Gulf War Air Power Survey



Download 5.55 Mb.
Page47/61
Date26.11.2017
Size5.55 Mb.
#35436
1   ...   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   ...   61

Supporting the People
Both CENTCOM and CENTAF were without assigned chaplains at the beginning the Gulf crisis and the responsibility for organizing the deploy­ment fell on the Tactical Air Command. Religious and cultural restric­tions varied in the theater depending on which Southwest Asia country personnel were assigned. The term “church services” and “chap­lain” had to be substituted with “morale services” and “morale officer” resulting in dissatisfaction among both the chaplains and other military personnel. However, the CENTCOM chaplain was able to get this restric­tion removed in January 1991.
Morale, Welfare, and Recreation (MWR) activities varied depend­ing on which country personnel were stationed, but the overall program was very good. The Air Force was designated the lead Service for MWR activities in the theater because of its substantial capabilities. Due to public support of the war effort, the theater was overwhelmed with pri­vate donations and the Air Force managed the distribution of these items to the other Services. However, recreational activities at home bases suffered a loss of revenues of between $1.5 and $2.5 million in the first quarter of FY91 and DOD had to request relief from those losses through the House Armed Services Committee MWR panel.
Disbursing agents did not have the experience nor the training needed to support operations in Southwest Asia. They were trained as disbursing agents and did not have the full range of financial accounting knowledge needed. Complicating the problem was the fact that guidance and direc­tion was received from nineteen separate finance offices in seven different commands, thus complicating operations at the disbursement agent level.
The Air Force, as the single Service manager for postal opera­tions for CENTCOM experienced difficulties in managing postal operations in the theater. This was primarily due to the Army's inability to handle the large volumes of incoming mail and reluctance to follow procedures established by the Air Force. Furthermore, insufficient in-country trans­portation assets bogged down the mail, as well as mail volumes stretching the limits of even the United States Postal Service. The many complaints from both Service members and their families resulted in numerous Con­gressional hearings on mail issues. At the outset of hostilities, the Feder­al Aviation Agency established further mail security procedures, thereby creating additional mail handling precautions and backlogs. However, these precautions proved to be necessary when C-4 explosives were found in a parcel mailed from Saudi Arabia.
Medical
Besides making many adjustments during the deployment, the Air Force Medical Service engaged in an extensive postwar analysis of its readiness posture. On direction from the Surgeon General, the major medical staffs of the Air Force Medical Service surveyed the after‑action reports of all Medical Service units to learn what the experience meant for medical readiness. Within a year of the Gulf War ceasefire, the Surgeon General concluded that none of areas identified for improvement were significant enough to tarnish the success of the Desert Shield/Desert Storm medical deployment.
The aeromedical evacuation system, moreover, which served as a safety valve for all the EUCOM and CENTCOM component medical sys­tems, had only mixed success in preparing for a major ground war. On the positive side, the Air Force was able to compensate in part for some problems in Army forward evacuation, and the Air Force created its own effective intratheater evacuation system. But the limited capacity and incompatibilities of the joint patient regulating systems meant that proba­bly not all seriously wounded and injured patients in a mass casualty ground war would have been transported speedily to the most appropri­ate medical facilities. Command and control of airevac missions de­manded greater centralization than allowed by prewar doctrine, and the Air Force could take only minor remedial action before the ground war. Further­more, casualty rates at the highest levels estimated by the Joint Chiefs of Staff would have demanded a major reinforcement of dedicated airevac planes and equipment from CONUS, at time when the dedicated airevac fleet of CRAF III was still not operationally ready.
Despite several areas for improvement, the Total Force policy for Air Force Medical Service worked well. Reserves provided almost half of the medical manpower committed to Desert Shield/Desert Storm. Their skills, flexibility, and hard work were essential to mission accom­plish­ment. The Gulf War, however, emphasized the need for a continu­ing and substantial investment in contingency training for reserve and active duty medics.

29

Joyous Americans welcome home troops from



the Persian Gulf War.




Appendix A





Deployment of

Engineering and Services Forces




Base

1 Sep

1 Dec

19 Jan

23 Feb

Al Ayn

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services

417


0

10

0


1300


99

33

43



1600


99

33

49


1650


99

34

49



Al Dhafra

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services

1977


153

24

79


2100


130

35

71


2850


135

40

73


3150


135

42

73



Al Jawf

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services









650


12

12

15



Al Kharj

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services




150


107

36

2


4400


155

60

97


4900


155

59

99



Al Minhad

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services




1650


99

28

32


2500


130

35

50


2650


130

35

50



Bateen

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services

765


100

14

25


1050


91

14

32


1100


109

14

29


1200


109

18

29



Cairo

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services




400


52

48

37


850


57

48

36


900


57

48

36



Dhahran

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services

2354


50

12

72


3150


108

35

73


3500


108

44

73


3750


108

44

73



Diego Garcia

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services

1107


51

10

45


1450


47

35

44


1450


47

35

44


1865


47

35

44



Doha

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services

62

0



6

0

850

47

12



36

950


47

12

36


1000


47

16

36



Jeddah

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services

1230


52

24

9


1650


38

36

9


3200


66

49

41


4100


66

49

41



Khamis Mushait

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services

842


95

30

41


850


56

24

16


1300


55

24

18


1450


55

24

18



King Fahd

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services

1846


150

46

43


3400


245

58

83


5200


267

72

132


7000


267

90

132



King Khalid

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services

720


0

0

0


1300


13

0

10


1550


34

1

15


1750


34

1

29



KKMC

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services




100


0

0

0


1000


61

25

47


1800


102

44

50



Masirah

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services

606


50

0

25


750


17

22

24



950


52

23

31



1000


52

24

31



Riyadh

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services

2840


76

14

48


5000


114

37

60


5550


141

49

78


7900


141

46

91



Seeb

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services

517


50

24

18


600


51

23

59


800


51

24

59


1300


51

36

59



Shaikh Isa

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services

1200


100

24

27


1550


96

24

27


2400


118

24

45


2700


118

24

45



Sharjah

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services

203


0

0

9


650


12

12

37


750


32

16

37


800


34

16

37



Tabuk

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services

70

35



0

0

800

30

24



5

850


31

22

5


1000


31

24

5



Taif

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services

1192


100

48

36


1800


102

28

61


2600


105

48

101


2850


105

40

99



Thumrait

Base Population

Engineers

Fire Fighters

Services

2040


200

26

59


1850


192

35

111


1300


195

35

57


1350


195

24

57




Appendix B



Gulf War Air Base Characteristics




Base



Location




Primary

Use




Runways (Feet)


Taxiways

Ramp Space

(Sq

Feet)


Host Nation Crash/Rescue Fire Protection



Lighting


Facilities

Al Ayn, United Arab Emirates

15 miles E of Dubai

Civilian--Under Construction

13,124 x 148

Parallel (1)

Link (13)



1,574,448

No

None

Tower

Al Dhafra, United Arab Emirates

75 miles SW of Dubai

Abu Dhabi Air Force

12, 057 x 150

Parallel (1) (taxiway to main runway),

Link (11) (short taxiway that links two runways or taxiway,

Dispersal (34) (leads to shelter or site away from major runway)

Loop (20)



2,214,029

Yes

Runway,

Taxiway,


Approach,

Visual Approach Slope Indicator (VASI)



Hangar (25)

Maintenance, Fuel Storage, Warehouse, Dining, Billeting, Administrative




Gulf War Air Base Characteristics (Continued)


Base


Location



Primary

Use



Runways

(Feet)


Taxiways

Ramp

Space

(Sq

Feet)

Host Nation

Crash/Rescue

Fire

Protection



Lighting


Facilities

Al Jawf, Saudi Arabia

10 miles E of Al Jawf

Joint Use--RSAF/Saudi Airlines

12,000 x 148

Parallel (1)

Link (3)


Dispersal (4)

265,200

Yes

Runway,

Approach, Threshold, VASI



Hangars (3), Maintenance, Dining, Billeting, Administrative

Al Kharj, Saudi Arabia

52 miles SE of Riyadh

Military--Under Construction

12,000 x 148

Parallel (1)

Link (5)


5,000,000

No

Taxiway

None (Some facilities available at nearby King Faisal Air Academy)

Al Minhad, United Arab Emirates

14 miles S of Dubai

UAE Air Force

9,843 x 148

Parallel (1)

Link (17)



494,788

Yes

Runway, Taxiway, Threshold, Approach, VASI

Hangars (4), Maintenance, Ordnance Storage, Fuel Storage, Warehouse, Dining, Administrative


Download 5.55 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   ...   61




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message

    Main page