Air Force, Lockheed Test New Reentry Vehicle for Sentinel ICBM

Air Force, Lockheed Test New Reentry Vehicle for Sentinel ICBM

June 18, 2024 | By Greg Hadley

The Air Force and Lockheed Martin announced their first test June 18 of a new reentry vehicle planned to ride atop the Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile. 

An unarmed Mk21A reentry vehicle was launched late June 17 at Vandenberg Space Force Base, Calif. Mounted on a Minotaur I rocket, it flew over the Pacific Ocean, according to a Lockheed Martin press release. The Mk21A is an update to the Mk21 that is currently mounted to the Minuteman III ICBM. 

Neither the Air Force nor Lockheed disclosed any other details about the test, though Lockheed did note that “data collected during the event will further inform Mk21A design and future flight test activities.” 

The Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center awarded Lockheed a $996 million contract for the Mk21A in October 2023. The reentry vehicles will ultimately be fitted with nuclear warheads and integrated into the Sentinel ICBM. In operation, the reentry vehicle is released near the top of the missile’s arc and descends back through the atmosphere towards the target. 

Sentinel has run into trouble recently, with cost and schedule overruns triggering a program review because the impact exceeded limits known as a Nunn-McCurdy breach.

The Nunn-McCurdy Act requires the Department of Defense to report to Congress each time a Major Defense Acquisition Program exceed certain cost thresholds. The Air Force declaired a critical breach for Sentinel in April, indicating cost increases greater than 25 percent over baseline estimates.

Mk21A is technically a separate program. Air Force budget documents show that the service plans to buy 426 reentry vehicles, with deliveries planned to begin in fiscal 2028 and continue through 2039. 

The Air Force is also funding research and development on a “next-generation reentry vehicle.” 

The Minotaur I rocket that launched the Mk21A on June 17 is part of a family of systems based on the Peacekeeper and Minuteman rocket motors, Space Launch Delta 30 noted in a release. The Mk21A is an update to the Mk21 that is currently mounted to the Minuteman III ICBM. 

Other elements of the Sentinel ICBM have been tested in the past few months. In February, manufacturer Northrop Grumman announced it had conducted a shroud fly-off test and a missile stack test. And in January, the company said it successfully tested the second stage solid-rocket motor of the missile. 

The Air Force wants to procure more than 600 Sentinel missiles to replace its aging Minuteman IIIs, which have been operational for decades and are well past their projected service life. The goal is to field the new ICBMs by 2030.

PHOTOS: B-2 Bombers Land on Guam for First Time in 5 Years

PHOTOS: B-2 Bombers Land on Guam for First Time in 5 Years

June 18, 2024 | By Greg Hadley

Multiple B-2 bombers flew to the Pacific last week to participate in a large-scale joint exercise around Guam, Palau, and the Northern Mariana Islands. During the deployment, the stealthy bombers landed on Guam for the first time in years.

Pacific Air Forces released images of the B-2s flying alongside Marine Corps F-35Bs and landing at Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, on June 13. While there, they participated in Exercise Valiant Shield, which concluded June 18. 

The Air Force has not announced a B-2 landing on Guam since 2019 during a refueling stop for a Bomber Task Force mission. The bomber made several appearances over Europe in 2023, and crews deployed to Australia in 2022 as part of a Bomber Task Force.

Valiant Shield is a biennial exercise, with the latest edition including all six services, as well as international partners for the first time. As part of the exercise, forces conducted a sinking exercise on the decommissioned hulk of an amphibious transport dock, launched high-altitude balloons from Andersen, conducted nighttime flying operations, and more, to build “real-world proficiency in sustaining joint forces by detecting, locating, tracking, and engaging units at sea, in the air, in space, on land, and in cyberspace in response to a range of mission areas,” according to a Navy release.

The Air Force, in particular, contributed a host of forces to the exercise. In addition to the B-2s from Whiteman Air Force Base, Mo., the exercise included: 

  • F-22s from Joint Base Langley–Eustis, Va.; and Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska 
  • F-16s from Misawa Air Base, Japan 
  • C-17s from Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, N.J. 
  • C-130Js from Dyess Air Force Base, Texas 
  • B-1s from Ellsworth Air Force Base, S.D.

      The C-130Js in particular participated in a maximum endurance operation to get to the exercise—echoing the epic 26-hour flight another C-130J crew took from Dyess to Guam in April, two C-130Js equipped with conformal fuel tanks flew 22 hours from Texas to the Pacific, with a quick stop in California, while two others made an additional stop. 

      The B-1s and F-22s took part in the formation flight over U.S. Navy and Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force ships to kick off the exercise on June 7. 

      Neither Pacific Air Forces nor Whiteman Air Force Base have disclosed what missions or training the B-2s participated in during the exercise. 

      Air Force’s New Goal: 24 Deployable Combat Wings

      Air Force’s New Goal: 24 Deployable Combat Wings

      June 18, 2024 | By Greg Hadley

      The Air Force plans to field 24 Deployable Combat Wings to meet its rotational demands and provide a cushion for times of crisis, Lt. Gen. Adrian L. Spain, deputy chief of staff for operations, said June 18. 

      Combat Wings replace squadrons as the “units of action” that the Air Force presents to combatant commanders when forces are needed. Deployable Combat Wings will include command, sustainment, and mission layers, and can either pick up and deploy as an entire unit, or add or exchange mission elements depending on a combatant command’s needs at the time.

      Getting to 24 DCWs won’t happen overnight. Chief of Staff Gen. David W. Allvin said June 14 that his staff is still developing the roadmap that will enable combat wings to be the operable deployable elements by late 2026.

      “I think the number that we’re shooting for right now is 24,” Spain said. “We think 16 Active-Duty and eight from the Reserve components.”  

      How many the Air Force can field may not equate to need, however.

      “The number that we can generate and the number that we need is absolutely what we’re talking about,” Spain said. “How many do we think we can actually generate with current resources? And how many do we need, not only to meet the current rotational requirements that we know we’re going to have or we’re likely to continue to have… but to give us some margin for combat credible and capable units of action beyond just the rotational part?” 

      Two dozen Deployable Combat Wings would allow the Air Force to maintain six wings each in the four phases of the Air Force force generation cycle: Prepare, Ready, Available to Commit, and Reset. Regular rotations would draw from the Available to Commit group, but in times of war, forces could be committed while in the ready, or “certified” phase, as well.

      “You have a bench in the certified phase that you might want to take some risk on depending on what’s going on in the world and forward deploy them,” Spain said. “That would be in the worst case: an existential fight that’s coming up and we’re willing to take that risk. You wouldn’t do that for day-to-day operations. But you do have [a ready capability] and they’re three-quarters of the way through that cycle and largely prepared to go.” 

      Rotational demand and availability would not be spread equally among the Active and reserve components, however. Drawn from both the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve, the eight reserve component DCWs will have different deploy-to-dwell ratios, meaning more time home between deployments, and they may not be quite as fully equipped to deploy on their own.

      No deployable combat wing will deploy with “more than about four mission force elements,” Spain said. Typically, those elements have been equated with squadrons, and Spain said the reality is that in most cases a dozen aircraft would make up a force element for fighters.  

      Air & Space Warfighters in Action series presents featured speaker Lt. Gen. Adrian Spain, the Air Force’s Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, during a June 18, 2024, event moderated by Air & Space Forces Association President and CEO Lt. Gen. Burt Field, USAF (Ret.) at AFA headquarters in Arlington, Virginia. Photo by Mike Tsukamoto/Air & Space Forces Magazine

      Equipping those fully will be key to making units fully combat ready.

      “Historically, in order to get to the deployable element, we kind of raided the follow-on force’s kit, in order to make sure the first 12 got out the door sufficiently,” Spain said. The Air Force would prefer not to have to do that, however, and this year’s unfunded priorities list included $612 million to bolster nine new elements, in the hope that Congress will buy out that deficit. 

      The exact makeup of the Deployable Combat Wings’ force elements may vary, but Spain said the wings will be designed to be modular enough that the command and support elements can take on other kinds of capabilities than whatever is their native force element.  

      “Where we are going to need to train the command echelon is to be able to receive forces of any type, because it’s probably going to be rare that the mission element that you have at your base is exactly what the crisis demands,” Spain said. “But I may need a command echelon and sustainment echelon … so they may go and the force elements may go either to a different place or not deployed at all, because I need F-16s versus F-22s at this time.” 

      PHOTOS: B-52 Flies over Red Sea and Arabian Peninsula

      PHOTOS: B-52 Flies over Red Sea and Arabian Peninsula

      June 17, 2024 | By Greg Hadley

      Air Force B-52 bombers roared over the Arabian Peninsula twice last week, flying alongside an American MC-130J and allied fighters during bomber task force missions.

      The Stratofortresses, originally from Minot Air Force Base, N.D., came from RAF Fairford, U.K., where they are currently deployed for a bomber task force. 

      The June 12 and June 14 flights “incorporated fighter escorts from several coalition nations,” Air Forces Central said in a release, though they did not disclose what nations flew alongside the B-52. The release noted that the flights included passes over the Red Sea and Arabian Gulf. 

      “Bomber Task Force missions highlight the U.S.’s ability to rapidly field combat airpower while enhancing training opportunities and interoperability for regional allies and partners operating alongside U.S. forces,” the release stated.

      On at least one flight, the B-52 was joined by a U.S. Special Operations Command-operated MC-130J. AFCENT noted in its release that the MC-130J took part in familiarization training this spring, with Airmen in the Middle East orienting themselves on “palletized effects”—cruise missiles on a pallet dropped out the back of cargo aircraft. 

      The B-52s’ tour over the Middle East comes as the region remains on edge. Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza continues, and Houthi rebels in Yemen have intensified their attacks on shipping in the Red Sea. Over the past several days, U.S. Central Command said it struck several Houthi missile launchers, sensors and drones, though it did not disclose what assets it used to conduct the strikes. 

      In April, B-1 bombers on a rotation in Spain deployed to Turkey for exercises, bringing them close to the Middle East. In February, B-1s flew from the continental U.S. to take part in dozens of airstrikes in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. And last November, B-1s flew three missions in CENTCOM over the course of eight days. 

      It’s been a little while longer since a B-52 flew over the region—in March 2023, a B-52 from Minot was escorted by fighters from seven different countries during a bomber task force mission. 

      Lawmakers Want Briefing on Fund That Could Take Sentinel Off the Air Force Books

      Lawmakers Want Briefing on Fund That Could Take Sentinel Off the Air Force Books

      June 17, 2024 | By John A. Tirpak

      Members of the Senate Armed Services Committee are eyeing major changes to the U.S. nuclear deterrence enterprise in their version of the 2025 defense policy bill, calling for exploration of a special fund—potentially separate from the Air Force’s budget—to pay for the Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile program.

      Lawmakers also want to establish a new Pentagon overseer for all deterrence matters and information on increasing the size of the deployed Sentinel inventory.  

      The committee completed its markup of the 2025 National Defense Authorization bill with more than a dozen significant and specific steps to bolster the strategic deterrent, affecting all aspects of the nuclear triad. The bill’s text has yet to be released, but a summary was made available.

      One provision would require a briefing on “the establishment of a National Land-Based Deterrence Fund, including the cost elements of the Sentinel ICBM weapon system.” The Navy already has a National Sea-Based Deterrence Fund separate from its other shipbuilding accounts, meant to finance nuclear modernization from “across DOD’s budget rather than solely from the Navy’s budget,” according to the Congressional Research Service.

      Such a fund might move some of the Sentinel program outside the Air Force budget. Taking even some of that burden off the Air Force’s plate could help the service significantly, as it struggles to recapitalize its aging and shrinking aircraft fleet. Cost overruns alone on the Sentinel—mainly due to the massive scope of the civil engineering required to rehabilitate the nation’s ICBM silos—are expected to add up to nearly $50 billion; the equivalent of more than 600 F-35s.

      Chief of Staff Gen. David Allvin said last week that the fiscal 2026 budget crunch—driven by Sentinel, budget caps, inflation, and more–is compelling the Air Force to rethink its Next-Generation Air Dominance program, the foundation of its future air superiority capability.

      It remains to be seen whether any briefing on a Sentinel-focused fund will take place. The bill must make it through the Senate, then be reconciled with the House version and signed into law by the president.

      Possibly connected with the discussion on funding Sentinel, Senate lawmakers also want to mandate a report on how the Air Force and the Army Corps of Engineers will cooperate to “recapitalize the existing Minuteman II ICBM infrastructure.”

      The committee also seem interested in increasing the size of the Sentinel fleet. It mandates “no fewer” than 400 “responsive, on-alert, U.S. intercontinental ballistic missiles to be deployed, except for activities related to maintenance, sustainment, and replacement, or activities to ensure safety, security, or reliability.” A deployed force of 400 ICBMs is the Sentinel plan, but the proposed bill would also require “a plan for acquiring and deploying up to 450 Sentinel ICBMs,” an increase of 50 missiles standing alert.

      The Sentinel program calls for 400 of the missiles to be based in silos, but production of 659 is planned, to accommodate thrice-annual surety/demonstration tests through 2075.   

      Boeing did not ultimately bid on the Sentinel program because it claimed Northrop Grumman—which got the award as sole bidder—had an unfair advantage as the only maker of large solid rocket motors. A provision in the bill would authorize increased funding “to support design and manufacturing of an advanced modular solid rocket motor.”  

      Beyond Sentinel, Senators indicated concern for the Defense Department’s entire nuclear enterprise. They want to create a “new senior Pentagon position” that would coordinate and oversee all nuclear deterrence policies and programs, a role now consolidated under the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Defense programs, who also serves as executive secretary of the Nuclear Weapons Council. Brandi C. Vann is the acting incumbent in the role. Presumably, the SASC sees a higher-level position to perform this function, potentially at the undersecretary level.

      The committee also wants a firm plan from the Pentagon on how it plans to deter two peer nuclear powers. Nuclear deterrence has always been calculated against a single opponent—Russia—but the accelerating deployment of nuclear weapons in China’s military requires a new calculus. Lawmakers want “a DOD plan for deterring and defeating simultaneous aggression by two near-peer nuclear competitors, including requirements for nuclear force sizing.”

      The panel also directed the Pentagon and Department of Energy (DOE) to provide an assessment “of  the recommendations on the final report of the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States.” No further detail was provided, but last November the commission urged the national nuclear enterprise to update its processes, increase its output of nuclear materials, and broadly recognize and prepare for a world with three major nuclear powers.

      Lawmakers also want the Pentagon to review “implementation of the 2022 Nuclear Posture Review, including overall risk management, and progress on meeting requirements to address long-term threats.”

      The U.S. has sized its nuclear forces based on the START treaty. But Russia’s exit from nearly all arms control treaties, coupled with China’s increasing nuclear arsenal, throws open the question about how many nuclear weapons are needed to deter both countries and lesser-armed members of the nuclear “club.”

      In a move to end debate on whether to pursue a nuclear-armed sea-launched cruise missile, Senators also would move to establish a program office for the weapon. The Navy has said a SLCM would not be provocative and would enhance deterrence by introducing a low-yield nuclear deterrent in the Indo-Pacific. The committee also wants to authorize “modification or development of the B61-13 gravity bomb and a variation of the W80 weapon for the nuclear-armed” SLCM.

      Without explanation, the SASC also voted to direct “the restoration of nuclear capabilities across the entire B-52 strategic bomber fleet.” The B-52 fleet is getting a massive upgrade to extend its service into the 2050s. The 76 aircraft are getting new engines, radars, navigation aids and weapons, including the new nuclear-armed Long Range Stand-Off missile. Collectively, the upgrades warrant the redesignation of the bomber from B-52H to B-52J.

      Lawmakers proposed an annual review of the Survivable Airborne Operations Center (SAOC) program—which replaces the E-4 National Airborne Operations Center. The committee wants the report to update its “cost, schedule, and technical readiness levels for on-board mission systems.”

      CMSAF Flosi: What ‘Mission-Ready Airmen’ Means for You

      CMSAF Flosi: What ‘Mission-Ready Airmen’ Means for You

      June 17, 2024 | By David Roza

      It’s been a busy first 100 days for Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force David A. Flosi, who earlier this year visited bases around the world with Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David W. Allvin and Secretary Frank Kendall heralding a massive reorganization of the service in preparation for potential conflict with China or Russia.

      Among other things, the reorg involves shifting to deployable combat wings, reorienting major commands, and replacing the ‘multi-capable Airmen’ concept with ‘mission-ready Airmen,’ a move meant to push Airmen to help accomplish a unit’s mission, rather than just pick up an unrelated series of tasks.

      “I assess that all of our Airmen are multi-capable: in fact, I’ve yet to meet somebody that’s singularly capable,” Flosi told Air & Space Forces Magazine. “Mission-ready is very specific: it means you are assigned to a specific organization that is going to employ a certain airpower methodology in a contested environment and we need you to be ready to execute that mission.”

      For example, if the mission is to deliver a certain weapon at a place and time using a certain platform such as a B-52, Airmen can work backwards to figure out what is needed to generate that mission.

      “I can drill into that enough to tell you ‘here’s what I need to be ready to execute that mission,’ as opposed to ‘here’s the functions that must exist,’” Flosi explained.

      Of course, B-52s have delivered weapons on targets for decades, so what makes the day-to-day work of a mission-ready Airman any different from that of earlier generations?

      The exact answer varies based on the unit and mission, but Flosi pointed to the example of the past 20 years of the Global War on Terror, where individuals or small groups of Airmen from as many as 93 different bases filled up a deployment to the Middle East, where they usually enjoyed uncontested communications, logistics, and air defense. With such protection and efficiencies in place, Airmen could afford to stay in their “functional stovepipes,” Flosi said.

      For example, a B-52 maintainer deployed to Qatar could wake up, brief, receive a work order, grab breakfast, wait until his part of turning the jet came up, complete his or her task, then step back off as the other specialists in electrical, avionics, hydraulics, or other systems completed their tasks on the jet.

      That arrangement may not be possible in a conflict with China or Russia, where enemy disruptions could leave small groups of Airmen to accomplish missions on their own. That means tomorrow’s B-52 maintainer might have to guide a jet down the taxiway, make food, purify water, fix a light cart, defend the airfield, or a wide range of other tasks needed to get the mission done.

      “We cannot put any more Airmen at risk than we absolutely must,” Flosi said, “which means we must pull all the capability out of every single Airmen that we put into harm’s way, and we have to un-constrain them from the functional stovepipes that we grow them in today.”

      U.S. Airmen assigned to the 20th Fighter Wing perform casualty carry techniques during an expeditionary skills training course at Shaw Air Force Base, S.C., March 20, 2024. (U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Steven Cardo)

      Also unlike past deployments, where Airmen spent a few weeks getting spun-up in-theater, tomorrow’s Airmen will have to hit the ground ready to perform missions in small groups, which means training for those missions together in-garrison.

      “That’s the whole idea of this new unit of action training together and exercising together,” the CMSAF said. “It expands beyond just the maintenance functions to ‘what conditions must exist for us to execute this mission.’”

      Feedback on the changes has so far been positive, because Airmen “very well understand the need to change our force presentation model,” Flosi said. But finding the resources to practice these concepts is a challenge. While wing commanders in the Indo-Pacific understand the need for change and are doing what they can to implement it, they are limited to their wing-level authorities and resources.

      “The feedback we’re getting from the force is ‘go faster,’” he said. “But they require some resources in order to fully exercise this new model, this new unit of action, so we’re working very hard on that.”

      There may be more news in the next few months as the Air Force starts to unveil a multi-service exercise called Return of Forces to the Pacific (REFORPAC) due to take place in the Indo-Pacific next year. 

      “Our Airmen are just thirsting for that type of capability,” Flosi said.

      Becoming mission-ready may also require a cultural shift, one that makes Airmen feel the “sense of purpose that comes with being a valued member of a team,” he explained. “Honestly, that motivates performance far more than most other things that we will spend time on here at the Pentagon.”

      Other leaders are also striving for a culture of purpose and empowerment through efforts such as Forging Warrior Hearts and Project Mercury. Some aspects of a ready force stem from quality-of-life issues such as housing, pay, and health care, Flosi said, while other parts come from the institution of the Air Force.

      “My role as a senior enlisted leader is ensuring that our processes: the machine behind the human that promotes people, that incentivizes performance, and that assesses performance, is aligned with this idea of mission-ready Airmen and empowered, capable, mission command, that’s built off of trusted teams,” he said.

      Space Force Cancels 3 Satellites Planned for MEO

      Space Force Cancels 3 Satellites Planned for MEO

      June 17, 2024 | By Greg Hadley

      The Space Force dropped RTX, the company formerly called Raytheon, from “Epoch 1” of its planned missile warning/missile tracking satellites in medium-Earth orbit June 17. Space Systems Command in Los Angeles cited rising costs and schedule delays for the move.

      Two more contractors are still on pace to support Epoch 1: Millenium Space Systems, a Boeing subsidiary, which is on contract to build six satellites; and L3Harris, which contracted to design and build payloads, but not satellites. Millenium passed a critical design review in November and began production, and L3Harris’ payload passed its preliminary design review in April.

      An SSC spokesperson told Air & Space Forces Magazine that Epoch 1 is on track “to provide an initial missile tracking capability, prototype several key technologies, and refine operational concepts in MEO.”  

      Space Systems Command notified RTX of its decision at the end of May. “The RTX Epoch 1 development effort was facing significant cost growth from the original agreement baseline, projecting slips to the launch schedule, and had unresolved design challenges,” the spokesperson said. 

      SSC could seek to acquire additional Epoch 1 satellites from Millenium or another vendor, but time is short: Epoch 1 launches are to begin in late 2026/early 2027. Alternatively, SSC could also expand its plans for Epoch 2 when it releases its request for proposals, probably in July, the official said. 

      Epoch 1 contracts were first awarded to RTX and Millenium in 2021. Originally, the plan was for only six total satellites in Epoch 1, but in the 2023 defense spending bill, lawmakers added $130 million to the program to procure more satellites. House of Representatives, aware of the cancellation, are now planning to cut $75.2 million from the program, to account for the canceled contract. 

      The spokesperson SSC was able to “execute this action without compromising our ability to meet the requirement to provide a resilient missile warning and tracking capability for the nation.”

      The Space Force’s missile warning and tracking plans include dozens of small satellites in low-Earth orbit supplemented by some in MEO and a few in geosynchronous and highly elliptical orbits. The Space Development Agency, the Missile Defense Agenc, and SSC are all collaborating, with a combined $4.7 billion investment included in the Pentagon’s fiscal 2025 budget request. Budget documents project spending will increase over the next five years. 

      RTX remains involved in the Space Development Agency’s low-Earth orbit “Tracking Layer” and the GEO-based Next-Generation Overhead Persistent Infrared (Next-Gen OPIR) program.

      For medium-Earth orbit, SSC is following the Space Development Agency’s spiral development approach—contracting for batches of satellites w launches every few years, enabling each batch, or Epoch, to incorporate new technologies as they become available. Similarly, the objectives increase with each new Epoch. For example, Epoch 1 would provide regional missile warning and tracking, while later Epochs will aim to provide more persistent global coverage. 

      Senators Want to Block F-22 and F-15E Retirements, Require Study on Air Superiority

      Senators Want to Block F-22 and F-15E Retirements, Require Study on Air Superiority

      June 14, 2024 | By John A. Tirpak

      The Senate Armed Services Committee finished its markup of the fiscal 2025 National Defense Authorization bill on June 14, with mandates on more than a dozen aircraft or related programs and a keen interest in the future of the Air Force fighter fleet.

      Among the moves, lawmakers would support the Air Force’s plan to buy 42 F-35As and allow the Air Force to divest some of the aircraft it wants to retire—56 A-10s, 65 F-15C/Ds, and 11 F-16C/Ds. Air Force officials say they need to retire the aircraft to help fund modernization efforts.

      However, the committee wants to deny USAF’s request to retire 26 F-15Es and 32 F-22s. And the bill would direct the Air Force to provide “an annual report on the Air Force tactical fighter force structure” and work with the Navy to develop a plan for air superiority in the 2030s and ‘40s.

      The committee issued only a summary of its version of the bill, without the underlying text, and did not offer a rationale, but in budget hearings this spring, members voiced concern about the shrinkage of the Air Force in order to pay for modernization.

      The defense bill provisions come just a day after Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David W. Allvin raised doubts as to the future of the service’s Next-Generation Air Dominance fighter, which is meant to take over the air dominance mission from the F-22. Allvin said June 13 that NGAD is merely one of many “choices” the Air Force faces in confronting oncoming financial challenges such as budget caps, inflation, and a $40-$50 billion overrun on the Sentinel missile program. Previously, leaders has referred to the program as a must-have.  

      The SASC’s proposed bill would have the Air Force and Navy jointly provide an analysis “of how the air superiority mission will be secured for the Joint force in the 2030s and 2040s,” a mandate potentially driven by the Navy’s indefinite deferral of its future fighter, the F/A-XX, and Allvin’s lukewarm remarks about NGAD.

      In addition to the report on the fighter force structure and the air dominance study, Senate lawmakers want the Air Force to provide a plan and cost estimate “for modernizing all 25 fighter aircraft squadrons in the Air National Guard.” They did not specify whether the new aircraft would be F-35s, F-15EXs, Block 70 F-16s, or Collaborative Combat Aircraft, all of which have been discussed in recent hearings as new missions for Guard units that are giving up old fighters.

      The bill would not add any F-35s to the Pentagon’s request for 68 fighters across the services, 42 for the Air Force. That leaves the fate of the F-35 in 2025 well up in the air—the House Armed Services Committee cut between 10 and 20 fighters from the request in their version of the defense policy bill, shifting the funds to software and test capacity items, while the House Appropriations Committee added eight F-35s to the Pentagon’s request.

      Beyond Fighters

      While the Air Force has said it is willing to accept a small gap in its airborne warning and control capability as it retires the E-3 AWACS and waits for the E-7 Wedgetail, lawmakers were less enthusiastic and want to mandate that the service keep 16 AWACS on duty until the arrival of the Wedgetail “or until the retirement of the E-3 would create no lapse in Air Force capabilities.”

      The Air Force has said it is unaffordable and unmanageable to keep the E-3s because of their poor condition and the Herculean effort to put them into action. The service has said the 26 E-7s it plans are a stopgap until the air- and ground-moving target indication mission migrates to space.

      The committee also disagreed with the Air Force in authorizing an additional five HH-60W combat rescue helicopters; aircraft the Air Force didn’t ask for and which it says it can’t use, because it’s trying to figure out how to do combat search and rescue in a broad regional area like the Pacific.

      The SASC reduced funding for three Air Force fleets:

      • The C-40 VIP transport, being built by Boeing
      • The VC-25B “Air Force One” presidential transport, being built by Boeing, because of contract delays
      • The Survivable Air Operations Center (SAOC), being built by Sierra Nevada Corp., also because of contract delays.

        Another provision would take Air Force UH-1N helicopters now serving as VIP transports and missile field support aircraft and planned for retirement and instead transfer them to the Army for use in the Kwajalein Atoll missile test region of the Pacific.

        Elsewhere, along with the Air Force’s fiscal 2026 budget submission, the committee wants a detailed plan for how the Air Force will modernize its strategic tanker fleet. The current plan calls for concluding the initial KC-46 buy around 2029, followed by a “bridge buy” of up to 75 tankers, competitively sourced. After that, the Air Force wants a smaller, stealthy tanker that can operate at the edge of contested airspace in the mid-2030s.

        Other briefings and plans the committee wants include:

        • A briefing from the Air Force on “the requirements for, and implications of” putting five to 10 long-range bombers on alert status “in the event that such an action should become necessary to meet operational requirements.” The service’s B-1 and B-2 fleet have been shrinking in recent years, and the B-52 fleet will shrink operationally as portions of it are retrofitted with new radars and engines, while others are needed for testing of those upgrades and the Long Range Standoff missile.
        • A report detailing the status of the Agile Combat Employment (ACE) program “in each one of the geographic combatant command areas of responsibility.” While the Air Force has touted ACE as applicable to all theaters, it has chiefly focused on the Indo-Pacific for exercises and implementation.
        • A briefing on “stratospheric balloon programs at the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), including plans for integrating stratospheric balloon systems into normal military exercises.” The committee didn’t say if it wants the balloons used as an intelligence-collecting resource for U.S. “blue” forces or as a “red” adversary system to mimic those balloons used by China to conduct surveillance of the U.S. and other countries.

        The SASC bill is not yet law and must first be harmonized with those of Senate appropriators, the full Senate, and the House before being forwarded to President Biden for his signature.

        No More Ops Groups, Allvin Says, Promising First ‘Combat Wings’ in ’26

        No More Ops Groups, Allvin Says, Promising First ‘Combat Wings’ in ’26

        June 14, 2024 | By Greg Hadley

        The Air Force is eliminating group-level Operations and Maintenance commands, streamlining the makeup of squadrons and wings, Chief of Staff Gen. David W. Allvin said June 14, revealing the latest twist in the drive to more effectively project combat power.

        Dozens of such commands, usually led by colonels, exist today across the Air Force. But as Allvin oversees the “re-optimization” of Air Force combat power for great power competition, leaders group-level commands don’t have a place in a structure where wings could deploy as a unit, then disperse squadrons or smaller units in a “hub-and-spoke” agile combat employment scheme.  

        “We’re talking about having a doctrine of mission command that means empowering at the lowest competent level, giving left and right limits—commander’s intent—and letting them leverage their initiative,” Allvin said. “Those squadrons need to be able to exercise that. And sometimes, if there’s another level of command between the squadron commander and the wing command, the group command maybe might be helping them out too much.

        “If you’re a group commander, what do you want to be when you grow up? A wing commander. How do you do that? Well, you make sure your squadrons are all the best. So maybe you might be helping them out and succeeding and not letting them fail forward in training.”  

        The colonels that previously commanded groups will instead move to wing staffs, where they will focus on “the operational warfighting and joint warfighting functions,” Allvin said. The aim is to help them become better joint leaders, something Allvin believes is necessary for the Air Force to take a leading role in the future of warfare. 

        “I think it’s our responsibility not only to be good participants in the joint force, but I also think the Air Force should start having maybe perhaps a greater leadership role,” he said. 

        The change is not a small one, Allvin acknowledged, and will require the service to revamp some of its processes. Officers’ career paths may have to change, and professional military education will have to shift to emphasize the operational level for wing commanders and their staff. 

        Doing so, though, will help align the Air Force better with the other services Allvin predicted. It will also make sense for the service’s new combat wings, the “unit of action” leaders first unveiled in February as part of their “Re-Optimization for Great Power Competition.” 

        At the AFA Warfare Symposium, officials said they will break down all of the Air Force’s operational wings into three categories: 

        • Deployable Combat Wings: Complete units that can deploy together, with their own native command-and-control, mission, and support elements 
        • In-Place Combat Wings (ICW): Complete units with command, mission, and support elements that fight from their home station. 
        • Combat Generation Wings (CGW): Units that provide force elements to Deployable Combat Wings, whether those elements entail command and control, mission, or service support elements. 

        The goal, leaders explained at the time, is to move away from the current system where Airmen are pulled from dozens of different units to fill out one expeditionary wing, only meeting and working together once they arrive in theater. Eventually, entire wings will train and deploy as one singular unit. The service is taking a phased approach to get there, first introducing Expeditionary Air Base teams pulled from a smaller group of bases, and now planning to move to Air Task Forces, who will pull forces from only two or three bases. 

        The locations of the first six Air Task Forces were announced in May and are scheduled to start deploying in late 2025 and early 2026. The timeline for implementing combat wings is “pretty dynamic right now,” Allvin told reporters, but the goal is to have enough in place ready to go when the Air Task Forces start to wrap up—sometime around the fall of 2026. 

        Like the Air Task Forces, some of the first combat wings will deploy to the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility. But make no mistake, Allvin said, they are not designed for the typical CENTCOM structure of large central bases from which all airpower is generated. 

        “We’re optimizing for the pacing challenge. So this construct is best suited for going over and doing deterrence exercises or actually having to go over and employ Agile Combat Employment against the pacing challenge of China,” Allvin said June 13 at an AFA Warfighters in Action event.

        A central tenet of Agile Combat Employment is dispersing smaller teams to operate from remote or austere airfields—and Allvin told reporters that it makes sense for the combat wing’s staff to act as the hub while squadrons go to the spokes. 

        “If we’re going to actually expect these wings to go and be able to do these maneuver functions in the hub and spoke locations, then we need them to have a different set of specialties,” Allvin said. That drove the decision to fold group commanders into the wing staffs. 

        Deployable Combat Wings will be the principal “units of action” presented to combatant commands, not every wing will be designated as such. Some will be Combat-Generation Wings, which might lack the command-and-control functions of a combat wing, but provide plug-and-play combat capability to those wings that can deploy as a unit. Allvin said USAF leaders are still determining how much combat airpower each Deployable Combat Wing will need.

        Still other wings will deploy in place. These could include any wing that can operate globally from its home station, including bomber and cyber units, among others. 

        “We don’t want to have a Deployable Combat Wing that’s got two airplanes in it just because we’ve got to spread them around,” Allvin said. “So finding the right number of platforms around which you can do the command element and then the sustainment element is going to be key, but it starts off with, what are the requirements? And then what are we resourced to do?” 

        Service leaders plan to make a decision on how many Deployable Combat Wings they’ll start with by this fall, Allvin told Air & Space Forces Magazine.