Has the Air Force lost its brand?
The US Army seems to think so. It is establishing its own air arm, to be more responsive to tactical needs on the ground, where today’s battles are increasingly won or lost. The Army’s focus is on unmanned surveillance aircraft under control of local (Army) officers:
. . . [I]n Iraq, the Army has quietly decided to try going it alone for the important surveillance mission, organizing an all-Army surveillance unit that represents a new move by the service toward self-sufficiency, and away from joint operations.
. . .
The work of the new aviation battalion was initially kept secret, but Army officials involved in its planning say it has been exceptionally active, using remotely piloted surveillance aircraft to call in Apache helicopter strikes with missiles and heavy machine gun fire that have killed more than 3,000 adversaries in the last year and led to the capture of almost 150 insurgent leaders
Brands are about performance, not “essence”
The Army’s air power initiative illustrates the rule that to sustain a brand, you have to deliver the goods. Your iconic “essence” is immaterial. You perform, or a better brand takes your place. Sometimes, customers take matters into their own hands—as in the case of the US Army.
The task force of about 300 people and 25 aircraft is a Rube Goldberg collection of surveillance and communications and attack systems, a mash-up of manned and remotely piloted vehicles, commercial aircraft with high-tech infrared sensors strapped to the fuselage, along with attack helicopters and infantry.
Bottom line: Brands of “essence” never have a chance against brands of innovation.
Photo: Wikipedia
June 28th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
I don’t know if it was part of the brand, but the suggestion the Air Force made to enlisted people was that it was a great place to get a technical education with a very low chance of seeing combat. That is now changing as Air Force people are being rotated into ground situations normally seen by Army and Marines.
June 30th, 2008 at 9:18 am
That’s a very good observation, one that points to a larger issue of the professional military brand itself. It really appears that the current US administration has undermined the (professional) US military brand. It has forced the armed services it into a poorly-conceived engagement where tours of duty have been extended far beyond the norm, imposing additional hardships on soldiers, and making a military career far less attractive. Recruiting has become so difficult that standards have been lowered, thus creating a downward spiral. If the US military doesn’t act soon, the future US military brand may well be Blackwater—force for hire and no accountability.