Grey Wolf Helicopter Still Has Deficiencies as It Prepares for Operational Testing

Feb. 12, 2025 | By John A. Tirpak

As the Air Force gets ready to put the new MH-139A Grey Wolf helicopter through initial operational test and evaluation—a key step before full-rate production—the Pentagon’s test director is warning that the aircraft still faces important deficiencies that could cause it to not meet operational requirements.

The MH-139A—Boeing’s adaptation of the civil Leonardo AW-139—has issues with dust ingestion, software, a redesigned gun mount and spent shell casing management, seating restraints and the seating layout, among other concerns, the office of the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation said in its 2024 annual report. An electromagnetic pulse test, required for entry into initial operational testing, also still hasn’t been done, the report noted.

While testing is set to begin this quarter, the report said the assessment may have to be delayed if the Air Force and Boeing can’t correct the problems.

The Air Force has largely completed developmental testing and made progress in addressing other previously noted deficiencies, testers acknowledged, including issues with the automatic flight control system, sensor displays, and crosswind takeoffs.

“But performance concerns remain that present a risk to MH-139A meeting operational effectiveness requirements,” the report states.

Among them, the engine has a tendency to ingest dust and debris, which could cause long-term maintenance issues. This issue showed up mainly during landings in austere areas and “degraded engine performance,” the report states. The Air Force is evaluating whether it needs to conduct additional tests, but the report suggested that this is the main issue putting the MH-139’s “suitability” in question.

That’s in addition to “previously reported concerns about engine maintenance caused by expansion of the aircraft flight envelope and higher power requirements.” Testers also noted a buildup of carbon on several parts of the aircraft’s engine, including its fuel nozzles, the report said.

Other issues include cabin seating constraints and commercially derived mission planning software, both of which are unresolved.

The helicopter mounts an M240 machine gun, and previously reported concerns about this weapon persist, the report states. These include weapon malfunctions, the need to design a new way to catch the spent-brass casings, and the ammunition feed system. “A gun mount redesign is in development but will not be completed prior to IOT&E,” the report said.

The helicopter’s intercom system, which lets the flight crew talk to personnel in the cabin, is expected to require a redesign, which will not be completed prior to IOT&E, the report noted.

There are survivability concerns as well.

“The original contractor-proposed fuel cell design did not meet the required self-sealing military requirements for vendor material qualification against the specified projectile threat,” the report noted, adding that “subsequent testing focused on the design’s ability to inhibit sustained dry bay fires.”

The Air Force has extended developmental testing to include some equipment changes. An additional radio is needed for Global Strike Command missions and must be integrated with the system.

The MH-139 is also “behind schedule on integrating contractor maintenance data into the Air Force Integrated Maintenance Data System,” which is required “to support both IOT&E and normal operations with fielded aircraft.”

To enter initial operational testing, Boeing needs to deliver “operationally representative aircraft; complete flight and maintenance technical orders with the new radio and environmental control system” and provide “fully trained flight crews and maintenance personnel.”

The first phase of cyber testing has been carried out by the Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation Center, and AFOTEC has submitted plans for further cyber testing, the report said.

The Air Force’s plans for the MH-139 have varied wildly in the last few years. The service initially planned a fleet of 84 aircraft to replace the aged UH-1N fleet. The helicopter was to transport troops across intercontinental ballistic missile fields under ground attack, provide other support for those widely dispersed locations, and carry VIP passengers as needed.

But due to budget constraints, the Air Force reduced the buy to 80 aircraft, then 74, then 36 in the fiscal 2025 budget, eliminating the VIP transport mission. Six developmental aircraft will join the fleet, however, making the new inventory objective 42 aircraft. The Air Force has contracted with Boeing for 26 aircraft so far. The Air Force is fully equipping all ICBM bases with planned MH-139s.

The DOT&E report recommended that the Air Force develop corrective action plans for all known deficiencies in the Grey Wolf and ensure that there are enough aircraft “in an operationally-representative configuration” available for IOT&E, along with trained flight and maintenance crews, maintenance support, and “all associated support equipment, consistent with approved concepts of operations.”

With Space Futures Command on Pause, How Is USSF Working on New Partnerships?

Feb. 11, 2025 | By Greg Hadley

RESTON, Va.—The Space Force may have stopped work on its Futures Command, but the service is still crafting future plans, to include a strategy for how it will work with international partners, a top official said.

RAF Air Marshal Paul Godfrey, currently serving in an exchange role as Assistant Chief of Space Operations for Future Concepts and Partnerships, teased some high-level details of the forthcoming strategy at the National Security Space Association’s Defense and Intelligence Space Conference.

At prior conferences, Godfrey has spoken of his role in helping establish Space Futures Command, a new field command that was one of the Space Force’s signature efforts from the Department of the Air Force’s “re-optimization for Great Power Competition.” Progress on that reorganization has been paused while the department waits for new civilian leaders as part of President Donald Trump’s administration.

On Feb. 11, Godfrey noted that his portfolio includes work “shaping futures,” but he was quick to note that “when I talk about shaping futures, I am not talking about standing up Futures Command.”

Rather, Godfrey said his focus is on “driving the Space Force to think about allied, commercial, and partner in every capability, every operation, and every mission.”

Space Futures Command was set to have a major role in that by studying new technologies and conducting wargaming and analysis—with allies and partners—to decide what capabilities the Space Force will need in years ahead.

Even without the command for the time being, Godfrey outlined several ways the Space Force is trying to work more closely with international partners, chief among them a new International Partnerships Strategy set to be released “in the coming months.”

While declining to discuss specifics, Godfrey said the strategy will focus on integration “across the three elements of joint force development”:

Force design, including work on long-term needs within the next five to 15 years

Force development, including work to acquire and integrate new technologies within two to seven years

Force employment, which includes generating and operating combat power within three years or less.

In keeping with Chief of Space Operations Gen. B. Chance Saltzman’s idea that the Space Force must be prepared for continual “competitive endurance,” Godfrey said the strategy “won’t have a static end state, but will rather use three enduring goals”:

Secure U.S. and allies’ collective interests in, from, and to space

Interoperability and information sharing across classification levels

Integration of allies and partners across every aspect of joint force development

To get there, Godfrey added, the strategy “sets the conditions” for allies to be included in Space Force planning, to develop information standards, to increase information sharing, and to increase opportunities for countries to train and operate together.

To achieve these goals, the strategy sets the conditions for allies and partners to be integrated into the Space Force’s planning and capability development, helps develop international standards, improves information sharing, and maximizes opportunities for allies and partners to train and conduct operations together.

Pentagon leaders have said collaborating with other countries, as well as industry, is especially important for the Space Force given the service’s relatively small size and budget, but wide-ranging missions. To accomplish all that the joint force needs, they say, the Space Force needs to be efficient and leverage every partnership it can. On top of that, other nations are eager to build up their own space capabilities.

Speaking later at the conference, the Space Force’s Chief Science Officer Stacie Williams reiterated that argument in advocating for research and development partnerships.

“Partnering with international, we have opened up new markets, we share risk, we get to build capacity in our allied nations, and we also get access to unique capabilities,” she said.

More immediately, Godfrey pointed to the Combined Space Operations (CSpO) initiative as a way that partnerships are growing by encouraging collaboration and cooperation among 10 different countries’ space operations.

“We can use existing collaborations such as CSpO,” Godfrey said, noting that the initiative can help craft international standards and set measurable goals to quantify how the countries are actually working together.

Williams also cited the CSpO as an avenue for more long-term cooperation and development through the service’s Space Strategic Technology Institute program, which funds academic research into complex operational problems.

“I would like to see us do something with the SSTI, the international one, with the CSpO, maybe something that’s based on awareness because geographical diversity is important,” Williams suggested. “So I’m looking forward to expanding that.”

Yet just as Godfrey was limited in what he could say about Space Futures Command due to the reorganization pause, external factors could impact future international partnerships. When asked if the new strategy required more resources to implement, Godfrey demurred.

“We are where we are at the moment in terms of resources,” he said, a reference to the Space Force’s relatively small budget that leaders say needs to be expanded. “I think this is about prioritization and process.”

Air Force Orders Halt to Some Work on Sentinel ICBM

Feb. 11, 2025 | By Chris Gordon

The Air Force is suspending work on a significant part of its new Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile program, ordering a pause on the design and construction of launch facilities being developed by Northrop Grumman.

The suspension comes as the service is working on a plan to restructure the program following significant cost and schedule overruns that triggered a review and required certification from the Secretary of Defense to continue.

“Due to evolving launch facility (LF) requirements in the Command & Launch segment, the Air Force directed the Northrop Grumman Corporation (NGC) to suspend the design, testing, and construction work related to the Command & Launch Segment” of Sentinel, an Air Force spokesperson told Air & Space Forces Magazine.

The order to halt work covers the “LF Standard Design,” which is the baseline design for all planned operational Sentinel launch facilities. The directive also covers work on several sites used for testing, evaluation, and training, the spokesperson said.

The Air Force gave no hint on when the suspension might be lifted.

“The Air Force’s ICBM Systems Directorate is assessing aspects of the current development effort that may be paused, or halted, as the Air Force restructures the program and updates the acquisition strategy,” the spokesperson added.

The sites covered by the order include Launch Facility-26 at Vandenberg Space Force Base, Calif., a test and training facility. Work was also suspended at a former Peacekeeper launch facility at Hill Air Force Base, Utah, and at the Physical Security Systems Test Facility (PSSTF) at Dugway, Utah, a military test site. Also paused is work on launch facility “derivative training devices,” which include maintenance and security forces training facilities at each of the Air Force’s missile wings.

The ICBM Systems Directorate officially stood up last year to help manage the mammoth task of fielding Sentinel as a one-for-one replacement for the 400 currently deployed Minuteman III missiles, which still must be sustained, maintained, and tested. The Air Force has ICBM wings at F.E. Warren Air Force Base, Wyo.; Malmstrom Air Force Base, Mont.; and Minot Air Force Base, N.D. Missile fields are spread out over five states—Colorado, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, and Wyoming.

Northrop Grumman CEO Kathy Warden first indicated there would be a pause on a Jan. 30 earnings call. The Air Force directive was first reported by Defense One.

“We are working with the government on the restructure, but in the meantime, we are performing and meeting important milestones on the [engineering and manufacturing development] contract,” Warden said last month. “The government has said that they project the restructure to take 18 to 24 months, and we’re still very much in that window—though they have paused work on some small infrastructure efforts in the command and launch segment.”

Sentinel, which Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, like his predecessors, has said is a priority for the Department of Defense, is now estimated to cost nearly $141 billion, according to the Pentagon. That triggered a review of the program under the Nunn-McCurdy Act, as the cost was some 81 percent higher than estimated in 2020. That cost overrun also led the DOD to rescind Sentinel’s “Milestone B” approval to enter the engineering and manufacturing development phase, and officials said last year the program could be delayed by several years.

Full operational capability for Sentinel had been set for 2036, and the Pentagon has long argued that the program is vital to maintain the land-based leg of the nuclear triad.

The Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center conducts a full-scale static test fire of the LGM-35A Sentinel stage-one solid rocket motor at the Northrop Grumman test facility in Promontory, Utah, March 2, 2023. U.S. Air Force photo by R. Nial Bradshaw

The cost and schedule growth of Sentinel stems mainly from the infrastructure to command and launch the new ICBM and not the missile itself.

“It’s not pulling the plug, but they’re certainly recognizing here that the entire core infrastructure of this system isn’t going to work. It’s going to be assessed,” said Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists.

Air Force and defense officials have said the missile is on track, but the infrastructure would be a significant civil engineering effort.

“I think the part that’s probably missed or lost is the scope and scale,” deputy commander of Air Force Global Strike Command Lt. Gen. Michael J. Lutton told Air & Space Forces Magazine during a visit to an unarmed Minuteman III test at Vandenberg Space Force Base, Calif., last November. “When you look at modernizing that infrastructure … it’s close to 500 facilities across an area of about 33,000 square miles, about the size of the state of South Carolina, and that’s going to be intra-netted. There’s an underground command and control network that connects all that across five states. So, when one looks at that, that’s highly complex.”

Air Force officials have said Minuteman III could be in service until 2050. The missile was originally expected to be decommissioned in the 2030s. Pentagon officials have argued the U.S. needs to embark on a costly but overdue modernization of all three legs of its nuclear triad, which also includes fielding the B-21 Raider bomber and Columbia-class submarine.

“You’ll push the program well into the 2030s,” Kristensen said of the latest pause. “They were pushing this single source contract, forging ahead with this, rushing the program. … Now the whole system, ironically, will face exactly that delay.”

The Air Force has hinted changes could be coming to the ground infrastructure before the recent move. In September, then-Air Force acquisition chief Andrew Hunter said the service could “change our design for the ground infrastructure to be simpler, more affordable.” Those comments added to ones made last July, in which Hunter indicated that there were “elements of the ground infrastructure where there may be opportunities for competition”—which could strip work away from Northrop Grumman.

Editor’s Note: This story was updated on Feb. 12 with additional details.

‘New’ F-35 Assembled from Two Wrecked Jets Makes Its First Flight

Feb. 11, 2025 | By Unshin Lee Harpley and David Roza

The Air Force’s first-ever effort to stitch two damaged F-35s into a single stealth fighter is nearing its final stages, with successful functional check flights now complete.

Dubbed the “Franken-bird,” the aircraft made its inaugural flight Jan. 16, a spokesperson for the 388th Fighter Wing at Hill Air Force Base, Utah, told Air & Space Forces Magazine. The fighter is now at Lockheed Martin’s assembly plant at Fort Worth, Texas, for additional tests before it returns to combat status.

There, the aircraft will also undergo final work on the section just behind its nose, which currently has only anti-corrosion primer, to apply low-observable materials.

“According to Lockheed Martin estimates, the aircraft is expected to be completed within an eight-week timeframe, with a projected return date of late March at the earliest,” the spokesperson said. Once the jet receives its final certifications, it will return to Hill and be operated by the 4th Fighter Squadron.

The project is estimated to have cost less than $6 million, a fraction of the typical $80 million for a brand-new F-35A. Dave Myers, lead engineer at the F-35 Joint Program Office, explained in a release that by combining the best parts of both aircraft, the result will be a fully capable jet with no loss in performance. The “new” fighter, designated as tail number -5269, was created from the wrecks of two earlier F-35s:

AF-27, which suffered a severe engine fire in 2014 at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla.

AF-211, which survived a landing gear collapse in 2020 at Hill

“When we received the aircraft, it was pretty much a shell,” Senior Airman Jaguar Arnold, the aircraft’s dedicated crew chief, said in a release. “There were a lot of tasks to complete that we hadn’t done before at the unit level.”

The “Franken-bird” team included the F-35 JPO, Airmen and civilians from the 388th Fighter Wing and Ogden Air Logistics Complex, and Lockheed Martin technicians. The team created custom tools and equipment to join the aircraft sections at Ogden before the jet returned to Hill in November 2023. Since then, maintainers have worked on the final restoration stages.

Merging the two wrecked planes involved a list of first-time tasks that hadn’t been tackled before. The work included reinstalling landing gear, rewiring the aircraft, rebuilding the cockpit and avionics, and installing a variety of components. The team also procured and installed “belly bands” between and just forward of the air intakes. These bands, made of composite material, provide extra structural support, and reinforced the aircraft’s body after the new nose was installed.

A new Mobil Maintenance System supports the donated nose section from a salvaged F-35 airframe used as an Aircraft Battle Damage Repair trainer at Hill Air Force Base, Utah, in October 2023. U.S Air Force courtesy photo

The groundwork for the project was laid back in January 2020, when the JPO turned to Lockheed Martin for insights on repairing F-22s. At that point, the JPO had already started salvaging damaged F-35 components, improving maintenance, and getting creative with parts, including turning the AF-27 into a trainer jet for Aircraft Deployed Battle Repair.

“When we took responsibility for this project, we were taking on something unprecedented at the field level and it wasn’t easy,” said 1st Lt. Ryan Bare, Sortie Generation Flight commander for the 4th Fighter Generation Squadron. “But we were also taking on an opportunity for our maintainers to gain proficiency in this type of work and build experience at the unit level. As a program, and as a unit, we’ve benefited greatly from this.”

The JPO has collected Insights and feedback from the process to update data and procedures for all F-35 maintainers. The service also anticipates this project paving the way for future reclamation tasks with the equipment, techniques, and expertise developed throughout the effort.

Airmen from the 388th Fighter Wing completed a lengthy project to restore a single F-35A Lightning II from two separate, damaged aircraft, and begin its return to combat status. The project was an interagency effort between the F-35 Joint Program Office, Ogden Air Logistics Complex, 388th Fighter Wing and Lockheed Martin. Seen here before its functional check flight. (U.S. Air Force photo by Todd Cromar)

Brig. Gen. L. Boyd Anderson, Former Vice Chairman of AFA, Dies at 89

Feb. 11, 2025 | By John A. Tirpak

Retired Brig. Gen. Lawrence Boyd Anderson, who served as vice chairman of the board of the Air Force Association—now the Air & Space Forces Association—and the last chairman of the board of the Aerospace Education Foundation, died Feb. 6. He was 89.

Anderson served in the Department of Defense for 33 years, retiring in 1995 as a Brigadier General in the Air Force Reserve, where his last duty station was as the mobilization assistant to the commander of the Ogden Air Logistics Center, Utah. He retired from the civil service at Ogden in 1994, where his last assignment was as chief of the manpower and organization office.

On Active-Duty, Boyd served in Air Force Systems Command at Hanscom Field, Mass., as well as in an airlift group, fighter group, and fighter wing. He assisted in the transition from the F-105 to the first F-16s in the Air Force Reserve. As a member of the Ogden command section, he was involved in managing support of the F-4 and F-16 fighters and the Minuteman and Peacekeeper intercontinental ballistic missiles, as well as materiel support for reconnaissance, training devices and conventional munitions. As the manpower director for AFMC at Ogden, he justified and allocated some 21,000 manpower authorizations.

Boyd “served as the last chairman of the board of the Aerospace Education Foundation (AEF) and led the evolution of the foundation to the current AFA Education Council (AEC),” said retired Brig. Gen. Bernie Skoch, chairman of the board of AFA. AEF and AFA were parallel organizations until they were consolidated in the mid-2000s.

“His tenure as Chairman of the AEF was marked with expansion of programs and an increase in scholarships. He served for a number of years as a National Director on the AFA Board of Directors. Prior to his AEF leadership position, he served for many years as an AEF Trustee, Rocky Mountain Region President, Utah State President, and UTE-Rocky Mountain Chapter President,” Skoch said, adding that Boyd’s leadership and vision “impacted all levels of AFA.”

Outside of AFA, Boyd chaired the Utah Committee for Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve; was the Utah State President of the Reserve Officers Association; a member of the Ogden-Weber Chamber of Commerce and the Utah Defense Alliance Board of Directors. He served as an advisor to the Salt Lake City Chamber of Commerce’s Military Affairs Committee and was a member of the Board of the Dee Shaw Stewart Museum at the Ogden Eccles Dinosaur Park.

Boyd received the Department of Defense Medal for Outstanding Public Service in 2002.

New Report: Instructor, Student Pilot Both at Fault in $10 Million Helicopter Crash

Feb. 10, 2025 | By Greg Hadley

A helicopter instructor pilot failed to take sufficient corrective action in time to fix the mistakes of a student pilot taking off from a slope, resulting in a rollover that caused nearly $11 million in damages to a TH-1H chopper last spring.

A new Air Force Accident Investigation Board report released Feb. 6 faulted pilot error on the part of both the teacher and the trainee.

The mishap took place April 3, 2024, at Skelly Stagefield Army Heliport, Ala., during a training flight for the 23rd Flying Training Squadron—the Air Force’s main unit for training helicopter pilots.

During the flight, the instructor pilot was evaluating three student pilots after they each had flown three sorties in the TH-1H, a trainer version of the UH-1H Huey.

Nearly an hour and a half into the flight, one of the student pilots was working on taking off and landing on slopes. After one successful landing and takeoff on an incline, the helicopter was on a grassy 5-degree slope, with the right skid higher than the left.

When it came time to take off again, the student pilot used the “cyclic”—a stick used to control directional thrust—and the “collective”—a lever to control overall vertical lift—to raise the lower left skid off the ground.

However, the trainee went too far. While he thought the aircraft was level, it wound up in a slight right bank of a few degrees. Then, the student became disoriented and thought the right skid was slipping and sending the aircraft sliding left.

Using the cyclic to push the aircraft further right, the student had the helicopter in a 6-to-10 degree bank. Combined with the upward lift from the collective, the bank caused the chopper to roll onto its right side and the main rotor blade hit the ground.

The whole incident took only a few seconds, but the report noted “significant damage” to the helicopter’s nose, cabin, mast, and main rotor head and tail rotor assemblies. The costs were estimated at $10.8 million.

Image from Air Force Accident Investigation Board report

Investigators noted that during the mishap, the instructor pilot only verbalized that there was a problem once, when the student was applying “right cyclic.” As the aircraft passed beyond a level attitude, the instructor said “no, no, no,” while attempting to apply “left cyclic.”

The corrective maneuver wasn’t enough to counter the student’s mistake, however, and the instructor never attempted to lower the collective—a costly error.

“Reduction of collective is most effective in controlling rolling motions and is the recommended procedure to prevent a dynamic rollover event,” the report states.

The student, meanwhile, was faulted in the report for misjudging the aircraft as level and becoming disoriented, thinking that the helicopter was sliding when it was “actually stationary over the surface of the ground.”

Both pilots’ mistakes caused the crash, and no other factors contributed to it, the investigation found.

The instructor was a highly experienced helicopter pilot, with more than 1,800 flight hours in a TH-1H and 5,200 hours of flight time overall. In the 30 days preceding the accident, he had flown more than 12 hours over the course of 9 sorties.

The student, by comparison, had just 4.5 hours in three sorties in the TH-1H and was “not qualified to accomplish anything unsupervised,” the report noted.

The incident marks a rare mishap for the Air Force’s helicopter fleet, particularly the venerable but aging H-1. According to service statistics, the H-1 had just one “Class A” mishap in the prior decade. Class A mishaps involve either a death or more than $2.5 million in damage.

Air Force Doesn’t Have Enough Desks for Everyone to Return to In-Person Work

Feb. 10, 2025 | By Unshin Lee Harpley

A week after ordering thousands of civilians and service members back to full-time in-person work, the Department of the Air Force has issued a new directive exempting some employees due to a shortage of workspace.

In a memo released Feb. 6, acting Air Force Secretary Gary A. Ashworth noted that the department has a lack of workstations in the Washington D.C. region and across Air Force and Space Force bases both in the U.S. and overseas.

With the current space crunch, some of the department’s civilian employees and service members will continue working remotely until additional capacity becomes available. The memo, however, did not specify how employees or units will be selected for telework eligibility at this time.

The Air Force previously instructed all commanders, directors of major commands, and field leaders to cancel telework and remote work agreements and require employees within 50 miles of their official worksite to return to in-person duties by Feb 7. The guidance was part of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s push to end all remote work across the Department of Defense.

To address the shortages hampering that push, Ashworth wrote in his memo that the DAF Infrastructure Council “will review significant facility requirements,” including large-scale facility sustainment, building maintenance, repairs, and leases.

However, that process could both protracted and costly. In testimony to Congress last year, then-Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Energy, Installations, and Environment Ravi Chaudhury said the department had $46.8 billion in deferred maintenance and repairs. That backlog was on top of some $5.4 billion the department requested in 2025 for Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization.

The Air Force has projected that rising inflation, supply chain disruptions, and a shortage of skilled labor will exacerbate the repair backlog moving forward. Meanwhile, around $3.45 billion in new construction is slated for 2025.

The effort to bring Air Force employees back to on-site work faces other challenges as well, including the renegotiation of union contracts with civilian employees, as telework provisions within these agreements may need to be adjusted.

According to a 2024 report by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, approximately 74,000 of the 155,000 civilian employees who worked for the Air Force in fiscal year 2023 teleworked, though the report noted that some employees may have been counted twice. This represents about 48 percent of the workforce, out of the 95 percent of employees across the department deemed eligible for telework.

An Air Force spokesperson could not provide the current number or percentage of teleworking employees as of Feb. 10, despite the fact that the service had to provide the Pentagon with data on its number of remote work arrangements by Feb. 7.

More Test T-7 Aircraft Could Help Air Force Make Up for Data It Can’t Use

Feb. 10, 2025 | By John A. Tirpak

Hundreds of test flight hours Boeing flew in prototype T-7A trainer aircraft cannot be used to assess the system’s operational effectiveness or suitability because the design has changed so much, the Pentagon’s top test official said recently.

Instead, the Air Force’s recently announced plans to buy extra T-7s for testing will allow the service to gather data more quickly and make up for the lost flight hours.

“Boeing flew a total of 548.5 hours in two contractor-owned and -operated prototype aircraft,” according to the recently released 2024 annual report from the office of the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation. “DOT&E will not include test data from these prototype aircraft in its final evaluation of system performance as the prototypes are substantially different from the [Engineering and Manufacturing Development] aircraft contracted.”

As it stands, there is not enough data on the T-7 yet for DOT&E to make a call on its effectiveness or suitability, the report noted.

In January, the Air Force said it will buy four aircraft to increase the T-7A test fleet from five to nine airframes. Officials said the decision will let them move faster on the flight test program and develop curriculum for the T-7A pilot training course, but they also said they were delaying the first production buy of T-7s from fiscal 2025 to 2026.

Part of Boeing’s strategy in its T-7A proposal—it received the contract for the T-X program in 2018—was that its initial design would effectively be “production representative,” and that while the production line was taking shape, testing could be largely accomplished with the prototypes, a label Boeing refused to use at the time.

By compressing the normal developmental timetable, Boeing and the Air Force hoped to reach initial operational capability by the end of 2024. Boeing was confident of this timeline because of the speed it achieved in designing and fabricating the first two T-7As using digital methods, and it bid the program under a fixed-price proposal. Saab is Boeing’s partner on the T-7.

Yet the DOT&E office noted that the T-7 has undergone—and is undergoing—design changes to address “issues including the escape system, flight control software, high angle-of-attack portion of the flight envelope, propulsion, noise and vibration, and departure resistance.”

The report noted that the the Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation Center (AFOTEC) provided perspective and feedback to Boeing throughout design and developmental testing

“AFOTEC published five periodic reports assessing progress towards operational effectiveness and suitability, with a total of 41 recommendations, 37 of which remain open,” the DOT&E report stated.

Test aircraft different from the prototypes can still be used for government-led developmental and operational testing, the DOT&E report states.

Those aircraft started arriving at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., in November 2023, and developmental testing began soon thereafter. Boeing delivered the last of the initially planned five test airplanes to Edwards in December 2024. In the past year, those aircraft’s test flights “focused on resolving safety-of-flight issues required for airworthiness certification,” the report states.

The report is not up to date, however, having been written when only three of the five initial EMD airplanes had been delivered. By the end of September 2024, Pentagon testers stated, the Air Force had flown “46.9 hours over 46 missions in EMD aircraft, testing wing flutter, flying qualities, and radionavigation test points” with the majority of developmental testing still to go.

“These events include structural loads, subsystems, tanker formation, crew systems, On-Board Oxygen Generation System (OBOGS), mission systems, and high-angle-of-attack testing, which have the potential to drive further software and flight control changes,” the report states.

The DOT&E report noted that developmental testing would not be complete until the end of 2026, a yearlong delay from previous estimates. That estimate did not include the additional aircraft the Air Force is adding to the test fleet.

More recently, the Air Force said it hopes to reach a production decision on the T-7 by fiscal 2026, and initial operational capability by 2027.

While the program continues to suffer delays, it did meet some milestones in 2024, testers noted. That included “initial cold and hot weather testing at the McKinley Climatic Laboratory” at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. However, the report notes that “this initial round of testing revealed several problems that require a second test event at the McKinley Laboratory” in the third quarter of fiscal 2025.

Testers also noted that Air Force student pilots “are highly likely to exceed Mach 1.0 during T-7A designated missions, particularly during the advanced fighter fundamentals course,” but the contract only requires flight to Mach .95. “The program office is … working with Boeing to contract testing in the aircraft’s transonic region prior to IOT&E,” the report says.

Testers also reiterated concerns from previous reports that the T-7A escape system “does not meet minimum safety requirements for the Air Force’s airworthiness certification and is currently operating with high-risk acceptance for airworthiness.”

While a February 2024 sled test “showed improvement at medium-speed ejections for the ejection seat sequencing,” a June 2024 test showed interference from a hose, and the “redesigned canopy fracturing system pattern did not function properly.”

The program “must successfully complete seven more sled tests before the escape system can be certified for airworthiness and IOT&E,” the report said.

The test organization is also keeping an eye on the on-board oxygen generating system. The test plan calls for 46 data points on the OBOGS collected over 10 ground and 100 hours of flight test, including high and sustained-G maneuvering. The system will soon reach the point where, in operational use, the OBOGS would be serviced or replaced, and what is seen then will help DOT&E determine if the system is performing as required. This will be measured against “lessons learned from several fighter aircraft mishaps” in the past related to OBOGS.

The Automatic Ground Collision Avoidance System is another known issue. Fighter aircraft employ AGCAS to prevent loss of life during sustained high-G maneuvers, which can cause the pilot to lose consciousness. While formal requirements for the T-X program didn’t include AGCAS, the program office is working on a strategy to start integrating it by 2026.

Boeing has lost nearly $1 billion on the T-7 program as a result of its delays and issues. The company reported a $500 million loss just this past quarter.

Defense Secretary Orders Air Force to Pause All Reorg Planning

Feb. 10, 2025 | By Greg Hadley

Editor’s Note: This story was updated Feb. 11 with additional comment from the Air Force on Exercise Resolute Force Pacific.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth directed the Department of the Air Force to pause all planning related to its “Re-Optimization for Great Power Competition” effort—a move that leaves a sweeping plan to transform the Air Force and Space Force in limbo.

Perhaps most prominently, the Air Force has paused work on Integrated Capabilities Command, the new organization meant to oversee the planning and requirements process for developing the service’s future systems.

A department spokesperson confirmed the order to Air & Space Forces Magazine.

“On Feb. 6, the Secretary of Defense directed the Department of the Air Force to pause all planning actions connected to its Re-Optimizing for Great Power Competition efforts,” the spokesperson said. “The planning pause remains in effect until a Senate-confirmed Secretary and Undersecretary of the Air Force are in place and have the opportunity to review the initiatives. The Department of the Air Force welcomes the opportunity for our new leaders to assess all ongoing actions and ensure compliance with DOD directives. We will issue clarifying guidance, as necessary.”

Air & Space Forces Magazine understands there was no memorandum directing the pause.

The directive raises dozens of questions about many of 24 “key decisions” the Department of the Air Force announced in February 2024, with then-Secretary Frank Kendall saying at the time that senior leadership had determined the department was not structured properly for “Great Power Competition”—a term coined under President Donald Trump’s first administration to describe how the Pentagon would seek to deter and counter China.

To “re-optimize,” the Air Force and Space Force embarked on a massive re-organization effort. The 24 key decisions included everything from the creation of Integrated Capabilities Command for the Air Force and Space Futures Command for the Space Force to a renewed emphasis on large-scale exercises starting with a massive one in the Pacific in summer 2025.

A defense official familiar with the pause order told Air & Space Forces Magazine that “readiness and lethality are at the core of both the Department of the Air Force’s efforts to realign to the threat environment and the new administration’s priorities. That is why everyone in the Department of the Air Force is fully onboard and welcomes the incoming civilian leadership team, once confirmed, reviewing not only the ‘why’ behind the warfighters and readiness initiatives, but also the considerable progress made to date. To be clear, the department is already actively moving out to implement the temporary planning pause.”

Some of the key decisions have already been put into action. The Air Force, for example, established a Warrant Officer Training School and has graduated its first new class of warrant officers in decades. The Space Force redesigned its career paths by creating an Officer Training Course that teaches every new officer the fundamentals of space, intelligence, and cyber operations instead of having them specialize right away. And the Secretariat of the Air Force established new organizations like an Integrated Capabilities Office and a secretive Office of Competitive Activities.

The Air Force spokesperson said that while planning has been paused, actions already taken do not have to be reversed, meaning those programs will continue.

On Feb. 11, a service official clarified that Resolute Force Pacific, the first of the large-scale exercises mentioned in the re-optimization, “is not impacted” by the pause. REFORPAC is meant to include some 300 aircraft, and planning has been ongoing for months, though leaders have suggested the scale may need to be tweaked if Congress does not pass a 2025 budget soon.

“REFORPAC is well-aligned with the Department of Defense’s priorities of enhancing warrior ethos and credible deterrence,” the official said.

There are many other decisions, however, that are now up in the air:

The future of Integrated Capabilities Command is in doubt. Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David W. Allvin announced last summer the standup of a provisional Integrated Capabilities Command, with the goal to reach full operational capability sometime in 2025. That work is now paused.

Space Futures Command was announced a year ago as the fourth Space Force field command. As of last September, the Space Force suggested the command could still take a year to stand up. With a mission to focus on long-term needs and capabilities, planning for SFC is now on hold.

Air Force Materiel Command was preparing to re-organize and create new system “centers,” including an Information Dominance Systems Center and a Nuclear Systems Center. Those efforts, which were still in the planning stages, are apparently on hold.

Air Education & Training Command was preparing to become Airman Development Command in 2025, with new centers of excellence starting up and working toward full operational capability. Its future is now in question.

Air Forces Cyber was set to be elevated as a service component commander, out from under Air Combat Command. That has yet to happen and planning is likewise now paused.

How quickly these issues are resolved is uncertain, but realistically, it could take months for the new Department of the Air Force leadership team to get in place and address these questions. President Donald Trump nominated Troy E. Meink for Air Force Secretary and Matthew Lohmeier for Undersecretary, but both must be confirmed, and no hearings have been scheduled so far by the Senate Armed Services Committee. Nominees must clear the committee first and then be approved by the full Senate

Of 63 Defense Department positions requiring Senate confirmation, the White House has submitted 14 nominations, and only the Defense Secretary has been confirmed as of Feb. 10, according to the Washington Post’s nomination tracker. Meink and Lohmeier are among 12 nominees who must be screened by the Senate Armed Services Committee.

To date, no hearing has been scheduled. When then-President Joe Biden nominated Frank Kendall for the post four years ago, three months elapsed before his confirmation; four years earlier, in the first Trump administration, it took three and a half months to get former Rep. Heather Wilson through the confirmation process to become Secretary of the Air Force.

Pentagon Editor Chris Gordon contributed to this report.