Air University Review, May-June 1969
TAC’s Secret Weapon
A good many years ago, Goethe said, “Power is duty.” If this is indeed true, then it follows that to perform that duty requires the most efficient application of the power available.
The basic planning, development, organization and training of the Air Force must be well rounded, covering every modern means of waging air war, and the techniques of employing such means must be continuously developed and kept up to date. The Air Force doctrines likewise must be flexible at all times and entirely uninhibited by tradition.1
Weapons, as instruments of power, have perennially been applied just as rapidly as they were devised, often with disastrous results to the user. The thinking in military circles for centuries was centered upon the idea that having a weapon necessitates using it. That theory changed considerably as it was realized that often owning a gun is more effective than using it. Not only must the effectiveness of a new weapon be evaluated in order to know its worth before employment in combat but also its relative merits as an instrument of power must be determined. In today’s environment of rapidly expanding technology and proliferating solutions to military problems, this aspect has become increasingly important.
We must stop and ask ourselves, before deciding whether to add a new and complex weapon system to our inventory, whether it is really the most effective way to do the job under the rigorous conditions of combat.2
To investigate these new ways of thinking-to assess existing weapon systems and tactics while simultaneously evaluating new ones—the United States Air Force in 1963 directed a study by the USAF Tactical Air Support Requirements Board, commonly known as the Disosway Board. The Army had long felt that propinquity of air power and unity of command were the keys to efficient utilization of air support forces. As a result of the Disosway Board recommendations, the Tactical Air Command (TAC) was directed to develop new concepts for the employment of tactical air forces. This major study effort by TAC led to the formation of the Tactical Air Warfare Center (TAWC) at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. 3
The mission of TAWC in 1963 was to improve the Air Force’s capability to support Army forces in joint field operations. In order to test the concepts put forth, “ . . . the Secretary of Defense called upon the Joint Chiefs of Staff to plan tests and demonstrations relative to the aerial movement and supply of troops in the battle area.”4 This led to Exercise Gold Fire, a maneuver designed to put the theories into practice. TAWC participated in this exercise as the Air Force element for testing and practicing new air concepts and tactics. From this exercise and a concurrent series of field exercises called Indian River, techniques were developed and new concepts conceived to provide improved integration of Air Force strike power with ground units of the United States Army. The lessons learned in these trials were, and to a great extent still are, the basis for tactical air support of the ground effort in Southeast Asia today. Since concepts, weapons, and tactics are in a continuous state of change, one can appreciate the wisdom of General Eisenhower’s advice:
. . . our armed forces must be modern, designed to deter or wage the type of war to be expected in the mid-twentieth century. No longer can we afford the folly so often indulged in in the past, of beginning each war with the weapons of the last . . .5
Operations in Southeast Asia illustrate this quite graphically as the weapons employed run the gamut from the venerable C-47 Gooney Bird to the controversial F-111.
As a result of this flux, TAWC is today involved in a variety of test and evaluation programs. In the research and development stages of testing, industry, Air Force Systems Command, and other agencies are primary. It is in the operational test stage that TAWC becomes involved. With the exception of nuclear weapons, almost anything that has to do with tactical air warfare is tested, evaluated, or monitored by TAWC at this stage in the development cycle. The scope now is worldwide tactical application, but special emphasis continues to be placed on tactical requirements generated by our forces in Southeast Asia.
The mission of TAWC is to conduct operational tests and evaluations of systems and components in five areas: armament, night operations, combat support, electronic warfare, and command and control. Test and evaluation, though primary, are only a part of TAWC’S job. The mission includes development of tactics, refinement of doctrine, and improvement of concepts, as well as training and deployment of special task forces abroad for the purpose of conducting combat evaluations. New techniques and procedures are verified or modified in this combat phase of the tests.
To accomplish the multifaceted mission of the center, it has been organized with a deputy chief of staff (DCS) for each major area of responsibility. The necessary personnel are assigned to each DCS to analyze concepts, prepare test plans, conduct evaluations, and even deploy for field testing when that is required. It is this functional arrangement which enhances the flexibility that must be inherent in an organization such as TAWC.
A brief discussion of the individual responsibilities of each DCS, combined with concrete examples of testing performed, should serve to illustrate how the center operates.
armament systems
Accurate delivery of munitions from an aircraft has been a problem since the inception of military air warfare. The DCS for Armament Systems was established in TAWC and has the responsibility for the areas of air-to-air missiles and targets, guided bombs, and aids to delivery.
In the area of air-to-air missiles, TAWC has examined the Falcon and Sparrow to improve their capabilities and flexibility. Here the primary effort is aimed at taking already operational systems and modifying them to perform a wider variety of roles. Under the same general heading, TAWC has evaluated lightweight ground-to-air missiles to determine their adaptability to the air-to-air environment. With successful results in these tests, some answers have been given to the recurring question of missiles versus guns in aerial combat.6
Targets used for these missile firing tests vary from the standard towed target to the Mace drone. TAWC has its own Mace launch facility, and other targets available to the center are the Firebee and the QF-1O4 drone. TAWC works closely with the Armament Development and Test Center (ADTC) in the development of new high-speed, highly maneuverable targets, to improve the test and evaluation data.
There is a constant need to improve the reliability and accuracy of air-delivered munitions. TAWC has recently been involved in the evaluation of three guided bomb systems. All three of these weapons consist of modern guidance systems attached to iron bombs, and all three are showing great promise of giving high degrees of accuracy under marginal bombing conditions.
Actual flight tests conducted by TAWC have shown that laser systems can be used to provide an accurate delivery system for bombs. These tests have also demonstrated that terminal guided bombs will give better accuracy at greater standoff distances when lasers are used by forward air controllers to illuminate the target.
This brief look at the activities of the DCS for Armament Systems is admittedly sketchy but should give some idea of where the emphasis lies. National security prevents in-depth discussion of many systems and components.
night operations
Accurate day and night operations in all weather are essential in maintaining pressure on the enemy, magnifying his requirements for defense, interfering with his production, and attacking movements of troops and supplies which have been driven to rely on the protection of darkness and bad weather. 7
General Arnold might almost have had Vietnam in mind when he made that statement. Our night air-to-ground operations still have not progressed to the point of being able to stop the enemy’s night activities. With this in mind, the Air Staff created a study group under the direction of the Air Force Systems Command, its object to develop a night attack capability within a short time span. This study resulted in the Shed Light program initiated in January 1966.
In August 1966 TAC designated TAWC as its executive agent for the Shed Light program. AFSC is the manager for the research and development, test, and certification of the components. TAC is the manager for the test, training, and deployment of developed capabilities overseas. The DCS for Night Operations is working in the areas of night attack systems, night operational components and subsystems, and Shed Light monitor.
The present generation of illuminators helps in the overt night work, but the effort is insufficient. There is a need for flares that last longer and can be dropped from a variety of aircraft. In addition to flares, aircraft equipped with various high-intensity floodlights are being evaluated.
The Gunship is an example of a program recently evaluated in Southeast Asia. When the night interdiction capability was seen to be desperately needed, TAWC, in cooperation with AFSC, evaluated the Gunship. New night viewing sensors and fire-control techniques were integrated into a C-130 aircraft.
The Gunship evaluation was highly successful and has resulted in a follow-on program, which is presently being carried out. The goal is a fully operational force of such weapon systems to be used mainly in a nighttime close air support and interdiction role.
The examples given are fairly representative of the programs now going on in the area of night operations. What is ultimately hoped for is a fully integrated, self-contained night attack system, an F-NX if you will: a production aircraft designed from the beginning with the night role in mind. TAWC’S contributions in this area should help to make that long-sought dream a reality.
combat support
. . . we need well-equipped, well-trained armed forces and we must be able to mobilize rapidly our resources in men and material for our own defense.8
TAWC’s DCS for Combat Support has the broad responsibility for insuring that our tactical air combat forces have the ground facilities available in order to deploy to any spot on earth within twenty-four hours. To be effective, our forces must arrive in time to be able to apply whatever measures of force our nation’s authorities require. With this in mind, Combat Support is working in the areas of bare base, life support, base support equipment, and air base defense.
The minimum requirements for a bare base are a landing strip and a source of water that can be made potable. It is the aim of the bare base program to insure that these two requirements are the only limitations placed on a deploying tactical operation. Numerous types of equipment in the program are being tested for utility, air transportability, serviceability, and ease of operation by a tactical unit’s own personnel. These projects include an expandable shelter container (usable as latrine, kitchen, office, laundry, or quarters), a multipurpose vehicle (‘convertible to truck, ambulance, personnel carrier, or tow vehicle), and various units of crash removal equipment. Testing will cover equipment used in all aspects of the basic housekeeping functions normally performed at an air base.
The Ethiopians were clothed in the skins of leopards and lions, and had long bows made of the stem of the palm leaf. . . . The Libyans wore a dress of leather, and carried javelins made hard in the fire. The Thracians went to the war wearing the skins of foxes upon their heads, and about their bodies, tunics, over which was thrown a long cloak of many colors.9
From these descriptions by Herodotus, written about 455 B.C., it is apparent that some thought was given to wearing apparel for the military even then. Though items were selected primarily for identification and for psychological reasons in those days, consideration was also given to individual comfort and protection.
At TAWC, the life-support function is an important and continuing program. The emphasis is on the total equipment required to fit man to his ever changing environment. For instance, a new ventile antiexposure suit has been undergoing evaluation and may well prove to be a major contribution to the problem of exposure in the open sea. It is made from a permeable material which, when dry, breathes without artificial circulation. When immersed in water, the fibers swell by 70 percent, making it a waterproof garment. When it dries out, it returns to its original form. Worn under a conventional flight suit, this chameleon-like material gives comfort and serviceability.
Another item recently tested was a summer-weight, fire-resistant flight suit. The material, when exposed to flash fire, chars slightly but will not burn and will not adhere to the flesh. However, the density of the fibers created a problem of comfort, and the item was rejected.
Base support equipment involves such items as pre-engineered dormitories, aircraft maintenance shelters, and hardened aircraft protective shelters. Several such projects are in the process of evaluation at Eglin now, with TAWC participating in many phases of the tests. An example is project “Concrete Sky,” an aircraft shelter capable of absorbing enemy ordnance. The arched shelter is erected with steel arch-beams and covered with concrete. Special nylon doors are designed to prevent aircraft damage from shrapnel, napalm, and small-arms fire. This unit is now near completion and will be used to harden revetments in South Vietnam-something long needed there.
. . . timbers served to bind the building together, and to prevent its becoming weak as it advanced in height; it had also a covering of skins and hides, which protected the woodwork against the attacks of burning missiles and allowed the men to work in safety.10
The problem of base defense is certainly not a new one, but Air Force involvement in this area is relatively new. Our ground forces, engaged in limited guerrilla-type warfare, cannot spare the vast numbers of men required to set up a wide area perimeter defense. Evaluations are now being conducted to incorporate the most modem electronic surveillance equipment into a base security system, making it possible to detect and counter attempted infiltration. TAWC is working closely with AFSC in examining the various devices and tactics to be used.
electronic warfare
Aristotle was quite the adviser on many things of a military nature. For example, in his “Politics,” he said:
. . . the strongest wall will be the truest soldierly precaution, more especially now that missiles . . . have been brought to such perfection. To have no walls would be foolish . . . .11
We discovered early in the Vietnam conflict just how foolish it was not to have a “wall” against surface-to-air missiles (SAM). TAWC was given the task of working on the problem, and a DCS for Anti-SAM was established.
As the scope of coverage expanded, the designation was changed to DCS for Electronic Warfare. He has the responsibility for insuring the maintenance of air superiority in an electronic environment. These areas of responsibility are being continuously assessed: the improved exploitation of electronic intelligence; the detection, location, and destruction of SAM’S; the improvement of electronic warfare equipment and tactics; and the decrease of aircraft vulnerability. Various programs have been evaluated to accomplish the aims. The marked decrease in U.S. aircraft losses over North Vietnam is attributable in part to the equipment devised in this program. The tactical advantages achieved required continued exploitation of electronic countermeasure(s) (ECM) and electronic counter-countermeasure(s) (ECCM) techniques to the fullest.
Although the primary mission of the tactical electronic warfare system will be to support aircraft attacking ground targets, it will also have the capability to defend itself from air-to-air attack. The system will aid attacking aircraft by jamming radars and analyzing enemy signals to determine the depth of the penetration environment. Such systems are necessary adjuncts of the force structure which the Air Force requires to meet the demands of the future.
Equally with the problems of today, the problems which may have to be faced in 1975 or 1985 will require imagination, boldness, and the utilization of available skills, manpower, resources .12
To face these problems of tomorrow, TAWC has established a threat and counter-threat staff that lends itself to a red and blue team concept. The red team simulates the hostile electronic environment. The blue team then devises ways to crack that environment. Information and data collected from these encounters are then fed to all interested agencies, and technological means are sought to insure that we stay several steps ahead of any potential aggressor’s electronic capabilities.
New aircraft must incorporate measures to reduce their vulnerability to attack. In addition to electronic devices intended to confuse the enemy, tests and evaluations are being conducted in such diverse areas as foam in the fuel tanks for suppression of explosion and fire, redundant flight control systems for added safety, and armor-plating of vital areas in the aircraft.
command and control
The conduct of war resembles the workings of an intricate machine with great friction, so that combinations which are easily planned on paper can be executed only with great difficulty.13
The broad concept of command and control had its inception somewhere in the dim reaches of the ancient history of warfare. It is a military requirement which has suffered much, rising and falling with the tides of war. After World War II and the Korean conflict, concern with command and control was neglected in both concepts and equipment but in more recent years, because of the situation in Southeast Asia and other pressing tactical requirements, renewed interest and increased emphasis are being given to Command and control.
At the present time TAWC’S DCS for this area of responsibility is concentrating his efforts on the Tactical Air Control System (TACS), tactical communications and electronics and airborne tactical air control. These subdivisions may sound repetitive, and to a certain extent they surely are. A few examples of current projects may serve to illustrate the reason for the shredout.
The Tactical Air Control System is that overall device through which the air commander controls the variety of forces at his disposal. The system itself consists of radar, communications equipment, operations centers, and other support equipment required for field operations. The operational aspect of the TACS encompasses aircraft control and warning, airlift, direct air support, air interdiction, and those planning functions required for the day-to-day Operation of the tactical force. In this area TAWC is now actively engaged in the 407L program.
The 407L program is designed to modernize the TACS through acquisition of equipment for aircraft control and warning, direct air support, command communications, and air traffic control. This equipment represents the latest state of the art in miniaturization and mobility and will introduce automation into the TACS. TAWC, in its capacity as TAC’S representative for the using commands (TAC, PACAF, and USAFE), participates in the Air Force Systems Command’s testing and has complete responsibility for the final Category III tests. All the units for 407L are being placed in a central location as they become available and will be evaluated as a total combat operational system.
Tactical communications covers a broad spectrum of equipment required to support a field operation. The equipment may vary from data banks to man-pack radios carried by forward air controllers. Current projects include the digital message entry system (DMES), the tactical satellite communications program, and “Combat Video.”
The digital message entry system is a system of instant message transmission for use with direct air support radio voice circuits. Messages of predetermined format can be digitally encoded and then transmitted in a fraction of a second. Field evaluation is complete, and the system is now being combattested overseas. DMES should appreciably decrease voice traffic on the air request net and reduce the chance of misunderstanding or misinterpretation.
The tactical satellite communications program is designed to demonstrate the feasibility of using spacecraft repeaters to extend the reliable range of command and control communications. This research and development effort will use a satellite in synchronous orbit to relay transmissions from ground and airborne transceivers to test long-range ultrahigh frequency and super-high frequency communications. TAC, in cooperation with other using commands, will conduct operational tests to evaluate the practicality of the tactical use of multiple access satellite communications.
Combat Video is a closed-circuit TV to allow the control tower operator to monitor the entire runway/ramp complex. The system is installed at McConnell AFB, Kansas, and testing continues on a daily basis. If it works well, it could prove a valuable training aid and a boon to flying safety.
Several navigation systems are being evaluated for their possible use in tactical operations. The inverse mode tactical air navigation (TACAN), new long-range navigation (LORAN) systems, and improved radar are being examined.
One general objective in command and control is to build a modern airborne warning and control system able to profit by the latest advances in communications. The concept under study is the use of a jet airframe to deploy and control the air operations until ground facilities can be emplaced. At that time the airborne system would be assigned the mission of controlling the forward air battle. This should give TAC much greater flexibility than it now has.
Red Horse
One of the new additions to TAWC is the 560th Civil Engineering Squadron, commonly known as “Red Horse.” This squadron was established to conduct academic and field training programs for personnel replacements for all civil engineering heavy-repair squadrons in Southeast Asia. It is also required to maintain a capability to deploy selected permanent-party personnel, augmented by students and/or Prime BEEF (Base Emergency Engineering Force) team members as a contingency civil engineering heavy-repair unit during emergencies.
The 506th conducts evaluations of current civil engineering field construction techniques, materials, and equipment and recommends improvements. Also, it will provide training in specialized areas for selected civil engineering officers and NCO’S as requested by TAC.
During all the tests performed, the Tactical Air Warfare Center is concerned with the man-machine relationship. Emphasis is placed on the operational environment of the system, covering aircrew, aircraft, ground personnel, and total facilities.
The visible products of TAWC are its test orders, plans, and final reports. The purpose of such documents is to convey usable information to operational organizations and planning headquarters to promote the combat capability of the Tactical Air Command.
The extreme urgency of tactical requirements in Southeast Asia often obviates the necessity for following classic test lines. Clear-cut lines of responsibility are impossible to draw. Evaluations must be made rapidly and accurately by the people best qualified in a particular field. The tactical centers lend themselves well to this type of flexibility.
It is well to bear in mind that TAWC is not charged with the responsibility for research and development of any item. The responsibility is to exploit tactically items already developed. Tactics and techniques are developed and personnel are trained in the operational use of a new weapon system. Follow-on testing may then be enlarged to explore the weapon system more fully.
TAWC we could not and does not operate in a vacuum. Heavy reliance is placed upon the expert assistance of the Armament Development and Testing Center and the excellent facilities available in the vast Eglin complex.
In our mission to attack and solve tactical air warfare problems on a worldwide scale, with special emphasis at this time on Southeast Asia, TAWC is organized according to five main functional areas:
We have great confidence in the concept of cooperative use of Armament Development Testing Center, Tactical Air Warfare Center, Special Operations Force, and Air Force Armament Technical Laboratory organizations as the “team” at Eglin Air Force Base to continue in the quick-reaction role of solving Southeast Asia problems.
Tactical Air Warfare Center
Notes
1. General H. H. Arnold, “Report of the Commanding General, Army Air Forces” in Walter Millis (ed.), American Military Thought (New York: Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc., 1966), p. 452.
2. Robert S. McNamara from a speech in November 1963 in Millis, p. 533.
3. Lieutenant Colonel David C. Collins, “Doctrine Development for the Employment of Tactical Air Forces,” Air University Review, XIX, 1 (November-December 1967), 45.
4. Major Robert G. Sparkman, “Exercise Gold Fire I,” Air University Review, XVI, 3 (March-April 1965), 22.
5. Dwight D. Eisenhower, Mandate for Change, 1953-1956 (New York: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1963), p. 446.
6. For a discussion of missiles versus guns, see General Bruce K. Holloway, “Air Superiority in Tactical Air Warfare,” Air University Review, XIX, 3 (March-April 1968), 2-15.
7. Arnold in Millis, p. 453.
8. President Harry S. Truman, “Second Annual Message, January 6, 1947,” in Millis, p. 461.
9. Herodotus, “History,” Great Books of the Western World (Chicago: William Benton, Publisher, 1952), Vol. 6, pp. 228-29.
10. Thucydides, “History of the Peloponnesian War,” Great Books of the Western World (Chicago: William Benton, Publisher, 1952), Vol. 6, p. 407.
11. Aristotle, On Man in the Universe (Roslyn, N.Y.: Walter J. Black, 1943), p. 401.
12. Arnold in Millis, p. 447.
13. Karl von Clausewitz, On War (London: Routledge & Kegan, Ltd., 1962), Vol. I, p. 31.
Captain Nathan K. Goldsmith (B.G.S., University of Nebraska at Omaha) is Programs Officer, Hq USAF Tactical Air War Center, Eglin AFB, Florida. He enlisted in the Air Force in 1952 and served in several radar assignments stateside and in Europe before completing Officer Candidate School, 1959, and flying training, 1960. Subsequent assignments have been with 61st Troop Carrier Squadron, Sewart AFB, Tennessee; 40th Troop Carrier Squadron, Evreux AB, France; 3201st Air Base Group, Eglin AFB; 310th Air Commando Squadron, Tan Son Nhut AB, Vietnam; 315th Air Division, Tachikawa AB, Japan; and as a “Bootstrap” student until his current assignment in 1968.
Disclaimer
The conclusions and opinions expressed in this
document are those of the author cultivated in the freedom of expression,
academic environment of Air University. They do not reflect the official
position of the U.S. Government, Department of Defense, the United States Air
Force or the Air University.
Home Page | Feedback? Email the Editor