F-35 Production Challenged to Keep Up with Demand

F-35 Production Challenged to Keep Up with Demand

July 3, 2023 | By John A. Tirpak

Javelins, HIMARS launchers, and artillery have dominated the discussion of armament production that has shifted into high gear since Russia’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine. But increasing F-35 orders have also raised questions about the capacity of the industrial base to keep up with demand, which could outstrip the planned peak output of the Lockheed Martin-made stealth fighter.

Israel announced a fresh order for F-35s on July 2, saying it will buy an additional 25 aircraft on top of the 50 it has already purchased. The Czech Republic got the green light from the U.S. State Department last week to buy 24 F-35s, which will replace the Saab JAS-39C Gripen fighters the Czechs have been leasing. The Gripens will go back to Sweden in 2027, but neither industry nor U.S. government officials could say if Prague will have its first F-35s by then.

Since 2022, several European countries—Finland, Switzerland, Germany, and now the Czech Republic—have announced plans to order 159 F-35s, collectively amounting to more than a whole year’s worth of production under Lockheed Martin’s planned maximum annual production rate of 156 aircraft by 2025. That figure doesn’t include Poland, which ordered 32 of the fighters in 2020, or Greece, which has signaled it wants to buy 20-24 F-35s, but the formal application for which has not been completed. Countries already flying the F-35 in Europe include Belgium, Denmark, Italy, Norway, and the U.K., most of which are still taking deliveries. Some non-European customers such as Japan, South Korea, and Singapore have ordered additional aircraft to build their growing F-35 fleets, and Canada is moving toward a purchase of 88 aircraft. More buyers are expected to signal plans to acquire the fighter in the next year.

The ordered aircraft will be delivered across a staggered series of production slots with some countries filling out their fleets across a decade or more.

The F-35 is the only 5th-generation fighter in production and cleared for export, leaving customers that want to upgrade their 4th-generation fighters fleets with the choice of buying the F-35, buying a “4th- generation plus” fighter like the latest F-16 Block 70 models, or waiting for a future 6th-generation fighter to become available for export.

The U.S. military, meanwhile, has indicated it will stick close to its fiscal year 2024 plan of buying 83 F-35s—48 for the Air Force, 19 for the Navy and 16 for the Marine Corps—for a while. The Air Force plans to buy 48 a year until 2028, and beyond that, it is still planning to buy 980 F-35s in total, to reach its never-altered original goal of 1,763 of the fighters.

The U.S. military has allowed foreign customers to take some of its slots on the production line before, preferring to buy newer versions of the F-35 that have greater capability.

A rate of 156 could also be challenging because it’s a big step up from current production. The Lot 15, 16 and 17 contracts were for 145, 127 and 126 aircraft, respectively, the latter being an optional level dependent on new orders.

Counting all known customers and backlog, the U.S. military will buy about half of the F-35s produced annually under current plans with the rest going to foreign customers.

Foreign buyers tend not to disclose their plans about when they will field new-build fighters. Announcements of such sales usually only include the planned dates of initial deliveries.  

The Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies has urged the U.S. services and the Pentagon to increase production and F-35 industrial capacity, so the U.S. military and partner F-35 users don’t have to wait too long to fill out their fifth-generation fighter fleets. The Air Force originally planned to buy 110 F-35s a year. The figure was later reduced to 80, then 60, and in recent years to 48 or fewer aircraft a year.

Lockheed Martin has said that negotiations with the Joint Program Office for F-35 production lots 18 and 19 are well underway, but those lots seem to be predicated on a maximum rate of 156 aircraft. The next lot is expected to be the first after a declaration of full-rate production, clearing the way for multiyear contracts on Lot 20 and beyond. Pentagon and JPO officials have said that 156 is, effectively, full rate, although Lockheed has said that it could, with additional resources, push production above 220 aircraft per year.  

Air Force acquisition chief Andrew Hunter told the Senate Armed Services Committee in April that Lockheed would be “very stressed” to produce more than 156 aircraft annually. Producing more that would mean “we would probably have to increase tooling” and add more shifts of workers, which have been hard for Lockheed to hire, Hunter said. Lockheed has pegged some delivery delays to worker shortages at component and material supplier companies trying to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hunter also said the center body of the aircraft is another “significant limiter.” Northrop Grumman builds the center body of the F-35 at its Palmdale, Calif. facilities, where it also builds the new B-21 Raider bomber, and has said it lacks the room to expand there easily.

The program was initially counting on Turkey to produce a substantial number of the center body assemblies for the international market, but Turkey was drummed out of the F-35 program in 2019 as a consequence of Ankara opting to buy Russian S-400 air defense systems. The other F-35 partners ousted Turkey from the program because Russian tech representatives helping Turkey set up and use the S-400 would have gained crucial insights into tracking and targeting the F-35, a situation the partners and NATO considered unacceptable. Turkey said it pursued the deal because Western nations couldn’t make a competitive offer of their own air defense systems.

Lockheed has struck a deal with Rheinmetall of Germany to produce F-35 center fuselages, creating an industrial offset for Germany’s purchase of 35 of the fighters and creating a degree of organic maintenance capability, but the exact timing of production there is not certain.

The 1,000 F-35 should come off the assembly line at Lockheed’s Fort Worth, Texas facility next month. However, the company is storing new-build Air Force F-35s because they have been built with the Technology Refresh 3 upgrade, testing of which is not yet complete. The aircraft could be delivered later in the year or by early in 2024, with a “top-off” software add to take into account discoveries during testing. The TR-3 upgrade first appears on Lot 16 and 17 jets. The TR-3 underwrites the new weapons and electronic warfare capabilities that will be part of the F-35 Block 4 upgrade.

More F-35 orders are part of increasing weapons buys throughout the world. Now defense companies must try to meet the demand.

Building the Force We Need in the Pacific: SECAF Kendall Has the Right Vector 

Building the Force We Need in the Pacific: SECAF Kendall Has the Right Vector 

July 3, 2023 | By Lt. Gen. Bruce Wright, USAF (Ret.)

Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall has begun each of his eight Congressional budget posture hearings with a reference to Gen. Douglas MacArthur’s warning that almost all military failures can be summed up in the words “too late.”

Our Secretary of the Air Force is right on target. Gen. MacArthur spoke from a position well within range of enemy attacks. That perspective is too often absent in debates over weapons system development, which tend to be Washington-centric and politicized among Congressional, Pentagon, and industry participants.

Over the course of a decade, I was honored to serve in and lead U.S. Forces Japan, Gen. McArthur’s legacy headquarters and command, where our constant focus was being ready to respond to China threats. We had our eyes on China’s military build-up and on North Korea’s provocative activities.

Congressional and defense industry leadership occasionally visited our headquarters at Yokota Air Base, West of Tokyo, in the 2002-2005 timeframe, but rarely listened. We had little to no ability to influence joint warfighting requirements, including the need for timely, responsive upgrades to the offensive capabilities of our combat air forces, to air base defense, command and control systems, satellite early warning, or targeting of Chinese and North Korean surface-to-surface launch capabilities. Nor were we asked about the integration of electronic warfare and then-emerging cyber operations technologies. Like all joint warfighting commands, U.S. Forces Japan has zero contractual authority for weapons systems and no acquisition budget.  

During that period and the decades that followed, America’s national security leadership was actively engaged in another fight: trying to deter threats and promote stable, friendly governments in the Middle East. With attention focused elsewhere, the Chinese Communist Party was able to leverage economic growth and insights gained watching the U.S. military at work to accelerate its own military build-up. Today, the United States can no longer guarantee that America’s joint warfighters will be decisive in combat operations across U.S. Indo-Pacific Command’s area of operations, including protecting our allies and partners in Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea.  

While Congressional and Pentagon leaders emphasize support for American warfighters, the fact is that unified combatant commands and sub-unified commands like U.S. Forces Japan are limited in their ability and authority to influence joint warfighting requirements with their own threat-informed analysis. The Joint Requirements Oversight Council led by the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is dedicated to being the voice of the joint warfighter, but this organizational construct is neither optimized for speed or efficiency. Our long-established Congressional, military, and defense industry cultures put too many cooks in the kitchen. Acquisition staff too frequently lack combat and operational theater experience, and too often default to NO when they should instead try to understand new ideas.  

As Air Force Secretary, Kendall has brought a lifetime of experience, as a Soldier and as a policy maker, to the Department of the Air Force. His decades of experience, keen insight, and driven focus on operational effectiveness are making a real difference. By focusing strategically around seven core “Operational Imperatives” and three “Cross-cutting Operational Enablers,” Kendall has rallied his Air and Space Forces leaders around the key requirements that will transform his department’s operational effectiveness.  

Secretary Kendall knows the most important customers for new capabilities are our military operators, including the Service Chiefs whose long experience in operational theaters informs their understanding. Forging close partnerships between operational customers and acquisition professionals is crucial. It’s no accident that he called these imperatives, which are all focused on acquiring new capabilities, “operational.” From the moment he took office, Secretary Kendall has repeatedly called for accelerating the delivery of “meaningful operational capability to the warfighter.”  

When the Korean War began, communists in the North and their Russian and Chinese backers took advantage of American weakness—a small trip-wire force in South Korea, in particular—to force a war America never wanted. In Vietnam, a decade later, the United States was again drawn into a conflict for which we were unprepared. Having built a force to deter nuclear war, America was unprepared for the kind of fight Hanoi waged against our allies in the south.  

By the time we had the military capabilities to be decisive, the nation had lost its will to fight. “Too late,” as McArthur said.  

Now we face new dangers. The instigators are familiar, even if the means, methods, and conditions are less so. We must listen to the commanders in the field. No one understands the threat better. Pentagon leaders, Senate and House committee members, and the defense industry all must pay heed. They must do so before it once again is “too late.” 

Lt. Gen. Bruce Wright, USAF (Ret.), is the President & CEO of the Air & Space Forces Association. A 1973 graduate of the Air Force Academy, Wright is a U.S. Air Force Weapons School graduate, and was the J3/Director of Operations of U.S. Forces Japan; commander of the 35th Fighter Wing at Misawa Air Base Japan, and concluded his career as Commander of U.S. Forces Japan and 5th Air Force in 2008. He led F-16 combat missions from 1991-1994 in Iraq and Bosnia Herzegovina. Wright has also served in the defense industry with responsibility for classified programs. 

First Air Force Pilot to Test T-7 Comes from a Family of History-Making Aviators

First Air Force Pilot to Test T-7 Comes from a Family of History-Making Aviators

July 3, 2023 | By David Roza

Aviation milestones are a family business for Air Force Maj. Bryce Turner, who on June 28 became the first Air Force pilot to take the T-7A Red Hawk on an official test flight. The T-7A is the Air Force’s first new jet trainer in more than half a century. Turner’s flight also marked the latest milestone in a three-generation tradition of Turner family aviation accomplishments.

As described in a recent press release from the 412th Test Wing, the major’s grandfather, retired Lt. Col. Alexander Parker Turner, became one of the first African American jet pilots in 1956, while his father, retired Col. Bryan Turner, was the first African American F-22 pilot. 

Maj. Turner was inspired to fly after watching his father perform with the F-16 Viper Demonstration team over Misawa Air Base, Japan, according to the Air Force. He went on to earn a degree in aerospace engineering while participating in the Reserve Officer Training Corps at the University of Virginia. He followed in his father’s footsteps, first by flying the same T-38 training jet tail number which Col. Turner had flown decades earlier, and then by becoming an F-16 pilot just like the colonel had been. At some point along the way, Turner picked up the callsign “Triple” in recognition of his three-generation heritage.

Maj. Bryce Turner, 416th Flight Test Squadron, holds up a patch that once belonged to John L. Hamilton of the 99th Fighter Squadron, the Tuskegee Airmen. U.S. Air Force photo by Todd Schannuth

After operational assignments in Korea and Italy, “Triple” completed the U.S. Air Force Test Pilot School and was assigned to the 416th Flight Test Squadron at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., where the nascent T-7A offered “a chance to apply his aerospace engineering expertise while conducting flight sciences testing,” the press release said.

“The T-7A program combines my engineering problem-solving abilities with the ability to carry on my family’s aviation legacy,” Turner said. 

The T-7A is called “Red Hawk” in honor of the “Red Tails” of the Tuskegee Airmen, the group of African American aviators and ground crew who battled both segregation and the Axis during World War II. Two of the last surviving Tuskegee Airmen, an aircraft mechanic named Homer Hogues and a pilot named Raymond Cassagnol died in late June. But the ground-breaking Tuskegee spirit seems to live on in the T-7A, which was designed from the ground up to enable many more “firsts” in the Air Force pilot community. 

As previously reported by Air & Space Forces Magazine, the trainer is the first Air Force aircraft designed to accommodate a broad range of body sizes, with the specific intent of making flying slots available to more women. In particular, the ejection seats on previous trainers and fighter aircraft could accommodate only a narrow range of physiques which excluded too many potential student pilots, especially small women.

“The T-7A is breaking barriers by accommodating a broader range of aircrew in terms of cockpit and ejection seat dimensions,” said Turner, whose great aunt was friends with retired Lt. Col. Theresa Claiborne, the first African American female pilot in the Air Force. 

t-7a
A production-representative T-7A advanced trainer flew June 28, 2023 with Air Force pilot Maj. Bryce Turner, director of the T-7 combined test force, at the controls. Image courtesy of Boeing

The Red Hawk’s development process has not been smooth: the Government Accountability Office wrote in May that the program is already two years behind schedule due to friction between the Air Force and manufacturer Boeing, as well as complications with the ejection seat, software, and flight control issues. The GAO predicted more delays ahead, which would force the Air Force to stretch the life of its 60-year-old T-38 trainers even further.

The Air Force expects to buy 351 T-7As, though the branch does not expect the aircraft to achieve initial operational capability until 2027 (its original target was 2024). Turner seemed to think the aircraft would be worth the wait.

“To the next generation of aviators, I can safely say I am jealous” he said. “This aircraft’s performance, commitment to pilot safety, and ground-based training system is something I could only dream of during my time in flight training. The T-7A performs like a fighter!”

Exclusive: CMSAF Bass Explains What Led to Her Recent ‘Standards’ Memo to Airmen

Exclusive: CMSAF Bass Explains What Led to Her Recent ‘Standards’ Memo to Airmen

July 1, 2023 | By David Roza

When the Air Force’s top enlisted leader wrote an open letter to Airmen focusing on professional standards in June, the memo drew mixed reactions. Some Airmen thanked her for addressing issues of concern about grooming and behavior standards; others questioned the memo’s timing and wondered why she didn’t shed more light on specifics.

“History shows that when standards erode, military capabilities and readiness decline,” Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force JoAnne S. Bass wrote in the letter, posted on Facebook on June 20. “We can’t afford to let this happen and still expect to keep pace with the rapid expansion of the Chinese military, Russian aggression, and other emerging global challenges.”

In an exclusive interview with Air & Space Forces Magazine, Bass said there was no particular instance or issue that prompted her memo, but that questions about discipline and even when and how to correct other Airmen came up regularly as she travelled around the force.

“All healthy organizations, all strong teams, [need to] take a step back and reflect on what is good and what things they can do to continue to get better at their profession and at their trade,” she said in the interview. “There wasn’t one thing that triggered this, it really was more, ‘Hey, we’ve got to always police ourselves up to make sure that we remember that we are part of a profession of arms and that we are holding ourselves to a higher standard than an everyday American.’”

Bass joined the Air Force amidst the post-Gulf War drawdown in the 1990s, a time of significant change in the force. Bass cited two deadly accidents, among them the accidental shoot down of two Army helicopters and a fatal B-52 crash which raised fears of a “hollow force.” At that time, the Air Force was rapidly getting smaller and a series of sexual harassment and related scandals across the military services had highlighted the growing role of women in the military. Congress and the White House negotiated what would come to be called “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the easing of rules that had formerly barred gay men and women from military service.

That’s when then-Chief of Staff Gen. Ronald Fogleman applied the Air Force Academy’s Core Values to the entire service, and with his personnel chief, Lt. Gen. Billy Boles, published the service’s original “Little Blue Book.”

The Air Force of today is also juggling change, undergoing a massive modernization push, developing new concepts like Agile Combat Employment, and gearing up for a different kind of security posture in which China looms as a peer and pacing military threat. At the same time, the COVID-19 pandemic, polarizing politics, and rapidly changing societal attitudes, including toward military service, are posing new challenges to the force.

Major changes to appearance standards, including looser regulations over hair length, color, and accessories, mustaches, tattoos, uniforms, morale patches, handbags, physical fitness, and even new rules allowing Airmen to stand with hands in pockets have generated controversy, particularly among old timers.

“The past five years there have been so many changes, it’s hard to keep up,” one security forces master sergeant told Air & Space Forces Magazine, on condition his name would be withheld. “As a senior NCO, trying to keep up with the new standards, if you make the wrong correction now you look like you don’t know what you’re talking about.”

Bass said she is well aware of such concerns.

“I have absolutely heard from our Airmen that there are too many changes … and they don’t know what those standards are,” she said. “What I would offer is, we cannot rationalize that ‘there are too many changes and that’s why we can’t uphold standards.’ We, as Airmen, absolutely know what right is and what right looks like, and [if unsure] we can look up what those standards are.”

One Airman told Air & Space Forces Magazine that he worried he might be accused of being racist or sexist if he tried to enforce particular grooming and appearance standards. Asked about that concern, Bass said the key is to enforce standards fairly and with respect.

“If you’re being fair, just, and true, then good order and discipline is going to prevail,” she said. Airmen should not be afraid to share high expectations and to hold each other accountable. 

“We can’t be afraid to do those things,” Bass said. “That gets back to being a disciplined force…. [NCOs] just have to be fair and you can do so in a way that is respectful.”

Times are always changing, and generations are always shifting. Bass urged that it’s important to remember that and try to understand the world as younger Airmen see it.

“When I was a young Airman 30 years ago, I remember the folks who’d been in a long time talked about my generation and how we lacked standards,” Bass said. “So it’s interesting how history repeats itself. … I’m excited for this generation, because this generation is going to help us get after and tackle some of the toughest challenges that we’ve ever had, and we need to make sure that we cultivate the landscape so that they’re able to be the best versions of themselves.”

Bass said her letter was intended to remind Airmen of the rigid discipline required to be the best Air Force in the world, the best possible warfighting organization. “We must set high standards and execute to them because the line between average and elite airpower is razor thin,” she wrote. “In our profession, second-best won’t cut it.”

The objective is to ensure the U.S. Air Force can win wars and what will make that possible is the core values and high standards that helped build that force in the first place, Bass said. But she admitted those issues may not always be at the front of every junior Airman’s mind.

“When I was young Airman Bass, I wasn’t necessarily reflecting on core values, I was just trying to do my job and do it well,” she said. “But as leaders, it’s important to understand the broader picture. … This uniform is a reminder to myself that this is a commitment to duty, it’s a profession of arms, and in that we must hold ourselves to higher standards.”

Among the deadly mishaps in 1994 that prompted Fogleman’s focus on values was a deadly friendly fire incident in which two Air Force F-15 pilots mistook two Army Black Hawk helicopters for Iraqi aircraft, and shot them down. The helicopters were carrying international military and diplomatic officials over Iraq; all 26 on board were killed. The Government Accountability Office concluded that discipline problems in the F-15 community at the time played a role in the incident.

That same year, a B-52 pilot flying over Washington state took the bomber beyond its operational limits, losing control of the aircraft, and killing all four officers aboard.

“When leadership fails and a command climate breaks down, tragic things can happen,” Air Force Maj. Tony Kern wrote in a 1995 case study about the crash. “This is the story of failed leadership and a command climate which had degenerated into an unhealthy state of apathy and non-compliance—a state which contributed to the tragic crash.”

Those events played a role in the original rollout of the Air Force Blue Book, which codified the branch’s three core values: Integrity First, Service Before Self, and Excellence In All We Do.

“The small things led to bigger things,” Bass said. “We can’t ever allow ourselves to go back.”

Still, tying the styling of hair to safety seems a stretch to some Airmen. An aircraft armaments master sergeant who spoke with Air & Space Forces Magazine noted that in his experience, different career fields adhere to grooming standards differently.

“What gets me is this assumption that if you have a slip up in grooming standards then you’re going to slip up at work,” said the master sergeant, who asked not to be named publicly. “Correlation doesn’t always equal causation.”

For her part, Bass emphasized that standards are about professionalism: taking pride in the service means embracing the rules as they exist and applying them fairly and consistently to the Airmen around you. Bass argued that attitude is key to ensuring the Air Force remains the best in the world.

Unlike those crashes, Bass said her letter had no single triggering event. “We needed just a quick vector check,” she said. “And we needed to put that out there for all Airmen.”

B-52s Keep Up Surge in Bomber Activity over Korean Peninsula

B-52s Keep Up Surge in Bomber Activity over Korean Peninsula

July 1, 2023 | By Greg Hadley

Multiple B-52 Stratofortresses flew over the Korean Peninsula on June 30, escorted by U.S. and South Korean fighters as part of a “combined aerial training event,” both countries’ militaries announced. 

The nuclear-capable bombers flew alongside U.S. Air Force F-16s and F-15Es and Republic of Korea Air Force F-35As and KF-16s, according to a release from the ROK Ministry of Defense. 

“The training offered the alliance an opportunity to further strengthen its interoperability by demonstrating a combined defense capability, rapid deployment, and extended deterrence in the defense of the Korean Peninsula,” a U.S. Forces Korea release stated. 

The B-52s were from Barksdale Air Force Base, La., and not part of the ongoing Bomber Task Force deployment of B-52s from Minot Air Force Base, N.D., which began June 14. Those bombers recently landed in Indonesia, the first time ever for a B-52, in a gesture of partnership with the strategically important southeast Asian country. 

In contrast, bombers have been a regular sight for South Koreans as of late. This latest exercise marks the seventh time in the last six months that B-52s or B-1s have flown above or near the Korean Peninsula. 

  • On Feb. 1, two B-1s and F-22 Raptors flew with South Korean F-35s over the Yellow Sea, just west of the Peninsula.  
  • On Feb. 19, two B-1s flew with F-16s and ROK F-35s through the Korean Air Defense Identification Zone, a buffer area that includes international airspace near the Korean Peninsula.  
  • On March 3, the South Korean Ministry of National Defense announced one B-1 had flown with South Korean F-15K and KF-16 fighters over the Yellow Sea. 
  • On March 15, a single B-52 flew with U.S. Air Force F-16s and ROK Air Force F-15s over the Peninsula. 
  • On March 19, a pair of B-1s flew with F-16s and South Korean F-35s as part of the joint combined exercise Freedom Shield 23 
  • On April 14, B-52s flew with USAF F-16s and ROKAF F-35s. 

Prior to the recent flurry of activity, U.S. Forces Korea had announced just two USAF bomber sorties over the Peninsula in the last two years. 

All seven training exercises have taken place since Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III visited South Korea in January and pledged to ramp up military exercises to include expanded use of air assets such as fifth-generation fighters and strategic bombers. 

Austin’s pledge was largely seen as reassurance for South Korea after North Korea conducted a record number of ballistic missile tests in 2022. Growing concerns about those tests led some South Korean officials to suggest the nation should conduct nuclear drills with America or even pursue its own nuclear weapons program. 

U.S. officials say they remain committed to the longstanding policy goal of denuclearizing the entire Korean Peninsula, and in April, President Joe Biden and South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol announced a joint declaration meant to bolster the U.S.’s nuclear “umbrella” to deter attacks on South Korea.  

The document included a declaration that the U.S. would enhance the visibility of its strategic assets in the region. 

Korean Peninsula B-52s
The Republic of Korea and U.S. conduct a combined aerial exercise with the deployment of U.S. Air Force B-52H Stratofortresses over the Republic of Korea, June 30, 2023. Photo by ROK Air Force
3,700 Airmen No Longer Rate Special Duty Assignment Pay

3,700 Airmen No Longer Rate Special Duty Assignment Pay

July 1, 2023 | By Greg Hadley

In a move that will cut the take-home pay of thousands of Airmen, the Air Force is reducing the number of Airmen who qualify for special duty assignment pay beginning in October.

Officials planned similar cuts a year ago, only to reverse course before the changes went into effect. Exactly who will or won’t be eligible has been withheld from public view. The Air Force offered no justification for withholding the actual list, which it has released in the past. The other military services also routinely publish details of who qualifies for the special pay, which is worth from $75 to $450 per month.

What is clear is that after a board review last month, the Air Force cut from 103 to 70 job specialties the number of fields that will merit special pay beginning in fiscal 2024, which starts Oct. 1. Four new specialties will qualify. The full list is available on myFSS, accessible to anyone on Active duty, but hidden from spouses, the public, and Congress, among others.  

Airmen whose assignments no longer qualify will be paid half the current rate through fiscal 2024, as an interim step to ease the pain of the cut.

Rates for seven specialties will decline; in those cases, the cuts will take effect on Jan. 1, 2025, however, allowing a grace period of 90 days to ease Airmen into the change.  

According to Air Force budget documents, the 3,708 Airmen who will no longer receive SDAP will suffer a net lost of $4.04 million, or about $90 per month on average. Most will actually lose $75 or $150 per month. 

Last year, when the Air Force also planned SDAP cuts, the reductions would have been less far reaching, with 489 Airmen losing a total of $1.5 million, or an average of $255 per month. Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall cancelled that plan amid an outcry over paycuts at a time of high inflation.  

According to the Air Force release, the board reviewing requests for SDAP this year were unaware of the budgeted funds for the program until after each request was considered. 

The Space Force hosted its own SDAP board for the first time for fields that had moved into its jurisdiction. That board approved 14 job specialties, while cutting three, adding two, and “rolling” one into an existing approval. Space Force budget documents indicate funding and the number of Guardians included in the program is expected to stay flat in 2024. The Space Force followed the Air Force’s lead and withheld the list from public release, linking from a public press release to a private webpage. Department of the Air Force public affairs officials were unable to offer an explanation for withholding the details.

State Department Greenlights F-35 Sale for Czech Republic

State Department Greenlights F-35 Sale for Czech Republic

June 30, 2023 | By John A. Tirpak

The State Department has OK’d the sale of two dozen F-35As to the Czech Republic, along with 25 Pratt & Whitney F135 engines, aircraft spares, and assorted weapons, including AIM-120 AMRAAMs and AIM-9X Sidewinders, collectively valued at up to $5.62 billion. The Czech Republic joins nine other countries in Europe and 17 worldwide that have selected the F-35 for their combat air forces.

Although greenlighted by the State Department, the sale is not yet a done deal and negotiations on the final package continue. The State Department said there may be industrial offsets as part of the sale. Congress can still object to the transfer, and it wasn’t disclosed when deliveries are expected.

Still, the June 29 announcement marks yet another positive development for the F-35, which has not lost a single competition to other Western fighters in Europe in recent years and is the only fifth-generation Western fighter now being offered.

More than 120 F-35s are flying in Europe today, operated by the U.S., Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands and the U.K., while Belgium, Finland, Germany, Poland, and Switzerland have all selected the fighter and are awaiting deliveries. Spain and Greece are reportedly evaluating the jet as well. Lockheed Martin, which builds the fighter, anticipates that 500 F-35s will be flying in Europe by 2030.

Worldwide, seven other countries are operating the F-35 or have the jet on order.  

Turkey was an original developmental partner on the F-35 and planned to acquire 100 of the jets but was ousted from the program when it moved to acquire S-400 air defense systems from Russia. NATO partners said operating the two systems in close proximity would give Russian personnel in Turkey crucial insights about how to detect and defeat the F-35. Turkey has opted to pursue an indigenous fifth-generation fighter, which resembles the F-35, called the TF-X.      

The Czech Republic announced its choice of the F-35 in June 2022, picking the fighter over Lockheed’s own F-16 Block 70, the Eurofighter Typhoon, and Sweden’s JAS-39E Gripen. The Czech Republic has been operating 14 JAS-39C Gripens under a lease arrangement, and the Swedish government had offered to let it keep the jets if it also bought the E model, but Prague declined to do so. The Gripens will be returned to Sweden in 2027, which may be when the F-35s are expected to arrive.

“Only the most-advanced fifth-generation fighters will be able to meet mission requirements in future battlefields,” Czech defense minister Jana Cernochova said in 2022, announcing the results of the Czech Air Force’s analysis of the offerings and choice of the F-35. Senior Czech officials have also touted the F-35’s networking capabilities and ability to integrate with F-35s in other countries as well as with other advanced NATO combat aircraft. Czech air force officials have also said they expect to operate the jets into the 2050s or later.

The deal approved by the State Department also calls for 86 Raytheon-built GBU-53/B SDB II Stormbreaker Small Diameter Bombs, along with training equipment and inert training rounds; 12 Mk 84 2000-pound penetrator bombs and Boeing KMU556/557 tail kits to turn them into Joint Direct Attack Munitions; 50 Raytheon AIM-9X Block II Sidewinder air-to-air missiles; 10 AIM-9X guidance units; 18 AIM-9X Captive Air Training Missiles (CATMs); and four AIM-9X CATM guidance units, as well as AIM-120 AMRAAM CATMs, among other munitions, training gear and accessories.

Non-kinetic gear to be supplied includes DSU-41B optical target detectors; ALE-70 Radio Frequency Countermeasures Transmitters; Identification, Friend or Foe (IFF) gear; electronic warfare data and “Reprogrammable Lab Support;” countermeasures to include chaff and flares; Built-in Test (BIT) reprogramming equipment; contractor logistics support, and various equipment to test and maintain the aircraft, systems and engines, as well as spare and repair parts, software support and other items.

“We are honored the Czech Republic government is interested in the F-35,” a Lockheed spokesperson said. “The choice of 17 nations to lead future fighter fleets, the F-35 is the only fifth-generation fighter offered today, and the only fighter designed to connect the 21st century security battlespace and counter the next generation of threats in Europe well into the 2070s. We will continue to provide the support the U.S. government requires about an acquisition with the Czech Republic.”

The Czech F-35s would likely be serviced in Italy’s airframe depot and the Netherlands’ F135 engine depot.

New Study: USAF Needs Big Cash Infusion to Overcome Aging Fighter Fleet

New Study: USAF Needs Big Cash Infusion to Overcome Aging Fighter Fleet

June 29, 2023 | By John A. Tirpak

Without a large corrective investment, the Air Force’s aged fighter force is breaking under the pressure of its small size, insufficient training time for high-end warfare, and chronic shortages of pilots and maintainers, according to a new report from the Air & Space Forces Association’s Mitchell Institute.

“We’re on a collision course” with real-world demands outstripping the fighter force’s ability to answer the call, said retired Lt. Gen. Joseph Guastella, one of the authors of the report. Fighter force readiness could “fall off a cliff,” added Guastella, whose last job in the Air Force was as deputy chief of staff for operations.

The Air Force’s resources and capabilities don’t match the National Defense Strategy, said retired Lt. Gen David Deptula, dean of the Mitchell Institute. In the face of an assertive China with rapidly increasing military capabilities, an aggressive Russia, and continuing demand for airpower from regional commanders, the need for comprehensive, capable airpower has never been greater, he said.

“It may take losing” a major war to get the public to understand the gravity of the deficit in airpower, he said, and by then, it will be too late.

A “modernization holiday” of the fighter force since the mid-1990s has left the service in a “capacity freefall,” said Doug Birkey, co-author and Mitchell’s executive director. He described USAF’s fighter force as “geriatric” and woefully undersized for what the nation expects of it.

The report authors urged the Air Force to buy more F-35s, especially since force structure decisions of the past hinged on the assumption that the fifth-generation F-35 fleet would be fully acquired by the early 2030s—but that never materialized.

The A-10Cs, F-15C/Ds, and F-16C/Ds which were designed in the 1970s  “now average 41, 38 and 32 years old,” Birkey said, and all have long outlived their planned service lives. Age has a cost, Guastella added: the older aircraft get, the more more maintenance and parts they require, which in turn means fewer flying hours for crews.

For the first time, Deptula said, China’s pilots are getting more flying hours than U.S. Air Force pilots, and that additional training “makes a difference.” The Navy and Marine Corps have their own fighters, but their first objectives are fleet defense and close air support. The Air Force is expected to provide the bulk of fighter capacity over all regions but has been shortchanged in funding, Deptula argued.

“Over the last 30 years, the Army has received $1.3 trillion more than the Air Force, and the Navy has received $900 billion more,” he said. “It’s time to redress these imbalances” and correct the long-overdue recapitalization of USAF’s fighter force, especially in light of the modern threat, he said.

The authors did not offer an exact dollar figure by which the Air Force’s budget should grow, but Deptula said the nation can bear the additional expense needed to correct the long neglect of the fighter force. The cost of not doing so far outweighs the expense of fixing the situation, he argued.  

Asked to “triage” the various fighter programs now on the books—whether the Next Generation Air Dominance fighter or Collaborative Combat Aircraft are more important than F-35 acquisitions, for example—Deptula said the whole slate of capabilities is needed and none can be traded off.

The Mitchell report offered 10 recommendations:

Buy more fighters

The fighter force has dwindled from 4,556 aircraft in 1990 to 2,176 today—and will continue to fall, as USAF is retiring 801 fighters and only buying 345 through 2028, the report notes. Although the Air Force is requesting 72 fighters in 2024, the number it has long said it needs to buy every year, that number no longer stops the rate at which the fleet is aging. To achieve a sustainable 20-year refresh rate, the report says, USAF needs to buy 109 fighters a year. That would hold down long-term sustainment costs. By contrast, 72 maintains a 30-year refresh rate. Collaborative Combat Aircraft are not included in either calculation.

Stick with F-35 Upgrades

The Joint Program Office that runs the F-35 program must keep the Technical Refresh 3 and Block 4 upgrades on schedule. This requires a coordinated team effort among the JPO, industry, the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and allied partners.

Develop a Force-Sizing Construct

The Air Force should develop and implement a force-sizing construct, and explain to Congress why it is necessary. In 2018, the Air Force set a goal of 386 squadrons, but Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall said last year that USAF is no longer pursuing that goal. Gen. Mark Kelly, head of Air Combat Command, has said the Air Force needs 60 fighter squadrons, and the report endorsed that figure as a floor. Right now, the nation has no public yardstick by which to measure how much airpower it has or needs, Deptula said.

Harness Cost-Per-Effect Analysis

Birkey argued fighters and fixed-wing combat aircraft generally yield a much lower cost per effect achieved than other means. Deptula pointed to investments by the Army and Navy in capabilities like long-range hypersonic missiles “with a small warhead, that cost $40-$50 million per shot” that have little impact in an extended air campaign. For two such missiles, the Air Force could buy an F-35 which could be reused again and again, he said. Services need to consider how to prosecute targets in the most cost-effective manner, he insisted.

Ensure Testing Doesn’t Slow Fielding

The Air Force has a deficit of testing capability, but “perfection is the enemy of ‘good enough’,” the paper states. Deptula said the U.S. no longer has the luxury of time to get new systems just right; instead, testing must be streamlined, test capacity must be expanded, and new technologies should be used to compress testing cycles.

Monitor Industrial Base Capacity

The industrial base “cannot support” the level of production the Air Force needs, Birkey said, thanks to years of the Pentagon buying a bare minimum of tactical aviation assets. The Ukraine war has highlighted the need for greater capacity and the Pentagon should assess its industrial base and provide incentives for surge production, the report said.

Stop ‘Divest to Invest’

The Air Force’s plan of retiring older equipment and using the savings to fund new systems “may have worked when inventories were larger” but no longer makes sense when fighter numbers are so low, the report argues. The planned reduction of more than 1,000 USAF aircraft across the next five years shows how short the Air Force is of needed modernization funds, and if it plays out, it will be a “capacity death spiral,” Birkey said. More funding is needed “today to modernize for the future and make up for years of anemic aircraft buys.”

Human Capital

Guastella said the Air Force has “spent years admiring the problem of the pilot shortage” but hasn’t taken any significant steps to correct it. The fighter pilot shortage is the most acute, and there is also a lack of qualified maintainers. The Air Force needs to make a full press on assessing retention, expanding its training capacity, and setting manpower force-sizing goals, the report states.   

Guard and Reserve

The Air Force has been using its Reserve force and Air National Guard as operational adjuncts. Guard units are slated to bear the brunt of coming divestments, Birkey said. Moreover, retiring aircraft without an immediate replacement flying mission means people will leave the Guard and Reserve, and the Air Force can’t afford to lose that expertise, he argued. The report urged members of the Air Guard—who are free, in their private lives, to advocate to Congress—to be a “powerful and credible voice on Capitol Hill” to signal the “severity of the problem.”

The Allied Component

The report recommends increasing production capacity for F-35—currently topping out at 156 per year—to meet increasing demand following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Allied fighter forces flying the F-35 are among the key strategic values of the joint strike fighter, Deptula said. Yet the Air Force should be careful not to assume all allied fighters are available all the time. Allies in the midst of a war theater will be focused on homeland defense and may not have capacity to contribute aircraft to coalition air operations against an aggressor.

NORAD, Allies Practice Intercepting B-1s Returning from Europe

NORAD, Allies Practice Intercepting B-1s Returning from Europe

June 29, 2023 | By Chris Gordon

The U.S. and its allies intercepted American B-1 bombers coming across the Atlantic toward North America, in a NORAD-led exercise simulating an enemy attack on June 26.

During an exercise dubbed Noble Defender, B-1 Lancers that were leaving Europe after a month-long Bomber Task Force deployment were successively tracked and intercepted by the U.S., Canadian, British, Danish, Finnish, Norwegian, and Swedish militaries.

A NORAD official told Air & Space Forces Magazine two B-1s were met in the skies by four U.K. fighters—two F-35s and two Eurofighter Typhoons. Denmark sent two F-16s, Sweden sent two JAS-39 Gripens, Norway sent two F-35s, and Finland sent two F-18s.

“All nations sequentially intercepted … B-1 Lancers in the North Atlantic region and off the east coast of Canada as it transited from Europe to North America on June 26,” NORAD said in a statement posted on Twitter.

Protecting from the simulated threat to the U.S. and Canada were two U.S. F-15C Eagles from Barnes Air National Guard Base, Mass., two Royal Canadian Air Force CF-18 fighters—a variant of the American F/A-18 Hornet—and a U.S. KC-135 Stratotanker, the NORAD official added. NORAD, short for North American Aerospace Defense Command, is a joint U.S.-Canadian effort.

“NORAD units executed maneuvers designed to defend the eastern approach of North America from simulated cruise missile threats in this particular operation,” according to the 104th Fighter Wing at Barnes.

The NORAD official noted that the command holds regular iterations of Noble Defender, which vary depending on the specific exercise, to keep its forces ready

“These intercepts demonstrated a cooperative and collaborative layered defense to strengthen our ability to deter potential threats,” NORAD added in its statement.

The intercepts made a full-circle deployment for the B-1s assigned to the 7th Bomb Wing at Dyess Air Force Base, Texas. The “Bones” were immediately met by a Russian Su-27 fighter when they entered European airspace in late May. A total of four B-1s completed the BTF, which involved the first landing of U.S. bombers in Sweden since World War II, as the U.S. looks to signal its growing alliance with the prospective NATO member.

U.S. Air Forces in Europe said in a press release that the highlights of the deployment included “the historic landing in Sweden and the first-ever hot-pit refueling in Romania.”

“The landing in Sweden fortified not only the friendship between the U.S. and Sweden, but the collective defense of Europe,” the USAFE release added.

The aircraft also flew over the Baltics and Balkans, participated in an Arctic defense exercise, flew all the way to the Middle East and back in a live-fire launch of a JASSM long-range cruise missile and JDAM guided bombs over Jordan and Saudi Arabia, and participated in the Paris Air Show.

“Throughout their rotation, the B-1B Lancers have built critical relationships throughout the Arctic, Central, and Eastern European regions, which has enhanced the coalition’s ability to respond to incursions threatening freedom of maneuver and navigation,” USAFE said.