Air Interdiction

This study examines whether current joint US Army and Air Force doctrine adequately supports the coordination of air interdiction (AI) efforts, at the operational level, within NATO in Central Europe. The considerations for and the procedures used in the employment of air interdiction missions by US and NATO forces are examined. The systems are compared and significant procedural differences are highlighted. Finally, implications for current and future operations are considered. The focus of the investigation is the procedures as outlined in the Joint Attack of the Second Echelon (J-SAK) and in NATO MAS ATP-27(B) and 33(A). Issues at the operational level of war are examined, and considerations for employment within the AirLand battle framework are presented. The study concludes that the framework of joint and combined doctrine supports coordination of interdiction efforts at the operational level. However, refinement is needed in both the US and NATO systems to insure an effective meshing of planning and coordination. Specific areas that require attention are the definitions of air missions, particularly battlefield air interdiction (BAI) as a subset of AI or offensive air support (OAS); the establishment of joint planning procedures in the US battlefield coordination element (BCE); the adoption of a reconnaissance and interdiction planning line (RIPL) by US forces; and the increased use of mission orders by US and NATO forces.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.