USSF Brings Acquisition Reforms to New Nuclear Command and Control Program

April 9, 2025 | By Greg Hadley

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo.—Some of the Space Force’s biggest acquisition reforms have made their way into the service’s new nuclear command, control, and communications satellite program, the officer in charge of the effort said April 8.

Evolved Strategic SATCOM is one of the biggest pieces of the Space Force budget, set to replace the Advanced Extremely High Frequency constellation. Fielded mostly in the 2010s, AEHF is one of the last programs with an old-school approach to space acquisition: just six spacecraft, each the size of multiple school buses and weighing more than six tons, with software for the ground control stations delivered after first launch.

In recent years, the Space Force has shifted toward buying larger numbers of smaller spacecraft with “commercial off the shelf” components, and former acquisition czar Frank Calvelli pushed programs to have their ground segment ready to go before the satellites launched.

ESS is embracing that shift, Col. A.J. Ashby, senior materiel leader for strategic SATCOM, told reporters at the Space Symposium, starting with where its satellites will fly.

“ESS will have a proliferated architecture, unlike AEHF,” he said. “AEHF is currently just in the geostationary orbit, and so we’ll be proliferated. We’ll be in diverse orbits, and there’s certain threats that we will address. But the most significant thing about ESS is that we’ll be able to service an increased number of strategic users that the current system doesn’t currently support.”

Space Force leaders have touted proliferation as a way to make targeting harder for potential adversaries, challenging them to find different ways to attack objects in different orbits and narrowing the target window as spacecraft move relative to the Earth.

The exact number of satellites in the ESS constellation remains a secret. Space Force budget documents reference the need for four space vehicles to achieve initial operational capability by fiscal 2032, but Ashby declined to comment further than that.

Who exactly will build those satellites is still to be determined—the program is in source selection, with Boeing and Northrop Grumman as the top contenders after building prototypes. Ashby also declined to say when a contract might be awarded.

However, Ashby did suggest whoever does win the contract won’t necessarily be building the exquisite systems that have defined strategically vital programs in the past. While there is no commercial market for nuclear command, control, and communications functions, existing commercial components and parts could be useful.

“Spacecraft buses, we’re taking a hard look at that,” Ashby said. “With regard to crypto, we’ve got Viasat, we’re on contract with ViaSat right now for their chassis for our cryptographic units. Those are commercial products, right?”

There are limits to how much commercial can be used for the program. Asked if SpaceX’s massive Starlink communications constellations is being considered for any part of the ESS requirement, Ashby said, “Not right at this point in time.”

On the ground, though, ESS will embrace a commercial-like approach. Back in 2023, the Space Force awarded a contract to Lockheed Martin for what it calls the Ground Resilient Integration & Framework for Operational NC3, or GRIFFON, but Lockheed won’t be the only contributor.

“You kind of liken the framework to your cell phone, and then you have different applications that would ride on that framework,” Ashby said, explaining that Lockheed will build the framework and then allow smaller software developers to work within that framework.

“We have the best of breed, so leveraging the software acquisition pathway, we’re leveraging the Space Enterprise Consortium, other transaction authorities, we’re able to put the best of breed of software developers on contract to do that,” he said.

That approach is one borne out of hard lessons learned from other ground segments the Space Force has tried to develop all at once, only to encounter years of delays that have limited satellites’ capabilities.

The Space Force has outlined plans to spend $5.11 billion in research and development on ESS from 2025 to 2029, making it one of the service’s biggest programs.

Military AI Will Mean Overhauling Test as Well as Tactics: DOD’s First AI Chief

April 9, 2025 | By Shaun Waterman

To employ autonomous weapons systems like pilotless aircraft and other artificial intelligence-powered innovations, the U.S. military will have to overhaul not just its strategy and tactics in every domain, but also the way it tests its technology, according to the Defense Department’s first ever AI chief.

The Pentagon “is not well postured yet” for testing and evaluation, or T&E, of artificial intelligence, or any other kind of cutting edge software that requires continuous updating, said retired Air Force Lt. Gen. John “Jack” Shanahan, the inaugural director of the DOD’s Joint Artificial Intelligence Center (JAIC), from 2018-2020.

Still, “there’s nobody better in the world at T&E than our military services … we’ve been doing it forever,” he told an audience at the Center for a New American Security.

That applies even to software as well as hardware, he added, so long as it is developed in a “very linear process.” Software like the Air Force’s Theater Battle Management Control System or Distributed Common Ground System was upgraded in “blocks” every couple of years, which allows for extensive multi-stage testing. “Upgrades went through development tests, operational tests, initial fielding, follow-on fielding, and all that,” he said.

But AI is different, he said: “We have got to get used to the fact that these updates may be happening in hours and days, not months and years.”

Like other systems that used the latest software engineering techniques, AI had to be updated regularly, Shanahan said, especially during a conflict. “If you don’t do that, it’s going to go stale. It’s not going to work as advertised. The adversary is going to corrupt it, and it’ll be worse than not having AI in the first place,” he said.

But how would such testing work in the midst of a shooting war, Shanahan mused, when the stakes and the pressure are high?

“For continuous integration/continuous deployment, I think we ought to be thinking about it down at unit level. … Does it always have to go back to some centralized T&E facility? Not in the heat of war,” he said. “Does someone wear a special patch, like they’ve been through Top Gun or the Air Force Weapons School, that says I am qualified to do AI T&E at the unit level? Maybe something like that. We’ve got to think our way through it.”

United States Air Force Test Pilot School students grapple with hands-on challenges of developing and testing AI robots during its inaugural “Test of AI and Emerging Technologies” course in partnership with Stanford University and the Department of the Air Force’s Stanford AI Studio. Photo by Tech. Sgt. Robert Cloys/Air Force Test Center

T&E can no longer be viewed as a “one and done” proposition that a system has to complete before deployment, he said. Instead, it had to be seen as a continuous process and one stage in a system life cycle.

“So we do have to look at this as a full life cycle approach, and that’s where we can start mitigating and managing risk, at the design and development phase, all the way through T&E, all the way through fielding and all the way through sustainability,” Shanahan said.

He added that the competitive pressure to deploy game-changing technology like AI before U.S. rivals creates a risk that T&E will get short changed.

“If we start saying we’re going to lose the competition against China unless we put this out in the field as fast as possible, that’s risky, because we will find [on the battlefield] that systems don’t work as intended, and the adversary always gets a vote. They will try to counter our systems,” he said.

Shanahan, now retired and working as a consultant, spoke during the launch of the new CNAS report “Safe and Effective: Advancing Department of Defense Test and Evaluation for Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Systems.”

Testing AI is challenging for other reasons too, report author and CNAS scholar Josh Wallin said. When the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) tested its autonomous dogfighting program, it did so in a digital simulation, where the program handily beat a human pilot. But when they put the program in a real plane with a human safety operator—a highly experienced test pilot who could disable the AI, take control, and land the plane if needed—it suddenly stopped performing as it had done in the digital simulator.

“They really quickly ran into this problem, which is … that so many of the novel behaviors that they’d been excited about in simulation were reasons that the test pilots would shut off the autonomy and kill the test right from the beginning,” he said.

User acceptance issues are a major challenge for the deployment of AI, he explained, adding that one of the major recommendations of the report was “just how important it is to integrate operators early from a development perspective and also from a testing perspective. You can’t wait until you get to operational tests to start talking to operators. You have to do it much earlier than that.”

Another big concern is integration, Wallis said: How autonomous systems would interact, not just with friendly operators and enemy troops, but with each other. Because it isn’t practical to test AI in every possible different combination of circumstances, he said, “there are always going to be edge cases” where systems behave in unanticipated ways, and because humans might be more removed from the process, there are a lot of questions about how to deal with such situations.

“When we’re deploying different [unmanned aerial systems] with each other, or with different [unmanned surface vehicles], when we have a [command and control] system that’s integrating some form of autonomy—How do all of these things actually work together now that we’re removing a lot of the operator role?” Wallin asked.

Wallis said he worries about DOD “getting bogged down in process when we’re developing these systems.” An AI-enabled administrative system that handles HR issues, for example, should be tested very differently and according to different criteria from a weapons system.

“I’m concerned about not moving quickly, because we’re lumping everything together rather than looking very specifically at what are the things that actually make these systems different,” he said.

Trump’s Picks for Joint Chiefs Chairman and Air Force Secretary Near Confirmation

April 9, 2025 | By Unshin Lee Harpley

President Donald Trump’s picks for the nation’s top uniformed officer and the Air Force’s highest-ranking civilian are on the verge of being confirmed after being approved by the Senate Armed Services Committee on April 8.

Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. John “Dan” Caine is set to become Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, while current NRO principal deputy director Troy E. Meink is set to be Air Force Secretary.

Caine and Meink’s nominations were approved in roll call votes along with three other senior defense nominees, the committee announced April 9. The nominations were “immediately reported” to the Senate floor, where they await a vote from the full chamber.

The committee did not announce the vote totals on the nominations, but SASC chairman Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) disclosed in a statement that Caine was approved 23-4. His office did not immediately respond to a query on the vote for Meink.

During his confirmation hearing two weeks ago, Meink appeared to be on a glide path to confirmation, facing little to no opposition from lawmakers.

Meink has spent more than a decade at the NRO, where he oversaw the agency’s space acquisition projects for years, including managing national geospatial intelligence satellite acquisitions with a budget of over $15 billion. He has worked closely with the Space Force and has perhaps the deepest space expertise of any Air Force Secretary nominee ever.

During his confirmation hearing, Meink asserted the need for “offensive and defensive” space control capabilities, stressing that the Space Force’s investment priorities focus on “achieving space superiority through space control,” echoing the priorities of Chief of Space Operations Gen. B. Chance Saltzman.

He also served in the Air Force as a KC-135 tanker navigator from 1988 to 1993, before transitioning to a civilian career with the Air Force, where he held various space-related roles, including the now-defunct office of deputy undersecretary of the Air Force for space.

Meink’s background aligns with Trump’s space-centered vision; during his first term, Trump championed the creation of the Space Force. If confirmed, Meink could be a significant advocate for the Space Force, as service leaders have called for more resources and manpower to keep up with a growing mission set.

He may also be a key player in “Golden Dome,” Trump’s comprehensive defense initiative to protect the nation from missile threats. Many details about the project, which will require heavy lifting from various military branches, government agencies, and commercial industry, are still unclear, but the Space Force is likely to play a key role and Meink would be involved in key decisions from procurement to project oversight, as well as cross-agency coordination.

The committee also voted to advance Caine’s nomination for Joint Chiefs Chairman.

Unlike others, Caine’s nomination came unexpectedly in February, following the abrupt dismissal of the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., who was less than two years into his four-year term.

Caine is a highly unconventional nominee; he retired as a three-star lieutenant general in December, and U.S. law requires the chairman to have previous service as one of the joint chiefs or commander of a combatant command. However, the law also allows the President to waive that requirement. If confirmed, Caine would also be the first Air National Guardsman to be elevated to chairman.

During his confirmation hearing, Caine reaffirmed his commitment to remain apolitical and emphasized that, as Chairman, he would not be in the chain of command to operators.

The prospective CJCS said his focus will be to urge and motivate the service chiefs to find faster ways to field technology that will preserve the nation’s military superiority, which he said is at risk as China improves its own military at a rapid pace.

“Our national defense requires urgent action and reform across the board,” Caine said. He also expressed full support for modernizing the nuclear triad as the foundation of American security. All of Trump’s top Pentagon nominees have advocated for nuclear modernization to date.

The other nominees approved by the SASC include:

Michael P. Duffey, nominated as Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment

Emil G. Michael, nominated as Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering

Keith M. Bass, nominated as Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs

New International Partnership Strategy ‘Touches Every Part’ of Space Force

April 9, 2025 | By Greg Hadley

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo.—The Space Force is looking at common standards, interoperable systems, robust data sharing, bigger exercises, and more with allies as part of its soon-to-be-released International Partnerships Strategy, service leaders said April 8 at the Space Symposium, pledging that it “touches every single part” of the USSF.

“In essence, our partnership strategy specifies the infrastructure for transforming policy into action, ensuring a unified, resilient approach to international space security,” Chief of Space Operations Gen. B. Chance Saltzman said in a keynote address to an audience that included scores of international officers.

Saltzman later told reporters that the strong international presence at the event made it a natural venue to preview the strategy, which he expects to officially sign and release in the next week or so. While some of its finer points are still under wraps, he outlined its three main goals during his speech:

Empower partners as force multipliers

Enhance interoperability and information sharing

Aligning service-level activities like force design, development, generation and employment

RAF Air Marshal Paul Godfrey, serving on the Space Staff as its first ever Assistant Chief of Space Operations for future concepts and partnerships, told reporters those three goals align with the fundamental responsibilities of the Space Force: force design, force development, and force employment.

“So you can see that touches every single part of the Space Force,” he said.

Godfrey led development of the strategy over the last five months or so and said interoperability will be a particular emphasis, referring to his past as a fighter pilot in the 1990s, when different datalinks hampered cooperation. Saltzman referred to a call for “common international standards” in the strategy, and Godfrey offered that “data standards, space refueling standards” could be part of it.

Saltzman and Godfrey also touted the importance of coordinating investments. In his address, Saltzman noted that the planned Space Futures Command will publish an “objective force” that the service intends to pursue.

“The objective force is going to state in very clear and simple terms the capability that we intend to develop, which will then, by extension, identify the capabilities that are unaddressed,” Saltzman said, suggesting other countries may then tailor their capabilities to match what the U.S. needs.

“You don’t want to buy two of things when you only have to buy one of them,” he told reporters. “You don’t want to buy things that don’t work together, because that creates a seam.”

Saltzman said the strategy won’t go quite so far as to suggest a combined coalition force design. But it will encourage allies to take advantage of specific capabilities and deepen their expertise.

Once allies have those capabilities, they also need to be able to operate them in conjunction with the U.S. That starts with a common operating picture.

“The number of partners with whom we share space domain awareness data has exploded in recent years, which is step one in ensuring we have the same operational awareness,” Saltzman said.

After that comes increased contact, ranging from more joint exercises to wargames to more exchange programs.

“Coalition operations will be far more successful if we work together well before those contingency operations become necessary,” Saltzman said. “If we’re not tightly coupled in our training, if we’re not reconciling our operational concepts, if we’re not integrating our capabilities, we will have a very steep learning curve when called upon in crisis or conflict.”

Chief of Space Operations Gen. Chance Saltzman hosts an office call to officially welcome U.K. Air Vice Marshal Paul Godfrey to the Space Force staff in the Pentagon, Arlington, Va., June 18, 2024. Godfrey is the former commander of U.K. Space Command and the first foreign officer to join the U.S. Space Force command staff. (U.S. Air Force photo by Andy Morataya)

Classification remains a sticking point, though. Despite changes to Pentagon policy aimed at moving more Space Force programs out of the ultra-secret “Special Access Program” status, Saltzman said he is still “not happy” with the lack of progress.

Still, Godfrey said the service has made improvements in declassifying intelligence so that allies can understand the threats they face.

As Saltzman and Godfrey touted their international strategy, questions swirl over how allies will work with the U.S. in the future. European nations, in particular, have some of the most advanced space industries, but leaders have suggested they want to depend less on the U.S. for military capabilities.

Both Saltzman and Godfrey said such questions are overblown, at least when it comes to space.

“It’s my fifth year here,” Godfrey said. “It’s been business as usual in terms of the collaboration with the partners and allies this week. And I think the space domain is different to the other domains. So obviously, I was involved in this in my previous role, from a European industrial base perspective, the U.S. has been doing this national security space for the longest time. So have to work together. There’s almost a level of mentorship, I think, from the U.S. to a lot of the emerging space commands, space squadrons, however allies are putting their forces together.

“Because if we just cut ties, let Europe get on with it, then they’re going to have to spend significant amounts of money to potentially go down dead ends, developing the sort of capabilities that the U.S. has put together over decades,” he added.

Air Force Has Flown More Than 50 Missions to Gather Intel at the Southern Border

April 9, 2025 | By Chris Gordon

The Air Force has conducted more than 50 surveillance missions around the U.S. southern border with crewed and uncrewed aircraft, as the Pentagon seeks to gather intelligence on foreign cartels, drug and human trafficking, and illegal migration.

Newly disclosed statistics issued by the service show that 53 sorties have been flown as of the beginning of April to support U.S. Northern Command’s effort to strengthen border security. More flights have been carried out since then.

“Protecting the homeland is our top priority and it always will be,” Air Force Chief of Staff David W. Allvin said in a statement to Air & Space Forces Magazine. “Airmen have executed over 50 intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance flights in support of U.S. Northern Command.”

According to a service spokesperson, the missions have been carried out by:

U-2 spy planes from the 9th Reconnaissance Wing at Beale Air Force Base, Calif.

RC-135 Rivet Joint signals intelligence collection aircraft from the 55th Wing from Offutt Air Force Base, Neb.

RQ-4 Global Hawk remotely piloted aircraft—long-endurance, high-altitude drones—flown by the 319th Reconnaissance Wing at Grand Forks Air Force Base, N.D.

Allvin said the crews operating those aircraft had logged more than 570 flight hours. Airmen on the ground have also been analyzing intelligence data and carrying out logistical operations at Guantanamo Bay, which has been used to hold migrants following the Trump administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration.

The Air Force has also carried out deportation flights out of the United States using C-17s and C-130s and has been conducting flights to move personnel and equipment to support thousands of extra troops that have been ordered to the border.

Those missions “help maintain the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and security of the United States,” Allvin said.

The U-2s can collect high-resolution imagery, signals intelligence (SIGINT), and measurement and signature intelligence (MASINT) from altitudes over 70,000 feet.

The original U-2 first flew in 1955, but current models date to the 1980s, when production restarted. The aircraft has been modernized since then and can carry a range of payloads, including advanced optical, electro-optical/infrared imaging, synthetic aperture radar, and signals intelligence sensors. The Air Force’s fleet of more than two dozen U-2s is based at Beale, but the aircraft are also deployed to forward operating locations worldwide.

Offutt’s RC-135s, which also deploy around the world, have been observed via flight tracking data operating from their home base in Nebraska on border surveillance missions. RC-135s date back to the 1970s, but they have been continuously upgraded with refreshed intelligence-gathering equipment since then. They have flown along the border and off the Mexican coast of the Baja Peninsula.

The Air Force flights are part of a joint effort by the U.S. military that also involves Army UH-72 Lakota and UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters and MQ-1 Grey Eagle unmanned aircraft.

A U.S. government surveillance drone taxis past U.S. Army UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters after landing at Libby Army Airfield in Fort Huachuca, Ariz., April 3, 2025. Chris Gordon/Air & Space Forces Magazine

The Navy has been flying multiple sorties per week with P-8 Poseidon anti-submarine warfare aircraft, which can function as intelligence-gathering planes over land and sea with their advanced radar and sensors.

The U.S. government is also operating several aerostat radar balloons around the southern border, U.S. officials told Air & Space Forces Magazine. U.S. Customs and Border Protection also operates MQ-9 d rones for surveillance, the officials added.

The U.S. Navy has deployed two destroyers—one off each coast—to patrol the waters off the U.S. under the direction of U.S. Northern Command.

The Joint Intelligence Task Force-Southern Border, based at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Ariz., helps oversee the joint service effort. Its intelligence analysts work with U.S. Customs and Border Protection. As of March, NORTHCOM had assigned some 40 Air Force intelligence analysts to the border mission.

Mexican drug cartels have also stepped up their aerial activities, including surveilling U.S. troops along the southern border with drones, said Army Maj. Gen. Scott Naumann, commander of Joint Task Force-Southern Border. Naumann also serves as the commander of the 10th Mountain Division, which provides a headquarters-level command, based at Fort Huachuca, Ariz., for some 6,600 Active-duty troops along the border.

The border town of Naco, Mexico, seen from a U.S. Army UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter over southern Arizona, April 3, 2025. Chris Gordon/Air & Space Forces Magazine

Air Force Rescinds Service-Wide Family Days, Commanders Can Still Schedule

April 9, 2025 | By David Roza

The acting Secretary of the Air Force rescinded a policy that scheduled extra days off for Airmen, Guardians, and their families across the service in conjunction with 11 federal holidays throughout 2025.

In an April 7 memo that took effect immediately, Gary Ashworth said “a blanket designation of pass days, often called family days … does not support our ability to execute the mission with excellence while maintaining our competitive advantage.”

Commanders, directors, and supervisors still have authority to set pass schedules for troops and families, though Ashworth encouraged “commanders at all levels to re-evaluate their pass structures to best align with warfighter readiness” in accordance with Air Force regulations.

An Air Force spokesperson confirmed the authenticity of the memo, which was first shared on social media.

“The Air Force and Space Force are focused on enhancing lethality and readiness,” the spokesperson told Air & Space Forces Magazine. “Providing blanket designations of pass days to align with all 11 federal holidays throughout the year does not support our ability to execute the mission.”

The guidance comes about two months after a Feb. 11 memo in which the Air Force said it would evaluate family days “to ensure they align with our ability to support warfighter readiness.”

Last March, then-Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall designated 11 family days, one around each federal holiday, in recognition “of our teams’ contributions to the mission and our families’ enduring support of our efforts,” Kendall wrote at the time.

Each command has its own family day schedule, which can vary from year to year. These schedules are generally determined and announced well in advance, sometimes as much as two years ahead of time. For instance, Air Force Global Strike Command scheduled 11 Family Days for 2025, while Air Education and Training Command planned to include six days, starting with a Friday before Memorial Day.

Federal law prohibits Air Force civilians from taking additional leave, but Kendall encouraged directors and supervisors “to treat family days as ‘liberal leave’ days to the maximum extent possible, for which use of leave, previously earned compensatory time, or previously approved time-off awards may be applied, as eligible.”

The Air Force memo issued in February emphasized that civilians must either be at work or on leave during family days, and the April 7 memo makes the same point.

The memo is the latest move by Air Force and Defense officials to demonstrate a focus on readiness. In January, Chief of Staff Gen. David W. Allvin issued revised uniform, grooming, and appearance standards that rescinded the wear of duty identifier patches and certain nail polish colors, among other changes. Allvin also directed quarterly inspections to ensure troops were meeting the new standards.

“Complying with and enforcing standards demonstrates shared commitment to our winning team, as well as an understanding of the gravity of our profession in today’s volatile security environment,” Allvin said at the time.

The backlash on social media to the changes, from the patches to the family days, has been fierce, with some Airmen and Guardians arguing the moves hurt morale and do not improve actual mission readiness.

The Defense Department has also phased out telework agreements for thousands of troops and civilians in the name of restoring “lethality and readiness,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth wrote in January. But a week later the Air Force had to exempt some employees due to a shortage of workspace.

Initial reactions on social media to the April 7 memo rescinding service-wide family days were also negative, with users concerned it would lead to fewer opportunities to spend time with family.

The Air Force spokesperson said all service members “are encouraged to use their 30 days of paid annual leave as an important part of maintaining overall well-being, morale, and readiness.”

The Army and Navy both have their own versions of family days called special passes and special liberty, respectively. Neither announced service-wide schedules for 2025, and neither has announced any changes to its policies this year.

Navy Eyes ‘Interchangeable’ CCAs with Air Force, Lessons from MQ-25

April 8, 2025 | By Matthew Cox

NATIONAL HARBOR, Md.—While the U.S. Air Force plans to spend big and make Collaborative Combat Aircraft drones an essential part of its tactical fleet in the near future, the U.S. Navy is working to team manned and unmanned aircraft as well.

And while the two services are planning separate acquisition programs and efforts, senior Navy officials said April 8 at the Sea-Air-Space conference that they’re coordinating with their USAF counterparts and may even want to share the drones once they’re available.

The Navy’s future CCAs will not be the same platform as the Air Force’s but will have common standards like architecture, mission planning, control stations, said Rear Adm. Michael “Buzz” Donnelly, director of air warfare for the Navy. That will “allow us not only to be interoperable but have our platforms and our vehicles interchangeable,” Donnelly said, adding that the Navy is doing a lot of work on the CCAs that is out of the public sphere.

For now, the centerpiece of the Navy’s efforts is its new unmanned tanker. Officials said they hope lessons learned from the challenges of operating that drone, the MQ-25, on aircraft carriers will ease future headaches when it shifts to combat drones to team with its fighters.

The Air Force has been working on semi-autonomous CCA drones to pair with fighters for more than a year and a half now, to the point that it has unveiled two full models and designations for them—General Atomics’ YFQ-42 and Anduril Industries YFQ-44.

CCAs will serve as drone wingmen for the Air Force’s F-35 and new F-47 Next-Generation Air Dominance manned fighter.

The Navy, meanwhile is poised to announce the winner of its own sixth-generation F/A-XX fighter but is relying on the Air Force to prove out the teaming of manned fighters with CCAs before introducing them to the harsh conditions of carrier operations.

“We want to understand the basics the Air Force is introducing, and then we can make that shipboard-capable,” Donnelly told Air & Space Force Magazine following a panel discussion on modernizing the future of naval aviation.

“The Navy is moving out, but we are doing it very smartly so it’s informed by the developments of the other services,” he said.

Donnelly said the Navy is in a “tri-service agreement with both the Air Force and the Marine Corps in the development of CCAs. … We are working on different aspects of the CCA that are not directly related to the air vehicle.”

A Boeing unmanned MQ-25 aircraft is given operating directions on the flight deck aboard the aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush (CVN 77). U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Brandon Roberson

During the panel, Navy and industry officials discussed how the service will use the new MQ-25 Stingray, scheduled to make its first flight in 2025, as a pathway for introducing drone aircraft to carrier operations.

Boeing won an $804 million Navy contract in 2018 to develop the MQ-25, an unmanned tanker capable of transferring 14,000 pounds of fuel to aircraft like the F/A-18 Super Hornet and the F-35 at a distance of 500 miles from a carrier in highly contested airspace.

“When we fly this aircraft later this year, it will be the safest unmanned aircraft that we have ever produced,” Boeing’s Dan Gillian said.

Commander of Naval Air Force Atlantic Rear Adm. Doug “V8” Verissimo said the Navy needs to get the MQ-25 “into the hands of Sailors and start incorporating it into the system … adapt and overcome challenges along the way, and I guarantee those opportunities are going to be bright and shining lights that give us future capabilities, both with the MQ-25 and other manned-unmanned teaming.”

Donnelly said the MQ-25 is going to establish a baseline standard that is going to be relevant for all of the Navy’s future unmanned aircraft.

“As we develop future Collaborative Combat Aircraft with the Marine Corps and the Air Force, the MQ-25 is going to provide that forward pathway for our operating environment, which is different from operating on a 6,000- or a 10,000-foot runway,” Donnelly said.

Introducing the new drone tanker to carrier operations will be the first challenge, Donnelly said after the panel.

“All of the flying on and off the aircraft carrier from a basic standpoint is fuel-critical,” Donnelly said. “When we come back and land, we do it with a very fuel-constrained environment that is unpredictable in terms of sea-state and weather, so it’s a very tight sequence of a ballet to get the aircraft on the aircraft carrier in a very finite timeline and a very tight sequence of events. And integrating unmanned systems into that is something very different.”

To Donnelly, mastering carrier operations will likely be much more complex for the MQ-25 than the combat missions it is designed to fly.

“That is going to be a lot of essential learning, and it is going to allow us to proceed very rapidly in what we are learning from the partnership with the Air Force and what they will be demonstrating very shortly,” Donnelly said.

F-35 Office Seeks to Clarify $2.1 Trillion Cost Ahead of Budget Release

April 8, 2025 | By John A. Tirpak

For months now, a big number has been attached to the F-35: $2.1 trillion.

That’s the new estimated lifetime costs for the program, a massive sum that has become an oft-cited figure in coverage about the fighter.

Now, the F-35 Joint Program Office is trying to put context around that number, releasing a “clarification” April 8 explaining those costs.

In a press release, the program office noted that the $2.1 trillion F-35 program estimate, which came to light last spring, is an all-inclusive figure covering 94 years of procurement of an eventual 2,456 aircraft, development, upgrades and modifications, spare parts, operating costs, personnel, the depot enterprise and even fuel, among other expenses. It also includes foreign investment.

Asked why it issued the statement, a JPO spokesperson told Air & Space Forces Magazine that Air Force Lt. Gen. Michael Schmidt, the program executive officer, “asked our team to work through a cost narrative to clarify information that he has seen in numerous reports (both internally and externally). He wanted to provide a breakdown of costs and provide context directly from the program.”

The breakdown comes at a potentially tenuous moment for the F-35.

The Pentagon and Office of Management and Budget are putting the finishing touches on the fiscal 2026 defense budget request, and President Donald Trump’s administration has given no overt indication of how it views the F-35’s place in the budget. While Trump himself has been complimentary of the program, his close adviser Elon Musk, who oversees the “Department of Government Oversight” commission, has derided the program as an obsolete “jack of all trades, master of none,” and a victim of a “broken” requirements process. Musk has for several years touted the position that uncrewed, autonomous aircraft are the future of military aviation.

On April 7, Trump said the 2026 defense budget would, for the first time, eclipse the $1 trillion mark, a major increase.

After the budget is revealed, the Senate and House Armed Services Committees typically hold hearings on fixed-wing tactical and training aircraft, and such hearings are often dominated by discussion of the F-35’s costs.

Finally, the JPO and Lockheed Martin reached a preliminary agreement on Lot 19 of the F-35 in late 2024, saying the specific costs of the three F-35 variants in the lot will be revealed when the contract is finalized. The JPO has said that will happen in spring 2025. No announcements have yet been made.

Amid all of this, press reports have frequently referred to the F-35 as the “$2 trillion fighter,” a sobriquet the JPO wished to address.

The program release, titled “Providing the Facts Behind the $2T Number,” noted that the Pentagon’s 2023 Modernized Selected Acquisition Report quoted a $2.1 trillion estimate “over [the F-35’s] 94-year life cycle, from 1994 through 2088,” and that this “comprehensive estimate” reflects not only the U.S. investment in the program, but that of its 10 original international partners, as well.

“This figure accounts for all costs associated with the development, production, and sustainment of the F-35 air system,” the JPO said, noting that it must make an educated guess on such mercurial figures as inflation and fuel prices more than 53 years into the future.

Included in the cost estimate:

The full development, procurement, and modernization of 2,456 production aircraft by 2049 across the U.S. Air Force (F-35A), U.S. Marine Corps (F-35B and F-35C), and U.S. Navy (F-35C)

The establishment of depot repair capability to support organic operations

Initial spares and sustainment operational support

Military and civilian personnel costs

Fuel, aircraft repairs, software maintenance, modifications, and other support services

Inflation adjustments spanning the entire 94-year life cycle. Notably, the F-35 program uniquely captures a 40-year forecast of through-life development costs at the outset, “a first-of-its-kind approach for a program of this scale.”

About half the $2.1 trillion estimate is inflation, the JPO noted. The overall figure is “calculated in ‘then-year’ dollars, meaning it is inflation-adjusted to reflect the projected value of money over the program’s 94-year span. Around $1 trillion of this total is influenced by inflationary effects over the years.”

The JPO said three main factors drive the program’s cost. The first is “scale,” as the F-35 is “set to become the largest single air system procurement in DOD history, with thousands of units planned for production.”

The second is concurrency: “The program’s 40 years of development and modernization, along with simultaneous efforts in development, production, and sustainment, contribute to its increased complexity and cost.”

The third factor is “duration.”

“The long-term nature of the program, spanning nearly a century, results in significant inflationary effects. This unprecedented scale, along with the simultaneous management of development, production, and sustainment, underlines the scope of the F-35 program and its associated costs.”

The F-35’s cost is likely to be an important consideration in final budget deliberations, as the Air Force pursues development of the F-47 Next-Generation Air Dominance fighter, development of which is expected to cost about $20 billion through the end of the decade. The Navy is also expected to pursue its own next-gen fighter, called F/A-XX, and a contract is nearly ready for award, according to reports.

It’s not clear whether each service’s fighter portfolio will have room for both aircraft, as well as the autonomous Collaborative Combat Aircraft which will partner with all current and future crewed fighters, even with the defense budget increase Trump said is coming.

Space Force Satellite Refueling Demos Coming in 2026 and 2028

April 8, 2025 | By Greg Hadley

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo.—The Space Force will have one of its satellites refueled for the first time next summer, an initial step toward a future in which satellites can maneuver like aircraft in the sky or ships on the sea to dodge threats and hold adversaries at risk.

However, there is also uncertainty about whether the Pentagon will invest heavily in the capability and what model for refueling it might pick as the best option.

Startup Astroscale announced the summer 2026 target date for the first refueling mission at the Space Symposium. Its APS-R spacecraft will launch to just above geosynchronous orbit, refuel a Space Force satellite, refuel itself from another spacecraft built by fellow startup Orbit Fab, then refuel another Space Force bird.

Typically, operators try to conserve satellites’ fuel as much as possible. Once the spacecraft runs out, its service life is functionally over. Space Force leaders have suggested they want to be able to maneuver “without regret” to adapt to an increasingly congested and contested environment. To do so will likely require some kind of logistical infrastructure.

“Logistics are no longer theoretical. They are operational,” said Clare Martin, Astroscale’s executive vice president. “It’s about enabling sustained maneuverability, extending the life of critical space assets, and giving our national security community the ability to adapt quickly in a dynamic space domain.”

Astroscale’s mission has a six-month window, but the actual refueling will happen much quicker, said Ian Thomas, the project manager at Astroscale. Both Astroscale and Orbit Fab’s satellites will stay above GEO so that they can avoid interfering with other satellites in the orbit and drift relative to them, getting closer to potential client satellites as needed.

Astroscale and Orbit Fab had previously announced a partnership in January 2024—Orbit Fab wants to build fuel depots that function as “gas stations in space” where refueling “shuttles” like APS-R can collect fuel to carry to other satellites.

space force refueling mobility — An artist’s rendering of one of Orbit Fab’s fuel depots in space. Graphic courtesy of Orbit Fab

Orbit Fab’s first depot will launch on the same rocket as Astroscale’s refueler in June 2026, Adam Harris, chief commercial officer at Orbit Fab, confirmed in an interview with Air & Space Forces Magazine.

The mission’s funding is coming from multiple sources—a sign of both the broad interest in refueling’s potential and its uncertain market.

Space Systems Command awarded some $44.5 million in contracts back in 2022 for two “Tetra-5” satellites that will be refueled.

The Defense Innovation Unit awarded a $13.3 million contract for Orbit Fab’s depot as part of its RAPIDS program.

The Space Enterprise Consortium, which exists to reach out to nontraditional contractors and small businesses, awarded a $61 million contract to Astroscale for the refueler satellite.

Space Force and industry officials alike said the demo mission is critical for the future of in-orbit refueling. Lt. Gen. Philip A. Garrant told reporters during a separate media briefing that he’s still not entirely sure the Space Force should go all-in on the idea, given how much it may cost to launch fuel depots or refueling satellites. First, he wants to see how the demonstration goes.

“One of the biggest things that we want to get out of it is to help us flesh out the requirements and [concept of operations] and understand the real feasibility,” Garrant said. “And does it make sense? Is this a good business case? Does it make sense to do that, particularly when you talk about [the cost of] launch, or is it to better spend money on a cheaper satellite that’s just cheaper to replace?”

Unsurprisingly, Orbit Fab doesn’t think so.

“Is refueling less expensive than building and launching a new satellite? In almost all cases, our answer is yes,” Harris said.

Given the Space Force’s limited budget, the question of cost is especially important. The service put just $20 million toward space access, mobility, and logistics in its fiscal 2025 budget, but it has outlined no further plans, and Garrant raised the possibility that new forms of propulsion may eventually mean spacecraft are not as limited by fuel.

Regardless, there is clear interest from operators in being able to maneuver their satellites. U.S. Space Command boss Gen. Stephen N. Whiting said in a keynote speech at the symposium that his command is working with the Space Force’s innovation arm, SpaceWERX, on that demand.

“We will soon be identifying 10 proposals for $1.9 million each in funding over a 15-month period of performance,” Whiting announced. “This effort will continue to invest in the most promising technology from commercial industry to help us solve the sustained space maneuver challenge.”

In the past, Space Force and industry officials have talked about the military’s need for space maneuver so that satellites can dodge attacks by China or Russia and keep performing their mission. Now, they’re adding another operational factor into the calculus.

‘There’s also the proactive side, or offensive side,” said Harris, “Which is, ‘I want to move my spacecraft to a new theater. I’ve gone from this area, and I need to surge to a new place.’ Lots of examples of how that could work, whether it’s communication or missile warning or those type of things.”

“Clearly, if we’re going to have an offensive or defensive capability, it has to be able to maneuver to the target or maneuver to the high-value asset that it’s defending,” added Garrant. “So all of those consume a limited fuel capability. So how do we make it so that we’re not limited by the fuel?”

Astroscale and Orbit Fab aren’t the only firms trying to answer that question. Northrop Grumman has developed its own refueling interfaces, as well as its own tanker spacecraft that will have enough fuel to maneuver between satellites and refuel them.

Last week, Northrop announced it had received contracts of its own from Space Systems Command for a program called Elixir—a satellite bus and refueling payload that can perform rendezvous and proximity operations, which will dock with a Space Force “Tetra-6” satellite spun off from the “Tetra-5” program.

An artist’s rendering of Northrop Grumman’s GAS-T spacecraft. Courtesy of Northrop Grumman.

A spokesperson for Space Systems Command told Air & Space Forces Magazine the demonstration is expected to occur no earlier than 2028.

In a statement, Northrop’s program manager for in-space refueling Lauren Smith touted the company’s demo as a way to “unlock new possibilities for dynamic space operations, providing the sustained maneuverability our customers need in a complex environment.”

Northrop’s model for refueling doesn’t require depots to work, while Orbit Fab and Astroscale’s is meant to be a long-term solution, with its satellites available for operations for years.

In either case, Garrant had a word of caution.

“You could have the best gas tank idea in the world as a satellite provider, but we still have to get you to the orbit of the target of interest,” Garrant said. “And if that’s GEO, that’s a high-energy launch, that’s not an insignificant investment from a launch perspective. So I advise these companies that are looking at abilities to create maneuver without regret, don’t forget to close the business case on launch too.”