Content provided in partnership with

Government Industry

Airpower 101: an expeditionary air base model

Air & Space Power Journal, Fall, 2004 by John Dobbins

Editorial Abstract: This article proposes a simple but powerful model for base-level command to use in organizing, writing, and assessing bare-base-support plans; determining buildup priorities; and executing bare-base operations. The author believes that the model could become a common Air Force construct, standardizing language so that all levels of command can understand and coordinate with each other on how to generate airpower from a bare base.

**********

Most Popular Articles in News: The Ten Best Laptop bags; Tata plans cheapest-ever car for Indian market; GLOBALIZATION AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF UNDERDEVELOPMENT OF THE THIRD WORLD; Corn is good for you; Corn is not only a tasty treat, but also a cereal that ...; THE 50 BEST STYLISH HANDBAGS TO CARRY; More »

THE AIR FORCE must document the lessons learned from standing-up and operating bare bases during Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). This project requires thoroughly detailing those successful procedures developed through experience at allied bases and on bases captured during the war. The new Eagle Flag exercise shows that the Air Force is serious about this type of learning. During OIF, I had the unique opportunity to participate in planning, building, and fighting from two deployed locations: Al Jaber Air Base (AB), Kuwait, as the vice-commander of an air expeditionary wing (AEW) and Tallil AB, Iraq, as the Air Force commander. This article identifies ways to improve current Air Force instructions (AFI) on base assessment and planning. My recommendations are based on a model that I found very useful, and this article will discuss how I applied it to the situations at Al Jaber and Tallil. I am optimistic that if it is fully understood, the Air Force will adopt it or a similar model to further standardize bare-base operations and assist future bare-base commanders.

AFI 10-404, Base Support and Expeditionary Site Planning, provides the Air Force outline for writing a base support plan (BSP). However, from my perspective as a base-level leader on the ground prior to and during OIF, the instruction proved to be inadequate for senior commanders. The content and organization failed to reflect real-world problems and never seemed to bond the various parts of a base that must come together to execute the mission. A BSP should be more than a catalog of physical facts and figures; it should explore the functionality of the various aspects of the base. In its finest form, the BSP needs to be a detailed template of how to fight the base--employ the base like a weapons system.

The Model: Dissecting Airpower

An air base is a complex machine that has so many moving parts and interdependent elements that one can easily become overwhelmed by its complexity and mesmerized by only a portion of the operation. To organize my thoughts, I (with much assistance from others) developed a model (fig. 1) to aid in understanding the complexity of how an air base generates airpower and to keep Airmen or commanders from concentrating on only one aspect of that process to the detriment of the whole. This model can help future commanders quickly analyze and set priorities for limited resources, identify gaps, and predict the impact those gaps might have on mission accomplishment. The model had to be kept simple, easy to remember, and re-creatable on a single sheet of paper because complex multi-page wiring diagrams generate their own requirements and are not easily created or communicated at remote locations.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

The function of any air base is to provide sustained airpower. The three essential "air" components of airpower--aircrew, aircraft, and airfield--form the basis of this model. Each of these components is in turn supported by three elements. As a memory key, the aircrew and aircraft elements begin with a "p" to connote the power of airpower. The power elements of aircrew are purpose, planning, and procedures. For aircraft the elements are parts; petroleum, oil, and lubricants (POL); and payload. The airfield elements begin with an "s" to show that sustained airpower begins and ends at airfields. The airfield sustainment elements are surfaces, security, and services. The services are flying-related and include activities like air traffic control (ATC), weather (WX), and base operations but not dining, billeting, or morale, welfare, and recreation (MWR).

In developing this model's structure, I recognized a wing-command-level responsibility for airpower; a group-level responsibility for the air components of aircrew, aircraft, and airfield; and squadron-level responsibilities for the power and sustaining elements of the components. This gave me confidence that the model did have some validity, because it reflected how the Air Force has generally been organized while I have been on active duty. The model seemed incomplete until the fundamental "power" component of people (Airmen) was added as the foundational underpinning. So across the bottom of the model (fig. 2) "people" needs were added in priority order: air, water, food, shelter, hygiene, and recreation.

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

Support

This dissection of airpower was simple and easy to understand. It reflected a hierarchy similar to the Air Force organizational construct, and I could hand-draw it on a single page and explain it in less than 15 minutes. The model helped me keep "the big picture" of what the air base was there to do and quickly focus on the important intricacies of building or operating an air base. It provided a useful tool to show how an organization or an individual contributed to airpower.

Government Industry

Airpower 101: an expeditionary air base model

Air & Space Power Journal, Fall, 2004 by John Dobbins

Find Research Guides for:

Find Featured Titles for: Business

Most Popular Articles in News

Most Popular Publications in News