|
In the US Air Force, Concepts of Operations are nothing
new. USAF has produced many CONOPS to guide specific
actions--strikes on enemy radars, for example, or on
computer networks.
Such CONOPS have generally been tactical in nature.
Conspicuously lacking has been an overarching servicewide "picture" of
integrated aerospace power at a strategic level.
Yet, in recent months, USAF has unveiled and begun
refining "Concept of Operations 2020," a
broad-gauged conceptual framework for employing air,
space, and cyber- power. A white paper billed CONOPS
2020 as "an operator's view of how aerospace power
will be orchestrated" over the next 20 years.
The paper concentrated on six mission areas. They
are operations to deter a conventional or nuclear attack;
provide vigilance; deploy, deliver, and sustain; gain
freedom to operate; achieve attack superiority; and
control the information environment.
For the Air Force, CONOPS 2020 will help to guide
future procurement decisions, and it will have a major
impact on how USAF allocates its future budgets, in
the view of Gen. Robert H. "Doc" Foglesong,
the vice chief of staff.
"It provides the construct that guides our corporate
investment and organizational decisions to address
challenges as we race into the next two decades," said
Foglesong.
"Shot at Every Day"
Foglesong added that operators needed an overarching
Concept of Operations because "we're getting shot
at every day, ... we're providing space services [and]
utilities every day, ... we're delivering cargo and
people every day, ... we're deterring conflict every
day, ... we're training [and] engaging around the world
every day."
Foglesong, until recently USAF's deputy chief of staff
for air and space operations, is mastermind and primary
advocate of the new CONOPS. He and officers in the
Air and Space Operations Directorate began writing
it late last year, as the Bush Administration prepared
to enter office and DOD geared up for a Quadrennial
Defense Review.
As the Administration continues with its review of
defense strategy and force structure requirements,
USAF looks to the new plan as a "bridging mechanism" to
help the service traverse the next two decades.
The plan is underpinned by several assumptions. These
include the belief that the US will emphasize deterrence;
that the armed forces will become heavily expeditionary;
that the service will fully integrate its air, space,
and information operations; that the nation will conduct
numerous humanitarian operations; and that US forces
must have freedom to operate in and over geographic
areas of critical national interest.
Basic operational assumptions are that the Air Force
will have less access to foreign bases, will need extreme
precision in everything it does, and that war will
demand capabilities along the full spectrum of conflict.

The Biggest Change
Air Force officials said the most notable difference
between today's threat environment and that of years
to come will be the difficulty of gaining early access
to theater airspace and foreign bases.
As a result, Foglesong said, the Air Force must place
greater emphasis on long-range strike capability in
all of its forms.
"We will require theater access, but the scope
may be diminished," according to Foglesong's briefing
on the CONOPS. "We are going to have to execute
globally, maybe with limited access."
The Air Force white paper noted, "Presence is
a powerful component of conventional deterrence" and
is to be used when at all possible. "However," it
continued, "due to nationalism and other external
pressures, it will be more difficult in the future
to maintain a large permanent presence overseas."
The Air Force depended heavily upon its European bases
to stage Operation Allied Force in 1999. Because it
enjoyed access to those bases, the service was able
to use pre-positioned assets and establish a heavy
flow of troops and cargo into the theater with its
strategic airlifter force.
"Our overseas presence is likely to be diminished," Foglesong
remarked. "We ... have to have an option so that,
when the President calls up and says, 'Can you reach
out globally and touch someone,' we can do that."
The service also learned during the air war over Kosovo
that potential enemies will likely have robust air
defenses capable of targeting some of the service's
more sophisticated aircraft, such as the stealthy F-117
fighter, one of which was shot down in the early days
of the air campaign.
In its formulation of ways to deal with the anti-access
problem, the CONOPS 2020 solution comes very close
to matching that produced by Air Combat Command. ACC's
Global Strike Task Force was unveiled this year by
Gen. John P. Jumper when he was still ACC commander.
Jumper is now USAF's Chief of Staff.
Under the GSTF concept, Air Force operators would
employ stealthy B-2 bombers and stealthy F-22 fighters
early in a future conflict to neutralize enemy air
defenses. Once an adversary's air defenses had been
struck and disabled, other assets could enter to maintain
air superiority in a region.
Long-Range Strikers
Foglesong noted, "We would see a Concept of Operations
where long-range strike aircraft take off and get updated
en route somehow, and then are on the way in. ... If
you have [fighter] assets that are forward deployed,
those assets can go in and suppress air defense systems,
but even if we're not [forward deployed], the long-range
strikers should be able to get in and get out."
As envisioned by Air Force planners, each operation
would have a trigger point, well-established ahead
of time.
"When the trigger point is reached," stated
the white paper, "employment of the full range
of aerospace firepower is required. Simultaneity will
be the key to attack superiority--the aggressor is
stunned by the simultaneous application of kinetic
and nonkinetic means at strategic, operational, and
tactical targets."
The white paper went on to say, "Information
superiority, fused intelligence, and highly refined
battle management will generate focused target sets
to create specific effects to halt the enemy, shape
the battlespace, and ensure freedom of operations."
This system would rely heavily upon a flawless system
of tankers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance
systems, and communications capabilities.
The CONOPS calls for "redefined" ISR. ACC
is now exploring ways to consolidate and modernize
the service's ISR fleets into an integrated constellation
of assets containing satellites, unmanned aerial vehicles,
and manned platforms.
A more robust communications infrastructure is key
to the success of GSTF, officials said.
During Allied Force, the military contracted with
commercial communication firms to fulfill surge requirements
of the air war. Commanders in Europe were particularly
interested in attaining large imagery files and conducting
video teleconferences with leaders in the United States.
Those capabilities and others, such as transmitting
targeting data and mapping files, require "big
pipes" that are expensive to procure and maintain.
"Today, the Air Force has an adequate communications
infrastructure," reported USAF's white paper. "We
are adding to that capability and its reliability daily.
However, the demands on bandwidth and connectivity
are growing exponentially."
The service's command-and-control capabilities were "embryonic" during
the 1999 Balkan air war, stated the white paper. Now,
officials at ACC's Aerospace Command and Control and
ISR Center at Langley AFB, Va., are working to meet
this challenge.
The focus of the center's effort is the experimental
Combined Air Operations Center, or CAOC-X. The facility
allows operators to test and integrate a variety of
software packages into the service's air operations
centers, using a streamlined acquisition process.
Operators get the tools for improved command and control
into the field much more quickly than would be the
case if they used traditional acquisition processes,
officials say.
The goal in using regional air operations centers
is to deploy far fewer support forces into a hostile
area while maintaining positive control over airspace.
However, this approach also requires a significant
communications infrastructure.
Sharing the Wealth
USAF forces must become lighter, leaner, and faster,
stated the white paper. Because it will want to be
able to quickly deploy forces from the continental
United States to some overseas battle area, the Air
Force will continue to refine its Expeditionary Aerospace
Force.
The EAF divides the service's warfighting assets and
personnel into 10 separate Aerospace Expeditionary
Forces that are given plenty of time to train and equip
for an overseas contingency operation.
However, these forces at present are not equally equipped,
and Air Force leaders hope to procure the equipment
in the future to more evenly equip all AEF organizations.
The service plans to continue "maturing" its
lighter-and-leaner concept of warfare, according to
Foglesong's briefing.
The Air Force will continue to use its strategic nuclear
assets to deter aggression, but its ability to employ
long-range conventional strikes against an adversary
will likely be more important in the future, according
to the white paper.
"While we have been successful for over 50 years
in using our strategic nuclear capabilities to 'keep
the genie in the bottle,' in the future we will more
heavily leverage our conventional capabilities for
strategic deterrence," the white paper stated.
"Slicking"
The Air Force of the future will be geared toward
desired "effects" rather than weapon systems,
said Foglesong. By looking at effects in the battlespace,
the service is not tied to traditional notions of warfighting
or weapon systems.
USAF can employ precision guided munitions with such
effectiveness and such miniscule collateral damage
that effects-based operations now is the preferred
method for fighting wars.
"Slicking" a runway to keep an adversary
from scrambling its fighters, or attacking electric
transformers outside of the urban area rather than
hitting generating stations in highly populated areas
are examples of effects-based operations.
Information attack and defense will also become a
crucial element of effects-based operations, stated
the white paper.
It noted that officials at US Space Command are refining
the service's CONOPS for computer network defense and
computer network attack, and many officials say wise
use of information warfare will give the United States
positive control over future battlefields.
Foglesong said current forces using current Concepts
of Operations are well-prepared to conduct tactical
missions to kill fixed targets. The new CONOPS also
emphasizes having the power to destroy mobile targets
that plagued the Air Force during Operations Allied
Force and Desert Storm.
These include mobile air defense missile launchers
and mobile ballistic missiles.
To attack this problem, the service is building a
capability to accurately model mission outcomes in
advance of an operation, the general said. This predictive
approach would provide a region's air component commander
a variety of options.
"We need to improve [to the point that] the JFACC
[Joint Forces Air Component Commander] can sit back
at the end of the table and watch the war actually
being played out," said Foglesong, "playing
the ATO [Air Tasking Order] out, on the screen, so
that he can see what the effects are going to be."
Foglesong went on, "Then, he can call back up
to the [commander in chief] and say, 'Boss, strategically,
... we can get better effects if we reprioritize,'
or, 'Boss, this is great. This is meeting your strategic
objective.' "
Not only would the JFACC be able to forecast what
is going to happen, according to Foglesong, but he
would watch the action as it happens.
"So," he explained, "if a target pops
up, and we know it is something we need to get to quickly,
then he can quickly call up what assets are available
... and then make a decision based on all those inputs."

CONOPS 2020 was designed to serve as a roadmap to
transform the current Air Force into a "Vision
Force" of 2020, one with dramatically different
capabilities.
Transformation Force First
The 2020 goal is to achieve highly integrated air,
space, and information operations, but officials admitted
full integration is a tall order. To balance current
needs with future goals, Foglesong said, USAF has agreed
on a way point called the "Transformation Force," with
a general target date of 2010.
This midpoint--the first incremental leap in capability--would
see a force that is a more dynamic and precise aerospace
force. The Transformation Force, for example, would
have enhanced combat, airlift, and ISR fleets, be lighter
and more agile, and include a more robust space force.
The Vision Force of 2020 will be considerably different.
In a recent interview with Air Force Magazine, Maj.
Gen. John L. Barry, director of Air Force strategic
planning, sketched out a new kind of Air Force. "Today,
we know pretty much what a potential adversary is doing," Barry
said. "What the Vision Force will give us is a
means to engage and create effects as well as know.
It's the difference between just advertising what the
bad guy is doing and doing something about it."
Foglesong agreed, and he noted it is too soon to choose
specific weapon systems that will fight those future
battles.
"Two decades from now, or sometime out in the
future, we see ourselves in a different force," said
Foglesong. "If you are asking me to [predict],
it is not easy. I know the capabilities that we would
like to have out there. But the platforms--it is probably
a little premature to decide 20 years out what are
your platforms."
For all the uncertainty, the white paper argued, this
much is clear: "This country's aerospace forces
will continue to be a force called upon to go from
zero to 'engaged' in minimum time."
Amy Butler is managing editor of Inside the Air Force,
a Washington, D.C.-based newsletter. Her most recent
article for Air Force Magazine,
"Loggies
vs. Contractors," appeared in the January 2001
issue.
Copyright Air Force Association. All rightsreserved.
|