Air Mobility

In the immediate post-World War II period, Army aviation began to evolve from an observatory role to a mobility role. Helicopter air mobility began to develop in the Army from 1949 onwards. The outbreak of the Korean war assisted and accelerated the acceptance of greater helicopter air mobility within the Army. The Eisenhower period was a golden age for Army aviation, with rapid and extensive developments in air mobility doctrine and tactics. There was also a strong research and development effort to overcome the initial technological lag. These developments allowed the formation of the first air mobile division in 1965 to meet the growing demands of the Vietnam war. This work gives a new understanding of the process of military innovation. Moreover, this case study has important general implications for future military policy-making.

Since airlift was first used as a tool of national security during the Berlin Airlift, it has grown to deliver passengers, cargo, and fuel to operations worldwide in support of national security. However, Air Mobility Command is the single organization that performs for air mobility for the United States. Cm%Currently, the Air Force has structured Air Mobility Command for war, yet this command performs operations during times when the US is at peace. Air Mobility Command performs missions to support US military operations in hostile environments as well as humanitarian operations in non-hostile environments. The number of operations requiring mobility air forces has been on the rise since the Cold War ended 10 years ago. These steady-state operations seem to over task mobility air forces. This study centers on the question: Can Air Mobility Command's force structure, organized for two major-theater wars, fulfill that requirement and perform the steady-state operations in today's strategic environment? This study finds that Air Mobility Command's force structure cannot meet its requirements for two major-theater wars and that the current force structure is inefficient in meeting the requirements for steady-state operations. First, this thesis presents a primer to acclimate the reader to the complex environment and multifaceted requirements of mobility air forces. Next, this thesis examines Air Mobility Command's current force structure as determined by Department of Defense requirements for war. Then this thesis also describes the various types of missions that Air Mobility Command performs on a steady-state basis and evaluates the importance of these operations in fulfilling US National Security Strategy. Finally, this thesis recommends action that the Air Force and the Department of Defense should investigate in order to improve their air mobility capabilities in.

Mobility forces dominate air operations in the post?Cold War era, at least statistically. Colonel Lenderman examines this trend and

Global air mobility is an American invention. During the twentieth century, other nations developed capabilities to transport supplies and personnel by air to support deployed military forces. But only the United States mustered the resources and will to create a global transport force and aerial refueling aircraft capable of moving air and ground combat forces of all types to anywhere in the world and supporting them in continuous combat operations. Whether contemplating a bomber campaign or halting another surprise attack, American war planners have depended on transport and tanker aircraft.

Advanced aerial mobility is a newly emerging industry that aims to develop and operate new air vehicles potentially capable of safe, reliable, and low-noise vertical flight. The world has seen a recent increase in the adoption of electric vertical lift aircraft for urban, suburban and rural operations. These new innovations and technologies change the way that we move cargo and people, affecting industries across the economy. These changes will challenge today's airspace monitoring systems and regulatory environment. The U.S. government and its regulatory agencies need technical guidance to facilitate the development of these technologies, and to create the regulatory framework to foster the growth of this vertical flight industry to the benefit of the aviation industry. Advancing Aerial Mobility evaluates the potential benefits and challenges associated with this emerging industry. This report provides recommendations that seek to foster an environment in which the nation can maintain its leading position in developing, deploying, and embracing these new technologies. This publication presents a national vision for advanced aerial mobility, market evolution, and safety and security management.

This is the exciting story of the development of U.S. airmobile power from theory to practice, involving air transport, fixed wing aircraft, and attack helicopters culminating in Vietnam War operations. It includes analysis of airmobile combat operations; doctrinal and interservice disputes; equipment descriptions; and the organization of combat and support units. It also includes data about airmobility in South Vietnam's army and it features personal reflections of the author, who was at the center of airmobility development and who commanded large airmobile units. John J. Tolson in June 1939 participated in the first tactical air movement of ground forces by the U.S. Army. He was in all combat jumps of the 503d Parachute Infantry Regiment during World War II, became an Army aviator in 1957, and served as Director of Army Aviation and Commandant of the Army Aviation School. From April 1967 to July 1968 he commanded the 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile), Vietnam. (Includes many maps and photographs)

This study applies lessons learned from air mobility’s pivotal role in Field Marshal Sir William Slim’s World War II Burma campaign to contemporary air mobility operations. The author begins by tracing the evolution of air mobility from its pre-World War I roots to the Second World War, noting how its development proceeded despite the lack of coherent, codified doctrine. Next the author assesses Slim’s Burma campaign and how the key elements of organization, training and leadership, apart from air mobility, proved critical to Allied victory. Building upon this, the discussion turns to air mobility’s contributions to Slim’s joint campaign. From this analysis, the author identifies the tenets of air superiority, organization and air mobility normalization as being critical and enduring airpower lessons from the Burma theater. The closing chapters offer a primer on contemporary mobility operations before arguing that modern air mobility practitioners must account for five key essentials: superiority across the air and space domains; proper organization that promotes relationship building at the operational level of war; normalization of the complete air mobility supply chain and its accompanying idea of “air mobility mindedness”; training focused on increased interoperability; and the vital role of leadership.