DISTRIBUTION A:
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
Document created: 1 March 05
Air & Space Power
Journal - Spring 2005
|
|
Ricochets and Replies |
We encourage you to send us your comments, preferably via e-mail, to aspj@maxwell.af.mil. You may also send letters to The Editor, Air and Space Power Journal, 401 Chennault Circle, Maxwell AFB AL 36112-6428. We reserve the right to edit the material for overall length.
Boydmania
Dr. Dave Mets’s article “Boydmania” (fall 2004) sparked considerable controversy among our readers. Clearly, we are still debating the proper way to interpret the late Col John Boyd’s legacy—OODA loops and all. We detected no neutral comments. Readers either loved the article or hated it. Most loved it. Here are some samples of the reactions we received:
I thoroughly enjoyed Dave Mets’s article. He did an outstanding job of debunking Boyd and his acolytes. My hat is off to Dr. Mets.
Gen Bennie L. Davis, USAF, Retired
I found Dr. Mets’s article on John Boyd excellent. John was a friend—passionate and brilliant in many ways but not perfect. The acolytes who would immortalize him were often “too close to the flame.” Dr. Mets brings reason and objectivity to the subject without disparaging the memory. John’s Aerial Attack Study, Energy Maneuverability Study, and Patterns of Conflict briefing were important contributions to the body of knowledge. There were others—the Red Baron Reports, TAC-85, the Fighter Force Modernization Study Group Report, TCMs 3-1, and AIMVAL/ACEVAL, to name a few. John’s contribution was important and recognized by the secretary of the Air Force.
Lt Gen Robert E. Kelley, USAF, Retired
I am a fan of Colonel Boyd’s work—his insight and perspective deserve discussion at every level of force planning and application—but I absolutely agree with the points made by the reviewer. His article is very thoughtful and well worth the time spent reading it.
Capt Bill Johnson, US Navy
As far as I can tell, Dr. Mets has no idea what he’s talking about. Does Mets even understand that the OODA loop theory stresses the vital importance of situational awareness and intelligence gathering/analysis (without a doubt the number-one culprit behind every US military blunder in the last 75 years)? Just doing your loop “faster” as measured by a timeline is one of the classic misunderstandings of Boyd’s theory, and Mets fell right into it.
Maj John Lance, USAF
Regarding the outstanding review by Dr. David Mets of Robert Coram’s Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War, Dr. Mets laments that he is “alone looking into the mirror and coming away with a negative view.” He’s not as alone as he believes. Admittedly, my Air Force career is still quite young, and I have yet to see an assignment in “the Building.” However, it took only a few chapters of Coram to realize that the author’s cynicism regarding the entire Air Force establishment clouds any real lessons he wanted the reader to take away. I think Dr. Mets’s implied skepticism about the thoroughness of Coram’s research and his uncritical use of interview sources is entirely warranted. Also, Dr. Mets’s more evenhanded treatment of issues like missiles versus guns and the Fighter Mafia versus “Goliath” was refreshing compared to Coram’s decidedly one-sided view.
Capt Brian D. Smith, USAF
Disclaimer
The conclusions and opinions expressed in this document are those of the author cultivated in the freedom of expression, academic environment of Air University. They do not reflect the official position of the U.S. Government, Department of Defense, the United States Air Force or the Air University.
[ Back Issues | Home Page | Feedback? Email the Editor ]