-Caveat Lector- WJPBR Email News List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Peace at any cost is a Prelude to War! 1107. Air Force doctrine burrows into Army posts by Staff Sgt. Jason Tudor Air Force Print News MAXWELL AIR FORCE BASE, Ala. -- Air Force doctrine is burrowing into the Army officer corps, transforming the way airmen and soldiers do business together in a joint environment. Teaching more than 7,500 students each year, Air Force officers at operating locations on Army training posts across the United States evangelize the Air Force way to every level of the Army's officer corps. The greenest lieutenant and the most senior brigade commander receive briefings on everything from what a C-130 Hercules looks like to how aerospace power can help them conduct land-based operations for the joint force commander. Ingraining Air Force blue into Army green has been done for as long as there has been a separate service. The difference now? Air Force instructors get the opportunity to weave operational doctrine into their teachings, cementing the vital role air power has in the joint warfighting arena. Classes are taught at Fort Rucker, Ala. (Army Aviation), Fort Knox, Ky. (Armor), Fort Sill, Okla. (field artillery), Fort Bliss, Texas (air defense artillery), and Fort Leavenworth, Kansas (combined arms). Lt. Col. Sonny Arvin preaches the Air Force gospel at the Army Armor Center at Fort Knox. He speaks to between 750 and 800 students every year, talking about Air Force missions to include air interdiction and close air support. He teaches at the Army Career Captains Courses (junior grade officers) and the Pre-Command Courses (field grade and senior officers). Arvin is no stranger to the Army. He was the 19th Air Support Operations Squadron commander with the 101st Airborne Division at Fort Campbell, Ky., for a time, and he is intimate with Army operations and the service's working mindset. During his tenure at Fort Knox, Arvin said he has learned even more about how the two services work together. "There's some different thinking and some different ways of working," he said. "We're all after the same objective though." That objective is working together to win a war. Arvin said doing that means approaching the fight from two very different perspectives. Traditionally, the Air Force supports the joint force commander by helping the Army in a number of ways such as providing reconnaissance (satellite imagery), close air support (A-10 Thunderbolt IIs engaging the enemy in close proximity to friendly troops) and other airborne mission areas. "There's the soldier's perspective, on the ground viewing the battlefield through its width and depth, and the airmen's perspective, seeing the battlefield in a three-dimensional manner," he said. "We go in and show them the Air Force way of doing business according to our doctrine and how we support the joint force commander during contingencies." The development, Arvin said, is evolutionary. "When we get them as lieutenants, we set the stage," he said. "By the time they become captains, there's a greater interest and, finally, as brigade commanders, there's a tremendous interest in seeing what aerospace power can bring to the fight." Lt. Col. Al Jones reaches more than 5,000 students each year at Fort Rucker, the home of Army aviation. They ask many of the same questions about what the Air Force can provide during battle, but many of the questions are about close air support, helping soldiers win their fight in the mud. However, sometimes the classroom atmosphere -- composed primarily of warrant officers, new and old -- can grow tense when Jones suggests there are other options for close air support when there just isn't enough to go around. "They're all concerned about close air support," Jones said. "When we're unable to provide it at times, we tell them 'look, we're not mad at you and didn't supply CAS because we were off playing golf. There's only so much to go around.'" Jones goes on to explain there are other options and ways to meet the mission needs, more effects-based solutions to the situation instead of just supplying close air support -- all revolving around the latest doctrine the Air Force is employing at an operational level. But while all the academic advice about global attack, joint warfare and Air Force methods sets the table, Jones said many of the issues he discusses are more fundamental. "On a lot of levels, what I'm trying to teach is that we are not the enemy," he said. "We're a joint force and we're not going to go to war without you." Both Arvin and Jones agree the development of a joint fighting force is the path to future operations. Having Air Force officers available to teach best practices to their counterparts in green is one way to accomplish that. "It's working," Arvin said. "Everybody believes that we ultimately have to come together to fight jointly. If we can come together on certain things, we'll fight and work better together." Jones agreed but said the mindset of joint warfighting, and meshing effects-based warfighting capabilities, will take time to catch on. "A shift like that will take a while," he said. "You almost have to be like an evangelist. First, we have to get Air Force people talking this way, and then we'll get the broad spectrum of camaraderie working. "The benefit," he said, "is for the joint force. The joint force will fight future wars. So, we have a lot in common." 1108. Jet fuel study prompts call for protective gear upgrade by Chief Master Sgt. Gary Emery Air Force Print News SAN ANTONIO -- Preliminary results of a health study of exposure to JP-8 jet fuel have led the Air Force Surgeon General to recommend the use of more effective protective equipment for workers who come in contact with the fuel. People were coming forward with health complaints after being exposed to JP-8, so the Surgeon General started to investigate worker's concerns, said Lt. Col. (Dr.) Thomas Neal, chief consultant for occupational medicine at the Air Force Surgeon General's office. Reported symptoms included dizziness, lightheadedness, skin irritation and objectionable taste and odor, records show. The Department of Defense completed a 20-year phased changeover from gasoline-based JP-4 to the safer and more versatile kerosene-based JP-8 in 1996. Information for the study, which compares health data from 169 fuel cell maintenance volunteers with 160 Air Force people who have no contact with JP-8, was gathered over an 18-month period at six stateside bases, Neal said. Scientists and researchers from several major universities are participating in the $3.6 million study, which is being funded by the Air Force and other government agencies, he said. Study results so far indicate no long-term health hazards from JP-8 exposure, Neal said. For instance, medical records show no significant difference in reported ailments between the fuels workers and the control group. But, Neal said, the study was specifically looking for acute, short-term health effects in a very narrowly defined group of workers -- fuel cell maintainers. Nevertheless, because short-term JP-8 exposure has unpleasant and uncomfortable side effects, the Air Force is ready to move ahead to the next step --investigating more effective protective clothing and reviewing procedures to ensure maximum personal protection for fuels workers, Neal said. "For many years, people exposed to solvents -- such as painters working in enclosed places -- have experienced similar symptoms to those we're seeing in people who enter JP-8 fuel tanks to perform maintenance," Neal said. "But that doesn't mean we're not concerned, we need to be proactive in protecting our people. "That's not to say we haven't done so already. We have protective equipment and technical orders in place, but we're taking the initiative to explore recent advances in equipment that may provide greater protection," he said. "Our interest is our people," Neal said. "We want to do everything possible to keep them healthy and safe." 1106. Missile maintainers finish treaty requirement early by Staff Sgt. Melissa Phillips 90th Space Wing Public Affairs F.E. WARREN AIR FORCE BASE, Wyo. (AFPN) -- Missile maintainers from the 90th Space Wing have completed the field reconfiguration of the wing's Minuteman III missiles to adhere to the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty I four months early. The Air Force's portion of the START I treaty called for F. E. Warren to reconfigure 150 Minuteman III missiles that contained three multiple re-entry vehicles to a single re-entry vehicle per missile by Dec. 5. The field work was completed Aug. 6. The re-entry vehicle is the portion of the missile that houses the nuclear warhead. "It's not every day that you go to work knowing you completed an international treaty," said Airman 1st Class David Glass, MMIII missile maintenance technician from the 90th Maintenance Squadron. "Placing the final SRV into the last silo was a momentous occasion in U.S. history," said Col. Thomas Shearer, 90th Space Wing commander. "The fact that it happened months in advance of the deadline date is due to the dedication and expertise of all the maintainers at both the weapon storage area -- where they reconfigured all the missiles from a MRV to a SRV -- and to the missile maintainers, who placed the SRVs back into the silos. Their hardworking efforts, along with supporting security forces teams, missile crew members and medical personnel, brought every missile back to full operational capability with minimal delay." The treaty mandates that the United States reduce its intercontinental ballistic missile force to 6,000 warheads and that Russia will do the same, said Rex Ellis, 90th Space Wing treaty compliance specialist. "The SRV program is only one piece of the START I treaty puzzle, but it's a very important piece," Ellis said. "(F.E.) Warren's portion of the treaty was to decommission 300 RVs. Reductions are also being made to the bomber fleet and the sea launch ballistic missile structure." The reduction will not detract from the deterrence of the force, Air Force Space Command officials said. "The deterrence is sound," said Maj. Gen. Howard Mitchell, AFSPC director of operations at Peterson Air Force Base, Colo. "The triad is still sound with bombers, land-based missiles and sea-based forces. We have adequate RVs to protect the nation, as we see the need, in today's environment." F.E. Warren will not be considered treaty compliant until the 150 multiple re-entry vehicle bulkheads, the portion of the missile that connects the RVs to the rest of the missile, are destroyed and a formal paperwork process is completed, Ellis said. That process is expected to be completed near the original Dec. 5 deadline. The method of destruction to demolish the bulkheads is a sledgehammer and a lot of muscle. Senior Airman Daika Dewolfe, munitions technician from the maintenance squadron, said she looks forward to the bulkhead destruction phase of the treaty compliance. "It relieves stress," she said. F.E. Warren began the reconfiguration process Nov. 23, 1998, and each re-entry system took four to six days to reconfigure. "It basically took sweat and bones to comply with START I, and we put in extra hours when we needed to," said Staff Sgt. Todd Burnham, munitions team chief. But, it is worth it, he said, knowing that they were able to complete this process four months early. "During the nearly three years of the download program, we had five on-site inspections by Russian delegations," Ellis said. These inspections would normally add time to the overall process but the maintainers kept up with the set time schedule. "Compounded with the fact that the silos are located in desolate areas in Wyoming, Colorado and Nebraska that are often besieged with erratic weather changes, it was difficult to stay on course," Ellis said. "Sometimes, maintainers literally had to dig their way through snow just to start working, and they normally worked 12- to 16-hour days to get the job done. They are truly phenomenal workers." 1105. Air Force testing athletic cut uniforms for men WASHINGTON (AFPN) -- Seeing a significant increase in tailoring costs, and based on feedback from the field, the Air Force is currently testing athletic-cut uniforms for men. "In the past few years, we had noticed a 142 percent increase in tailoring costs at basic training to accommodate men with athletic-type builds," said Master Sgt. Ruth Nischwitz, chief of the Air Force uniform board office. "We also were getting questions and comments about the uniform fit from athletic-built second-term and career airmen." The test started in July and is projected to end in March. Participants are testing the service jacket and trousers, Nischwitz said. There are also plans to include men's shirts in the test program. For the test phase, uniform designers enlarged the upper torso, chest, neck and biceps and decreased the waist for the service jackets. Additionally, the thighs and seat areas were increased on the trousers, while the waists were made smaller, Nischwitz said. According to program managers at the Air Force Clothing Office at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, participants will evaluate the garments' appearance, comfort, fit and suitability. During this phase, participants will focus on wearing and maintaining these uniforms. Data gathered from the test will be used to confirm the suitability of the new sizes, validate size prediction charts and update procurement documents, said program managers Yvonne Wilson and Debra Klensch. Although the current test applies only to the men's uniform, the clothing office may possibly expand the test to include the women's uniform. based on the participants' feedback and suggestions, the items would eventually be placed in clothing sales stores for purchase, Nischwitz said. "I've always believed a team evolves into what you equip and envision them to be, he said. "If you want a fit force, arm them with uniforms that fit that image." *COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and educational purposes only.[Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ] Want to be on our lists? Write at [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a menu of our lists! <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
