Just Give Me the FACs! The Case on CAS

Abstract

Okay.. let's get this straight.. The Air Force doesn't want the close air support (CAS) mission, but they'd love to devote all their sorties to it. And... the Air Force would "rather easily" give up the CAS mission, even though it's the work nearest to their heart. And... the Army feels the Air Force has abandoned them in the CAS arena, but. they're happy with that... (pause for thought) .... Is anybody else confused? Sadly, the comments above have been repeated in one form or another for over forty years by a veritable "who's who" among military experts and service leaders. The very simple concept of close air support for friendly troops, born on the battlefields of World War I, has become an absolute nightmare in terms of inter-service rivalry and friction over the ensuing years. Although there is no single document which lists every Army/Air Force disagreement on the subject, the "rational reader's rapid review" process points to two questions which are the meat around each bone of contention: 1. What exactly is "close air support?" 2. Who should do it? On the surface, neither of these questions appear to be that formidable, so where's the rest of the iceberg? In his book, Essence of Decision Mr. Graham Allison provides the answer. He asserts that there are three different models which explain behavior: the rational actor model, the organizational process model, and the bureaucratic (personal) politics model. The unwillingness of the U.S. Air Force and Army to redefine the close air support mission and restructure the force to best accomplish it is the result of 2 organizational and personal politics rather than an objective assessment of future capabilities and threats. To prove the point, this paper will examine historical background, briefly asses current capabilities and limitations in the CAS arena, highlight the impact of individual personalities on the issue, and close by offering a roadmap for the future.

Open PDF

Document Details

Document Type
Technical Report
Publication Date
Jan 01, 1993
Accession Number
ADA440826

Entities

People

  • Mark Welsh

Organizations

  • National War College

Tags

Communities of Interest

  • Air Platforms
  • C4I
  • Human Systems
  • Weapons Technologies

DTIC Thesaurus Topics

  • Agreements
  • Air Force
  • Aircraft Equipment
  • Aircrafts
  • Airframes
  • Attack Helicopters
  • Command And Control
  • Fire Support
  • Fixed Wing Aircraft
  • Helicopters
  • House Of Representatives
  • Military Organizations
  • Procurement
  • Rotary Wing Aircraft
  • Second World War
  • War Colleges
  • Warfare

Readers

  • Aerospace logistics and air mobility.
  • Educational Psychology
  • Strategic Security Studies