How An F-16 (Might Have) Avenged The Taliban’s Helicopter Killing

The Pentagon’s got some nice heads to stick on the proverbial pike: CENTOM’s General John Allen claims an F-16 airstrike killed the Taliban RPG gunners who blew up a SEAL-filled helicopter last week. How? The old-fashioned way: huge explosion.

Although you’ll have to take the Pentagon at its word (!) that it was able to track and kill the exact same fighters who downed the Chinook, Allen says 10 Taliban were nailed in a “kinetic strike”. So what’s a kinetic strike mean? Nothing! It’s a military euphemism for blowing shit up. The F-16 bombed them. Plain and simple.

But with what? The NYT reports that Americans “located and followed the insurgents to a wooded area in Chak district. After ensuring no civilians were in the area, the force called for the airstrike.” This might indicate something important: it was likely a big bomb. If you track people down to a “wooded area” and are still worried about killing civilians, you’re likely working with some serious heat.

An F-16′s capable of a panoply of airstrike options:

Precision Weapons (AGM-65 Maverick, Paveway Laser-Guided Bombs, GBU-15)

Wind-Corrected Munitions Dispenser Weapons (CBU-103, -104, -105)

All-Weather Standoff Weapons

(GBU-31/32 JDAM, AGM-154 JSOW, AGM-158 JASSM, AGM-142 Popeye II)

In a wooded area, presumably with low visibility, would a cluster bomb like the CBU-103 have been the weapon of choice?

Military expert David Cenciotti speculates it was probably a Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) — an unguided “dumb bomb” like the 907kg GBU-31 seen here, or its lighter brother, the GBU-38.

But plenty of other payloads, both laser-guided and TV-maneuvered, could have done the trick. Either way, the Pentagon has a (symbolic) high five to extend itself.

[BBC, NYT]

Discuss

(12 Comments)
  • [–]

    trace

    Thursday, August 11, 2011 at 9:29 AM

    No comments on the picture?!

  • [–]

    Alex

    Thursday, August 11, 2011 at 9:31 AM

    F-18 in the pic, not an F-16.

    • [–]

      Lachlan

      Thursday, August 11, 2011 at 11:35 AM

      +1

      But, it’s still nice to look at. :)

  • [–]

    TandemDrip

    Thursday, August 11, 2011 at 9:55 AM

    At least they got the JDAM right

    • [–]

      Dave

      Thursday, August 11, 2011 at 12:42 PM

      No they didn’t. The bomb in the picture is a laser-guided bomb, not a JDAM. And the description of JDAM is wrong too – it’s not an unguided “dumb bomb”. It’s a tail-kit that is attached to a dumb bomb to make it GPS guided.

      • [–]

        Trace

        Thursday, August 11, 2011 at 1:27 PM

        lol +1

  • [–]

    TSH

    Thursday, August 11, 2011 at 10:45 AM

    Wouldn’t “kinetic strike” imply that the ordnance *wasn’t* explosive in nature? Think about the kind of energy and penetrating power you’d have if your payload was nearly a ton of sharp steel javelins, given a boost with a powered dive. If properly targetted, no explosions necessary!

    • [–]

      Flux

      Thursday, August 11, 2011 at 11:33 AM

      While your interpretation of a kinetic weapon or bombardment is accurate, and quite popular in sci-fi circles when dropped from low orbit, a ‘kinetic strike’ is usually used in US military-ese to describe an assault where forces stay continuously mobile – no entrenchments, no occupation. It’s usually associated with aircraft/missiles, since that’s basically all they do.

      At least, I think so – the politicians seem to use it as just another clean euphemism for combat, so its lost in translation somewhat.

  • [–]

    Ollie

    Thursday, August 11, 2011 at 12:36 PM

    Cos it’s hard to google an image of an actual F-16… fail.

    • [–]

      Colin

      Thursday, August 11, 2011 at 5:19 PM

      Not only could they not google an F-16, it’s a Canadian F-18 in the pic! Double fail.

  • [–]

    GG

    Thursday, August 11, 2011 at 4:03 PM

    So in general what the pentagon is saying: we have no idea who did it (and we don’t care) but to please some people we bombed some other people we think might possible have something to do with the shooting (and if they did not who cares) so all fine again now and we saved some face by retalliating.

  • [–]

    jeremy

    Thursday, August 11, 2011 at 5:59 PM

    Generally this means guided but very low yield or guided concrete dummy. It could also mean they used the cannon. It could also just be a armed forces PR that speaks jiberish :-)

Join The Discussion