GIULIO DOUHET – RELEVANCE TODAY

Disegno tratto da “La figura e l’opera di Giulio Douhet. Atti, Caserta 1988”

Pic Courtesy: Internet

 

Giulio Doheut was born into a military family in Italy in 1869. He served as a professional artillery officer and was never trained as a pilot but he was an innovator and had the quality of stirring things up. He was appointed as the commander of Italy’s first aviation battalion before World War I. During the War, his impolitic criticism of his military and civilian superiors resulted in him being court-martialled and imprisoned for one year. However, the war (Battle of Caporetto) demonstrated that he was correct and was later exonerated. Soon after the war, Douhet was given a place of honour, but he left the service and passed his remaining years writing and speaking about airpower. He brought forth his Command of the Air in 1921 as an official publication. Douhet died in 1930.

 

Douhet’s Thoughts/Beliefs with Comments

 

The Main gist of Douhet’s theory was that airpower can make the war end quickly, thus making it comparatively more humane (lesser death and destruction).

 

Effect of an Early Air Attack. Douhet argued that an early air attack on the enemy’s vital centres could win a humane victory, while surface forces could contain the enemy.

“Mercifully, the decision will be quick in this kind of war, since the decisive blows will be directed at civilians, that element of the countries at war least able to sustain them. These future wars may yet prove to be more humane than wars in the past, because they may in the long run shed less blood”.

 

Comments

 

    • His thought (about humane victory) was that due to the use of air power, the conflict termination would be faster and overall death and destruction would be comparatively lesser.
    • War itself can never be humane. The death and destruction is the process and purpose of war.
    • Mankind has gone on to develop weapons of mass destruction.
    • Although the trend these days is for reduced tolerance to the loss of human life.
    • Warfare is changing wherein resorting to terror is becoming a norm, and terror strives on the loss of human life not only during hostilities but even during peacetime.
    • An early attack on the enemy’s vital centres to commence hostilities has become a norm but for the reason of creating destruction, disruption, chaos and confusion.

 

About Targeting and Orchestrating Air War. “The selection of objectives, the grouping of [attack] zones, and determining the order in which they are to be destroyed is the most difficult and delicate task in aerial warfare, constituting what may be defined as aerial strategy. The truth of the [targeting] matter is that no hard and fast rules can be laid down on this aspect of aerial warfare. It is impossible even to outline general standards because the choice of enemy targets will depend upon several circumstances, material, moral, and psychological, the importance of which, though real, is not easily estimated. It is just here, in grasping these imponderables, in choosing enemy targets, that future commanders of Independent Air Forces will show their ability”.

 

Comments.

 

    • Many scholars feel that he was vague on this matter, but he was right in that the use of air power and orchestrating air war is a complex subject not easily comprehensible.

 

    • The factors to be considered and imponderables are many, and laying down hard and fast rules is not possible. However, over the years some guidelines have been articulated.

 

    • His remarks leave an impression of sequential warfare, whereas airpower capability development allows parallel operations, conducting various campaigns simultaneously.

 

    • Orchestrating an air war has become both a science and an art.

 

    • Commanders (of both independent air forces and joint forces) have to decide on the allocation of percentages of air effort towards different campaigns being run concurrently. Also, dynamically change these depending on the developing situations.

 

On Air Superiority. Douhet argued that the first step in war—gaining command of the air—is achieved best by attacking the enemy’s airpower on the ground, at the airfields, and in the factories. He also believed that the bomber would always get through.

 

Comments.

    • Command/Control of the air is still a very relevant strategy/theory.
    • However, the degree of achievement (air supremacy, air superiority and favourable air situation) varies depending upon the disparity between the opposing forces.
    • Attaining air superiority by attacking the enemy’s airpower on the ground itself is the most desirable method, however, alternative means have evolved over the years for its achievement (attack on aircraft on the ground, operating surfaces, attack on storage facilities and supply chain of crucial aviation enabling supplies and reliance on AD weapons etc.).
    • Commencement of surface operations has been delinked from the earlier concept of sequential warfare, wherein, surface operations commenced after the dedicated air superiority counter-air campaign.
    • The survivability of bombers in contested airspace is doubtful. It needs a certain degree of air superiority and fighter protection with under coverage of AWACS/AEWC aircraft.

 

Air Exploitation. Douhet argued that the achievement of the command of the air itself would increase the enemy’s vulnerability to such a high level that their leaders would realise and capitulate. Otherwise, the next step would be to exploit that advantage immediately by attacking the cities and other vital targets to break the will of the people, forcing the government to relent. Douhet asserted that independent airpower would speed up the achievement of the objectives without much surface struggles, therefore the surface forces would only be required to defend.

 

Comments.

 

    • Achieving air superiority has a lot of advantages but does not assure a victory. It has to be exploited to gain the victory.

 

    • Human will has lots of resilience and is not easy to break. History is replete with examples wherein the attacks to break the will have instead strengthened it further.

 

    • Each force has its defined roles, tasks and core competencies. Warfare has evolved into a complex activity wherein no service alone can achieve national or military objectives. It has to jointly coordinate efforts with a proper understanding and utilisation of their respective strengths.

 

    • The warfare is no longer restricted to the domain of the military. It needs a coordinated effort by all the means of statecraft. The military-civil fusion has become extremely important.

 

Organisation Adaptation and Force Structure. Douhet propagated that to bring about victory over the enemy would require organising airpower under a separate air force. He argued that the humane short war could not be brought about under traditional military organisations with surface forces controlling and using the air assets for tactical victories. Douhet stressed on the development of an independent strategic air force, applying the economy of force principle on the surface forces, keeping in mind the country’s geography, existing threat perception and affordability.

 

Comments

 

    • He was right on the count that the airpower had and has a lot of potential beyond tactical employment.

 

    • Airpower has a role in both, tactical utilisation in a support role as well as independent operations (in coordination with surface forces) towards national security and objectives.

 

    • Ideally, the surface forces should have their air arm (equipped to their requirement) for utilisation according to the tenets of surface operations.

 

    • This would be an ideal situation (e.g. USA has four air arms, USAF, US Army aviation, US Navy air arm, and, the air arm of US Marines). However, it is not achievable by all due to affordability (air assets are costly to procure and maintain). The next best solution therefore is centralised placing and operation of air assets with joint planning and execution.

 

    • Specialist aircraft (fixed wing and helicopters) for close air support to the surface forces were in use for some time. However, with the proliferation of shoulder-fired AD weapons their efficacy has become doubtful. Secondly, the trend is to develop and maintain a fleet of multi-role aircraft.

 

Suggestions and value additions are most welcome

 

637
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

David R. Mets, “The Air Campaign John Warden and the Classical Airpower Theorists” , Air University Press Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama

To all the online sites and channels.

 

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from sources deemed reliable and accurate. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for purposes of wider dissemination.

 

Global Air Powers Ranking (2024)

 

The WDMMA (World Directory of Modern Military Aircraft) annual ranking utilises a formula that considers values related to the total fighting strength of the various air services of the world.  The formula produces the ‘TrueValueRating’ (TvR).

 

It evaluates the strength of the nation’s airpower based on – not only overall strength – but also modernisation, logistical support, attack and defence capabilities and so on. In this way, power is not simply assessed on its total quantity of aircraft but rather its quality and general inventory mix.

 

Greater weightage is given to categories generally overlooked by some powers, namely special-mission, dedicated bomber force, CAS, training, and on-order units. Beyond this is a focus on local aero-industry capabilities, inventory balance (general mix of unit types), and force experience.

 

TvR remains, however, a work-in-progress and is constantly evaluated as needed.

 

The current WDMMA inventory consists of 103 air services covered (this includes Army, Navy, and Marine branches of service where applicable), and 48,082 total aircraft followed.

 

Statistical Analysis

 

USA. The highest attainable TvR score is 242.9 held by the United States Air Force (USAF). The USAF features a broad mix of aircraft types as well as a balanced strength. Many of its products are locally- sourced thanks to the U.S.’s massive industrial base. It also maintains dedicated strategic-level bombers, CAS aircraft, a sizeable helicopter fleet and fighter force (of which many are multirole types), and hundreds of transport aircraft to reach anywhere in the world. Beyond this is a large training, tanker, and special-mission force. The service is also set to be reinforced shortly with hundreds of units still on order.

 

Four out of the first five positions are of US forces- 1st United States Air Force (5,189) TvR: 242.9, 2nd United States Navy (2,626)    TvR: 142.4, 4th United States Army Aviation (4,397) TvR: 112.6 and 5th United States Marine Corps (1,211) TvR: 85.3.

 

    • The Total added TvR of the USA at 583.2 is almost 3.5 times the total TvR of the next closest country Russia.

 

    • The total TvR of the USA is equal to the combined TvR of the next ten countries.

 

    • US assets seem to be very high in numbers but are deployed around the globe.

 

 

Russia. Russian Air Force with a TvR of 114.2 is at 3rd position after USAF and USN. The total TvR of Russia (AF and Navy Combined) is 157.8.

 

    • Russian air power is still a formidable force (Ukraine war propaganda notwithstanding).

 

China.   At 7th place is PLA Air Force (2,084) TvR: 63.8, 15th place is PLA Naval Air Force (436) TvR: 42.4 and the total TvR is 106.2.

 

Pakistan. 18th position Pakistan Air Force (818) TvR: 46.3.

 

India.  Indian Air Force (1,645) is in 4th position with a TvR of 69.4, Indian Naval Aviation (232) with a TvR: of 41.2 is in 28th position and Indian Army Aviation (195) at 37th place with a TvR: 30.0.

 

    • The combined TvR is 140.6, which is one-fourth of that of the USA.

 

    • IAF is marginally ahead of PLAAF by 5.6 points.

 

    • Numerically China is way ahead and is rapidly adding more and more aircraft to its inventory.

 

 

Complete List

(Number of aircraft in brackets)

 

      1. United States Air Force (5,189) TvR: 242.9
      2. United States Navy (2,626) TvR: 142.4
      3. Russian Air Force (3,652) TvR: 114.2
      4. United States Army Aviation (4,397) TvR: 112.6
      5. United States Marine Corps (1,211)     TvR: 85.3
      6. Indian Air Force (1,645) TvR: 69.4
      7. People’s Liberation Army Air Force (2,084) TvR: 63.8
      8. Japan Air Self-Defense Force (779) TvR: 58.1
      9. Israeli Air Force (581) TvR: 58.0
      10. French Air Force (501) TvR: 56.3
      11. British Royal Air Force (466) TvR: 55.3
      12. South Korean Air Force (890) TvR: 53.4
      13. Italian Air Force (506) TvR: 51.9
      14. Royal Australian Air Force (296) TvR: 51.7
      15. People’s Liberation Army Naval Air Force (436) TvR: 49.3
      16. Brazilian Air Force (527) TvR: 48.3
      17. Royal Saudi Air Force (702) TvR: 46.4
      18. Pakistan Air Force (818) TvR: 46.3
      19. German Air Force (394) TvR: 46.2
      20. French Navy Aviation (196) TvR: 45.9
      21. Turkish Air Force (618) TvR: 44.6
      22. Egyptian Air Force (1,122) TvR: 44.0
      23. Russian Naval Aviation (384) TvR: 43.6
      24. Algerian Air Force (541) TvR: 43.2
      25. People’s Liberation Naval Air Force (436) TvR: 42.4
      26. Spanish Air Force (393) TvR: 41.6
      27. Royal Canadian Air Force (378) TvR: 41.3
      28. Indian Naval Aviation (232) TvR: 41.2
      29. Indonesian Air Force (254) TvR: 40.0
      30. Swedish Air Force (152) TvR: 38.6
      31. Ukrainian Air Force (271) TvR: 36.3
      32. United Arab Emirates Air Force (335) TvR: 33.1
      33. Republic of China Air Force (518) TvR: 33.0
      34. Turkish Army Aviation (392) TvR: 32.4
      35. Republic of Singapore Air Force (247) TvR: 32.1
      36. People’s Liberation Army Ground Force (857) TvR: 31.3
      37. Indian Army Aviation (195) TvR: 30.0
      38. Chilean Air Force (207) TvR: 27.9
      39. Argentine Air Force (150) TvR: 27.4
      40. Royal Jordanian Air Force (278) TvR: 27.3
      41. Peruvian Air Force (187) TvR: 27.1
      42. Colombian Air Force (296) TvR: 27.0
      43. Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force (343) TvR: 25.8
      44. Korean People’s Army Air Force (North Korea) (951) TvR: 24.8
      45. German Army Aviation (264) TvR: 24.5
      46. Royal Norwegian Air Force (110) TvR: 24.3
      47. Republic of Korea Navy (South Korea) (77) TvR: 24.3
      48. Hellenic Air Force (372) TvR: 24.2
      49. Serbian Air Force (109) TvR: 24.0
      50. South African Air Force (228) TvR: 23.8
      51. Royal Thai Air Force (230) TvR: 23 2
      52. Polish Air Force (275) TvR: 22.8
      53. Spanish Army Aviation (95) TvR: 21.4
      54. Kazakh Air Defense Forces (235) TvR: 21.1
      55.  Venezuelan Air Force (183)       TvR: 20.8       
      56. Australia Naval Aviation (44) TvR: 20.5
      57. Royal Navy Fleet Air Arm (108) TvR: 20.2
      58. Italian Army Aviation (256) TvR: 19.6
      59. Philippine Air Force (169) TvR: 19.2
      60. Portuguese Air Force (104)
      61. Italian Navy (113) TvR: 18.9
      62. Royal Malaysian Air Force (176) TvR: 18.8
      63. Royal Netherlands Air Force (171) TvR: 18.7
      64. Royal Danish Air Force (115)    TvR: 18.6
      65.  Romanian Air Force (140)     TvR: 18.4
      66. Swiss Air Force (174) TvR: 18.1
      67. Vietnamese People’s Air Force (274) TvR: 18.0
      68. Nigerian Air Force (138) TvR: 17.9
      69. Royal Thai Army Aviation (284) TvR: 17.4
      70. Kuwait Air Force (87) TvR: 16.8
      71. Qatar Emiri Air Force (125) TvR: 16.4
      72. Kenya Air Force (150) TvR: 16.
      73. Belarus Air Force (201) TvR: 16.2
      74. Uzbekistan Air and Air Defence Forces (185) TvR: 16.
      75. Royal Air Force of Oman (133) TvR: 16.0
      76. Belgian Air Component (124) TvR: 15.6 
      77. Bulgarian Air Force (65) TvR: 15.5 
      78. German Navy Aviation (56) TvR: 15.4
      79. Australian Army Aviation (107) TvR: 14.4
      80. Slovak Air Force (47) TvR: 14.3
      81. Bangladesh Air Force (173) TvR: 14.1
      82. Armenian Air Force (51) TvR: 14.0 
      83. Austrian Air Force (102) TvR: 13.8
      84. Hungarian Air Force (48) TvR: 12.6
      85. Finnish Air Force (139) TvR: 12.5
      86. Azerbaijan Air Defence Force (149) TvR: 12.2
      87. Islamic Republic of Iran Army Aviation (78) TvR: 11.4
      88. Hellenic Army (217) TvR: 11.2
      89. Turkmen Air Force (101) TvR: 10.4
      90. Islamic Republic of Iran Navy Aviation (31) TvR: 9.8
      91. Bangladesh Army Aviation (13) TvR: 9.2
      92. Croatian Air Force (80) TvR: 9.0
      93. Ecuadorian Air Force (60) TvR: 8.8
      94. Ethiopian Air Force (82) TvR: 8.1
      95. Spanish Naval Aviation (55) TvR: 7.6
      96. Iraqi Air Force (189) TvR: 7.4
      97. Turkish Navy Aviation (45) TvR: 6.9
      98. Republic of China Army (201) TvR: 6.7
      99. Nagorno-Karabakh Army AF (12) TvR: 6.6
      100. Air Force Brigade of Bosnia and Herzegovina (19) TvR: 5.8
      101. Syrian Air Force (453) TvR: 5.5
      102. emen Arab Republic Air Force (169) TvR: 5.2
      103. Afghan Air Force (17) TvR: 5.0
    1. Suggestions and value additions are most welcome

       

      637
      Default rating

      Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

       

      For regular updates, please register here:-

      Subscribe

       

       

      References and credits

      Global airpower ranking 2024, https://www.wdmma.org/ranking.php

    2.  

      To all the online sites and channels.

       

      Disclaimer:

      Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from sources deemed reliable and accurate. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for purposes of wider dissemination.

 

 

 

 

 

 

CHINA AIR CRAFT CARRIER PROGRAM (A voyage of surreptitious discovery, creativity, and determination)

Pic Courtesy: Internet

 

Over the next couple of years, the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) will undertake intensive trials of its third aircraft carrier, the Fujian (Type-003), to bring it into service. China has been intent on building its carrier capacity since the 1970s. The last five decades have been a journey of discovery and determination for a country with no previous experience.

 

The Chinese effort accelerated in the 1980s under Liu Huaqing, commander-in-chief of the navy, who subsequently served on the Central Military Commission. He is widely credited as the father of the modern Chinese navy and its carrier capability.

 

First Step. Beijing’s early moves were surreptitious and creative. China closely studied the decommissioned Australian aircraft carrier HMAS Melbourne, sold for scrap to a Chinese company in 1985 with a surprising amount of its aircraft-operating equipment – catapults, arresting gear, mirror landing sights and flight deck arrangements – left intact. The ship was not dismantled for many years after it arrived in China.

 

First Carrier with Soviet Role. In the 1990s, China gambled on the purchased ex-Soviet hybrid carriers Kiev and Minsk and the incomplete hull of the larger Varyag (which would have been a sister ship to the Soviet and then Russian navy’s Admiral Kuznetsov), supposedly to turn them into floating hotels or casinos. China reportedly also bought eight truckloads of detailed design drawings of the ship. While two of them, after extensive evaluation, took on their civilian role, the ex-Varyag was completed in China as the PLAN’s prototype carrier Liaoning.

 

Gaining Experience. The effort allowed the PLAN to gain rapid early experience in carrier operations at sea (ship handling and maintenance skills), carrier air operations and integration into a task-group formation. Chinese planners carefully studied the practices of other navies (particularly those of the US Navy). Two months after the PLAN commissioned the Liaoning, it carried out the first landing and take-off of a J-15 fighter at sea. The PLAN also adapted US flight-deck procedures and organisations, including colour-coding uniforms to denote the role of personnel.

 

Carrier Capability Development. Beijing declared the Liaoning ‘combat ready’ in November 2016 and an initial operating capability for the carrier and its task group in May 2018. China’s second carrier, the Shandong, a domestically built improved version, was commissioned in December 2019 and supposedly achieved initial operating capability the following year. Given its challenges, the PLAN’s development of carrier capabilities was relatively cautious, and the operational capability remains limited. The carriers only recently have embarked on more extended deployments further from Chinese home waters.

 

Carrier Air Operations: Teething Problems. The PLAN’s carrier fighter, the J-15 is an unlicensed development of the Russian Su-33. It has shortcomings due to its size, weight and operational characteristics. Carrier-capable fighters are in relatively short supply and barely sufficient for two carrier air groups. The size and design of the existing carriers, especially the lack of a catapult launching system, significantly constrain aircraft range and payload. More complex operational flying at sea, including night-time operations, remains a work in progress. Pilot training is another area of concern.

 

Fujian (Type-003). The arrival of the Fujian addresses some of the earlier issues. The ship represents a significant advance on the navy’s first two carriers, the Liaoning and Shandong. The indigenous design is larger than its predecessors and equipped with an electromagnetic catapult launch system rather than a ‘ski ramp’ for aircraft launches, enabling a larger and more capable air group. While that requires a step change in the PLAN’s capacity to support the operation of such a vessel, it will bring the PLAN closer to its ambition for a fully capable carrier force.

 

Carrier Air Operations: Work in Progress.  Fujian is expected to introduce electromagnetic catapult system technology. Operationalisation of the system has its challenges. While upgrading the J-15 aircraft, China is developing a carrier-compatible variant of the J-35 aircraft, a variant of the J-31. At least three prototypes of the twin-engine J-35 are undergoing flight testing. Along with the J-35, the PLAN is supporting the development of the KJ-600 airborne early warning platform for carrier operations, with several airframes under consideration.

 

Future Trajectory. The PLAN’s experience of fielding the Fujian will influence the further development of its carrier force. PLAN appears intent on having a force of at least six carriers sometimes (maybe by the 2030s). While a fully-fledged carrier force may still be some way off, with a decade of experience in carrier operations, the PLAN appears to have mastered a limited degree of power projection capability. Future ships may be larger with nuclear propulsion.

 

Suggestions and value additions are most welcome

 

637
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

 

To all the online sites and channels.

The International Institute for Strategic studies, “The Military Balance 2024”.

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from sources deemed reliable and accurate. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for purposes of wider dissemination.