Just out of curiosity, how effective would aircraft, warships, tanks, helicopters, etc. be if they had to fight in the very teeth of a Category-4 hurricane?
(I am guessing that Category-5 would be impossible for anyone to fight in, so let’s go with Category 4.)
The obvious thing for the generals would be to refrain from fighting until the thing has blown over, but suppose that for some reason it was absolutely essential to fight the enemy ***now ***in the teeth of that hurricane. (The enemy is equally hampered by the weather.) Would missiles be blown off course? Would large airplanes like an E-3 AWACS survive the high wind speed?
Submarines would probably be the only military assets that would be totally unaffected.
The most modern warplanes have trouble operating in bad weather, or don’t fly at all, forget about a hurricane. Helicopters couldn’t fly. Ships go out of their way to avoid hurricanes. I’m no expert on artillery, but I’m guessing precision bombardment even from a stationary position is going to be affected by weather. Tanks and armored vehicles are going to have trouble in mud and roads may be washed away.
That leaves infantry. Maybe a small unit could make its way through weather to achieve some objective?
Don’t forget the hurricane is also destroying the operational capability of the enemy too, so it’s hard to imagine what kind of mission would be essential under these conditions.
“Fighting” in a hurricane would consist of both sides hunkering down to weather the storm, and each hoping that the other isn’t hunkering down quite as well as they are. There is never a military need to fight, and militaries prefer to avoid fighting entirely if possible. What there is sometimes a military need for is to damage or destroy resources held by the enemy, and hey, look, that’s happening already.
USAF & NOAA C-130s and P-3s fly in hurricanes regularly. It’s rough, but it isn’t deadly. Airliners fly in the jet stream every day which can have similar wind speeds.
What is problematic is the chaotic turbulence down low. A bomber or a fighter/attack airplane that drops on GPS coordinates can still do that. The bomb is far more likely to miss by an unpredictably wider margin. Whether that matters tactically depends on what you’re trying to hit.
Darn near anything that depends on visual or IR operations will fail completely in the dense cloud and rain.
Another factor is: what exactly is a “hurricane”? This Hurricane HARVEY? is the NHC’s public announcement from 4pm on Friday as Harvey was nearing the coast. Or more specifically, as Harvey’s centerpoint was nearing the coast; quite a lot of Harvey was already over land by then. At that time the max sustained winds were about 125 mph. But that was a narrow ring just a few miles wide roughly 10 miles in radius. At 35 miles radius the winds were down to <74 mph. The winds were still pretty blustery out to 175 miles radius. But blustery isn’t obliterative.
So are we fighting in the near 0-knot eye, the 125 mph eyewall, the 75 mph 35 mi ring, the 50 mph 50 mi ring, or the 35 mph 150 mile ring? Big difference and they’re all “Hurricane Harvey”.
I remember that storm and seeing pictures of Apaches flipped over due to wind. That was straight line wind not a hurricane. I remember being woken up in the middle of the night to move helicopters into the hanger when we got wind alerts. Helicopters can’t fly and the Army will move them inland if they are in the path of a hurricane.
Also take into account flooding. Most army vehicles have limited fording ability. Last year a bunch of soldiers were killed on Fort Hood crossing a stream in a truck.
Windage is a thing. Wind will effect the trajectory of projectiles. I can’t imagine what 100mph winds will do to aim not even taking driving rain in your face into account.
Any of our axes of advance might be effected unpredictably without notice. Floods, mud, downed trees and washed out roads all might bog down an offensive. My engineer unit was clearing roads after Sandy and it was very slow going and that was days later in good weather.
During the drive to Baghdad the offensive stalled due to a sand storm. A hurricane would be much worse.
During a hurricane everyone would hunker down and go into the defensive.
Ever seen those poor reporters getting blown over while they’re trying to do a live shot when the hurricane is still miles away from shore? Now try aiming a rifle in that weather.
I think the best bet is a cruise missile that can correct its own flight path.
So, insane question, but could an aircraft deliberately use a hurricane as protective cover by flying in the hurricane and being shielded from enemy attack, yet still releasing missiles to strike the enemy outside the hurricane?( The missiles would have difficulty flying while inside the hurricane, but once they exited the hurricane, they could fly normally. Whereas the enemy’s missiles would be exactly the opposite - fly normally outside the typhoon, but be unable to strike a target inside the typhoon.)
A hurricane doesn’t have a sharp edge. And as you’ve probably read, NOAA sends C-130s driving around inside hurricanes all the time. The only problem with a hurricane is the mess it stirs up on the ground or water.
Good bet that an air-to-ground missile would have a hard time coping with hundred-plus mph winds in the impact zone. But other than extending or reducing its range, they’d not be any material issue while the missile is enroute to the target.
US Air Force Reserve flies C-130s (WC-130Js) into Atlantic hurricanes, operating from Keesler AFB, MS (53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron “Hurricane Hunters”). NOAA Hurricane Hunters are based out of Lakeland, FL, and fly two de-militarized Lockheed Orion weather recco aircraft (WP-3) for mid-level storm penetration (similar to the Air Force mission) and an appropriately instrumented Gulfstream IV for upper-level work.
Sorry for the nitpick, but this stuff is a big part of my career history and subject matter expertise so I like to see it right.