Documents / FOIA release

Warsaw Pact Air Forces: Support of Strategic Operations in Central Europe, CIA/DI/SOVA Intelligence Assessment, January 1985.

Central Intelligence Agency · 95 pages · text from the file's own layer

This Central Intelligence Agency Directorate of Intelligence assessment, dated January 1985, examines how Warsaw Pact air forces would support large strategic operations in Central Europe. It concludes that the Soviets see NATO air power as the greatest threat to a Pact ground offensive. They revised their air supremacy plans in 1980 and 1981 to use sector-concentrated raids and a defensive air operation. The assessment also finds that heavy aircraft losses and limited deep attack capability would remain serious problems. The document has no UFO content.

  • p. 4 …This perceived shift in the air balance-probably caused by a combination of closer French cooperation…
  • p. 35 …an increasingly difficult a large number of cooperating headquarters. It would problem for the Pact air…
  • p. 46 …through NATO's forward air defenses in cooperation of the first two echelons at the con…
  • p. 90 …key role in the usually with the cooperation of other forces. An air front airspace management…
Top \ecret
The substantial Pact air balance advantage in the likely starting qualitative air balance in the Western
mid-1970s is reduced to near parity by 1980 in our TMO would be one of near parity. Moreover, they
estimate because we assume that in the late 1970s the probably also believe that it is unlikely that either side
Soviets introduced new counting rules for calculating could achieve a sufficient lead in mobilization and
the air balance. Our scores data indicate the Soviets reinforcement to establish a substantial air balance
had switched from multiple to unitary combat poten- advantage. The peacetime in-place air forces on both
tial scores by 1977, and our analysis of Soviet percep- sides are so large that it would take a massive
tions of the air balance in 1975 leads us to speculate reinforcement by one side in concert with the other's
that this switch probably occurred after 1975. Of relative inactivity to substantially shift the starting
ual importance to our calculations balance. Both sides have sufficient air forces reserves
Soviet planners pro a ly to alter the balance, but a reinforcement of that
started by 1977 to count French forces as part of magnitude would take at a minimum most of a week
NATO from the outset of hostilities. All of the air (perhaps as much as two weeks) and considerable
balance shift between 1975 and 1980 in our calcula- logistic support to prepare and execute. We believe
tions is attributable to the addition of about 70 that typically conservative Soviet planners would as-
percent of the French Air Force to the NATO air sume that neither side would be able to conceal
forces and to applying unitary rather than multiple preparations on that scale for more than a couple of
combat potential scores to NATO multirole fighter- days, and that once detected, it would likely trigger a
bombers. Force modernization is not a major contrib- reciprocal response from the other side.i
utor to the air balance shift in our calculations,
because there is no significant change in the balance If our air balance calculations arc representative of
between 1975 and 1980 if the combat potential scores Soviet estimates, the Soviets expect that neither side
are applied using the same method in both ears and would be likely to amass a TMO-wide qualitative air
if the French are excluded balance advantage greater than about 1.2:1 at the
outset of war, despite a Pact advantage of about 1.4:1
We estimate that in 1980 the Soviets projected fur- to 1.6:1 in the numbers of deployed combat aircraft
ther NATO gains in the qualitative air balance by (table 9). Even in the highly unlikely event that the
1985 but that a situation of near parity would contin- Pact was able to deploy a force as large as our
ue to exist (table 8). Unlike the preceding five years, hypothetical Force 5F-3S against an unreinforced
however, NATO's gains between 1980 and 1985 are NATO, the Pact would have only a 1.30:1 qualitative
due to its higher rate of qualitative improvement advantage TMO-wide. Moredver, we estimate that
through force modernization than that of the Warsaw the US Tactical Air Command's planned reinforce-
Pact, rather than to changes in Soviet estimative ment after three days of mobilization would more
techniques. This higher rate of improvement is almost than offset the addition of the Vinnitsa air army in
entirely attributable to the introduction of substantial Soviet calculations of the air balance and that the
numbers of F-16s and Tornados-both of which the planned US reinforcement force after 14 days of
Soviets score much higher than the Pact MIG-23/27 mobilization would counterbalance the addition of
and SU-24 counterparts during this period. We did that air army and the Belorussian and Carpathian
-not perform air balance projections for the less pre- Front air forces. In our estimate, we assume the
dictable years beyond 1985, but we believe the Soviets Soviets count about 70 percent of the French Air
may hope to halt NATO's gains-and perhaps reverse Force as part of the NATO forces-the exclusion of
them-if they are able to introduce enough SU-27 which would turn a typical 1.05:1 NATO advantage
and MIG-29 fighters during the late 1980s and the in our calculations into a Pact advantage of 1.05:1 to
1990s, because they may view these aircraft as being 1.10:1 (depending on the extent of the reinforcement
qualitatively comparable to the F-15 and F-16,.which period).
they regard highly
The Current TMO-Wide Balance. Our analysis sug-
gests the Soviets now probably perceive that the most
73 Top 'ecret

Not linked to a story yet.

About this file

FOIA release, from the cia-readingroom collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. 95 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.