AIR FORCE HANDBOOK SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE. 1 SEPTEMBER Civil Engineering. FACILITY REQUIREMENTS. NOTICE: This. requirements are defined in ANGH , ANG Standard Facility AFMAN 32 to assign occupancy and to program new facilities. AFM 32 Facilities Requirements-Civil. Uploaded by AIR FORCE MANUAL 20 APRIL Civil Engineering FACILITY See AFH V7.
|Published (Last):||7 December 2015|
|PDF File Size:||4.17 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||11.78 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Search the history of over billion web pages on the Internet. This research developed a spreadsheet analysis tool that takes hard requirements and compares them with existing capabilities at a given location. Through gap analysis, the tool produced infrastructure requirement shortfalls and associated costs to satisfy the shortfalls. IV Acknowledgments I would like to express my sineere appreciation to my research advisor, Doctor Alan Johnson afhh his guidance and support throughout the course of this thesis effort.
His interest, insight, and experience were invaluable in keeping my efforts in focus and on schedule. I would also like to extend my appreciation to everyone in Air Mobility Command Planning and Programs Requirements Division that contributed to this effort: I would also like to thank the individuals from the C Special Programs Office that contributed: Above all, I would like to give special thanks to my wife for her patience, understanding, and support throughout the course of my work.
32-084 V Table of Contents Abstract. Introduction General Issues Beddown is the process and act of placing a unit, mission or activity on real property for longer than one year. Actions are taken to position Air Force units worldwide, which include selecting sites and resolving political, airspace, environmental, and beddown issues.
Such actions may range from establishing and maintaining units in permanent facilities beddown to arranging access, transit, and service agreements for contingencies, exercises, and visits AFPD 32-10884 Requirements are developed for global peacetime and wartime planning. What-if scenarios are constantly being analyzed for the movement of aircraft within the command.
Infrastructure shortfalls and a rough order of magnitude cost are the main requirements for each scenario. At times, the timeline required for the completion of these scenarios is as little as two hours. A typical 32-108 begins with any combination of what, where, when, and how many — type of aircraft, location of beddown, time frame for the decision, and the number of aircraft involved.
Currently, infrastructure requirements for a proposed location are accomplished through corporate knowledge, electronic inquiries, and manual lookup. Corporate knowledge is dependent on the individual, their level of experience, and their knowledge of Air Force systems. The electronic inquiries consist of telephone calls to community planners from installations in question, electronic mail back and forth to different areas of expertise, and investigations into databases.
The manual lookups are accomplished via as-built drawings on record, air field evaluations, and real estate records. These numbers are compared to what is currently available and a list of shortfalls is developed.
BY ORDER OF THE AIR FORCE HANDBOOK 32-1084 Civil Engineering
The corporate knowledge of beddown analysis has not qfh been captured in a management information system. No single decision analysis tool exits that can promote fast, consistent beddown analyses. Problem Statement Currently, infrastructure requirements for a proposed beddown location are accomplished through corporate knowledge and manual lookup. The purpose of this research is to develop a decision analysis tool that compares hard requirements versus existing capabilities and through gap analysis identifies infrastructure requirement shortfalls and associated costs to satisfy these shortfalls.
Research Objectives This thesis will be based on three objectives through which the research problem will be addressed. Each objective is not independent of the other, but each may not sfh be fully accomplished before looking at the next.
The first objective is to understand the current what-if scenario process. This includes identifying the controlling factors, quantification of those factors, and relative importance of each.
These factors will be identified through current directive for infrastructure requirements, as well as discussion with subject matter experts. The second objective will be to link the controlling factors 23-1084. The 32-10884 will begin with deciding what decision analysis tool is best suited for this problem and it will then be implemented. The final objective will be to validate the tool using historic scenarios as well as current day scenarios. A historic scenario will be analyzed and the results will be compared to the actual historic results.
Also a current day scenario will be analyzed and the results will be compared to a current day manual lookup exercise.
Research Questions To meet the objectives of this research, the following questions were developed: What are the key xfh to consider when conducting beddown planning? How are these factors quantified? What is their relative importance? What relationships link these factors together?
What potential issues might arise with implementation and how might they be addressed? Methodology This research will begin with an extensive review of literature, current tools, and discussion with subject matter experts. From the information gathered, the key factors will be identified, quantified, and relationships will be connected.
From this, a spreadsheet based decision analysis tool will be distilled, tested, and validated. Limiting factors and shortfalls will be investigated from lessons learned and expert input. The literature available for this application is limited mostly to tools developed by the military and military contractors. These tools will be investigated for the possibility of being 23-1084 to this problem. BCAT and ATT will also be used as a beginning point for the development of a spreadsheet tool which avh then be refined to fit this research.
Assumptions and Limitations The current tools that are being used as a part qfh this research were developed for the military and for different types of missions. Another limitation is within the cost portion of the final product of this research. When this is done, line item costs and projected 5 cost factors are updated. To maintain any level of aecuraey, the cost portion of this new 3-21084 will need to be updated with any 32-0184 made to 32-108 Cost Handbook. A major assumption being made is that the researeh driving this methodology is purely a Headquarters perspeetive.
Any similar base-level infrastrueture investment that has been previously programmed will not be eonsidered through the use of the tool developed by this researeh.
Lastly, this researeh will not take any politieal elimates into eonsideration. This researeh will attempt to synthesize a spreadsheet based deeision analysis tool that will do away with the manual lookup method that is currently being used to aeeomplish this task.
AFMAN Facility Requirements Standards | WBDG – Whole Building Design Guide
To do this, subjeet matter experts and the BCAT and ATT tools will be used to develop key faetors, relationships between them, how they are quantified, their relative importanee, and the basis of this new tool. Finally, the methodology to meet the objectives and answer the research questions was discussed as well as the assumptions and limitations of this researeh.
The following chapters explain the steps taken to address the problem being addressed by this researeh. Chapter II will diseuss the eurrent what-if scenario proeess 6 and tools being used, and review the relevant literature. Chapter III will provide our methodology for meeting the objeetive and researeh questions of this researeh. Chapter IV will discuss the results and analysis of the tool developed by this research. Finally, Chapter V will synthesize this research, discuss implications for AMC, and recommend future research possibilities.
Currently the Air Force is in high operations tempo and has been for many years.
Thanks to space utilization efforts, Environmental Management finally ‘home’
As a corporation, we are very good at contingency preparation, deployment, employment, and recovery. This type of beddown is done quickly with very little permanent infrastructure. Technology and innovation have dramatically shaped things over the years changing the use of slide rules to computers that fit in the hand for difficult calculations. The same calculations that took minutes now take seconds. The Air Force has been bedding down people, missions, and weapon systems before More specifically Air Mobility Command has been planning tanker and air lift beddown from way back with its roots in Strategic Air Command.
These requirements are developed for changes in threat or strategy, i. A predicament occurs when individuals synthesize these directives into a base of corporate knowledge that they can use to make recommendations to leadership. When leadership has a question about moving X number of aircraft to Y location what-if scenariosthese individuals must either work from memory or turn directly to the corresponding directive, chapter, and page to develop a solution.
To further complicate this issue, this corporate knowledge is not satisfactorily captured to be passed on to others. The table contains aircraft types and their respective infrastructure requirements by category codes.
Category codes are used by the Air Force as numerical identifiers for different types of facilities. For example, the category code represents runway pavements. The numbers avh from this table are compared to what is currently available and a list of shortfalls is developed.
This research is not a case of having a smart piece of technology and trying to find a 9 problem to apply it to, but rather a case of having a problem and developing a system to apply as a solution.
Information Systems This research will investigate three deployment type operation tools as 32-084 means to gain an understanding of their information organization, connection of controlling factor relationships, and attempts in overcoming the resistance to technology acceptance.
The research was based on defining a methodology for determining manpower and equipment deployment requirements and was summarized by the prototype research tool START which illustrates the methodology. Adopting a planning strategy based on a portfolio of capabilities suggests the need to develop a means to calculate swiftly the manpower and equipment required to generate each of the capabilities in that portfolio.
This need, in combination with the current expeditionary posture of the Air Force, highlights the value of expediting deployment-planning timelines. Tabletop plans and war plans can take years to develop. This process gives planners valuable experience that translates into better deployment plans when real world crisis occurs.
In some instances the planners use the tabletops as templates. START illustrates how the methodology of this process can be implemented into an analysis tool for this capability.
It was developed with two objectives in mind: Knowledge of what material is needed at a base to attain eapabilities given the state of the base, the type and mission of the aireraft and other parameters exists organieally within eaeh funetional area of the Air Foree.
In the development of the START model, rules developed by funetional areas as well as information eolleeted from various sourees where ineorporated. The funetional responses provided the eore of the logie and eritieal inputs that were implemented. Air Foree doeuments aeted as a supplement to the interviews. In some eases, funetional areas have already formalized their requirements as rules e. In other eases, the doeuments were used to fill in gaps and ambiguities that arose from the interviews.
This flow diagram along with the original narrative diseussion gives the reader the basie understanding of how the Air Foree deploys and the power of developing these types of analysis tools. This model will not be applied direetly to our researeh but supplies the understanding of organizing inputs, outputs, and data flow within the model. This model aids in identifying limiting factors, optimizing throughput, and simulating resources and process on an airfield.
The tools included in this model investigate the enablers and processes at an airfield from reception to onward movement and is evaluated at four points in the flow at the airfield.