flights without carrying any armament. The news is that, since Day 34, they are cleared to engage ground targets. Even if only 2 Predators will be used by the US military in Unified Protector (under NATO command) their impact could be relevant. For sure, they can loiter over a target area for some 15 – 16 hours (thus saving 4 conventional sorties) and, apart from attacking ground targets directly with AGM-114 Hellfire missiles, they can provide target description, buddy lasing and reconnaissance in favour of other allied planes.

Image credit: USAF

Still, as already explained many times in my daily debriefs, it is not only important how many assets are used in Unified Protector but how they are used: even if 2 more orbits could provide a better coverage of the norther part of Libya, the current 4, as explained by Paul Smyth in his “Libya: is NATO doing enough”

However, this does not explain the seeming periodic absence of NATO aircraft over the eastern battlefront, the apparent shifting of NATO emphasis between Misratah and other locations, or the UK decisions to reinforce the Tornado GR4 deployment and re-role some Typhoon air defence fighters to strike assets. Furthermore, on four days NATO figures indicate flying less than sixty strike sorties (fifty-eight on 3 and 4,fifty-six on 9 and fifty-four on 7 April); it is therefore highly unlikely that it provided a constant presence over key resistance areas whilst conducting interdiction duties elsewhere.

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) In one of the past Debrief I’ve explained what I thought about the presumed missiles shortage reported by some media. According to the Daily Telegraph, the RAF was recently compelled to order more Brimstone bombs (read Day 7 Debrief for some details on this weapon) as a consequence of their intense and effective usage in both Libya and Afghanistan. The newspaper disclosed that more than 110 Brimstones have been fired since they were first used against Taliban in 2009 and an estimate of 60 were fired at armoured vehicles in Libya. Tornado GR4s flying Unified Protector missions within British Operation Ellamy, usually carry a single three-missile launcher for the Brimstone within a mixed configuration which includes also 500 lbs Paveway IV LGB and pod-housed targeting/reconnaissance sensors. If a large amount of them are used also in the coming weeks, the RAF risks having low stocks: without Brimstone, the Tornado GR4s would have to use the 500lbs Paveway II or the 1000 lbs Paveway IV used by the Typhoons.

More than 2,000 Brimstones were originally built to take on massed Soviet armoured divisions and were unable to discriminate between friend or foe vehicles. The MoD decided to convert more than 300 Brimstones into the “dual mode” under an urgent operational requirement and proved a huge success in Afghanistan where it can target individuals, buildings and fast-moving vehicles.
However, converting more bombs is a complex process taking a number of weeks. It is understood that the British manufacturers MBDA have been quietly asked to begin making more.

Following the success in Libya, other foreign countries, like US and France seems to be interested in the dual mode Brimstone, a 50kg (110lb) missile that is an extensive redevelopment of the Lockheed Martin AGM-114 Hellfire, optimised for release from fast moving platforms, that is considered “a unique munition capable of destroying manoeuvering targets”.

In the meanwhile, NATO has realeased an interesting video showing footage recorded by RAF Tornado and Typhoon targeting pods as the British plane struck Libyan communication installations of Gaddafi’s command and control network.

A RAF pilot recalled the first bombing mission with the Typhoon here.

2) Newspaper Aftenposten reported on Apr. 20 that RNoAF fired at least 12 % of NATO’s bombs against Gaddafi’s forces. Around 140 PGMs have been dropped against military targets since the beginning of Odyssey Dawn. Article also says the total number of missions passed 90 (even if, as suggest by Aksel Magdahl, that could be the actual number of sorties). Just a few days ago the RNoAF F-16 had dropped 100 PGMs, so an increase of 40 bombs since then would indicate an increase in tempo for the Norwegian F16s. A short video released by the RNoAF (as pictures below) taken from the F-16 Sniper pod is available here.

3) The brief Italian MoD press release on Apr. 22 informs that in the last 24 hrs the Italian contingent flew 6 missions (12 sorties): 3x Typhoons, 2x Tornados, 1x AV-8B+ Harrier. NATO flew on Apr. 20, 132 sorties (50 air strikes) bringing the total to 3.148 sorties and 1.311 strike sorties. Key engagements for Apr. 20 were: 2 heavy equipment transporters, 3 armored vehicles, 1 ammunition storage site near Tripoli, 2 tanks, 1 communication tower, 1 radar near Misratah, and 1 tank and 2 rocket launchers in the vicinity of Zintan.

4) The Swedish Air Force released an image of a Libyan airfield taken by a JAS-39 Gripen assigned to Unified Protector with the recce pod. Even if the location was not released I’m almost 100% the photo was taken at Misratah airport. You can compare the SweAF picture with the screenshot I took with Google Earth (obviously they were not taken on the same date….).

My instructor is Nico, he is an ex Italian Air Force pilot and has been a commercial flying instructor for some 7 years I think.  He is really good and recognises that I have done flying before and hence is adapting the syllabus to have me doing landings and take-offs plus radio transmission from the off.  I managed to successfully float the aircraft onto the ground without bottoming the suspension out, but I am still struggling to get used to the power of the rudder (it is much more powerful than the Katana DV20 which I was last flying all those years ago) and so I end up hoofing about half rudder and over yawing the aircraft.  The rest of flying I am just really rusty on like radio transmissions and general handling, I’m sure it will come together though.

Mixing both the flying and ground school is tough, flying can be quite mentally draining and I feel like I need a sleep halfway through the day so that I can continue functioning, the problem is that when I am not flying I need to be doing either flying study or ground school study.

This phase I have the following ground school subjects:

Instruments, Auto-flight, Air Law, Operational Procedures, Flight Planning, Human Performance, Communications and Aircraft Performance.  The books are even bigger than the ones in Phase 1    Who ever said that Phase 2 was easier is blatantly lying…

		First week of Flying and Ground school (Phase 2) VIEW SLIDE SHOW DOWNLOAD ALL

Since there’s no significant change in the battlefield nor any evident sign of an attempt to get out of the stalemate, the news of the day is that two photojournalists, Oscar-nominated filmmaker Tim Hetherington and Getty photographer Chris Hondros, were killed on Apr. 20, Day 33 of the war, after coming under mortar fire in Misratah. Hetherington, co-director of the Academy Awards-candidate documentary “Restrepo” on the Afghan War and Hondros were working together with other media representatives on Tripoli Street, one of the most important location in the third-largest Libyan city where fighting between rebels and Gaddafi’s forces is more fierce. The last Tweet from Hetherington, is dated Apr. 19, 12:46, and came from is Twitter for iPhone application: “@TimHetherington: In besieged Libyan city of Misrata. Indiscriminate shelling by Qaddafi forces. No sign of NATO”.

The Restrepo trailer:

Hence, although NATO said that allies planes have conducted numerous strikes against Gaddafi’s forces in and around Misratah, destroying over 40 tanks and several armoured vehicles, and many anti-aircraft systems “enabling our planes to operate more effectively in the area” Hetherington had seen no sign of NATO planes. On the contrary, he was a victim of that fire that, according to Gen. van Hum, was watched threatening civilians by allied pilots and consequently destroyed.

Is NATO doing enough? No, it isn’t. It’s not a personal opinion, it is what the situation in Libya shows.

That said, I would like to share with my readers also another thought. I acknowledge that, doing media relations at NATO these days must not be simple. However, I find irritating as well as useless a press release from NATO issued on Apr. 20 to advice Libyans to avoid Gaddafi’s forces.

Maybe NATO should explain something different. For instance, why after 32 days there are still fixed targets like ammunition depots to be hit, when these should be destroyed in the very first stages of an air campaign (just after making the enemy’s air defenses unserviceable). Anyway, below is the usual count of sorties flown in the previous 24 hrs:

Since the beginning of the NATO operation (31 March 2011, 08.00GMT) a total of 3.016 sorties and 1.261 strike sorties have been conducted. On Apr. 19, 139 sorties (62 air strikes). Key targets were: 2 Ammunition depots near Tripoli, 2 T-62 Tanks, 1 T-55 Tank, 3 Rocket launcher vehicles near Misratah, and 1 Surface-To-Surface (SSM) Missile Site near Sirte.

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) An interesting update comes today from the French MoD. As you know, since Mar. 25, 2011, 4 French Mirage 2000-5s are operating from Souda Bay airbase in Crete, from where they conduct joint air interdiction missions with Qatari Mirage 2000-5s. Beginning on Apr. 18, 4 Mirage 2000Ds (like those in the French MoD released pictures below), which previously operated from Solenzara, in Corsica, were redeployed to Souda to conduct air interdiction missions and ground strikes from the Greek airbase. On Apr. 19, they were joined by two more Mirage 2000Ds. This redeployment in Crete can enhance the effectiveness of French combat aircraft by reducing the transit time to the area of operations, thereby reducing reaction times and increasing the amount of time spent on patrol. In total, from Apr. 19, 10 FAF planes are deployed to Souda: 4 Mirage 2000-5s and 6 Mirage 2000Ds.

On Apr. 20, 2 Mirage F1CR performed an emergency landing for fuel problems in Malta Luqa airport. The aircraft were refuelled and departed again to Solenzara later the same day. After the two defecting Libyan Mirage F1s, this is the second time Malta International Airport receives the unexpected visit by two Mirage F1s….

Source: Reuters

2) The Italian contingent in the last 24 hours flew 8 missions: 2x Tornados, 5x Typhoons, 1x AV-8B+s. Since the Italian Navy Harriers are involved in reconnaissance and air defense missions, many have asked in which configuration the AV-8Bs are flying over Libya. Even if I haven’t seen any picture depicting an Italian Navy jump jet so far, I think that, as many other assets involved in the enforcement of the No Fly Zone, they are flying with air-to-air missiles (AIM-120s/AIM-9s) but, since they are multi-role aircraft perfectly suitable for the air-to-ground role and for the CAS in particular, they are bringing also Litening pods on one of the underwing pylons to have a closer look at the overflown areas. The Litening has the possibility to transmit TV images in real time to a ground receiving station.

The picture below shows an AV-8B of the Marina Militare with a Litening pod under the right wing.

3) As said, the US are contributing to Unified Protector with support assets. Among them, some of the most important are the KC-135s and KC-10s deployed to Moron, Spain, providing air-to-air refueling to both American and allied planes. The aircraft belongs to the 313th Air Expeditionary Wing, which was given a nickname “Calico Wing” by the wing’s commander because, the multitude of colors of tail flashes on the 313th AEW ramp, looked like a Calico Cat (a domestic cat with a spotted or parti-colored coat).

As an example, a recently published photo from 313th AEW Public Affairs shows the various tail flash colors of the aircraft that might resemble the “spotted” coat of a calico cat. The illustration features aircraft tails from Air National Guard units in Nebraska, Utah, Ohio, Arizona, Tennessee, Illinois, Iowa and Pennsylvania. It also shows Air Force Reserve aircraft from Indiana and North Carolina, and active-duty aircraft from California, Kansas, North Dakota, Washington, Florida and New Jersey.

Although the battlefield is deadlocked, with fightings taking place more or less in the same manner at Misratah and other disputed cities along the northern Libyan coastline, with NATO being unable to prevent, for various reasons, Gaddafi’s forces to bomb civilians with rockets, heavy artillery and also cluster bombs.

From its point of view, NATO has kept up a high operational tempo. NATO Spokesperson, Oana Lungescu said:

Allied aircraft have flown well over 2.800 missions — an average of just over 1.000 a week. Almost half of them strikes. We have struck a broad range of targets — tanks and rocket launchers, armoured vehicles and ammunition sites. We are keeping up the pressure on the Gaddafi regime forces to stop their brutal onslaught against civilians. It’s a challenging task — but we are making significant progress in weakening Gaddafi’s ability to use his military machine against his own people.

That operational tempo has been matched by a high political tempo. Last week, as you know, NATO foreign ministers met in Berlin with our operational partners and reinforced the political impetus behind Operation Unified Protector. They re-stated full support for the mission. They committed to providing all the resources needed to do the job. And they agreed that they will do so until all attacks on civilians have stopped; until all of Gaddafi’s forces, including his snipers, mercenaries and paramilitary forces have returned to bases; and until there is full, safe and unhindered humanitarian access to all people in need of assistance.

[...]

So NATO and its partners are united, we are determined, and we are focused. We are doing what the UN has mandated — and we will continue to do so, for as long as it takes.

Gen. van Hum, chief of Allied Operations at SHAPE, explained that the arms embargo is comprehensive and effective. Since operation started NATO has checked 432 vessels and boarded 10 for further inspection and found no violations. Dealing with the NFZ, there were no violations from fixed wing aircraft since last week (does this mean that some violations from rotary wing assets occurred?). For what concerns the activities aimed at protecting civilians on the ground, the battlefield is “fluid, dynamic and always changing”. NATO is not only operating in Misratah, Zintan and Ajdabiya but across all Libya. It is currently hitting Command and Control facilities of the regime including communication infrastructures. Over the last 36 hours beginning on Sunday evening these communication nodes were the focus of a coordinated series of strikes aimed at degrading Gaddafi’s ability to command and direct with his forces. Still, nothing indicates that Gaddafi has any intention of disengaging from operations as his forces continue to use heavy weapons against civilians. Therefore NATO will continue with the air strikes.

In Misratah, NATO has been watching the situation over the past 10 days: “On the ground the situation fluid. The regime force have been indiscriminately rocketing and shelling the city causing widespread damages. The sea port was closed a few times due to repeated shelling and fighting in the area. Our forces have conducted numerous strikes against Gaddafi’s forces in and around Misratah. We have destroyed over 40 tanks and several armoured vehicles. In addition several anti-aircraft system were destroyed enabling our planes to operate more effectively in the area” he said. Allied pilots watched rocket launchers being used in the area to hit civilians and they destroyed them.

But there’s a limit to what can be achieved by air power to stop fighting in a city. We are taking every precaution to avoid causing civilian casualties by our own air ops. What we are doing is attacking regime’s ability to supply and sustain these attacks not just in the area of Misratah but across the country.

According to van Hum, there’s a good balance between enforcing the NFZ and interdicting the forces threatening civilians as the 1.200 air strike sorties represent over 40% of the total sorties flown.

Van Uhm said that the alliance has the necessary planes for the missions. He explained that there are planes constantly flying over Libya, day and night, gathering information about the forces on the ground and capable of directing other assets to strike them, when need. Furthermore, without going into specific details, he said that NATO already has “more assets” than last Friday when NATO officials said the NATO mission is short of about 10 aircraft and at a meeting of alliance foreign ministers. He refused to comment why NATO is not currently using helicopters and naval firepower for Unified Protector, answering once again that NATO has the required assets to fulfil the mission.

So, NATO rejects critics by saying that it is maintaining a high operational tempo and affirming it has everything it needs to execute the air campaign, to target the Gaddafi’s forces and to attack loyalist second echelon forces. Sorties conducted on Apr. 18 were 143, comprising 53 air strikes which hit, among other targets, 9 ammunitions bunkers and the HQ of 32nd Brigade in the vicinity of Tripoli, 6 surface to air missiles, 4 tanks, 3 air defence missile sites and 1 mobile rocket launcher in the vicinity of Misratah, 3 ammunition storage bunkers in the vicinity of Sirte, 3 tanks, 1 anti-aircraft weapon system and 1 armoured vehicles, in the vicinity of Zitan, and 1 building near Brega.

Ok, nice. However, as an analyst I can’t but notice that the impact of such strikes hasn’t had the expected result so, maybe it’s time to change something.

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) Alvaro Muñoz-Aycuens (@Alvarito) sent me the following interesting update about the Spanish Air Force contribution to Unified Protector, with information released by the Ministry of Defense to get approval by congress to expand the mission for two more months.

Since the 19th of March to the 17th of April, the missions numbers are as follow:

The E/F-18M has made 45 CAP missions in which they have flown a total of 328 hours without the need to intercept any aircraft. The B707 tanker has done 22 missions and 134 hours, in all the AAR they have transferred a total of 453.000 liters of fuel to the F18 plus other alliance members.

The CAP mission lasst 4 hours, in which they operate in pairs on one of the 3 assigned CAP areas which according to the info involves 1 or 2 AAR. Meanwhile the B707 operations are almost daily on one single AAR area in which the missions last at least 6 hours. By a request of the NATO, because of the lack of tanker assets, they are going to add to the mission a C130 tanker. They say this doesn’t increase the spending assigned to the mission because of the reduction in CAP missions and will neither surpass the limits of assigned personnel which currently sits at 500 men.

Regarding the naval blockade and the support of the CN.235 SAR plane, since its mission start on March 23 has flown 12 missions clocking a total of 66 hours identifying 14 ships. These operations account for 25% of all the maritime patrol operations of Unified Protector.

Officially the name of the operation/detachment is “Argos”. Also they have authorize the mission to support the future humanitarian missions requested by the UN.

2) Italian contingent flew 6 missions (2 acft each) in the last 24 hours: 2x Tornados, 2x AV-8Bs, 2x Typhoons. Eurofighter released on the company’s official website some interesting pictures about Italian and British Typhoons involved in Unified Protector (the one above, showing a RAF Typhoon taking off from Gioia del Colle comes from Eurofighter webpage too).

The one below was taken, in my opinion, at the beginning of Odyssey Dawn and not recently as it shows an ItAF Typhoon landing in Trapani with 4 IRIS-T and 4 AIM-120 and “only” 2 (not 3 as seen in the last weeks) drop tanks.

3) The following Reuter picture, depicting Libyan horsemen shouting pro-Gaddafi slogans as they parade during a welcome ceremony for the African Union delegation at Tripoli’s airport on Apr. 10, 2011, is particularly interesting because it shows the Bombardier BD-700-1A11 “5A-UAB” sitting on the apron at Tripoli International Airport. The fate and current location of this bizjet, presumed to be used by the Libyan Government and possibly by Gaddafi and his close aides for both “domestic” and international flight, was unknown.

Source: Reuters

My Day 30 debrief, with some simple statistics about the number of air strikes conducted by NATO in Libya, opened a debate with the readers of this blog and Twitter followers. Someone asked me to compare the Allied Force strike sorties breakdown with the Unified Protector trends, just to have an idea of how the alliance is performing in respect to the previous involvement in Serbia and Kosovo war. The only possible answer is “better not trying to compare” since you’ll get a clear idea of a different strategy and an overall clear vision of the aims of the air campagn and the ways to achieve them.

In 78 days of air strikes, NATO flew 38.004 sorties (of 45.935 planned ones….in that area, in that period – March – June, the weather was a factor), 14.112 of them strike sorties. On average 487 sorties were launched each day, 180 being strike sorties, even if during the beginning phases of the war and towards the end, when the air strikes against the Serbian ground forces became more intense, the alliance flew more than 700 sorties every day with roughly one third being bombing missions. Some 20.000 PGMs were used along with some dumb bombs. Regardless the figures (for sure the Serbian military was a dangerous opponent), the operation in former Jugoslavia was focused on a quick achievement of the air superiority and a subsequent instense use of the air power against the ground targets.

Hence, comparing the two operations is useless; although, a look at Allied Force shows that, using the required resolve, NATO can be successful even when facing strong “enemies”.

Anyway, the “air strikes debate” urged me to extend the yesterday’s graphs including also the data I could recollect from the first US DoD press briefings on Odyssey Dawn, during which some figures about sorties and air strikes were released by Pentagon.

Below, a table with the information released so far (note, not all dates are available).

Here are the new graphs (note that NATO sorties are as of Apr. 18 and consider that March sorties are those effectively flown on that date and not those of the previous 24 hrs as NATO’s).

After reaching a peak of 107 air strike sorties on Mar. 27, the number of bombing missions dropped. The reason, if you check the figures seems to be that NATO has continued conducting more or less the same number of strike sorties even after US withdrew their bombers. For instance, on Mar. 27, the US flew 52 air strikes and coalition flew 55 air strikes that is around the average count of sorties flown by NATO since US put their bombers on stand-by status. So, a quick examination of this figures show that NATO has not filled the gap whe US withdrew, or at least it hasn’t completely filled it.

In the meanwhile, according to NATO, multiple air strikes targeted communications infrastructure and the headquarters of Gaddafi’s 32nd brigade 10 km to the south of Tripoli.

“NATO will continue its campaign to degrade the Gaddafi regime forces that are involved in the ongoing attacks on civilians,” the commander of the NATO operation, Lieutenant-General Charles Bouchard, said.

The question is: how long will it take considering the current sortie ratio?

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) Italian Minister of Defense La Russa explained to Sec Def. Robert Gates that Italy will not change its mission and will not supply more planes to Unified Protector. Hence, the Italian pilots will continue flying “airshow” sorties and there will be no Tornado IDS dropping PGMs in Libya. I still can’t understand what will happen if/when a Tornado ECR will detect an active SAM radar site and will be asked to hit it with an AGM-88 HARM missile…..

Do you think it’s not going to happen because there are no more active radar sites in Libya? Yesterday, an US F-16CJ hit and destroyed 2 SAM sites near Tripoli in a SEAD mission bringing to 8 the total SEAD strikes since Apr. 1.

In the meanwhile, in the previous 24 hrs, the Italian contingent flew 5 missions (2 sorties each): 1x Tornado, 3x Typhoon, 1x AV-8B Harrier from Cavour aircraft carrier.

2) Giuliano Ranieri, after checking on Google Earth the location of a NATO air strike asked me what are the shelters almost hidden in the desert around coordinates 31°41’44.48″N 12°19’54.25″E. I wonder if they could be related to the underground storage facilities I wrote about yesterday and, while I hope that some of those OSINT experts reading this blog will be able to explain me what’s stored inside those shelters, I suggest you reading another old article that Richard Clements found and brought once again to my attention: Libya’s “Secret tunnels of death”.

• Day 1
• Day 2
• Day 3
• Day 4
• Day 5
• Day 6
• Day 7
• Day 8
• Day 9
• Day 10
• Day 11
• Day 12
• Day 13
• Day 14
• Day 15
• Day 16
• Day 17
• Day 18
• Day 19
• Day 20
• Day 21
• Day 22
• Day 23
• Day 24
• Day 25
• Day 26
• Day 27
• Day 28
• Day 29

A notice to the readers after 30 days of reports: I’m still deciding when the daily debriefs will have to switch to a weekly update. The amount of data and interesting facts is in fact decreasing each day while the comments you leave on each debrief and the email I receive are so interesting that they require a better analysis and more in-depth replies. For this reason, I suggest you reading the comments and replies on each debrief to follow the discussions that sometimes have become a continuation which add more interesting details to the daily reports.
In the meanwhile, beginning tomorrow, you’ll find the list of links to the previous reports on a dedicated page whose link will be the only one preceeding the daily recap. This should make the text easier to read (at least there will be no need to scroll down the page to find the beginning of the article).

Day 30 recap

The situation has not changed since Day 29. Interviewed by Al Jazeera, Major General Abdul Fatah Younis, commander of rebels troops in Libya called on NATO for “a more effective performance” saying that insurgents would break the siege of Misratah, if they receive gunship helicopters. Explaining that 6 Libyan military vehicles were hit during the battles between Ajdabiya and Brega, he said that they were destroyed by the “Ali al-Jabir brigade” of the Libyan rebel fighters: looks like the insurgents are at least somehow organized, with some brigades. As reported by AJE, commenting the fierce battles of Apr. 16, Gen. Abdul Fattah Younis said:

Targets were given for NATO to take out. Our forces then moved towards the east of Brega. We were surprised by a massive attack against us even though NATO had assured us there was no one there. We pulled back and directed NATO where to attack but they didn’t do anything.

Clearly, there must be some sort of poor coordination between NATO and rebel forces in spite of the small British military team, acting as a liaison team between rebels and NATO and advising anti-Gaddafi fighters on how to organise their command structure and communications.

A sandstorm (this time witnessed by local reporters…) prevented NATO planes from targeting Gaddafi’s forces allowing them to advance once again on the western edge of the city of Ajdabiya. Allies bombed Al-Hira, 50km south west of Tripoli and Sirte where probably the weather was better.

Needless to say, Misratah is still under heavy shelling: according to some source 1.000 died and 3.000 were wounded (80% civilians) in the loyalists attacks of the last weeks.

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) Many readers and Twitter followers asked me to prepare a graph showing the trend in the air strikes vs overall sorties since the beginning of Unified Protector. Using the figures released by NATO, I prepared the following simple graphs which show a slight decrease in the number of air strikes flown by the allies in Libya. Noteworthy, on average, no more than 40% of sorties are air strikes: considering that “strike sorties are intended to identify and engage appropriate targets, but do not necessarily deploy munitions each time”, the amount of firepower dedicated to the enforcement of the NFZ (meaning fighters in Combat Air Patrol with air-to-air missiles) is excessive if compared to that capable of bombing ground targets, especially if we think to the almost complete lack of Libyan Arab Republic Air Force activity.
Since figures released by NATO refer to “the previous 24 hours” embracing 2 different dates, I thought it was better to use the release date as a reference.

2) Richard Clements sent me the link to an interesting article, titled “Mysterious Libyan Pipeline Could Be Conduit for Troops”, published in Dec. 1997 by the NYT (you can read it here on the FAS website).

Here’s an interesting excerpt:

A tunnel of pipes 4 meters, or 13 feet, in diameter is large enough to accommodate military vehicles, even a rail line. When the project is completed, Libya will have more than 2,000 miles of tunnel stretching from Tunisia to Egypt. In the south, it will reach almost to Sudan and Chad, a country with which Libya has tense relations.

Every 50 to 60 miles along the pipeline, huge underground storage areas are being constructed, and the engineers said they are more elaborate than would be needed for holding water. The facilities, made of reinforced concrete, would be suitable for bivouacking troops or storing military supplies, including poison gas, the engineers said.

While the system of pipelines does not by itself change the military balance in the region, it provides Col. Moammar Gadhafi, the Libyan leader, extensive opportunities to conceal his activities from the American spy satellites that pass overhead each day.

“This is the first real evidence of something which has been suspected for several years,” Paul Beaver, a defense and intelligence analyst with Jane’s Defense Weekly, said when told of the engineers’ descriptions of the project. “Gadhafi seems to have taken a leaf out of Kim Il Sung’s book and created a potential military arsenal underground,” he added, referring to the late North Korean dictator.

North Korea has an elaborate underground military system with storage facilities and tunnel routes for vehicles and troops. Beaver, a former British army officer with intelligence expertise, said that the tunnel system would allow Gadhafi to conceal troop movements, gain an element of surprise over an enemy, and protect his own troops from pre-emptive strikes.

Other analysts are alarmed because the pipeline runs through a mountain called Tarhuna. This is where Gadhafi is constructing a chemical and biological weapons plant, American and European intelligence officials have said.

I don’t know if the underground storage was finished, however, the article reminded me of a few articles I’ve read of Italian workers describing Libyan underground military facilities in the desert. Even Tom Cooper of ACIG.org once told me something about a “huge underground depot” capable of containing an entire squadron of aircraft. The problem is not only what these storages contain, but how the hidden material could be used. Gaddafi’s forces have already bombed their own people with cluster bombs, what if they are able to collect chemical weapons possibly sheltered in one of these underground storage facilities?

• Day 1
• Day 2
• Day 3
• Day 4
• Day 5
• Day 6
• Day 7
• Day 8
• Day 9
• Day 10
• Day 11
• Day 12
• Day 13
• Day 14
• Day 15
• Day 16
• Day 17
• Day 18
• Day 19
• Day 20
• Day 21
• Day 22
• Day 23
• Day 24
• Day 25
• Day 26
• Day 27
• Day 28

Once again “stalemate” is the most used term to define the situation on the battlefield in Libya. Misratah is still under siege as Gaddafi’s forces pounded the third largest Libyan city with rocket, mortars and cluster bombs used also on residential areas. Loyalist are attacking food industry plants in Misrata including a dairy as well as a cooking oil one while tanks entered the city pushing civilians closer to the port area. More often Misratah is referred to as a new or mini-Stalingrad after the famous city which saw Soviet troops resisting to the Nazis for almost 6 months in a house-to-house fighting that took place with complete disregard of military and civilian casualties. If that for Stalingrad was one of the bloodest battle in WWII, Misratah is where rebels, outnumbered by pro-Government troops, are resisting from more than 6 weeks of street-fighting.

Insurgents made another effort to push towards Brega oil terminal and 6 were killed and more than 20 wounded when loyalist fired rockets on the rebel vehicles along the coastal highway, from Ajdabiyah westward to Brega. In Ajdabiyah, oppositors said Gaddafi’s forces were positioned in the center of Brega, sometimes inside houses, while rebels were more exposed.

During Day 29, the number of sorties conducted by NATO dropped to 144, 42 of which were strike ones. Since the beginning of the NATO operation (31 March 2011, 08.00GMT) a total of 2.734 sorties and 1.146 strike sorties have been conducted (as always, strike sorties are intended to identify and engage appropriate targets, but do not necessarily deploy munitions each time). I’m still not sure if reconnaissance sorties count as strike sorties or not.
The key targets hit were 2 ammunition bunkers destroyed, one Surface-to-air anti-aircraft site destroyed in the vicinity of Tripoli, 1 Armoured Personnel Carrier destroyed in the vicinity of Misrata, 2 tanks, 2 equipment transporters, 1 artillery piece, 1 tank transporter, 4 ammunition storage sites and one ammunition bunker destroyed in the vicinity of Sirte and 1 ammunition storage site damaged near Zintan.
Considering the type of battle being fought in and around Misratah, isn’t a single APC destroyed not enough to avoid the massacre in the strategic city?

Source: Twitpic

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) Many are still asking why NATO is not doing enough to prevent civilians being literally slaughtered by Gaddafi’ snipers and heavy artillery. According to the Washington Post, one of the reasons is that NATO is running short of PGMs. Below you can find an excerpt of the article:

NATO runs short on some munitions in Libya
By Karen DeYoung and Greg Jaffe, Friday, April 15, 8:46 PM

Less than a month into the Libyan conflict, NATO is running short of precision bombs, highlighting the limitations of Britain, France and other European countries in sustaining even a relatively small military action over an extended period of time, according to senior NATO and U.S. officials.

The shortage of European munitions, along with the limited number of aircraft available, has raised doubts among some officials about whether the United States can continue to avoid returning to the air campaign if Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi hangs on to power for several more months.

[...]

But, they said, the current bombing rate by the participating nations is not sustainable. “The reason we need more capability isn’t because we aren’t hitting what we see — it’s so that we can sustain the ability to do so. One problem is flight time, the other is munitions,” said another official, one of several who were not authorized to discuss the issue on the record.

European arsenals of laser-guided bombs, the NATO weapon of choice in the Libyan campaign, have been quickly depleted, officials said. Although the United States has significant stockpiles, its munitions do not fit on the British- and French-made planes that have flown the bulk of the missions.

Britain and France have each contributed about 20 strike aircraft to the campaign. Belgium, Norway, Denmark and Canada have each contributed six — all of them U.S.-manufactured and compatible with U.S. weaponry.

[...]

But with Gaddafi’s forces and the rebel army locked in a stalemate, Obama has resisted calls from opposition leaders, and some hardline lawmakers in this country, to move U.S. warplanes back into a leading role.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and other have called on Obama to redeploy U.S. AC-130 gunships, which are considered more effective over populated areas.

Although the gunships flew several missions early in the operation, Gen. Carter Ham, who commanded the mission before it was turned over to NATO, said last week that they were frequently grounded because of weather and other concerns.

The slow-moving aircraft, which flew as low as 4,000 feet over Libya, are also considerably more vulnerable than jet fighters to surface-to-air missiles. While much of Libya’s stationary air defenses have been destroyed, Ham said Gaddafi was believed to have about 20,000 shoulder-held SAMS at the beginning of the conflict, and “most” of them are still unaccounted for.

Concerns that supplies of jet-launched precision bombs are growing short in Europe have reignited long-standing controversies over both burden-sharing and compatibility within NATO. While allied jets have largely followed the U.S. lead and converted to precision munitions over the last decade, they have struggled to keep pace, according to senior U.S. military officials.

Libya “has not been a very big war. If [the Europeans] would run out of these munitions this early in such a small operation, you have to wonder what kind of war they were planning on fighting,” said John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, a defense think tank. “Maybe they were just planning on using their air force for air shows.”

Despite U.S. badgering, European allies have been slow in some cases to modify their planes and other weapons systems so they can accommodate U.S. bombs. Retooling these fighter jets so that they are compatible with U.S. systems requires money, and all European militaries have faced significant cuts in recent years.

Typically, the British and French militaries buy munitions in batches and stockpile them. When arsenals start to run low, factories must be retooled and production lines restarted to replace the diminished stock, all of which can take time and additional money, said Elizabeth Quintana, an aerospace analyst at the Royal United Service Institute in London.

deyoungk@washpost.com

jaffeg@washpost.com

Correspondent Simon Denyer in Tripoli contributed to this report.

I don’t know which countries are already short of LGBs but most probably among those actively involved in the air strike some might be nearing the end of their stocks. The RDAF alone (one of the most active contingents in Unified Protector) has dropped more than 200 PGMs. If we consider that orders for (quite expensive) ordnance are usually placed by European countries for a few hundred bombs at one time or for quantities lower than 1.000 pieces (as, fortunately, LGBs are not used very often in peacetime), those that are involved in both Afghanistan from some years and now in Libya might be in the need to replenish their stocks in the future, but most probably not yet after just 28 days of operations.

Noteworthy, the article underlines that European air forces should modify their planes to accomodate US bombs even if in most (if not all) cases, US and NATO PGMs (both LGBs and GPS-guided bombs) can be attached to the standard pylons and rails without the need of any modification. For sure there are some weapons that were “locally-developed” and don’t fit with standard bomb racks or suspension lugs but the large majority of the ordnance carried by the aircraft is “NATO standard”, as the extensive use of GBU-12s (described in the previous reports) and GBU-38s shows.

2) The number of Italian missions flown in the last 24 hours dropped to 3, each flown by pairs: 2x AV-8Bs and 1x Tornados (not clear if ECRs or IDSs).

3) A couple of days ago I reported of the speculations about an increased activity of US assets in Aviano. After investigating the rumours, I discovered that activity of US aircraft supporting Unified Protector has decreased. The USN Growlers, as already explained, are flying single ship one sortie per day. The F-16CJs are flying 1 mission per day (2 sorties). On a daily basis, even the RJAF F-16s are flying a single mission with 2 aircraft, lasting on average 5 – 6 hours. Still on the ground, not flying from days, on stand by, there should be no more than 4 F-15Es and 4 A-10s.

4) Aksel Magdahl informed me that as of Apr. 15, the RNoAF flew 81 missions under Unified Protector (even if it is not clear whether it is a total comprising Odyssey Dawn or just since UP has begun).

• Day 1
• Day 2
• Day 3
• Day 4
• Day 5
• Day 6
• Day 7
• Day 8
• Day 9
• Day 10
• Day 11
• Day 12
• Day 13
• Day 14
• Day 15
• Day 16
• Day 17
• Day 18
• Day 19
• Day 20
• Day 21
• Day 22
• Day 23
• Day 24
• Day 25
• Day 26
• Day 27

“We will not take part in the air strikes as Italy is a former colonial power in Libya”. Italian PM Silvio Berlusconi words, backed by similar statements by both the Foreign and Defense Ministers, explained on Apr. 15 the attitude of Italy towards improving its contribution to Unified Protector, the NATO led mission in the North African country. Along with the 7 deployment airbases rendered available to the allies, 12 aircraft and4 ships were transferred under NATO command to enforce the NFZ over Libya and the arms embargo. However, although allies urged other partners to supply more combat planes capable of performing air strikes, Italy ruled out clearing its planes to drop bombs as well as the possibility of assigning to NATO more aircraft. Differently, Italy will also reconsider  its participation in some of the expensive overseas missions, like the one in Lebanon.

It still remains unclear whether the “no clearance to engage” applies also to the Tornado ECRs involved in SEAD strikes or not: considering the suppression of the enemy air defenses a defensive rather than offessive mission, it is reasonable to think that the Italian planes would fire their HARM missiles if needed to shut down a Libyan radar site, otherwise, the number of missions flown by the 155° Gruppo “Panthers” since Mar. 19 would be only an unbelievable waste of money (time, fuel, etc.).

As already explained in the previous Debriefs, Italy was one of the key candidates to increase NATO firepower: the Tornados are already deployed to Trapani, headquarters of the Italian Air Force Task Group Air, to perform reconnaissance and buddy air-to-air refueling, hence there would have been no need to relocate if Italy had decided to contribute with more aircraft.

A similar decision was taken by Spain that has said it doesn’t intend to give its F-18s the order to change their role and to employ its Hornets against ground targets. Other partner that could be called to provide more firepower are the Netherlands and Sweden with the latter already partially involved in the air to ground role with the JAS-39 Gripen (not dropping bombs, but at least identifying targets for air strikes within reconnaissance missions).

While NATO partners discuss if it is better to enlarge the fleet of planes capable of attacking Libyan ground targets rather than supplying rebels with arms, Gaddafi’s forces have intensified their attacks with rockets and heavy artillery on the besieged Misratah where allies performed a few attacks. NATO attacked also Tripoli, striking a missile battery and two other targets in and around the capital city.

Dealing with the NATO operation, since the beginning of Unified Protector (31 March 2011, 08.00GMT) a total of 2,583 sorties and 1087 strike sorties were conducted. On Apr. 15, 145 sorties were flown, 58 of which were strikes. Among the key targets struck on Day 28: 5 bunkers in the vicinity of Sirte, 2 tanks in the vicinity of Zintan, 2 tanks in the vicinity of Misratah, and 4 bunkers in or around Tripoli. Interestingly, in the previous 24 hours (on Apr. 14) during the 60 of 146 sorties flown, the allied aircraft had hit 8 bunkers, 4 ammunition storages sites, 2 armoured personnel carriers in the vicinity of Sirte, 1 SA-3 radar and 1 SA-3 missile laucher in the vicinity of Tunisian border, 3 bunkers and 1 helicopter (probably on the ground) in the vicinity of Misratah and 2 ammunition storage sites, 1 radar and 1 tank in the vicinity of Tripoli. Clearly, some (mobile?) SAM sites can be still found in Libya.

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) For the first time, Gaddafi’s forces used MAT-120 mortar-launched cluster bombs which were fired into populated areas. Although not accurate cluster bombs used in Misratah contains 21 bomblets capable of covering large areas (2/3 of a football field) posing civilian under serious risk and, for this reason, they were banned by those nations that ratified the Convention on Cluster Munitions, adopted in Dublin, Ireland in May 2008 (that became International law in 2010).

Source: NYT

2) According to the BBC, RAF Typhoons were not employed as efficiently as possible because, of the 48 pilots who are qualified on the Typhoon, only 8 can perform ground attacks. “Several other pilots are grounded as they could not make the required number of training hours because of a lack of spare parts for the aircraft”.

French MoD released a weekly update about Operation Harmattan. Since Apr. 7, the French military provides an average of 30 sorties, 120 flying hours a day, half of which are strike missions. These figures represent 20% of the overall NATO flying activity and 25% of all the air strikes conducted within Unified Protector.

Since April 7, 2011, the French military provides an average of thirty times a day, or about 120 hours of flying time, approximately half of the ground strike missions. Ces chiffres représentent 20% des sorties de l’OTAN et 25% des sorties d’attaques au sol. These figures represent 20% of the outputs of NATO and 25% of output ground attacks.

Between April 7, 2011 6:00 ET and April 14, 2011 0600, France has conducted:

• 96 air strike sorties ( Rafale Air, Mirage 2000-D et Mirage F1 CR / Rafale Marine et Super-Etendard Marine)
• 48 reconnaissance sorties ( Rafale Air, Mirage F1 CR et Rafale Marine / Reco NG)
• 22 air defense sorties ( Mirage 2000-5 from Souda Bay in cooperation with Qatar)
• 12 air space management (E3F and E2C)
• 33 air-to-air refueling sorties (C135 and Rafale Marine / Super Etendard Marine)

Furthermore, since Apr. 7, the air to ground activity of the French aircraft have neutralized around 20 targets, including 15 military vehicles, 2 SA-2, 5 pieces of artillery, multiple rocket launchers and a piece of anti-aircraft artillery. A command post near Sirte, and an ammunition depot between Brega and Adjabiya were also destroyed.

3) In the last days I explained that the Swedish Air Force was flying reconnaissance with what I thought was a Recce Lite pod. Actually, the one in the pictures was not a Recce Lite pod but a Litening pod: datalink antenna aside (that it is not always present underneath the pod), the two pods, sharing 70% of common parts, are impossible to distinguish each other.

Source: Internet (the Litening and Recce Lite pods. Identical (apart from the data link antenna, that is not always required).

Since the Gripen can carry the Recce Lite and this pod was used for tests in Sweden I thought that was the kind of recce pod used by the Swedish Gripens. However, a further investigation and the help of Karl-Johan Norén (a reader of this blog) and @GripenNews on Twitter enabled me to discover that the one used by the JAS-39 is the large MPRS with Spaningskapsel 39 (SPK39IV).

SweAF released some pictures, reduced in quality of imagery taken by the Gripens of the Okba Ibn Nafa SAM site near Tripoli.

Dealing with the Swedish mission (named Operation Karakal), the aircraft are flying two missions per day; so far 16 missions were flown from Apr. 7 to Apr. 13. The C-130 tanker (Swedish designation TP-84) suffered an engine transmission fault, and also a bird strike during the landing, requiring two days of repairs.

4) Yesterday I published a picture showing a Belgian Air Force F-16 with an LGB of the same type, even in terms of colors, of the one dropped on the rebels on Apr. 7. Jakob Knold noticed the same GBU-12s also on the RDAF F-16 as the following official Royal Danish Air Force pictures show.

5) The RNoAF has conducted 80 sorties dropping more than 100 PGMs Lieutenant, Colonel and senior spokesman John Espen Lien of the Armed Forces Operational Headquarters explained in an interview published on the Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet.
The 6 F-16s deployed to Souda Bay, Crete, are flying 4 to 8 sorties per day. They are mostly engaging ground targets with both laser guided and GPS guided bombs, even if some reconnaissance sorties were flown in the last days. For the RNoAF, that took part in Allied Force in Serbia in 1999, Unified Protector it’s the most intense air operation since WWII.

• Day 1
• Day 2
• Day 3
• Day 4
• Day 5
• Day 6
• Day 7
• Day 8
• Day 9
• Day 10
• Day 11
• Day 12
• Day 13
• Day 14
• Day 15
• Day 16
• Day 17
• Day 18
• Day 19
• Day 20
• Day 21
• Day 22
• Day 23
• Day 24
• Day 25
• Day 26

What happened on Day 27 of Odyssey Dawn/Unified Protector can be summarized in the few words used by Al Jazeera English Libya Live Blog that, just past the midnight on Day 28, provided the following recap of the situation:

After two days of discussions and two high-level meetings over the past few hours, there appears to be little consensus on how to resolve the conflict in Libya.

In the Egyptian capital Cairo, the United Nations and other major blocs have called for a political solution.

While during a meeting in the German capital Berlin, NATO said it will continue military strikes for as long as it is necessary.

US secretary of state Hillary Clinton, said that the US military will “strongly support” the coalition until the work is completed and Gaddafi is dislodged. Even if someone thinks that Clinton’s words were a confirmation on a renewed involvement of the US in the air strikes, urged by the European diplomacy in the previous days, it seems that, at least for the moment, the Americans will continue supporting Unified Protector with the same assets already under NATO command. There are reports of increased activity at Aviano airbase, where the majority of the US bombers (F-15Es and A-10s) were (and still are) deployed but there’s no confirmation so far that the missions flown were directly related to the ops over Libya.

Misratah is still under siege, with local population and rebels asking for more NATO air strikes to avoid a massacre as the strategic town was blasted with a barrage of rockets, mortar fire and heavy artillery but, at the same time, the almost four-week old air campaign has failed to knock the Libyan leader off.

A fierce fighting is still taking place in Ajdabiya, where the AFP news agency reported that a convoy of 60 rebel vehicles came under heavy fire while, NATO air strikes were conduceted on Tripoli and at al-Assah, located about 170 km to the west of the capital city.

Furthermore, while allied bombs hit targets in downtown Tripoli on Apr. 14, Gaddafi patrolled the streets of the capital in an open-top vehicle with horns blazing as he waved to the people along the way.

Source: Reuters via AJE

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) Although without providing as many details as one might expect, the Italian MoD is one of the few that is still providing a daily update on the missions flown for Unified Protector. During the last 24 hrs, the Italian contingent flew 6 missions with 2 aircraft each: 2x Tornados, 3x Typhoons, 1x Harriers from Garibaldi aircraft carrier.

2) For sure one of the most interesting detachment that is not releasing information on the number and type of mission flown for Unified Protector is the UAE AF one at Decimomannu. However the UAE F-16s and Mirage 2000s are attracting the interest of thousands spotters and aircraft enthusiasts from Europe, that are flying to Sardinia to see them departing and returning for their patrol flights, along with the Dutch F-16s operating from the same base. Below you can see some pictures taken at Decimomannu by Giovanni Maduli.

3) In the Day 21 Debrief, explaining that many had asked me to determine the plane involved in the blue-of-blue accident when a GBU-12 was dropped by a NATO aircraft on a rebel tank column advancing from Ajdabiyah to Brega, I wrote:

[...]

So far, analyzing the pictures made available by both the various air forces involved and by AP, Getty etc., I think I’ve seen that type of LGB (same colors etc) attached to the CAF CF-18s [...], however, this obviously doesn’t mean that Canadian planes were involved in the friendly fire incident!

[...]

Finally, I’ve found a USAF picture showing another NATO aircraft, a Belgian Air Force F-16, carrying a GBU-12 of the same type, even in terms of colors, of the one dropped on the rebels on Apr. 7. The picture was not taken during Unified Protector, but during Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan but I think it is worth a mention since it shows, as explained, that not only the CAF uses that kind of LGB in Libya.

• Day 1
• Day 2
• Day 3
• Day 4
• Day 5
• Day 6
• Day 7
• Day 8
• Day 9
• Day 10
• Day 11
• Day 12
• Day 13
• Day 14
• Day 15
• Day 16
• Day 17
• Day 18
• Day 19
• Day 20
• Day 21
• Day 22
• Day 23
• Day 24
• Day 25

For some important newspapers and magazines the news of the Day 26 is that, in spite of the announced US withdrawal after the transfer of authority to NATO of the air campaign in Libya, American planes have conducted air strikes attacking Gaddafi’s air defenses. After US handed over command of the Operation Odyssey Dawn (named Unified Protector under NATO), along with providing surveillance and air-to-air refueling operations, USAF and USN planes performed attacks on Libyan SAM sites to take out what remained of the Libyan air defense systems.

The news should not come unexpected because, among the US assets under NATO command, there are also 5 EA-18 Growlers and 6 F-16CJ that are capable to perform SEAD strikes (for a description of a SEAD mission please read the first daily debriefs on this website). Hence, NATO has no need to request the US military for additional planes to fulfil a role that, actually, is not characterized as a ‘strike,’ because the suppression of air defenses is considered a defensive mission. For instance even Italy, performing SEAD tasks with the Tornado ECR of the 155° Gruppo deployed at Trapani (for more details, please read the Day 25 Debrief), considers this type of mission defensive rather than offesive.

Therefore, NATO can issue Air Tasking Orders (ATOs) without any special request because F-16s and EA-18s are under NATO command and control, and no special request is needed to release the aircraft for operations against mobile and fixed regime air defense systems. Since Apr. 4, when the change of command took place) the US SEAD planes have flown a to total of 97 sorties and, on 3 occasions (on Apr. 4, 6 and 7), they fired ordnance. Noteworthy, the strikes took place at the beginning of the NATO operations, when the risk posed by SAM and MANPADS was probably higher than it currently is.

Dealing with the US SEAD assets it would be interesting to know if they are flying mainly at night. In fact, visiting the Italian Task Group at Trapani I’ve noticed an intense activity by the Italian Tornado ECR during daylight and, provided that the SAM radar activity decreased since the beginning of Odyssey Dawn, maybe the SEAD tasks are shared, in these days, in the following way: the Italians perform the task mainly during the day, while the Americans fly the same types of mission, preferably at night.

Since Apr. 1, US aircraft have flown 35 percent of all sorties, 77 percent of all air-to-air refueling sorties and 27 percent of all intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance sorties, US Marine Corps Col. Dave Lapan said. Along with tankers, spyplanes, drones, etc, American CSAR assets are in the area as well as maritime patrol planes and USN ships. More in detail the current US Orbat for Unified Protector/Odyssey Dawn (some assets are still operated under US command) as reported by the NYT: one guided-missile destroyer; one P-3C Orion maritime patrol aircraft; one EP-3E signals reconnaissance aircraft; 22 KC-135 tankers; six F-16CJ aircraft; five EA-18G attack aircraft; two E-3 command and control aircraft; two EC-130 signals and communications aircraft; two RC-135 reconnaissance aircraft; one U-2 high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft; one E-8 Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System; two MQ-1 Predator unmanned aerial vehicles; and one RQ-4 Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle.

The “disclosure” raised questions among those who didn’t know the US planes were still striking ground targets, if needed. Other described the SEAD capability as a “unique capability” of the US military, a statement that is clearly wrong, or at least not completely correct. For example, the Associated Press wrote: “Italy and other nations are also participating, but defense officials said such missions [SEAD one] are considered a unique capability that the U.S. can perform”. That’s not true because, as explained many times in the previous debrief, the Italian Tornado ECRs are some of the few specialized SEAD platforms operating in the theatre and there are no other aircraft with the same capabilities currently available (EA-18G aside). For sure, the Growler can do something more, that is to say it not only detects and destroys radar sites, but can also actively jam Libyan signals rendering the radio and radar equipment unusable, however considering SEAD a unique US capability is a twist.

The SEAD “revelation” came on the day after some Governments urged NATO and other partners to intensify strikes against the Libyan government forces, complaining about the reduced American role in the conflict even if, so far, the DoD has not received requests for additional firepower or to resume air strikes with those assets currently in stand by status.

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) NATO conducted 153 sorties (58 air strikes) on Apr. 13, bringing the total to 2.191 sorties and 890 air strikes. Among the key targets engaged on Day 26, 13 bunkers, 1 Tank and 1 Amoured Personnel Carrier destroyed in the vicinity of Tripoli, and 3 Multiple Rocket Launchers destroyed in the vicinity of Brega.

2) The Swedish Air Force released some interesting information and pictures about the first mission performed by the JAS 39 Gripen over Libya on Apr. 8. The two fighters, using radio callsign “Tiger 37″ departed from Sigonella airbase at 15.55LT along with a TP84 (C-130) tanker using c/s “Mighty 65″ (later spelt “Mity”). After refueling at FL100, the two Gripens entered the Libyan airspace to enforce the No-Fly Zone and returned to “Saigon” shortly after 18.30LT. It was the very first mission with Swedish fighter jets in more than 50 years. Interestingly, as noticed on other aircraft involved in the enforcement of the NFZ and not in the air strikes, even the SweAF Gripen flew with a Reccelite reconnaissance pod.

3) The Italian contingent in the last 24 hrs flew 9 missions (2 acft for each one): 3x AV-8B, 3x Tornados (both ECRs and IDSs) and 3x Eurofighter Typhoons. Since they are flying “reconnaissance and air defense missions” according to the MoD, I think that even the AV-8B+ Harriers of the Marina Militare are flying their sorties with air-to-air missiles and Reccelite recce pods. Below, some pictures of the Tornado IDS equipped with Reccelite at Trapani airbase on Apr. 12.

4) The French MoD is no longer updating its website with the daily reports of missions and sorties flown by the FAF and FNy.

• Day 1
• Day 2
• Day 3
• Day 4
• Day 5
• Day 6
• Day 7
• Day 8
• Day 9
• Day 10
• Day 11
• Day 12
• Day 13
• Day 14
• Day 15
• Day 16
• Day 17
• Day 18
• Day 19
• Day 20
• Day 21
• Day 22
• Day 23
• Day 24

Trapani airbase

I spent Day 25 of Odyssey Dawn/Unified Protector at Trapani-Birgi, one of the most active forward operating bases for the Libyan crisis. The airbase is the operative headquarters of the Italian Air Force contingent, to be soon become a Task Group “Air” and put under the direct command of Col. Mauro Gabetta, Cdr of the 37° Stormo. The base permanently hosts the NATO Forward Operating Base and, since Odyssey Dawn began, the Task Force Libeccio, the air detachment of the Canadian Armed Forces deployed on Operation Mobile. The overall flying activity was pretty intense on Day 25 with several Tornado ECR and IDS missions since early morning, a CC-150 tanker sortie and 2 RAF VC-10s sorties plus the usual training activity of the local based 18° Gruppo with its F-16 ADFs. The Typhoons did not fly until the evening, most probably because scheduled for night CAPs. As the 37° Stormo PAO, Lt.Col. Di Battista explained: “there’s no fixed schedule since the operative activity depends on NATO taskings. There are days in which the flying activity is mainly during daylight and others when it is shifted towards night”. The base is operative on an H24 basis.

Italian Task Group “Air”

Hosted in the 82° CSAR apron are the Tornado ECRs of the 50° Stormo and the Tornado IDSs of the 6° Stormo assigned to NATO to perform, respectively, Suppression of Enemy Air Defences and reconnaissance missions. SEAD missions are flown with the standard load of 2 AGM-88 HARM missiles, while the recce see the Tornado IDSs flying with the Reccelite pod on the right underfuselage pylon. Deployed to Trapani but not assigned to NATO (hence operating under National command) are also the IDSs performing air-to-air refueling in favour of other Tornados (both ECRs and IDSs). Also flying under Italian command although supporting Italian sorties tasked for Unified Protector is a single KC-130J of the 46^ Brigata Aerea, initially deployed to Trapani, but currently operating almost exclusively from Pisa airbase. Next to the Tornados, the HH-3Fs of the local 82° SAR Center ensure a raised level of readiness for SAR missions needed to search and rescue any crews in emergency.

Eight Eurofighter Typhoons belonging to both the 4° and 36° Stormo (4 of which assigned to NATO) operate from the 18° Gruppo that has flown the F-16s over Libya until the beginning of Unified Protector. The Typhoons are flying in the “heavy” configuration already mentioned in the daily debrief some days ago, with 4 AIM-120s, 4 IRIS-T and 3 drop tanks, while the F-16 flew with 2 drop tanks, 4 AMRAAMs and 2 AIM-9Ls. With the end of the activities for Odyssey Dawn some F-16s have been assigned to the QRA service while the remaining ones are flying standard training sorties.

Canadian Detachment

Trapani is currently being the base of Op. Mobile, the Canadian Air Force mission, with 7 CF-18s involved in the air-to-ground role and 2 CC-150 (A310) used for air-to-air refueling. While the tankers are parked in the civil apron, the Hornets use the Zulu apon located on the western side of the 13/31 runway. Actually, 6 CF-18s are assigned to NATO to perform daily sorties in Libya, one being used as a spare. The CAF detachment uses the local hangars (assigned to the HH-3Fs of the 82° Stormo before it moved to the southeastern part of the airport) to perform maintenance activities as well as to store equipment and parts, besides a few containers hosting the operative facilities of the Canadians and a tent for the mess (supplied by a local catering service). The aircraft are not necessarily always flying day and night missions but they perform missions according to the NATO taskings. For instance, during my visit, while all the 6 were checked and fully armed, 2 aircraft (+1 spare) were on-call meaning that they could be ordered to take off to relieve other flights performing combat patrols and intervene on targets of opportunity if needed. Indeed they were ordered to depart only in the late afternoon. The aircraft are armed (as the remaining 4) with 2 AIM-9Ls, 1 AIM-120C, 2 GBU-12s, a Sniper XR pod and 3 drop tanks, a heavy configuration slightly different from that used during the first days of the air campaign, when the planes of the 425 Sqn flew with 4 GBUs and 1 drop tank.

As of Apr. 12 at 23.59 UTC the CF-188s have flown 98 sorties, while the CC-150 43 sorties.

Belonging also to the Task Force Libeccio, but deployed to Sigonella, a CP-140 Aurora detachment made up from 405 Long Range Patrol Squadron at 14 Wing Greenwood, Nova Scotia, and 407 Long Range Patrol Squadron at 19 Wing Comox, British Columbia, flying maritime patrol missions in the embargo zone at sea has flown 16 sorties.

NATO Forward Operating Base

Another interesting guest of the base is the NATO Forward Operating Bases with dedicated areas and facilities (other FOBs in the Med. being Konya and Preveza). The base is a sort of extraterritorial place (in fact, I was escorted in the apron by Capt. Wilko ter Horst from NATO E-3A AWACS Component Public Affair Office. Currently being hosted by the FOB are 5(!) E-3s in both A version (used by NATO) and D version (used by RAF): 3 (out of 17) NATO’s and 2 (out of 7) RAF’s ones. That’s the maximum number of E-3s that can be parked and moved in the (relatively) small apron of the FOB, the same it was reached in 1999 during Allied Force operation. In fact, from a few days, the British E-3Ds, previously detached to Akrotiri, where moved to Trapani, where, thanks to the similiarities between the A and D version, they can benefit of the installation that is tailored to manage and service the “Sentry”.

Dealing with the two different types of aircraft, externally, besides the Luxemburg civil registration (NATO is an inter-governative organisation that cannot certify a fleet hence the aircraft are registered in Luxembourg, a partner without its own air force, and each plane carries), the royal Luxembourg lion emblem on its vertical tail and the NATO markings, the A differs from the D version because of the obsolete (and smoky) engines and the type of air-to-air refueling system: the A has a receptable and can be refueled by those tankers equipped with a boom while the D model has a probe, that is suitable for the hose and drogue capable tankers. For what concerns the internal layout, it is similar (as the one of any other AWACS platform) even if the software used by the consoles in the Sentry AEW.1 (British designation for E-3D)is more modern than the one running on the older E-3A. The RAF fleet is assigned to the 8 Sqn based at RAF Waddington, while the NATO one is based at Geilenkirken in Germany.

Walking inside the cabin of an E-3A from the cockpit to the tail, you find the communication and data processing equipment and then you reach the main body of the aircraft, where display and control consoles of the mission crew are located. As Capt. ter Horst explained, along with pilots (aircraft commander and co-pilot), navigator and engineer, who serve in on the cockpit, on board an E-3 a mission crew operates under command of a Tactical Director. The mission crew consists of a surveillance team, a passive detection controller (responsible of the on-board ESM system needed to improve the situational awareness and to update the Electronic Order of Battle), a weapons team (controllers that are responsible for the management of the various flying assets in the different scenarios: DCA, OCA, CAS, BAI, CSAR, etc), a communications operator and some technicians that are responsible for both the radar and the consoles/displays. Since the aircraft can be refueled to fly missions that can last much more than 8 hours, the aft part of the cabin, along with the restroom, houses some retractable beds, more comfortable seats/armchairs and a kitchen equipped with an oven.

Recap of Day 25 facts

The Day was characterized by the critics to NATO coming from both the French and British foreign ministers who said that the alliance is not doing enough to destroy heavy weaponry used by Gaddafi’s forces. They urged NATO allies to do more to protect civilians and to intensify military operations against the Libyan regime.

Brig. Gen. Mark Van Uhm, Chief Allied Ops at SHAPE, rejected French and British criticism saying NATO is successfully enforcing the arms embargo and the No-Fly Zone as well as protecting civilians in Libya.

Meanwhile, fierce fighting took place at the gates of Ajdabiya, where Gaddafi’s forces continued to attack rebel positions and lines, and in Misratah, under artillery attack.

Since the beginning of the NATO operation (31 March 2011, 08.00GMT) a total of 2038 sorties and 832 strike sorties were conducted by the alliance. On Apr. 12, NATO flew 159 sorties, 60 of which were air strikes. Noteworthy, in the daily report NATO’s website provided a few more details about the target struck: 12 tanks destroyed in the vicinity of Misrata; 4 tanks and 1 pick-up truck with an anti-aircraft gun destroyed southeast of Sirte.

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) Chief of the air staff Air Chief Marshal Sir Stephen Dalton, during the Royal Aeronautical Society’s Aerospace 2011 conference in London revealed that two RAF Typhoons, each dorpped one Paveway II 454kg (1,000lb) bomb against loyalist ground vehicles that were successfully and accurately destroyed. The strike represents an important milestone for the multi-role Typhoon whose debut in the air-to-ground role was on Apr. 10, when F-2000s performed joint sorties with Tornado GR4s also deployed at Gioia del Colle.

• Day 1
• Day 2
• Day 3
• Day 4
• Day 5
• Day 6
• Day 7
• Day 8
• Day 9
• Day 10
• Day 11
• Day 12
• Day 13
• Day 14
• Day 15
• Day 16
• Day 17
• Day 18
• Day 19
• Day 20
• Day 21
• Day 22
• Day 23

Day 24 saw the quick and quite expected collapse of the African roadmap to halt Libya’s civil war: as representatives from the African Union were in Benghazi to discuss with rebels the plan for peace, including immediate ceasefire, already accepted by Gaddafi after talks with South African President Jacob Zuma, head of an African Union mission, insurgents said Misratah was shelled by pro-government forces. Fierce fighting took place almost house-to-house in the besieged town.

NATO refused to suspend its bombing of Gaddafi’s forces unless there was a credible and verifiable ceasefire since, as Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen told during a press briefing in Brussels, Libyan government had already announced ceasefires in the past, but “they did not keep their promises.” For this reason air strike continued on Apr. 11, with allied airplanes hitting also military and (according to the State TV) civilian sites in Al Jufrah, in Central Libya, some 460 km to the southeast of Tripoli.

Since the beginning of Unified Protector (31 March 2011, 08.00GMT) NATO has flown a total of 1721 sorties conducting 713 strike sorties. On Apr. 10, out of 154 flown ones, 70 were strike sorties, intended to identify and engage ground targets, but not necessarily involving the use of PGMs.
Noteworthy, NATO has made available the exact number of assets currently under its command: 195.

According to the Al Jazeera English Libya Live Blog, the cost of the air war in Libya for the US military has reached $608million (from Mar. 19 to Apr. 4, thus including both Odyssey Dawn and Unified Protector) as an unidentified US defence official told to the AFP news agency. For the USAF alone, the cost of the war was estimated in about $4 million a day, Air Force Secretary Michael Donley explained to reports a week ago, even if it was a figure expected to come down as other allies carried out more air strike missions with the US aircraft playing only a support role.

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) A few days ago, the Canadian Combat Camera released the following video showing the footage from a CF-18 targeting pod as the Canadian Hornet hit a Scud launcher storage in souther Libya.

The video reminded me two things. First one, that the Scud Hunting, was an important phase of Desert Storm in Iraq when the coalition committed dedicated assets and special forces to locate and destroy Scuds and their launchers. Despite being inaccurate, the Scud missiles back in 1991 served as an effective terror weapon when fired against densely populated urban areas. On Jan. 18, 1991, 7 Scuds hit Israeli towns of Haifa and Tel Aviv causing nearly 50 deads. Similar attacks followed in the next days. The capability to prevent further launches was essential to persuade Israel to not intervene in the conflict spurring a reaction by other Arab nations.  CAPs were arranged over those areas where Scud launchers were suspected to be present: in southern Iraq, from where they could hit Saudi Arabia, and in the western part of the country, along the border with Jordan, where they could be fired at Israel. Despite the use of LANTIRN targeting pods by F-15Es and satellites, the Iraqi TELs (Transporter Erector Launcher) were extremely difficult to detect because they were hidden under bridges or inside camouflaged culverts and they were withdrawn and moved to another location immediately after fired, increasing their survivability. Even if the allied aircraft were a deterrent for Scud launches they failed to destroy the majority of the TELs as post-war reviews underlined.

Second thing that the footage reminded me is that two Scuds were fired in 1986 by Gaddafi against Lampedusa island as a retaliatory attack in response to the US air strikes in both Tripoli and Benghazi. The two SS-1s did not reach the Italian island, but they scared a lot the local population.

When Odyssey Dawn began, many in Italy feared that some remaining Scud-Bs could be fired towards Italy. On this subject, Tom Cooper of ACIG.org told me at the end of March:

I’m sure at least a brigade/battalion of these is still operational. Reportedly no more but 4 TELs (plus few in storage) and around 50 missiles in total. The brigade in question was usually deployed in Syrte area. IMHO, that’s one of the reasons why that place has been particularly heavily targeted, in the last few days.

Here’s an excerpt of the press conference regarding the military actions in Libya, given by Gen. Carter Ham, commander U.S. Africa Command, in Sigonella on Mar. 24, 2011. The one below was the very first question Ham was called to answer:

Q: Yes, do you think Sicily is at risk of any direct attack by Libyan forces?

GEN. HAM: I do not think that Sicily is under threat of direct attack. Our mission is under the United Nations Security Council resolution and it’s very clear. It is to establish an arms embargo and to prevent the illegal shipment of arms to and from Libya. It is, secondly, to establish a no-fly zone so that his military aircraft cannot strike civilians, and thirdly, to protect the civilians from regime forces as best we can. And we’re accomplishing those missions. But I think the people here are safe from Libyan attacks, certainly.

Noteworthy, during the same period pictures of TELs 9K72E for R-17E/SS-1c SCUD-B appeared on an interesting blog at the following address:
http://milinme.wordpress.com/2011/03/17/arab-revolts-revolutions-libya-11/
. The one below should be credited to the above mentioned blog.

After reading the Day 13 Debrief pt.2 (about the “suspicious” Algerian AF flights to Libya) Richard Clements pointed me to the following interesting article on the subject, published by the Globe and Mail <a href=”http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/africa-mideast/rebels-fear-other-regimes-are-throwing-support-behind-gadhafis-forces/article1940647//”>here</a&#62; which contains some information about the Libyan Scuds:

March 14, 2011
Rebels fear other regimes are throwing support behind Gadhafi’s forces
By GRAEME SMITH
From Monday’s Globe and Mail
As the rebels retreat further, Algeria and Syria deny backing the regime in Tripoli

Rebels retreated under heavy bombardment over the weekend, and expressed growing alarm about Arab strongmen who have thrown their political weight – and, some suspect, military support – behind the regime in Tripoli.

As artillery and air strikes forced the rebels back along the main coastal highway, their chief military representative spoke for the first time about reports that Syria and Algeria are supplying men and weapons to Colonel Moammar Gadhafi.

Omar Hariri, military head of the Libyan Provisional Transitional National Council, said he’s concerned about reports that Col. Gadhafi hired Algerian pilots for bombing raids on Libyan targets. The council also fears that a Syrian ship loaded with weapons has sailed for Tripoli, he said.

“I hope this isn’t true,” Mr. Hariri said. “They’re our brothers.”

The regimes in Algeria and Syria have denied such allegations.

However, the rebels’ suspicions about an Algerian role, in particular, grew stronger in recent days they collected data from the air traffic control tower at Benina International Airport. The tarmac outside of Benghazi remains silent as the regime’s aircraft dominate the skies, but rebels have switched on radar and other monitoring systems. As an old printer grinds out reports about aircraft movement over Libyan skies, former pilots say they’re seeing a disturbing number of Algerian military flights to airstrips controlled by Col. Gadhafi.

The rebels are still struggling to get more recent data from their antiquated systems, but they supplied The Globe and Mail with records for 22 flights by Algerian aircraft to Libyan destinations between Feb. 19 and 26. Some are listed as passenger flights by Air Algerie, using civilian aircraft, but the majority are labelled “special flights” by aircraft bearing registration codes used by the Algerian military.

The records appear to show repeated flights by C-130 Hercules and Ilyushin Il-76, aircraft big enough carry battle tanks, from Algeria and within Libya. The destinations include small airports in Sabha and Surt, key forward bases for the regime forces now advancing on rebels in the east.

“The Algerians denied this very loudly, but they cannot deny this data,” said Gamal Elkour, a former flight engineer. “What did these planes carry? Fruits and vegetables?”

Algeria has described its role in the Libyan crisis as purely humanitarian, helping with evacuations. A senior Algerian official told Reuters last week that military support for the regime in Tripoli would be “absolutely inconceivable.”

Syria has also denied reports of involvement in the conflict. Local media in Damascus say the government has expressed outrage at reports on Al-Jazeera television about a Syrian boat carrying weapons and vehicles to Tripoli, and Damascus further denies reports of Syrian soldiers fighting alongside Col. Gadhafi’s forces.

Whatever the source, rebel commanders say their enemies now appear better equipped and organized. General Abdel-Fattah Younis, chief of staff for the rebel forces, said the regime’s weapons in the field now include R-17 Scud missiles.

“At the beginning, the momentum was good and we made really fast gains, but then he [Col. Gadhafi] started recruiting more mercenaries and bringing more armaments like the R-17 missiles and other heavy armaments,” he said. “What we’re trying to do now, is lure them into an area where we can even the fight.”

[...]

The Arab League supported the rebel call for a no-fly zone in a statement on Saturday, and recognized the council in Benghazi as the country’s legitimate government. Algeria and Syria reportedly offered dissenting views, perhaps nervous about dissent within their own borders.

“The ordinary people in Syria and Algeria are just like us,” said a rebel fighter, Mutaz El-Aukely, 29, smoking a cigarette on the waterfront in Benghazi. “They haven’t had their revolutions yet, and their leaders are afraid.”

So, most probably, some Scuds (B version) are in the hands of the regime and could be used like Saddam Hussein did in 1991. However they can be hidden and fired without the risk of being detected by the allied planes in those areas that are not covered by the NFZ, zones that are too far from Lampedusa island. On the paper, the range of a Scud-B should be around 300 km with a CEP (Circular Error Probable) of 450 mt: being 270 km away from the nearest patch of Libyan soil, Lampedusa should be out of reach of any SS-1C Scud-B in the hands of Gaddafi.

2) In the last 24 hrs the RDAF F-16s destroyed 2 tanks near Ajdabiya. Since the beginning of Odyssey Dawn, the Danish detachment has completed 82 missions during which has dropped 160 PGMs. The Italian contingent flew 8 mix (each with 2 aircraft): 3x Tornados, 5x Typhoons, 1x Harriers from Garibaldi aircraft carrier (I can’t understand why the only aircraft carrier mentioned when reporting about the war is Charles De Gaulle).

3) In the last weeks I was interviewed by many journalist about my theory that the French aggressive attitude at the beginning of the war was caused also by the need to showcase the Rafale (read Day 1, 2 debriefs and following for details). On Apr. 11, Al Jazeera English Libya Live Blog gave some details about an interview given by Saif al-Islam (Gaddafi’ son), over the weekend, in which he warned France that it would not make “a single Euro” out of the war and that it had lost important contracts that Libya would have signed to buy Airbus airliners and Rafale attack jets. But he didn’t rule out further negotiations, saying:

We are ready for talks even with the devil, but even the devil must know that there are red lines we will not cross.

Source: French Mod

• Day 1
• Day 2
• Day 3
• Day 4
• Day 5
• Day 6
• Day 7
• Day 8
• Day 9
• Day 10
• Day 11
• Day 12
• Day 13
• Day 14
• Day 15
• Day 16
• Day 17
• Day 18
• Day 19
• Day 20
• Day 21

From 00.00 to 23.59 of Apr.9, NATO has conducted 133 sorties, 56 of those being air strikes. The total since the beginning of Unified Protector is 1567 sorties and 643 air strike sorties. More than figures, which tell us just a little about the effectiveness of the air campaing (since not always air strikes end with planes dropping their ammunitions on ground targets), the reports coming from Libya seem to be the proof that NATO has changed its attitude, being a bit more aggressive and achieving some important results against the Gaddafi’s forces. After many people, not only on rebel side, argued about a too conservative use of force by the allied aircraft, it looks like that NATO has started to hit loyalist vehicles hard, where and when needed. And it seems also that it is willing now to give the public opinion some proofs of this new attitude.

Air strikes were conducted across the country and destroyed key logistic facilities and several armoured vehicles of the Libyan Government. Allied aircraft struck ammunition stockpiles of the Libyan Government east of Tripoli that were being used to resupply forces involved in shelling innocent civilians in Misratah and other population centers.

The NATO’s press release gives some interesting details on Day 22 activity:

“In addition to hitting their supplies, our aircraft successfully destroyed a significant percentage of the Libyan Government’s armoured forces,” said Lieutenant-General Charlie Bouchard, the Commander of Operation Unified Protector. “Some of these armoured forces also were involved in the indiscriminate shelling of Misratah. By eliminating these heavy weapons, we are reducing the Gaddafi Regime’s ability to attack the local population.”

“We struck armoured vehicles that continue to fire on civilians in the vicinity of Misrata and Ajdabiya in the East,” added the Commander. “In one particular strike near Misrata, our pilots observed Regime forces loading armoured vehicles onto equipment transporters to be taken forward into population centres. NATO pilots, observing many troops around the transporter, first engaged a tank concealed along a nearby hedge line. This strike destroyed the tank and forced the nearby troops to flee, allowing the second strike to destroy other vehicles with minimal loss of life. We will not always be able to limit loss of life but Regime forces should understand that if they continue to operate these vehicles and follow orders to attack their own people they will be targeted.

NATO continues to observe the use of civilians as human shields by Gaddafi forces. “We have observed horrific examples of Regime forces deliberately placing their weapons systems close to civilians, their homes and even their places of worship,” said Lieutenant-General Bouchard. “Troops have also been observed hiding behind women and children. This type of behaviour violates the principles of international law and will not be tolerated.”

During Apr. 9 press briefing, NATO released some interesting videos of the air strike conducted by the RAF on Day 21, when Tornado GR4s, using Brimstone missiles and Paveway IV bombs in the area of Ajdabiyah (hitting two tanks) and in the area of Misratah (hitting 5 tanks). The “Tonkas” were involved in armed air reconnaissance and overwatch patrols over Misratah, Brega and Ajdabiyah.

At 17.43 Al Jazeera English Libya Live Blog gave the news of a military helicopter with the Libyan rebel flag reportedly seen flying towards the fontline around Ajdabiya on Saturday despite a UN-imposed no-fly zone, showing also a nice picture by AFP of a Mi-24 clearly violating the NFZ (that, worth a remind, applies to both the rebel and governative planes). At 20.41, AJE reported of a Mig-23 flown by a rebel pilot, intercepted and forced to land back at Benina few minutes after take off. The aircraft, was immediately detected by a patrolling E-3 AWACS which directed one of the CAP flights to visually identify it. The Mig did not display any aggressive action and was simply led to land back at the airfield located to the south of Benghazi; the RoE usually require a prior visual contact with the “bogie” (in order to prevent friendly fire) but such violations could be extremely risky as “unannounced” rebel flights appearing on NATO’s radars could be easily mistaken for government planes and being shot down. The fact that they wear Free Libya flag is not enough to determine its intentions (what if the aircraft with the Free Libya Air Force roundel is flown by a pro-Gaddafi?).

Source: AFP via AJE

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) After a long “silence” the Italian Air Force has provided through its official website some interesting pictures (without logos or watermarks, well done!) and details about its involvement in the Odyssey Dawn/Unified Protector ops. First of all I’m happy I had already “discovered” (read Day 13 Debrief) that the Tornado IDS of the 6° Stormo with Reccelite pod were transferred under the NATO command and were flying ISR (Intelligence Surveillance Reconnaissance) missions over Libya from Trapani airbase.

From Apr. 7, also the 36° Stormo is flying with its F-2000 in support of Unified Protector, with some planes deployed to Trapani, where the Italian Task Force is based). The 4 Typhoons of both 4° and 36° Stormo assigned to the NATP are involved in COMAOs (Combined Air Operations) and fly with 4 IRIS-T, 4 AMRAAM missiles and 3 drop tanks, a really “heavy configuration”.

We have discussed a lot about the Tornado ECRs and about the  KC-130Js and Tornado IDSs used in air-to-air refuelling missions. Less known is that the Italian Air Force has been providing 24 hours services to support flight operations in Since the beginning of the operations, Italian Air Force has granted the use of seven air bases at Trapani Birgi, Gioia del Colle, Sigonella, Decimomannu and Aviano: logistic support, refuelling, air traffic control, weather service, fire service, first aid service and foreign personnel lodging. Furthermore, in connection with the Libyan crisis the Italian Air Force has reinforced the national air defense/QRA system and raised the level of readiness. An increased number of Typhoons of 4° and 36° Stormo and F-16s of 37° Stormo are ready to take off in few minutes in order to intercept and counter any suspicious aircraft and without authorization for the overflight of national airspace. Moreover, a SPADA anti-aircraft missile battery was based at Trapani in order to stregthen the  air defense of the airbase. Even the SAR service has been reinforced with HH-3F and AB.212 helicopters ready to perform search and rescue missions from various airbases located across the Italian peninsula.

2) RNoAF F-16s have bombed about 30 targets in Libya. In an interesting article Morten Haga Lunde, a Norwegian high rank officer, explained that the main task of the coalition is to protect the civilian population in Libya against the abuse and murder from the Libyan army and the Libyan military system. He acknowledge the problem that, performing an air strike, the allied aircraft do not who is actually using those weapons that can fire into populated cities. For this reason, it is very difficult to distinguish who is inside a tank when this is seen as a legitimate target because the situation is extremely dynamic, with fighting shifting back and forth.

• Day 1
• Day 2
• Day 3
• Day 4
• Day 5
• Day 6
• Day 7
• Day 8
• Day 9
• Day 10
• Day 11
• Day 12
• Day 13
• Day 14
• Day 15
• Day 16
• Day 17
• Day 18
• Day 19
• Day 20

The battlefield hasn’t changed much in the last day. Misratah is still under siege and there’s no clear strategy to get out of the stalemate. Anyway, in spite of the often underlined lack of training, “Mad Max-like vehicles” (as someone dubbed them) and limited NATO air support (we have analyzed the reasons for the presumed lack of air strikes many times in the previous Debriefs), a group of rebels is resisting to an organized and better equipped army.

The following Al Jazeera English Libya live blog summarizes the situation:

9:49pm Libyan government forces continue to attack anti-Gaddafi fighters in the rebel-held town of Misurata, AFP reports.
Fierce fighting is ongoing in the city, about 215km east of Tripoli – which has seen battles rage for more than 40 days since the start of the uprising.
Doctors said last week that 200 people had been killed there since fighting began.

Many have asked me if it is possible, basing on the picture and footage available, to determine the type of aircraft involved in the blue-on-blue accident. The answer is obviously: not. That type of bomb is used by many aircraft. So far, analyzing the pictures made available by both the various air forces involved and by AP, Getty etc., I think I’ve seen that type of LGB (same colors etc) attached to the CAF CF-18s (see official Canadian Force Combat Camera pics below), however, this obviously doesn’t mean that Canadian planes were involved in the friendly fire incident!

Furthermore, a bomb dropped on the wrong target is not always a pilot’s fault. It could depend from a wrong designation made by the JSTAR (if available), by  an incorrect information gathered by ISR platforms, by a wrong description provided by an UAV performing the AFAC role, a faulty lasing system, and so on. So, whose bomb was the one dropped on the rebel column is not as important as understandy why it hit a “friendly” target.

In order to prevent further blue-on-blue accidents and to avoid being bombed by NATO aircraft as happened on Apr. 7, when the second such incidents in a week was caused by a GBU-12 dropped by an allied plane on a rebel tank column as it advanced from Ajdabiyah to the disputed oil terminal of Brega, the rebels have decided to paint the roofs of their vehicle in pink color.

As soon as the information spread (I tweeted the link to the Reuters news too), I received many questions, either on Twitter or via email, asking about the opportunity to paint vehicles’ roofs considering that targeting pods give the pilots black and white images. Actually, what must be said is that it wasn’t a good idea to advertize such a news because this will soon lead the loyalist to do the same on their vehicles and create even more confusion on the battlefield.

Even if I’ve never seen videos showing color footage from a Litening pod, I know that it uses a CCD camera that can provide hi-definition color images (I’m not sure Sniper pod can do the same), that can be of some use during daylight. Someone might think that the entire identification and targeting phase of an air strike during a CAS sortie is done without the need to have a prior visual ID of the target.

Some of the most interesting and detailed description of CAS missions with TIC (Troops In Contact) in Afghanistan can be found in a book, titled “Joint Force Harrier”, by Cdr Ade Orchard of the Royal Navy, who flew the British Harrier GR9 and explains:

Some non-aviators imagine that modern sensors have taken a lot of the skill out of identifying targets, but the reality is rather different. There’s no denying that the sensors are highly sophisticated pieces of equipment, but the pilot must first locate the target, or at least its approximately position, and then slew the sensor on to it: the aircraft needs to know what it’s pointing at. If the pilot can’t do this, the search and acquisition of a target is still possible, but it can take a hell of a long time.

Orchard describes many CAS missions requiring many orbits above the target area to get a visual ID of them before targeting, hence the possibility to visually identify them because of the roofs’ color ain’t that bad. What the RN pilots let the reader understand is also that the correct description of the position of the target, coming from a two way radio contact from a JTAC on the ground is paramount to get a correct identification of the enemy vehicle and to be cleared, in accordance with the RoE to attack it without the risk of friendly fire.

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) Two Italian Air Force C-130Js (operating under UN flag) flew on Apr. 8 from Brindisi to Benghazi – Benina, to carry 15 tons of aids and to embark 25 wounded Libyans from Misratah. Later on the same day, according to the Associated Press news agency, the European Union would be ready to put the boots on ground and launch “a humanitarian mission” in Libya’s Misurata within several days, but only if it has United Nations backing.

Anyway, the Italian mission to Benina should mean the airport is still in the hands of the rebels.

2) Nothing really new from public channels when the weekend comes. Even the French, which have been extremely talkative, did not publish any further update since Thursday. Dealing with the Norwegians, total mission count as of Apr. 7 is 42 (28 under NATO command), and the classic “ground targets engaged also last 24 hours” statement.

Aksel Magdahl, a Norwegian reader who’s sending me daily updates on the RNoAF contribution to Unified Protector explained that the spokesperson for Norwegian Armed Forces Operational Headquarters said that the Norwegian F-16’s were not involved in the two bombings of rebels “We hit what we were supposed to hit” he said…
http://www.nrk.no/nyheter/distrikt/nordland/1.7585905

Aksel left me with an interesting comment:

Would be interesting to know more about the tasking for the different air forces. Given all the ordinance dropped by the Danish, one could get the impression that they are assigned fixed targets – fly in, bomb gps position, fly out. Of course, if something like the ammo dump reported in position 31º27′N 12º55′E is their target, they can be hitting it for days to damage all of it. Mass production…

Dealing with the Italians, the daily press release from the MoD provides nothing more than the count of the missions flown: 9 in the last 24 hrs (117 in total), 4x Typhoons, 3x Harriers and 2x Tornados. Noteworthy, the number of missions flown by the Tornado ECRs is dropping, probably as a consequence of lack of SAM and radar sites. For instance, perhaps for the same reason, the USN Growlers are flying some “single ship” sorties out of Aviano.

• Day 1
• Day 2
• Day 3
• Day 4
• Day 5
• Day 6
• Day 7
• Day 8
• Day 9
• Day 10
• Day 11
• Day 12
• Day 13
• Day 14
• Day 15
• Day 16
• Day 17
• Day 18
• Day 19

Let do a quick recap of what happened on Apr. 7, Day 20 of the Odyssey Dawn then Unified Protector operation.
First of all the day began and ended with the news of two alleged friendly fire episodes. The first, was the one I already mentioned yesterday, about the RAF Tornados hitting an oilfield e Sarir oilfield in the Sirte basin, under rebel control, killing three guards. According to a media release by NATO, the accusation by Colonel Gaddafi that the alliance was responsible for fires in the Sarir Oil Fields is false and is a direct result of his attacks on his own people and infrastructure.

NATO has been monitoring this area since the beginning of the month. Attacks last week by pro-Gaddafi forces have resulted in a number of skirmishes with anti-Gaddafi forces and at least one fire at an oil facility in region of Sarir.

“We are aware that pro-Gaddafi forces have attacked this area in recent days, which resulted in at least one fire at an oil facility north of Sarir,” said Lieutenant General Charles Bouchard, Commander of NATO’s Operation UNIFIED PROTECTOR.

“To try and blame it on NATO is a clear demonstration how desperate this regime is. We have never conducted strike operations in this area because his forces were not threatening civilian population centers from there,” Bouchard said. “The only one responsible for this fire is the Gaddafi regime and we know he wants to disrupt oil getting to Tobruk.”

Hence, since there was no NATO air strikes on ground targets in that area, neither the alliance nor the Royal Air Force can be blamed for the death of the three guards at the oil terminal. So the first one was not a blue-on-blue fire.

The second mishap happened on Day 20, near the eastern town of Brega where five people died and 14 were wounded in an air strike that bombed a rebel tank column near the contested port.

In this case there was no need to wait for the NATO to admit its fault since the amateur footage made available on the Internet immediately after the incident had occurred, clearly shows two Paveway bombs hitting a rebel tank. Even if the explaination that the rebel tanks were moving in different directions and were difficult to distinguish who was operating them, what’s really weird is that Rear Admiral Russell Harding, deputy commander of NATO’s ops in Libya (the same who’s now famous and blamed for “not apologising” for the airstrikes), affirmed that until yesterday, in spite of the pictures available on the internet, the alliance didn’t know that the rebels were operating tanks. According to the rebels, they are operating some 400 tanks and NATO was informed that they were moving T55 and T72 heavy tanks from Benghazi to Brega.

Source: Libya State via The Telegraph

In the aftermath of the incident, BBC had reported the words of a rebel spokesman who had said that the air strike on the tanks column was carried out by pro-government forces, using SIAI SF-260 planes rather than by Nato.

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) Since the beginning of the NATO operation (31 March 2011, 08.00GMT) a total of 1170 sorties and 473
strike sorties have been conducted. On Apr. 6, 164 sorties (73 air strikes).

2) Sky News reported that the military intervention in Libya could lead Prime Minister David Cameron to rethink Britain’s defence budget recently cut with the famous SDSR. The report says that changes could include U-turns on plans to cut the Tornado GR4 fleet and to scrap surveillance planes. Noteworthy, both Sentinels and Nimrods, to be retired as a consequence of the SDSR, have been constantly flying vital ELINT missions out of Akrotiri.
Is the same rethink going to be prompted elsewhere?

3) The Swedish Air Force flew the first sortie in support of Unified Protector on Apr. 8. Two aircraft flew a brief 30 minute-long mission (it’s hard to believe they have been able to reach the Libyan airspace considering the distance from the NFZ). Dealing with the fuel problem, a visitor of this site wrote me that the problem was actually that the Swedish detachment had ordered the fuel for Sigonella, but the Italian logistics failed to deliver it when agreed. I’ve been asked to comment. I don’t know if this is true even if I can’t rule out the possibility that the shipment was not delivered on time because of an Italian fault but, as a general rule, a good Project Manager must be able to advance this type of “failures”, especially when the scheduled “work” (in this case the delivery of the fuel) is a requirement for having the aircraft ready for the mission.

Source: Swedish AF and NATO

4) There are also pictures showing TuAF F-16s taking off with a/a missiles from Sigonella in the last few days, even if I haven’t found any official confirmation of the deployment (even if I had mentioned the Turkish Air Force F-16s were expected). The RDAF flew the usual 4 missions dropping 4 bombs. Looks like they are the only ones to be able to drop bombs each time they fly. So far they have performed 62 missions dropping 150 bombs. The French MoD instead of providing the details of the last 24 hours, has issued a recap of the roles and missions flown since Mar. 31.

Between Thursday, March 31, 2011 at 6:00 ET Thursday, April 7, 2011 to 0600, France has made nearly 900 flight hours:

• 120 support and air interdiction sorties;
• 24 reconnaissance sorties;
• 13 AEW sorties;
• 22 AAR sorties with the C-135s and 28 buddy sorties with the Rafale and SEM;
• 22 sorties CAP sorties from Souda Bay

During such missions air strikes were carried out as follows:

• A tank west of Misratah (01 April);
• Five armored vehicles in the Sirte region (Apr. 2);
• Two tanks in the Ras Lanuf  area (Apr. 3);
• A military vehicle southwest of Brega (05 April);
• Two SAM sites, one in southern Zlitan and the other one a hundred miles south of Sirte (Apr. 6).

Source: French MoD

The Italian contingent, made of 12 aircraft, flew 108 missions since the beginning of Odyssey Dawn. During the last 24 hours, the Italian AF and Navy flew a total of 8 missions (each with 2 planes): 2x Typhoons, 3x Tornado ECRs, 3x AV-8B+ Harrier. Some fully armed Typhoons belonging to the 36° Stormo were photographed landing in Trapani. It’s still unclear wheter they are airframes belonging to the Gioia del Colle-based Wing flown by 4° Stormo pilots or they are flying with crews of the 12° or 10° Gruppo in direct support of Unified Protector.

5) The role of the Italian Navy Harriers deserves a few more words, following specific requests of explaination I’ve received by the thousands visitors of this blog. After reading in some forums and message boards that the AV-8B Harriers are used only for the air-to-ground role, someone guessed for which reason the Italian jump jets were reported by the Italian MoD to be flying in the air defence role. Simply, they are flying air defence sorties because the AV-8B+ Harriers serving with the Italian and Spanish Navy, similarly to what happened with the now retired Royal Navy Sea Harriers, are multirole aircraft whose primary role is the air defence of the fleet and aircraft carrier from which they operate (as the Sea Harriers in the Falkland War) with an air-to-ground secondary role being capable of performing Close Air Support with a wide variety of weapons. Unfortunately there are a bunch of wannabe experts that, on this and other subjects, in this period, are giving incorrect information.

• Day 1
• Day 2
• Day 3
• Day 4
• Day 5
• Day 6
• Day 7
• Day 8
• Day 9
• Day 10
• Day 11
• Day 12
• Day 13
• Day 14
• Day 15
• Day 16
• Day 17
• Day 18

As the stalemate on the battlefield in eastern Libya persists, the debate on the role played by NATO in Libya is making the news. In spite of the claimed accuracy of the allied aircraft involved in the air strikes on loyalist forces and the continuous reassurance that the US partial withdrawal did not affect the overall firepower and tactics, few achievements were obtained in the last few days under a military point of view. Misratah is still under siege and rebels are still under heavy shelling on the distuputed towns.

Source: Reuters

I’ve received many emails, comments, etc., each providing a different point of view or simply asking my opinion on the reasons for the scarce results achieved so far by NATO and I think it’s better clarifying a few points:

1. Provided that the US will support Unified Protector, as it is doing since the beginning, with tankers, SIGINT and SEAD planes, the number and type of aircraft involved in the operation, is consistent with the assigned mission (that, worth a remind, is not to defeat Gaddafi but to protect civilians). Should the terms of the intervention change, something different (as attack helicopters) will be needed in theatre.
2. For sure NATO’s mission is not aimed at providing air cover to the rebels because that’s not what the UN resolution asks. However, by simply stating that the protection must be achieved by taking “all necessary measures” the resolution comprises those air strikes and Close Air Support missions required to prevent loyalist from shelling civilians and rebels strongholds.
3. In my opinion, the main problem is not only with NATO’s tactics but, more generally speaking, with UN (and EU in particular) and their inability to timely react to such kind of crisis providing the right mandate for the situation. The problem is not only military but mainly political. For sure as suggested by the DoD, NATO can’t be successful on the Libyan battlefield without changing its tactics but how to employ the assets, RoE, target list, etc, are military choices strongly influenced at political level. How could the same Governments that have cut the military budgets and were unwilling to provide ground attack assets for either internal struggles, existing ties with Gaddafi or simply fearing that terrorists could get to the power, back a military solution of the crisis, now? Aware of their own limitations they are hoping in some sort of agreement that would soon lead to a ceasefire and that Gaddafi steps down.
4. The way NATO interprets the UN mandate on maritime arms embargo is tight meaning that, unless some weapons are found the ship is allowed the transit to/from Libyan ports. This enabled petrol brought by a ship previously checked by Nato to reach Tripoli supplying the starving loyalist forces. If that petrol is used to supply fighting forces threatening or possibly threatening civilians, they had to be stopped. Or not?

Anyway, Rear Admiral Russell Harding OBE, Deputy Commander of Combined Joint Task Force Operation UNIFIED PROTECTOR gave a speech at the Press Conference held in Naples on Apr. 6. Here you can read some of the key things he said during the opening statement:

Although limited by poor weather for a few days, Alliance air assets have effectively engaged Libyan combat forces on the ground to mitigate their capabilities and protect the areas toward which they have advanced.
You will be aware that, over the past few days, Libyan government forces have increasingly shifted to non-conventional tactics, blending in with road traffic and using civilian life as a shield for their advance. As a consequence, they have moved in the direction of Ajdabiya, posing a direct threat to that city, and beyond that, to Benghazi.
In response, NATO has pursued direct strikes on advancing forces and their logistical and munitions supply chains.

NATO has also used surgical air strikes to sever the main supply route between Ajdibaya and Misrata.

In doing so, NATO forces have been particularly careful to avoid injury to civilians who are in close proximity to the fighting, often precisely because of the tactics of government forces.

I would now like to clarify an issue that has been reported in the news media.
Some media and TNC leaders have stated that NATO has picked sides and at the same time that we have mostly been destroying Libyan military targets.
Let me be clear: we will attack any forces that mean to harm innocent civilians.

I would remind you that it is Col Gadhafi who has stated he will show no mercy to his own population, and it is his military that has shelled civilians, bombed cities and continues to threaten innocents.Again, we will attack any forces that mean harm to the civilian population.

Following there is an abstract of the most interesting parts of the Q&A part of the press conference:

Q: Despite of content of your statement, rebel military leaders are saying NATO is failing in its mission to protect Libyan civilians and quote that NATO don’t do anything even though the United Nations gave them right to act.   If you could give a comment on that and what do you plan to do to regain the rebels’ trust.

A:  I think I’d stop with the last bit of your question.  The UN mandates and the Security Council resolutions and that which NATO has signed up to do, is to protect the civilian population; let me be clear, it didn’t say to gain the trust of either side in doing that; the trust is for the International community to accept that NATO is acting in accordance with the mandate and doing what it said it would do. I can say that in the first five days we have flown in excess of 850 missions the substantial portion of which were strike missions I know personally myself that we’ve ranged from the west  from arms munitions depots that were used to re-supply the forces for the second ……..forces and all the way through.  If you look in the last 24 hours, we’ve taken substantial action in the area of Misurata as well, against heavy mechanized units and tanks precisely to protect the civilian population.  Perhaps there is a problem in that I think Libya must be nearly eight hundred miles wide if not a thousand miles wide – I think eight hundred, and in all that air space we are dominating and so perhaps – and I m not criticizing anyone-in one or 2 areas if they don’t hear us or see us for some hours, I can understand how that might lead to lack of confidence, but I can reassure you that every hour of every day we are watching what is going on in Libya and making sure that we are protecting the civilians.  Thank you.

Q: Hello, I wanted to ask a couple of questions.  One was on the rebels that have criticized NATO for having stopped boats with aid and arms from getting into Misurata, and I wanted to know if that comes under the naval embargo or NATO’s position, really, on aid and arm ships.  [...].

A: [...] The rebels and stopping boats on the embargo:  There are three things we’re doing.  We’re doing the embargo, the no-fly zone and the protect-civilians missions.  The embargo started first…nearly ten days ago now, and the job of that is to make sure that arms and other prescribed goods don’t go into Libya.  Some people will know yesterday there were a range of vessels boarded by NATO, boarding officers from a range of countries went onboard those ships and inspected and looked at the manifest of those vessels spoke to the commanding officers and looked at exactly what they had, and discussions were underway with the headquarters down in Nisida here in Naples led by Admiral Veri, and then discussions with this headquarters in NATO and I think what you will find at the end of the day, that no vessels were detained by NATO in that respect.  [...].

Q: The rebels have hardly criticized NATO for what has happened in Misurata, to the point that they said they consider NATO to be a problem for them.  You said you will attack anyone who will attack civilians, but Gheddafi continues using human shields to proceed in his fight.  How do you intend to intervene?

A: I think your question was about human shields at the end, protecting civilians, and I think you’ve mentioned Misurata at the same time.  If I can say a couple of things about Misurata. We are watching the whole country from the west to the east and south and we are looking for forces that are taking action directly against civilian populations and civilian areas or forces that are threatening those areas directly.  And we’re also looking at the logistics that support those forces, we’re also looking at where they get their munitions and their gas petroleum at the same time, and we’re looking at forces that might threaten further out. So for an example, there are forces around in the deepest south that we are watching at this moment, and these forces have popped themselves up against civilian population concentrations which we watch and will take action.

On the particular issue of Misurata, I said a moment ago, yesterday – I can’t remember the exact time -a substantial number of heavy vehicles and tanks were attacked and destroyed by NATO aircraft in Misurata.  Those vehicles and tanks could directly attack the population and probably had been doing so at that time.  There is an issue though, with destroying tanks in built up areas without harming innocent civilians, and that’s the issue that’s been going on with Misurata.

I’ve heard your point about human shields it’s very difficult for an aircraft to take action if civilians are being used as human shields from up in the air, but I can say that where we can take action –and we are taking action in Misurata, and I know this has been a question-, we are-, and before coming in here I checked that my information is correct and the aircraft have taken action and continue taking action in Misurata or indeed anywhere else where the population is threaten, but I think you’d understand as I say, they’re trying to protect human shields when there’s a tank with dozens of people around about it of innocent civilians, the best thing in that stage is to not to drop a bomb on the tank.  So there’s a limit, a physical limit because we’re not allowed boots on the ground there is a limit to what we’re able to do in that respect but that doesn’t mean to say we don’t have the will and the intent to take action to stop that.

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) The battle around oilfields is fierce. Those in Misla and Waha area, used to pump oil to Tobruk, were hit by Gaddafi’s forces in the last two days. There’s an unconfirmed report that RAF Tornados have hit an oilfield e Sarir oilfield in the Sirte basin, under rebel control, during the night of Apr. 6 and 7, killing three guards.

2)  As of Apr. 6, 24 missions were flown by the RNoAF under Unified Protector bringing the total to 38. The RJAF F-16 from Aviano, are reported to be flying with USAF F-16s from a few days. It’s still unclear whether they are performing local training sorties or have already flying to enforce the NFZ over Libya. The RAF will add 4 Typhoons to the 16 Tornado GR4s already under NATO command. In the meanwhile, the British ground attack aircraft hit 6 armoured fighting vehicles and 6 battle tanks around rebel-held Misratah and Sirte. The Italian contingent flew 10 missions each involving 2 planes: 4 AV-8B+ missions, 3 Tornado and 3 Typhoon ones. On the evening of Apr. 5, the French flew 2 joint patrol missions of Rafale / Mirage 2000D and 2 joint missions of Rafale / Super Etendard while a flight of 2 Rafales carried out a reconnaissance mission.These missions were supported by US KC-135s, British and NATO E-3s and 2 Rafale in tanker configuration (noteworthy this is the first time the Frenc MoD reported about the support provided by other partners). On Apr. 6, 2 joint Mirage 2000D / Mirage F1CR, 3 Rafale / Super Etendard, 1 Rafale and 2 Rafale from CdG missions were flown in the in the areas of Ajdabyah and Misratah. During these missions, two SAM sites were hit, one in southern Zlitan and one 100 kilometers south of Sirte. In addition, a reconnaissance mission was flown by a pair of Rafales while support was provided by French tankers and AWACS. From Souda, 3 missions were flown each involving 1 French and 1 Qatari Mirage 2000-5s.

Source: French MoD

3) Swedish Gripens have not taken part to any Unified Protector missions yet because they are unable to use the JP-5 fuel available at Sigonella airbase since they require the civilian Jet A-1. Quite surprisingly such a basic requirement was not checked before the aircraft deployed to Italy.

The news of the Swedish Gripen grounded by the lack of jet fuel as appeared on a Norwegian newspaper’s website

• Day 1
• Day 2
• Day 3
• Day 4
• Day 5
• Day 6
• Day 7
• Day 8
• Day 9
• Day 10
• Day 11
• Day 12
• Day 13
• Day 14
• Day 15
• Day 16

NATO is providing daily updates on the air campaign in Libya, merely providing the figures of the sorties since the beginning of the NATO operation (31 March 2011, 08.00GMT). So far, a total of 701 sorties and 276 strike sorties* have been conducted. Of those, 154 were flown on Apr. 3 (58 were air strikes). As always, strike sorties are those intended to identify and engage proper targets; do not necessarily imply the use of bombs for various reasons (lack of target identification, RoE, etc).

A quick comparison with Day 16′s data (read yesterday debrief for details) shows that the number of air strike dropped from 70 to 58 in the last 24 hours.

In the meanwhile, after an extensions requested by NATO, the US has withdrawn from Unified Protector its attack aircraft (not clear if planes will be kept for a certain period at the current forward operating bases or will return home). Here’s a statement released on this subject by Captain Darryn James, the director of the Pentagon’s Defense Press Operations:

- There have been no TLAMs [Tomahawk missiles] launched in the last 24 hours.

“- Between 6 p.m. Eastern and 6 a.m. Eastern this morning, one US Harrier [fighter jet] mission engaged military vehicles near Sert and one US A-10 [ground attack aircraft] mission engaged military vehicles near Brega as part of our commitment to protect the Libyan civilian population from attack and support NATO enforcement of UNCR [UN Security Council Resolution] 1973.

“Tonight, US military assets will officially shift to a support mode to NATO for Operation Unified Protector. As [US Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee Chief] Admiral [Michael] Mullen said during SASC testimony on Thursday, US strike aircraft will be available in ‘standby mode’ and could be made available after a specific request from NATO leadership.

“But as of 6 p.m. eastern time tonight, US aviation assets are expected to cease strike sorties and will remain on an alert status if NATO requests their support.”

Support aircraft, as tankers, SEAD, EW, SIGINT etc. are still operating for Unified Protector.

Other interesting things, information and thoughts:

1) A total of 12 Turkish Air Force F-16s provided air cover to the aid ship M/F Ankara loaded with 2 tons of medical supplies and 3 ambulances and helthcare professionals, that was sent to Misratah to evacuate 230 wounded and 60 helpers bringing them in Turkey for further treatment. The ship, escorted also by a Turkish frigate, had been waiting off Misratah for 4 days, because the fighting in the city had prevented it to enter the harbour. A 12 hours cease-fire was agreed between the two opposing parts to make the evacuation possible. The TuAF aircraft took off from Bandirma and Dalama and were supported by 4 KC-135s from Incirlik airbase.

Turkish F-16 operating from Grazzanise airbase in 2005 for Ex. Destined Glory.

Italy will perform a similar humanitarian mission in the next days, said Italy’s Foreign Minister Franco Frattini, after meeting a representative of the opposition Transitional National Council. Frattini said that Italy will “fly” to Misratah, so it is possible that an air bridge will be arranged to rescue the wounded Libyans. However, since the airport is not controlled by the rebels, unless a cease-fire is agreed as happened during the Turkish rescue, it is likely that the Italian aid mission will be conducted by sea, with a close air cover.

2) An Italian radio ham recorded on Apr. 4 was seems to be the first counter-PSYOPS message sent by Gaddafi’s forces on HF frequencies. Here’s the message (in Arabic language only):

. Initially, someone said it was a Free Libya radio transmission, but, according to those who translated the message after the news spread on the web, affirmed that it speaks about rebels embracing the “crusaders” and welcoming “people who drew cartoons of muhammed”. The message should be trasmitted from Sabratah, a Gaddafi’s held area to “rebel held areas”.

If it is really a pro-Gaddafi message (or a sort of counter-PSYOPS speach), it is at least weird that it was not jammed by the US EC-130Hs operating in the area.

3) Noteworthy, some of the air forces that are not taking part to the air strikes operating only for the enforcement of the No-Fly Zone, are flying with air-to-air missiles and also Litening Targeting pods or Reccelite reconnaissance pods. Maybe they use it to have a clearer view on the ground while performing Combat Air Patrols over Libya. SpAF and RNlAF are among them.

4) Information about each partecipating force’s activity is becoming scarcer each day. A Media Day was held on Apr. 4 by the Danish contingent in Sigonella, some pictures and details are published by the French MoD but some air forces are not providing any information at all. The RNlAF and Spanish detachments to Decimomannu have been some of the less talkative. The RNoAF flew 30 missions in total, 16 of those under NATO command. During the last day “ground targets were engaged”. The RDAF flew 4 more missions (dropping 4 PGMs) on Apr. 3, while in the Italian Air Force flew 8 missions: 3 by F-2000 Typhoons, 3 by Tornados and 2 by AV-8B+ from Garibaldi aircraft carrier. AAR capability was ensured by both KC-130J and Tornado IDS.
Dealing with the French, on the evening of Apr. 3, recon missions involving Rafales, Mirage 2000s and joint formations made by Rafale and Super Etendard, supported by a Rafale with buddy tanker for AAR, were flown. A recce mission, involving Rafales from Charles De Gaulle aircraft carrier was flown. On Apr. 4, 2 Mirage 2000D missions and 2 mixed Rafale / Super Etendard missions were flown, along with a Rafale reconnaissance mission, in the regions of Sirte and Ras Lanuf, with supporting C-135, E-3F, E-2C and 2 Rafales with refueling pod. From Souda Bay, 3 missions in standard “configuration” (1 French + 1 Qatari Mirage 2000-5) were flown.

Source: French MoD

The RAF will deploy 4 more Tornado GR4s from IX (B) Squadron of RAF Marham to Gioia del Colle, bringing to 22 the number of UK fast jets taking part in Unified Protector. The news came from PM Cameron who made a surprise visit to the Italian airbase which has been the temporary home for the last two weeks for 10 Typhoon fighters and eight Tornados. So far, the RAF aircraft have completed over 70 combat sorties over Libya and, during the last weekend, the British planes destroyed three regime tanks and 10 armoured vehicles
UK’s PM visit came on the day when the head of the RAF, Air Chief Marshal Sir Stephen Dalton, planning at least 6 months of operations over Libya, warned that the RAF will need ”genuine increases” in budget in the next years, after suffering the 8% cut imposed in last year’s SDSR, if it is to continue running the current range of operations.

The arrival of the Tornados will help ease pressure on the international coalition from the US decision to withdraw its planes, however, in my opinion, the problem is not the number and type of aircraft in the area, but how and where they are tasked.

5) The following famous picture of the wreckage of a Su-24MK downed by the rebels during the Libyan uprising shows an interesting detail: the LAAF text. The official English acronym of the Libyan Arab Republic Air Force, should be, LARAF. However the official badge of the 1124Sqn has the shorter version LAAF for Libyan Arab Air Force. Noteworthy, even Sqdn, the short form for Squadron, refers to the English language.