What's new

What will be modern Day 'D-Day' Scenario ?

Ghusaa kiya karneiii key zaroorat haiii isss mein ! :(

I promise the next time I'm channeling Rommel's spirit I'd heed your advice ! :agree:

Khair what I meant was that with the advent of smart bombs, cruise missiles, smart artillery shells and overall general battle awareness; the need to land hundreds of thousands of troops on a beach for them to win the day for you or get mowed down by machine gun fire is over.

If a country goes for such a landing they'd probably soften the targets up enough with weeks of bombings that whereas it may not be a walkover but it sure as hell may not be the kind of daunting task that required Allied soldiers to brave the beaches of Normandy.

For that u need air superiority as i said earlier.Cruise missile strikes won't clear the way for an invasion force alone by any means.Volume of firepower simply too low and too infrequent.
 
.
It will look like this
24 C-130s 'Elephant Walk' For The USAF's Joint Forcible Entry Exercise

24 C-130s 'Elephant Walk' For The USAF's Joint Forcible Entry Exercise


Tyler Rogoway
ProfileFoll
Tyler Rogo
Filed to: CARGO HAULERS 12/13/14 11:14am
Imagine the sound of 24 C-130 Hercules transports buzz-sawing their way down the runway at Dyess Air Force Base. This incredible scene, and the many others posted below, was the result of the USAF's latest Joint Forcible Entry Exercise, which also saw 20 C-17 Globemasters take part, along with a plethora of fighter and support aircraft, as well as many ground combat elements.


cm8zsppuhxiv2g5wqswp.png


JFEX is a massive air lift exercise that pulls together multiple tactics and platforms from across the US to participate in a very complex series of large force employment (LFE) scenarios. These scenarios usually have to do with gaining a foothold right in the enemy's backyard via the application of air power combined with ground combat units. The USAF states:

The Joint Concept for Entry Operations doctrine defines forcible entry as the seizing and holding of a lodgment in the face of armed opposition. The exercise tested the Air Force's ability to tactically deliver and recover combat assets via air drops in a contested environment.

e seperate mini-wars made up JFEX '14, with one being 'fought' in the Pacific region, with C-17 units from Alaska, Washington State and Hawaii. This fake war scenario was called the 'Rainier War,' during which, five ship formations of C-17s would perform low-level interdiction flying, heavy container delivery system drops and a series of aerial refuelings over Washington State.


Capt. Cliff Caldwell, 62nd Operations Support Squadron wing weapons and tactics director stated:

"This is day one and night one of the war... This is us going in and taking all the training that we do and putting it all together and focus on application of combat skills."

Another 'war' was also being conducted over Keno Airstrip, located within Nevada Test and Training Range, which saw C-17s, C-130s and dozens of other aircraft envelope the austere airstrip while under simulated threat from various layers of enemy defenses. A highly orchestrated series of airdrops, landings and departures occurred at Keno while being supported by special operations forces on the ground and a full range of combat and support aircraft.


The whole goal of these giant JFEX exercises, which are put on by the USAF's Weapon School, is to put the school's prestigious students, along with external mission planners, aircrews, their machines and support elements to the test by attempting to prove the entire force's ability to synchronize large numbers of aircraft operations from bases separated by thousands of miles, then having these mixed fleets participate in large formations and 'access operations' in a high-threat environment. Beyond that, critical skills like the ability to deliver and extract combat forces from rough airstrips and by using various drop techniques under threat, proves that the USAF's tactical airlift abilities can work as a canopener on an enemy's territory.



The 'joint' aspect of these training events also underlines the vast array of DoD capabilities that are brought to bear to make such an undertaking happen safely and successfully. For instance, up-to-date satellite imagery and intelligence has to be used to plan the assault. Fighter aircraft have to sweep the skies of enemy fighters and jamming aircraft and 'Wild Weasels" have to respond to enemy radar threats as they popup as the formations of transport aircraft interdict their way into the enemy's airspace. An AWACS may control the 'big picture' flow of air traffic over the battlespace but USAF combat controllers on the ground, supported by special forces teams, would control the terminal area around the airstrip itself, potentially while under simulated attack. Meanwhile, A-10s may provide armed over-watch of the operation, watching for enemy advances on the airstrip's perimeter. Communications, aerial refueling tracks, search and rescue assets, payloads, integration of large ground force units (this exercise it was the 82nd Airborne) and so many other elements need to be addressed as well. The reality is that it literally takes much more than a village to make something like what JFEX attempts to pull off happen, and ironing out any bugs during training is much less costly than doing it during real-life combat operations.


Capt. Andy Miller, 29th Weapons Squadron and JFE 14B instructor states:

"Here at the Weapons School, we're able to instill in our students the tactical-level tools that will enable them to be successful in the future, in the planning and execution of a joint forcible entry. In this case, we're able to take a glimpse at both the operational and strategic level impacts of this capability."

x7vpeioubhred0vldw2n.jpg

They say logistics wins wars, and in this day and age of emerging enemy anti-access/area denial capabilities and America's stumbling pivot toward the Pacific, this statement remains highly relevant. Future wars will be just as much about sustaining dispersed forces separated by great distances, and hitting the enemy where they least expect it with non-traditional attacks, than anything else. With exercises like JFEX, our air mobility forces can exercise the breadth of their capabilities while learning how to integrate with all the different elements that make such complex combat missions actually feasible. Finally, the very fact that America's military, including its air mobility forces, train to such a high a degree for combat operations works as a strong deterrent to would-be aggressors, and like other emerging expeditionary tactics, it makes them vulnerable in places they traditionally would never have thought of as being militarily accessible.



ad8famyubgrdx0hvo0vl.png

yaasanfh6nd9bwjtu6vo.jpg


n3cftpy7vcvkvpvtgudr.jpg


p9u5wqfpu8vlam3bnbvd.jpg


u7kgiyqof29a595a9aam.jpg


msopooavuciyhj48fsih.jpg


ot1ospxsg1n110szfq9q.jpg


nnexlxqyxwnfcchjjkh9.jpg

Source and Photos: USAF
WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Impressive.
 
.
I watched WW2 D-Day documentary. It is the biggest amphibious assault in human history.
It really fasicated me about how desperate allied force was to bring down hitlar's military and take back europe.
Their strategies and hitler's strategies.
here is the documentary:


now new question has emerged, how it will look like today's D-Day mission and defence ?
technology has brought new modern warfare like radar, satellite etc.

so I am asking PDF members to discuss about modern day D-Day scenario
A modern D day will be fought on the wireless sets. Information will be the key. There won't be any Ob West reserve of 3 Panzer divisions hoping for a second invasion by a phantom army. At the same time, the attacker can also jam all comms and then pick and blow a more or less entrenched enemy. It will take time, but the outcome will never be in doubt. The wars today are fought more on the intel front.

Spiedel(Hans) will probably be more crucial. ;) Imagine the La Roche Bayone(cant remember the spelling) HQ of OB West is communication jammed.....the entire positions can be wiped out by a much smaller force...picking one targets out at a time.

@BDforever

Thats amphibious warfare in 2014

A question to the experts:

Why did the allies not use smoke cover during the D Day landings? Especially on Omaha beach?

@AUSTERLITZ @jhungary @Penguin
Smoke?

In the immediate approaches they did not - because of beach mines, and Rommel's asparagus.
After coming ashore, smoke cover was used, but this was in early June...the sea was stormy and wind strong - so had little effect.

For that u need air superiority as i said earlier.Cruise missile strikes won't clear the way for an invasion force alone by any means.Volume of firepower simply too low and too infrequent.
Cruise missiles are useless against a fortified complex. The power station supplying power to the complex - ok, but the defences must be taken down by heavy guns - naval artillery or by bombers.

Ghusaa kiya karneiii key zaroorat haiii isss mein ! :(

I promise the next time I'm channeling Rommel's spirit I'd heed your advice ! :agree:

Khair what I meant was that with the advent of smart bombs, cruise missiles, smart artillery shells and overall general battle awareness; the need to land hundreds of thousands of troops on a beach for them to win the day for you or get mowed down by machine gun fire is over.

If a country goes for such a landing they'd probably soften the targets up enough with weeks of bombings that whereas it may not be a walkover but it sure as hell may not be the kind of daunting task that required Allied soldiers to brave the beaches of Normandy.
Very much on the contrary. A long bombing will make sure the surprise element is lost. Even if you land 200000 men on the ground in 5 days, their supplies can be denied by a mass attack on a nearby port. :)

Given German superior technology today for example, it is highly likely that the Brits and Canadians(first landers apart from the 101 Airborne) would have starved to submission.

oh that is blaspheme @levina would skin him alive.
Uh oh - she's watching. :unsure:
 
. .
@BDforever
I could not watch the video (its a 2hr long video). :(
Frankly today a D Day invasion against countries with guided missiles is unrealistic. Massive infantry charge with troops marching shoulder to shoulder was unwise in 1863 but it was often a good tactic 70 years earlier.
Last amphibious attack happened in 1950 when U.S. Marines landed at Inchon, South Korea. Its not happening again!!



levina is preparing laddoos for you. :coffee: Still katti? :P
No :disagree: I was making ginger bread :agree:

oh that is blaspheme @levina would skin him alive.
I would prefer deep frying :devil:
 
.
Why did the allies not use smoke cover during the D Day landings? Especially on Omaha beach?

@AUSTERLITZ @jhungary @Penguin
IIRC on British and Canadian Beaches, where special sapper tanks ("Hobart's Funnies") lead the way through enemy obstacles, there were screens.

Navy also got / used smoke
As H-Hour neared, when troops would land and fight their way onto the beaches, two Allied planes began generating smoke screens between the shore batteries and bombarding warships to conceal the ships from enemy fire. While other frontline destroyers and rear vessels were receiving smoke cover, the plane assigned to lay smoke for the Corry suddenly got shot down, leaving the Corry fully exposed to German gunners who were now firing at her in full fury
USS Corry (DD-463) D-Day Photos
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom