Guest Gonads Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 Anyone heard anything out of the Corona? We have heard that the PAD for the new nuke paradigm has already been written and the conference was pretty much just an informational meeting. What about AFCyber? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gonads Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 Looks like AFCYBER is going to be a NAF within Space Command. But if Space Command is the new AFSTRAT ... Air Force Senior Leaders Take Up Key Decisions 10/7/2008 - WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- The nuclear enterprise, cyber organization, end strength, force shaping, and command and control of Air Force operations were just some of the topics discussed when Air Force senior leaders met at CORONA on Oct. 1-3 at the U.S. Air Force Academy, Colo. Secretary of the Air Force Michael B. Donley set the tone stating, "Over the past two days we addressed several issues, making decisions on key Air Force missions necessary to move our Air Force in the right direction." The Air Force Chief of Staff, Gen. Norton Schwartz, followed with comments on the importance of the conference saying, "CORONA is a forum for decision. The teamwork manifested in this room will allow us to accomplish what our Air Force needs done." As a follow-up to the recent nuclear summit, the briefings and decisions at CORONA were dominated by discussions on the nuclear enterprise. Discussions included options to reconfigure the command structure for nuclear forces, roles and responsibilities of the Nuclear Weapons Center, the required skills and force development for personnel conducting the nuclear mission, and stand-up of the new nuclear-focused staff element organization within Air Force headquarters. The leadership also decided to establish a nuclear focused major command to concentrate Air Force support for the nuclear and deterrence missions. "We will announce decisions soon because they are crucial steps toward attaining excellence in our nuclear enterprise and re-vitalization of the nuclear culture across the Air Force," said Secretary Donley. Initial planning will be integrated into the Air Force Nuclear Roadmap, which will be unveiled in a few weeks. In addition, the senior leaders discussed the Air Force active duty end strength ceiling, now to be 330,000 personnel, and addressed which missions and functional specialties should obtain additional allocations based on emerging missions as well as critically-manned career fields. "Force shaping across the Air Force is hard work. There are many factors that need to be considered as we determine where manpower billets will be placed...everything from new missions that are directly contributing everyday to joint operations to shortfalls in specific functional areas," said General Schwartz. "The leadership will work to close this issue for this budget cycle in the coming weeks." A key component of the Air Force's contribution to the current war on terrorism is the execution of command and control of air assets supporting theater operations. Leaders initiated discussions on how the service can better fulfill the responsibilities to organize, train, and equip command and control capabilities for the joint force commander, as well as how the Air Force can best identify and overcome potential shortfalls in our capabilities. "How we prioritize and utilize our command and control capabilities in support of joint force operations are key to the overall success of every mission," said General Schwartz. Also discussed was how the Air Force can improve support to joint force commanders. One decision made is to assign a senior Air Force officer to appropriate JFCs with command authority to direct air support. The leadership also decided to strengthen our air to ground integration by increasing the number and training of the Airmen supporting tactical air control systems and accepting offers from other services to integrate their personnel into our command and control units. Leadership also decided to establish a Numbered Air Force for cyber operations within Air Force Space Command and discussed how the Air Force will continue to develop capabilities in this new domain and train personnel to execute this new mission. "The conduct of cyber operations is a complex issue, as DoD and other interagency partners have substantial equity in the cyber arena," said Secretary Donley. "We will continue to do our part to increase Air Force cyber capabilities and institutionalize our cyber mission." Locations for the new nuclear command and cyber NAF were not addressed and require further deliberation. Other key AF issues discussed include an update on the status of joint basing initiatives, the development of a common Logistics Standardization Evaluation Program, and review of the concept of integrating the networks used to repair the Air Force's weapon systems. "We came together to discuss key issues, chart a way ahead and move forward with sound decisions," said General Schwartz. "Our goal is a more stable Air Force, focused on our core missions, as a key member of the joint team." "What Airmen do every day across the Air Force is not easy work. What our leadership team did over the last couple days at CORONA was not easy work," said Secretary Donley. "But we all know how to rise to the challenge and the Air Force is better because of everyone's efforts at making key decisions." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Smoke_Jaguar4 Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 I count at least four significant decisions in the AFNEWS Article: - Establish a nuclear focused major command to concentrate Air Force support for the nuclear and deterrence missions - Assign a senior Air Force officer to appropriate JFCs with command authority to direct air support. - Increasing the number and training of the Airmen supporting tactical air control systems and accepting offers from other services to integrate their personnel into our command and control units. - Establish a Numbered Air Force for cyber operations within Air Force Space Command Pulling Cyber out of 8AF and placing it under AFSPACE makes a lot of sense. It will let the Mighty Eighth focus on it's core mission: bombers, to include working with the new Nuclear MAJCOM (SAC reborn?). There are a lot of parallels between space and cyber; a lot of the training being stood up for cyber is already patterned on space. Furthermore it opens up better locations for the HQ. There is virtually no IT industry at Barksdale but there's a lot of inter-relation between network and space industries. AFSPACE offers Los Angeles, Onizuka (in Silicon Valley no less), Vandy, Denver, Colorado Springs, and Melbourne FL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlphaMikeFoxtrot Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 This showed up in the INBOX yesterday: 1) Global Strike Command will stand up and include 8th AF and 20th AF (removed from AFSPC) 2) 24th AF will stand up as the CYBER NAF and replace 20th AF w/in AFSPC 3) SMC will remain under AFSPC but nuke sustainment will move to Global Strike Command 4) A10 will stand up as part of HAF Air Staff Location of Global Strike Command and 24th AF TDB... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
busdriver Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Can you even get an internet connection there? The morse code connection is currently competing with the long entrenched semaphore community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Smoke_Jaguar4 Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 This showed up in the INBOX yesterday: 1) Global Strike Command will stand up and include 8th AF and 20th AF (removed from AFSPC) 2) 24th AF will stand up as the CYBER NAF and replace 20th AF w/in AFSPC 3) SMC will remain under AFSPC but nuke sustainment will move to Global Strike Command 4) A10 will stand up as part of HAF Air Staff Location of Global Strike Command and 24th AF TDB... Meanwhile, over at AFCYBER (P) someone LOL'd Good to see someone has a sense of humor. Now the real question is will Cyber Operators get to wear the Space Bag??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenkspaz Posted October 9, 2008 Share Posted October 9, 2008 I just got the CORONA Fall 2008 Decision and Tasker Review .ppt emailed to me. Lots of new things coming our way. It's pretty interesting. PM me if you want me to send you a copy via .mil address. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitaryToFinance Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 Did anybody else get that email today? Do we really need another MAJCOM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B*D*A Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 Haven't read the email yet, but the name sounds like the title to a cheesy 80's movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goblin Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 Care to enlighten us who didnt get the e-mail? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitaryToFinance Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 I didn't read it too thoroughly but it basically said that in mid January they're planning on standing up a new MAJCOM same as the thread title. Temporarily based out of Andrews I think it was... That was all I really took in from skimming the attachment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenkspaz Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 Care to enlighten us who didnt get the e-mail? It was formally announced in Oct at the CORONA this year. CORONA Thread I used to have copies of the manning/tasking briefings from the conference, but I deleted them a while back. Does anyone still have them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Johann Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 Global Strike Command? The AF keeps getting er and er... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brickhistory Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 Ummm, is there a difference between a "Global Strike Command" and "Air Combat Command?" Just askin'... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goblin Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 Just wait 20 years and it will be Air Force Air Global Combat Strike Command (AFAGCSC) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerMateo Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 Just wait 20 years and it will be Air Force Air Global Combat Strike Command (AFAGCSC) Air Force Universe Wide Strike Command...we can't leave the Space folks out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerMateo Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 The morse code connection is currently competing with the long entrenched semaphore community. Don't forget smoke signals...there are natives in that area of the country too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skitzo Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 This is the new nuke-centric command. Allright the missile part, I can see that. But what happens when AFCENT wants to task B-52s/B-2s in a non nuclear role? Do they rob them from PACAF or GSC? Either way, I like the idea of a seperate nuclear command but with mixed assets like BUFFs, you better bring more than one squadron online. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineline Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 Air Force Universe Wide Strike Command...we can't leave the Space folks out... How about Air Force Strategic Universal Combat Command? Of course, most of us will shorten it to 'SUCC'. -9- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeepGuyC17 Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 Haven't read the email yet, but the name sounds like the title to a cheesy 80's movie. I was thinking more along the lines of one of those '80s cartoons/action figure advertisements like M.A.S.K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Boom Posted December 21, 2008 Share Posted December 21, 2008 (edited) Allright the missile part, I can see that. But what happens when AFCENT wants to task B-52s/B-2s in a non nuclear role? Do they rob them from PACAF or GSC? Either way, I like the idea of a seperate nuclear command but with mixed assets like BUFFs, you better bring more than one squadron online. They probably won't be chopped to AFCENT, they'll just be there with GSC option to recall them (sorta like the way C-17's deploy). Edited December 21, 2008 by Boom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenkspaz Posted December 22, 2008 Share Posted December 22, 2008 1-Star Tapped to Lead Provisional Command Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BQZip01 Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 (edited) Ummm, is there a difference between a "Global Strike Command" and "Air Combat Command?" Just askin'... It's the difference between global assets and tactical assets (SAC & TAC back in the day). The argument can certainly be made that the long-range strategic assets are being neglected for the benefit of the fighter community. As an example, a single F-22's money could be used to modernize the entire B-52 fleet with a host of upgrades performing many of the same missions at a fraction of the cost. The same goes for modernizing our tanker force. How about affording the troops we need to do the job? I'm not saying we don't need the F-22, but simply the cost at which we are receiving them may be focused too much in the fighter realm. Allright the missile part, I can see that. But what happens when AFCENT wants to task B-52s/B-2s in a non nuclear role? Do they rob them from PACAF or GSC? Either way, I like the idea of a seperate nuclear command but with mixed assets like BUFFs, you better bring more than one squadron online. I believe that is part of the reason for the new BUFF squadron Did anybody else get that email today? Do we really need another MAJCOM? GSC=yes. see above. Placing 24 AF under AFSPC is misplaced, IMHO. If anything, it simply needs to be a numbered Air Force not under a MAJCOM. With the increasing reliance on the internet, its vulnerability to attack, and the sheer manpower that China has dedicated to it? Yes, yes, a hundred times yes. Right now, they are the nation states' world leaders in cyber attacks, IMHO. They have a massive quantity of troops doing nothing but cyber attacks. If you don't think we don't need a capacity to counter it, you are sorely mistaken. Edited December 23, 2008 by BQZip01 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerMateo Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 With the increasing reliance on the internet, its vulnerability to attack, and the sheer manpower that China has dedicated to it? Yes, yes, a hundred times yes. Right now, they are the nation states' world leaders in cyber attacks, IMHO. They have a massive quantity of troops doing nothing but cyber attacks. If you don't think we don't need a capacity to counter it, you are sorely mistaken. Current state of USAF networking is evidence of that. I really don't understand people that make fun of or dismiss the idea of a Cyber Command. It's probably the most necessary thing that is lacking out there currently...and I would argue it is more important that getting more F-22's, for the near future anyway. Arguably it doesn't belong in the Air Force, but who else are we going to give it to? The Army? That'd be a *great* idea (No it wouldn't). USAF is interested mostly because of the $$$'s associated with it, but it really makes the most sense to be integrated into the AF at least until it becomes it's own service (and I think it will...black flight suits and all...). We also should have called this an act of war: Chinese Hack Into Senator's Computer. Imagine the state of our defense if our computer shit all the sudden stopped working. Most can still navigate with a TPC, compass and stop watch, in fact, there are probably some folks out there that could spin back up on Cel Nav pretty quickly, but how do we communicate, coordinate, get recon, etc. Not to get all ASBC about it, but if we have any critical Center of Gravity it's our network/comm systems. If that shit breaks we're up a creek and the bad guys know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bucky60k Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 (edited) C. I really don't understand people that make fun of or dismiss the idea of a Cyber Command. It's probably the most necessary thing that is lacking out there currently...and I would argue it is more important that getting more F-22's, for the near future anyway. Latest edition of Aviation Week highlights that cyber attack is gonna be one the crucial ways to able to defeat the SA-20 (S-300) systems that the Iranians have acquired (if we ever do decide to attack their nuclear facilities). Pretty interesting to see the SA-20 SAM command posts using commerical using Leonovo laptops and Blackberrys to coordinate and network their SAM systems as well as using VOIP and civilian wireless freqs in order to counteract our dominance in jamming traditional C2 links. Edited December 24, 2008 by bucky60k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now