Bomb damage assessment
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a2/Bda-basrah-defenselink-mil.jpg/275px-Bda-basrah-defenselink-mil.jpg)
Bomb damage assessment (BDA), also known as battle damage assessment, is the practice of assessing damage inflicted on a target from a stand-off weapon, most typically a bomb or air launched missile. It is part of the larger discipline of combat assessment. Assessment is performed using many techniques including footage from in-weapon cameras, gun cameras, forces on the ground near the target, satellite imagery and follow-up visits to the target. Preventing information on battle damage reaching the enemy is a key objective of military censorship. For nuclear weapons special techniques may be required due to the extensive damage caused and difficulty in approaching the site.
History of bomb damage assessment
Originally, BDA was required due to the disconnected nature of aerial bombardment during
BDA may be performed using information released accidentally by the enemy. In World War II, United Press International transmitted a report on the damage caused by the Japanese raid on Pearl Harbor including details on the number of damaged warships and shore installations.[2]
In more recent conflicts,
BDA was used during the two Gulf Wars, both during the conflict and retrospectively. In the opening days of the air campaign of the 1991 Gulf War it was used to assess the damage to key Iraqi installations including its nuclear reactors.[4] At the conclusion of the 2003 invasion of Iraq a joint team from the allied nations (including Britain, the United States and Australia) assessed the damage caused to almost 400 sites across the country to determine the effectiveness of weapon strikes.[5]
As the field has advanced and the quantity of available data has increased, statistical techniques have been introduced to improve the speed and quality of data analysis.[6]
Objectives of bomb damage analysis
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/US_Navy_030622-F-0000L-001_U.S._Navy_Lt._Cmdr._Leonard_Yowell_examines_the_effectiveness_of_a_Joint_Direct_Attack_Munition_%28JDAM%29_at_one_of_Saddam_Hussein%27s_presidential_palaces.jpg/220px-thumbnail.jpg)
Bomb damage assessment has a number of objectives. The assessment will attempt to determine if the munition functioned properly and according to its design. An estimate will be made of the extent of physical damage (through munitions blast, fragmentation, and/or fire damage effects) to the target. This assessment is based upon observed or interpreted damage. Collateral and additional damage is also assessed in this process. Estimates will be made of the degree to which the military value of the target has been degraded in respect of its intended mission. Finally the overall impact on the enemy's capability will be assessed.
The future of bomb damage assessment
After the end of hostilities in the 1991 Gulf War, the Battle Damage Assessment Working Group (BDAWG) was formed at the behest of MTIC, the Military Targeting Intelligence Committee. Largely, this group sought to create a standard lexicon of terminology for describing BDA, and to develop an outlook for the future of BDA.
Possible future techniques involve using
Limitations of bomb damage assessment
BDA relies on humans to interpret and analyze the data collected from various sources. Despite improvements in the data capture techniques limitations were exposed following the 1991 Gulf War in the assessment process when the data supplied by on-board cameras was not analysed correctly.[7] This flawed analysis resulted in incorrect or incomplete information being given to local commanders on the extent of the damage caused.[8] In particular the analysis did not reliably identify whether a target had been damaged (but remained militarily viable) or was no longer a threat.[8]
Use of misinformation
Information on bomb damage is highly valuable to the enemy and military intelligence and censors will endeavour to conceal, exaggerate or underplay the extent of damage depending on the circumstances. Following the
References
- ^ Oliver S. Reading (January 1944). "Science —Study Of Invariables". American Scientist. 32 (1): 56.
- ^ Greg Wilsbacher (Fall 2010). "Al Brick: The Forgotten Newsreel Man at Pearl Harbour". The Moving Image: The Journal of the Association of Moving Image Archivists. 10 (2). University of Minnesota Press: 36.
- Royal Institute of International Affairs.
- ^ Lee Feinstein (March 1991). "Iraqi Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological Facilities Attacked". Arms Control Today. Arms Control Association: 19.
- ^ "Cultural pursuit inspires Fellowship: Assessing bomb damage in Iraq". Air Force News. Retrieved 2014-08-14.
- .
- JSTOR 20045895.
- ^ JSTOR 796875.
- ^ ISBN 0-7146-3269-4.