Supporting the Future Total Force a Methodology for Evaluating Potential Air National Guard Mission Assignments
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE ARTS This PDF document was made available CHILD POLICY from www.rand.org as a public service of CIVIL JUSTICE the RAND Corporation. EDUCATION ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT Jump down to document6 HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit NATIONAL SECURITY research organization providing POPULATION AND AGING PUBLIC SAFETY objective analysis and effective SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY solutions that address the challenges SUBSTANCE ABUSE facing the public and private sectors TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY around the world. TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE Support RAND WORKFORCE AND WORKPLACE Purchase this document Browse Books & Publications Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore RAND Project AIR FORCE View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please see RAND Permissions. This product is part of the RAND Corporation monograph series. RAND monographs present major research findings that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND mono- graphs undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity. Supporting the Future Total Force A Methodology for Evaluating Potential Air National Guard Mission Assignments Kristin F. Lynch, John G. Drew, Sally Sleeper, William A. Williams, James M. Masters, Louis Luangkesorn, Robert S. Tripp, Dahlia S. Lichter, Charles Robert Roll, Jr. Prepared for the United States Air Force Approved for public release, distribution unlimited PROJECT AIR FORCE The research described in this report was sponsored by the United States Air Force under Contract F49642-01-C-0003 and FA7014-06-C-0001. Further information may be obtained from the Strategic Planning Division, Directorate of Plans, Hq USAF. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Supporting the future total force : a methodology for evaluating potential Air National Guard mission assignments / Kristin F. Lynch ... [et al.]. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-0-8330-4019-0 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. United States—Air National Guard. 2. United States. Air Force. 3. Military planning—United States. I. Lynch, Kristin F. UG633.S856 2007 358.4'137—dc22 2007015189 The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research organization providing objective analysis and effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors around the world. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. R® is a registered trademark. Cover design by Stephen Bloodsworth © Copyright 2007 RAND Corporation All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from RAND. Published 2007 by the RAND Corporation 1776 Main Street, P.O. Box 2138, Santa Monica, CA 90407-2138 1200 South Hayes Street, Arlington, VA 22202-5050 4570 Fifth Avenue, Suite 600, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-2665 RAND URL: http://www.rand.org/ To order RAND documents or to obtain additional information, contact Distribution Services: Telephone: (310) 451-7002; Fax: (310) 451-6915; Email: [email protected] Preface As the Air Force faces manpower end-strength reductions of approxi- mately 40,000 active duty personnel, it becomes more difficult to sup- port the air and space expeditionary force (AEF) construct using cur- rent force employment practices. These manpower reductions could leave the active component without sufficient end-strength personnel authorizations to support current operational requirements. The Air National Guard (ANG), on the other hand, will not undergo signifi- cant manpower reductions, but it will be affected by the Air Force force structure planning under way in support of the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) and Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) that calls for the retirement of a significant number of legacy aircraft. This could potentially leave the ANG with a large number of highly trained, highly experienced personnel with no aircraft to operate and support. This document presents a methodology that can be used to evalu- ate potential support posture options for the future total force employ- ing the ANG. In conducting this research, we focused on the needs of the Air Force, as a whole, in achieving operational effects to enable the AEF. We investigated how to align the total force—to organize, train, and equip—in the most effective way possible employing the avail- able resources. Transitioning some missions from the active component to the ANG may be a way to meet that goal without significant cost to the total force. Employing the ANG would use existing Air Force personnel to fulfill mission area requirements as directed in DoD and Air Force planning guidance. The ANG could contribute to the war- fighter mission in ways that would leverage ANG strengths and pro- iii iv A Methodology for Evaluating Potential ANG Mission Assignments vide effective and efficient approaches in achieving the desired opera- tional effects. The monograph reports our evaluation of five mission areas as the beginning of the development of a portfolio of potential missions for assignment to the ANG. We present each mission area along with a range of implementation options that could be considered by Air Force leaders for assignment to the ANG. The five mission areas we evaluated are not meant to be exhaustive. There are many other areas in which the ANG could add value to the warfighter. We chose these five mission areas, based on recent experience and operational requirements, simply to illustrate how the methodology used in this report can be applied to any mission area. We evaluated the following mission areas: • Predator operations and support • air mobility command and control • Commander of Air Force forces staffing • base-level intermediate maintenance • intercontinental ballistic missile maintenance. This report is intended to help inform strategic planning deci- sions, including those associated with QDR, BRAC, and the Future Total Force effort. Further manpower reductions only heighten the need for a continued review of roles and missions within the different component of the Total Force. The Air National Guard Director of Logistics (ANG/LG) spon- sored this research, which was conducted in the Resource Manage- ment Program of RAND Project AIR FORCE as part of a fiscal year 2005 project entitled “Evaluation of Air National Guard Transforma- tion Options.” The research for this report was completed in December 2005. The report should be of interest to functional area subject matter experts (such as combat support, logisticians, or operations planners); mobility planners; headquarters personnel at the Air Force, major com- mand (MAJCOM), and operational levels; maintenance personnel; and operators throughout the Department of Defense (DoD), espe- cially those in the Air National Guard and active duty Air Force. Preface v This report is one of a series of RAND reports that address agile combat support (ACS) issues in implementing the AEF. Other related publications include: • Supporting Expeditionary Aerospace Forces: An Integrated Strate- gic Agile Combat Support Planning Framework, Robert S. Tripp, Lionel A. Galway, Paul S. Killingsworth, Eric Peltz, Timothy L. Ramey, and John G. Drew (MR-1056-AF, 1999). This report describes an integrated combat support planning framework that may be used to evaluate support options on a continuing basis, particularly as technology, force structure, and threats change. • Supporting Expeditionary Aerospace Forces: An Analysis of F-15 Avi- onics Options, Eric Peltz, Hyman L. Shulman, Robert S. Tripp, Timothy L. Ramey, and John G. Drew (MR-1174-AF, 2000). This report examines alternatives for meeting F-15 avionics maintenance requirements across a range of likely scenarios. The authors evaluate investments for new F-15 Avionics Intermediate Shop test equipment against several support options, including deploying maintenance capabilities with units, performing main- tenance at forward support locations (FSLs), or performing all maintenance at the home station for deploying units. • Supporting Expeditionary Aerospace Forces: Expanded Analysis of LANTIRN Options, Amatzia Feinberg, Hyman L. Shulman, Louis W. Miller, and Robert S. Tripp (MR-1225-AF, 2001). This report examines alternatives for meeting Low Altitude Navigation and Targeting Infrared for Night (LANTIRN) support require- ments for AEF operations. The authors evaluate investments for new LANTIRN test equipment against several support options, including deploying maintenance capabilities with units, per- forming maintenance at FSLs, or performing all maintenance at Continental United States (CONUS) support hubs for deploying units. • Supporting Expeditionary Aerospace Forces: Lessons From the Air War Over Serbia, Amatzia Feinberg, Eric Peltz, James Leftwich, Robert S. Tripp, Mahyar Amouzegar, Russell Grunch, John Drew, Tom LaTourrette,