Content deleted Content added
→Examples: Extra for the war In Afghanistan since it's over in 2021 and the country have taken over by the ISIS. Tag: Reverted |
|||
| (35 intermediate revisions by 21 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{short description|
{{about|unintentional incidents|institutionalised, intentional instances of fratricide|barrier troops}}
{{other uses|Friendly Fire (disambiguation)}}
Line 5:
[[File:United States bombing raid over a German city - NARA - 197269.jpg|thumb|upright=1.35|An American [[Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress|B-17 Flying Fortress]] "Miss Donna Mae II" is damaged by bombs after drifting under the American bomber flying above it during the [[Bombing of Berlin in World War II|bombing of Berlin]] in 1944. The damage to the [[horizontal stabilizer]] caused the plane to go into an uncontrollable spin and crash, killing all 11 crew members.]]
In [[military terminology]], '''friendly fire''' or '''fratricide'''{{efn|From the term for [[Fratricide|killing one's brother]]}} is an attack by [[belligerent]] or [[neutral country|neutral]] forces on friendly troops while attempting to attack enemy
Use of the term
Friendly fire should not be confused with [[fragging]], which is the uncondoned ''intentional'' (or attempted) killing of servicemen by fellow personnel serving on the same side.
==History==
Paul R. Syms argues that friendly fire is an ancient phenomenon.<ref>Kirke, Charles (ed.). 2010. ''Fratricide in Battle: (Un)Friendly Fire''. London: Bloomsbury, p. 7.</ref> He notes recorded events in Ancient Greece and other early accounts of battles. He and other historians also note that weapons such as guns, artillery, and aircraft dramatically increased friendly-fire casualties.
By the 20th and 21st centuries, friendly-fire casualties have likely become a significant percentage of combat injuries and fatalities. [[Jon Krakauer]] provides an overview of American casualties during and since the [[Second World War]]:
{{blockquote|While acknowledging that the "statistical dimensions of the friendly fire problem have yet to be defined; reliable data are simply not available in most cases," ''The Oxford Companion to American Military History'' estimates that between 2 percent and
==Under-reporting==
In the annals of warfare, deaths at the hand of the enemy are often valorized, while those at the hand of friendly forces may be cast in shame. Moreover, because [[public relations]] and [[morale]] are important, especially in modern warfare, the military may be inclined to under-report incidents of friendly-fire, especially when in charge of both investigations and [[press releases]]:
{{Blockquote|text=If [[fratricide]] is an untoward but inevitable aspect of warfare, so, too, is the tendency by military commanders to sweep such tragedies under the rug. It's part of a larger pattern: the temptation among generals and politicians to control how the press portrays their military campaigns, which all too often leads them to misrepresent the truth in order to bolster public support for the war of the moment.|author=Jon Krakauer |source=''Where Men Win Glory''. NY: Bloomsbury, p. 205.}}
Although there may well be a longstanding history of such bias,<ref>Claire Outteridge, Simon Henderson, Raphael Pascual, Paul Shanahan, "How can Human Factors be Exploited to Reduce the Risk of Fratricide?" in Kirke, p. 115</ref><ref>Krakauer, Jon. 2009. Where Men Win Glory. NY: Bloomsbury, p. 204.</ref>
==Causes==
Line 30:
===Errors of identification===
Errors of identification happen when friendly troops are mistakenly attacked in the belief that they are the enemy. Highly mobile battles, and battles involving troops from many nations are more likely to cause this kind of incident as evidenced by incidents in the 1991 [[Gulf War]], or the shooting down of a British aircraft by a U.S. [[MIM-104 Patriot|Patriot battery]] during the [[2003 invasion of Iraq]].<ref>The Economist ''Closing in on Baghdad'' 25 March 2003</ref> In the [[Tarnak Farm incident]], four Canadian soldiers were killed and eight others injured when a [[U.S. Air National Guard]]
During [[World War II]], "[[invasion stripes]]" were painted on [[Allies of World War II|Allied]] [[aircraft]] to assist identification in preparation for the [[invasion of Normandy]]. [[Invasion stripes#Hawker Typhoon|Similar markings had been used]] when the [[Hawker Typhoon]] was first introduced into use as it was otherwise very similar in profile to a German aircraft. Late in the war the "protection squadron" that covered the [[Jagdverband 44|elite German jet fighter squadron]] as it landed or took off were brightly painted to distinguish them from raiding Allied fighters.
===Errors of response inhibition===
Errors of response inhibition have recently been proposed as another potential cause of some friendly fire accidents.<ref>Biggs, A. T., Cain, M. S., & Mitroff, S. R. (2015). Cognitive training can reduce civilian casualties in a simulated shooting environment. Psychological science, 26(8), 1164–1176. {{doi|10.1177/0956797615579274}}</ref><ref>Wilson, K. M., Head, J., de Joux, N. R., Finkbeiner, K. M., & Helton, W. S. (2015). Friendly fire and the sustained attention to response task. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society,
A number of situations can lead to or exacerbate the risk of friendly fire. Difficult terrain and visibility are major factors. Soldiers fighting on unfamiliar ground can become disoriented more easily than on familiar terrain. The direction from which enemy fire comes may not be easy to identify, and poor weather conditions and combat stress may add to the confusion, especially if fire is exchanged. Accurate navigation and fire discipline are vital. In high-risk situations, leaders need to ensure units are properly informed of the location of friendly units and must issue clear, unambiguous orders, but they must also react correctly to responses from soldiers who are capable of using their own judgement. Miscommunication can be deadly. Radios, field telephones, and signalling systems can be used to address the problem, but when these systems are used to co-ordinate multiple forces such as ground troops and aircraft, their breakdown can dramatically increase the risk of friendly fire. When allied troops are operating, the situation is even more complex, especially with language barriers to overcome.<ref name="Kirke"/>
Line 41:
==Impact reduction==
Some analyses dismiss the material impact of friendly fire, by concluding friendly-fire casualties are usually too few to affect the outcome of a battle.<ref>{{in lang|fr}} Percin, Gen. Alexandre (1921) ''Le Massacre de Notre Infanterie 1914–1918'', Michel Albin, Paris;</ref><ref>Shrader, Charles R. (1982) ''Amicicide: The Problem of Friendly Fire in Modern War'', US Command & General Staff College Survey No. 1</ref> The effects of friendly fire, however, are not just material. Troops expect to be targeted by the enemy, but being hit by their own forces has a huge negative impact on
Attempts to reduce this effect by military leaders involve identifying the causes of friendly fire and overcoming repetition of the incident through training, tactics and technology.<ref name="Kirke">Kirke, Charles M. (ed., 2012) ''Fratricide in Battle: (Un)Friendly Fire'' [http://www.continuumbooks.com/books/detail.aspx?BookId=158678&SearchType=Basic Continuum Books] {{Webarchive|url=https://wayback.archive-it.org/all/20171011073806/https://www.ebookweek.com/fat-obliterator-review/ |date=11 October 2017 }}</ref>
Line 47:
===Training===
[[File:Bold Quest 2011 wraps up 110921-A-CP678-108.jpg|thumb|upright=1.2|Soldiers perform a night assault at [[Camp Atterbury]] Joint Maneuver Training Center during Bold Quest 2011, a combat assessment exercise to test the interoperability of target identification systems of different allied nations to reduce friendly fire incidents.]]
Most militaries use extensive training to ensure troop safety as part of normal coordination and planning, but are not always exposed to possible friendly-fire situations to ensure they are aware of situations where the risk is high. Difficult terrain and bad weather cannot be controlled, but soldiers must be trained to operate effectively in these conditions, as well as being trained to fight at night. Such simulated training is now commonplace for soldiers worldwide. Avoiding friendly fire can be as straightforward as ensuring fire discipline is instilled in troops, so that they fire and cease firing when they are told to. Firing ranges now also include [[
The increasing sophistication of weaponry, and the tactics employed against American forces to deliberately confuse them has meant that while overall casualties have fallen for American soldiers in the late 20th and 21st centuries, the overall percentage of deaths due to friendly fire in American actions has risen dramatically. In the 1991 Gulf War, most of the Americans killed by their own forces were crew members of armored vehicles hit by anti-tank rounds. The response in training includes recognition training for Apache helicopter crews to help them distinguish American tanks and armored vehicles at night and in bad weather from those of the enemy. In addition, tank gunners must watch for "friendly" robotic tanks that pop out on training courses in California's Mojave Desert. They also study video footage to help them recognize American forces in battle more quickly.<ref name=autogenerated1>{{cite news |last=Schmitt |first=Eric |url=https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE6DF1E3FF93AA35751C1A967958260 |title=U.S. Striving to Prevent 'Friendly Fire' |location=Middle East |work=The New York Times |date=9 December 1991 |access-date=4 January 2011 |archive-date=25 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220125063247/https://www.nytimes.com/1991/12/09/us/us-striving-to-prevent-friendly-fire.html |url-status=live }}</ref>
Line 54:
Improved technology to assist in identifying friendly forces is also an ongoing response to friendly fire problems.
From the earliest days of warfare, identification systems were visual and developed into extremely elaborate suits of armour with distinctive [[heraldry|heraldic]] patterns. During the [[Napoleonic Wars]], Admiral Nelson ordered that ships under his command adopt a common paint scheme to reduce friendly fire incidents; this pattern became known as the [[Nelson Chequer]]. [[Invasion stripes]] served a similar function during the Allied invasion of Normandy in World War II. When [[radar]] was developed during World War II, IFF ("[[Identification friend or foe
Correct [[navigation]] is vital to ensuring units know where they are in relation to their own force and the enemy. Efforts to provide accurate compasses inside metal boxes in tanks and trucks has proven difficult, with [[GPS]] a major breakthrough.
Line 60:
Other technological changes include hand-held navigational devices that use [[satellite]] signals, giving ground forces the exact location of enemy forces as well as their own. The use of infrared lights and [[Combat Identification Panel|thermal tape]] that are invisible to observers without night-goggles, or fibres and dyes that reflect only specific wavelengths are developing into key identifiers for friendly infantry units at night.
There is also some development of remote sensors to detect enemy vehicles – the Remotely Monitored Battlefield Sensor System (REMBASS) uses a combination of [[acoustics|acoustic]], seismic vibration, and infrared to not just detect, but identify vehicles.<ref name="
===Tactics===
Some [[Military tactics|tactics]] make friendly fire virtually inevitable, such as the practice of dropping barrages of mortars on enemy [[machine gun]] posts in the final moments before capture. This practice continued throughout the 20th century since machine guns were first used in World War I. The high friendly fire risk has generally been accepted by troops since machine gun emplacements are tactically so valuable, and at the same time so dangerous that the attackers wanted them to be shelled, considering the shells far less deadly than the machine guns.<ref name="
Tactical adjustments include the use of "kill boxes", or zones that are placed off-limits to ground forces while allied aircraft attack targets, which goes back to the beginning of military aircraft in World War I.<ref name=autogenerated1/>
The [[shock and awe]] battle tactics adopted by the American military – overwhelming power, battlefield awareness, dominant maneuvers, and spectacular displays of force – are employed because they are believed to be the best way to win a war quickly and decisively, reducing casualties on both sides. However, if the only people doing the shooting are American, then a high percentage of total casualties are bound to be the result of friendly fire, blunting the effectiveness of the shock and awe tactic. It is probably the fact that friendly fire has proven to be the only fundamental weakness of the tactics that has caused the American military to take significant steps to overturn a blasé attitude to friendly fire and assess ways to eliminate it.<ref name="
=== Markings ===
Line 73:
During [[Allied invasion of Sicily|Operation Husky]], codename for the [[Allied invasion of Sicily]], on the night of 11 July 1943, American [[Douglas C-47 Skytrain|C-47 transport plane]]s were mistakenly fired upon by American ground and naval forces and 23 planes were shot down and 37 damaged, resulting in 318 casualties, with 60 airmen and 81 paratroopers killed.<ref>{{cite web | title = Airborne Reinforcement | work = US Army in World War II | url = http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/USA-MTO-Sicily/USA-MTO-Sicily-9.html | access-date =10 March 2009 }}</ref>
This led to the use of [[Invasion stripes]] that were used during D-Day as a visible way to prevent friendly fire.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.classicwarbirds.co.uk/articles/the-history-of-invasion-stripes.php |title=The History of Invasion Stripes | access-date=19 April 2022}}</ref> During the [[
|newspaper=Latest Asian, Middle-East, Eurasian, Indian News
| date=19 April 2022| access-date=19 April 2022|last1=Tiwari
|first1=Sakshi
}}</ref> The picture has become more confused as both sides are using captured or abandoned equipment with Ukraine using captured Russian tanks.<ref>{{cite web | url= https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2022/03/24/the-ukrainian-army-has-captured-enough-russian-tanks-to-make-good-all-its-own-losses-and-then-some/ |title= The Ukrainian Army Has More Tanks Now Than When The War
|website= [[Forbes]]
| date=24 March 2022| access-date=19 April 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.jpost.com/international/article-704372 |title=Russia restoring captured, damaged Ukrainian tanks, vehicles
|newspaper=The Jerusalem Post
| date=17 April 2022| access-date=19 April 2022}}</ref>
Line 86:
{{Main|List of friendly fire incidents}}
Incidents
==See also==
* ''[[A Second Knock at the Door]]'' (2011 documentary film)
* ''[[Friendly Fire (1979 film)|Friendly Fire]]'', 1979 television docudrama about a high-profile friendly fire incident during the Vietnam War * [[Identification friend or foe]] (IFF), aviation technology▼
▲*[[Identification friend or foe]], aviation technology
== Notes ==
Line 98 ⟶ 97:
==References==
{{reflist|30em}}
==Further reading==
*
* Garrison, Webb B. (1999) ''Friendly Fire in the Civil War: More than 100 True Stories of Comrade Killing Comrade'', Rutledge Hill Press, Nashville, TN; {{ISBN|1558537147}}
*
* Kirke, Charles M. (ed., 2012) ''Fratricide in Battle: (Un)Friendly Fire'', Continuum Books; {{ISBN|9781441157003}}
* {{in lang|fr}} Percin, Gen. Alexandre (1921) ''Le Massacre de Notre Infanterie 1914–1918'', Michel Albin, Paris; {{OCLC|924214914}}
* Regan, Geoffrey (
* Regan, Geoffrey (2004) ''More Military Blunders'', Carlton Books {{ISBN|9781844427109}}
* Shrader, Charles R. (1982) [https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a211713.pdf ''Amicicide: The Problem of Friendly Fire in Modern War''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210420195917/https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a211713.pdf |date=20 April 2021 }}, US Command & Staff College, Fort Leavenworth
==External links==
{{Wiktionary|friendly fire}}
{{commons category-inline}}
* [http://napoleonistyka.atspace.com/infantry_tactics_2.htm#infantrycombatmusketfire7 Friendly fire during the Napoleonic Wars]
* [http://www.americanwarlibrary.com/ff/ff.htm The American War Library's best estimates on friendly fire casualties]
{{authority control}}
| |||