1. Analysis of Weather Forecast Impacts on United States Air Force Combat Operations Thesis Research Project by Major Karen Darnell, USAF Naval Postgraduate School (NPS) kmdarnel@nps.edu Advisors: Prof Tom Murphree, NPS Col Dave Smarsh, NPS Col Dave Smarsh, NPS AFWA/CC Briefing 16 March 2006 Research supported in part by funding from Office of Naval Research and Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center

2. Motivation and Goals CWT Challenges –AFMAN 15-129 & AFI 15-114: measure relevancy of AFW products to customers, conduct operational verification, develop process improvement metrics, and operator debriefs (face-to-face preferred) –Air Force Audit Agency Report released Sep 2005: deficiencies in customer feedback processes, no standard procedure in AFIs –Manpower not adequate to embed, high number of deployments Goals –Adapt existing web-based, near-real time system for collecting and analyzing data –Implement and test system to assess value AFW, ACC, & PACAF –Use results to provide AFW, ACC, and PACAF advice on how to alter procedures and allocation of resources to better accomplish goals Maj Darnell NPS AFWA/CC Brief, 16 Mar 06, POC: kmdarnel@nps.edu

3. Data and Methods Data: –From aviators: Beale AFB (U-2), Dyess AFB (B-1), Kunsan AB (F-16), Nellis AFB (A-10), Osan AB (A-10 & F-16), Whiteman AFB (B-2) –Type: planning/execution forecasts, mission planning impacts due to forecasts, aircrew-observed weather, operational impacts of weather on mission –Timeframe: Oct 05 – Jan 06 –NPS AF aviator survey Methods: –Paper copy and online forms from aviators (predominantly flight leads) –Data archived and analyzed in close to near-real time at NPS to calculate forecast performance and operational impacts metrics Maj Darnell NPS AFWA/CC Brief, 16 Mar 06, POC: kmdarnel@nps.edu

4. Results 107 Missions Analyzed: 82% Successful, 7% Unsuccessful, 11% Unknown Osan AB: 40% Dyess AFB: 17% Whiteman AFB: 16% Kunsan AB: 14% Nellis AFB: 8% Beale AFB: 5% F-16: 38% A-10: 24% B-1: 17% B-2: 16% U-2: 5% http://wx.met.nps.navy.mil/metrics/airforce PWFs indicated negative weather impacts:36% Mission plans changed due to PWFs: 21% MEFs indicated negative weather impacts:39% Mission plans changed due to MEFs: 21% Missions that experienced negative wx impacts: 36% Mean PWFFAC: 69.2%Mean MEFFAC: 69.2% Mean PWFPOD: 65.5%Mean MEFPOD: 65.5% Mean PWFFAR: 31.2%Mean MEFFAR: 52.1% Maj Darnell NPS AFWA/CC Brief, 16 Mar 06, POC: kmdarnel@nps.edu

5. Results Negative Mission Impacts Occurring Mission Plan Changes Positive Mission Contribution Potential Positive Mission Contribution Maj Darnell NPS AFWA/CC Brief, 16 Mar 06, POC: kmdarnel@nps.edu

6. Recommendations for AFW Include system in AFI 15-114 as prototype for customer feedback and metrics Compare mission success at bases with embedded vs non-embedded wx personnel Direct R&D, E&T funds toward surface visibility, cloud ceilings and cloud layers Educate aviators on wx products via IRC Adapt this system to OWSs Maj Darnell NPS AFWA/CC Brief, 16 Mar 06, POC: kmdarnel@nps.edu