Despite the Space Force’s “laser-focused” effort to accelerate an initiative to bolster its GPS constellation, the service’s No. 2 officer said the effort is mostly in the study and analysis phase.
“I don’t think we’ll ever move fast enough,” Vice Chief of Space Operations Gen. Michael A. Guetlein said at the Defense News Conference last week. “There is an enormous amount of attention from the White House on position, navigation and timing (PNT) and how to shore up those signals, looking at alternative capabilities. Is there another way we could be doing this, that’s more resilient, more survival against the threat? I would say we could be doing more in this area.”
One of service’s main efforts in the area is dubbed Resilient GPS, or R-GPS. The idea is to add around 20 small, cost-effective GPS satellites to the existing 31, addressing rising concerns about over-reliance on the existing satellites and the possibility of an attack on them.
The initiative first emerged in February when Space Systems Command began exploring the commercial market for a constellation of GPS satellites, seeking “ways to reduce lifecycle cost and increase the pace of GPS satellite development, production and on-orbit deployment.” In April, the Department of the Air Force revealed it had chosen the program as one of the first to take advantage of its new ‘Quick Start’ authorities.
But the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense turned down the service’s request to reprogram $77 million for Resilient GPS in the 2025 budget in June. They cited unclear benefits, questioning whether the additional satellites would better protect against GPS jamming compared to other methods, and noted the program for focusing solely on satellites while overlooking the need for the M-code equipment—an encrypted GPS signal essential for jamming resistance. They also questioned whether the program should have followed the regular budget process.
While details on the R-GPS program’s direction is scarce, experts share lawmakers’ reservations regarding the new initiative.
“Whatever solution the Space Force pursues, it must address the variety of the most likely and most dangerous threats, such as jamming, cyber and potential threats to the on-orbit architecture,” said Charles Galbreath, senior resident fellow at Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies. “But if the resilient GPS architecture that they’re putting forward does not address all these concerns, the service may need to rethink their strategy to gain Congressional support.”
The question centers on whether the new system will simply add more of the same GPS satellites or include satellites with different waveforms to better counter jamming. Guetlein noted that the service is currently exploring these areas of concern, with the Space Warfare Analysis Center leading the effort.
“What can we do to shore up the civil signal and the military signal on GPS, to get more resilience during times of crisis—that study is going on right now,” said Guetlein. “We’re looking at, can we proliferate it? Can we disaggregate it? Or is there an alternative, technically, that we should be pursuing? Those studies are ongoing, the discussions are happening in the Pentagon as we speak.”
Guetlein noted that should be GPS be disrupted for even just 15 minutes, the U.S. would face a $1 billion hit to the economy, and that it would “dwarf anything that we’ve seen since COVID.”
“If we lose GPS in this nation, we can’t get crops out of the field, we can’t get goods off the shelf or off the boat, we can’t get ambulances to your house, and you can’t travel,” Guetlein warned.
The vulnerability of GPS could seriously amplify the chaos in a conflict. If the Space Force’s constellations face interference, similar to what China, Russia, and others have demonstrated, it could disrupt U.S. military logistics and navigation on land, sea, and air. This would also hurt the accuracy of GPS-guided munitions, leading to more flights needed to hit targets and putting additional American and coalition aircrews at risk, while also raising the chance of collateral damage.
“We are laser-focused on guaranteeing space capabilities will be there when needed, which means we need more SATCOM, more resilient position navigation and timing, or GPS,” added Guetlein. “We’re waiting on the 2025 budget on the Hill to see what that shakes out.”
How a New Organization Is Helping Tie the Air Force Together with Software
TINKER AIR FORCE BASE, Okla.—Just a few hallways removed from the massive industrial floor of Building 9001, where technicians, welders and mechanics grind away to keep Air Force planes flying, a highy skilled team is solving crucial problems without bending metal, changing fluids, or fiddling with wires.
The Air Force Sustainment Center Software Directorate, barely one year old, was established in summer 2023 to unite three software engineering groups, a total of 5,000 engineers spread among a dozen locations. Their work here is a sign that the Air Force’s coding efforts have grown since USAF stood up its first software factory less than a decade ago.
As part of the Sustainment Center, the Software Directorate is among the Air Force’s largest software-focused organizations, yet typically flies under the radar.
“We’re creating software all the time,” Michael E. Jennings, senior leader for the directorate, told Air & Space Forces Magazine. “We’re not called the Software Sustainment Directorate. We are the Software Directorate within the Sustainment Center. And so our mission really is probably much bigger than a lot of people realize.”
Jennings and his engineers focus on the future, trying to see what new advances and improvements they can program into software to enhance aircraft performance.
“We are constantly very aware of what the threat is from our adversaries … being able to create software very quickly in a DevSecOps environment, to be able to take software and put software on a platform very, very quickly, to be able to handle whatever threat is out there,” Jennings said.
The team’s involvement in a weapons system depends on who owns the data rights. The Software Directorate is almost entirely responsible for the software on the F-16 and A-10, for example, while providing supplementary code for the F-35, Jennings said.
Older aircraft like the B-52 or E-3 are also getting updates. “You absolutely have strong software systems that can be put on a lot of these systems,” so as long as they can keep flying.
Integrated
But even more than platform-specific code, software that is applicable across platforms and enables better technical integration is where Jennings focuses his team.
“We’re not winning against our adversaries with one single airplane anymore,” Jennings said. “We’re winning it as an integrated system. And the way it’s an integrated system is through software. It’s that software that’s talking to all of these systems, whether it’s an up-front F-35 using its sensor systems to understand what the battlefield looks like and connect that with an F-22 and to be able to connect that back to a B-52 to be able to engage weapons.”
What that looks like is a common, government-owned standard interface, through which any aircraft system can exchange data. Such Open Mission Systems have been a holy grail for years for program executives.
Jennings’ crew works with the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center and Air Force Materiel Command’s new Integrated Development Office to prioritize work. Together, they share recommendations, priorities, and then take action, depending on whether the aircraft’s software work is led by the directorate or industry.
“As we talk about the systems of systems, we’re really laying out that framework for how we connect together and really create the next generation of the standard architectures for how we interconnect together,” Jennings said.
Now the Air Force is pushing to modernize battle management and command, control, and communications—the systems acquired and developed for that effort need to be able to work together to transfer data at the speed the service needs, and common software can help that. To that end, Jennings said his team regularly works with C3/BM czar Brig. Gen. Luke Cropsey to ensure they are on the same page.
Federated
“We need to be able to be better and design more what I call federated systems, in regards to how the systems are set up to be able to make rapid changes to mission computing while leaving the flight stuff, alone,” he said.
Changing software code in one area can impact other parts of the code, affecting flight safety, so changes must be rigorously examined and tested—slowing the pace of upgrades. In the future, Jennings wants the software controlling different functions within the aircraft to be more separate and distinct, so that an update to one will not affect other aspects.
“It’s like Legos, right? It’s creating a system of Legos,” Jennings said. “Some Legos, you’re leaving alone. You’re leaving those structures apart, but you’re allowing these systems to be able to talk to each other and integrate each other to be able to function and to understand where each other are at. Making sure we have the right radios on the systems to be able to communicate, to be able to pass data, to each other, and to be able to trust that data is so important.”
How Fast Can They Go?
Federating systems within aircraft should accelerate updates. Already, speed is improving, even if it’s not as fast as many would like.
“Most of the changes we’re measuring on the F-16 are now in months and not years,” Jennings said. In future systems, updates could be much faster. But in older ones, the limitations on speed remain.
“When you talk about DevSecOps in its purest form, you’re pushing stuff out there, like, on a daily basis,” Jennings said. “You can’t do that with a B-52 because of the way it’s architected, but I can still create changes to that.” It’s all just a matter of time.
First AC-130J Arrives at Kirtland in New Chapter for Gunship Training
Late last month, Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico welcomed a new resident: an AC-130J Ghostrider flying in from its old home at Hurlburt Field, Fla.
The arrival, celebrated with an official ceremony Sept. 5, marks a new chapter for Air Force gunship aircrew training, which is currently split between the two locations. By bringing AC-130J training under one roof, planners hope to make the training pipeline faster and more efficient.
“The training quality has been outstanding,” Lt. Col. John Barringer, commander of the 73rd Special Operations Squadron at Kirtland, told Air & Space Forces Magazine. “We’re focused on being able to reduce the timeline, get that standard of training that the AC-130 community has established, and then get them [aircrew] to the operational unit faster.”
Under the status quo, AC-130J student pilots complete their initial qualification training at Kirtland for about four to six months. That’s where students learn to fly the C-130J, the four-engine transport plane of which the AC-130J is a variant.
Once they complete initial qualification training, students move to Hurlburt to start mission qualification training, which is where they learn to fly the AC-130J, a ground attack platform with two cannons sticking out the left side of the fuselage, the ability to drop a range of bombs and missiles, and a crew in back who operate the aircraft’s weapons and sensors.
Mission qualification training “really familiarizes them with how we employ the AC-130J Ghostrider,” said Lt. Col. Joshua Martin, operations officer for the 73rd SOS. “That is more like the mission sets that we accomplish, how to integrate with the crew for the mission.”
An AC-130J arrives at Kirtland Air Force Base, N.M. after departing its previous home at Hurlburt Field, Fla. on Aug. 27, 2024. Photo via Facebook/58th Special Operations Wing
The problem with the current arrangement is the transit to Hurlburt: paperwork, finding lodging in Florida, and travel itself stretches the pipeline by about a month.
“It’s a break in training for at least a month, if not more,” Barringer said. “We reduce that month gap immediately by moving them right to the flightline as soon as they’re done with the initial qual.”
The move will also benefit the rest of the crew, as the 73rd will conduct all initial and upgrade training for pilots, combat system officers, weapons system operators, aerial gunners, and other positions, Martin said. The current arrangement for those other crew members is more disparate, with some Airmen training at the 19th Special Operations Squadron at Hurlburt.
The journey back to Kirtland also streamlines things on the organizational side of the house. Under the status quo, AC-130J crew training takes place under both Air Education and Training Command (AETC), which oversees the 58th Special Operations Wing at Kirtland, and Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC), which oversees Hurlburt Field.
Putting all training activities under AETC helps centralize training resources and expertise, which lets AFSOC focus on operations, Barringer and Martin explained. The 73rd SOS used to be an operational squadron stationed at Hurlburt Field, but it was deactivated in May and then reactivated a month later as a training squadron under AETC.
“They [AETC] are the experts on educating and training Airmen,” the squadron commander said. “So moving the training of all AC-130J aircrew into this major command—to me, that’s probably the biggest thing I’m excited about. This entire office, this entire organization is focused on training, and that’s it.”
“That allows AFSOC to focus on deployments, preparation for deployments, and readiness, while we focus on those training objectives,” Martin added.
The 58th Special Operations Wing trains about 10,000 aircrew every year for special operations, rescue, VIP airlift, missile site support, and other missions on a range of helicopter, fixed-wing, and tilt-rotor aircraft.
During an aircraft arrival ceremony, Col. Joshua Jackson, 58th Special Operations Wing deputy commander, and Patricia Knighten, Team Kirtland Wingman, cut the ribbon to the first AC-130J aircraft at Kirtland Air Force Base, N.M., Sept. 5. U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Karissa Dick
The Road Ahead
The plan to consolidate AC-130J training at Kirtland was first announced in 2020, with the first aircraft and Airmen scheduled to arrive in fiscal y2023. As it turned out, the first AC-130J did not arrive until Aug. 27, near the end of fiscal 2024.
When asked what caused the delay, Barringer and Martin said the answer was above their pay grade, but they acknowledged that military basing decisions are complicated processes involving a lengthy environmental study and other factors. It was not until May 2023 that Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall formally signed off on the basing decision.
The squadron will eventually host six aircraft and 299 people including aircrew, maintainers, and support staff. The goal is to be ready for student training by April 1, 2025, and right now the squadron is on pace to meet that goal, Berringer asked. Some temporary facilities will have to be built and other buildings updated to handle the new mission, but most of those projects are nearing completion, he added.
Coming to Kirtland also marks a new base for the AC-130 community, which previously was limited to Hurlburt and Cannon Air Force Base, N.M.
“Now we have three bases that folks could potentially rotate to,” Martin said. “It provides new opportunities for our folks to crossflow and to get some new experiences with formal training schoolhouses in AETC. So more opportunities there and a new community we can be involved with.”
New Air Mobility Boss Promises to Continue Command’s Transformation
Gen. John D. Lamontagne took over Sept. 9 as the top officer at Air Mobility Command, promising to continue the organization’s sweeping preparations for the prospect of war in the Pacific that have picked up speed in recent years.
The change of command brings the newly minted four-star from his front-row seat to NATO’s efforts to keep the war in Ukraine from spilling across Europe to Scott Air Force Base, Ill., where Lamontagne will lead nearly 107,000 troops and civilians who conduct daily transport and aerial refueling missions around the globe.
In a speech at the change of command ceremony, Lamontagne likened the current tactical hurdles Airmen face to the challenges their predecessors navigated in World War II. Troops of wars past secured battlefield victories even with limited resources under difficult circumstances, he said, and so will today’s Air Force.
“We fight tonight and win tonight with what we have tonight,” Lamontagne said. “We will also have an eye to the future so that our successors will also guarantee … the ability to project power anywhere around the world, in the face of any adversary, at the time and place of our choosing.”
As AMC commander, Lamontagne will have to juggle the operational demands of the U.S. military’s response to conflicts and humanitarian crises worldwide, training and acquisition initiatives to prepare for the future, and the health and well-being of his troops and their families.
The past 12 months alone have seen air mobility units airdrop aid to Gaza, conduct humanitarian aid and security missions in Haiti, and support the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Chad and Niger—plus longer-term initiatives to redefine how Air Force squadrons deploy and vie with China and Russia for military dominance.
Lamontagne is a decorated airlift pilot who previously served as the deputy commander of U.S. Air Forces in Europe-Air Forces Africa and held several other command roles across the mobility enterprise and on the Joint Staff. Military leaders at the ceremony said that resume has prepared the general to continue building a flexible, fast-moving command that can ferry troops and equipment anywhere on Earth.
“We’ve got a lot more work to do,” Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David W. Allvin said. “Gen. Lamontagne’s going to take us there.”
Lamontagne replaces Gen. Mike Minihan, who is retiring after more than three decades in uniform. “Mini,” a career C-130 Hercules airlift pilot known for his booming voice and small kindnesses to troops and their families, has served as AMC boss since October 2021.
Over the past three years, Minihan has urged Airmen to connect with a mission bigger than themselves as the Air Force looks to the Pacific. He has ordered units to ensure they can perform in the vast Pacific, emphasized the importance of mental health, and encouraged troops to bend tactical rules to push missions farther and faster than in decades past. He’s also brought on the troubled KC-46 Pegasus tanker while exploring future aircraft that could blur the lines between traditional airlifters and tankers.
“I stand here reluctant and defiant that this is my last act of uniformed service,” he said, “reluctant that the best job and also the longest job that I’ve ever had terminates in just a few moments; defiant that I’ve been judged excess.”
“The greatest gift warriors can give to one another is the gift of respect,” he said. “You have mine, always.”
Minihan is an “Airman’s Airman” who led the command with a steady hand during turbulent times, said his predecessor, U.S. Transportation Command boss Gen. Jacqueline Van Ovost.
“He brought a passion that he wore on his sleeve … which empowered others to do the same,” Allvin added. “He had a passion for the mission, and a drive and a personality that was infectious and led people to want to follow.”
The service chief pledged to continue Minihan’s push for more realistic training that illuminates where the Air Force is ready for war—and where it still falls short.
“You can’t win the fight if you can’t get there, and you can’t sustain the fight,” Allvin said. “The joint force is waking up to this. … That’s something that will be a hallmark of Gen. Mike Minihan and [his wife] Ashley’s time here.”
Solving DOD’s Software Dilemma With Continuous Authorizations to Operate
Conventional software processes no longer make sense in an age where technology changes overnight and sensors and software systems either keep pace or fail. But trying to adapt modern commercial software practices to legacy applications and contracting is no easy task.
“We’ve got rules and regulations, and you have got to check all these boxes,” said Airman-turned-bureaucracy hacker Bryon Kroger, Founder and CEO of Rise8, a software development house specializing in mission-critical software applications.
As an Air Force intelligence officer operating in combat zones, Kroger observed the tragic results of the failure to fix known software flaws. Later, as an acquisition officer and pioneer with the Air Force’s Kessel Run software factory, he helped deliver the kind of rapid software updates he wished he’d had in combat.
Now he’s dedicating himself to ensuring future warfighters get the updates they need at the speed of relevance.
“Our ability to conduct future warfare will be about how quickly we can respond to the enemy with new software,” Kroger said. “Not just offensive and defensive cyber, but new software capabilities to run the war.”
The idea of rapid software updates can be scary for those who grew up in a conventional development environment, where it takes years to gather requirements, code to those requirements, and then test the finished product before an Authority to Operate (ATO) is granted.
But speed does not have to mean eliminating all those safeguards. “The military lives in a world where we say: ‘Well, we want to make sure that what you’re delivering works,’” Kroger said.
That’s still necessary. But there are ways to ensure software is secure and reliable without having to wait a year or more for an ATO.
It was at Kessel Run that Kroger first pursued the concept of a continuous ATO (cATO). It’s a secure and reliable means for ensuring that software updates can be pushed into production quickly, relying on software “containers” to narrow the scope of what needs to be tested and proven before software goes live. Automation ensures that code is tested and complies with all requirements.
In a peer conflict, Kroger said, “we’re going to find out very quickly that our software is not up to the task.” That’s to be expected. The challenge is how fast can fixes be put into action.
Members of North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Northern Command maintain around-the-clock manning of the Joint Operations Center at the commands’ headquarters on Peterson Space Force Base, Colorado. The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) visual information does not imply or constitute DOD endorsement.
Speed, Stability, and Security Are Interlinked
In conventional software development, requirements are compiled and lumped together such that an update may take years to complete. Pushing some of those components into production sooner entails risk.
“Commanders do have a lot of leeway to accept risk, but not very many people want to get crosswise with the law and find themselves on the floor of Congress explaining why there was a major cybersecurity breach,” Kroger said.
But in a modern, agile software development context, developers work more closely with operators and break down the requirements into more digestible pieces that can be completed in a matter of hours, days, weeks, or months instead of years. These “sprints” define the pace of development.
Called DevOps or DevSecOps, this more rapid process can accelerate capability to the warfighter—but only if the software, once developed, can be cleared for use in production. That requires an initial ATO.
The continuous ATO (cATO) eliminates the delays that come with leaving testing and certification to the end. By doing those things in parallel time is saved and mission effectiveness improved, Kroger said.
Case in point: “In Ukraine, where Starlink was getting jammed, they deployed a software update to the Starlink system and stopped the jamming immediately,” Kroger said.
To deliver results like that, DOD needs to modernize its authorization processes.
In May, the Pentagon published evaluation criteria for obtaining a cATO. “DOD must respond quickly to rapidly changing threats through the continuous integration and
delivery of capabilities, cybersecurity, resiliency, and survivability,” the document states. “To allow software delivery organizations to deploy more secure software faster, the Department will implement a new approach to system authorizations: Continuous Authorization to Operate (cATO).”
Those “organizations that want to move faster and are willing to adopt the necessary culture change… [must make the shift from] a document-based, point-in-time
technical security assessment approach … to a continuous risk determination and authorization concept by continuously assessing, monitoring, and managing risk.”
What’s more, the document concludes, “cATO raises the security standard over a traditional Authorization to Operate (ATO) and provides the ability to deploy software more rapidly to the field while improving security.”
Accelerating Software While Avoiding Risk
Suppose for example a defense agency wants a web-based application deployed in the cloud. Before starting, “you should have the cloud in place, the platform that the app’s going to run on, and the path to get there,” Kroger said.
The path to production depends on a level of trust. Ideally, “the authorizing officials should all trust each other,” Kroger said. Achieving that level of trust requires “government and industry coming together to establish enterprise-level paths to production that are relatively consistent across the services and maybe even the agencies.”
Such a clear production pipeline won’t solve every authorization-related problem, Kroger admits. “But it will solve probably 80 percent of the use cases.”
Once the bulk of cases are covered, the remainder can be dealt with more effectively. One ATO—or cATO—at a time.
Outgoing AMC Boss Minihan Wishes He Could Give Airmen ‘Predictability’
Sept. 9 marked the end of an era as Gen. Mike Minihan, the head of Air Mobility Command, retired after a 34-year career and passed the baton to Gen. John D. Lamontagne at a ceremony at Scott Air Force Base, Ill.
During his tenure, Minihan oversaw some of the most demanding periods in AMC history. The command’s 107,000 troops and 1,100 aircraft responded to Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and Israel’s invasion of Gaza; moved U.S. troops out of Niger; delivered aid to a series of humanitarian crises, and put on Mobility Guardian 2023, a massive exercise where 70 aircraft, 3,000 personnel, and several international partners practiced moving troops and supplies across the Pacific for two weeks.
Mobility Guardian was just one part of a wider effort across the Air Force to prepare for possible future conflict against a near-peer rival such as Russia or China. Elsewhere, mobility troops are flying longer sorties than ever to prepare for the vast reaches of the Pacific and working in smaller teams than ever so they can quickly avoid incoming missile strikes.
It’s a lot to juggle, which is why Minihan wishes he could give mobility Airmen an easier way to handle it all.
“The reality is, we have to find ways that can handle both the tyranny of the urgent and also plan for the future,” he said. “So if I had one gift that I could give to the Airmen of Air Mobility Command, it would be predictability. We have to, with all of that, still provide, to the best we can, predictability so their professional and personal lives are not continually in a state of chaos.”
Airmen load cargo onto a U.S. Air Force C-17 Globemaster III at an undisclosed location within the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility, Oct. 27, 2023. (Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Alexander Cook)
Every three minutes around the clock, a mobility aircraft takes off or lands after refueling fighters, hauling supplies for a humanitarian relief effort, or a wide range of other missions. That tempo picks up in response to crises, and with only so many aircraft and crews available, AMC is sometimes referred to as “Another Missed Christmas.”
“When we surge, we have to provide an opposite recovery time so that what was lost can be gained back, but also we don’t lose what should have been done,” he said. “So we have to really proactively drive the recovery for the Guard, Active-Duty, Reserve when it comes to the surges that they do routinely.”
Other generals have raised similar concerns. Earlier this year, Maj. Gen. Corey J. Martin, then-head of the 18th Air Force, the only Numbered Air Force under AMC, said mobility Airmen may need their own version of the Air Force Force Generation deployment schedule (AFFORGEN), a two-year cycle made up of four phases: prepare, certify, deploy, and reset, each of which lasts six months.
“Our Airmen don’t necessarily have the luxury of having a six-month reset in the traditional sense that it was designed,” Martin told Air & Space Forces Magazine.
Warrior Heart
In the meantime, Minihan strived to make it easier for Airmen to handle life stress through “Warrior Heart,” an effort to give equal attention and priority to mind, body, and craft by eliminating the stigma surrounding mental health treatment, lowering barriers to treatment, and increasing access and options.
The general pointed out Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, which in July 2023 launched a program called Sean’s Room, where service members can walk into a room at the 305th Air Mobility Wing’s Passenger Terminal and get confidential, informal peer support from trained volunteer Airmen.
The idea lines up with what then-Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force JoAnne Bass said in February: only two out of every 10 Airmen who seek mental health need clinical support, according to mental health providers. “The other eight just need to know someone cares,” she said.
“There is a shortage of mental health providers, but there is not a shortage of leaders and wingmen,” Bass added.
Gen. Mike Minihan, Air Mobility Command commander, officiates the ribbon cutting ceremony for Sean’s Room at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, N.J. on 10 October, 2023. (U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Matt Porter)
By October, Sean’s Room had already helped more than 500 guests and saved nine lives, according to Senior Airman Connor Runkle, a C-17 crew chief who played a key role standing up the program along with 305th AMW commander Col. Elizabeth Hanson.
“These individuals received the help and support they needed because we were there to answer their calls,” Runkle said in a press release last year.
Minihan wants mobility wings to have the resources they need to pursue those kinds of ideas.
“We need to be the headquarters that supplies those tools,” he said. “I think we’ve made enormous progress. At the same time, I know we’ve got a lot more to do.”
Starting From Further Behind
Resource issues extend beyond mental health. After Mobility Guardian, Minihan set a goal to outfit 25 percent of the mobility enterprise with connectivity upgrades by 2025. Airmen say secure, beyond-line-of-sight communication—a capability enjoyed by fighter and bomber pilots for decades—is crucial for them to fly the rest of the joint force across the Pacific in a near-peer conflict. But progress has been slow, and reaching the goal by 2025 is very much in doubt.
“There is absolutely a way that we can still get there,” he said. “However, it’s in jeopardy unless we get some infusion of resourcing earlier.”
The technology to provide that connectivity exists. When asked what might be getting in the way, Minihan pointed to the Air Force-wide resourcing problem, the fact that AMC is starting from further behind than other major commands, and the unnecessary bureaucracy that former Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. criticized in his “Accelerate Change or Lose” strategy.
“I think my frustrations are similar to what Gen. Brown laid out,” Minihan said. “The bureaucracy is always a challenge, especially when it comes to developing new technology or instituting technology that already exists.”
In speeches and memos, Minihan made strong statements about the urgency of preparing for near-peer conflict, which experts say will be far more bloody than any Americans have seen for generations. The statements were too strong, some argued—in 2023, the Pentagon distanced itself from a memo in which Minihan predicted a war with China in 2025 and encouraged his Airmen to get to the shooting range and “aim for the head.”
What was his strategy? The general said it was to be clear and concise on the things that he as AMC boss felt needed urgent action.
“I’ve been consistent throughout my whole career in my approach towards commanding and putting a team on the field that’s ready to dominate and win,” he said.
That, and his experience as deputy commander for U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, was why he was promoted to be AMC boss in October 2021, he said.
“I was also told by Gen. Brown, the morning he promoted me and we did the change of command, to go faster,” he said. “I felt a sense of urgency and action from the get-go. I use tools to help define what that urgency and action would look like, and that urgency and action that was delivered by those tools has been extremely successful.
“I am not the least bit concerned about the legacy of Mike Minihan,” he added. “I am consumed with the legacy for Air Mobility Command and its total force Airmen, civilians, families, retirees, everybody that wore the AMC patch past, present, and future.”
A C-130 aircraft flies by as Gen. Mike Minihan, Air Mobility Command commander, speaks during the C-130 70th Anniversary Celebration at Robins Air Force Base, Georgia, Aug. 23, 2024. (U.S. Air Force photo by Patrick Sullivan)
The general’s own future lies in Florida, where he will move to help take care of his parents, explore doing nonprofit work, and be available for service members who want advice.
“I have not been able to control my personal tempo for decades,” he said. “I’m looking forward to learning the civilian side of Mike Minihan, and I’m looking forward to spending incredible amounts of time with my family.”
Now it’s up to Gen. Lamontagne to keep building the momentum for what Minihan calls “the most relied-upon force in the history of warfare.”
“Mobility Airmen understand that their efforts … deliver the peace, prosperity, and prestige every day that not just this nation deserves, but the free world deserves,” he said. “We’ve got to do everything in our power to make sure that they have the tools necessary to be successful.”
Pentagon Report: Air Force to Bed Down Only 25 F-35s in Fiscal 2026
The Air Force would only bed down 25 F-35s in fiscal 2026 under a plan included in a recent Pentagon report on the fighter. The plan calls for the service to field some 700 of the jets by the end of the decade and never buy more than 48 in any given year.
The Selected Acquisition Report, which was completed Dec. 31, 2023, but only cleared for public release on Aug. 7, 2024, includes an “Operational Fielding Plan” for all three variants of the F-35. The Air Force’s fielding plan and inventory shows that 419 Lightning IIs were in the service’s inventory at the end of 2023, but more will be added annually in an irregular pattern. The service also expects losses of between two and four F-35s per year.
F-35A Fielding Plan and Inventory
Year
Fielded
Losses
Decommissioned
Inventory
2023
0
0
–
419
2024
51
3
–
467
2025
57
2
–
522
2026
25
3
–
544
2027
39
3
–
580
2028
44
3
–
621
2029
47
4
–
664
(source: DOD Modernized Selected Acquisition Report, F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter [JSF] Program, citing 2023 “Weapon System Planning Document [WSPD] Approved Beddowns”)
An Air Force official said the figures should not be construed as mirroring planned Air Force budget requests but reflect “a number of factors” affecting how fast jets can be purchased, delivered, and absorbed into existing F-35 units and fielded in new locations.
The service’s desire to defer larger purchases until the preferred Block 4 version of the jet is tested and available
Lockheed Martin’s difficulties in achieving intended annual production rates.
The official also noted that the plan dates to late 2023 and that there have been adjustments to the program since then which were not captured in the report.
The expected annual attrition losses are about double those predicated by the Marine Corps and Navy for their F-35 fleets, which range from zero to two per year.
The report separately plots a notional buying plan for the F-35A. The Air Force’s plan calls for buying 42 per year in fiscal 2025 and 2026, 47 in both 2027 and 2028, and then a steady 48 per year until 2048, with the last 34 aircraft planned for 2049, for a total of 1,763.
Under early plans for the program, the Air Force envisioned buying between 81 and 110 F-35s per year, with the intent of concluding production in the 2030s.
The Air Force only requested 42 F-35As in its fiscal 2025 budget request, down from previous requests of 48 per year. Senior service officials have said those numbers reflected other priorities, such as the need to develop the Next-Generation Air Dominance fighter and the associated Collaborative Combat Aircraft, and to procure F-15EXs to backfill F-15Cs rapidly aging out of the inventory.
The Marine Corps buying plan calls for a low of 13 F-35s per year in 2025 and 2026, and a high of 25 in 2032, which is the end year for its planned F-35B procurement, totaling 353 aircraft.
The Navy will similarly vary its buy of carrier-capable F-35Cs from just 13 in fiscal 2025, ramping up to 24 in 2029, and then declining to 15 toward the latter years, ending with 340 F-35Cs by 2035, the planned last year of production for the Navy.
By the end of fiscal 2029, the Marine Corps expects to have 245 F-35Bs in service, while the Navy expects to have 219 F-35Cs; together totaling 464 aircraft, or about two-thirds of planned Navy/Marine Corps procurement of 693 F-35s.
Together with the Air Force, the U.S. services expect to field 1,128 F-35s by the end of fiscal 2029. The numbers do not include production or fielding for international partners or Foreign Military Sales customers.
The Air Force set its objective of 1,763 F-35s circa 2005 and has not adjusted that figure since, despite growing inventories of fourth- and fifth-generation fighters in China, the proliferation of more lethal air-to-air and surface-to-air missile threats worldwide, and the pursuit of more advanced fighters like the NGAD.
Service officials say they are cognizant that reducing the planned buy would instantly increase the unit cost of the F-35 on paper, as developmental and beddown costs would be amortized over a smaller number of aircraft produced. This increase in turn would potentially lead to a Nunn-McCurdy breach, and potentially persuade Capitol Hill not to continue the program.
US Space Command Leaders Endorse Other Services Having Role in Space
U.S. Space Command leaders expressed support in recent weeks for contributions to the combatant command from all the military branches as they build space expertise and integrate it into their operations, amid a debate over how to balance the roles of the Space Force and other services’ space capabilities.
“When the command stood up, we did not have components from all of the services,” Navy Rear Adm. Will Pennington, SPACECOM chief of staff, said at a recent Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies event at Peterson Space Force Base, Colo. “And now, we have service components from the Army, the Air Force, the Marine Corps, and the Navy. … Beyond that, what the services have invested in, is the development of their force to have a greater understanding of space, therefore be able to serve a greater role in liaison and equity and to enable true multi-domain, joint force, and coalition force warfare.”
Each branch can bring its own specialized skills to tackle the challenges of space-based missions, Pennington suggested.
U.S. Space Command leaders – Space Force Gen. Stephen Whiting, Navy Rear Adm. Will Pennington, and Air Commodore Darren Whiteley speak at Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies event held in Peterson Space Force Base, Colo., on Aug 28.
As an example, Pennington pointed to the Army’s Space Operations Officers, or FA 40, who remain pivotal even with the standup of the Space Force in late 2019. These specialists leverage space-based assets—like satellite communications, GPS, and missile warning systems—to support military missions and ensure space capabilities are integrated into Army operations, as the Army remains the largest user of satellite resources in the Department of Defense.
“That expertise has continued and remains incredibly important to us,” added Pennington.
Pennington’s remark comes on the heels of a recent Army proposal to create a space military occupational specialty (MOS) to build long-term expertise in the field. The commander of the Army’s Space and Missile Defense Command, Lt. Gen. Sean Gainey, has argued a dedicated MOS would allow Soldiers to specialize early, deepening expertise and cementing the Army’s stake in space.
“The Army has a place in space, and we need to continue leading the charge by giving our Soldiers every opportunity possible to become the experts we’ll turn to during the next conflict,” Gainey said at the Space and Missile Defense Conference last month.
The initiative is part of the Army’s broader ambition to carve out its own role in space. A key milestone came in January when senior leaders endorsed the Army Space Vision for multi-domain operations, declaring Army space professionals “critical” to the service’s readiness.
Some experts have raised doubts, however, arguing that the Army’s proposal duplicates efforts, wastes resources, undermines cooperation, and favors its own missions over joint operations.
“The Army should be stopped, and all resources involved should be revectored to the Space Force,” Charles Galbreath and Jennifer Reeves from the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies argued in an op-ed, calling on the Secretary of Defense and Congress to step in. With the Space Force’s $30 billion budget this year dwarfed by the Army’s $185.5 billion, they called the Army’s move to fund its own space assets “ludicrous,” especially given the lack of growth in the Space Force budget.
In response, U.S. Space Command boss Gen. Stephen Whiting, also a member of the Space Force, noted space expertise doesn’t need to be exclusive to Guardians, backing the Army’s initiative. Two Army Space officers also offered their own op-ed in rebuttal, arguing the service has a vital role to play in space.
Other branches are also crafting new occupations dedicated to space as well. The Navy is training its own Maritime Space Officers to handle space operations full-time. Their mission is to integrate space capabilities into naval operations, support Navy and Marine Corps efforts, and sharpen space situational awareness for naval warfare. The Marines have developed space-focused military occupational specialties (MOS) as well, with the Maritime Space Officer leading the charge in the revamped 17XX Information Maneuver field.
According to Pennington, these personnel come from diverse warfare backgrounds—surface ships, submarines, aircraft, and information warfare roles like cryptology—before transitioning into space operations through specialized training. This eventually broadens the command’s expertise and ensures they have top talent ready for the final frontier.
“What that allows, just like we saw in an air operations center during our time in the Middle East, (is that) when you have a population of folks that are deeply steeped in joint warfare and processes, but have a baseline knowledge of space warfare, it really enables the synergy of the joint force,” said Pennington.
Beyond just skilled personnel, Pennington stressed a demand for capabilities required to secure space superiority. While the Space Force remains the “principal partner,” Pennington noted the critical role of other branches, especially in electronic warfare and cyber defense. He argued that a unified Joint Force effort is essential for protecting and exploiting space and cyber vulnerabilities for future operations.
“Having forces that can understand the space architecture well enough to be able to produce tools to help us both defend what we need to and possibly exploit enemy vulnerabilities is going to be incredibly important,” said Pennington. “So, it will remain very important that we have an all Joint Force effort moving forward, both in terms of personnel expertise, and in terms of capability.”
30 Million Hours and Counting: Pratt & Whitney’s Stalwart F100 Engine
Sept. 6, 2024
Pratt & Whitney’s F100 engine debuted in 1972 and continues to power F-15 and F-16 jets for the U.S. Air Force and allied militaries around the globe. Josh Goodman, who leads the F100 program at Pratt & Whitney, and Nick “JDAM” Graham, a former U.S. Air Force F-15 Weapon Systems Officer and now senior manager in the company’s F100 program office, share what the engine has achieved so far—and what comes next.
The latest generation F100 engine, which is fully capable of powering the advanced F-16 Block 72 and Advanced F-15 / F-15EX.
What is it about the F100 engine that makes it unique?
Josh Goodman: The F100 is the engine that powers the F-15, the F-16, and more recently, provides the gas turbine core capability in the Quarterhorse and Darkhorse uncrewed platforms under development by Hermeus. The F100 flew on the first flight of the F-15 in 1972, and earlier this year, we celebrated the 50th anniversary of the first flight of the F-16 in 1974. Since its debut, F100 engines have surpassed 30 million flight hours—nearly three times as many hours as other fourth-generation fighter engines.
Josh Goodman
The F100 has an unmatched record of safety and reliability: According to the Air Force Safety Center, it is the safest fourth-generation engine in a single-engine fighter application. For the U.S. Air Force, the engine currently meets its aggressive mean time between removal requirement, which increased in 2020 because of its consistent performance. We have a superior thrust-to-weight ratio. Feedback from pilots indicates that the pilot-throttle response is unmatched, which gives the Thunderbird pilots the ability to put their wingtips mere inches from each other.
The F100 has a modular design, and our sustainment approach at Pratt & Whitney is part of the engine’s value proposition in the marketplace.
Pratt & Whitney F100-powered F-15s and F-16s have an undefeated combat record, 165 to 0 — a little bit of an aged statistic, just prior to some of the more recent conflicts that the F100 is fighting in the world. We’re the only fourth-generation engine that provides operationally proven fifth-generation technologies, such as thermal coatings, improved turbine cooling capabilities, and prognostics.
Moving forward, we have the ability to grow thrust. We have additional bleed and horsepower extraction capabilities to give back to the aircraft. In short, the F100s coming off our active production line have been modernized and they are a technically superior product that enables expanded airframe capability. The Pratt & Whitney F100 truly remains the very best choice for the F-15 and F-16 (including the latest variants like the F-15EX and F-16 block 72).
Nick Graham
Nick Graham: During my time in the Air Force flying the F-15E, I flew over 1,000 hours of combat sorties in Iraq and Afghanistan—220 combat missions in all—and every single one of those was flying the F100 engine. There are so many things we need to consider and concern ourselves with in combat: whether troops are taking fire on the ground; [if] it’s night; if you have to dive down under the weather in Afghanistan in between the mountains to try to pick out targets — lots of details competing for attention. The one thing I never had to worry about were the two engines powering my aircraft.
You mentioned the potential for more thrust. What difference might that make for pilots?
JG: Integrating additional electronics requires additional cooling potential for the aircraft. That requires additional bleed from the engine, or alternative means, but given the engine’s capability, we have the ability to provide that cooling potential to enable the aircraft to add mission capability. By decreasing the weight, it gives you the ability to load out additional capabilities on the aircraft.
NG: The aircraft that the F100 powers currently all have a prominent air-to-ground role. When it comes to the value of these aircraft in combat scenarios, being able to fly further with more ordnance is an incredibly high value. You always have to concern yourself with your weight: How much can you hook on the aircraft? How far can you go with it efficiently? From my experience flying the F-15E model, we put a lot of weapons on that aircraft. The ground commanders, the combatant commanders, love to call on that aircraft because they know they’re getting a lot of bang when we show up. Any way we can reduce weight in the aircraft to allow us to either put more ordnance on there or, at a lower weight, we fly a little bit further and hang around a little bit longer … is beneficial to everybody.
What other platforms do you envision for the F100?
JG: There’s been some press recently on taking the F-15 to an electronic warfare version. That will require exactly what we’re talking about: additional electronics for that mission, and we’ve got to figure out how to power and cool them and how to afford the added weight. Stepping a little bit outside of the traditional F-15 and F-16 applications … the Hermeus aircraft gives you another example of the F100’s capability. The Hermeus organization is seeking a low-risk solution to get into the Mach 2, Mach 3 range until they cocoon the engine and engage the ramjet portion of the combined cycle propulsion system to get to approximately Mach 5. The history, the safety and the people that stand behind this engine all play into its reliability, that low risk, and the reason that it is a chosen solution for future nontraditional applications beyond F-15s and F-16s.
What unique considerations do you have to work through when adding the F100 to a new platform?
JG: There is a very rigorous qualification program to ensure that the aircraft-engine interface — all the wires and/or cables that exist — are connected properly and responding properly to ensure that we’re keeping our brave men and women safe. We like when the number of landings equals the number of takeoffs, and we want to keep it that way.
What’s unique about including the F100 in a hypersonic propulsion system for Hermeus?
JG: The engine that will go into the combined-cycle propulsion system for Hermeus is not the same engine that powers F-15s and F-16s. It is very, very similar. But there are differences in hardware—and particularly in software—in integrating the majority of the F100 into the combined-cycle propulsion system. However, because we’re keeping most of the engine common, we get to take advantage of the stellar record of reliability and safety in that application.
Nick flying in an F-15E
What improvements do pilots and maintainers tell you they’d like to see in the F100?
NG: From the fliers’ perspective, range is always first. As adversaries get better systems, we all end up pushing further and further away from each other by design. Engines that can deliver the range to give us the advantage are always in need. The thrust-to-weight ratio of our engines certainly helps with that. … And there’s some opportunity for growth in that area. When it comes to modern air combat, the electromagnetic spectrum and directed energy weapons that may come down the line in the future all require power. We have a tremendous growth capacity that already exists in our F100-PW-229 engines to provide excess power to customers who want to install additional systems on those aircraft. So as we step forward into more transmitters — more power being transmitted from the aircraft — our engines have the capability to do a lot more than they are doing today.
JG: At the component level, we are continually learning from our designs on our fifth- and sixth-gen engines and seeking the opportunity to integrate those technologies back into our fourth-generation engines. We look at this modernization not only from a system perspective, but at a component-level perspective as well, to ensure that we are continually improving the value of this engine to the warfighter.
At the end of the day, Pratt & Whitney likes to do hard things. That’s why we’re in this business.
How would you describe the state of the F100 sustainment enterprise right now?
JG: We have 23 air forces, including the U.S. Air Force that we support worldwide. It creates a rather dynamic environment.
The great thing about the F100 organization within Pratt & Whitney is that we meet a customer’s sustainment demands in whatever way they want. Where we have a more integrated, strategic [performance-based logistics]-type relationship, we absolutely see the best affordability and availability, because all our incentives are aligned. But we also have the ability to support from a transactional perspective. We have invested in digital tools to help us better understand exactly what’s going on in the world and how we can optimize. Sustainment is about affordability and availability, and we have plans in the future to engage additional machine learning, AI capabilities in order to further improve that support. Most of our AI exploration so far has been on the supply side of the analysis. We are currently in the process of expanding that to the demand side of the analysis. This is all about optimizing support worldwide for our customers.
Nick ‘JDAM’ Graham, on the left, and his wingman, depart after mid-air refueling over Afghanistan in 2011.
You’re now delivering F100s to Poland. What have you done to ramp up that production line, and do you expect it to keep growing?
JG: The F100 production line has been and is active. We’re delivering actively for both aircraft and spares to worldwide customers. Because we believe the F100 remains the best choice, we absolutely are continuing to pursue not only traditional F-15 and F-16 offerings (including the latest variants like F-15EX and F-16 block 72) but also the non-traditional ones like Hermeus.
What upgrades are on the horizon that you’re under contract for or that you’re going for right now? What could we expect to see in the next five years?
JG: We’ve put together modernization packages at the system level that showcase capability expansion. It’s less about thrust, and more about horsepower extraction and bleeds. We’re actively in conversation with our customers in order to engage those capabilities for the warfighter.
What role do you see for the F100 in engine modernization efforts going forward?
JG: We’re going to continue to modernize the engine both at the component and system levels. At the component level, making it safer and more reliable; at the system level, providing additional capability to the aircraft and the warfighter. We’re going to continue to actively promote the Hermeus relationship for its one-of-a-kind solution, and we’re going to continue to seek these non-traditional applications where a low-risk engine like the F100 presents an advantage—even in a futuristic-type application like Hermeus. For drones that are in the thrust class, we expect to see the opportunity for F100 to fill that need, as well.
Is there anything else that we should know?
Josh Goodman, center, is presented a plaque signed by the U.S. Thunderbirds.
JG: Outstanding past, exceptional future. We’re really excited about supporting this engine for another 50 years and to continue adding new engines into the field and ensuring that the company, processes, and global infrastructure exist to support this engine across the world.
NG: We have 50 years of history on this engine and it’s going to be powering aircraft for a long time. We’re ready to support that as far as we can into the future. In all the combat time I’ve had, I’ve had to adjust and cancel combat sorties for pretty much every system on the aircraft—weapons, sensors, hydraulics, you name it. But in my 220 combat sorties, I never once had to cancel or alter a combat sortie due to engines. When we talk about reliability, these engines got me where my pilot and I needed to go to provide support to our forces on the ground. And they did it 100 percent of the time.
JG: The Pratt & Whitney F100 has had an incredible and iconic history, but at P&W, we are most excited about its future: the F100s coming off our active production line have been modernized and they are a technically superior product that enables expanded airframe capability. The Pratt & Whitney F100 truly remains the very best choice for the F-15 and F-16 (including the latest variants like the F-15EX and F-16 block 72).
