Strategic Command For The Mac!
No. USSTRATCOM is not a successor to SAC. SAC was an Air Force Command. When SAC stood down in May of 1992, it was part of a larger Air Force reorganization. The disestablishment of Military Airlift Command (MAC) and Tactical Air Command (TAC) was also part of that reorganization. The forces from the three commands were redistributed to two new Air Force Commands, Air Combat Command (ACC) and Air Mobility Command (AMC). The standup of USSTRATCOM was separate from the Air Force organization. Headquarters, United States Air Force, or a subordinate Air Force command, such as Air Force Global Strke Command, should process requests for former SAC records.
Strategic Command for the Mac!
At that time, USAF answered the question in the affirmative and, as a result, created Strategic Air Command and Tactical Air Command as bedrock major commands. SAC and TAC have held sway over missions and operations ever since and have come to seem indestructible.
They may not be. The question is before USAF again, and the answer may well be different this time around. It now seems likely that the Air Force, intent on reorganizing to apply airpower with maximum effect in a changing world, will categorize its missions as nuclear and conventional instead of strategic and tactical and will replace or revamp SAC and TAC with the new missions in mind.
[As this column went to press, the Air Force was expected to announce plans to dissolve Strategic Air Command, Tactical Air Command, and Military Airlift Command and combine their missions and assets in two new commands: Air Combat Command (ACC) and Air Mobility Command (AMC). As conceived, ACC would embody all fighters, all bombers, all ICBMs, all reconnaissance aircraft, some tankers, some tactical airlift, and all command, control, communications, and intelligence (C3I) aircraft. AMC would enfold all strategic airlift, most tactical airlift, some tankers, and all rescue and aeromedical evacuation aircraft and operations.]
Ideas in this vein are percolating in Air Force leadership circles. They spring from the notion that longtime distinctions between strategic and tactical forces and operations have become anachronistic and artificial in the new heyday of globe-girdling, multipurpose US airpower [see p. 26]. They also appear to be compatible with reorganization proposals, some quite bold, that Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Merrill A. McPeak and/or Air Force Secretary Donald B. Rice have already put into play.
It has been evident for some time that the case against strategic/tactical terminology and subdivisions has caught on in four-star country. General McPeak said as much early this year at an Air Force Association symposium in Florida.
He noted, for example, that F-15Es categorized as tactical aircraft struck strategic targets during the war against Iraq while B-52s stereotyped as strategic aircraft were used to bomb tactical targets, such as Iraqi Republican Guard positions, in the Kuwait theater of operations.
He continued, It seems to me it was right that we did [subdivide the Air Force) at the time. In the beginning, it was a rather straightforward proposition because Strategic Air Command supported the long-range nuclear deterrent and Tactical Air Command supported the airpower needs of the theater commander.
General McPeak also made the point that differences in range and payload once signified whether a plane was strategic or tactical but mean nothing nowadays. He noted that an F-15E can carry a bigger payload a greater distance without refueling than World War II strategic bombers could and that aerial refueling enabled eighteen squadrons of Air Force air-to-air and ground-attack fighters to fly nonstop from the US to the Gulf region just as expeditiously as did B-52 strategic bombers.
The Chief of Staff was asked at the AFA symposium whether reorganizing the Air Force around nuclear and conventional missions and commands might coincide with a unification of Air Force and Navy nuclear operations.
A month or so ago, General McPeak unveiled his initial plans for composite wings. The first such wing to blend tactical and strategic missions and assets would be the one at Mountain Home AFB. Shortly thereafter, General Loh addressed the question of how B-52s now belonging to SAC will fit into that wing to be run by TAC.
At some point, the Air Force may combine elements of TAC and SAC in a new composite command just as it is combining their airplanes in new composite wings. Teamwork between the commands is in fashion.
FTL is all about replayability. Your first defeat will be bitter, perhaps even surprising as the game is unapologetically difficult in its random generation. But once you understand the mechanics at work, casual space-farers will be sucked in by the simple premise and seasoned star captains will dig the complex strategic options at your disposal.
Focusing on the legendary Trojan War, the 20-year conflict between the kingdoms of Greece and Troy, the game provides the large-scale battles and strategic challenges that fans expect from the series. However, there are also elements of roleplaying, as you can take control of heroic leaders, such as the nimble but hot-tempered Achilles, who leads the fast-moving Myrmidon strike force, or the heavily armoured King Menelaus leading his troops in search of vengeance. You can also take command of both sides in the conflict, providing plenty of scope for replaying the game as you experiment with different heroes and playing styles.
Incident Command: The Incident Command System organizational element responsible for overall management of the incident and consisting of the Incident Commander (either single or unified command structure) and any assigned supporting staff.
Incident Objectives: Statements of guidance and direction needed to select appropriate strategy(s) and the tactical direction of resources. Incident objectives are based on realistic expectations of what can be accomplished when all allocated resources have been effectively deployed. Incident objectives must be achievable and measurable, yet flexible enough to allow strategic and tactical alternatives.
Unified Command (UC): In incidents involving multiple jurisdictions, a single jurisdiction with multiagency involvement, or multiple jurisdictions with multiagency involvement, unified command allows agencies with different legal, geographic, and functional authorities and responsibilities to work together effectively without affecting individual agency authority, responsibility, or accountability.
With seven distinct races and different abilities to choose from, Warhammer III feels like a Total War game. Which is a good thing, because the Total War franchise is well known for its heroes, highly strategic warfare, and large-scale epic battles. Additionally, Warhammer III has a customizable avatar that you can move around and fight with, making you feel like an actual character controlling the armies.
The Military Affairs Council (MAC) is comprised of business leaders, state and local officials, non-profit organizations, community leaders and retired U.S. flag and general officers to advocate and liaison with the military commands to:
In front of a packed audience on the South ramp flightline at Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph, Col. Scott Rowe, 12th Flying Training Wing commander, passed the guidon to the new 12th Operations Group commander, Col. James Muniz.
Muniz previously served as the United States Strategic Command liaison officer. He was responsible for coordinating air refueling and airlift missions in support of the Department of Defense's global deterrence and strategic options.
Muniz is a command pilot with more than 4,800 flying hours in the KC-135 R/T/RT, T-1 and T-6 with multiple deployments performing combat and contingency flight operations in USCENTCOM and USAFRICOM including Operations Southern Watch, Enduring Freedom, Iraqi Freedom and Odyssey Dawn.
The gameplay is a turn-based IGOUGO system following its inspired tabletop counterpart. Virtual chit counters represent units, and the game gives you the ability to change the stats layout like movement, attack and defence on the face of the counter. This varies across the air and naval units. An example is that your air force units have air-to-air and strategic bombardment stats that the land units do not possess.
What the Chinese General Chiang Kai-shek must have been worrying about at the time of the invasion should be the same as the players while playing as the Chinese. Although a sizable Sino army is at your command, the fanatical Japanese will push the Chinese further into the mainland, cutting off ports from Hong Kong to Shanghai and everything in between.
What sets this game apart from other wargames of similar stature is the special rules it provides each faction on taking certain cities or ports based on historical outcomes. For instance, If you attempt to take Singapore before taking Bandar Lampung, Kuala Lumpur and Saigon, it will be nearly impossible to take the great fortification of the Singapore island even with two army groups. I tried, and I failed. Historically, Yamashita fooled the British commander, even with a smaller force, into surrendering to the Japanese using strategically targeted supply blockades and a heart of a poker player.
Wallace Oakley is responsible for the company's human capital strategy, future of work and employee engagement efforts focused on growing talent for today and tomorrow. She leads a team of experts who deliver best-in-class practices in talent management, compensation, rewards and recognition, and total well-being, along with HR solutions such as workforce technology, strategic workforce data, analytics and insights, among others, to position Freddie Mac as an employer of choice.
Players will take command of either the Wehrmacht or the Red Army fighting to take specific territorial objectives and earn victory points. The sheer amount of units and systems at play is staggering and will take a lot of time to get through.