Distributed Operations in a Contested Environment
Priebe, Miranda; Vick, Alan J.; Heim, Jacob L.; Smith, Meagan L. (2019). Distributed Operations in a Contested Environment. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, The. ISBN 978-1-9774-0232-5.
- Has attachment: File:CED9I9K3.pdf
Abstract: "RAND Project AIR FORCE.". The 2018 National Defense Strategy instructed the services to prioritize capabilities for conflict with another great power. This gave new urgency to ongoing initiatives within the U.S. Air Force (USAF) to prepare for growing air and missile threats to bases and a contested communications environment. There are a wide range of possible counters to the particular problem of air base vulnerability, including greater reliance on long-range systems, active defenses, hardening of bases, and on-base dispersal of assets. The authors of this report focus on a particular set of emerging concepts for distributed operations that call for using a larger number of air bases to complicate enemy targeting and employing a more decentralized command and control approach. The USAF asked RAND to consider whether it needs to change its force presentation model (FPM), the way it organizes to employ airpower as part of a joint operation, to implement these concepts. Since the USAF has not developed a single, detailed concept for distributed operations, in this report the authors synthesize and extend the logic of emerging concepts. They then identify an initial list of capabilities the USAF may need in order to protect, command and control, and sustain fighter forces at a larger number of operating locations. Finally, the authors assess whether the current USAF FPM for fighter forces provides these capabilities and identify the trade-offs associated with force presentation changes.
"...Distributed operations will greatly increase the demand for airfield access. If the USAF were to operate six fighter wings exclusively out of its current bases in East Asia, the demand for airfields would be six (Osan AB, Kunsan AB, Misawa AB, Yokota AB, Kadena AB, and Andersen AFB). Limited distributed operations (three airfields per wing) could increase the requirement to 18 bases. Adding two Drop-in bases for each wing would increase the number to 30. Adding a Fighter FARP for each wing would increase the number to 36, a sixfold increase in facility requirements and associated access arrangements...."
"To be precise, this example includes five bases on foreign soil and one (Andersen AFB, Guam) on U.S. soil. Access to Guam is not an issue, but if a fighter wing were to distribute itself in the vicinity of Guam it might operate out of Yap, Palau, and the Commonwealth of Northern Marianas Islands (CNMI). The United States has full legal authority to conduct military operations from any of these locations because the CNMI are a U.S. commonwealth and Yap and Palau are parties to a Compact of Free Association with the United States that cedes authority for security to the United States. In peacetime, however, it has proven quite difficult to negotiate expanded military access and facility improvements at these locations. For more on U.S. authority and responsibility regarding the security of the Federated States of Micronesia (including Yap) and the Republic of Palau, see Public Law 108-188, Compact of Free Association Amendments Act of 2003, December 17, 2003.."
Extra details:
MAG: 2959570431 CorpusID: 199287320 OpenAlex: W2959570431
