bobdina
05-31-2009, 01:49 PM
Leaders to lay out AF role in today’s warfare
By Bruce Rolfsen - Staff writer
Posted : Sunday May 31, 2009 9:39:54 EDT
The Air Force is getting ready to define its role in irregular warfare, which could become the service’s next regular mission.
This week, Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz and the other four-stars will consider the options at their spring Corona session. Shortly after taking over the top job last August, Schwartz appointed a task force to study what role the Air Force should play in irregular warfare. The task force in turn set up a team of experts to advise it.
One option that Schwartz himself has mentioned is a new wing dedicated to this evolving war-fighting doctrine.
“I think a wing-size unit, at least to get started, is not unlikely,” Schwartz told reporters in April.
Other alternatives range from relatively modest — more airmen to train foreign air forces — to expensive and far-reaching — a new small attack airplane that nations unable to afford supersonic fighters could fly.
To develop choices, the special team looked at the needs of the regional joint commands such as Central Command and Southern Command and considered ideas from the service’s nine major commands, said Steve Day, director of irregular warfare requirements for the Air Staff.
“Several options currently exist, and the Air Force is not committed to a construct that is stove-piped within one operational capability,” Day said.
For Lt. Col. Michael Pietrucha, who helped develop Air Combat Command’s recommendations for the team, the ability to quickly fly supplies and troops, perform reconnaissance, develop intelligence and set up command and control of forces is just as important as putting bombs on target.
“If you’re doing it right, fires is the smallest of the pieces,” said Pietrucha, who flew as a weapons systems officer.
Ideally, much of the work is done by the nation with whom the U.S. is allied.
“It is far better to build a partner nation so that they can solve the problem,” Pietrucha said.
Any increase in the number of trainers would be permanent if the generals went with the option.
Right now, only the 6th Special Operations Squadron at Hurlburt Field, Fla., is assigned to deploy instructors.
“The Air Force, along with U.S. Special Operations Command, has a modest capability of train-and-assist personnel in the special operations community,” Schwartz said. “I think it is a fair question about whether we should scale that up in order to meet the demands of the current fight.”
A 2006 Rand Corp. report sponsored by the Air Force called for assigning 800 airmen to advisory positions, more than double the number now specializing in the field.
To meet training demands in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Air Force deploys airmen from conventional flying and maintenance squadrons, as well as those experienced in nonflying missions such as security and medicine. Those are in addition to trainers from the 6th.
If the Air Force increases the number of trainers and other airmen with full-time irregular warfare missions, it then has to decide how to organize them. The airmen could fall under a stand-alone wing or be assigned to several wings and come together when deployed, the same way expeditionary wings are formed.
An irregular warfare wing would come under Air Force Special Operations Command, according to a 2007 report prepared by AFSOC’s plans and program office. Making up the wing would be 20 “light strike” attack planes; four C-130 Hercules to ferry troops, small transports and helicopters; perhaps Army aircraft and crews; and manned reconnaissance aircraft.
With or without a separate wing, the Air Force is already acquiring planes intended for irregular warfare missions.
Air Combat Command is fielding a manned reconnaissance aircraft, the MC-12 Liberty. The Air Force is on tap to buy 37 of the twin-propeller driven planes and assign about 300 pilots and the same number of enlisted aircrew members to the planes.
No decision, however, has been made on where to locate the headquarters of the operational MC-12 squadron. For at least the start of the program, training will be based at the Mississippi Air National Guard’s Key Field in Meridian.
The service is also in the early stages of deciding if it should move ahead with buying a light attack plane, sometimes called the OA-X. Ongoing now is a review to determine light-strike capabilities, Day said.
In earlier interviews, Air Force officials said the plane could be a two-seat jet or single-engine turbo-prop that could carry bombs, rockets and a machine gun. The price for the basic model — about $10 million — would be low enough for a developing country to afford.
By Bruce Rolfsen - Staff writer
Posted : Sunday May 31, 2009 9:39:54 EDT
The Air Force is getting ready to define its role in irregular warfare, which could become the service’s next regular mission.
This week, Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz and the other four-stars will consider the options at their spring Corona session. Shortly after taking over the top job last August, Schwartz appointed a task force to study what role the Air Force should play in irregular warfare. The task force in turn set up a team of experts to advise it.
One option that Schwartz himself has mentioned is a new wing dedicated to this evolving war-fighting doctrine.
“I think a wing-size unit, at least to get started, is not unlikely,” Schwartz told reporters in April.
Other alternatives range from relatively modest — more airmen to train foreign air forces — to expensive and far-reaching — a new small attack airplane that nations unable to afford supersonic fighters could fly.
To develop choices, the special team looked at the needs of the regional joint commands such as Central Command and Southern Command and considered ideas from the service’s nine major commands, said Steve Day, director of irregular warfare requirements for the Air Staff.
“Several options currently exist, and the Air Force is not committed to a construct that is stove-piped within one operational capability,” Day said.
For Lt. Col. Michael Pietrucha, who helped develop Air Combat Command’s recommendations for the team, the ability to quickly fly supplies and troops, perform reconnaissance, develop intelligence and set up command and control of forces is just as important as putting bombs on target.
“If you’re doing it right, fires is the smallest of the pieces,” said Pietrucha, who flew as a weapons systems officer.
Ideally, much of the work is done by the nation with whom the U.S. is allied.
“It is far better to build a partner nation so that they can solve the problem,” Pietrucha said.
Any increase in the number of trainers would be permanent if the generals went with the option.
Right now, only the 6th Special Operations Squadron at Hurlburt Field, Fla., is assigned to deploy instructors.
“The Air Force, along with U.S. Special Operations Command, has a modest capability of train-and-assist personnel in the special operations community,” Schwartz said. “I think it is a fair question about whether we should scale that up in order to meet the demands of the current fight.”
A 2006 Rand Corp. report sponsored by the Air Force called for assigning 800 airmen to advisory positions, more than double the number now specializing in the field.
To meet training demands in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Air Force deploys airmen from conventional flying and maintenance squadrons, as well as those experienced in nonflying missions such as security and medicine. Those are in addition to trainers from the 6th.
If the Air Force increases the number of trainers and other airmen with full-time irregular warfare missions, it then has to decide how to organize them. The airmen could fall under a stand-alone wing or be assigned to several wings and come together when deployed, the same way expeditionary wings are formed.
An irregular warfare wing would come under Air Force Special Operations Command, according to a 2007 report prepared by AFSOC’s plans and program office. Making up the wing would be 20 “light strike” attack planes; four C-130 Hercules to ferry troops, small transports and helicopters; perhaps Army aircraft and crews; and manned reconnaissance aircraft.
With or without a separate wing, the Air Force is already acquiring planes intended for irregular warfare missions.
Air Combat Command is fielding a manned reconnaissance aircraft, the MC-12 Liberty. The Air Force is on tap to buy 37 of the twin-propeller driven planes and assign about 300 pilots and the same number of enlisted aircrew members to the planes.
No decision, however, has been made on where to locate the headquarters of the operational MC-12 squadron. For at least the start of the program, training will be based at the Mississippi Air National Guard’s Key Field in Meridian.
The service is also in the early stages of deciding if it should move ahead with buying a light attack plane, sometimes called the OA-X. Ongoing now is a review to determine light-strike capabilities, Day said.
In earlier interviews, Air Force officials said the plane could be a two-seat jet or single-engine turbo-prop that could carry bombs, rockets and a machine gun. The price for the basic model — about $10 million — would be low enough for a developing country to afford.