AIR POWER DEVELOPMENT CENTRE BULLETIN

CRITICAL MASS AND AIR POWER

The term ‘critical mass’ is derived from nuclear physics, where it is defined as the smallest mass of material that can sustain a nuclear reaction at a constant level. Over a period of time the term has found its way into common usage in social dynamics to mean a sufficient number of people adopting a particular social innovation in which the rate of such adoptions become self-sustaining and thereby creates further growth. In this sphere, critical mass is influenced directly by size, interrelations and the level of two-way communications.

The concept of critical mass is not new and it has been used in medicine, specifically in the area of epidemiology, since around 1920 to explain the spread of communicable diseases. However, it gained popular understanding in the 1970s, when game theorist Thomas Schelling and sociologist Mark Granovetter used the term to explain the actions and behaviours of a very wide range of people and activities. The concept or theory of critical mass has thereafter been adapted by businesses and other aspects of human endeavour. Therefore, it is not surprising that military forces also use the concept to understand and underline certain aspects of their organisations.

Taken into the military sphere, the nuance of the definition of critical mass changes to, ‘the minimum number of people and amount or level of capability needed to start and/or sustain an operation to achieve a specific result and for a new action to occur.’

Critical mass has particular influence on military forces that are numerically limited and only have the ability to project a finite amount of power. Considering that the fundamental responsibility of a military force is to project power to ensure national security, the concept

of critical mass should be carefully analysed by medium and small-sized forces. In the current environment of budgetary constraints, that is forcing most military forces to adopt economies of scale, defining the critical mass necessary to achieve national security objectives becomes an onerous responsibility.

Air power is perhaps the most resource-intensive military capability to acquire and operate effectively and efficiently. The combination of shrinking resource availability on the one hand and increased demands being placed on it on the other, makes air power particularly vulnerable to the phenomena of having to operate at critical mass on a continuous basis. So what is ‘critical mass’, in air power terms?

From the definition of critical mass, two major factors can be derived—people and capability. Each of these will have sub-sets that need to be understood in order to ensure that an air force operating at critical mass does not fall below it. The result of falling below the critical mass is straightforward to explain. The self-sustaining process, which should see the operation to a successful completion, will no longer function as appropriate and the quantum of air power being generated will gradually reduce to a level wherein it will not be sufficient to meet the requirements of the battle, campaign, and war. In other words, the force will fail to deliver its primary responsibility of ensuring national sovereignty and protecting national interests.

Before determining the critical mass in terms of people and capability, it is necessary to determine the minimum air power requirements needed to effectively enact the articulated strategy of the nation for the envisaged

Issue 229, September 2014

When an idea [concept] reaches critical mass there is no stopping the shift its presence will induce..—Marianne Willimson

Armament Technicians loading a Guided Bomb Unit - 24 onto an F/A-18F Super Hornet.

minimum period. From this would flow the critical mass required in terms of people and capability.

The critical mass for people would be a minimum number required to carry out the myriad activities necessary to project air power in all its aspects for the required period of time. Dependent on the minimum time that such air power projection is deemed necessary, the entire process of raising, training and sustaining the necessary number of personnel would have to be worked out. Into this equation attrition—through normal redundancies and enemy action—would have to be injected and taken into account. The final calculation of the minimum number of personnel would have to cater for a number of intangible factors such as the broad base available for recruitment, the national ethos regarding military service, educational base of the nation, and the envisaged nature of the conflict.

Calculating the critical mass in terms of capability is a more exacting process and also more prone to be influenced by external factors, beyond the control of the air force. Here the political aspects of national security as well as alliances come into direct play. Air power is, and has always been, a product of technology. Aerospace technology is neither cheap to obtain nor is it easy to develop and maintain at the cutting edge. Resource-intensiveness is just one factor in the overall picture of the aerospace industry. Since air power is at the high-end of technology, most nations are dependent on friends and allies to develop, maintain and deploy an air force of calibre. The availability of the necessary capability therefore becomes a political factor.

If it is taken for granted that the necessary technology and capability will be made available to the air force, the next step in maintaining it at or above the level of critical mass is dependent on the ability of the workforce to optimise the employment of available capabilities. In this understanding of capabilities, it is necessary to add the development of strategic and operational concepts as

an important input. Air forces can no longer be totally reliant on their capability edge with assured critical mass to assume success—capabilities have to be very clearly supported by concepts that also function at a minimum critical mass. Critical mass in the intellectual capacity of the force as a whole therefore becomes an integral part of ‘capability’. Therefore, the holistic capability of air power is a complex characteristic to measure. Competent air forces would ensure that the critical mass is determined correctly and that they would then function at a state higher than that. This is a big order even for middle level powers.

There is an intrinsic relationship between critical mass and air power—one that can be ignored by an air force only at its own peril. While creating the critical mass in personnel is a relatively straight-forward process, capability development to critical mass is a constantly evolving process. Technological innovations will continually move the goal posts of critical mass in capability. An air force of calibre would therefore have to constantly evaluate their position vis-à-vis the critical mass necessary to deliver the required air power for the nation. Superior understanding of the strategic imperatives of national security will be the underpinning factor that would create a winning air force, able to operate above critcal mass.

Key Points• Critical mass is the minimum number of people and

amount or level of capability needed to start and/or sustain an operation

• Critical mass is dependent on the envisaged minimum air power requirements needed to effectively enact the articulated strategy of the nation

• The two major factors in determining critical mass are people and capability

Air Power Development CentreF3-GF, PO Box 7932, Department of Defence

CANBERRA BC ACT 2610Ph: 02 6128 7041 Fax: 02 6128 7053

Email: airpower@defence.gov.auWeb: www.airforce.gov.au/airpower

Disclaimer: The views in this Pathfinder are not necessarily those of the RAAF

Conducting pre-flight inspections on the F/A-

18A Hornet.