If
Only They Had Employed a Balloon Barrage
There
are two events in military history that I have often wondered how different the
outcome would have been had the Commanders in the field used a Balloon Barrage
to defend their positions.
If
I can take you back to the dark days of World War Two for a moment and give some
thought to 7th December 1941. The American Fleet was based largely at Pearl
Harbour, the American Government was watching the Japanese Government make its
way across the lands and ocean, yet since they were not at war with them they
chose to let them continue with their appalling war and keep them at arms
length, a policy of isolationism.
However,
all that was to change, the Japanese Government had decided the American forces
were a threat to them and a first strike against the United States was chosen.
The
Japanese had been gathering intelligence for a long time on the build up of arms
and the distribution of ships and planes across the island.
They
knew the layout of aircraft and stores and munitions and oil supplies.
The
attack sank four
Afterwards
it was a clear tactical victory for the Japanese but a grand strategic failure.
The result was inevitable:
American
Intelligence deciphered a message from a
From:
Tokyo
To:
Honolulu
Date:
2 Dec. 41
"
In view of the present situation, the presence in port of
warships,
airplane carriers, and cruisers is of utmost
importance.
Hereafter, to the utmost of your ability, let me
know
day by day. Wire me in each case
whether or not there are
any
observation balloons above
indications
that they will be sent up. Also
advise me whether
or
not the warships are provided with anti-mine nets."
A
second message was issued on the 6th a day before the attack saying:
From:
Honolulu
To:
Tokyo
Date:
6 Dec. 41
"
1. On the American Continent in October the Army began
training
barrage balloon troops at
Not
only have they ordered four of five hundred balloons, but it
is
understood that they are considering the use of these
balloons
in the defence of
neighbourhood
of
equipment,
nor have they selected the troops to man them.
Furthermore,
there is no indication that any training for the
maintenance
of balloons is being undertaken. At
present time
there
are no signs of barrage balloon equipment.
In addition, it
is
difficult to imagine that they have actually any.
However,
even
though they have actually made preparations, because they
must
control the air over the water and land runways of the
airports
in the vicinity of
Ewa,
there are
limits to the balloon defence of
imagine
that in all probability there is considerable
opportunity
left to take advantage for a surprise attack against
these
places.
"
2. In my opinion the battleships do not have torpedo
nets..."
They
could have used barrage balloons at
Pearl Harbour to reduce the threat from enemy aircraft, although if deployed,
the mentality of the average Japanese pilot was that they would have pressed on
with the attack in any case, preferring self-sacrifice to failure. This would
have meant that any balloon crews would have needed to be pretty slick to get a
fresh balloon inflated, armed and back up quickly. With over 300 enemy aircraft
flying over the base, over a 3 hour attack,
it was likely that had balloons been deployed the tactic would have been
to press on with the attack and take out the balloons one by one leaving a
fairly clean sweep for the remaining bombers.
Even
if well defended the Japanese would have pressed home with their attack and even
an unsuccessful attack would have led to a declaration of war by the
Pearl Harbour being attacked – Japanese Picture
The
Another
conflict that might have had a different outcome would have been in 1982 when
our forces were under attack from low-flying Argentinean bombers. We seemed to
have put our faith in defending ships from such attacks by use of rapid fire and
radar controlled weaponry. The list
of bombing attacks came out like this:
Saturday
1st May
HMS
Alacrity - slightly damaged by bomb near misses
HMS
Arrow - slightly damaged by cannon fire
HMS
Glamorgan - slightly damaged by bomb near misses, all off
Wednesday
12th May
HMS
Glasgow - moderately damaged off
Friday
21st May
HMS
Antrim - seriously damaged in Falkland Sound outside
HMS
Broadsword - slightly damaged outside San Carlos Water by cannon fire from
Daggers of Grupo 6.
HMS
Argonaut - slightly damaged outside San Carlos Water by rockets and cannon fire
from Aermacchi MB.339A of CANA 1 Esc, and then seriously damaged by two
unexploded bombs dropped by A-4B Skyhawks of FAA Grupo 5. Removing the
unexploded bomb’s and carrying out repairs took a number of days and although
declared operational, she soon sailed for the
HMS
Brilliant - slightly damaged outside San Carlos Water by cannon fire from
Daggers of Grupo 6.
HMS
ARDENT - badly damaged in Grantham Sound by bombs - hits, unexploded bombs and
near misses - dropped by Daggers of Grupo 6, then mortally damaged by bombs from
A-4Q Skyhawks of CANA 3 Esc off
Sunday
23rd May
HMS
ANTELOPE - damaged in San Carlos Water by two unexploded bombs dropped by A-4B
Skyhawks of Grupo 5. One of the bombs exploded that evening while being defused
and she caught fire and sank next day.
Monday
24th May
RFA
Sir Galahad - damaged by unexploded bomb and out of action for some days,
RFA
Sir Lancelot - damaged by unexploded bomb and not fully operational for almost
three weeks,
RFA
Sir Bedivere - slightly damaged by glancing bomb, all in San Carlos Water
probably by A-4C Skyhawks of FAA Grupo 4.
Tuesday
25th May
HMS
Broadsword - damaged north of
HMS
COVENTRY - sunk north of
Saturday
29th May
British
Wye - hit north of
Tuesday
8th June
HMS
Plymouth - damaged in Falkland Sound off San Carlos Water by four unexploded
bombs from Daggers of FAA Grupo 6.
RFA
SIR GALAHAD - mortally damaged off Fitzroy by bombs from A-4B Skyhawks of Grupo
5 and burnt out. Later in June towed out to sea and sunk as a war grave.
RFA
Sir Tristram - badly damaged off Fitzroy in same attack and abandoned, but later
returned to
LCU
F4, HMS Fearless - sunk in Choiseul Sound by bomb from A-4B Skyhawk of Grupo 5.
When
one considers the amount of bombing hits above , it does make you realize that
these pilots were very well trained at such low level attacks.
During
WWII we gave enormous support to our convoys with barrage balloon vessels. In
addition inlets, bays, harbours and mooring sites for large ships were given
extra protection of a series of barrage balloons.
I
contend that the use of barrage balloons as a form of air defence at the
Falkland Islands would have been a low cost, low technology weapon that would
have made the Argentinean pilots realise that they now stood a chance of
striking a balloon cable and being killed. The technique employed by these
pilots was to try and fly as low and as fast as possible to avoid radar
detection and then “pop up” to bombing height and release their bombs on
target. It goes without saying that they showed exceptional skill when one
considers the accuracy of their bombing but if they had to contend with a
balloon barrage they might well have not been so lucky.
The
terrain around the
The
lower shore areas and hills would have given the attacking enemy aircraft an
ideal low level run in and by keeping low and fast they would reduce the risk of
gunfire attacks to some degree. A logically placed balloon barrage along the
shore and in the inlets where anchored ships could be protected by floating
barrage balloon barges would have in my humble opinion changed the outcome to
one of less loss in terms of ships, and men. Helicopters were in considerable
use during the
Perhaps
some Mandarin in Whitehall will one day evaluate the cost of a modern radar
controlled, satellite linked, air defence system against the cost of a humble
bag of gas with a cable attached that is quite capable of bringing down an enemy
aircraft at much lower cost. Air
superiority has become the ultimate factor in warfare. I for one was surprised
that countries like
Who
knows, one day, Balloon Command might be “ Let Up! ” from the ashes once
again in a new form!!