DOCSLIB.ORG

Aerospace World

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Aerospace World Aerospace World By Peter Grier US Indicts 14 in Khobar Towers Case A US federal grand jury on June 21 indicted 13 Saudis and one Leba- nese national in the 1996 terrorist bombing of the Khobar Towers com- Lockheed Martin photo plex in Saudi Arabia—a terrorist act which killed 19 US airmen and wounded hundreds more US military person- nel. The indictment alleged extensive involvement by unnamed officials in Iran, though it sidestepped the ques- tion of Iranian government involvement and named no Iranian defendants. The indictments were handed up five years almost to the day after the June 25, 1996, bombing. The statute of limitations was about to expire. US authorities appeared to be try- ing to strike a balance between hold- ing to account those who were re- sponsible for murder while not unduly The fuselage of the US Navy EP-3 that made an emergency landing on Hainan damaging US–Iran relations, which Island, China, after a Chinese fighter collided with it April 1, is loaded onto an have warmed a bit since the election AN-124. The transport brought the EP-3 to Dobbins ARB, Ga., on July 5. of President Mohammad Khatami. None of those charged are cur- rently in US custody. Some are in The actual bombing operation was The deal, potentially worth $7 bil- Saudi detainment—the FBI did not masterminded by a senior Saudi lion, brings together the Air Force say how many—and some are cur- Hezbollah member named Ahmed al- and three major contractors. rently at large. Then–FBI Director Mughassil, according to the indict- The award was made to prime con- Louis J. Freeh expressed confidence ment. He and confederates in 1993 tractor Boeing and to subcontractors that at least a few of the suspects began their search for a suitable tar- Northrop Grumman and Lockheed would soon be brought for trial before get for a large-scale anti–US attack. Martin and extends over the next 18 US courts, though he did not say how By 1995, an Iranian military official years. It is designed to provide a that would happen. Washington and had counseled the Saudis to focus cradle-to-grave outlook for firms man- Riyadh have no extradition treaty. on sites in eastern Saudi Arabia, ac- aging the E-3 system, said the Air Moreover, Saudi officials were an- cording to the indictment. After zero- Force. gry at Washington for filing charges ing in on Khobar Towers as vulner- “AWACS is somewhat unique in without notifying Riyadh (see “Sau- able, explosives were brought from that it’s been in service for almost 25 dis React With Displeasure at Khobar Beirut, Lebanon, and a refitted tanker years and will likely be around for at Towers Charges,” p. 18). truck was outftted as a rolling bomb. least another 25,” said Lt. Col. Sidney The effect of the bomb al-Mug- Kimhan, manager of AWACS mod- Behind the Scenes, It Was Iran hassil and his group fashioned was ernization and sustainment support It was Iranian nationals who “in- more powerful than the one that Timo- until his recent retirement. spired, supported, and supervised” thy McVeigh used to destroy the Okla- “The system has had tremendous members of Saudi Hezbollah through- homa federal building in 1995. When success, but we realized that to main- out the preparation and execution of the Khobar Towers bomb exploded, tain and expand on that success, we the Khobar Towers attack, US offi- the blast left a crater 30 feet deep. needed to look at a somewhat differ- cials said when announcing the in- ent management approach.” dictment. USAF Signs $7 Billion AWACS Existing sustaining engineering and Saudi Hezbollah is a homegrown Contract management contracts expire at the terrorist group dedicated to driving USAF officials finalized a long-term end of this fiscal year. Upcoming US forces and influence from the Gulf. Airborne Warning and Control Sys- AWACS issues include the aging air- The text of the indictment is laced tem modernization, sustainment, and frame problems, projected service life with references to unnamed “Irani- support contract, officials announced extension, and system upgrades. The ans,” but they are not identified. May 31. top–down approach provided by 12 AIR FORCE Magazine / August 2001 grouping this work in a single con- tract will place greater responsibility on the prime contractor to integrate the work properly. No-Fly-Zone Duty Called More Dangerous Surveying the scene on a swing through Southwest Asia in early June, USAF photo by SSgt. Randy Mallard Secretary of Defense Donald Rums- feld said that pilots enforcing the no- fly zones over Iraq face increasing dangers. Rumsfeld spoke after meeting with USAF pilots at Incirlik AB, Turkey. The Pentagon chief said they ex- pressed concerns about heightened dangers posed by a greater aggres- siveness that has characterized Iraqi air defense forces in recent months. That aggressiveness stems partly from the fact that foreign help has strengthened Iraqi defensive capa- bility, said Rumsfeld. In Major Shift, B-1B Bomber Fleet Comes “With lives at risk, it’s important Under the Axe that we be attentive to what’s taking place, and what changes on the The Bush Pentagon, with Air Force concurrence, proposed a one-third reduc- ground, and what circumstances tion in the fleet of B-1B bombers, which USAF once called the “backbone” of its might evolve in a way that would lead long-range conventional force. to some changes” in the manner in At present, there are 93 bombers in the B-1 inventory. In DOD’s revised Fiscal which zone enforcement takes place, 2002 budget, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld asked for authority to retire said Rumsfeld. 33, leaving 60. USAF and coalition forces have Defense officials portrayed the B-1B decision as an effort to seek greater efficiencies for a military trying to adjust to a post–Cold War climate. However, the been enforcing the exclusion zones plan itself was an Air Force initiative. USAF itself asserted that reducing the fleet over southern and northern Iraq since to 60 bombers would cut operating expenses and lead to heightened readiness shortly after the war in the Gulf in in the remaining force. The savings would be plowed back into the surviving 1991. aircraft. The move will slice costs by $130 million, said Maj. Gen. Larry W. Northington, USAF Reaches Recruiting USAF’s deputy assistant secretary for budget. “We do not want to maintain these Milestone airplanes,” he said. “That’s the whole idea.” The Air Force in May reached a The Air Force bought a total of 100 of the sleek, needle-nose B-1Bs in the major recruiting milestone by signing 1980s. Attrition has claimed seven. The B-1B line was shut down after the last delivery in 1988. The B-1B entered service as a nuclear bomber designed to its 34,600th enlistment contract for attack the Soviet Union but was eventually converted for conventional missions. the year. The retirement would further reduce an already shrunken bomber force, which The number equals the goal for once boasted hundreds of aircraft. Today’s fleet consists of the 93 B-1s, 94 B-52Hs, accessions into basic training by Sept. and 21 B-2s. Not all are combat-coded and ready for action, however. 30. Last year, the service did not sign In a controversial move, Rumsfeld would consolidate the remaining B-1Bs at up enough new recruits to fill its quota just two bases: Dyess AFB, Tex., and Ellsworth AFB, S.D. The change would end until July. the B-1B mission for the Georgia Air National Guard’s 116th Bomb Wing at Robins “We increased the number of our Air Force Base and the Kansas ANG’s 184th Bomb Wing at McConnell Air Force recruiters, utilized enlistment bo- Base. A smaller number of B-1Bs are assigned at Mountain Home AFB, Idaho. It was the basing aspect of the Bush plan that prompted howls of protest from nuses, and continued an aggressive Kansas and Georgia lawmakers and officials. They have accused the Administra- advertising and marketing campaign, tion of playing politics, in light of the fact that the two remaining B-1 bases would and basically worked very hard,” said be in the home states of President Bush and Sen. Tom Daschle (D–S.D.), the Brig. Gen. Duane Deal, commander Senate majority leader. of Air Force Recruiting Service. On June 27, a group of 12 members of Congress wrote to Rumsfeld, protesting “However, we won’t let up. We’re the B-1B decision. The B-1B, they asserted, is the Air Force’s “fastest long-range definitely still hiring.” strategic bomber” and, as such, dovetails with the Bush Administration’s pro- Continuing to recruit and writing fessed desire to shift its emphasis to more long-range precision-strike capability. what appears at present to be excess “We urge you to reconsider this decision, which was made without consultation with Congress,” the letter says. recruit contracts will come in handy One of the letter writers, Sen. Max Cleland, a Georgia Democrat who serves to cover for possible cancellations on the Senate Armed Services Committee, was weighing a legislative move to and to get a head start on filling the block the B-1B plan. next year’s quota. At a June 28 hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Pat The Air Force continues to struggle Roberts (R–Kan.) disclosed an Air Force briefing slide that shows the political to acquire sufficient numbers of health impacts of the decision to keep the B-1s in Texas and South Dakota.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Each Cadet Squadron Is Sponsored by an Active Duty Unit. Below Is The
    Each Cadet Squadron is sponsored by an Active Duty Unit. Below is the listing for the Cadet Squadron and the Sponsor Unit CS SPONSOR WING BASE MAJCOM 1 1st Fighter Wing 1 FW Langley AFB VA ACC 2 388th Fighter Wing 388 FW Hill AFB UT ACC 3 60th Air Mobility Wing 60 AMW Travis AFB CA AMC 4 15th Wing 15 WG Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam PACAF 5 12th Flying Training Wing 12 FTW Randolph AFB TX AETC 6 4th Fighter Wing 4 FW Seymour Johonson AFB NC ACC 7 49th Fighter Wing 49 FW Holloman AFB NM ACC 8 46th Test Wing 46 TW Eglin AFB FL AFMC 9 23rd Wing 23 WG Moody AFB GA ACC 10 56th Fighter Wing 56 FW Luke AFB AZ AETC 11 55th Wing AND 11th Wing 55WG AND 11WG Offutt AFB NE AND Andrews AFB ACC 12 325th Fighter Wing 325 FW Tyndall AFB FL AETC 13 92nd Air Refueling Wing 92 ARW Fairchild AFB WA AMC 14 412th Test Wing 412 TW Edwards AFB CA AFMC 15 355th Fighter Wing 375 AMW Scott AFB IL AMC 16 89th Airlift Wing 89 AW Andrews AFB MD AMC 17 437th Airlift Wing 437 AW Charleston AFB SC AMC 18 314th Airlift Wing 314 AW Little Rock AFB AR AETC 19 19th Airlift Wing 19 AW Little Rock AFB AR AMC 20 20th Fighter Wing 20 FW Shaw AFB SC ACC 21 366th Fighter Wing AND 439 AW 366 FW Mountain Home AFB ID AND Westover ARB ACC/AFRC 22 22nd Air Refueling Wing 22 ARW McConnell AFB KS AMC 23 305th Air Mobility Wing 305 AMW McGuire AFB NJ AMC 24 375th Air Mobility Wing 355 FW Davis-Monthan AFB AZ ACC 25 432nd Wing 432 WG Creech AFB ACC 26 57th Wing 57 WG Nellis AFB NV ACC 27 1st Special Operations Wing 1 SOW Hurlburt Field FL AFSOC 28 96th Air Base Wing AND 434th ARW 96 ABW
    [Show full text]
  • THE MOBILITY FORUM Spring 2018 AIR MOBILITY COMMAND Gen Carlton Everhart II
    THE MOBILITYTHE MAGAZINE OF AIR MOBILITY COMMAND | SPRING 2018 FORUM 2017 SAFETY AWA R D W I N N E R S AMC Command Chief Shelina Frey Shares Thoughts on Full Spectrum Readiness Volume 27, No. 1 CONTENTS THE MOBILITY FORUM Spring 2018 AIR MOBILITY COMMAND Gen Carlton Everhart II DIRECTOR OF SAFETY Col Brandon R. Hileman [email protected] EDITORS Kim Knight 5 14 28 34 [email protected] Sherrie Schatz Sheree Lewis FROM THE TOP AMC NEWS [email protected] 3 AMC Command Chief Shelina 26 Bronze Star Recipient Reflects on GRAPHIC DESIGN Frey Shares Thoughts on Full Dirt Strip Operations in Syria Elizabeth Bailey Spectrum Readiness 34 Feeding the Hungry with The Mobility Forum (TMF) is published Humanitarian Aid four times a year by the Director of RISK MANAGEMENT Safety, Air Mobility Command, Scott AMC OPS AFB, IL. The contents are informative and 5 Brig Gen Lamberth Expounds not regulatory or directive. Viewpoints on Embracing the Red: An 28 The Strategic Airlift Capability in expressed are those of the authors and do Update on Air Force Inspection Pápa, Hungary: A Dozen Nations, not necessarily reflect the policy of AMC, System Implementation a Single Mission USAF, or any DoD agency. 10 The Five Levels of Military Flight Contributions: Please email articles and Operations Quality Assurance photos to [email protected], MOTORCYCLE CULTURE fax to (580) 628-2011, or mail to Schatz Analysis Acceptance 30 A Short Ride with a Lifelong Lesson Publishing, 11950 W. Highland Ave., 36 AMC’s Aerial Port LOSA Proof Blackwell, OK 74631.
    [Show full text]
  • Colonel James “Jay” Burks Commander, 87Th Medical Group Joint Base Mcguire-Dix-Lakehurst: America’S Premier Joint Warfighting Base
    Colonel James “Jay” Burks Commander, 87th Medical Group Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst: America’s Premier Joint Warfighting Base • The nation's only tri-Service joint base • Active-duty, reserve and guard service members – Air Force, Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard – Ensure total force integration by training, supporting and sustaining installation and global contingency operations • JB MDL hosts more than 80 missions partners – Multiple federal, state and local agencies • Federal Correctional Institute, the FBI, and the Departments of Homeland Security, Justice and Veterans Affairs DoD Joint Bases 1. Joint Base Pearl Harbor – Hickam, HI Navy 2. Joint Region Marianas, GU (Navy Base Guam, Andersen) Lead 3. Joint Base Anacostia – Bolling, DC 4. Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek – Fort Story, VA Army 5. Joint Base Lewis – McChord, WA Lead 6. Joint Base Myer – Henderson Hall, VA 7. Joint Base Charleston, SC (Charleston, NWS Charleston) 8. Joint Base McGuire – Dix – Lakehurst, NJ AF 9. Joint Base Andrews – NAF Washington, MD Lead 10. Joint Base Elmendorf – Richardson, AK 11. Joint Base San Antonio, TX (Lackland, Randolph, Sam Houston) 12. Joint Base Langley – Eustis, VA Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst All Services…All Components...America’s Only Tri-Service Joint Base ALZ 87 ABW NAVAIR Lakehurst McGuire CERDEC Combined Logistics 305 AMW Dix Facility EC NOSC COL 44,000 People Live/Work on JB MDL USAF USA USAF Expeditionary Center (AMC) 99th Regional Support Command 87th Air Base Wing (AMC) 72nd FA BDE 305th Air Mobility
    [Show full text]
  • Glenn Snyder's Deterrence Theory and NATO's Deterrence Strategy
    Glenn Snyder’s Deterrence Theory and NATO’s Deterrence Strategy during the Cold War (YAMASHITA Aihito) Glenn Snyder’s Deterrence Theory and NATO’s Deterrence Strategy during the Cold War Col. YAMASHITA Aihito Director, Center for Air and Space Power Strategic Studies Introduction The main strategic issues on NATO that the U.S. and Europe faced during the Cold War, when they are marshaled from the perspective of deterrence particularly for Europe, should be summarized as the questions of how to deter invasion by the Soviet Union, how to secure extended deterrence by the U.S., and in particular, how to enhance the credibility of the U.S. deterrence by punishment.1 NATO’s conventional military forces dominated by NATO’s ground troops were extremely vulnerable to those of the Soviet Union, which meant a significant disparity.2 Therefore, extended deterrence by the U.S. was thought to be essential for NATO in order to produce deterrent effect on the Soviet Union in the circumstances of the significant disparity in the conventional military forces dominated by ground troops. However, after the Soviet Union acquired the ability to attack the U.S. mainland with its nuclear weapons (typically represented by the situation of mutual assured destruction), Europe began to doubt the effectiveness of extended deterrence by the U.S. In this context, various theories including “stability-instability paradox” and “entrapment-abandonment” were discussed. 69 Air Power Studies (vol. 6) The concern Europe felt was connected with the controversy over the positioning theory of nuclear weapons in the U.S., that is, how the nature of nuclear weapons should be defined.
    [Show full text]
  • Governing the Bomb: Civilian Control and Democratic
    DCAF GOVERNING THE BOMB Civilian Control and Democratic Accountability of Nuclear Weapons edited by hans born, bates gill and heiner hänggi Governing the Bomb Civilian Control and Democratic Accountability of Nuclear Weapons STOCKHOLM INTERNATIONAL PEACE RESEARCH INSTITUTE SIPRI is an independent international institute dedicated to research into conflict, armaments, arms control and disarmament. Established in 1966, SIPRI provides data, analysis and recommendations, based on open sources, to policymakers, researchers, media and the interested public. The Governing Board is not responsible for the views expressed in the publications of the Institute. GOVERNING BOARD Göran Lennmarker, Chairman (Sweden) Dr Dewi Fortuna Anwar (Indonesia) Dr Alexei G. Arbatov (Russia) Ambassador Lakhdar Brahimi (Algeria) Jayantha Dhanapala (Sri Lanka) Dr Nabil Elaraby (Egypt) Ambassador Wolfgang Ischinger (Germany) Professor Mary Kaldor (United Kingdom) The Director DIRECTOR Dr Bates Gill (United States) Signalistgatan 9 SE-169 70 Solna, Sweden Telephone: +46 8 655 97 00 Fax: +46 8 655 97 33 Email: [email protected] Internet: www.sipri.org Governing the Bomb Civilian Control and Democratic Accountability of Nuclear Weapons EDITED BY HANS BORN, BATES GILL AND HEINER HÄNGGI OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 2010 1 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide in Oxford New York Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto With offices in Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore South Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries Published in the United States by Oxford University Press Inc., New York © SIPRI 2010 All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • (FY) 2019 Budget Estimates Military Construction Family Housing
    Department of Defense Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 Budget Estimates Military Construction Family Housing Defense-Wide Justification Data Submitted to Congress February 2018 FY 2019 Budget Estimates Military Construction, Defense-Wide Table of Contents Page No. State List ii Budget Appendix vii Special Program Considerations viii Agency/Activity Summary x Agencies – Inside And Outside U.S. Defense Health Agency 1 Defense Logistics Agency 19 DoD Dependents Education Activity 73 Missile Defense Agency 99 National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency 109 National Security Agency 121 U.S. Special Operations Command 134 Washington Headquarters Services 203 Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment Program 214 Secretary of Defense Contingency Construction 215 Unspecified Minor Construction 217 Planning and Design 219 FYDP 221 Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO)/European 229 Deterrence Initiative Preparation of the Defense-Wide budget, excluding revolving funds, cost the Department of Defense a total of approximately $1,150,000 in FY 2018. i FY 2019 Base Military Construction, Defense-Wide ($ in Thousands) New/ Authorization Approp. Current Page State/Installation/Project Request Request Mission No. Alaska Defense Logistics Agency Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson Operations Facility Replacement 14,000 14,000 C 22 Missile Defense Agency Clear Air Force Station Long Range Discrimination Radar System Complex Phase 2 174,000 174,000 N 101 Fort Greely Missile Field #1 Expansion 8,000 8,000 C 106 Arkansas Defense Logistics Agency Little Rock Air Force Base
    [Show full text]
  • Preface 1 Western Europe Between Soviet Threat And
    Notes PREFACE Nuclear Strategies and Belief-Systems in Britain, France and the FRG (London: Macmillan, forthcoming 1988). 2 Germany and the Politics of Nuclear Weapons (New York: Columbia University Press, 1975). 1 WESTERN EUROPE BETWEEN SOVIET THREAT AND AMERICAN GURANTEE NATO document MC 48 (FINAL) of 22 November 1954: 'The most effective pattern of NATO military strength for the next few years', § 6 (see Preface on sources). 2 For the switch from a mainly political and ideological to a military threat perception in 1950, see Robert Jervis: 'The impact of the Korean War on the Cold War', Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 24, No. 4 (December 1980), pp. 563-92; and for the European perspective, see Beatrice Heuser: 'NSC 68 and the Soviet threat', Review of International Studies, Vol. 17, No. 4 (1991), pp. 17-40. 3 Beatrice Heuser: Western Containment Policies in the Cold War: The Yugoslav Case, 1948-1953 (London and New York: Routledge, 1989), pp. 125-34, and Appendix C. 4 North Atlantic Treaty, Washington, DC, 4 April 1949, in NATO Office ofInformation: NATO Handbook (Brussels: 1989), p. 14. 5 With the exception of the Neth(:rlands, see Jan Willem Honig: Defense Policy in the North Atlantic Alliance: The Case of the Netherlands (New York: Praeger, 1993), passim. 6 See Beatrice Heuser: Nuclear Strategies and Belief-Systems: Britain, France and the FRG (London: Macmillan, forthcoming 1998). 7 See for example Carl-Christoph Schweitzer (ed.): The Changing Western Analysis of the Soviet Threat (London: Pinter, 1990). 8 NATO MC 14 of 20 March 1950, § 7. 9 NSC 68, Section VIII.
    [Show full text]
  • USAF MAJOR INSTALLATIONS BASE FACT SHEETS G.:F..He B*",*-..'T," DEFENSE BASE CLOSURE and REALIGNMENTCOMMISSIOP~ 1700 NORTH MOORE STREET SUITE 1425 2
    DCN 1117 USAF MAJOR INSTALLATIONS BASE FACT SHEETS g.:F..he b*",*-..'t," DEFENSE BASE CLOSURE AND REALIGNMENTCOMMISSIOP~ 1700 NORTH MOORE STREET SUITE 1425 2 . 5 -'.. *.s ARLINGTON. VA 22209 +w-' lwy& 703-696-0504 &-L ", -e ',;, e n!er to this when wr~ty~~r~d%Qa_tctt\ February 13, 1995 ,----- Headquarters USAF/RT 1670 Air Force Pentagon Washington D.C. 20330-1670 Dear General Blume: To enhance the background knowledge of the Air Force Team members on the current Air Force hfhmwture, we request Base Fact Sheets on individual major installations located within the US.be fo'mded to the commission at your earliest convenience. These fact sheets are a standard product prepared by the Air Force's Bases and Units Division of the Directorate of Operations and are used by Air Force leaders and congressional representatives for information purposes. The fact sheets contain only current information pertaining to the bases, i.e., location, major units assigned, manpower authorizations, congressionally announced ehanges, and the most i cumnt MILCON programs as approved or submitted to Congress. The information will stbe 1 used as m@ed data in the analysis of the DOD closure and realignment recommendations to be ....... on March 1, 1995. \ Thank you for your support in this request. SZ&. F cis A. ~rillo. Air Force Team ~eader FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY USAF BASE FACT SHEET w ALTUS AIR FORCE BASE, OKLAHOMA MAJCOM/LOCATION/SIZE: AETC base in Altus with 3,878 acres MAJOR UNITSIFORCE STRUCTURE: 97th Air Mobility Wing -- Provides formal airlift and tanker training -- 6 C-5A, 12 C-141B, and 24 KC-135R USAF MANPOWER AUTHORIZATIONS: (As of FY 9512) MILITARY--Am CIVILIAN TOTAL ANNOUNCED ACTIONS: The 97th Air Mobility Wing will lose 1 C-141B aircraft in midl-1995.
    [Show full text]
  • The Development of US Extended Nuclear Deterrence Over Japan: a Study of Invisible Deterrence Between 1945 and 1970
    The University Of Reading The Development of US Extended Nuclear Deterrence over Japan: A Study of Invisible Deterrence between 1945 and 1970 Hiroshi Nakatani PhD, Politics Department of Politics and International Relations February 2019 Declaration of Original Authorship Declaration: I confirm that this is my own work and the use of all materials from other sources has been properly and fully acknowledged Hiroshi Nakatani 1 This thesis is dedicated to the late Colonel Matuo Keiichi for his service to Japan. 2 Acknowledgments Throughout my PhD life, many people and institutions have thoughtfully supported and encouraged my work. It is probably most appropriate to begin by acknowledging the School of Politics, International Relations and Economics, University of Reading for its financial assistance for three years. I am also extremely indebted to the Lyndon Johnson Library, the British Association for Japanese Studies and Reading Travel Research Grants for providing me with research grants, which enabled me to travel and research abroad. Without their generous financial support, this research project would not have been possible. I would also like to express my appreciation to my supervisors. I have been fortunate to have three supervisors. It was my greatest honour to work under Professor Beatrice Heuser, for whom I came to Reading. She has taught me many invaluable things which otherwise I could have never learned. She has taught me how to conduct great research and treat your students in particular. As a matter of fact, finding a greater supervisor than her can be more difficult to finish a PhD. I would also like to thank Professor Alan Cromartie for his supervision and patience.
    [Show full text]
  • View 2020 Catalog
    “Largest Producer of full-color, historical aviation artwork. SQUADRON GRAPHICS Visit our website for a current listing of over 500+ prints” phone: 1.800.275.0986 url: www.squadrongraphics.com catalog: 03-2020 Our artwork is technically superior. Each subject is photographed and then a full-color original artwork of that aircraft is produced 942LE C-5A “Galaxy” 164th Airlift Wing, 155th Airlift Squadron Tennessee ANG 586LE P-3B “Orion” NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Wallops Flight Facility, VA by one of several fine aviation artists commissioned to work within the series. The exacting portrayal of the specific aircraft as 941LE C-130T “Hercules” Fleet Logistics Support Wing, VR-64 NAF Andrews, JB Andrews, 583LE T-38 C “Talon” 80th FTW,469th FTS Sheppard AFB, TX seen on a given date is accurate down to the smallest detail, which is why the Squadron Graphics series is unmatched. MD 582LE C-5A "Galaxy" 439th AW,337th AS Westover ARB, MA 939LE C-17A “Globemaster III” 164th Airlift Wing, 155th Airlift Squadron Tennessee ANG 581LE C-130J “Hercules” 19th AW,41st AS Little Rock AFB, AR 932 MC-130P "Combat Shadow" Strike Fighter Squadron 151 Eglin AFB, FL 580LE T-34C “Turbo Mentor” TAW-6, VT-2 NAS Whiting Field, FL Get Your Print Done? Want to add your print to the best Aviation Series in the World? Go to our website and download the 929 RQ-4B “Global Hawk” 9th Reconnaissance Wing, 940th Wing Beale AFB, CA 579LE T-34C “Turbo Mentor” TAW-5, VT-2 NAS Whiting Field, FL information package, or contact us from the website or by phone.
    [Show full text]
  • 224 Lives $11.6 Billion 186 Aircraft
    MILITARY AVIATION LOSSES FY2013–2020 4 22 Lives $11.6 billion 186 aircraft ON MIL ON ITA SI RY IS A V M I M A T O I O C N L National Commission on A S A N F O E I T T A Y N NCMAS Military Aviation Safety Report to the President and the Congress of the United States DECEMBER 1, 2020 ON MIL ON ITA SI RY IS A V M I M A T O I O C N L A S A N F O E I T T A Y N NCMAS National Commission on Military Aviation Safety Report to the President and the Congress of the United States DECEMBER 1, 2020 Cover image: U.S. Air Force F-22 Raptors from the 199th Fighter Squadron Hawaii Air National Guard and the 19th Fighter Squadron at Joint Base Pearl Harbor- Hickam perform the missing man formation in honor of fallen servicemembers during a Pearl Harbor Day remembrance ceremony. The missing man formation comprises four aircraft in a V-shape formation. The aircraft in the ring finger position pulls up and leaves the formation to signify a lost comrade in arms. (Department of Defense photo by U.S. Air Force Tech. Sgt. Michael R. Holzworth.) ON MIL ON ITA SI RY IS A V M I M A T O I O C N L A S A N F O E I T T A Y N NCMAS The National Commission on Military Aviation Safety dedicates its work to the men and women who serve in the aviation units of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Major Commands
    Hq. Air Force The Department of the Air Force incorporates all elements of the Air ■ 2007 USAF Almanac Force and is administered by a civilian Secretary and supervised by a military Chief of Staff. The Secretariat and the Air Staff help the Secretary and the Chief of Staff direct the Air Force mission. Headquarters Pentagon, Washington, D.C. Headquarters Air Force Established Sept. 18, 1947 Secretary Michael W. Wynne HAF Chief of Staff Gen. T. Michael Moseley ROLE PERSONNEL Organize, train, and equip air and (as of Sept. 30, 2006) space forces Active duty 1,713 Officers 1,456 MISSION Enlisted 257 Deliver sovereign options for the Reserve components 479 defense of the United States of ANG 0 America and its global interests—to AFRC 479 fly and fight in air, space, and cyber- Civilian 871 space Total 3,063 FORCE STRUCTURE— SECRETARIAT One Secretary One undersecretary Four assistant secretaries Two deputy undersecretaries Five directors Five offices FORCE STRUCTURE— AIR STAFF USAF photo by A1C Marleah L. Miller One Chief of Staff One vice chief of staff One Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force Eight deputy chiefs of staff Three directors Eight offices The US Air Force Honor Guard Drill Team performs during a USAF open house at the Pentagon. 86 AIR FORCE Magazine / May 2007 SECRETARIAT, PENTAGON, WASHINGTON, D.C. Secretary of the Air Force Undersecretary of the Air Force Asst. Secretary of Asst. Secretary of Asst. Secretary of Asst. Secretary Deputy Undersec- Deputy Undersec- the Air Force for the Air Force for the Air Force for In- of the Air Force retary of the Air retary of the Air Acquisition Financial Mgmt.
    [Show full text]