Recent evaluation challenges Liberty warriors

  • Published
  • By Capt. Trisha Wright
  • 48th Fighter Wing Public Affairs
ROYAL AIR FORCE LAKENHEATH, England --  While most Airmen have either participated in or are familiar with an Operational Readiness Inspection -- comprised of both the Phase 1 and Phase II portions--some are scratching their head over this week's Operations Evaluation, more commonly known as an "Op Eval," because it looks and feels much like a Phase II exercise.

So what's the difference between them? Both a little and a lot! A Phase II exercise and an Op Eval both test the same thing -- an installation's ability to function and respond appropriately in a deployed environment. However, the significant difference between both exercises lies in the evaluating agency.

An Op Eval is a North Atlantic Treaty Organization, better known as NATO, based deployment exercise using NATO standards and criteria to grade performance.

"An Op 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 at the 48th Fighter Wing, he said, we will only exercise "Op Evals" because the U.S. 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 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's the biggest hurdle for the wing's Airmen during an "Op Eval?"

According to Master Sgt. Russell Eidenschink, fire fighting evaluator for the exercise and member of the 48th Civil Engineer Squadron, "The Op 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 fire fighting function is basically the same, according to Eidenschink. The end result is that we have to generate aircraft and keep them safe, to include the ability to egress a pilot or being able to safely employ the techniques and procedures if there was an aircraft crash.

Similarly, as an evaluator, Eidenschink is also evaluating every Airmen's ability to safely protect their assets--i.e. 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 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 exercise was in preparation for an Operations Evaluation slated for mid-November when NATO inspectors will evaluate the wing's ability to operate in a deployed location based on NATO criteria.

Meyer believes the 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."