DOCSLIB.ORG

Cost-Benefit Analysis of the 2006 Air Force Materiel Command Test and Evaluation Proposal

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cost-Benefit Analysis of the 2006 Air Force Materiel Command Test and Evaluation Proposal THE ARTS This PDF document was made available from www.rand.org as a public CHILD POLICY service of the RAND Corporation. CIVIL JUSTICE EDUCATION ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT Jump down to document6 HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS NATIONAL SECURITY The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research POPULATION AND AGING organization providing objective analysis and effective PUBLIC SAFETY solutions that address the challenges facing the public SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY and private sectors around the world. SUBSTANCE ABUSE TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE WORKFORCE AND WORKPLACE Support RAND Purchase this document Browse Books & Publications Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore the 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 mono- graphs present major research findings that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND monographs undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity. Cost-Benefit Analysis of the 2006 Air Force Materiel Command Test and Evaluation Proposal Michael R. Thirtle, Michael Boito, Ian P. Cook, Bernard Fox, Phyllis Gilmore, Michelle Grace, Jeff Hagen, Thomas Hamilton, Lawrence M. Hanser, Herbert J. Shukiar, Jerry M. Sollinger, David Vaughan 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 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 Cost-benefit analysis of the 2006 Air Force Materiel Command test and evaluation proposal / Michael R. Thirtle ... [et al.]. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-0-8330-4300-9 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. United States. Air Force Materiel Command—Reorganization—Cost effectiveness. I. Thirtle, Michael R., 1967– UG633.2.C67 2008 358.4'1621—dc22 2007049639 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. © Copyright 2008 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 2008 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 This monograph provides the results of a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) of an Air Force proposal to consolidate and divest itself of a portion of its test and evaluation (T&E) facilities and capa- bilities. Congress directed the Air Force, in the 2007 Defense Appropriations Act, to study the effects of this proposal, and the Air Force asked RAND Project AIR FORCE to carry out the analysis. This monograph should interest those associated with military T&E facilities and capabilities. The work documented here was part of a fiscal year (FY) 2007 project, “United States Air Force Test and Evaluation Infrastructure Assessment.” RAND Project AIR FORCE RAND Project AIR FORCE (PAF), a division of the RAND Corporation, is the U.S. Air Force’s federally funded research and development center for studies and analysis. PAF pro- vides the Air Force with independent analyses of policy alternatives affecting the development, employment, combat readiness, and support of current and future aerospace forces. Research is conducted in four programs: Aerospace Force Development; Manpower, Personnel, and Train- ing; Resource Management; and Strategy and Doctrine. Integrative research projects and work on modeling and simulation are conducted on a PAF-wide basis. The research reported here was prepared within the PAF-wide program. Additional information about PAF is available on our Web site: http://www.rand.org/paf/ iii Contents Preface ........................................................................................................... iii Figures ........................................................................................................... ix Tables ............................................................................................................ xi Summary .......................................................................................................xiii Acknowledgments ............................................................................................ xxi Abbreviations ................................................................................................ xxiii CHAPTER ONE Introduction ..................................................................................................... 1 Background ....................................................................................................... 1 Project Scope...................................................................................................... 2 Research Approach ............................................................................................... 3 Data Sources .................................................................................................... 3 Effects on Customers .......................................................................................... 4 How We Analyzed the Data .................................................................................. 5 Financial Methods and Considerations ....................................................................... 5 Organization of This Monograph .............................................................................. 6 CHAPTER TWO Test Wing Consolidation ...................................................................................... 7 The Test Wings ................................................................................................... 7 Overview: The Air Armament Center and the 46th Test Wing ......................................... 7 Edwards AFB Overview ...................................................................................... 7 Human Capital Issues ......................................................................................... 8 Summary of Findings ......................................................................................... 9 What Functions Would Move from the 46th Test Wing to Edwards AFB? .............................. 9 46th Flying Hour Program ..................................................................................10 46th Test Wing Maintenance ...............................................................................12 Support Staff Reductions ....................................................................................19 Miscellaneous AFMC Test Wing Reductions Not Included in This CBA ...............................21 46th Test Wing Resource Earning Units That Move .....................................................21 412th Test Wing REU ...................................................................................... 22 C4ISR ......................................................................................................... 23 Arnold Engineering Development Center Contractor Staff and Information Technology ......... 23 Effect of Changes at Eglin AFB on the 53rd Wing ........................................................ 23 v vi Cost-Benefit Analysis of the 2006 Air Force Materiel Command Test and Evaluation Proposal Wing Activities at Eglin ..................................................................................... 23 Effect of Facility Closures ................................................................................... 24 Effect of Overall Range Capacity Reduction ..............................................................25 Effect of the 46th Test Wing Relocation .................................................................. 26 Cost Summary ............................................................................................... 28 Other Alternatives for the 53rd Wing ..................................................................... 28 CHAPTER THREE Ranges ...........................................................................................................31 Ground-Based Activities .......................................................................................32
Load more

Recommended publications
  • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Sacramento District 1325 J Street Sacramento, California Contract: DACA05-97-D-0013, Task 0001 FOSTER WHEELER ENVIRONMENTAL CORPORATION
    CALIFORNIA HISTORIC MILITARY BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES INVENTORY VOLUME II: THE HISTORY AND HISTORIC RESOURCES OF THE MILITARY IN CALIFORNIA, 1769-1989 by Stephen D. Mikesell Prepared for: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Sacramento District 1325 J Street Sacramento, California Contract: DACA05-97-D-0013, Task 0001 FOSTER WHEELER ENVIRONMENTAL CORPORATION Prepared by: JRP JRP HISTORICAL CONSULTING SERVICES Davis, California 95616 March 2000 California llistoric Military Buildings and Stnictures Inventory, Volume II CONTENTS CONTENTS ..................................................................................................................................... i FIGURES ....................................................................................................................................... iii LIST OF ACRONYMS .................................................................................................................. iv PREFACE .................................................................................................................................... viii 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1-1 2.0 COLONIAL ERA (1769-1846) .............................................................................................. 2-1 2.1 Spanish-Mexican Era Buildings Owned by the Military ............................................... 2-8 2.2 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Linkages Study 2015
    Florida’s Military Installations Linkages Study conducted by The Principi Group and The SPECTRUM Group Team for the Florida Defense Support Task Force February 10, 2015 Florida’s Military Installations Linkages Study Table of Contents Executive Summary…………………………………………………4 Introduction……………….…………………………………………10 Scope of Study………….…………………………………………..10 Methodology……….………………………………………………..11 Analysis…………………………………………………….………..13 Intrastate Linkages…..………………………………………….…14 Interstate Linkages…………………………………………….…..31 Conclusions………….………….…………………………………..54 Recommendations………………………..………………….…….56 Navy Installation Linkages…………………………………...…..58 Air Force Installation Linkages……..………………………...…67 Team Orlando/National Simulation Center Linkages………..83 Coast Guard Linkages…………………………………………….88 National Guard Linkages…………………………………..……102 2 Florida’s Military Installations Linkages Study List of Figures Figure 1. Florida’s Major Military Installations and Ranges………………………….14 Figure 2. Key Command and Control Linkages in Florida……………………………15 Figure 3. Key Command and Control Linkages in South Florida…...………………16 Figure 4. Key Command and Control Linkages in Northeast Florida………………16 Figure 5. Key Command and Control Linkages in Northwest Florida……………...17 Figure 6. Key Communication Support Linkages in Florida…………………………18 Figure 7. Key Communications Support Linkages in Northwest Florida………….18 Figure 8. Key Training Linkages in Florida……………………………………………...20 Figure 9. Key Training Linkages in South Florida……………………………………...20 Figure 10. Key Training Linkages
    [Show full text]
  • United States Air Force and Its Antecedents Published and Printed Unit Histories
    UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AND ITS ANTECEDENTS PUBLISHED AND PRINTED UNIT HISTORIES A BIBLIOGRAPHY EXPANDED & REVISED EDITION compiled by James T. Controvich January 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTERS User's Guide................................................................................................................................1 I. Named Commands .......................................................................................................................4 II. Numbered Air Forces ................................................................................................................ 20 III. Numbered Commands .............................................................................................................. 41 IV. Air Divisions ............................................................................................................................. 45 V. Wings ........................................................................................................................................ 49 VI. Groups ..................................................................................................................................... 69 VII. Squadrons..............................................................................................................................122 VIII. Aviation Engineers................................................................................................................ 179 IX. Womens Army Corps............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 0511Bases.Pdf
    Guide to Air Force Installations Worldwide ■ 2011 USAF Almanac Active Duty Installations Abbreviations ABW/G Air Base Wing/Group This section includes Air Force owned and operated command: ACC. Major units/missions: 9th ACW/S Air Control Wing/Squadron facilities around the world. (It also lists the former RW (ACC), ISR and UAV operations; 548th ISRG AFB Air Force Base USAF bases now under other service leadership (AFISRA), DCGS; 940th Wing (AFRC), C2, ISR, AFDW Air Force District of Washington as joint bases.) It is not a complete list of units and UAV operations. History: opened October AFGLSC Air Force Global Logistics Support Center by base. Many USAF installations host numerous 1942 as Army’s Camp Beale. Named for Edward F. AFISRA Air Force ISR Agency tenants, not just other USAF units but DOD, joint, Beale, a former Navy officer who became a hero AFNWC Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center AFOSI Air Force Office of Special Investigations other service, and federal and civil entities. of the Mexican-American War and early devel- AFRICOM US Africa Command oper of California, as well as a senior appointee/ AFRL Air Force Research Laboratory Altus AFB, Okla. 73523-5000. Nearest city: Al- diplomat for four Presidents. Transferred to USAF AFS Air Force Station tus. Phone: 580-482-8100. Owning command: 1948. Designated AFB April 1951. AFWA Air Force Weather Agency AETC. Unit/mission: 97th AMW (AETC), training. AGOW Air Ground Operations Wing History: activated January 1943. Inactivated Brooks City-Base, Tex., 78235-5115. Nearest ALC Air Logistics Center May 1945. Reactivated August 1953. city: San Antonio.
    [Show full text]
  • California State Parks
    1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 Pelican SB Designated Wildlife/Nature Viewing Designated Wildlife/Nature Viewing Visit Historical/Cultural Sites Visit Historical/Cultural Sites Smith River Off Highway Vehicle Use Off Highway Vehicle Use Equestrian Camp Site(s) Non-Motorized Boating Equestrian Camp Site(s) Non-Motorized Boating ( Tolowa Dunes SP C Educational Programs Educational Programs Wind Surfing/Surfing Wind Surfing/Surfing lo RV Sites w/Hookups RV Sites w/Hookups Gasquet 199 s Marina/Boat Ramp Motorized Boating Marina/Boat Ramp Motorized Boating A 101 ed Horseback Riding Horseback Riding Lake Earl RV Dump Station Mountain Biking RV Dump Station Mountain Biking r i S v e n m i t h R i Rustic Cabins Rustic Cabins w Visitor Center Food Service Visitor Center Food Service Camp Site(s) Snow Sports Camp Site(s) Geocaching Snow Sports Crescent City i Picnic Area Camp Store Geocaching Picnic Area Camp Store Jedediah Smith Redwoods n Restrooms RV Access Swimming Restrooms RV Access Swimming t Hilt S r e Seiad ShowersMuseum ShowersMuseum e r California Lodging California Lodging SP v ) l Klamath Iron Fishing Fishing F i i Horse Beach Hiking Beach Hiking o a Valley Gate r R r River k T Happy Creek Res. Copco Del Norte Coast Redwoods SP h r t i t e s Lake State Parks State Parks · S m Camp v e 96 i r Hornbrook R C h c Meiss Dorris PARKS FACILITIES ACTIVITIES PARKS FACILITIES ACTIVITIES t i Scott Bar f OREGON i Requa a Lake Tulelake c Admiral William Standley SRA, G2 • • (707) 247-3318 Indian Grinding Rock SHP, K7 • • • • • • • • • • • (209) 296-7488 Klamath m a P Lower CALIFORNIA Redwood K l a Yreka 5 Tule Ahjumawi Lava Springs SP, D7 • • • • • • • • • (530) 335-2777 Jack London SHP, J2 • • • • • • • • • • • • (707) 938-5216 l K Sc Macdoel Klamath a o tt Montague Lake A I m R National iv Lake Albany SMR, K3 • • • • • • (888) 327-2757 Jedediah Smith Redwoods SP, A2 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • (707) 458-3018 e S Mount a r Park h I4 E2 t 3 Newell Anderson Marsh SHP, • • • • • • (707) 994-0688 John B.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 17A Stealth Fighter Organizations
    HISTORY AND LINEAGE OF THE F- 1 17A STEALTH FIGHTER ORGANIZATIONS DECEMBER 1991 SPECIAL STUDY HO-91-2 OFFICE OF HIST RY HEADQUARTERS, 37TH FPGHTER WING TWELFTH AIR FORCE TACTICAL AIR COMMAND INTRODUCTION In 1978, the Air Force awarded a full-scale development contract for the F-117A Stealth Fighter to Lockheed Corporation's Advanced Development Projects (the famous Skunk Works). Thirty- one months later, on 18 June 1981, the F-117A made its first flight. Meanwhile, the Tactical Air Command (TAC) decided to set up a group-level organization to guide the F-117A to an initial operating capability. That organization became the 4450th Tactical Group (TG), which officially activated on 15 October 1979 at Nellis AFB, Nevada. The 4450 TG began flying operations in 1981 from the Tonopah Test Range Airfield, located approximately 130 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. Lockheed test pilots put the Stealth Fighter through its early paces. The 4450 TG also operated the A-7D as a surrogate trainer for the F-l17A, and these operations continued until 15 October 1982 under the guise of an avionics test mis- sion. October 15th is important to the program because on that date Maj Alton C. Whitley, Jr. became the first 4450 TG pilot to fly the F-117A. The 4450 TG then achieved an initial operating capability with the F-117A in October 1983. The 4450 TG's mission continued to evolve under a cloak of secrecy--all Tonopah training flights conducted at night under the cover of darkness--until late 1988. On 10 November 1988, the Air Force brought the F-117A from behind a "black veil" by publicly acknowledging its existence.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • 2021-2 Bio Book
    BBIIOOGGRRAAPPHHIICCAALL DDAATTAA BBOOOOKK Keystone Class 2021-2 7-18 June 2021 National Defense University NDU PRESIDENT Lieutenant General Mike Plehn is the 17th President of the National Defense University. As President of NDU, he oversees its five component colleges that offer graduate-level degrees and certifications in joint professional military education to over 2,000 U.S. military officers, civilian government officials, international military officers and industry partners annually. Raised in an Army family, he graduated from Miami Southridge Senior High School in 1983 and attended the U.S. Air Force Academy Preparatory School in Colorado Springs, Colorado. He graduated from the U.S. Air Force Academy with Military Distinction and a degree in Astronautical Engineering in 1988. He is a Distinguished Graduate of Squadron Officer School as well as the College of Naval Command and Staff, where he received a Master’s Degree with Highest Distinction in National Security and Strategic Studies. He also holds a Master of Airpower Art and Science degree from the School of Advanced Airpower Studies, as well as a Master of Aerospace Science degree from Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. Lt Gen Plehn has extensive experience in joint, interagency, and special operations, including: Middle East Policy in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization, and four tours at the Combatant Command level to include U.S. European Command, U.S. Central Command, and twice at U.S. Southern Command, where he was most recently the Military Deputy Commander. He also served on the Air Staff in Strategy and Policy and as the speechwriter to the Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force.
    [Show full text]
  • Cradle of Airpower Education
    Cradle of Airpower Education Maxwell Air Force Base Centennial April 1918 – April 2018 A Short History of The Air University, Maxwell AFB, and the 42nd Air Base Wing Air University Directorate of History March 2019 1 2 Cradle of Airpower Education A Short History of The Air University, Maxwell AFB, and 42nd Air Base Wing THE INTELLECTUAL AND LEADERSHIP- DEVELOPMENT CENTER OF THE US AIR FORCE Air University Directorate of History Table of Contents Origins and Early Development 3 The Air Corps Tactical School Period 3 Maxwell Field during World War II 4 Early Years of Air University 6 Air University during the Vietnam War 7 Air University after the Vietnam War 7 Air University in the Post-Cold War Era 8 Chronology of Key Events 11 Air University Commanders and Presidents 16 Maxwell Post/Base Commanders 17 Lineage and Honors: Air University 20 Lineage and Honors: 42nd Bombardment Wing 21 “Be the intellectual and leadership-development center of the Air Force Develop leaders, enrich minds, advance airpower, build relationships, and inspire service.” 3 Origins and Early Development The history of Maxwell Air Force Base began with Orville and Wilbur Wright, who, following their 1903 historic flight, decided in early 1910 to open a flying school to teach people how to fly and to promote the sale of their airplane. After looking at locations in Florida, Wilbur came to Montgomery, Alabama in February 1910 and decided to open the nation’s first civilian flying school on an old cotton plantation near Montgomery that subsequently become Maxwell Air Force Base (AFB).
    [Show full text]
  • Major Commands and Air National Guard
    2019 USAF ALMANAC MAJOR COMMANDS AND AIR NATIONAL GUARD Pilots from the 388th Fighter Wing’s, 4th Fighter Squadron prepare to lead Red Flag 19-1, the Air Force’s premier combat exercise, at Nellis AFB, Nev. Photo: R. Nial Bradshaw/USAF R.Photo: Nial The Air Force has 10 major commands and two Air Reserve Components. (Air Force Reserve Command is both a majcom and an ARC.) ACRONYMS AA active associate: CFACC combined force air evasion, resistance, and NOSS network operations security ANG/AFRC owned aircraft component commander escape specialists) squadron AATTC Advanced Airlift Tactics CRF centralized repair facility GEODSS Ground-based Electro- PARCS Perimeter Acquisition Training Center CRG contingency response group Optical Deep Space Radar Attack AEHF Advanced Extremely High CRTC Combat Readiness Training Surveillance system Characterization System Frequency Center GPS Global Positioning System RAOC regional Air Operations Center AFS Air Force Station CSO combat systems officer GSSAP Geosynchronous Space ROTC Reserve Officer Training Corps ALCF airlift control flight CW combat weather Situational Awareness SBIRS Space Based Infrared System AOC/G/S air and space operations DCGS Distributed Common Program SCMS supply chain management center/group/squadron Ground Station ISR intelligence, surveillance, squadron ARB Air Reserve Base DMSP Defense Meteorological and reconnaissance SBSS Space Based Surveillance ATCS air traffic control squadron Satellite Program JB Joint Base System BM battle management DSCS Defense Satellite JBSA Joint Base
    [Show full text]
  • 1945-12-11 GO-116 728 ROB Central Europe Campaign Award
    GO 116 SWAR DEPARTMENT No. 116. WASHINGTON 25, D. C.,11 December- 1945 UNITS ENTITLED TO BATTLE CREDITS' CENTRAL EUROPE.-I. Announcement is made of: units awarded battle par- ticipation credit under the provisions of paragraph 21b(2), AR 260-10, 25 October 1944, in the.Central Europe campaign. a. Combat zone.-The.areas occupied by troops assigned to the European Theater of" Operations, United States Army, which lie. beyond a line 10 miles west of the Rhine River between Switzerland and the Waal River until 28 March '1945 (inclusive), and thereafter beyond ..the east bank of the Rhine.. b. Time imitation.--22TMarch:,to11-May 1945. 2. When'entering individual credit on officers' !qualiflcation cards. (WD AGO Forms 66-1 and 66-2),or In-the service record of enlisted personnel. :(WD AGO 9 :Form 24),.: this g!neial Orders may be ited as: authority forsuch. entries for personnel who were present for duty ".asa member of orattached' to a unit listed&at, some time-during the'limiting dates of the Central Europe campaign. CENTRAL EUROPE ....irst Airborne Army, Headquarters aMd 1st Photographic Technical Unit. Headquarters Company. 1st Prisoner of War Interrogation Team. First Airborne Army, Military Po1ie,e 1st Quartermaster Battalion, Headquar- Platoon. ters and Headquarters Detachment. 1st Air Division, 'Headquarters an 1 1st Replacementand Training Squad- Headquarters Squadron. ron. 1st Air Service Squadron. 1st Signal Battalion. 1st Armored Group, Headquarters and1 1st Signal Center Team. Headquarters 3attery. 1st Signal Radar Maintenance Unit. 19t Auxiliary Surgical Group, Genera]1 1st Special Service Company. Surgical Team 10. 1st Tank DestroyerBrigade, Headquar- 1st Combat Bombardment Wing, Head- ters and Headquarters Battery.: quarters and Headquarters Squadron.
    [Show full text]
  • Conquering the Night Army Air Forces Night Fighters at War
    The U.S. Army Air Forces in World War II Conquering the Night Army Air Forces Night Fighters at War PRINTER: strip in FIGURE NUMBER A-1 Shoot at 277% bleed all sides Stephen L. McFarland A Douglas P–70 takes off for a night fighter training mission, silhouetted by the setting Florida sun. 2 The U.S. Army Air Forces in World War II Conquering the Night Army Air Forces Night Fighters at War Stephen L. McFarland AIR FORCE HISTORY AND MUSEUMS PROGRAM 1998 Conquering the Night Army Air Forces Night Fighters at War The author traces the AAF’s development of aerial night fighting, in- cluding technology, training, and tactical operations in the North African, European, Pacific, and Asian theaters of war. In this effort the United States never wanted for recruits in what was, from start to finish, an all-volunteer night fighting force. Cut short the night; use some of it for the day’s business. — Seneca For combatants, a constant in warfare through the ages has been the sanctuary of night, a refuge from the terror of the day’s armed struggle. On the other hand, darkness has offered protection for operations made too dangerous by daylight. Combat has also extended into the twilight as day has seemed to provide too little time for the destruction demanded in modern mass warfare. In World War II the United States Army Air Forces (AAF) flew night- time missions to counter enemy activities under cover of darkness. Allied air forces had established air superiority over the battlefield and behind their own lines, and so Axis air forces had to exploit the night’s protection for their attacks on Allied installations.
    [Show full text]