Summer 2009

131 Pages·2009·5.03 MB·English

Chief of Staf, US Air Force
Gen Norton A. Schwartz
Commander, Air Education
and Training Command
Gen Stephen R. Lorenz
Commander, Air University
http://www.af.mil
Lt Gen Allen G. Peck
Director, Air Force Research Institute
Gen John A. Shaud, USAF, Retired
Chief, Professional Journals
Maj Darren K. Stanford
Deputy Chief, Professional Journals
Capt Lori Katowich
Professional Staf
http://www.aetc.randolph.af
Marvin W. Bassett, Contributing Editor
Darlene H. Barnes, Editorial Assistant
Steven C. Garst, Director of Art and Production
Daniel M. Armstrong, Illustrator
L. Susan Fair, Illustrator

Ann Bailey, Prepress Production Manager

The Air and Space Power Journal (ISSN 1554-2505), Air
Force Recurring Publication 10-1, published quarterly,
is the professional journal of the United States Air
Force. It is designed to serve as an open forum for the
http://www.au.af.mil
presentation and stimulation of innovative thinking on
military doctrine, strategy, force structure, readiness,
and other matters of national defense. The views and
opinions expressed or implied in the Journal are those
of the authors and should not be construed as carrying Air and Space Power Journal
the ofcial sanction of the Department of Defense, 155 N. Twining Street
Air Force, Air Education and Training Command, Air Maxwell AFB AL 36112-6026
University, or other agencies or departments of the US
e -mail: a s
Summer 2009 Volume XXIII, No. 2 AFRP 10-1

Senior Leader Perspectives
Assimilating Unmanned Aircraft Systems 5

Air Vice-Marshal R A Mason, Royal Air Force, Retired

Col Jeffery Barnett, USAF, Retired

Col Richard Szafranski, USAF, Retired

Col Sung-pyo Hong, Republic of Korea Air Force

Perspectives on Leadership and Management 11

Dr Raymond A Shulstad, Brigadier General, USAF, Retired

Understanding the Enemy as a Complex System: A Multidisciplinary

Analytic Problem Requiring a Multidisciplinary Team Approach 19

D Lee Fuell Jr , Defense Intelligence Senior Leader, USAF
Focus Area
Unmanned Aircraft Systems 25

Maj D K Stanford, USAF, Chief, Professional Journals

Features
Operators of Air Force Unmanned Aircraft Systems: Breaking Paradigms 67

Lt Col Houston R Cantwell, USAF

Tactical Generals: Leaders, Technology, and the Perils of Battlefeld

Micromanagement 78

Dr P W Singer

The Army’s “Organic” Unmanned Aircraft Systems: An Unhealthy Choice

for the Joint Operational Environment 88

Maj Travis A Burdine, USAF

Airpower Trends 2010: The Future Is Closer Than You Think 101

Col John D Jogerst, USAF, Retired

Departments
Prelaunch Notes
Publishing in Air and Space Power Journal 26

Ricochets and Replies 27

The Merge
Managing the Human Weapon System: A Vision for an Air Force

Human-Performance Doctrine 34

Lt Col Anthony P Tvaryanas, USAF, MC, SFS

Col Lex Brown, USAF, MC, SFS

Nita L Miller, PhD

The Air Force Commander: The Power of Interaction and Vision 42

Col William Mott, USAF

2009-2 contents.indd 1 4/28/09 1:16:21 PM
America’s Two Air Forces 51
Lt Col Robert Spalding, USAF
PIREP
Optimizing the Effectiveness of Directed Energy Weapons with Specialized
Weather Support 57
Maj De Leon C Narcisse, USAF
Lt Col Steven T Fiorino, USAF
Col Richard J Bartell, USAFR
Quick-Look
Air Domain Development in Africa: A Reasonable Proposition 111
Maj Jean-Philippe N Peltier, USAF
Maj Thomas Meer, USAF
Book Reviews
ARVN: Life and Death in the South Vietnamese Army 114
Robert K Brigham
Reviewer: Dr Michael E Weaver
New Heavens: My Life as a Fighter Pilot and a Founder of the Israel
Air Force 115
Boris Senior
Reviewer: CSM James H Clifford, USA, Retired
Go for Launch! An Illustrated History of Cape Canaveral 116
Joel W Powell with Art LeBrun
Reviewer: Dr Roger D Launius
Enduring the Freedom: A Rogue Historian in Afghanistan 117
Sean M Maloney
Reviewer: Lt Col James J McNally, USAF, Retired
LeMay 118
Barrett Tillman
Reviewer: Lt Col Rick Hughes, USAF
Rattler One-Seven: A Vietnam Helicopter Pilot’s War Story 119
Chuck Gross
Reviewer: Lt Col John F Guilmartin Jr , USAF, Retired
Globemaster III: Acquiring the C-17 120
Betty R Kennedy
Reviewer: Kenneth P Katz
1776 121
David McCullough
Reviewer: Dr Jack D Kem, Colonel, USA, Retired
Space as a Strategic Asset 121
Joan Johnson-Freese
Reviewer: Col Joseph J McCue, USAF, Retired
Frontline Pakistan: The Struggle with Militant Islam 122
Zahid Hussain
Reviewer: Dr David R Mets
2009-2 contents.indd 2 4/28/09 1:16:22 PM
War Bird Ace: The Great War Exploits of Capt. Field E. Kindley 123
Jack Stokes Ballard
Reviewer: Lt Col Raymond F Hain III, USAFR, Retired
American Generalship: Character Is Everything: The Art of Command 123
Edgar F Puryear Jr
Reviewer: Col James M Pfaff, Ohio ANG
Mission Debrief 125
EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD

Gen John A. Shaud, USAF, Retired, Air Force Research Institute

Lt Gen Bradley C. Hosmer, USAF, Retired

Dr. J. Douglas Beason, Colonel, USAF, Retired, Los Alamos National Laboratory

Dr. Alexander S. Cochran, Offce of the Chief of Staff, US Army

Prof. Thomas B. Grassey, US Naval Academy

Lt Col Dave Mets, USAF, Retired, School of Advanced Air and Space Studies (professor emeritus)

2009-2 contents.indd 3 4/28/09 1:16:22 PM
Air and Space Power Journal Board of Reviewers
Col Ronald K. Bartley, USAFR Mr. Charles Tustin Kamps
Air University USAF Air Command and Staff College
Lt Col Eric Braganca, USAF Dr. Tom Keaney
Naval Air Station Johns Hopkins University
Patuxent River, Maryland
Col Merrick E. Krause, USAF, Retired
Dr. Kendall K. Brown Department of Homeland Security
NASA Marshall Space Flight Center
Col Chris J. Krisinger, USAF, Retired
Col Steven D. Carey, USAF, Retired Burke, Virginia
Daphne, Alabama
Dr. Benjamin S. Lambeth
Dr. Clayton K. S. Chun RAND
US Army War College
Mr. Douglas E. Lee
Dr. Mark Clodfelter
Air Force Space Command
National War College
Dr. Richard I. Lester
Dr. Conrad Crane
Eaker College for Professional Development
Director, US Army Military History Institute
Mr. Brent Marley
Col Michael D. Davis, USAF
Redstone Arsenal, Alabama
Defense Attaché
Mr. Rémy M. Mauduit
Col Dennis M. Drew, USAF, Retired
Air Force Research Institute
USAF School of Advanced Air and Space Studies
Col Phillip S. Meilinger, USAF, Retired
Maj Gen Charles J. Dunlap Jr., USAF
West Chicago, Illinois
The Pentagon
Dr. Daniel Mortensen
Dr. Stephen Fought
Air Force Research Institute
USAF Air War College (professor emeritus)
Dr. Richard R. Muller
Col Richard L. Fullerton, USAF
USAF School of Advanced Air and Space Studies
USAF Academy
Dr. Bruce T. Murphy
Lt Col Derrill T. Goldizen, PhD, USAF, Retired
Air University
Westport Point, Massachusetts
Col Robert Owen, USAF, Retired
Col W. Michael Guillot, USAF, Retired
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
Montgomery, Alabama
Lt Col Brian S. Pinkston, USAF, MC, SFS
Dr. John F. Guilmartin Jr.
The Pentagon
Ohio State University
Col Bob Potter, USAF, Retired
Dr. Amit Gupta
Air Force Research Institute
USAF Air War College
Dr. Steve Rothstein
Dr. Grant T. Hammond
Colorado Springs Science Center Project
Dean, NATO Defence College
Lt Col Reagan E. Schaupp, USAF
Dr. Dale L. Hayden
Air Force Research Institute Air University
Dr. Thomas Hughes Col Richard Szafranski, USAF, Retired
USAF School of Advanced Air and Space Studies Toffer Associates
Lt Col Jeffrey Hukill, USAF, Retired Lt Col Edward B. Tomme, PhD, USAF, Retired
Air Force Research Institute Sci-Ops Consulting
Lt Col J. P. Hunerwadel, USAF, Retired Dr. Christopher H. Toner
LeMay Center for Doctrine Development and Education USAF Air Command and Staff College
Col Mark P. Jelonek, USAF Lt Col David A. Umphress, PhD, USAFR, Retired
The Pentagon Auburn University
Col John Jogerst, USAF, Retired Dr. Harold R. Winton
Navarre, Florida USAF School of Advanced Air and Space Studies

2009-2 Board of Reviewers.indd 4 4/28/09 1:16:47 PM
Assimilating Unmanned Aircraft
Systems
Air Vice-MArshAl r. A. MAson, royAl Air Force, retired
col JeFFery BArnett, UsAF, retired
col richArd szAFrAnski, UsAF, retired
col sUng-pyo hong, repUBlic oF koreA Air Force
Envisioning future unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) as stand-alone weapons is not productive. As these air­
craft evolve, legacy systems will advance, and enemies will simultaneously adapt. The resulting mix of future
UASs and modernized legacy systems—as well as adaptive enemies—requires uniquely designed organiza­
tions, career paths, and strategies. In the following discussion, four airpower theorists and analysts consider
historical lessons and current trends that might help airmen build the right combination of leaders, concepts,
and institutions to realize the full potential of unmanned aircraft.
Air Vice-Marshal Tony Mason: The assimi­
lation of UASs into national air forces is mov­
ing briskly, but in an astonishing array of di­
rections. If there is a clear path to the future
for these systems, no one has captured it to my
satisfaction. Dick Szafranski and Jeffery Barnett,
both of Toffer Associates, you are published
futurists on airpower. Sung-pyo Hong, your air
force is on a continuous war footing, so you
can keep these two futurists grounded in cur­
rent realities. My questions to the three of you
are, “How should airmen assimilate UASs, and
what is the best path to the future of these air­
craft?” Jeffery, lead us off.
Jeffery Barnett: As a frst principle, I think
we have to remember that weapons are addi­
tive. When new weapons emerge, they add
to arsenals; they seldom subtract. For ex­
ample, today’s soldiers don wearable
computers—but they still train to kill
with knives and rife butts. Naval ships
track and destroy satellites in orbit—but
they still carry cannons on their decks. The
new F-22 Raptor has supercruise engines, ad­
vanced avionics, and stealthy coatings—but it

01-SLP-Mason et al.indd 5 4/28/09 1:17:46 PM
AIR & SPACE POWER JOURNAL SUMMER 2009
is still armed with a machine gun. It is a mis­ clear—and reasonable. The US Air Force will
take to suppose that new weapons retire their develop UASs that integrate with the rest of the
predecessors. New weapons and methods ex­ force to fght across the spectrum of confict.
pand the scale of war; they don’t replace it. Col Sung-pyo Hong: I think that all of these
Warriors retain the weapons of the past be­ points are right. Legacy weapons and types of
cause previous means of war making endure. war don’t go away. They just absorb new sys­
The small number of weapons that fade away tems to create new military effects. In fact,
over time, such as sailing ships and horse shouldn’t we expect UASs to combine with
cavalry, is far too few to refute the additive legacy systems—to produce effects greater
nature of weaponry. than the sum of their parts?
Dick Szafranski: Types of war are also ac­ Jeff: I couldn’t agree more. Just as warriors
cretive. Conventional war did not make insur­ of the past integrated industrial- and agrarian-
gencies obsolete. Nuclear war did not make age weapons to fght over resources and land,
insurgencies and conventional wars obsolete. so will future warriors integrate industrial-,
Cyberwar will not make nuclear, conventional, agrarian-, and information-age weapons to
and insurgent wars obsolete. Just as the Third fght over resources, land, and cyberspace. In­
Wave information age changed, but did not surgents, for example, will fuse information-
replace, the way societies manufacture and farm, age cell phones with industrial-age artillery
so will new waves in warfare change, but not shells to war over tribal homelands that formed
replace, humankind’s previous ways of violence. in the agrarian age. They will fuse multiple
Tribes will still war over land, using First Wave means of war to produce effects that exceed
(agrarian age) tools; nations will still war over the power of any single weapon or type of war.
fuels for factories, using Second Wave (indus­ It is the product of this fusion that modern
trial age) tools; and future societies will war warriors must seek to understand. With this
over cyberspace, using Third Wave (informa­ knowledge, they can build operational concepts
tion age) tools. These three types of war—and to master the wars of their generation, and they
all the other types developed by humans over can develop the talents needed to command
1
millennia—will inevitably remain. So when modern war as well as the tools to prosecute it.
we envision future UAS operations, we have to Because we need tools and talent to produce
see them in the context of all types of war. and execute new operational concepts—and
Jeff: Your comments remind me of an in­ because those new concepts demand particu­
terchange during the Air Force chief of staff’s lar types and numbers of tools and talent—the
confrmation hearing. Senator Daniel Akaka entire process is iterative. Militaries that seek
asked Gen Norton A. Schwartz if he believed to posture for the next war must fuse weap­
that the Air Force should continue building ons, concepts, and talent in parallel.
its counterinsurgency capabilities or if he Dick: That’s the point. Today’s generation
thought that doing so would adversely affect of military professionals must incorporate
preparations for building the future Air Force. UASs into their calculus of future war. These
General Schwartz replied, “ ‘Fundamentally, I platforms offer revolutionary capabilities on a
do not believe it is an either/or condition. . . . par with radar, jet engines, surface-to-air mis­
The United States Air Force, like the other siles, precision weapons, and stealth. Like
services, needs to be a full-spectrum capabil­ these previous revolutionary capabilities, UASs
ity. . . . The bottom line, Senator, is that we as will realize their full potential only when fused
an Air Force can provide both the kind of con­ with legacy systems, novel concepts of opera­
centrated effort required by the joint team in tion, and innovative organizational structures.
Central Command today and posture our­ Jeff: This fusion is easier said than done.
selves for future potential adversaries at the Humans tend to use a new capability as simply
2
same time.’ ” an improved version of a previous capability.
When it comes to unmanned systems, I think For example, offce workers initially used per­
that the guidance from the chief of staff is sonal computers as word processors. To an ex­
01-SLP-Mason et al.indd 6 4/28/09 1:17:47 PM
ASSIMILATING UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS
tent this was valid—desktop computers made rethinking existing bureaucratic and hierar­
an existing task (typing) easier and faster. chical formations, which might prove more
However, desktop computers eventually in­ diffcult than deploying the aircraft them­
serted new functions and ways of operating selves.
into our offces. Lots of people fought this Hong: This is exactly what Mr. Andrew Mar­
transformation for years, holding on to secre­ shall of the Offce of Net Assessment articulated
taries, refusing to allow telecommuting, and in his theories on the revolution in military
insisting that all staff work arrive in bound affairs. He said that radically new technologies
form. Those people slowly lost out in the com­ required new concepts of operation and new
petitive workplace. The lesson learned from organizational structures to realize their full
the growth of personal computers is that al­ potential. He also said that the frst step in
though the initial change may be linear (and building concepts and organizations for the
compatible with existing structures), the even­ future involved projecting the realistic poten­
3
tual effects may undermine those same struc­ tial of new technologies.
tures. Dick: We can’t predict the future or know
Hong: In other words, understanding new what’s ahead with precision, but we can project
technologies simply as improved versions of that enabling UAS technologies will continue
their predecessors has a short half-life. Can their rapid advance. Moore’s Law endures:
you apply this theory directly to the UASs of bandwidth and computer-processing speeds
today? continue to double every 18 months. Knowl­
Dick: As we fuse unmanned aircraft with edge is now digitized, permitting the rapid
legacy systems to produce new operational ca­ sharing of cross-discipline data by billions of
pabilities, we need to think of UASs as far people. New types of sensors are spewing from
more than just uninhabited versions of the medical and security spheres. Global
manned aircraft. Though true, this linear per­ spending on information and communica­
4
spective is less and less relevant. UASs are tions will soon pass $4 trillion a year. Individu­
more than just airplanes without pilots, just as ally, these trends show no signs of slowing.
cell phones are more than just phones with­ Viewed collectively, they promise logarithmic
out wires. Our challenge is to foresee where advances for years to come in multiple tech­
UASs will evolve in unique ways—and then nologies enabling UASs.
build future concepts of operation and orga­ Hong: If your projections prove true, the
nizations accordingly. UAS of the future will have a full range of ca­
Tony: Let me expand on your point. A need pabilities. In Korea we are beginning the de­
exists for more fusion than that simply be­ bate on employing these systems in air-to-air
tween current and future weapons, concepts, or air-to-ground combat. Most airmen agree
and talent. At present, the structure of UAS that UASs will eventually take part in future
operations is the legacy of an earlier era. It is combat missions. Our question is, “When will
determined by location rather than by func­ this happen?” The current consensus is that
tion. Horizontally, it corresponds to the UAS combat capabilities will lag behind those
boundaries of theatres and commands. Verti­ of manned aircraft for some time.
cally, the structure distinguishes among outer My personal guess is that our air force will
space, inner space, and atmosphere. The func­ continue to invest in manned fghters, such as
tions and capabilities of UASs already tran­ the A-0 or a more capable future KFX. We
scend earthly features. Satellites are un­ will gradually increase the roles of unmanned
manned systems. The new structure must aircraft. They will get more attention, but our
refect function—not location or propulsion. UAS focus, at least for the midterm, will remain
It must present a seamless fusion of netted on constant surveillance and reconnaissance.
UASs, responsive to one central executive but Jeff: The prospect that UASs will produce
fexible enough to remain accessible and avail­ constant surveillance is profound. We have
able at any operational level. That will require never lived in a world where potential aggres­
01-SLP-Mason et al.indd 7 4/28/09 1:17:47 PM
8 AIR & SPACE POWER JOURNAL SUMMER 2009
sors operated under such surveillance. Con­ ised by UASs may indeed allow “manipulation”
sider, for a moment, Heisenberg’s uncertainty of an opponent’s behavior. An intelligent op­
principle, which theorized that the very act of ponent who is aware of the threat from UASs,

observation affects the object observed. however, may respond with behavior that be­
Though envisioned for physical behavior, comes more diffcult to detect, identify, and
this theory would seem to apply to organic be­ anticipate. An opponent not constrained by
havior as well. If feets of UASs can persistently time, unscrupulous in the exploitation of in­
observe potential aggressors and if the very nocents, and impervious to casualties will seek
act of observation can affect actions, then it new methods of concealment, deception, and
follows that skillfully applied observation can duplicity to counter the observation technolo­
have a dynamic effect on adversary nations. In gies orbiting above.
essence, persistent surveillance from UASs Jeff: Enemies will certainly react, but their
may allow militaries to infuence enemies options will be limited by the scope of poten­
through skilled observation. tial observation. Let’s talk in terms of aviation
Anyone who has shined a fashlight on bugs history. Currently deployed UASs will soon
in the basement understands this principle. seem as quaint as a Wright Flyer. After all, it
As soon as the light shines on them, the bugs took just 1 years for manned aviation to prog­
start scurrying about. Illuminating the bugs ress from Kitty Hawk to Billy Mitchell’s 1918
changes their behavior. St. Mihiel offensive with 1,00 Allied fghters
Dick: Viewed in this light (sorry for the and bombers. Within another decade, aircraft
pun), it’s clear that UASs will soon offer de­ were exceeding 300 miles per hour, Charles
grees of persistence unavailable to previous Lindbergh had fown the Atlantic, and Robert
generations of military leaders. They will loi­ Goddard was launching liquid-fueled rockets.
ter in massive numbers over practically any Ten years after that (1938), radar was invented,
point on the earth for days (even months) at a the DC-3 (with autopilot) was fying coast-to­
time. Fleets of unmanned aircraft will offer coast, and jet engines were on the test stands
persistent intelligence, surveillance, and re­ (the frst jet-powered aircraft few in 1939).
connaissance; persistent strike; and persistent History’s lesson is that aviation technologies
logistics. These UASs will take full advantage advance rapidly.
of persistent development. The absence of a Hong: Putting these two thoughts together,
human in the cockpit allows far more aggres­ we clearly see great potential. Aviation’s inher­
sive and risk-intensive approaches to experi­ ent freedom and fexibility, combined with
mentation, production, and adaptation. An the global information revolution, leave no
entirely new industrial base should emerge to room for conservative projections of future
leverage persistent development. capabilities. The UAS of 10 to 1 years from
Jeff: This kind of persistence has strategic now will perform far differently than the one
implications. The persistent effects made avail­ in development today. Given the speed of the
able through UASs, in concert with other joint information age and its enabling technolo­
military capabilities, open new possibilities for gies, we should prepare for remarkable UAS
persistent deterrence. Nations can persistently advancements in the near future.
engage with other nations—and with insur­ Jeff: All of us must avoid “old think.” Con­
gents—for extended periods without overtask­ sider the fact of institutional transformations.
ing manned systems. To meet the emerging Almost 90 years ago, the United States Navy
“long war” against global terrorism (a type of began an equally audacious transformation.
persistent confict), nations can engage persis­ The slow-moving feet of history adopted the
tently with UASs. They enable persistent effects airplane. Although sailors accepted it at varying
against a persistent enemy—at operational rates, naval leadership in 1921 set a frm course,
tempos that militaries can sustain indefnitely. probably with full awareness of the possible
Tony: The Heisenberg principle is well end game, by creating a single institution—
founded, and the constant observation prom­ within the Navy—to develop naval aviation.
01-SLP-Mason et al.indd 8 4/28/09 1:17:48 PM