Gulf War Air Power Survey
Figure 40 Air Refueling Tracks and Anchors
Download 5.55 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Table 16 Average Daily Air Refueling Statistics
- Desert Shield Desert Storm KC-10
- Figure 41 KC-135s Deployed From
- Figure 42 Air Refueling Sorties Flown. 17 Redeployment
- Operational Issues Air Tasking Order
- Air Refueling Airspace Congestion
- Table 17
- Multipoint Refueling Expedited Air Refueling
- KC‑135 Boom Drogue Assemblies
Figure 40 Air Refueling Tracks and Anchors 15
The demand for air refueling in the AOR changed significantly during the transition from Desert Shield to Desert Storm. Putting the force in place, which took over five and a half months, had been a major undertaking. Once the positioning was accomplished, refueling proceeded at a relatively normal pace, until initiation of the 42 days of Desert Storm signalled a dramatic increase in refueling requirements, as shown in Table 16. Table 16 Average Daily Air Refueling Statistics408
Source: Totals for entire operations from HQ SAC/DOOT. Another illustration of the change in pattern and intensity of air refueling activity is reflected in the following chart accounting for KC‑135 tankers deployed from the CONUS from August 90 to the end of Desert Storm. Figure 41 KC-135s Deployed From CONUS409 16
Virtually every type of strike and direct combat support mission required air refueling. The total of all U.S. and foreign combat sorties was 69,399, an average of 1,650 per day. In addition to U.S. tankers, the tankers of the United Kingdom, France, Canada, and Saudi Arabia accomplished air refueling; the British and French tankers refueled their own aircraft. Canada's tankers refueled approximately seventy-five percent of its aircraft; United States Air Force aircraft refueled the remaining twenty-five percent. Saudi Arabia's tankers refueled fifty percent of its aircraft; United States Air Force tankers refueled the other fifty percent. Other foreign aircraft received United States Air Force refuelings. The total number of Air Force, Navy, Marine, and foreign refueling sorties in Desert Storm was approximately 15,100, or 360 sorties a day. On average, each tanker flown provided 4.5 refuelings to combat aircraft. The following figure reflects the daily activity levels.410 During Desert Storm, nearly 107 million gallons were delivered by air to more than 43,000 receivers. The air campaign was heavily dependent on air refueling, and the successful integration of air combat missions and related refueling missions was a major achievement. Figure 42 Air Refueling Sorties Flown. 17
Redeployment USCENTAF, USAFE, and U.S. Marine Corps, Central Command fighters used the Atlantic Bridge to return to their home stations quickly and efficiently. Fighter streams flew from tanker to tanker on their legs from Southwest Asia to a remain-over-night location en route to the CONUS. European-based fighters redeploying directly to home stations used the same refueling procedure. The majority of CONUS aircraft were to remain over night in Spain, with the exception of A-10s, which were to spend the night at Sigonella in Italy and Lajes in the Azores. The tanker bridge allowed SAC to support planned flow of one fighter squadron per day from Southwest Asia to Spain and one fighter squadron per day from Spain to the CONUS. Airlift SAC was not explicitly tasked to participate in the airlift role except for the dual-role assigned its KC-10s. However, organic air movement provided necessary SAC resources to support B-52, KC-135, KC-10, RC‑135, and U-2 aircraft. MAC was heavily tasked to support deployments to Southwest Asia and could not fulfill all airlift requirements. Unable to assign sufficient priority to strategic lift requirements, SAC had to use KC-10s and KC-135s for cargo and passenger transportation. During the first 30 days of Desert Shield, SAC organic airlift carried 4,870 passengers and 2,612 tons of cargo.411 SAC planners had to compete with MAC requirements for KC‑10s. KC‑10s could be placed in the MAC channel and used as airlifters under MAC control. KC-10s were in great demand because of KC-10 dual-role commitments and because a tanker base to anchor the Atlantic bridge was not available in the deep eastern Mediterranean region at the onset of Desert Shield. Five KC-10s were given to MAC on 24 August 1990, and five more were made available on 4 September 1990 for a purely airlift role to help USTRANSCOM overcome its backlogs. Ten KC‑10s were given to TRANSCOM in March and April 1991 to assist MAC in redeploying forces from the AOR. During the early phases of Desert Shield, SAC utilization of KC‑10s was high, and SAC planners recommended to the Headquarters Strategic Air Command Director of Operations (Hq SAC/DO) that SAC delay making a large number of KC‑10s available to MAC for the following reasons: • MAC did not actively pursue using KC-10s to augment C-5 and C-141 missions until the F-117 deployment on 21 and 22 August 1990. • SAC had a JCS requirement to maintain sixteen KC-10s at Moron and Zarogoza in Spain to support bridge deployment operations. • Twelve KC-10s were required to support a movement of twenty-four F-4G aircraft from the CONUS to the AOR. • KC-10s were used extensively for dual-role and force extension missions (four to five missions per day). • The 330 fighters and many other larger aircraft deployed to the AOR depended heavily on KC-10A support. • Operational requirements often resulted in a quick need for drogue-equipped tankers to move Navy and Marine aircraft. Drogue-equipped KC-135s were not always immediately available. To help overcome USTRANSCOM's backlogs, SAC offered KC‑135 support; but USTRANSCOM rejected this proposal, partly because of the incompatibility of MAC's cargo handling equipment with the KC-135. Also, MAC preferred KC-10s because cargo bays in KC‑135s do not have room for many of the standard loads packaged on MAC pallets. After USTRANSCOM's rejection of KC-135s for airlift and a need for additional supplies to sustain on-going operations, SAC independently employed tankers to transport equipment and personnel to tanker forward operating locations (FOLs). Mighty Express was formed and utilized ANG KC‑135Es to transport cargo and personnel from CONUS to Europe or to the AOR. Mighty Express was an airlift support initiative by Eighth Air Force Logistics and Operations approved by Hq SAC. The Express began operations on 21 January 1991 and was supported by Mather's 940th AREFG KC-135Es. Mighty Express, flying from its Barksdale Aerial Port of Embarkation, in CONUS used two primary routes intersecting at Moron in Spain to facilitate rapid movement of cargo from CONUS to Southwest Asia. The Express moved nearly 700 passengers, 3,000 high priority parts, and almost 200 tons of cargo between January and April 1991, when it was terminated.412 An interesting situation arose at Moron. The B-52s began dropping bombs in the AOR at such a substantial rate that Moron was expected to run out of munitions. Fortunately, 3,200 short tons of munitions were available in Bitburg, Germany. To maximize their air refueling support to the B-52s on strike missions, as well as assist in resupply of ordnance, Zaragoza KC-10s launched for an air refueling mission and landed in Germany to pick up weapons. They offloaded the weapons at Moron, took off on a refueling mission, and recovered at Zaragoza. Aircrew Manning The aircrew manning level of SAC's KC-135 and KC-10 tanker force had a direct impact on tanker operations. The KC-135 manning level was 1.27 and was based primarily on supporting SAC's SIOP commitment. The KC-10 manning level was 3.5 (2.0 active plus 1.5 reserves) and was dedicated to supporting contingency operations. Initially, the theater commander requested that all tanker forces in the AOR be manned at the 2.0 level. Because SAC could not support a KC‑135 crew ratio of 2.0 in the AOR, the 2.0 level was later reduced to 1.5. Despite the change, few tankers were available for training, and crew shortages forced continued back-to-back alert cycles even with the call-up of Reserve forces. The manning level of the KC-10 was more than sufficient to support the 2.0 AOR requirement. The call-up of one of the three KC-10 Reserve Associate units enabled a 3.0 crew ratio for KC-10 aircraft temporarily dedicated to TRANSCOM. The only significant KC-10 manning problem occurred in the AOR when many crews pushed the flying-hour limitations of 125 hours per 30 consecutive days as specified in AFR 60-1, SAC Supplement 1. In an effort to keep only highly experienced crews in the AOR, the theater's no-rotation policy prevented SAC from rotating crews with high flying times. Therefore, SAC was forced to raise the flying-hour limitation from 125 hours to 150 hours per 30 consecutive days. Had additional crews been sent to the AOR, or if the no-rotation policy had been relaxed, the waiver may not have been necessary. Even with the waiver, crews approached or exceeded the 150‑hour limit in isolated incidents. The 330-hour limitation per 90 consecutive days, as required by AFR 60-1, SAC Supplement 1, was not waived. While KC-10 manning was not as serious a problem, aircraft availability was. Because of limited availability and high demand, KC-10 training came to a virtual standstill. During the period from 30 October 1990 through 15 January 1991, a backlog of over 60 students developed. Hq SAC/DO dedicated three KC-10 aircraft to combat crew training squadron (CCTS) training at March AFB in California. From 15 February 1991 through 21 April 1991, over 130 student sorties were flown, and a total of 44 students received their SACR 60-4 qualification evaluations. This brought the CCTS student load back to normal levels, and with increased KC-10 availability, the special CCTS was terminated and returned to unit level on 26 April 1991. To provide additional relief to the KC-135 force and to prevent the call-up of additional KC-10 Reserve associate units, SAC implemented STOP LOSS for all tanker specialties. This personnel program prevented voluntary separation of qualified tanker crew members and remained in effect until the first of June 1991.413 Operational Issues Air Tasking Order The number of SAC tankers allocated to the various strike packages was a USCENTAF decision. The U.S. Navy deemed the initial allocation of tanker support to Naval air unacceptable. This perceived problem was alleviated when the United Kingdom made tankers available to the Navy, four carriers were positioned in the Persian Gulf to reduce flight time and fuel requirements to target areas, and SAC tankers became available to Navy aircraft on a “when available” basis. The scheduling and assignment of tankers was labor intensive and a major factor in the time required to produce each air tasking order (ATO). Scheduling tankers was virtually the last part of the ATO construction process. The tanker schedulers had to wait until the receivers computed their routes of flight and onload requirements. This constraint allowed for only a short time (2 to 4 hours) to deconflict the airspace, schedule the tankers, and task the various air refueling units. Significant inroads were made toward improving the automation of scheduling as the operation progressed. Further improvement in the actual assignment of air refueling assets to receivers could result in an increase in total offload capability and shorten the ATO processing time for future operations.414 Airspace Air space was the critical limiting factor affecting air refueling during Desert Storm. This problem was not just confined to the theater of operations but was also a factor in the refueling areas on the Turkey/ Iraqi border and in the Mediterranean. Within the theater during heavier flying periods, additional tankers, regardless of configuration, could not have been used because airspace was unavailable. This was especially true as the war shifted to the Kuwaiti theater of operations (KTO) and the vast majority of air refuelings were being requested for the northeastern section of Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf. Within the theaters, additional tankers could have been scheduled during less intensive flying periods to reduce the overall utilization rate or to increase the overall number of attack sorties during a given twenty-four-hour period. Airspace was also a limiting factor for the forces stationed in Turkey. As an example, a dedicated air refueling area was used by the RC-135, North Atlantic Treaty Organization AWACS, and the F-15 CAP. The area was also utilized as an orbit area for the AWACS and the RC‑135. Later, when aircraft flying combat air patrol were pursuing defecting Iraqi fighters, two smaller orbit areas were set up on the southeast corner of the border between Turkey and Iraq. Despite reduced civilian air traffic, the airspace above the Mediterranean Sea was extremely congested. The congestion problems were compounded by severe language barriers between aircrews and the foreign air traffic controllers. Multiple ship refueling formations would often be vectored off course because the controllers were unable to communicate that a single aircraft should take a different route.415 Air Refueling Airspace Congestion During Desert Storm, the critical limiting air refueling factor was airspace congestion. Large strike forces were designed to overwhelm the enemy defenses. However, force size was constrained by the number of tankers that could be scheduled into the heavily congested air refueling tracks. This was especially true as the air campaign shifted to the KTO and the majority of air refueling took place over northeastern Saudi Arabia and the Arabian Gulf. As a result, there were more near mid‑air collisions (NMACs). The USCENTCOM planning staff monitored air refueling airspace congestion carefully. When the staff refined the initial air campaign before the war, it ran computer programs to track the number of tankers and receivers and modified the flow of the strike forces to even out the peaks in airspace congestion. During the war, the tanker scheduler who developed the tanker portion of the daily ATO flew on one of the AWACS. He would literally stand behind the AWACS controller at his console and assist with tanker track coordination. Having someone who knew the planned air refueling flow assist in monitoring the air traffic proved very useful. Nevertheless, the Air Force Inspection and Safety Center received 37 NMAC reports for Desert Storm. It estimated that reported NMACs equaled only a small fraction of those actually occurring. Table 17 shows selected NMAC details to illustrate the air traffic congestion and aircraft separation problems involving tankers. Of the 37 reports, 26 incidents had been fully investigated and closed out by l July. The balance of the reports may never be closed out because the incidents involved host nation air traffic control support. A disturbing trend is that these NMACs occurred at mid-to-high altitudes. Historically, over half of NMACs occur at low altitude, below 5,000 feet. One of the reasons for the mid‑to-high altitude NMACs was the configuration of the minimum risk routes (MRRs). Returning strike aircraft would follow the MRR corridors until inside the Saudi border and then proceed directly to their landing base, often cutting across the air refueling tracks. The practice was particularly dangerous at mid-to-high altitudes because of the higher aircraft speeds involved. During a high-altitude, head-on NMAC, there was simply not enough time for man and machine to react and take evasive action. The “see and avoid” concept worked some of the time; however, the “big sky” theory was operating more often than not.416 Fortunately, only one mid-air collision actually occurred. Table 17417 Tanker Near Mid-Air Collisions
Multipoint Refueling Expedited Air Refueling A large formation of receivers can mean that the first receiver to refuel will have the least amount of fuel at the end of the refueling track. To expedite air refueling in Desert Storm, quick-flow procedures were institutionalized that allow a large number of receiver aircraft to engage a limited number of refueling booms quickly. This also resulted in higher receiver to tanker ratios. Quick-flow procedures were designed for up to three flights of four receivers per tanker, a 12 to 1 ratio. After the first receiver is in contact with the boom and taking fuel, the next receiver moves from the right observation position to an on-deck position. This can be visualized as a loose fingertip (pilot technique) right wing formation with the receiver on the boom. These procedures also provided assurance that all aircraft in a package were topped off with fuel by the end of the refueling track. Significant reductions in boom cycle time were realized by reducing the “no contact” time between disconnect and contact for multiple receivers. The net result was an increase in capability for more receivers to refuel in a given period of time. The procedure also made it possible for an entire strike package to arrive at the refueling drop-off point with full tanks.418 Air refueling can be expedited by placing more offload points on a tanker; i.e., adding wing-mounted air refueling drogues. However, the time allocated for air refueling in Desert Storm was normally sufficient, especially when the above quick-flow air refueling procedures were used. A few strike forces were composed of receptacle and probe aircraft requiring either a DC-10 or multiple KC-135s with boom and drogues. Wing-mounted drogues would have decreased the number of KC-135s needed for composite forces. Wing-mounted drogues on KC-135 and KC-10 aircraft would have facilitated the refueling of Navy attack aircraft. KC‑135 Boom Drogue Assemblies At the start of Desert Shield, one air refueling drogue was deployed with every three KC‑135 aircraft. The supply of drogues was rapidly exhausted. Units needing drogues began assigning drogue orders the highest priority available, putting a large demand on the supply system. Additionally, many of the drogues in storage developed leaks when exposed to fuel because of dry unused O‑rings and seals. Replacements for drogues in storage were ordered, further increasing the demand on supply; finally, orders could not be filled in a timely manner. The majority of the inoperable drogues in the AOR were unserviceable because of coupling leaks. To provide relief, the drogue coupling leak limit was increased and limited field repair of seals and O‑rings within the coupling was authorized. Also, a drogue repair team was established to travel within the AOR repairing drogue assemblies. Management and direction of drogues became impossible from CONUS and were turned over to theater headquarters. As a result, the availability of drogues in the AOR improved and mission shortfalls due to faulty drogues were no longer a problem.419 F-117 Air Refueling The F-117 had been used in previous contingency operations. However, throughout its development and certification, only a limited number of tanker units were involved in refueling these aircraft. The tankers were primarily KC‑135Qs from Beale AFB and KC‑10s from March AFB. [DELETED] The first squadron of F-117s from Tonopah were refueled en route to Langley AFB by KC‑135Qs. KC‑10s operating in a dual role carried cargo and refueled the F-117s across the bridge into Saudi Arabia. The second squadron of F-117s were supported solely by KC‑10s. Early in the development of the Desert Storm plan, it was determined that ten KC‑135Qs at Riyadh would be insufficient to support planned F-117 missions. An intensive training program was then developed to train and qualify KC‑135R crews at KKI to provide the additional air refueling capability required to support F-117 missions.420 The maximum number of F-117s allocated to one tanker was two. The KC‑135R had the ability to support the two F-117s in both prestrike and poststrike phases. Navy Refueling During initial refueling of Navy receivers, tanker planners decided that the majority of naval refueling for training purposes would be provided by KC‑135s rather than KC‑10s. The motive behind the decision was to decrease the resistance and apprehension naval aviators felt concerning refueling from behind the KC‑135s. Following some months of air refueling training behind the KC‑l35, tanker planners travelled to each of the carriers in the Gulf. Statements made by Navy pilots and operations staffs on each carrier revealed that the pilots were no longer as uncomfortable refueling behind the KC‑l35. The scheduling of KC‑135s for Navy receivers between August 1990 and October 1990 had extremely beneficial results. The same training program was attempted with the Marines; however, an early mishap, in which the radome of an F‑18 was damaged by the basket of a KC‑135, stopped further advancements. Following the incident, the Marines refused to refuel behind KC‑135s at night and were hesitant to refuel behind them during daylight hours. The Marines specified KC-10s for all nighttime refueling and normally used their own KC‑130 if their refueling could not be accommodated by an Air Force KC‑10. Air refueling rendezvous procedures were modified from the standard Air Force procedures to accommodate the Navy. Multiple tanker air refueling cells normally consist of tankers stacked at 500-foot intervals. The Navy senior staff and the 17th Air Division (Provisional) Commander agreed to 1,000-foot intervals between tankers in the same cell. This change was primarily due to the method in which naval receivers rendezvous on KA‑6 tankers. Instead of proceeding through an air refueling initial point as Air Force aircraft do, they approach the air refueling cell from any direction. They generally view the tanker cell from a side view and plan to rendezvous with their respective tanker at or just below their refueling altitude. Due to these established procedures, they felt it was inherently unsafe to have the tankers at 500-foot intervals. Upon the insistence of 17th Air Division (Provisional) planners, they agreed to conduct all rendezvous at an altitude 1,000 feet below the lowest tanker in the cell in accordance with Air Force Regulations. Upon attaining visual contact with the tanker cell, the receivers would climb and join their respective tankers. 18 Directory: sgp -> library sgp -> Sgp country Programme Strategy for op6 sgp -> Itu-d study groups sgp -> Internship with Congressional Campaign Exploratory Committee — Only 4 spots left! sgp -> Using Well Logs in the Petroleum Industry sgp -> Telecommunication development bureau itu-d study groups Download 5.55 Mb. Share with your friends:
|