Talk:Hobson Plan

Areas for Improvement

Hobson Plan I have never seen an explanation for this term (or who Hobson was). Official references to this call it the wing base organization plan. If the title remains, an explanation is needed for the term.

The Old System An explanation of what the system was is needed. Only an example is given and it does not distinguish between operational control and administrative control. The 311th reported to Fifteenth Air Force operationally when it was at MacDill. The example is also anecdotal and unreferenced.

Dating The article implies that the reorganization occurred when the USAF became a separate service. In fact, it predates the replacement of the AAF, with the first experimental T/D units formed in the summer of 1947. It also implies that the plan was adopted world-wide at the time. In fact the 1947 experimental T/D wings were limited to combat units in the US. It was not until 1948 that the plan was adopted on a permanent basis and at the same time adopted overseas and by the support commands. Ravenstein's Combat Wings and Volume VI of Craven and Cate both address the motivating factors and implementation briefly. Strategic Air Command was trying out the concept as early as January 1947 with provisional units and support commands, like Air Transport Command were also toying around with provisional units. Continental Air Command did not implement the organization for reserve units until June 1949 and the Air National Guard only joined in by October 1950,

The person in charge of the wing would in turn be an experienced air combat leader This was not a new feature of the reorganization. In fact, law (a now superceded portion of the United States Code) required commanders of flying units to be rated pilots. I believe the statute was a part of the 1926 Act establishing the Air Corps. This might be addressed in an AFHRA historical study.

Squadrons would be assigned to groups, which in turn were assigned to a wing Again not a new feature of the plan.

Groups existed more on paper than reality, often consisting of a commander and an assistant at first, but eventually were phased out, and the administrative unit survived in non-combat roles. This would mean that an operations group would often control all the base functions I'm not sure what we are talking about here. What groups?

Loring Air Force Base I think a better example would be a wing at a base that was impacted by the reorganization, The 42d Bombardment Wing was not established until 1953. In addition, from 1955-1990, the 2192d Communications Squadron (under several designations) was not assigned to the wing until Air Force Communications Command was broken up.

It also meant that all groups would be renamed wings Just not true.

Over the years, the plan was changed, but the concept has remained the same in terms of organization No it hasn't. In 1952 SAC adopted the Dual Deputy system, which was adopted by other commands piecemeal until it was air force wide around 1963. In the 1970s this system was replaced by the Tri-Deputy organization. Neither of these operated through groups. The Objective Wing reorganization of 1991-1992 represented a return to the 1947 organization,

Detail Needed Not enough discussion of the combat commander controlling the organizations supporting his group on the base. Experimental system was Airdrome Group (with integral lettered squadrons), Maintenance & Supply Group (with integral squadrons), and Station Medical Group (no components) reporting to a new institution, the single base combat wing. The final system replaced the integral squadrons of the Airdrome (renamed Air Base) and Maintenance & Supply Groups with squadrons (and a Finance Disbursing Unit) with the wing's number. The immediate preceding system was to have a combat group and an air service group on the same base. The air service group provided the same support as the later Airdrome and Maintenance & Supply groups through its Headquarters and Base Service Squadron (replaced by the Airdrome Group) and its Air Engineering and Air Materiel Squadrons (replaced by the M&S Group). However, the Air Service Group reported through an entirely different chain of command than the combat group did. The problem within the AAF was big as any presented by a Cavalry Colonel in command of an Air Base. Also need mention of the change in the role of the wing from one controlling several combat groups on different bases to one controlling combat and support groups on a single base.

But it's a good start. One idea for discussion. It's arguably the most important reorganization in the USAF, but should the article be expanded to include other major USAF reorganizations, like the Dual Deputy, Tri-Deputy and Objective Wing organizations mentioned above, plus the SAC Combat Wing Reorganization, Production Oriented Maintenance Organization, Objective Medical Reorganization, Standard Wing Organization (the current structure) or the failed Air Force Materiel Command Transformation? --Lineagegeek (talk) 00:06, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

"Base Plan"

I have removed the capitals and quotes from the lead sentence.

Presumably, the use of the term "Base Plan" is a reference to the Base Unit system adopted in the US in the spring of 1944. I know of no references to this system as the "Base Plan."

Also, this Base Unit system was not universal by any means. It was not adopted for combat units. The few combat units still training in the US after the spring of 1944 (mostly B-29 and long range fighter units) trained alongside the "new model" Air Service Groups that were to support them overseas. When a limited number of combat units remained active after the war, they were accompanied by Air Service Groups as well. As a result, there were two organizational models existing alongside one another in the AAF. All overseas units (very few of the overseas Air Transport Command and none of the overseas Airways and Air Communications Service Base Units were responsible for managing a base) used the Air Service Group, whose Headquarters and Base Service Squadron ran the administrative functions) for bases where combat groups were stationed. Smaller stations typically had Airdrome Squadrons, Base Service Squadrons, or Air Service Squadrons running them. In December 1947, USAFE did make some limited use of the Base Unit system. Even in the US, bases with combat groups assigned also had Air Service Groups and it was personnel from the Air Service Groups that filled out the new Airdrome Groups and Maintenance & Supply Groups. --Lineagegeek (talk) 22:59, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hobson Plan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130926022530/http://loringmilitaryheritagecenter.com/Squadrons_and_Services.html to http://www.loringmilitaryheritagecenter.com/Squadrons_and_Services.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:11, 5 November 2017 (UTC)