Recent ops eval challenges Lakenheath Airmen

  • Published
  • By Capt. Trisha Wright
  • 48th Fighter Wing Public Affairs
ROYAL AIR FORCE LAKENHEATH, England (AFPN) --  While most Airmen either have participated in or are familiar with an operational readiness inspection -- both the Phase 1 and Phase II portions--some are scratching their heads over a recent evaluation exercise held here.  The operations evaluation, more commonly known as an "ops eval," looks and feels much like a Phase II exercise, but there are some differences. 

A Phase II exercise and an ops eval both test the same thing, an installation's ability to function and respond appropriately in a deployed environment.  However, the significant difference between the two exercises lies in the evaluating agency.

An op eval is a NATO-based deployment exercise using the alliance's standards and criteria to grade performance.

"An ops eval is a NATO exercise and is roughly equivalent to the U.S. Air Force based Phase II exercise, " said Maj. Mark Wyatt, deputy chief of wing inspections. "Both evaluate our ability to operate in a deployed location."

"Since we fall under the NATO chain of command as well as the U.S. Air Force chain of command here (in United States Air Forces in Europe Command) we are required to demonstrate our proficiency for both exercises."

Typically the 48th Fighter Wing will only exercise op evals, he said. Because the Air Force recognizes that the Phase II is so similar, the base receives credit for exercising both functions.

"There are minor differences in what's expected (between the two exercises)," he said, "because we always train to employ our military power in conjunction with our NATO allies.

Capt. Victor Meyer, officer in charge of the unit control center during the exercise agrees that there aren't many differences between the exercises.

"Overall it's about the same," said Captain Meyer.  "The inspectors have done a good job hitting us with injects and it's been a good sample of what we might see in a real world deployment."

So what do Airmen here consider the biggest hurdle during an ops eval?

According to Master Sgt. Russell Eidenschink, firefighting evaluator for the exercise and member of the 48th Civil Engineer Squadron, "The ops eval uses different terminology than we are used to. In essence you have to translate their terms into our terms and demonstrated the ability to do what they are asking."

The firefighting function is basically the same, according to Sergeant Eidenschink.  The end result is that Airmen will have to generate aircraft and keep them safe, be able to safely egress a pilot or safely employ the techniques and procedures if there were an aircraft crash.

Similarly, as an evaluator, Sergeant Eidenschink also is evaluating every Airmen's ability to safely protect his or her assets, that is, use fire extinguishers and provide buddy care to anyone exposed to a fire.

One difference however, is the role host nation support plays in the exercise.

"Host-nation support is a big factor in fire," said Sergeant Eidenschink. "We need to be able to demonstrate the ability to set up a support agreement with a host-nation fire department as well as conduct training."

The recent local exercise here was to prepare for an ops eval slated for mid-November when NATO inspectors will evaluate the wing's ability to operate in a deployed location based on NATO criteria.

Captain Meyer believes this recent exercise has been a realistic test of their ability to function in a deployed environment.

"These types of exercises prepare you to react appropriately to particular situations," he said. "The exercise is generating the most likely scenarios that we may encounter and teaching us to react properly to whatever situation might pop up."

Comment on this story (comments may be published on Air Force Link)

Click here to view the comments/letters page