Photographs Written Historical and Descriptive

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Photographs Written Historical and Descriptive EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, RANGE 22 ARMAMENT RESEARCH HABS FL-411-D SHOP HABS FL-411-D (Building 411) Range 22, east end adjacent to Eglin Boulevard Valparaiso vicinity Okaloosa County Florida PHOTOGRAPHS WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior 1849 C Street NW Washington, DC 20240-0001 HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, RANGE 22 ARMAMENT RESEARCH SHOP (Building 411) HABS No. FL-411-D Location: Range 22, east end adjacent to Eglin Boulevard, Eglin Air Force Base, Valparaiso vicinity, Okaloosa County, Florida. The building is located at latitude: 30.476767, longitude: -86.506094, which represents the center of the building. The coordinates were obtained in 2014 by plotting its location in Google Earth. Coordinates are based on WGS84. Eglin Air Force Base location has no restriction on its release to the public. Present Owner/ Occupant: United States Air Force, Eglin Air Force Base. Present Use: This building is currently unoccupied; however, the general area is used for testing. Significance: Building 411 was used primarily to support testing operations at Range 22. Range 22 was developed during the late 1930s as a gunnery range and it evolved in World War II to proof test the following: armament and armament- equipped aircraft; machine gun armament and incendiary bullets; gun turrets; periscope guns; and other military materiel. The gunnery tests were designed to gather information on guns and gun sight installations pertaining to accuracy, field of fire, reliability and durability, and base provisions. Each gunnery test consisted of a ground inspection and ground firing test, as well as an air firing test. These armament tests were for operational suitability. The proving ground was used to test aircraft coming off the production line, not yet tested for tactical suitability, and to make recommendations for possible improvements to equipment in the factory and in the field. The proving ground testing personnel were directed to “place themselves in the position of the combat crews” to ensure the materiel was operational.1 In addition to testing, the range supported the mission of the Air Corps Gunnery School, which was to instruct the students of all the Air Corps Advanced Flying Schools in fixed gunnery skills. 1 Brigadier General Muir S. Fairchild, Director of Military Requirements to Commanding Officer, AAFPG Command, 6 April 1942, Subject: Accelerated Service Tests of United States Aircraft, Exhibit 31; Fairchild to Commanding Officer, AAFPG Command, 9 April 1942, Subject: Directives, Exhibit 32; and Fairchild to Commanding Officer AAFPG Command, 29 June 1942, Subject: Reports on Operational Fitness of Aircraft Types, Exhibit 36 all in Joseph W. Angell, Air Proving Ground Command, History of the Army Air Forces Proving Ground Command, Part I: Historical Outline, 1933–1944 Appendices, reprinted (Eglin Air Force Base: Office of History, Munitions Systems Division, November 1989). EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, RANGE 22 ARMAMENT RESEARCH SHOP HABS No. FL-411-D (page 2) The same mission applied during the Cold War when Building 411 was constructed to support armament research and non-destructive testing. Building 411 housed an armament machine shop, control tower on the roof, non-destructive testing room, and storage for testing equipment. Historian(s): Karen Van Citters, Van Citters: Historic Preservation, LLC (VCHP). The text for the section below called, “Establishing a Military Proving Ground” was adapted from the February 2, 2011 “Eglin Field World War II Historic District” National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form, an amendment to an historic district at Eglin Air Force Base completed by Dr. Sarah Payne, previously of VCHP. This current documentation was completed in July 2015. Project Information: This HABS Level II documentation was completed by VCHP for Eglin Air Force Base, Civil Engineering Group, Cultural Resources Management in 2015. Photographic documentation completed by Martin Stupich in September, 2014. It was reviewed for transmittal by Christopher Marston and Mary McPartland of Heritage Documentation Programs in 2015. Part I. Historical Information A. Physical History 1. Date of erection: Between 1951 and 1955 (as evidenced by site plans); control tower added in 1956. 2. Architect: Air Force Armament Center 3. Original and subsequent owners, occupants, uses: The building was originally an armament research shop on Range 22 at Eglin Air Force Base. The shop was constructed for the Air Research and Development Command (ARDC), which was established in 1950. In 1961, the ARDC was redesignated the Air Force Systems Command (AFSC) and AFSC took over the mission at Range 22 and thereby, the armament research shop. By 2002, the Eglin AFB Fire Department was occupying the building. However by 2013, the building was unoccupied. 4. Builder, contractor, suppliers: Unknown. 5. Original plans and construction: The two story building was built on the Fighter Bomber Firing Apron of Range 22. It was constructed of a poured concrete frame with a concrete floor and roof structure, and a concrete masonry unit infill wall. The first story consisted of four bays and the second story consisted of two on the east elevation and two and a half bays on the west elevation; the extra half bay of the second story was an entry room from an exterior metal stair on the west elevation. The building included ribbon windows on both the first and second floors on the EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, RANGE 22 ARMAMENT RESEARCH SHOP HABS No. FL-411-D (page 3) north and east elevations. The second floor window units were taller than the ones on the first floor and were also installed on the south elevation. There were metal personnel doors on the north end of the east and west elevations and an overhead door on the north and south elevations. An exterior clay tile chimney was located on the north elevation to the west of the overhead door. The exterior metal stair ran from the base of the northwest corner up to the second floor, where there were two metal personnel doors at the landing. The first floor had three large rooms with 12’ high bay ceilings and an enclosure for the boiler room in the northwest corner. One room was the width of two bays and the other two rooms were each one bay wide. The second floor was one large room with windows facing downrange for test viewing. 6. Alterations and additions: In March 1956, a degreaser and a monorail were added to the north room on the first floor. The monorail was hung from the concrete beam at the center of the room and supported by new 3” diameter pipe columns on the north and south walls of the room. It was attached to the existing beam and walls with 8” x 8” steel angles. In May 1956, a wood control tower was added to the roof of the concrete building. A steel pedestal was added to the top of the building’s original poured concrete frame to serve as support for an open-web steel truss, which in turn supported a 6’–8” by 6’–8” wood room constructed of 2” x 4” dimensional lumber with fiberboard walls and a 12/4 pitch shed roof. There was a wood door with an L-shaped wood walkway and wood railing that led to the west edge of the roof, where there was a metal ladder that led down to the exterior stair landing. In 1965, the rooms at the south end of the building were altered to provide a radiology laboratory, ultrasonic laboratory, dark room, and photo viewing room. As noted, originally there were three rooms that matched the exterior concrete frame bays of the building, with a smaller boiler room within the northwest corner. The northeast bay/corner became the radiology lab, which was constructed with 1’–3” thick poured concrete walls and a gypsum board ceiling attached to the existing 2” x 4” joist structure, which was then surmounted by 3/8” plywood and a ¼” lead sheathing. The new poured concrete was installed on the interior to create the south and east walls, and a partial north wall, leaving the original opening for the overhead door on the north. The door was replaced by a sliding metal radiation door constructed with steel angles and an interior core of ¾” lead, encased in 20 gauge steel. The east wall was constructed on the exterior of the original concrete masonry unit, infilling the original personnel door. In order to install the new poured concrete wall, the existing concrete floors were saw cut and the new poured concrete wall structure extended one foot below grade. The dark and viewing rooms were constructed with concrete masonry units; both were the same 11’–10” length as the radiology room, but the dark room was 8’–10” wide and the viewing room as 5’–6” wide; they were connected by an open “U” shaped 3’-wide interior hall. The interior height of these and the radiology room was 8’, while the remainder of the first floor rooms were the original 12’ high bay height. The ultrasonic lab was directly across from the two photographic rooms and was the EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, RANGE 22 ARMAMENT RESEARCH SHOP HABS No. FL-411-D (page 4) combined width of both, but only had walls on three sides, leaving the laboratory open to the hallway. The south half of the building was open in its entirety and called the work room. In 1968, a 24’ x 48’ poured concrete frame with concrete masonry unit infill work room was constructed on the south end of the building. There was no fenestration, except the overhead door on the south elevation. The addition was constructed to house the new fluorescent penetrant inspection unit for non-destructive testing.
Recommended publications
  • Air & Space Power Journal
    July–August 2013 Volume 27, No. 4 AFRP 10-1 Senior Leader Perspective The Air Advisor ❙ 4 The Face of US Air Force Engagement Maj Gen Timothy M. Zadalis, USAF Features The Swarm, the Cloud, and the Importance of Getting There First ❙ 14 What’s at Stake in the Remote Aviation Culture Debate Maj David J. Blair, USAF Capt Nick Helms, USAF The Next Lightweight Fighter ❙ 39 Not Your Grandfather’s Combat Aircraft Col Michael W. Pietrucha, USAF Building Partnership Capacity by Using MQ-9s in the Asia-Pacific ❙ 59 Col Andrew A. Torelli, USAF Personnel Security during Joint Operations with Foreign Military Forces ❙ 79 David C. Aykens Departments 101 ❙ Views The Glass Ceiling for Remotely Piloted Aircraft ❙ 101 Lt Col Lawrence Spinetta, PhD, USAF Funding Cyberspace: The Case for an Air Force Venture Capital Initiative ❙ 119 Maj Chadwick M. Steipp, USAF Strategic Distraction: The Consequence of Neglecting Organizational Design ❙ 129 Col John F. Price Jr., USAF 140 ❙ Book Reviews Master of the Air: William Tunner and the Success of Military Airlift . 140 Robert A. Slayton Reviewer: Frank Kalesnik, PhD Selling Air Power: Military Aviation and American Popular Culture after World War II . 142 Steve Call Reviewer: Scott D. Murdock From Lexington to Baghdad and Beyond: War and Politics in the American Experience, 3rd ed . 144 Donald M. Snow and Dennis M. Drew Reviewer: Capt Chris Sanders, USAF Beer, Bacon, and Bullets: Culture in Coalition Warfare from Gallipoli to Iraq . 147 Gal Luft Reviewer: Col Chad T. Manske, USAF Global Air Power . 149 John Andreas Olsen, editor Reviewer: Lt Col P.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of the Air Force Materiel Command Reorganization Report for Congress
    CHILDREN AND FAMILIES The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and EDUCATION AND THE ARTS decisionmaking through research and analysis. ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE This electronic document was made available from www.rand.org as a public service INFRASTRUCTURE AND of the RAND Corporation. TRANSPORTATION INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS LAW AND BUSINESS Skip all front matter: Jump to Page 16 NATIONAL SECURITY POPULATION AND AGING PUBLIC SAFETY Support RAND SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Purchase this document TERRORISM AND Browse Reports & Bookstore HOMELAND SECURITY 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 electronic documents to a non-RAND website is prohibited. RAND electronic documents 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 report is part of the RAND Corporation research report series. RAND reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity. Research Report Assessment of the Air Force Materiel Command Reorganization Report for Congress Don Snyder, Bernard Fox, Kristin F.
    [Show full text]
  • Photochart of USAF Leadership
    Photochart of USAF Leadership An Air Force Magazine Directory (As of Aug. 20, 2009) By June Lee, Editorial Associate Office of the Secretary of the Air Force Asst. Secretary of the Air Asst. Secretary of the Air Asst. Secretary of the Air Asst. Secretary of the Air Force Force (Acquisition) Force (Financial Mgmt. & Force (Installations, Envi- (Manpower & Reserve Affairs) David M. Van Buren Comptroller) ronment, & Logistics) Daniel B. Ginsberg (acting) Jamie M. Morin Debra K. Walker Secretary of the Air Force Michael B. Donley Deputy Undersecretary of Auditor General General Counsel Inspector General the Air Force Theodore J. Williams Charles A. Blanchard Lt. Gen. Marc E. Rogers (International Affairs) Bruce S. Lemkin Undersecretary of the Air Force Vacant Chief, Warfighting Integration & Director, Legislative Liaison Director, Public Affairs Director, Small Business Chief Information Officer Maj. Gen. Robin Rand Col. Les A. Kodlick Programs Lt. Gen. William T. Lord Ronald A. Poussard Senior Military Asst. to the Administrative Asst. Secretary of the Air Force to the Secretary Col. Charles H. Porter of the Air Force William A. Davidson 72 AIR FORCE Magazine / September 2009 The United States Air Force Air Staff Asst. Vice Chief of Staff Chief Master Sergeant Air Force Historian Judge Advocate General Lt. Gen. William L. Shelton of the Air Force Clarence R. Anderegg Lt. Gen. Jack L. Rives CMSAF James A. Roy Chief of Staff Gen. Norton A. Schwartz Surgeon General Chair, Scientific Advisory Board Chief of Chaplains Chief of Safety Lt. Gen. Charles B. Green John W. Betz Maj. Gen. Cecil R. Richardson Maj. Gen. Frederick F.
    [Show full text]
  • Afsc 21Mx Munitions and Missile Maintenance Officer Career Field
    DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE CFETP 21MX Headquarters, United States Air Force Parts I and II Washington, DC 20330-1030 12 November 2014 AFSC 21MX MUNITIONS AND MISSILE MAINTENANCE OFFICER CAREER FIELD EDUCATION AND TRAINING PLAN ACCESSIBILITY: Publications and forms are available on the e-publishing website at http://www.e- publishing.af.mil/ for downloading or ordering. RELEASABILITY: There are no releasability restrictions on this publication. The Missile Badge Heraldry The first distinctive missile badge was established May 23, 1958, to recognize those within the Air Force who had a direct role in the development, maintenance or operation of guided missiles. The badge was first called the Guided Missile Insignia and was authorized for those who performed duty in or were associated with the Snark, Atlas, Goose, Thor, Jupiter, Matador, Mace, Bomarc, Titan and Minuteman missile systems. In 1963, the name was changed to the Missileman Badge and three levels of expertise were established: Basic, Senior, and Master Missileman. The honor of wearing the badge went to those who completed specialized missile training. In April 1979, the name of the Missileman Badge was once again changed, this time to simply Missile Badge, deleting any reference to gender. In addition to the original missile systems, the Missile Badge is now awarded to personnel in the Peacekeeper, Air Launched Cruise Missile, Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile and Advanced Cruise Missile weapon systems. In 1988, with the approval of the “Missile Operations Designator,” a wreath encircling the Missile Badge, the original Missile Badge became a badge awarded exclusively to missile maintainers. In 2004, the Missile Badge was approved for wear by officers who had graduated the Conventional Munitions Officer Course and supervised 2M/W personnel in the maintenance, loading and unloading of guided missiles or missile systems for 12 months.
    [Show full text]
  • Major Connie L. Clay
    U N I T E D S T A T E S A I R F O R C E D S R F O R C E MAJOR CONNIE L. CLAY Major Connie Clay is currently the Director of Operations , 919th Force Support Squadron, 919th Mission Support Group, 919th Special Operations Wing , Duke Field, Florida. In h er current position, Major Clay oversees the operational and support readiness of a diverse group of over 1,200 wing personnel, providing personnel readiness, military personnel, manpower, education and training, and services support for one of Air Force Special Operations Command’s and Air Force Reserve Command’s most diverse reserve wings. Major Clay received her commission from the Air Force th rough ROTC and entered active duty in October 2000. She has served at multiple levels in the personnel career field to include acting as the first J1 in the newly established Office of the Defense Representative -Pakistan, Islamabad, Pakistan. Major Clay separated from active duty and became a reservist in 2005. She has deployed in support of Operations ENDURING FREEDOM and NEW DAWN and Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa . EDUCATION 2011 Air Command and Staff College ( Non-Residence) 2005 Squadron Officer School (Residence) 2003 Masters of Interdisciplinary Arts and Science, Touro University International 2000 Bachelor of Arts in Environmental Sciences , University of Washington ASSIGNMENTS 1. 2000 – 2002, Chief, Relocations and Employments, 62d Mission Support Squadron, McChord AFB, Washington 2. 2002-2003, Section Commander, 62d Logistics Readiness Squadron, McChord AFB, Washington 3. 2003 – 2003, Executive Officer, 62d Mission Support Group , McChord AFB, Washington 4.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Air Force Lieutenant General Arnold
    UNITED STATES AIR FORCE LIEUTENANT GENERAL ARNOLD W. BUNCH JR. Lt. Gen. Arnold W. Bunch, Jr., is the Military Deputy, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, the Pentagon, Washington, D.C. He is responsible for research and development, test, production, and modernization of Air Force programs worth more than $32 billion annually. General Bunch was commissioned in 1984 as a graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy. He completed undergraduate pilot training in 1985. He completed operational assignments as an instructor, evaluator and aircraft commander for B-52 Stratofortresses. Following graduation from the Air Force Test Pilot School, General Bunch conducted developmental testing in the B-2 Spirit and B-52 and served as an instructor in each. Additionally, he has commanded at the squadron, group and wing levels. Prior to his current assignment, he was the Commander of the Air Force Test Center, headquartered at Edwards Air Force Base, California. EDUCATION 1984 Bachelor of Science degree in civil engineering, U.S. Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, Colo. 1991 Squadron Officer School, Maxwell AFB, Ala. 1994 Master of Science degree in mechanical engineering, California State University Fresno 1996 Army Command and General Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, Kan. 2000 Master of Science degree in national security strategy, National War College, Fort Lesley J. McNair, Washington, D.C. ASSIGNMENTS 1. July 1984 - July 1985, Student, undergraduate pilot training, Columbus Air Force Base, Miss. 2. August 1985 - December 1985, Student, B-52 Combat Crew Training School, Castle AFB, Calif. 3. January 1986 - June 1990, Standardization and Evaluation Instructor Aircraft Commander, 325th Bomb Squadron, Fairchild AFB, Wash.
    [Show full text]
  • U N I T E D S T a T E S a I R F O R C E Lieutenant General
    U N I T E D S T A T E S A I R F O R C E LIEUTENANT GENERAL ARNOLD W. BUNCH JR. Lt. Gen. Arnold W. Bunch, Jr., is the Military Deputy, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, the Pentagon, Washington, D.C. He is responsible for research and development, test, production, and modernization of Air Force programs worth more than $32 billion annually. General Bunch was commissioned in 1984 as a graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy. He completed undergraduate pilot training in 1985. He completed operational assignments as an instructor, evaluator and aircraft commander for B­52 Stratofortresses. Following graduation from the Air Force Test Pilot School, General Bunch conducted developmental testing in the B­2 Spirit and B­52 and served as an instructor in each. Additionally, he has commanded at the squadron, group and wing levels. Prior to his current assignment, he was the Commander of the Air Force Test Center, headquartered at Edwards Air Force Base, California. EDUCATION 1984 Bachelor of Science degree in civil engineering, U.S. Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, Colo. 1991 Squadron Officer School, Maxwell AFB, Ala. 1994 Master of Science degree in mechanical engineering, California State University Fresno 1996 Army Command and General Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, Kan. 2000 Master of Science degree in national security strategy, National War College, Fort Lesley J. McNair, Washington, D.C. ASSIGNMENTS 1. July 1984 ­ July 1985, Student, undergraduate pilot training, Columbus Air Force Base, Miss. 2. August 1985 ­ December 1985, Student, B­52 Combat Crew Training School, Castle AFB, Calif.
    [Show full text]
  • FY 2001 MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, DEFENSE-WIDE ($ in Thousands)
    FY 2001 MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, DEFENSE-WIDE ($ in Thousands) New/ Authorization Approp. Current Page State/Agency/Installation/Project Request Request Mission No. Alaska Tricare Management Activity Fort Wainwright Hospital Replacement (Phase II) 0 44,000 C 8 California Tricare Management Activity Camp Pendleton MC Base FHOTC Support Facilities 2,900 2,900 C 12 Medical/Dental Clinic Repl (Horno) 3,950 3,950 C 15 Medical/Dental Clinic Repl (Las Flores) 3,550 3,550 C 18 Medical/Dental Clinic Repl (Las Pulgas) 3,750 3,750 C 21 Edwards Air Force Base Medical Clinic Addn/Dental Clinic Alt 17,900 17,900 C 24 Florida Tricare Management Activity Eglin Air Force Base Hospital Addition/Alteration/LSU 37,600 37,600 C 28 Patrick Air Force Base Medical Clinic 2,700 2,700 C 32 Tyndall Air Force Base Medical Clinic Addition/Alteration 7,700 7,700 C 36 New York Tricare Management Activity Fort Drum Veterinary Treatment Facility 1,400 1,400 C 40 Total Inside the United States 81,450 125,450 Germany Tricare Management Activity Kitzingen Health/Dental Clinic Life Safety Upgrade 1,400 1,400 C 45 Wiesbaden Health/Dental Clinic Addition/Alteration 7,187 7,187 C 48 FY 2001 MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, DEFENSE-WIDE ($ in Thousands) New/ Authorization Approp. Current Page State/Agency/Installation/Project Request Request Mission No. Italy Tricare Management Activity Naples Medical/Dental Facility Replacement 43,850 43,850 C 51 Total Outside the United States 52,437 52,437 Total 133,887 177,887 1. COMPONENT FY 2001 MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 2.
    [Show full text]
  • In the News Would Take Care of This
    troller is responsible for ensuring that resources expended on financial statement preparation are minimized until the reporting entity can demonstrate that it is ready for audit. Typically the financial management community In the News would take care of this. But military equipment is unique. Information about military equipment must be obtained from the acquisition and logistics communities, so indi- THE AUDITORS ARE COMING! THE viduals in these communities are required to assert to AUDITORS ARE COMING! the accuracy of the information they give to the finan- Richard K. Sylvester cial management community. In fact, these communi- f you’re an acquisition professional who works with ties are involved in four management assertions: military equipment programs, you need to prepare • The Valuation Assertion, which verifies that the assets Ifor one of the biggest New Year’s events in Depart- have been valued in accordance with federal accounting ment of Defense history. No, we’re not having a huge standards and generally accepted accounting princi- party, but we are sending out a serious invitation. ples • The Completeness Assertion, which verifies that all the In early 2007, the inspector general is going to invite in- programs on the Property, Plant & Equipment (PP&E) dependent auditors to begin their audit of DoD’s mili- line item of the balance sheet that should have been tary equipment programs. And here’s the good news: reported have been recorded and reported We’ll be ready for the auditors, thanks to the Military Equipment Valuation (MEV) initiative. Preparing our military equipment In case you haven’t heard, MEV is a DoD-wide effort to programs for audit is the law.
    [Show full text]
  • AF Nonnuclear Munitions Safety Approval Process
    Air Armament Center War-Winning Capabilities…On Time, On Cost AF Nonnuclear Munitions Safety Approval Process An Overview This presentation is cleared for public release AF Nonnuclear Munitions Safety Approval Process • Who: Melvin Duval, Chief, AAC/SES • Where: AF System Safety Office, Air Armament Center • Experience: 20 + years in acquisition at Eglin, Chief Engineer several times, ~6 years in AAC/SES • What: Overview of what is needed for a successful Nonnuclear Munitions Safety Board (NNMSB) evaluation Background • System Safety begins at the inception of the program • Acquisition management authorities need to ensure system safety is an integral part of the acquisition strategy. (AFI 91-202, Chapter 9 and AFI 91-205) • The AAC System Safety Office (AAC/SES) is primary AF source of conventional munition safety expertise • Ensuring program design safety requirements • Assisting in defining contractual system safety requirements • Supporting the systems engineering processes • Evaluating and documenting design as required for NNMSB safety approval/ certification actions for all conventional munition systems Background • NNMSB Core Mission • Review Authority and System Safety Group for All USAF Conventional Munitions • Advisor to Acquisition Authorities on Design Safety and Qualification Issues • Approval Authority for Airborne Flight Testing of Uncertified, Live-Loaded Munitions and Associated Subsystems • Design Safety Certification Authority for all Air Force Conventional Munitions • AAC/SES, as NNMSB Executive Secretariat, assures
    [Show full text]
  • Major Commands
    Major Commands A major command is a subdivision of the Air Force assigned a major part of the Air Force mission and directly subordinate to Hq. USAF. In general, ■ 2010 USAF Almanac there are two types of major commands: functional and geographical. Headquarters Joint Base Langley, Va. Established June 1, 1992 Commander Gen. William M. Fraser III AirACC Combat Command Missions Major training exercises PErsonnEl operate USAF bombers (nuclear- Accurate Test; Amalgam Dart/Fab- (as of Sept. 30, 2009) capable bombers transferred to ric Series; Angel Thunder; Ardent Active duty 77,892 AFGSC Feb. 1, 2010); USAF’s CO- Sentry; Atlantic Strike; Austere Officers 11,226 NUS-based fighter, reconnaissance, Challenge; Blue Flag; Bright Star; Enlisted 66,666 battle management, and command Eager Tiger; Eagle Resolve; East- Reserve Components 58,127 and control aircraft and intelligence ern Falcon; Emerald Warrior; Falcon ANG 46,346 and surveillance systems Nest; Foal Eagle; Global Lightning; AFRC 11,781 organize, train, equip, and Global Thunder; Green Flag (East Civilian 10,371 maintain combat-ready forces for and West); Initial Link; Integrated Ad- Total 146,390 rapid deployment and employment vance; Internal Look; Iron Falcon; Key to meet the challenges of peacetime Resolve; Jaded Thunder; National air sovereignty and wartime combat Level Exercise; New Horizons Series; EquipmenT requirements Northern Edge; Panamax; Red Flag; (Total active inventory as of Sept. 30, Provide combat airpower to Talisman Saber; Terminal Fury; Ulchi 2009) America’s warfighting
    [Show full text]
  • Profiles of Pentagon Spending by State Center
    PROFILES OF PENTAGON SPENDING BY STATE CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL POLICY BASED ON AVAILABLE DATA AS OF DECEMBER 2012 Contact: William D. Hartung Email: [email protected] Tel.: 917-923-3202 Note: These profiles were assembled by Natalie Peterson, Daniel Resnick, and William D. Hartung Profiles of Pentagon Spending by State December 2012 Alabama ......................................................................................... page 4 Alaska ............................................................................................ page 9 Arizona .......................................................................................... page 16 Arkansas ........................................................................................ page 22 California ....................................................................................... page 28 Colorado ....................................................................................... page 36 Connecticut ................................................................................... page 42 Delaware ....................................................................................... page 47 District of Columbia ...................................................................... page 52 Florida ........................................................................................... page 56 Georgia ......................................................................................... page 64 Hawaii ..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]