Combat Air Power: Joint Mission Assessments Needed Before Making Program and Budget Decisions
DIANE Publishing, 1996 - Всего страниц: 96
This comprehensive report on U.S. air power examines whether the U.S. Secretary of Defense has sufficient information from a joint perspective to prioritize programs, objectively weigh the merits of new program investments, and decide whether current programs should receive continued funding. Summarizes major changes in U.S. air power capabilities since 1991 and the broad capabilities of potential adversaries. Synthesizes the findings of six individual air power reviews that were conducted over the past two years. Charts and tables.
Отзывы - Написать отзыв
Не удалось найти ни одного отзыва.
acquisition programs advice air defense Air Force air power programs alternative analysis analytical arms assessments assets attack attack aircraft Based billion bombers budgets Chairman changes Chiefs of Staff combat air power combat aircraft commanders comprehensive considered continue conventional cost decisions Department developed effectiveness enemy enhance equipment estimated Evaluation example existing expected fighter Figure fiscal year 1996 funding further future God's helicopters identified improve increase integrate interdiction inventory investments issues Joint Assessments Joint Chiefs joint requirements Joint Staff joint warfighting jroc jwca levels Limited long-range major meet military missiles mission area modernization programs Navy needs night Office operations perform plans potential adversaries priorities production projected proposals range recommendations reconnaissance reduce requirements responsibilities Roles Secretary of Defense Security strategy Strike surveillance teams threat transfers U.S. air power United upgrades warfighting capabilities weapons
Стр. 5 - Defense on the priorities of the requirements identified by the commanders of the unified combatant commands and on the extent to which program recommendations and budget proposals of the military departments and other DOD components for a fiscal year conform with priorities established in requirements of the unified combatant commands.
Стр. 55 - F-22 program was initiated in 1981 to meet the evolving threat projected for the mid-1990s. Since the F-22 program entered full-scale development in 1991, the severity of the projected military threat in terms of quantities and capabilities has declined. Instead of confronting thousands of modern Soviet fighters, US air forces are...
Стр. 23 - The Joint Chiefs of Staff are the principal military advisers to the President, the National Security Council, and the Secretary of Defense...
Стр. 13 - ... joint requirements; (4) determine the most cost-effective means to satisfy any shortages; and (5) where excesses exist, assess the relative merits of retiring alternative assets, reducing procurement quantities, or canceling acquisition programs.
Стр. 2 - House of Representatives The Honorable CW Bill Young Chairman The Honorable John P. Murtha Ranking Minority Member Subcommittee on Defense Committee on Appropriations House of Representatives...
Стр. 64 - ... (3) as part of its mission to assist the Chairman in assigning joint priority among existing and future programs meeting valid requirements, ensure that the assignment of such priorities conforms to and reflects resource levels projected by the Secretary of Defense through defense planning guidance...
Стр. 53 - We agree that overlapping capabilities provide combatant commanders with desirable operational flexibility, but the question is whether, in the post-cold war era, the United States needs or can afford the current levels of overlapping redundancy.
Стр. 5 - In addition to other matters assigned to it by the President or Secretary of Defense, the Joint Requirements Oversight Council shall — "(1) assist the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in identifying and assessing the priority of joint military requirements (including existing systems and equipment) to meet the national military strategy; "(2) assist the Chairman in considering alternatives to any acquisition program that has been identified to meet military requirements by evaluating the cost,...
Стр. 11 - Bottom line: a staggering target overkill exists in Fortress America, even for fighting two wars at once. The GAO has documented the redundancies in a 1996 study: The services already have at least 10 ways to hit 65 percent of the thousands of expected ground targets in two major regional conflicts. In addition, service interdiction assets can provide 140 to 160 percent coverage for many types of targets. Despite their numerous overlapping, often redundant, interdiction capabilities, the services...
Стр. 6 - ... alternative solutions, including the joint acquisition of systems with the other services. In addition, because DOD does not routinely develop information on joint mission needs and aggregate capabilities, it has little assurance that decisions to buy, modify, or retire systems are sound.