The SAC Bombing and Navigation Competition

For nearly forty years, Strategic Air Command's best crews have gathered to participate in the annual SAC Bombing and Navigation Competition which took the name Proud Shield in 1986. Over the years, the competition had helped build morale and sharpen the competitive edge of SAC's bomber and tanker crews. More importantly, the 'bomb comp' had served to test crew skills and equipment under exacting conditions.

The Bombing and Navigation Competition had its origins in the late 1940s when America's strategic air forces were in a period of adjustment. In May 1948, SAC Deputy Commander Major General Clements McMullen instructed all bomber units to concentrate upon improving their bombing capability. He also announced that a competition would be held to reinforce this order and to focus attention on the need for improved accuracy.

The FB-111A participated in its first SAC Bomb Comp in November 1970 at McCoy AFB, Florida. Two FB-111A from the 340th BG at Carswell AFB, Texas made their first showing at the competition. The FBs made a stunning debut, with one crew capturing the wing bombing trophy while the other narrowly missed winning the navigation award. The criteria for winning the Fairchild Trophy had been changed and was awarded now to the outstanding bomber unit and associated tanker squadron in the combined fields of bombing and navigation. Since the FB-111's parent organization, the 340th BG, had no collected tanker unit, it was ruled ineligible for the Fairchild. In December 1971, SAC crews from all over the United States converged on McCoy AFB for the Eighteenth Bombing and Navigation Competition. Renamed 'Giant Voice', the competition was identical to the preceding year. SAC's B-52 units swept the competition and the FB-111s did not win a single event.

Because of the war in Southeast Asia, the competition did not take place in 1972 and 1973. The Bomb Comp resumed in November 1974 at Barksdale AFB, Louisiana. A turning point in the history of the competition was reached when 'Vulcan' and FB-111A broke the B-52's long monopoly over the top competition trophies. Even more significant was the performance of the 380th BMW. The 380th captured not only the Fairchild Trophy, but the crew and wing bombing trophies as well. The FB-111A's sophisticated avionics system made it especially difficult for the B-52 to compete against it.

For the next twelve years, the FB-111A did win every 'Bomb Comp' but three. Between 1974 and 1979, the 380th BW's FBs took home the Fairchild. In 1980, a B-52 Wing, the 320th, captured the Fairchild. For the next three years, 1981 to 1983, the trophy belonged to SAC's only other FB-111A wing, the 509th from Pease AFB, N.H. In 1984, the trophy passed back to the 380th. Finally, in 1985 the B-52s of the 97th Bomb Wing stationed at Blytheville, Arkansas broke the FB-111A's four years monopoly over the Fairchild.

The FB-111A's long reign over the 'Bomb Comp' had two effects on the combat competition, both of which were felt almost immediately. First, in 1974 SAC revived the practice of rewarding the best performance made by each category of aircraft. SAC had stopped this practice after the B-47 was phased out in 1965. Separate awards were given out in 1974 for the best F/FB-111, B-52, KC-135 and Vulcan missions. The second effect of the FB-111A preeminence in the Fairchild competition was the development of a long standing debate over the merits of handicapping. The alterations had little effect, and in 1977 the FB-111A won every award for which it was eligible. SAC Headquarters continued to oppose the institution of any outright handicapping system. Major General Earl M.Peck, SAC Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, noted that the current system served to highlight the FB-111A superiority. If the FB-111 units truly had the best equipment and crews, then, reasoned Peck, they deserved to win. Handicapping, on the other hand, would only make the B-52 appear equal to the FB-111A. This would have unfortunate consequences in regard to the public's perception of the FB-111. Any perception by the public that SAC's older B-52s were just as good as the more modern FB-111s would undermine the Command's efforts to further update B-52 and FB-111 systems. Given the FB-111s already controversial history, General Peck feared that allowing the B-52 to win would only perpetuate the public's impression that the FB-111A was an inferior aircraft. With these thoughts in mind, CINCSAC General Richard H.Hellis rejected Fifthteen Air Force's appeal for a handicapping system.

The 1975 Giant Voice competition was canceled and replaced by a military exercise nicknamed "Operation High Noon". Operation 'High Noon' served as a transition phase while SAC redesigned the Giant Voice competition. General Dougherty had three primary goals in reorganizing the 'Bomb Comp'. First, he sought to broaden participation in the competition in order to give all crews a feeling of participation in the 'Bomb Comp' progress. Secondly, he wanted to reduce the costs associated with the 'Bomb Comp'. Finally, General Dougherty sought to make the competition more meaningful by injecting more realism into the competition missions. As such, the reforms of 1976 reflected General Power's earlier efforts to transform the competition from a bombing tournament into a realistic test of capabilities of SAC's best bomber and tanker crews.

SAC reorganized the 1976 Giant Voice Competition into three distinct phases. During the first phase (July-August), every combat ready crew in SAC (with the exception of overseas units) would be evaluated with an eye toward selecting the top three crews of each unit. The top three crews from each unit, together with one 'wild card' crew chosen by the wing commander, would represent the unit at the second or semi-final phase which was held over a three day period in late September. Each crew flew a prescribed course which was scored by the 1st Combat Evaluation Group. The two highest scoring crews from each unit would then progress to the final phase. Scores from both the semi-final and final phases would be used to determine the competition winners. Finally, a two-day symposium would be held at Barksdale AFB to announce the winners and discuss the results. This three phases structure ensured that all combat capable crews would initially have a chance to compete, while the field was gradually narrowed down to each unit's best two crews.

Beginning in 1980, the semi-final phase was eliminated and thereafter the competition consisted simply of a preliminary phase and a final competition in which the two best crews of each SAC unit competed for top honors. The elimination of the middle phase allowed SAC to increase the number of missions flown in the final phase. The most important trend in the competition since 1976 have been the growth in the size and complexity of the tournament. Over the past ten years, non-SAC units have played a role in the competition. TAC F-111s have been regular contestants since 1974, and in 1977, Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve tankers joined the competition. In 1980, Royal Australian Air Force F-111s came to participate on a biennial basis. USAFE joined the 28th 'Bomb Comp' in 1984 when it sent two F-111F.

The participation of non-SAC units was less important than the steps taken to increase the level of difficulty in the competition. Electronic countermeasures became increasingly important as aircraft were required to evade and fend off "hostile" AAA and SAM defenses. In 1978, simulated launches of Short Range Attack Missiles (SRAM) were added to the competition. Each competition after 1978 included multiple simulated SRAM launches as well as the traditional high and low-level bombing. In 1979, an entirely new dimension was added when Air Defense Tactical Air Command (ADTAC) interceptors were sent to 'shoot down' the bombers during the competition. Now, SAC crews had to try and evade live opponents on their way to their appointed targets. Even greater realism was added in 1984 when SAC began to hold part of the competition over the Nellis AFB 'Red Flag' bombing range. The use of the Nellis range permitted competition aircraft to drop inert weapons for the first time in many years. It also provided a more challenging environment as bomber crews attempted to avoid a barrage of simulated anti-aircraft fire, surface-to-air missiles and NORAD interceptors.

Along with the new phases of the competition came a host of new awards. In addition to reintroducing awards for the best crew of each type of aircraft, Headquarters SAC created the General John C.Meyer Trophy in 1976.The Meyer trophy was awarded to the F/FB-111 unit with the best score in ECM and low altitude bombing. Eventually, the RAF's Tornado was eligible for this award as well. Another award which appeared in 1978 was the General Russell E.Dougherty Trophy for the best score in simulated SRAM exercises. By the mid-1980s, four additional awards were added to the list of major trophies. Two of them were the Curtis E.LeMay Trophy to the crew with the highest score in low and high-level bombardment. In 1984, the B.L.Davis Trophy was given out to the most improved unit.

Over the years, the SAC Bombing and Navigation Competition had evolved from a relatively simple bombing exercise to a challenging course which had tested the all round skills of SAC crews. Ground crews have been tested too, especially after the use of spare aircraft was banned in 1953. By the mid-1980s, high and low-level bomb runs, low-level navigation and terrain following, fighter intercepts, missile defense runs and a battery of other ECM tests had been combined to provide a meaningful challenge to SAC crews.

The competition was renamed "Proud Shield" in 1987 and with it came some changes. The biggest change came in crew selection. Every crew in the SAC wings got a shot to 'try out' for the competition during normal training. However, the four crews from each bomber and tanker unit who actually participated in the competition were selected by the 1st Combat Evaluation Group rather than by the unit themselves. The 1st CEG was also responsible for scoring the meet. Furthermore, the competition crews were not told that they would be participating until five days before the flights began. Another change in the Bomb Comp was that the bomber crews, upon completion of their low-level bombing runs, and even the tanker crews were required to regenerate their own aircraft. Flying crews would land at an unfamiliar base, deplane, check the oil and hydraulics, fuel the aircraft themselves and depart for their home base.

Starting in 1987, four new awards were presented to the crew chiefs under the "Glossy Eagle" restoration program and the winning aircraft were displayed during the three day Bomb Comp Symposium held at Barksdale AFB in November. The Symposium was a proper forum for the close of the Bomb Comp Competition. SAC crews who participated joined their commanders, distinguished civilian visitors, SAC staff members, numbered air forces and air division officers to exchange ideas at two symposiums. One for military participants and the other for civilian guests. The Symposium was a valuable tool to exchange information and ideas to improve proficiency and better understand SAC's mission.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of SAC's crews to perform their mission belonged to the 1st Combat Evaluation Group, based at Barksdale AFB, Louisiana. Using sophisticated prepositioned ground-based equipment, the 1st CEG's technicians determined if the target was hit, or, if missed, by how much. The core of the scoring system in use was the AN/TPQ-43 Seek Score computerized radar and optical tracking system. The system plotted when the simulated bomb was released and then factors in weight, speed, trajectory, winds, altitude of the aircraft and other variables to arrive at a determination of the specific impact point.