Airborne Options for Special Forces.

Although special forces often have access to some of the more exotic or unusual systems and weapons available, for purely practical reasons such as budgetary and technological factors, their choices are generally restricted to conventional devices. So James Bond-style strap-on jet packs are rarer than hens' teeth and likely to stay so. Thus, the means of infiltration and extraction of special forces units into operational areas generally differ only marginally from the methods used by orthodox arms.

Amiasma of mystery and mythology -- mainly the latter -- surrounds subjects such as the operational techniques and selection of the equipment employed by special forces units. Of course, the cult of secrecy associated with such regiments as the United Kingdom's Special Air Service (SAS) ensures that much of the published writing about such regiments is often speculative to the point at which it becomes almost entirely fictional. Only those relative few who have been closely involved in special forces operations can say with certainty which weapons and support equipment have been used for particular tasks. Unfortunately, if all of those claiming to have such intimate involvement were to be believed, then the personnel strengths of the units concerned would indeed have been much greater than that of the entire Army of which they were only a fractionally small part!

As its very name implies, the SAS was from its outset reliant on the parachute for delivery of forces into the field. However, during early operations in the North African desert of the 1940s, this method did not always yield wholly satisfactory results, largely due to injuries to personnel. Thus there was a subsequent concentration on use of multi-wheel-drive land vehicles, when use of these was feasible and was compatible with the aims of an operation.

Parachutes have nonetheless religiously remained an integral part of special forces' delivery system inventories for the very good reason that they are sometimes the only means of insertion of combat or reconnaissance teams deep within enemy-held territory. Parachutes, like all forms of aerial delivery, have their shortcomings. In comparison with water and land transport, use of aircraft necessarily imposes weight restrictions and if large quantities of equipment or supplies are required for a task then these limitations may impose a need for ongoing re-supply operations. Each time that additional personnel or supplies are parachuted in, so is another risk dimension added. Therefore, whenever air transportation is deemed unavoidable, the option of making use of suitable landing sites for either helicopters or, preferably, large fixed-wing aircraft is generally preferred.

Among the main shortcomings of parachuting is the fact that both soldiers and their equipment tend to become scattered over large tracts of terrain. The inherent degree of imprecision in parachute landings means that time may be taken up in re-grouping with consequent possible loss of security, and equipment may sometimes be completely lost, especially if a drop is carried out in windy conditions.

Halo for Non-angelic Flyers

Parachutes can nevertheless offer a large degree of stealthiness, especially when high altitude, low opening (Halo) techniques are applied, particularly at night. Personnel can exit an aircraft which is ostensibly making a legitimate -- or possibly undetectable -- overflight, at heights which obscure its real purpose. Most of the descent is made in free-fall and the parachute canopy, perhaps made of black-dyed textile in order to reduce its contrast against the dark sky backdrop, is opened relatively close to the ground. The feasibility of jumping from altitudes at which breathing oxygen is required has been well demonstrated and training jumps from jumps from well above 25 000 feet are regularly made. But the carriage of the requisite cylinders and use of masks may make for an unwieldy equipment package, and most operational Halo jumps are probably made from lower than 15 000 feet.

Halo techniques may increase the tendency for personnel to become scattered and one alternative is to employ extremely low altitude insertion, with aircraft entering hostile airspace below radar cover, and with troops' parachutes being deployed by static lines on exiting the aircraft. In the late 1960s the minimum safe height for parachuting was considered to be from some 750 feet but this has been progressively reduced, to a considerable extent. Since 1993 Britain's airborne forces, using Irvin Mk 1 LLP low level parachutes, have possessed the capability of undertaking safe descents from 250 feet. Sweden's special forces are known to be recipients of a parachute system based on the Mk 1 LLP, this comprising main and reserve canopies plus a rucksack carrying and lowering bridle.

The scattering problem was addressed during the late 1980s by British Airborne Systems and Equipment (Base), a subsidiary of the former ML company, through development of its Cads controlled aerial delivery system. This comprised radio transmitters and airborne guidance units that were used to steer ram air-inflated, aerofoil-shaped gliding parachutes, similar to sports parachutes, during flight. Transmitters could be situated on the ground so that in good-visibility daylight conditions a parachute and its load could be guided to any point desired by the controller.

Alternatively, a transmitter could be worn on a parachutist's chest so that supply loads dropped from the same aircraft could be guided to where he wished them to land, usually close to his own touchdown point. Special electrical-conducting gloves were provided for connecting the parachutist's hands to the transmitter so that he could steer the accompanying loads without releasing the pull toggles of his own parachute.

Another delivery means was for a Cads transmitter to provide signals on which up to ten parachutes could home automatically, the airborne guidance units steering them directly to the transmitter site. This mode was aimed at ensuring deliveries during night or poor weather conditions. Transmitters could be left unattended so that ground personnel could be free to conduct other operations in the knowledge that air dropped supplies would arrive during their absence.

It would appear that the Cads system could also be employed to guide personnel, as well as supplies, to prearranged landing spots, even in darkness, thereby saving time normally lost in regrouping troops who have arrived on the ground over a wide expanse of terrain. Base was understood to have had under development a Cads-type system that used GPS positioning to guide users to landing sites where homing transmitters could not be emplaced. A further refinement was envisaged under which a radar altimeter would be incorporated within the airborne guidance unit, to ensure late yet safe canopy deployment in the case of Halo drops in cloud or darkness.

With the absorption of ML into other businesses, little more has been publicly revealed of the fate of Cads, but it is believed that it was used by special forces during the 1991 Gulf War and was certainly due to have entered regular British service in 1992. A number of systems were also acquired by the US Marine Corps. Both Cads and a similar system of South African origin were tested with parachutes from various international manufacturers, apparently with wide success. A number of forces were supposedly acquiring such systems although little more has since been heard of them, this perhaps suggesting, in keeping with the usually secrecy surrounding special forces, that Cads and like systems are actually in current service.

Even with the availability of such systems, decisions on whether troops can realistically always be parachuted into their destination drop zones depend on tactical, geographic or meteorological factors, among others. And sometimes use of parachutes may be completely precluded. As a result many desired operations have been cancelled due to the impossibility of inserting troops at the right places at the right times.

Aviation Truths -- Not Sci-fi

Because parachutes cannot be regarded as the universal solution, a number of novel ideas for covert insertion of troops from a distance have been examined over the years, some tending to verge on the realms of science fiction. Mention was earlier made of `a James Bond-type strap-on jet pack.' Well, such a device in fact was tested during the late 1950s. Other belief-stretching but nonetheless real devices featured in the Bond movies included a system that snatched people from the ground via a highly elastic rope, suspended from a balloon, that was hooked by an aircraft. This was intended for search and rescue operations but it is a fair wager that the system was looked at by special forces assessors for possible personnel exfiltration purposes.

The Wallis autogyro, also used by the silver screen's Bond, must once have been considered as a candidate for emplacing and recovering special forces troops. But, like the Hiller Rotorcycle, a small one-man helicopter developed in the early 1950s, such aircraft generally lack the weight-carrying capacity needed to ensure effective operation. The same is also probably true of the inflatable aircraft that were products of the same era. One of these, the ML Inflatable, was given the somewhat irreverent nickname of `the Durex Delta,' owing to its wing planform and its rubberised fabric construction. Another, of more conventional configuration but fabricated from similar material, was made by tyre manufacturer Goodyear. Both inflatables were flight tested by defence authorities in the United Kingdom but neither, as far as is known, was operationally employed.

In the realms of -- probably -- fantasy, other air vehicles have been proposed for special forces' use, these ranging from gas-filled or hot air balloons to conventional gliders, all of which have been suggested as having stealth advantages springing from low radar cross-sections and signatures. This is not necessarily true, since gas cylinders and burners, to say nothing of "metallised" fabrics, can produce significant radar echoes, as can the structural components of glider aircraft. As in the case of hang gliders also, unpowered aircraft are too subject to meteorological conditions to be sensibly applied to troop insertion and cannot attain the same operating ranges as soldiers parachuted from conventional aircraft.

One possible compromise is the use of para-gliders whose pilots could make use of small back-packed petrol engines fitted with propellers, these having made some impact among sports parachutists. They might confer some range advantage over unpowered para-gliders but would be almost exclusively confined to low level operation in order to avoid radar detection. Unfortunately, like microlight aircraft, which have also been proposed for insertion roles, the fact that they would be so confined would render them vulnerable to surface fire attack. And both forms of transport suffer from their powerplants having distinctive acoustic signatures, while they lack the speed and manoeuvrability needed to evade hostile fire.

Which leaves only two other truly viable modes of transport for special forces operations -- conventional fixed wing-aircraft and helicopters. So-called `tree jumping' -- parachute descents into thick jungle, entailing descent from tree top height on long ropes -- had led to many injuries and the increased availability of helicopters of adequate performance soon led to abandonment of this technique, except when circumstances dictated that there was no alternative.

Aircraft Options

The very nature of special forces operations usually means that insertion of troops must be carried out in a clandestine manner, therefore it is unlikely that landing facilities will be available for conventional fixed-wing aircraft of an appreciable size.

That stated, however, special forces are known to make use of aircraft such as the C-130, which has excellent rough field capability and can carry substantially-sized, relatively heavily-armed vehicles either directly to insertion points or within striking distance of these. It is, of course, possible for both troops and vehicles to be air dropped, trucks being pulled from aircraft cargo holds by extraction or main parachutes. But when airstrips are available then a landing is the better option for damage avoidance and reduction of force scattering.

As seen above, very low altitude penetration may be the only option if one needs to remain below radar detection. This method, however, imposes a real punishment on an aircraft's structural integrity and reduces its airframe useful life. Increased low altitude operations have, for example, taken their toll on the US Air Force's special operations C-141s life expectancy to the extent that their replacement became an urgent necessity, something that was acknowledged by the Air force which plans to purchase 15 special operations C-17 Globemaster IIIs. Not only was the aircraft designed from the outset to withstand low-altitude flight torture during 40 per cent of its flight life, its navigation suite appears to have generated a general thumbs up from its pilots, if one judges from the reaction of a former C-141 pilot interviewed some time ago by Armada: "When we approached an airfield [in a C-141], I knew that I would have to make a big turn left or right to find the runway. With the C-17 the runway is straight where it should be".

In-and-out time also needs to remain a short as possible, and so does required landing and take-off runs on soft terrain. The C-17 once again seems to score well in this respect. Globemaster III operations in Kosovo, for example, have revealed the benefits that its quick offloading and loading system could offer. The crew typically consists of three members, one of whom is the load master -- just one. During operations in Kosovo, Boeing told Armada that it was not rare to see a Globemaster coming in, park alongside a Hercules, unload and be on its way again before the Herc had finished unloading. Yet the bigger bird carries four times the load of the quadprop aircraft.

The C-17 proves one thing: an air-delivery system must be a comprehensive package that conveys to its users the confidence of solidness.

Europe, in this respect, has always lagged well behind the United States, particularly in regards to range and load. This of course has nothing to do with technological capabilities but financial power, as no individual European nation can match the resources of a country which alone is almost the size and thereby, has the potential, of a single continent. For years now, it has become increasingly apparent that the unification of Europe is driven by industry and economy rather than by sheer political willpower. Europe's industry, through Airbus Military, has had the A400M on its drawing boards for a while, but the design never ceased to change configuration, the most noticeable variations being the switch from turboprop to turbofan and then back to turboprops again. This tends to demonstrate once again that what can be achieved comparatively swiftly in the commercial world cannot in the institutional one.

Nevertheless, a first step in what appears to be the right direction has recently been made by putting a single procurement agency, the Occar, in charge of overall management of the A400M procurement programme. The Occar, whilst representing a convoluted French acronym for Organisme conjoint de cooperation en matiere d'armement (or joint body for armament co-operation) is based in Germany's former capital Bonn. At stake are now 225 aircraft to be procured by eight countries (in alphabetical order): Belgium (7), Britain (25), France (50), Germany (73), Italy (16), Luxembourg (1), Spain (27) and Turkey (26). The powerplant, although using the core from the Snecma M88 engine that powers the Rafale, is not a simple affair as it is to be co-developed by Snecma, Rolls-Royce, MTU, Fiat Avio, Industria de Termopropulsores and Techspace Aero -- and a share could be expected to go to Turkey as well.

Whirly Birds

When a landing is deemed essential but no strips are available the helicopter comes into its own in that it permits precision placement of ground teams, providing that there is sufficient landing space. If this is not the case then troops may abseil from a hovering aircraft but the discharge of large loads, such as internally-carried vehicles, is unlikely to be possible.

Use of sufficiently large helicopters -- the Boeing Chinook springs readily to mind -- ensures that troops with adequate quantities of supplies as well as high mobility vehicles can be inserted with geographical accuracy, aided by use of onboard navigational and communications systems. Comprehensive aircraft radio outfits, together with the radio extended range afforded by the helicopter's ability to provide a high-altitude antenna platform, may facilitate an uninterrupted communications link between base stations and deployed troops on the ground at the most critical moments of an operation, the infiltration and exfiltration of forces.

Other avionic systems, such as forward-looking infrared systems, pilots' night vision goggles and electronic warfare systems such as radar warning receivers, jammers and chaff or flare decoy launchers, add elements of protection to operations. The electro-optical systems, for instance, can be used to ensure that unwelcoming hostile forces are not occupying an intended landing zone. In addition, sufficiently large helicopters can carry defensive weapons, such as pintle-mounted machine guns, to provide covering fire if a hostile reception is expected.

In Europe, the workhorse helicopter for special operations units appears to be the Eurocopter Cougar. This machine has been purchased for this purpose by numerous nations (lately by Greece for its "combat, search and rescue" missions), but an even more capable version has been recently introduced under the designation of EC 725. With a five-blade Spheriflex main rotor, reinforced gearbox and two 1800 kW Turbomeca Makila 1A4 turboshaft engines, the 725 sees its all-up weight leap from 9.75 tonnes to 11 tonnes compared with the older Mk 2, payload from 4.8 to 5.7 tonnes, range at all-up weight from 636 to 783 nm and max cruise speed from 138 to 160 knots. Other features include four 6 x 8-inch and two 4 x 5-inch multiple-function liquid crystal displays. Since its maiden flight in November 2000, the aircraft, initially and for a very short period of time known as the Mk 2+, has been presented to the French Air Force which has a requirement for 14 units for combat search and rescue missions. Earlier, in October 2000, Eurocopter had fully qualified its in-flight refuelling boom for use from a Cougar Mk 2. since both airframes are almost identical, design carry-over onto the EC 725 should not pose a problem and certainly improve rescue operations to no end.

In America, the favoured special ops helicopter is the Sikorsky MH-60K for which (and its MH-47s and A/MH-6) the Army Special Operations Command has recently ordered Rockwell Collins' Flight2 avionics suite which includes a comprehensive, integrated flight management function with GPS-based navigation, providing primary navigation and precision approaches.

The MH-60K offers performances that are closely matched by that of the older Cougar. It is powered by two General Electric T700-GE-701C 1375 kW engines has an all-up weight of 11 tonnes and a useful load of 4.5 tonnes. Range and speed are respectively 755 nm and 130 knots. The MH-60K is also fitted with an air-refuelling boom (carried over from the US Air Force MH-60G).

Rotor cum Fixed Wing

The introduction of the V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft, combining the helicopter's vertical take-off and landing and hovering capabilities with the higher speeds of fixed-wing aircraft, looks set to be a promising event for US special forces, especially if utility, vehicle-carrying variants are forthcoming. But for what may be termed quick-in-and-out operations, requiring minimal numbers of lightly-equipped personnel, then an innovation devised by the British firm Avpro may provide another air-insertion solution. This company's `Exint' pod is an air-conditioned container designed to fit beneath the wing of V/STOL aircraft such as the Harrier or variants of the Joint Strike Fighter, as well as to battlefield helicopters such as the AH-64 Apache, or conventional light aircraft. Although originally envisaged as a means of rescuing downed airmen, perhaps from behind enemy lines, the two-man Exint units have also been recognised as ideal for special forces infiltration/exfilitration roles. Such pods fitted to high-performance aircraft, capable of being air refuelled, offer opportunities for rapid reaction operations to be undertaken over long strategic distances, further extending the already formidable capability of special forces.

Have special forces' air transportation methods now entered the fast jet age? If so, then it is almost certain that little open acknowledgement of the fact will be made. The public, of course, will be the last to know.