Training of Mission Ready Airman

TOPIC SPONSOR: AFIMSC/A38

Combat support in an ACE scheme of maneuver relies on small teams of Mission Ready Airman (formerly Multi-Capable Airmen).  The current model for building MRA starts with Airmen who focus on a primary skillset first and then introduces them to secondary skillsets.  However, these Airmen always retain their identity and expertise within their primary specialty, potentially at the expense of their secondary skillsets.  As an alternative, could the Air Force create an AFSC for dedicated MRAs for ACE who are consistently trained in a wide variety of skills from the beginning of their careers?  These MRA wouldn’t have the depth of knowledge in one specific skill set as MRA today, but is that really needed for ACE. Are  Airmen with a broader mix of skills with less depth would be better suited for MRA?  
 

• Acker, Maj. Joseph M., "Not Going Alone: Agile Combat Employment as a Joint Mission," AFGC thesis, 2022.
  • Answers the question by offering a completely different alternative to creating a dedicated MCA AFSC with less depth: using a Joint Force. The paper argues that it is highly uneconomical to continue adding secondary specialties onto Airmen when other military branches already possess the necessary depth and expertise in those specific areas. Rather than fielding Airmen with a broad but shallow mix of skills, the author concludes that the Air Force should minimize its reliance on the MCA concept and instead use Army, Marine, and Navy (Seabee) personnel who already specialize in austere logistics, ground mobility, and security, creating a leaner and more capable joint ACE team.
• Altman, Maj. Amanda et al, "American Airman, Wingman, Leader, Warrior," ACSC EL, 2022.
  • Addresses the concept of training Airmen in a wide variety of skills from the beginning of their careers by advocating for a foundational "Basic Military Skills" (BMS) program. The authors argue that the Air Force's historical overemphasis on specific "occupationalism" and functional stovepipes breeds functional Airmen at the cost of mission-oriented Airmen, which harms ACE operations. While they do not explicitly recommend a new AFSC, the paper asserts that before the Air Force can successfully implement cross-functional MCA efficiencies, every Airman, regardless of their specialty, must first receive a baseline of expeditionary, survival, and combat skills. This supports the idea that instilling a broader mix of foundational skills across the entire force from the beginning is a necessary prerequisite to creating survivable Airmen suited for ACE.
• Bagnall, Capt. Dustin, et al, "Mobility Air Force and Agile combat Employment: Recommendations on Unit-Type Codes, Multi-Capable Airmen, Sustainment Challenges and Distribution," SOS AUAR, 2021.
  • Directly answers whether the Air Force should create a new AFSC for MCA by evaluating it as a specific Course of Action (COA). The authors acknowledge that creating a single AFSC encompassing all MCA skills would provide the advantage of a universally standardized Airman across all major commands. However, the paper ultimately argues against this approach, noting it would incur an extensive training bill for a single individual and produce personnel who lack the depth to ever be subject matter experts (SMEs). Instead, the authors conclude that the current model—where an Airman maintains a primary AFSC at an expert "7-level" competency while cross-training in complementary skills to a basic "5-level" competency—is a much more manageable and sustainable long-term capability for wings to employ in ACE.
• Banez, Col. Justin D., "Evaluating Air Fore Special Warfare for the Contested Fight: Kill Chain Advantages as a Stand-In Force," AF Fellows (Institute for Defense Analyses), 2025.
  • Answers the question by illustrating how the Air Force is currently restructuring certain career fields to operate in a manner very similar to a dedicated MRA AFSC. The author highlights a recent Program Action Directive (PAD) that reorganizes Air Force Special Warfare specialties into "multidisciplinary and mission-oriented ground teams". By allowing these forces to form and train around specific mission threads rather than traditional "career field stovepipes," the Air Force is creating agile, cross-functional teams from the ground up to ensure they can execute complex kill chains and project power in highly contested environments.
• Bendokas, Maj. Jehon N., "OA-1K SKYRAIDER II: How AFSOF Airpower Will Redefine the Strategic Environment," AFGC thesis, 2025, 32 pgs.
  • Bendokas asserts that the organizational structure of OA-1K units will absolutely require the Multi-Capable Airmen (MCA) construct. To sustain operations with a minimal footprint, Airmen will have to blur traditional career boundaries; for example, pilots will take on aircraft servicing, weapons systems officers (WSOs) will load weapons, munitions troops will perform force protection, and communications Airmen will handle administrative duties.
• Borja, Maj. Kevin S., "Optimizing Officer Development for USSF Operations: Specialization vs. Generalization," AFGC thesis, 2026.
  • Directly addresses the "depth versus breadth" debate by arguing against the effectiveness of a "jack of all trades" model. Although the paper focuses on Space Force officers rather than ACE combat support, it evaluates the tension between deep technical expertise and broad generalization. The author concludes that relying on a broader mix of skills with less depth is detrimental to tactical and operational success, as modern contested environments require operators to deeply understand complex systems. The paper warns that early generalization without deep domain mastery leads to "strategic tunnel vision" and critical errors, suggesting that sacrificing depth for breadth in a dedicated MRA AFSC could pose significant risks to mission effectiveness.
• Corrado, Maj. Salvatore A., "Communicating in a Degraded Environment: Command and Control during Contested Operations," AFGC thesis, 2025, 49 pgs. 
  • Corrado (referring to these personnel as Multi-Capable Airmen, or MCA) notes that cross-training airmen in cross-functional and expeditionary skills is critical for reducing the support footprint and sustaining dispersed Agile Combat Employment (ACE) locations. While Air Force studies show airmen have the cognitive capacity to retain these varied skills efficiently, Corrado warns that relying on a broader mix of skills carries the risk of degrading an airman's primary competencies if training time is restricted. To ensure MCAs remain a lethal and capable force in near-peer combat, he argues the Air Force must move away from ad-hoc, localized training and establish standardized, enterprise-wide proficiency requirements. 
• Fogarty, Maj. Trennart M. Barillas, "Tilted ACE: Optimizing Mission-Ready Airmen for CV-22," AFGC thesis, 2025.
  • Fogarty addresses the development of Mission Ready Airmen (MRA) for Agile Combat Employment (ACE) by arguing that MRA are the human capital cornerstone of ACE and must be trained with measurable proficiency standards across multiple mission-critical competencies. Rather than adopting a uniform, one-size-fits-all Air Force Specialty Code, he recommends that Airmen first receive baseline MRA training—incorporating advanced medical, force protection, and basic cyberspace skills—and then undergo specialized training tailored by their gaining Major Command, such as AFSOC MRAs focusing on extended ground force protection and ACC MRAs focusing on rapid aircraft refueling. Additionally, to minimize the number of exposed individuals and increase unit self-sufficiency, he suggests expanding existing aircrew roles, such as training Flight Engineers to conduct basic maintenance and refueling tasks.
• Glojek, Lt. Col. Gary, "Ready to Fight All Night: High-Tempo Airpower Generation," AF Fellows, 2024.
  • Glojek addresses the prompt by proposing a concept that completely bypasses traditional AFSCs in favor of dedicated, broadly trained generation teams known as Rapid Airpower Generation Elements (RAGE). Focused specifically on the generation of Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) in dispersed environments, Glojek argues that RAGE teams should be composed of three Airmen "unconstrained by Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC)" who perform a variety of general tasks that would traditionally require specialized crew chiefs, expeditors, logisticians, and weapons personnel. Rather than relying on a depth of technical maintenance expertise, the paper argues these Airmen should be selected for athleticism and ability to perform under pressure, focusing entirely on highly choreographed, repetitive launch and recovery tasks without performing deep maintenance (which would be handed off to specialized units), essentially functioning as dedicated, broadly skilled MRAs.
• Gillispie, Capt. John, "BBP on Advanced Tools and Concepts for Accelerated Expertise," SOS AUAR, 2024, 25 pgs. 
  • ​​​​​​​Gillispie does not directly answer whether the Air Force should create a dedicated AFSC for Mission Ready Airmen (MRA) or if a broader, shallower mix of skills is inherently better for Agile Combat Employment (ACE). Instead of addressing the structural depth-versus-breadth debate, the paper focuses on how to rapidly build the critical decision-making expertise required for MRAs with limited time and resources. Gillispie proposes utilizing "accelerated expertise" methods—such as adaptive training aids, human-autonomy teaming, and cognitive task analysis—to rapidly develop the necessary knowledge and skills. Notably, the author points out that these accelerated training concepts can be "career field agnostic if training is tailored," suggesting that advanced immersive training tools could bridge the competency gap for Airmen operating outside their primary specialties without necessarily requiring the creation of a brand new, generalized AFSC.
• Hall. Captain Michael J., "Operating Distributed Command and Control Networks with Agile Combat Employment," SOS AUAR 2021.
  • Answers the question of whether a broader mix of skills is better suited for ACE combat support. The paper highlights that the Multi-Capable Airman (MCA) concept fundamentally relies on personnel employing an expanded skillset well beyond their primary AFSC to ensure survivability and sustainment in contested environments. By cross-utilizing personnel—such as tasking aircraft maintainers with base security or having aircrew operate aerial port material handling equipment—the Air Force can successfully maintain distributed logistics networks without a large, specialized footprint, demonstrating the operational necessity of breadth and flexibility.
• Hinkley, Maj. Eric., "Troops-in-Contact: Utilizing the A-10C in Contested South China Sea Airspace," AFGC thesis, 2024.
  • Hinckley answers the question by arguing that to fully employ the ACE philosophy, the Air Force must abandon the traditional model where Airmen are "pigeonholed into their specific Air Force Specialty Codes (AFSCs), or 'jobs'". Rather than just adding secondary skills to a primary specialty, the paper suggests that the Air Force needs to actively "cut, merge, and morph several AFSCs to represent more encompassing ACE roles". As an example of this broader, less-specialized approach, Hinckley advocates for making all Air Force maintainers generalized Airframe and Powerplant (A&P) certified, arguing that moving away from narrow technical depth toward generalized, encompassing roles is an achievable starting point that benefits the individual and ensures combat sorties can be generated in austere locations.
• Murphy, Brandon S., "Know Yourself to Change Yourself: Organization Change as a Catalyst for Positive Change," SAASS thesis, 2023.
  • Murphy counters the idea that Airmen with a broader mix of skills but less depth are better suited for operations, arguing that instead of relying on cross-functional training that degrades primary expertise, the Air Force needs to build on fundamental training. To illustrate the flaw in trading depth for breadth, the author notes, "No one expects a neurosurgeon to cross train as otolaryngologist and maintain proficiency in both". To solve the ACE requirement without sacrificing depth in primary skillsets, Murphy proposes "Talon Training" to instill a baseline of fundamental force protection and enabling skills into every single member at basic training. Under this model, every Airman acts as a capable enabler and defender in austere locations—meeting the needs of ACE—while still retaining their distinct identity and deep expertise in their primary functional specialty.
• Ortiz, Lt. Col.. Amber N. and Lt. Col. Elizabeth Goldsmith, "Support When and Where It Is Needed Most: Redefining Force Support Identity and Connections for Resilience," AWC and AF Fellows (RAND), 2025.

  • Further answers the question by warning against the dangers of making Airmen "everything to everyone" at the expense of deep expertise. The authors analyze past Air Force efficiency efforts that forced support personnel to be "multi-skilled" across functional communities in order to bridge personnel vacancies and expertise gaps. The paper concludes that this broad, generalized approach fragmented the force's identity, diluted its mission purpose, and created unsustainable task saturation. It cautions that relying on a broad mix of skills without preserving the deep, centralized expertise typically found in specialized career fields ultimately degrades operational adaptability and unit resilience.

• Rhodes, Phillip L., "Empowering Enlisted Airmen: Strategies to Enhance the Mission Ready Airmen Initiative in the United States Air Force," AFGC thesis, 2025.
  • This paper directly addresses the tension between maintaining specialized depth and developing broader MRA skills, and it explicitly suggests that the Air Force could address this by "creating new specialties or modifying existing ones to incorporate MRA-specific competencies". Rhodes acknowledges the risk that pursuing multi-capability could dilute the deep technical knowledge required in many fields, citing the Navy’s "Optimal Manning" cross-training initiative in the 2000s as a cautionary tale where reduced specialized training resulted in a severe decline in technical proficiency and overall readiness. To balance this, Rhodes recommends standardized core competencies for all Airmen supplemented by clear career progression pathways that recognize and reward these newly created or modified broad-skill specialties, ensuring the force remains flexible without suffering from dangerous knowledge gaps.
• Taylor, Maj. Ryan J., "A Cresting Wave: Optimizing Dynamic Force Employment to Avoid Defeat in the South China Sea," AFGC thesis, 2021.
  • Touches on the idea of standardizing the MCA model from the ground up to provide commanders with a more predictable asset. The paper highlights proposals by military analysts Adamson and Praiswater, who call for broadening the "multi-capable" Airman concept into a service-wide model with a completely standardized training pipeline. The paper notes that instead of the current fragmented approach to MCA training, a unified, standardized model would allow commanders to receive Airmen who are uniformly trained in a broader mix of skills, enabling them to be employed in known quantities against specific objectives just like an aircraft's capabilities are matched to a target.
• Werner, Maj. Philip B., "Keeping Reserve Defenders Ready to Fight," AFGC thesis 2024.
  • Werner addresses the question by referencing recent RAND Corporation studies on MRA/MCA implementation to highlight the dangers of over-generalizing the force. The paper points out that the MRA concept requires Airmen to work outside of their AFSC to support ACE force elements with a smaller footprint, meaning they must learn and do more than ever before. However, Werner notes that "Multi-skilling can degrade workforce effectiveness if overdone, and the benefits are contingent on the effective design and management of a multi-skilled team". This suggests that replacing deep primary expertise with a broader mix of shallow skills is not inherently better for ACE unless it is rigorously standardized and managed, as current wing-level programs often lack the resources and sustainment training to make these broadly-skilled Airmen truly effective.