Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: The Navy SEAL Assault on Patilla Airfield, Panama - Operation Just Cause - 1989...

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    34,082
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)

    The Navy SEAL Assault on Patilla Airfield, Panama - Operation Just Cause - 1989...

    It was in 1990 that I first learned what a "Seal" was, and not just because of that Charlie Sheen movie. It was several months after the assault on Patilla Airfield that a few people I knew in the special operations community (SF 10th) were discussing how badly things had gone for elements of NSW. Prior to that my understanding of "Seals" was more UDT in Vietnam and Magnum PI. I had heard the name before but didn't have complete context as Clancy and Marchinko weren't writing about them yet.

    Most here probably know the event very well, especially if you had the History Channel when it actually talked about history in the late 1990's. But here are the details.

    In 1989 the United States invaded Panama. During the invasion, the US Navy SEALs were tasked with two missions. The first, to disable a boat General Noriega might use to escape, was successful (It was "disabled" by putting so much explosives under the hull that one engine was never found!). The second was not, to the tune of four SEALs killed and eight seriously wounded. It is this second incident we will focus on.

    The failure of this mission started during the planning process. The original plan called for Army units to be air lifted into key areas. But the Navy command was unhappy that none of their units got to share in the action, so SEAL Team 4 was given two missions one of which probably should have been assigned to the Army Rangers. The second mission SEALS were tasked with was disabling Manuel Noriega's Learjet at Patilla Field to prevent him from escaping in it.

    Originally, the plan called for 48 SEALs in two platoons to be towed near the cliffs at the end of the runway. The SEALs would then move the 3,500 ft. length of the airfield up to the hangar the lear was kept. One squad would disable the lear while another would pull small airplanes onto the airstrip to prevent it from being used. The others would be used to provide security at the north and south end of the fields.

    The planner of the mission, Commodore John Sandoz, had asked an experienced SEAL under his command, a Lieutenant Commander Mike Walsh, to review his plan. Walsh had recently returned from a three half year tour in Panama and knew both the country and its current situation well. Walsh almost immediately rejected the original and offered three different plans of his own.

    The first was to drive a team of eight SEALs to the fence of the airfield in a vehicle disguised to look like one of the many canal zone vehicles in the area. Previous reconnaissance would have located a hole in the fence the SEALs could use to gain access to the field. Four SEALS would remain behind as vehicle and fence guards while the remaining four would move to the hangar, take care of any guards in the hangar with sienced MP5s, and then disable the plane.

    The second plan was to infiltrate a SEAL sniper team into the airfield and have them take position on top of the airfield's cafeteria. This position would give them a commanding view of the main doors to the hangar as well as the rest of the airfield. Only if the plane was about to move out would the SEALs open fire, disabling it with rounds into the cockpit ot tires.

    The third and best plan involved the same two-man SEAL sniper team, but would base them from an apartment rented next to the airfield. This plan would involve the least amount of danger to the SEAL operators and was more in-line with how SEALs normally operate.

    All three plans were shot by Commodore Sandoz. The original plan would be implemented. Lt. Cdr Walsh refused to sign an endorsement for Sandoz's plan and was moved from operations to logistics for his refusal.

    H hour for the invasion was set for 0100. The PBR from SBU-26, with CRRCs in tow, left the dock at Rodman 2000 hours on December 19, 1989. The SEALs were armed with an impressive array of weapons. Not only were pistols and M-16/203 combos carried, but several team members had the then-new M-249 Saw or M-60 machine gun. Rounding out their arsenal were fragmentation grenades, claymore mines, and AT-4 anti-tank rockets.

    At 0045, the mission commander was notified that H hour had been moved forward 15 minutes (fighting had broken out early between Panamanian and American forces). The element of surprise lost, the SEALs continued towards their objective. A second problem was that the USAF Combat Controllers attached to the SEALs had not been able to raise the AC-130 Spectre assigned to provide supporting fire if needed.

    Other problems began to crop up as the reached the shore and assembled on the edge of the runway. There was no cover. The runway was well lit by landing lights and backscatter from the city. Worse yet, the administration building and hangar itself were well lit. And fire from the nearby city began waking up houseguards in buildings surrounding the field. On the positive side, a SEAL surveillance team had occupied a rented apartment across from the field earlier in the day and could give them realtime intelligence about troop and vehicle movements.

    So far, things had gone well. Bravo Platoon had disarmed several guards and had began to drag light aircraft onto the runway. As they did, the two squads of Golf Platoon made their way up the field. Radio calls came in; one reporting that a helicopter had left Colon heading for Patilla--possibly carrying Noriega. The second relayed that several PDF armed cars mounting 90mm cannon were possibly heading to the north end of the field.

    About this time, the houseguards in the buildings surrounding the airfield noticed members of Golf Platoon's unprotected dash up the field. Using portable radios, they notified guards in the hangar and then took aim on the SEALs below. The hangar guards, now awake, quickly dressed and took up defensive positions in the hangar.

    The two squads took up position, the first within 100 feet of the hangar, the second slightly behind and to the side of the first. A call came out from the hangar for the SEALS to surrender. A SEAL responded by demanding the Panamanians surrender to the SEALs. Realizing they were in a bad position on a brightly lit field, the first squad tried to relocate. Then several long bursts of fire came out from the hangar.

    In the initial volley of fire, all but one of the SEALs were wounded. The houseguards across the airfield also began to fire upon the SEALs, putting them in a deadly cross-fire. Some of the SEALs were now dead, and those that weren't were having a hard time dealing with their wounds and getting out of the heavy rucks they'd brought with them.


    The second squad of Golf platoon began to attempt to lay down a protective cover as Bravo Platoon and members of the command and control element rushed to the hangar. The USAF Combat Controllers had just made contact with the gunship, but they had been kept with the command and control element of the SEALs and were too far away to provide assistance.

    Surviving members began to drag the casualties away, several becoming casualties themselves in the process. Lt Phillips from Golf's second squad ordered the Learjet to be taken out by rocket. The AT-4 hit the aircraft cleanly, destroying any chance of it being used to escape. A medevac was reported as inbound, but wasn't actually released from Howard AFB (only ten minutes away) for another hour and a half.

    Killed were Lt. John Connors, CPO Donald McFaul, Torpedoman's Mate 2nd Class Issac Rodriguez, and Botswain's Mate 1st Class Chris Tilghman. Rodriguez had only been a SEAL for one week. Eight other SEALS had been seriously wounded.

    Clearly, the tragedy at Patilla was the fault of poor planning. But there were many factors that played into the events that took place, and many questions that should be asked. Why weren't the Rangers given this mission? Why did the Naval command decide to use such a large operating force? Why was the advice of an experienced operator and decorated SEAL ignored? Could the gunship had provided enough cover and broken Panimanian resistance had it been in contact with the team?

    The operations during Just Cause should have been tasked to the units that specialized in that type of operation. The SEALS were a logical choice in the assault on Noriega's boat, but the Army Rangers should have been given the Patilla mission. Given that the SEALs got the mission, the senior staff should have come up with a better plan that was less risky, and the SEALs leading the team should have refused the mission as it was planned and developed a new plan using methods more in-line with SEAL doctrine. A smaller force should have been used. A sniper team could have taken out the lear and prevented any other aircraft from using the field. The SEALs should not have tried a conventional assault on an open, coverless airfield.


    Many of us of course remember the debacle that was Eagle Claw, which failed for many of the same kinds of reasons, so when the general public was finally acquainted with Navy "special forces" there was lots of deja vu. Of course Noriega was captured and Panama pacified so that tended to overshadow "Nifty Package" unless you were paying attention to the details.

    It would be another three years before an event highlighted an operation gone wrong in Mogadishu so we had lots of time to think about this one.
    It's hard to be a ACLU hating, philosophically Libertarian, socially liberal, fiscally conservative, scientifically grounded, agnostic, porn admiring gun owner who believes in self determination.

    Chuck, we miss ya man.

    كافر

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Herndon,VA
    Posts
    1,096
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    In late November/December 89 I was in Panama finishing up a UNITAS deployment in South America. UNITAS was a reinforced USMC infantry company with full weapons company attachments that trained with South American military on 5 month rotations. We had a platoon of 12 Amtraks attached to us also. Two of the four SEALS killed were part of SEAL team 4 that had been on the UNITAS deployment with us. While in Panama we were given a briefing on Operation Just Cause. We drew ammo, off loaded the Amtraks and staged by the bridge of the Americas. After a day of sitting around we loaded up the Amtraks and left Panama. The SEAL team with us on the ship stayed behind in Panama. We were told the invasion would be an Army operation and the USMC was not needed. After a quick stop in Puerto Rico I was back at Camp Geiger in a week. I was actually on Firewatch watching the news when I saw that the four SEALS had been killed. I have always wondered why they used 48 SEALs with only small arms to take and hold an airfield when they had 150 Marines with Amtraks each with MK19's and M2's on standby that they sent home. David

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,320
    Feedback Score
    9 (91%)
    Quote Originally Posted by dwhitehorne View Post
    I have always wondered why they used 48 SEALs with only small arms to take and hold an airfield when they had 150 Marines with Amtraks each with MK19's and M2's on standby that they sent home. David
    Because of the institutional arrogance of SEALs in general and their officers in particular. They have a history of pulling spectacular defeats from the jaws of victory because they buy into the belief that they are invincible. Either the selection process or the training makes them think they are Supermen and immune to failure, physics and just bad luck. Monday morning quarterback, the commander lost sight of the mission: keep the plane from moving.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,136
    Feedback Score
    26 (100%)
    Good information.

    Remember also Operation Acid Gambit - our very own LAV was part of that mission.


    Riots are like sports, it's better to watch it on TV at home.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Posts
    6,958
    Feedback Score
    23 (100%)
    I was/am friends with one of the SEALSs who was injured. Said during the planning phase they kept recommending to leadership that it was a classic Ranger operation and that it would be problematic for their platoon. Also said that during the hot wash following that leadership told them that part of the reason it went down so bad was because of flaws in execution.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Not in a gun friendly state
    Posts
    3,810
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by just a scout View Post
    Because of the institutional arrogance of SEALs in general and their officers in particular. They have a history of pulling spectacular defeats from the jaws of victory because they buy into the belief that they are invincible. Either the selection process or the training makes them think they are Supermen and immune to failure, physics and just bad luck. Monday morning quarterback, the commander lost sight of the mission: keep the plane from moving.
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckman
    I was/am friends with one of the SEALSs who was injured. Said during the planning phase they kept recommending to leadership that it was a classic Ranger operation and that it would be problematic for their platoon. Also said that during the hot wash following that leadership told them that part of the reason it went down so bad was because of flaws in execution.
    My understanding was it was yet another case of the good idea fairy ****ing things up. I believe the original plan was to have a SEAL sniper team disable of the plane from a (somewhat) safe distance. But then there was a worry that it would be easier to confirm the plane's destruction if they physically slashed the tires and took out the engines by actually placing explosives on them. So even though the mission had now changed from a precision, small unit strike to an airfield assault, it was either too late, or too much ego among the commanders, got in the way to change the SEALs out for the Rangers.
    Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who do not.-Ben Franklin

    there’s some good in this world, Mr. Frodo. And it’s worth fighting for.-Samwise Gamgee

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,319
    Feedback Score
    12 (100%)
    If they knew where the plane was, why have guys on the ground at all, other than combat controllers and maybe SEAL spotters? I'd think 105mm from the AC-130 would've worked fine.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in the Sierras
    Posts
    2,026
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    I was at Howard AB that night as part of a C-141 crew. Somewhere I still have my flight orders listing "Operation Just Cause".

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    34,082
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckman View Post
    I was/am friends with one of the SEALSs who was injured. Said during the planning phase they kept recommending to leadership that it was a classic Ranger operation and that it would be problematic for their platoon. Also said that during the hot wash following that leadership told them that part of the reason it went down so bad was because of flaws in execution.
    I always think how much money and effort is required to produce a Seal, Green Beret, Ranger, etc. Then I think how many people are actually qualified and in what number do members of the special operations exist, especially when it comes to those like Devgru and Delta, and then I think about all the times we send them out half assed, without proper support and with objectives that are unlikely to succeed in a video game.

    It's like hey we are going after Tier 1 bad guys in Asscrackistan, let's HALO in three members of a super elite force armed with .38 revolvers, pixie sticks and shitty comms. They will have a four day hike to their objective where they will engage a stronghold that was a former training camp with dorms that we believe is housed by only six individuals where they will capture those individuals and then hike across open valley terrain for two more days where they will be picked up by big yellow school buses and exfil.

    Given what we were spending and what was at risk I don't know why we didn't send Seals AND Rangers in a joint operation seize the entire airfield. Or we could have tasked a SF group with a FAC mission for a AC-130 to take out the entire hanger complex.
    It's hard to be a ACLU hating, philosophically Libertarian, socially liberal, fiscally conservative, scientifically grounded, agnostic, porn admiring gun owner who believes in self determination.

    Chuck, we miss ya man.

    كافر

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •