Dwell Times and Deployments

The military deploys. That's the nature of an expeditionary defense force. It is certainly more desirable, albeit expensive, to fight an enemy in their backyard than in your own.

When fighting the "Long War" as we are now, forces are deployed frequently. Often times, high-demand units (special ops, helicopters, infantry, EOD, etc.) without large numbers find themselves doing numerous repeat deployments.

Over time, these repeat deployments start to deteriorate the combat capacity of these units. Training cycles lapse, morale degrades, families are stressed, and retention falls to abysmal levels.

The DoD uses a metric known as dwell rate to depict a particular unit's deployment frequency, given in a ratio of time deployed to time at home. For example, a unit that is deployed for six months and then home for a year has a 1:2 dwell. the Office of Secretary of Defense (OSD) describes a sustainable dwell rate of 1:3-1:5 for its military units. A dwell rate of 1:2-1:3 is not considered sustainable, but can be used for high-tempo, short-term/duration operations. A 1:1-1:2 dwell rate causes "significant" deterioration in retention, proficiency, and force development. Anything less than 1:1 is clearly in the "red zone" with units being exhausted as fast as they are deployed. Retention and force development are near zero.

The USAF HH-60G community has been at a 1:1-1:2 dwell rate since 1993. Since 2005, the community writ large has been at 1:1. The OSD characterization of this level is:

"Rate of decay is rapid.  Significant mission tasks cannot be trained, development of forces all but ceases. Historically has resulted in significant losses due to lack of training and proficiency in basic mission tasks."

USAF Rescue forces continue to do their job, and do it well. Take for instance my previous article on the "Pedros" with hundreds of lives saved and record-breaking combat tempos. Unfortunately, job satisfaction alone will not provide enough long-term impetus to secure aircrew retention.

So what is the answer? Several studies have been done on this subject, but but comes down to supply and demand. Either the supply of forces (right now a force of 112 helicopters, 40% of which is Guard/Reserve) must increase, or the demand must go down. Joint and USAF studies have determined a force of 141-171 would be necessary to sustain current demand and support future requirements at a dwell of 1:2 or better.

This still does not meet the long-term sustainable level of 1:3-1:5 prescribed by OSD guidance. And with the recent decision to maintain the HH-60G force at 112, it would seem that digging the HH-60G force out of its 1:1 hole is still not achievable with current demand.