Q&A: Major General Kurt A. Cichowski
AERIAL COMMANDO:
Delivering Airborne Special Operations Assets Worldwide
Major General Kurt A. Cichowski
Vice Commander
Air Force Special Operations Command
Delivering Airborne Special Operations Assets Worldwide
Major General Kurt A. Cichowski
Vice Commander
Air Force Special Operations Command
Major General Kurt A. Cichowski graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree in engineering sciences and received his commission from the U.S. Air Force Academy in 1977. He completed a master’s degree in business administration and management in 1982 from the University of Northern Colorado, and earned a master’s degree in airpower art and science in 1995 from Air University, Maxwell Air Force Base, Ala.
The general has commanded an operations group, the Air Force Studies and Analyses Agency, two wings and an expeditionary mobility task force. He has also served as deputy chief of staff, strategy, plans and assessment, Multi-National Force-Iraq, Baghdad, Iraq. He is a command pilot with more than 3,400 flying hours in the T/AT-38, F-4D/E, F-16C/D, F-117A, KC-10, C-130 and AC-130.
His major awards and decorations include: Defense Superior Service Medal; Legion of Merit with three oak leaf clusters; Bronze Star Medal with oak leaf cluster; Defense Meritorious Service Medal; Meritorious Service Medal with two oak leaf clusters; Joint Service Commendation Medal; and Air Force Commendation Medal.
Q: AFSOC has seen some organizational changes over the past two years, for example the stand-up out at Cannon AFB. Could you give me an overview of the command organization and some of the changes that have taken place recently? Do you foresee any further adjustments?
A: As the air component to the United States Special Operations Command, we organize, train and equip air commandos from the United States Air Force to provide for our nation’s specialized airpower capability. Our command is comprised of 16,000 active, Reserve, Guard, and civilian personnel organized into a numbered Air Force, four special operations wings and a special tactics group. Additionally, we provide two overseas special operations groups who work for their respective operational theater special operations component commanders in the U.S. European Command and the U.S. Pacific Command.
As to the recent changes, the addition of the 27th SOW at Cannon AFB, N.M., in October 2007, is one of the most significant. It allows us to expand our mobility air fleet; our intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capability; and gives us an additional live-fire range to conduct joint SOF training. Overall, this new base is in great condition, and with the on-going military construction projects, we’ll have the infrastructure in place to accommodate AFSOC’s planned upgrade and growth of aircraft and personnel.
Another significant item of interest results from the very positive decisions and investments to recapitalize and modernize our aging inventory. This year, the Air Force programmed funding to buy the first seven MC-130Js, as well as to accelerate funding for five CV-22s. Both systems will provide key mobility and resupply of special operations forces since battlefield mobility is our number-one requirement. These kinds of efforts are a great start.
To ensure we have qualified personnel to match the growth in aircraft, we have transformed our flying and ground training activities by consolidating five different units under a single training center which is scheduled to stand up at Hurlburt in October 2008. This initiative relieves much of the training burden on our operational units.
Finally, we’re growing our Battlefield Airmen numbers to begin to meet operational demands, and we soon plan on further expansions through successful execution of recruiting and training initiatives. We’ve also begun to double our aviation foreign internal defense forces to meet combatant commanders’ requirements in this vital area as well.
Q: What can you tell me about the smaller gunship project?
A: The AC-XX project stems from USSOCOM’s need for a multi-role aircraft that can provide precision standoff fires, airlift, ISR, command and control and armed overwatch in support of special operations ground forces. We hope to see the same kind of rapid acquisition speed and innovative approach as taken with the original AC-130 during Vietnam.
Our planned concept is to prototype a C-27-equipped aircraft with an infrared/electro-optical sensor, small precision-guided munitions and appropriate communication equipment. This multi-role platform will offer a small size, reconfigurable versatility using the latest proven sensor technology and is based on the lessons learned from real-world operational experience. A smaller aircraft equals smaller footprint and increased ability to work in austere locations while requiring less support personnel and aircrew to get the job done.
Finally, a smaller aircraft variant would serve as a likely candidate for us to work by, with and through our partner nations also seeking this type of capability.
Q: There have been discussions over the ultimate authority over unmanned aerial systems whether it should reside with the Army or the Air Force. AFSOC operates several types of UAS. First do you see the AFSOC UAS fleet growing beyond it current state?
A: Our UAS fleet is expanding and will continue to grow for the foreseeable future. In fact, the Air Force chief of staff accelerated our MQ-1 Predator program by more than two years. Our phenomenal UAS combat mission success has actually resulted in more operational requirements being levied by the units we support. Not only has there been an increase in operational requirements, but the mission types, roles and functions our UAS are being asked to perform are continually expanding.
The demand for integrated find, fix and finish capabilities has never been higher, therefore AFSOC is now programmed to grow in UAS types and numbers, as well as personnel and basing. Part of this growth will be accommodated by using our new UAS operating location at Cannon Air. We fully expect this to become an AFSOC intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance center of excellence for UAS and we remain committed to keeping pace with the ever-increasing demand for UAS support.
Q: In 2006, AFSOC activated the 11th Intelligence Squadron to harvest and exploit intelligence gained through the use of UAS platforms and other means. How would you characterize their work and has their basic mission remained the same?
A: This unit is doing an absolutely outstanding job. The 11th Intelligence Squadron has established the benchmark for ISR data production, exploitation and dissemination. Its mission remains focused on providing exploitation and analysis of full-motion video collected by MQ-1 Predators and MQ-9 Reapers directly to special operations forces around the world.
To enhance the actionable intelligence value of the products provided to the warfighter, the 11th IS has also added a fusion capability to incorporate data from all intelligence disciplines into their products. Air Commandos in the 11th IS have become experts at analyzing individual and organizational habits, routines and actions, and building pattern-oflife folders. These products are enabling SOF ground forces to quickly and decisively execute the Long War, so you could almost state that this unit is the classic definition of an adapting and learning organization.
You must realize that the 11th IS stood up in 2006, almost two years ahead of schedule. Its mission success has created additional requirements, some not even conceived prior to its creation. The acceleration and growth has only been made possible by using a mix of active duty, Guard, Reserve and contractor personnel. The squadron is already exploiting more than 50 percent of all MQ-1 and MQ-9 orbits and is expecting to double the number of missions it supports within the next year.
Q: The tanker recapitalization project for the Air Force has certainly been a news item this year. Your tanker issues are significant in their own right. Are you going to run out of available hours on your tankers and have to look at grounding airframes before you have replacements?
A: The short answer is no, we will not have to ground aircraft; however, we plan to recapitalize all 37 of the MC-130E Combat Talon Is and MC-130P Combat Shadows as rapidly as possible. The projected buys should have new aircraft fielded in time to provide needed air refueling and mobility support for special operations forces prior to this kind of drastic action needing to be taken. However, the tanker recapitalization procurement effort remains vital because these aircraft are among the oldest in the AFSOC/USSOCOM inventory. The key issues affecting them are cost to sustain and operate, as well as their diminishing capacity to remain compliant with global airspace and navigation requirements.
The C-130 is an inherently sound and versatile design; however, the center wing box is the most critical component in terms of service life. While the center wing boxes on all MC-130E/P aircraft were replaced in the 1990s, other important structures are beginning to show the effects of age and heavy use. For example, the MC-130E must undergo a full depot maintenance inspection every 54 months, and during the past several years the numbers of unanticipated structural repairs have grown significantly and are extending the length of the depot maintenance down time.
In addition to aircraft structures, other avionics and mission specific equipment is aging, vendors are vanishing and we’re reaching a point where keeping the aircraft available to support our SOF mission is becoming increasingly difficult. Some mission computers, displays and numerous other critical subsystems are projected to reach a point where they are not supportable by 2015. Today an MC-130E mission available rate in the 60 percent range is not uncommon. This number compares to C-130J availability rates of around 90 percent.
As the international community reshapes the global airspace and navigation control system, our aircraft are becoming more limited in how they can operate. For example, as Europe implements reduced frequency separation on radios, our systems are no longer compliant. As traffic congestion increases and the commercial airspace is compressed, we won’t have the equipment necessary to navigate in that airspace. This will become a critical issue for us by 2015.
Q: Will the delays and controversy with the Air Force’s tanker program in any way affect AFSOC programs down the road?
A: As a user of the strategic tanker force, AFSOC has a vested interest in the Air Force bringing this new capability online as quickly as possible, but as long as the KC-135 and KC-10 are available in sufficient numbers, we can accomplish our missions. There is no direct correlation between the Air Force strategic tanker recapitalization issues and AFSOC programs.
Q: With operational tempo and the growth of AFSOC, how are you doing with meeting current manning levels and the authorized increases?
A: Overall, we are doing well. We have received tremendous support from both the Air Force at large and from the Air Force Personnel Center in filling out our emerging mission units. Issues such as the large number of limited experienced aircrew and absorbing an increased number of flight training students has been balanced by the continued cross-flow from our mobility brethren, helping AFSOC keep pace with these growing authorizations.
As you might expect with the large influx of new aircrew, maintaining the proper mix of experience will be a challenge in our units in the short term. For the longer term, during the FY10 budget cycle, we are anticipating an approximate gain of an additional 2,000 authorizations.
Q: More than a year ago, the training pipeline for combat controllers and pararesecuemen was redesigned to meet operational needs and address candidate completion rates. Can you describe the training process for these specialties and do you think the redesign of the system is complete or are further adjustments expected?
A: In 2000, the combat control pipeline was re-designed and re-sequenced to afford trainees a longer span of time to reach the level of capability needed to complete each successively more challenging school in the pipeline. The physical fitness standards were not changed because the demands of the modern battlefield have not warranted any easing of the benchmarks. With respect to the pararescue pipeline specifically, AFSOC did not significantly influence any changes in that training regimen.
The combat control training pipeline consists of two parts. After completing basic military training, prospective operators are assessed, selected and then educated during the year-long Air Education and Training Command portion of training. This effort includes core skills training in air traffic control school, airborne school, survival school and a basic combat control course. Once the trainees are assigned to AFSOC, the training pipeline then continues with advanced skills training, a combatant divers course, Army military freefall course and skill upgrades in the core combat control tasks. The approximate year of AFSOC-specific training culminates with full mission profiles which produces a controller requiring very little spin-up in his operations unit to become fully combat ready.
We’ve also taken on other initiatives to further enhance both the effectiveness as well as the efficiency of training being provided. For example, today’s CCT pipeline training updates have proven to be a successful model to stair-step trainees’ physical fitness levels into that required of SOF operators, while also preparing each airman with fundamental knowledge and skills. We are therefore working to reduce the amount of attrition through several means, including a new battlefield airman clinic, which tailors physical therapy and medical innovations to ensure injured or sick operators get back to training as quickly and safely as possible.
Additionally, AFSOC has recently established nine operating locations, aligned with Air Force recruiting groups and squadrons, across the country. Each location will be manned by a special tactics operator whose task is to assist Air Force recruiters with initial assessment of potential recruits plus follow-up on each candidate’s physical training and questions about the career field. Through this initiative, AFSOC hopes to improve the quality of candidates, thereby reducing wash-outs throughout the various pipelines and increasing the numbers of graduates.
Finally, AFSOC’s subject-matter experts continue to study how to improve our training process. Continued tweaks to AFSOC’s training program are inevitable to meet evolving operational needs driven through the long war, but no overhauls are envisioned for implementation in the near future.
Q: In the past, the need for additional high-fidelity simulators has been voiced. Is there still a need for additional simulators? What types—flight, maintenance, weapons, etc.—would be your priority and what would be the immediate benefits of adding these simulators?
A: We absolutely need more and better simulators. We must acquire these simulators with adequate fidelity so aircrew and maintainers can sustain both training and currency. For example, the CV-22, as with other newer weapon systems, is being acquired with simulators as an integral companion to both initial, as well as upgrade, training, and is a major portion of continuation training in this platform. As we start to replace some of our older MC-130 fleet, we will be looking to the same approach in other aircraft.
Priority one, therefore, is to acquire high-definition aircraft simulators. However, this is really an issue of opportunity cost. AFSOC has a low-supply, high-demand fleet. By trading training and rehearsal time in the aircraft for less-expensive simulator time, we are freeing our limited fleets to be used for the nation’s business.
In the past, lower-fidelity training devices have driven nearly all of our continuation and upgrade training to be accomplished in the aircraft. In addition to procuring higher-fidelity level-flight devices, acquiring maintenance and weapons training devices, as we have with the CV-22, can shift increasing amounts of the training burden to simulation. Consequently, we can then better focus our limited flying hours toward high-value joint SOF training and preparation and increase our aircraft availability to the combatant commanders for crucial engagement worldwide.
Q: Are there any particularly important tools that you feel need to be added to the battlefield airmen kit to make them more effective?
A: Our airmen need to be able to shoot, move and communicate effectively. We are continually researching new technologies to reduce the size and weight of our equipment. Currently, our battlefield airmen are carrying approximately 120 pounds of gear, with a disproportionate amount of that weight being batteries. One of the most critical areas of innovation is in lightweight power generation.
Additionally, there are several other tools being developed for our battlefield airmen. We are continuing improvements in sensor integration with unmanned aerial systems to improve our ability to geo-locate and designate targets for precision weaponry. In addition, to communicate more effectively, we are researching a small, wearable version of our rugged field computers, as well as working some improvements to our cursor-on-target architecture which will allow digital communications across multiple platforms. If we can conquer this hurdle, we’ll then enable our systems to share data digitally, without translations or human errors.
Q: As it stands now, the first operational AFSOC CV-22 squadron will become operational early next year. Can you give me some of the major accomplishments in getting to this point and a look at what still needs to be done to get to that operational point?
A: First of all, our primary focus is to put the CV-22 in the hands of warfighters on the battlefield. This platform gives us critical vertical lift and speed-to-target capabilities we need to support SOF operations. However, the current delivery schedule is too slow to meet those needs and we are doing everything we can to hasten delivery and fielding.
There have been many significant accomplishments in the CV-22 development process, but most recently we completed the initial operational test and evaluation phase. This testing is pivotal in that we have put the aircraft through the operational profiles we intend to fly during actual combat missions. It is also an opportunity to combine our maintenance teams with our flyers to evaluate overall operations in an environment just short of actual combat.
While we are on track to meet our programmed goals of fielding an initial operational capability by February 2009, there is still a lot to be done. This is a new aircraft, and crews and maintenance have to be trained. There is not an existing pool of seasoned CV-22 aircrew or maintainers to draw from, so we have to build an experience level that is required to handle the rigors of SOF mission requirements, and at the same time train and exercise with the ground forces we will be supporting in combat.
Additionally, as we are building a seasoned personnel force and accepting the newly developed aircraft, we are also looking at ways to enhance the combat effectiveness of the CV-22. Using lessons learned from the MV-22 deployment, and also doing some independent and thoughtful concept development, we are specifically testing a new defensive weapon system while also looking at some terrain-following system improvements.
Q: Is AFSOC pushing for a suitably-sized airborne laser system?
A: AFSOC is continually searching for improvements in our ability to support warfighting commanders. Because directed energy weapons— both high-energy lasers and high-power microwaves—would be revolutionary on the battlefield, we are investigating their applicability along with earliest-practical capability. As the demonstration of concepts, such as the advanced tactical laser, take the research out of the lab and place it on an airframe, we’ll closely monitor the results to let us know what a laser weapon can and cannot do.
Keep in mind that special operations forces are only a very small portion of the Air Force, and as such we are in the position where we evaluate many potential systems—kinetic and directed energy—for affordability and applicability to our requirements. In most cases we are not the driving factor in these developments, but where we can adapt systems to our needs, it makes sense to be engaged.
Q: Any closing thoughts?
A: Our highest priority is to make a positive difference on the battlefield. Our biggest challenge will be to shape the future with newer and more reliable aircraft; with properly selected, trained, and committed personnel and with an agile, flexible mindset that balances risk with mission as we defend our nation’s interests around the world. We have made significant gains in recapitalizing our fleet, but we still have more work to do.
The next few years are historic ones. Our plank organization, the 1st Air Commando Group of World War II fame, will have their final reunion. Additionally, the MH-53 helicopters will fly their last combat missions this September 2008. While history retreats behind us, fresh generations of air commandos, with new machines like the CV-22, MC-130J, unmanned vehicles like the Predator and Reaper, and other possibilities, herald a bright and promising future. Air commands will fly and fight any time, any place to meet national objectives, just as our predecessors did before us. We’re proud members of an exceedingly competent and professional joint team. We’re on a good path to recapitalize and modernize our air fleet for their use and our future is a bright one. ♦
The general has commanded an operations group, the Air Force Studies and Analyses Agency, two wings and an expeditionary mobility task force. He has also served as deputy chief of staff, strategy, plans and assessment, Multi-National Force-Iraq, Baghdad, Iraq. He is a command pilot with more than 3,400 flying hours in the T/AT-38, F-4D/E, F-16C/D, F-117A, KC-10, C-130 and AC-130.
His major awards and decorations include: Defense Superior Service Medal; Legion of Merit with three oak leaf clusters; Bronze Star Medal with oak leaf cluster; Defense Meritorious Service Medal; Meritorious Service Medal with two oak leaf clusters; Joint Service Commendation Medal; and Air Force Commendation Medal.
Q: AFSOC has seen some organizational changes over the past two years, for example the stand-up out at Cannon AFB. Could you give me an overview of the command organization and some of the changes that have taken place recently? Do you foresee any further adjustments?
A: As the air component to the United States Special Operations Command, we organize, train and equip air commandos from the United States Air Force to provide for our nation’s specialized airpower capability. Our command is comprised of 16,000 active, Reserve, Guard, and civilian personnel organized into a numbered Air Force, four special operations wings and a special tactics group. Additionally, we provide two overseas special operations groups who work for their respective operational theater special operations component commanders in the U.S. European Command and the U.S. Pacific Command.
As to the recent changes, the addition of the 27th SOW at Cannon AFB, N.M., in October 2007, is one of the most significant. It allows us to expand our mobility air fleet; our intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capability; and gives us an additional live-fire range to conduct joint SOF training. Overall, this new base is in great condition, and with the on-going military construction projects, we’ll have the infrastructure in place to accommodate AFSOC’s planned upgrade and growth of aircraft and personnel.
Another significant item of interest results from the very positive decisions and investments to recapitalize and modernize our aging inventory. This year, the Air Force programmed funding to buy the first seven MC-130Js, as well as to accelerate funding for five CV-22s. Both systems will provide key mobility and resupply of special operations forces since battlefield mobility is our number-one requirement. These kinds of efforts are a great start.
To ensure we have qualified personnel to match the growth in aircraft, we have transformed our flying and ground training activities by consolidating five different units under a single training center which is scheduled to stand up at Hurlburt in October 2008. This initiative relieves much of the training burden on our operational units.
Finally, we’re growing our Battlefield Airmen numbers to begin to meet operational demands, and we soon plan on further expansions through successful execution of recruiting and training initiatives. We’ve also begun to double our aviation foreign internal defense forces to meet combatant commanders’ requirements in this vital area as well.
Q: What can you tell me about the smaller gunship project?
A: The AC-XX project stems from USSOCOM’s need for a multi-role aircraft that can provide precision standoff fires, airlift, ISR, command and control and armed overwatch in support of special operations ground forces. We hope to see the same kind of rapid acquisition speed and innovative approach as taken with the original AC-130 during Vietnam.
Our planned concept is to prototype a C-27-equipped aircraft with an infrared/electro-optical sensor, small precision-guided munitions and appropriate communication equipment. This multi-role platform will offer a small size, reconfigurable versatility using the latest proven sensor technology and is based on the lessons learned from real-world operational experience. A smaller aircraft equals smaller footprint and increased ability to work in austere locations while requiring less support personnel and aircrew to get the job done.
Finally, a smaller aircraft variant would serve as a likely candidate for us to work by, with and through our partner nations also seeking this type of capability.
Q: There have been discussions over the ultimate authority over unmanned aerial systems whether it should reside with the Army or the Air Force. AFSOC operates several types of UAS. First do you see the AFSOC UAS fleet growing beyond it current state?
A: Our UAS fleet is expanding and will continue to grow for the foreseeable future. In fact, the Air Force chief of staff accelerated our MQ-1 Predator program by more than two years. Our phenomenal UAS combat mission success has actually resulted in more operational requirements being levied by the units we support. Not only has there been an increase in operational requirements, but the mission types, roles and functions our UAS are being asked to perform are continually expanding.
The demand for integrated find, fix and finish capabilities has never been higher, therefore AFSOC is now programmed to grow in UAS types and numbers, as well as personnel and basing. Part of this growth will be accommodated by using our new UAS operating location at Cannon Air. We fully expect this to become an AFSOC intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance center of excellence for UAS and we remain committed to keeping pace with the ever-increasing demand for UAS support.
Q: In 2006, AFSOC activated the 11th Intelligence Squadron to harvest and exploit intelligence gained through the use of UAS platforms and other means. How would you characterize their work and has their basic mission remained the same?
A: This unit is doing an absolutely outstanding job. The 11th Intelligence Squadron has established the benchmark for ISR data production, exploitation and dissemination. Its mission remains focused on providing exploitation and analysis of full-motion video collected by MQ-1 Predators and MQ-9 Reapers directly to special operations forces around the world.
To enhance the actionable intelligence value of the products provided to the warfighter, the 11th IS has also added a fusion capability to incorporate data from all intelligence disciplines into their products. Air Commandos in the 11th IS have become experts at analyzing individual and organizational habits, routines and actions, and building pattern-oflife folders. These products are enabling SOF ground forces to quickly and decisively execute the Long War, so you could almost state that this unit is the classic definition of an adapting and learning organization.
You must realize that the 11th IS stood up in 2006, almost two years ahead of schedule. Its mission success has created additional requirements, some not even conceived prior to its creation. The acceleration and growth has only been made possible by using a mix of active duty, Guard, Reserve and contractor personnel. The squadron is already exploiting more than 50 percent of all MQ-1 and MQ-9 orbits and is expecting to double the number of missions it supports within the next year.
Q: The tanker recapitalization project for the Air Force has certainly been a news item this year. Your tanker issues are significant in their own right. Are you going to run out of available hours on your tankers and have to look at grounding airframes before you have replacements?
A: The short answer is no, we will not have to ground aircraft; however, we plan to recapitalize all 37 of the MC-130E Combat Talon Is and MC-130P Combat Shadows as rapidly as possible. The projected buys should have new aircraft fielded in time to provide needed air refueling and mobility support for special operations forces prior to this kind of drastic action needing to be taken. However, the tanker recapitalization procurement effort remains vital because these aircraft are among the oldest in the AFSOC/USSOCOM inventory. The key issues affecting them are cost to sustain and operate, as well as their diminishing capacity to remain compliant with global airspace and navigation requirements.
The C-130 is an inherently sound and versatile design; however, the center wing box is the most critical component in terms of service life. While the center wing boxes on all MC-130E/P aircraft were replaced in the 1990s, other important structures are beginning to show the effects of age and heavy use. For example, the MC-130E must undergo a full depot maintenance inspection every 54 months, and during the past several years the numbers of unanticipated structural repairs have grown significantly and are extending the length of the depot maintenance down time.
In addition to aircraft structures, other avionics and mission specific equipment is aging, vendors are vanishing and we’re reaching a point where keeping the aircraft available to support our SOF mission is becoming increasingly difficult. Some mission computers, displays and numerous other critical subsystems are projected to reach a point where they are not supportable by 2015. Today an MC-130E mission available rate in the 60 percent range is not uncommon. This number compares to C-130J availability rates of around 90 percent.
As the international community reshapes the global airspace and navigation control system, our aircraft are becoming more limited in how they can operate. For example, as Europe implements reduced frequency separation on radios, our systems are no longer compliant. As traffic congestion increases and the commercial airspace is compressed, we won’t have the equipment necessary to navigate in that airspace. This will become a critical issue for us by 2015.
Q: Will the delays and controversy with the Air Force’s tanker program in any way affect AFSOC programs down the road?
A: As a user of the strategic tanker force, AFSOC has a vested interest in the Air Force bringing this new capability online as quickly as possible, but as long as the KC-135 and KC-10 are available in sufficient numbers, we can accomplish our missions. There is no direct correlation between the Air Force strategic tanker recapitalization issues and AFSOC programs.
Q: With operational tempo and the growth of AFSOC, how are you doing with meeting current manning levels and the authorized increases?
A: Overall, we are doing well. We have received tremendous support from both the Air Force at large and from the Air Force Personnel Center in filling out our emerging mission units. Issues such as the large number of limited experienced aircrew and absorbing an increased number of flight training students has been balanced by the continued cross-flow from our mobility brethren, helping AFSOC keep pace with these growing authorizations.
As you might expect with the large influx of new aircrew, maintaining the proper mix of experience will be a challenge in our units in the short term. For the longer term, during the FY10 budget cycle, we are anticipating an approximate gain of an additional 2,000 authorizations.
Q: More than a year ago, the training pipeline for combat controllers and pararesecuemen was redesigned to meet operational needs and address candidate completion rates. Can you describe the training process for these specialties and do you think the redesign of the system is complete or are further adjustments expected?
A: In 2000, the combat control pipeline was re-designed and re-sequenced to afford trainees a longer span of time to reach the level of capability needed to complete each successively more challenging school in the pipeline. The physical fitness standards were not changed because the demands of the modern battlefield have not warranted any easing of the benchmarks. With respect to the pararescue pipeline specifically, AFSOC did not significantly influence any changes in that training regimen.
The combat control training pipeline consists of two parts. After completing basic military training, prospective operators are assessed, selected and then educated during the year-long Air Education and Training Command portion of training. This effort includes core skills training in air traffic control school, airborne school, survival school and a basic combat control course. Once the trainees are assigned to AFSOC, the training pipeline then continues with advanced skills training, a combatant divers course, Army military freefall course and skill upgrades in the core combat control tasks. The approximate year of AFSOC-specific training culminates with full mission profiles which produces a controller requiring very little spin-up in his operations unit to become fully combat ready.
We’ve also taken on other initiatives to further enhance both the effectiveness as well as the efficiency of training being provided. For example, today’s CCT pipeline training updates have proven to be a successful model to stair-step trainees’ physical fitness levels into that required of SOF operators, while also preparing each airman with fundamental knowledge and skills. We are therefore working to reduce the amount of attrition through several means, including a new battlefield airman clinic, which tailors physical therapy and medical innovations to ensure injured or sick operators get back to training as quickly and safely as possible.
Additionally, AFSOC has recently established nine operating locations, aligned with Air Force recruiting groups and squadrons, across the country. Each location will be manned by a special tactics operator whose task is to assist Air Force recruiters with initial assessment of potential recruits plus follow-up on each candidate’s physical training and questions about the career field. Through this initiative, AFSOC hopes to improve the quality of candidates, thereby reducing wash-outs throughout the various pipelines and increasing the numbers of graduates.
Finally, AFSOC’s subject-matter experts continue to study how to improve our training process. Continued tweaks to AFSOC’s training program are inevitable to meet evolving operational needs driven through the long war, but no overhauls are envisioned for implementation in the near future.
Q: In the past, the need for additional high-fidelity simulators has been voiced. Is there still a need for additional simulators? What types—flight, maintenance, weapons, etc.—would be your priority and what would be the immediate benefits of adding these simulators?
A: We absolutely need more and better simulators. We must acquire these simulators with adequate fidelity so aircrew and maintainers can sustain both training and currency. For example, the CV-22, as with other newer weapon systems, is being acquired with simulators as an integral companion to both initial, as well as upgrade, training, and is a major portion of continuation training in this platform. As we start to replace some of our older MC-130 fleet, we will be looking to the same approach in other aircraft.
Priority one, therefore, is to acquire high-definition aircraft simulators. However, this is really an issue of opportunity cost. AFSOC has a low-supply, high-demand fleet. By trading training and rehearsal time in the aircraft for less-expensive simulator time, we are freeing our limited fleets to be used for the nation’s business.
In the past, lower-fidelity training devices have driven nearly all of our continuation and upgrade training to be accomplished in the aircraft. In addition to procuring higher-fidelity level-flight devices, acquiring maintenance and weapons training devices, as we have with the CV-22, can shift increasing amounts of the training burden to simulation. Consequently, we can then better focus our limited flying hours toward high-value joint SOF training and preparation and increase our aircraft availability to the combatant commanders for crucial engagement worldwide.
Q: Are there any particularly important tools that you feel need to be added to the battlefield airmen kit to make them more effective?
A: Our airmen need to be able to shoot, move and communicate effectively. We are continually researching new technologies to reduce the size and weight of our equipment. Currently, our battlefield airmen are carrying approximately 120 pounds of gear, with a disproportionate amount of that weight being batteries. One of the most critical areas of innovation is in lightweight power generation.
Additionally, there are several other tools being developed for our battlefield airmen. We are continuing improvements in sensor integration with unmanned aerial systems to improve our ability to geo-locate and designate targets for precision weaponry. In addition, to communicate more effectively, we are researching a small, wearable version of our rugged field computers, as well as working some improvements to our cursor-on-target architecture which will allow digital communications across multiple platforms. If we can conquer this hurdle, we’ll then enable our systems to share data digitally, without translations or human errors.
Q: As it stands now, the first operational AFSOC CV-22 squadron will become operational early next year. Can you give me some of the major accomplishments in getting to this point and a look at what still needs to be done to get to that operational point?
A: First of all, our primary focus is to put the CV-22 in the hands of warfighters on the battlefield. This platform gives us critical vertical lift and speed-to-target capabilities we need to support SOF operations. However, the current delivery schedule is too slow to meet those needs and we are doing everything we can to hasten delivery and fielding.
There have been many significant accomplishments in the CV-22 development process, but most recently we completed the initial operational test and evaluation phase. This testing is pivotal in that we have put the aircraft through the operational profiles we intend to fly during actual combat missions. It is also an opportunity to combine our maintenance teams with our flyers to evaluate overall operations in an environment just short of actual combat.
While we are on track to meet our programmed goals of fielding an initial operational capability by February 2009, there is still a lot to be done. This is a new aircraft, and crews and maintenance have to be trained. There is not an existing pool of seasoned CV-22 aircrew or maintainers to draw from, so we have to build an experience level that is required to handle the rigors of SOF mission requirements, and at the same time train and exercise with the ground forces we will be supporting in combat.
Additionally, as we are building a seasoned personnel force and accepting the newly developed aircraft, we are also looking at ways to enhance the combat effectiveness of the CV-22. Using lessons learned from the MV-22 deployment, and also doing some independent and thoughtful concept development, we are specifically testing a new defensive weapon system while also looking at some terrain-following system improvements.
Q: Is AFSOC pushing for a suitably-sized airborne laser system?
A: AFSOC is continually searching for improvements in our ability to support warfighting commanders. Because directed energy weapons— both high-energy lasers and high-power microwaves—would be revolutionary on the battlefield, we are investigating their applicability along with earliest-practical capability. As the demonstration of concepts, such as the advanced tactical laser, take the research out of the lab and place it on an airframe, we’ll closely monitor the results to let us know what a laser weapon can and cannot do.
Keep in mind that special operations forces are only a very small portion of the Air Force, and as such we are in the position where we evaluate many potential systems—kinetic and directed energy—for affordability and applicability to our requirements. In most cases we are not the driving factor in these developments, but where we can adapt systems to our needs, it makes sense to be engaged.
Q: Any closing thoughts?
A: Our highest priority is to make a positive difference on the battlefield. Our biggest challenge will be to shape the future with newer and more reliable aircraft; with properly selected, trained, and committed personnel and with an agile, flexible mindset that balances risk with mission as we defend our nation’s interests around the world. We have made significant gains in recapitalizing our fleet, but we still have more work to do.
The next few years are historic ones. Our plank organization, the 1st Air Commando Group of World War II fame, will have their final reunion. Additionally, the MH-53 helicopters will fly their last combat missions this September 2008. While history retreats behind us, fresh generations of air commandos, with new machines like the CV-22, MC-130J, unmanned vehicles like the Predator and Reaper, and other possibilities, herald a bright and promising future. Air commands will fly and fight any time, any place to meet national objectives, just as our predecessors did before us. We’re proud members of an exceedingly competent and professional joint team. We’re on a good path to recapitalize and modernize our air fleet for their use and our future is a bright one. ♦