House Appropriators Want to Add F-35s, Block U-2 and F-15 Retirements

House Appropriators Want to Add F-35s, Block U-2 and F-15 Retirements

The House Appropriations Committee released its version of the fiscal 2025 defense appropriations bill on June 4, an $833 billion bill that would increase funding for the F-35 and block the service from retiring the U-2 spy plane and some F-15s.

The proposed legislation sets up a conflict with the House Armed Services Committee, which used its version of the National Defense Authorization Act to propose slashing F-35 procurement by 10-20 jets from the services’ request of 68 jets and use the funds to boost the program’s test and evaluation infrastructure. House appropriators want to fund procurement for 76 F-35s for all services in 2025.

Specifically for the Air Force, appropriators want to add two F-35As to the request of 42, for a total of 44 F-35As.

TypePentagon RequestHASC NDAA*HAC Appropriations
F-35A423644
F-35B131113
F-35C131119
TOTAL685876
*After DOD takes corrective actions

The HAC’s spending will would also only fund six new F-35 test aircraft, while the HASC NDAA funded nine.

The NDAA authorizes funding and sets policy for the Pentagon, while the appropriations bill actually provides the money.

Elsewhere in the appropriations bill, lawmakers included provisions that would block the Air Force from being able to “divest or prepare to divest” the U-2 spy plane, as the service has said it wants to do in 2026.

Similarly, the Air Force would not be allowed to divest or prepare to divest “any F-15 aircraft unless the Secretary of Defense certifies … that such aircraft will be replaced in a manner that maintains the current total aircraft assigned at a given unit and the readiness of such unit.”

The Air Force recently revealed its F-15C/D fleet only has a 33 percent mission capable rate, due mainly to the type being past its planned retirement and suffering from structural fatigue, flight restrictions and obsolescent parts. The service plans to retire 37 F-15s in 2025, 11 C/D models and 17 E models.

Appropriators did leave the Air Force’s request for its other major fighter procurement program, the F-15EX, alone, to the tune of $1.8 billion for 18 F-15EX fighters for $1.8 billion. They also went along with the Air Force’s request for 15 KC-46A tankers, providing $2.7 billion for them, and funded eight MH-139 Gray Wolf missile field support helicopters at a level of $294 million.

Lawmakers also met the Air Force request of $3.3 billion for the Next-Generation Air Dominance program—which includes the autonomous Collaborative Combat Aircraft.

Some programs may see potential increases if the committee gets its way. Lawmakers added $400 million to “accelerate” the E-7 Wedgetail airborne command and control program, which will succeed the E-3 AWACS. They also tacked on two HH-60W rescue helicopters for the Air Force and two C-130Js for the Air National Guard, even though the Air Force did not ask for either aircraft. It provided $120 million for the HH-60s and $263.4 million for the two C-130Js.

A pay increase of 4.5 percent was funded for all service members, and the appropriators provided $2.5 billion to boost junior enlisted pay by 15 percent, matching the HASC version of the NDAA.

Defense-wide, the HAC provided just $163.5 billion for procurement, a drop of $1.4 billion below the Biden administration’s request and $6.7 billion below the fiscal 2024 enacted level. The HAC also cut the Pentagon’s operations and maintenance request by $2 billion, to $294.3 billion, which was still $7.1 billion above the 2024 enacted level.

In defense-wide research, development, test and evaluation, the HAC provided $145.9 billion, or $2.7 billion more than requested, but $2.4 billion below the fiscal ‘24 enacted amount. That includes $2.1 billion to continue development of the F-35 for all the services, and $2.7 billion for continuing development of the B-21 bomber.   

The HAC appropriated $3.4 billion for continued development of the Air Force’s Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile, indicating its support for the program, which is in a Nunn-McCurdy breach, having exceeded its baseline cost estimate by 37 percent.

The Air Force’s Hypersonic Attack Cruise missile was funded at $492.7 million, and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Joint Hypersonic Transition Office would get $99.97 million.

The appropriators provided “over $900 million” for the Pentagon’s Defense Innovation Unit “and select defense-wide innovation efforts to deliver capabilities from nontraditional sources, attract America’s best companies and talent, and increase flexibility for DIU Fielding in exchange for greater transparency with Congress.” The DIU funding included $220 million to address combatant commander priorities and $45 million for facilities needed to develop and test some capabilities in secret.

The full House Appropriations Committee takes up the defense bill the week of June 10.  

Airman Earned an Air Force Cross. His Name Remains Secret.

Airman Earned an Air Force Cross. His Name Remains Secret.

An Air Force combat controller was awarded the Air Force Cross—the second-highest decoration for valor in combat behind the Medal of Honor—for actions during a fierce battle in Syria in 2018. His identity, however, remains a well-kept secret.  

The Airman, a member of the 24th Special Tactics Squadron, was awarded the medal in September 2020, but the Air Force didn’t disclose it until it answered Washington Post reporter Kyle Rempfer’s Freedom of Information Act request seeking the citation and order. An Air Force spokeswoman confirmed the citation to Air & Space Forces Magazine and said the combat controller’s identity was redacted under a FOIA exemption covering personnel in overseas, sensitive, or routinely deployable units. 

Rempfer wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter, May 31 that his FOIA request was related to the Battle of Khasham, which took place Feb. 7-8, 2018, near Dewr Az Zewr, Syria, the time and place included in the Airman’s citation. 

“On this date, [redacted] exposed himself to artillery, rocket, and mortar bombardment, and direct fire from main battle tanks, rocket-propelled grenades, and heavy automatic weapons during the hasty defense of a United States Special Operations Forces operating location,” the citation reads. “His actions prevented an isolated force of American and coalition personnel from being overrun by a professionally trained and technically proficient combined-arms enemy assault comprised of main battle tanks, armored personnel carriers, heavy artillery tubes, and a battalion of infantry soldiers.” 

At the time, U.S. officials said their troops faced an “unprovoked attack” by forces associated with the regime of leader Bashar al-Assad. U.S. forces have been in Syria since 2014 as part of Operation Inherent Resolve, its defeat-ISIS mission, and were embedded with the Syrian Democratic Forces, who oppose al-Assad in the Syrian civil war. 

U.S. troops watched for about a week as “pro-regime” forces built up a battalion-sized force complete with artillery, tanks, and mortars near their position, officials said. The forces fired up to 30 artillery and tank rounds on the SDF and U.S. position, prompting a response by U.S. aircraft, including F-22s and MQ-9s, as well as artillery on the ground. 

Air Force combat controllers deploy with special operations units into combat or hostile environments and help direct aircraft and provide command and control. According to a subsequent New York Times report based on interviews and documents, USAF combat controllers helped direct B-52 bombers where to strike, helping stop an intense barrage of tank fire, artillery, and mortar rounds. 

A 321st Special Tactics Squadron combat controller gears up before the start of an austere landing training exercise at Nowe Miasto, Poland, July 20, 2015. U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Luke Kitterman/Released

The Air Force Cross citation notes that the Airman showed “extraordinary heroism, superb airmanship, and aggressiveness in the face of the enemy.” 

Despite being significantly outnumbered, U.S. forces suffered no casualties in the battle. 

There have been conflicting subsequent reports as to whether members of Russian private military companies were part of the formation that attacked U.S. forces. Officials have said they maintained deconfliction lines with the Russian military before and during the battle. 

Since the Global War on Terror began in 2001, the Air Force has only announced the awards of 11 Air Force Cross medals, the latest in 2017. The service has had only one Medal of Honor recipient in that time—Master. Sgt. John A. Chapman, also a combat controller in the 24th Special Tactics Squadron.

Air Force Launches ICBM Test for the First Time in Seven Months

Air Force Launches ICBM Test for the First Time in Seven Months

Airmen and Guardians worked together to launch an unarmed Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile from Vandenberg Space Force Base, Calif., early June 4, marking both the first test launch since November and the first of two back-to-back tests.

The missile, equipped with one test reentry vehicle, launched at 12:56 a.m. Pacific Time. It flew about 4,200 miles at speeds exceeding 15,000 miles per hour to reach a test range near the Kwajalein Atoll of the Marshall Islands, in the central Pacific Ocean.

“These tests hold immense significance, not only for our nation’s defense, but also serve as a pivotal moment in showcasing the exceptional capabilities and expertise of our dedicated team,” said Col. Bryan Titus, Space Launch Delta 30 vice commander, who oversaw the launch decision.

The launch involved a randomly selected ICBM from F.E. Warren Air Force Base in Wyoming, which was reassembled at Vandenberg after being transported to California. There are about 400 Minuteman III missiles currently in service across Colorado, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, and Wyoming.

“A previous test launch slated for February 2024 had to be postponed due to some needed repairs at Reagan Test Site,” Col. Chris Cruise, 377th Test and Evaluation Group commander, said in a release. “This summer’s test launch was already scheduled so it made sense to do them both while all the necessary personnel were in place.”

The back-to-back tests will conclude June 6, with launch scheduled from 12:01 a.m. to 6:01 a.m.

The most recent test before this June ended with the Air Force having to terminate the ICBM during its flight over the Pacific Ocean on Nov. 1 due to an anomaly.

Consistent with previous test launches, the June 4 launch was carried out to “validate and verify the safety, security, effectiveness, and readiness of the weapon system,” according to the Air Force Global Strike Command. The service repeatedly underscored the pre-scheduled nature of these tests and that they are unrelated to ongoing world events.

“Vandenberg Guardians and Airmen are committed to supporting our mission partners and these vitally important test launches from the Western Range,” said Col. Mark Shoemaker, Space Launch Delta 30 commander, adding that these test launches are “critical in safeguarding the defense our nation.”

The test launches include a pre-launch notification submission under the Hague Code of Conduct. The Air Force said the Russian government also received a separate heads-up for the test launch on June 4.

Operational since 1970, the aging LGM-30 Minuteman III is set to be replaced by the LGM-35A Sentinel. Sentinel has a “no-fail” initial operational capability deadline of September 2030 set by U.S. Strategic Command, but earlier this year, the Air Force disclosed critical cost and schedule overruns to the new ICBM program, prompting a Nunn-McCurdy review that temporarily halted work and requires certification from the Secretary of Defense to continue.

In the meantime, experts have noted while the Minuteman III system remains reliable, vital upgrades are needed in certain aspects, such as the 50-year-old silos, electronics, and warheads.

How an F-15 Landed in a Ditch: Blame All Around

How an F-15 Landed in a Ditch: Blame All Around

A series of errors by the pilot, air traffic controller, and maintainers all contributed to launch an F-15D careening off the runway and into an irrigation canal at Kingsley Field, Ore., last year, investigators said. The accident destroyed the $35 million fighter. 

An Air Force Accident Investigation Board report, released June 4, faulted the pilot for choosing the wrong action, the controller for poor communication, and the maintenance crew for insufficient care. These were the central and contributing causes of the May 15, 2023, accident, which ended with the twin-seat fighter lying mostly underwater. The pilot emerged from the crash with non-life-threatening injuries. 

According to the report, a single aviator was operating the aircraft as part of a four-ship formation from the Oregon Air National Guard’s 173rd Fighter Wing. The Eagles were training with nearby F-35s and were returning to Kingsley Field on a low-level route, when the pilot was alerted to a hydraulic malfunction. Told by the pilot’s wingman that “hydraulic fluid was leaking from behind the right main landing gear and now trailing the [aircraft] between the exhaust nozzles,” the pilot declared an in-flight emergency, abandoned the route and headed back to Kingsley. 

On approach, the pilot alerted the tower and said he would try to land normally, but go around if the brakes failed, before trying to land a second time using the F-15’s emergency tailhook. The air traffic controller responded that the runway’s arresting cable, which catches the tailhook, was up. 

The pilot touched down and tried to brake. About halfway down the 10,000-foot runway, he decided he lacked the time and space to safely execute a go-around, so decided instead to deploy the tailhook, radioing the tower the single word “cable.” 

“The [air traffic controller] understood the radio transmission to mean the [pilot] wanted the cable down, activated the switch to lower the arrestment cable and approximately three seconds later transmitted ‘cable coming down’ on tower frequency,” the report states. “Approximately seven seconds later … the [pilot] transmitted ‘no, no, I need cable, cable up, cable up, cable up, cable up.’ Approximately four seconds later, [the air traffic controller] activated the switch to raise the cable and responded, ‘cable up.’” 

It was too late.

The F-15’s tailhook missed the arresting cable, and the pilot decided not to engage the fighter’s emergency brake system. He subsequently told investigators that he did not want to use the emergency system because technical orders caution against doing so when the aircraft is going above 70 knots calibrated airspeed and recommend applying light pressure at first. 

“During the AIB interview the [pilot] described being involved in previous F-15C loss of brakes incidents where use of the Emergency Brake/Steering system resulted in blown tires,” the report states. The pilot indicated concern about losing directional control of the plane. 

But without the emergency brake, the pilot lost control. When he steered around a lighting system, the report states, the jet “struck a raised retention berm on the northside, momentarily became airborne, and impacted the southside berm of the irrigation canal.”

Using interviews, simulators, flight data, and technical documents, investigators subsequently concluded the most direct cause of the mishap was the failure to use the emergency brake system, a decision that went against the emergency checklist. 

“Engaging the Emergency Brake/Steering system may or may not have resulted in blown tires or damage to the landing gear but would have ultimately prevented the mishap,” the board president wrote. A simulation employing the same circumstances showed the aircraft could have safely stopped before leaving the runway. 

Other factors contributed, however:

  • The air traffic controller should have recognized when the pilot deployed his emergency tailhook
  • The pilot’s one-word communication with the air traffic controller did not follow Air Force procedure, creating confusion, and
  • The controller did not confirm with the pilot before lowering the arresting cable. 

“It is also likely that the departure-end arrestment cable would have remained in the raised position had the [pilot] said nothing, as [the air traffic controller] had already communicated that the cable was raised prior to the … landing,” the board president noted. 

Beyond that, investigators determined that maintainers failed to do their job in preventing the hydraulic failure that caused the in-flight emergency.  

On May 3, 12 days before the mishap, the aircraft suffered a utility pump failure that caused a flight to be aborted on the ground and led to an overhaul of the utility hydraulic system. The aircraft didn’t fly again until a prior flight the same day as the mishap. 

“After the first flight, maintenance personnel reported a possible Utility System hydraulic leak during the Thru-Flight inspection,” the report noted. They found hydraulic fluid leaking under a door just behind the main landing gear and conducted a quick fix before clearing the aircraft to fly again, without properly documenting their actions. 

“These factors should have indicated to maintenance personnel that a more thorough evaluation was required, and had proper maintenance procedures been followed to isolate the leak, there is a high likelihood that the MA would have been deemed Non-Mission Capable (NMC) on the day of the mishap,” the board president wrote. Subsequent analysis determined the cause of the leak was a crack near a weld on the Fuel Oil Heat Exchanger. 

The loss of the F-15 shrinks an already small fleet of two-seat D models. As of September 2023, there were just 12 F-15Ds across the entire Air Force and Air National Guard. The planes average more than 36 years of age. The Air Force plans to retire most of its C and D models in the coming years and last year announced, just days after the mishap, that it plans to put an F-35 Formal Training Unit at Kingsley.

USAF, DIU Pick 4 Firms to Explore Cheaper, Modular, Mass-Produced Drones

USAF, DIU Pick 4 Firms to Explore Cheaper, Modular, Mass-Produced Drones

Four companies will develop Enterprise Test Vehicles designed to use off the-shelf and readily-available components and materials meant for rapid, high-rate production, the Air Force’s Armament Directorate and Pentagon’s Defense Innovation Unit announced June 3.

Anduril Industries, Integrated Solutions for Systems, Inc., Leidos Dynetics and Zone 5 Technologies received contracts “to develop prototype solutions for flight demonstration in late summer/fall 2024,” according to a DIU press release, but the contract values and the dates of the awards were not disclosed.

The program will aim to maximize subsystem modularity and will complement the Air Force’s Collaborative Combat Aircraft program, as well as other efforts.

It isn’t immediately clear whether the program directly supports the Pentagon’s “Replicator” effort, but its goals align with it. Replicator, announced by Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks last August, is focused on large-scale production of low-cost but capable systems to achieve mass effects.  

The four companies picked for the Enterprise Test Vehicle program “were selected from a highly competitive field of more than 100 commercial and dual-use technology company applicants,” according to a DIU release.

Anduril was also one of two companies to receive contracts in April for the first increment of the Air Force’s Collaborative Combat Aircraft program, and a company spokesman said the ETV work will be done “by the same group” within the company. General Atomics was the other company picked to do CCA work.

Zone 5 Technologies will fly this concept for the ETV project.

In a statement, Anduril’s senior vice president for its air dominance and strike division Jason Levin said the company looks forward to working with DIU and the Air Force Armament Directorate “to deliver deliver a highly-producible, modular, affordable, and capable Enterprise Test Vehicle (ETV) that will serve as the baseline architecture for large-scale production of next-generation airborne platforms.”

The new project will identify and prototype “commercial and dual-use technology solutions for an Enterprise Test Vehicle that demonstrates modularity for subsystem upgrade testing,” the DIU said. “The technology will also serve as a foundation for affordable, high-speed production.”

“Initial flight demonstrations will occur within seven months from the agreement award dates,” the DIU said, suggesting the contracts were awarded around January. After test flights and evaluations, “one or multiple of the most promising prototypes will continue development toward a production variant capable of rapidly scalable manufacture.”

Leidos Dynetics is competing for the ETV project with this concept.

Under the program, the contractors are incorporating commercial, off-the-shelf components “wherever possible to mitigate supply chain bottlenecks and to keep costs low,” the DIU said. They will also “leverage modern design for manufacturing approaches,” so that the vehicles aren’t over-engineered and minimize the use of expensive or hard-to-get materials, making high-rate production easier.

Cassie Johnson, the Air Force Armament Directorate’s ETV program manager, said that while the directorate “remains committed to our highly-capable legacy products, we have become convinced that widening the aperture to include more non-traditional aerospace companies offers the best chance at accomplishing our cost-per-unit goals, project timeline, and production quantity goals.”

She said the directorate anticipates “bringing respectable capability to our warfighters” through the ETV effort.

The designs will use an open architecture, in order to rapidly integrate subsystems and ease future design improvements.

The DIU said the idea is to use ETVs “en masse, through multiple launch methods” to create “an overwhelming dilemma for any defending adversary.”

Doug Beck, director of the DIU, said the award “is a great example of how we are partnered closely with the Air Force to drive innovation for the warfighter.”

Additional ETV government project collaborators and evaluators include Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), Special Operations Command (SOCOM), Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR), and U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (USINDOPACOM).

“We are excited to partner with DIU,” Air Force acquisition, technology and logistics chief executive Andrew Hunter said.

US Flies B-52 to Cap Off Its Largest Exercise in Africa

US Flies B-52 to Cap Off Its Largest Exercise in Africa

Moroccan Royal Air Force fighters escorted a U.S. Air Force B-52H Stratofortress on May 31 to help mark the 20th anniversary of the U.S.’s largest annual exercise in Africa.

U.S. Africa Command’s African Lion featured more than 8,100 participants from 27 nations, running from April 19 to May 31 across Morocco, Ghana, Senegal, and Tunisia.

The U.S. Air Force in particular contributed Airmen from the 302nd Airlift Wing at Peterson Space Force Base, Colo.; the 349th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron at Travis Air Force Base, Calif.; the 36th Aerial Port Squadron at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Wash; the 86th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron at Ramstein Air Base, Germany; the 4th Combat Training Squadron at U.S. Army Garrison Bavaria-Hohenfel Germany; and the 109th Air Control Squadron at Roland R. Wright Air National Guard Base, Utah.

“This exercise is an incredible opportunity for all of us to work shoulder-to-shoulder with our partners as we develop essential aviation capacity and strengthen regional cooperation,” Lt. Col. Bradley Ross, African Lion Air Force element commander, said in a release. “Together, we’re building a team capable of ensuring Africa’s future safety, security and prosperity.”

A U.S. Air Force KC-135 Stratotanker, assigned to the 100th Air Refueling Wing, departs after refueling a U.S. Air Force B-52H Stratofortress, on May 31, 2024. The presence of U.S. military assets highlights commitment to NATO’s efforts, ensuring peace and security in the European region. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Emily Farnsworth)

Along with the B-52—which is currently operating from RAF Fairford, U.K., as part of a bomber task force—the Air Force sent two C-130H Hercules aircraft from the 302nd Airlift Wing, a U.S. Air Forces in Europe and Air Forces Africa (USAFE-AFAFRICA) spokesperson told Air & Space Forces Magazine. The Hercules aircraft conducted a joint forcible entry exercise and cargo drop operations in Morocco, allowing aircrew to airdrop efficiently and deploy personnel to specific locations.

Other U.S. aircraft included the Navy’s P-8A Poseidon and the Utah Army National Guard’s AH-64 Apache helicopters. The helicopters were transported by two C-17 Globemaster III aircraft from the 445th Airlift Wing at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, and the 437th/315th Airlift Wing, Joint Base Charleston, S.C. The Globemasters did not participate in the exercise, the spokesperson added.

A C-130 assigned to the Morocco Royal Armed Forces flies during exercise African Lion 2024 (AL24) at Kenitra Air Base, Morocco, May 22, 2024. U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Jenna A. Bond

During the exercise, a real-life evacuation scenario unfolded as the 86th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron at Ramstein Air Base swiftly transported a U.S. Army Soldier on a Tunisian C-130J Super Hercules. The squadron evacuated the soldier from El Aouina Air Base, Tunisia, suffering from a gastrointestinal infection with complications. The patient evacuation occurred within 12 hours of notification, with help from TRANSCOM, the Army Southern European Task Force in Africa, and the U.S. and Tunisian embassies.

The large scale exercise is an example of AFRICOM’s “immense convening power,” which fosters interoperability across its African allies, said Air Force Maj. Gen. Kenneth P. Ekman, director of strategy, engagement, and programs of U.S. Africa Command.

“We partner with African militaries by playing the U.S. strikes, which are distinctive,” Ekman said at U.S. Global Leadership Coalition’s Global Impact Forum on June 3. “We build relevant and resilient military capacity to address our shared security interests. Those are backed by education and training programs that put a premium on rule of law, human rights, and civilian control.”

Ekman also described the strategic challenges facing AFRICOM in response to efforts against violent extremist organizations (VEOs).

“I am most concerned about the diminishing U.S. competitive advantage in a multipolar world among increasingly nonaligned partners in Africa,” said Ekman. “This sets the fulcrum for leveraging our AFRICOM means and ways as a posture-limited theater, focused on security cooperation. We’re almost completely pursuing the disruption of select VEOs through partner led U.S.-enabled operations. Al Qaeda and ISIS affiliates drive our focus primarily in East and West Africa, where we had some recent successes in East Africa last week.”

Ekman stressed the command’s need to use its resources to prioritize security cooperation in the face of growing Russian influence through Private Military Companies (PMCs) in Africa. PMCs add a layer of complexity, as they often operate independently or in support of state interests, posing challenges for traditional military and diplomatic efforts.

“For Russia, our challenge involves providing a viable alternative to what they offer, operating alongside Russian forces and PMCs, who pursue separate or related security objectives and then maintaining access and influence despite state capture,” said Ekman. “That’s an area where we’re still trying to figure out how to do it, with an increasingly nonaligned Africa.”

In recent years, Russian diplomacy in Africa has become closely tied to private PMCs, like the Wagner Group. These private mercenary groups offer services to African governments independently, while providing Kremlin with plausible deniability regarding its involvement. Reports have shown their actions often involve human rights abuses, disinformation, and worsened civil conflicts. Experts caution against hiring Russian private military companies in Africa due to potential consequences, including increased violence and military tensions and exacerbated civil-military relations.

Airmen and Guardians: Now You Can Reenlist Sooner—and for Longer

Airmen and Guardians: Now You Can Reenlist Sooner—and for Longer

The Department of the Air Force will now let Airmen and Guardians reenlist up to year ahead of their end of service date, one of several moves designed to boost retention and give troops more career flexibility.

The changes are in the latest revisions to DAFI 36-2606, which lays out the rules for reenlisting and extending enlistment contracts. They were released on May 31. 

Until now, second-term and career Airmen and Guardians had to wait until they were just 90 days from the end of their active service obligation to reenlist.

“The update maximizes opportunities for Airmen and Guardians to reenlist by allowing them to do so up to 12 months before their expiration term of service, giving them more time to decide to reenlist,” the department said in a release. 

First-term Airmen and Guardians already could reenlist up to a year before their initial enlistment ended—provided they are approved to do so based on the needs of their Air Force or Space Force Specialty Code. These changes make that standard for everyone.  

Among other moves, the department simplified the terms of reenlistment and increased the maximum service obligation from 72 months to 96 months—eight years—when combined with their remaining obligated service.

The move suggests retention is beginning to lag, and follows other recent steps intended to increase reenlistment rates. Last week, for example, the service announced that more career fields are now eligible for reenlistment bonuses. It also raised the maximum bonus by 80 percent, from $100,000 to up to $180,000 starting Oct. 1. 

In December, the Air Force said it had loosened its “up-or-out” rules, adding two years to the maximum time in service allowed at every enlisted paygrade up to E-8. 

The shift is not unprecedented, however. In 2020, as the COVID-19 pandemic took hold, the enlisted retention rate hit a 20-year high of 91.1 percent. Since then, the rate has floated downward, to 89.4 percent in 2022 and 89 percent in 2023, according to reports. 

Lt. Gen. Caroline M. Miller, deputy chief of staff for manpower, personnel, and services, acknowledged in written testimony to Congress last month, that “officer and enlisted personnel retention rates continue to decline—[but] less than a percentage point per year.” 

While Miller noted that the declines are in line with pre-pandemic numbers, she said the service is increasing its 2024 recruiting goal in response to those and “potential future retention trend declines.” 

“The change is part of a larger force management strategy that involves additional retention programs designed to deliver the right number of Airmen to match future force structure,” Miller wrote. 

Space Force Looks to MEO for Narrowband SATCOM

Space Force Looks to MEO for Narrowband SATCOM

Medium-Earth orbit—the region in space from 2,000 to 35,786 kilometers above the Earth’s surface—is getting more attention from the Space Force, potentially to host its next generation of narrowband communications satellites, part of a broader contemplation on the future of its entire satellite communications enterprise.

Space Systems Command published a request for information May 29 seeking plans and ideas for how to transition at least part of its narrowband SATCOM architecture to MEO, which it considers a “key aspect of the transition to the future.” 

Today’s primary narrowband constellation is the Mobile User Objective System, which will add two more satellites in geostationary orbit in 2031 as part of a service life extension that will keep the six-satellite fleet operational until 2040. The MEO constellation USSF is envisioning would not deploy until near that time. The RFI details “delivery in 2031.” 

GPS satellites operate in MEO today, but not much else. But the Space Force sees medium-Earth orbit as a way to bolster its narrowband capabilities. 

“The Government is developing a vision for a future [narrowband] architecture which will likely entail multiple orbit regimes for delivery of advanced services to current and future user communities,” the request states. “Additional goals are increased resilience, reduced lifecycle cost, and decreased time scales for fielding new capabilities.” 

Compared to wideband communications, narrowband signals are less complex and power-intensive. They can better penetrate bad weather and other obstacles, albeit with lower data rates. 

The Navy developed MUOS and other narrowband satellites, but the Space Force assumed control of them in 2022 as it consolidated all satellite communications across the military. 

Shortly after assuming responsibility, USSF kicked off the MUOS service life extension program, and in January awarded two $66 million contracts to Lockheed Martin and Boeing to design two new MUOS satellites. According to budget documents, the service plans to make a final selection in fiscal 2026. 

That program will drive a surge in spending, with narrowband SATCOM investment rising from $228.4 million in 2025 to $706.2 million in 2028. All told, the service projects to spend $2.7 billion through the end of the decade, with still more investment after that. 

The request for information does not specify how many spacecraft the Space Force is considering or how much it might be willing to spend on such a program. It does say, however, that it wants the satellites to be able to work with MUOS and other SATCOM constellations, and asks industry to provide input on the technical challenges and risks associated with delivering such a capability by 2031. 

The Space Force is also eyeing commercial capabilities to supplement its narrowband satellites. In January, Breaking Defense reported that SSC was working on a long-term acquisition plan for narrowband, with commercial being one of the top options under consideration. The 2025 budget request seeks $134.5 million for Commercial Satellite Communications, or COMSATCOM, specifically to experiment with services using wideband, narrowband, protected, and commercial communications bands.  

Specifically, the program is aimed at showing “the onboarding of MEO commercial SATCOM services into the SATCOM architecture,” according to budget documents. 

The idea of placing more satellites into medium-Earth orbit has gained popularity in recent years, as an attractive middle ground between “big, fat juicy targets” in GEO and the mega-constellations now operating in LEO. With fewer than 200 satellites in medium-Earth orbit, compared to thousands in low-Earth orbit, the region is also less congested than even geostationary orbit, where several hundred satellites now orbit the Earth. 

In addition to GPS and SATCOM, the Space Force is also working on missile warning/missile tracking satellites in MEO, part of an integrated system with the Space Development Agency’s low-Earth orbit constellation and the Next-Generation Overhead Persistent Infrared (OPIR) system and Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS) operating in geostationary orbit. 

Airmen Faced Less Competition for Promotion to Lieutenant Colonel in 2024

Airmen Faced Less Competition for Promotion to Lieutenant Colonel in 2024

Competition for promotions to lieutenant colonel eased for much of the Air Force in 2024, driven by a smaller pool of majors considered.

Across the six main “Line of the Air Force” categories, 1,258 officers were selected from 2,495 considered, a rate of 50.4 percent. That is the smallest group of majors considered since the COVID-19 pandemic. 

The full list of those selected was released by the Air Force Personnel Center on May 30 and is available here.

According to Air Force data, officer retention rates hit a 20-year high in 2020, at 93.7 percent. That increased even more in 2021 to 94.1 percent, but has since fallen.

In 2020, the same year that the pandemic began, the Air Force made sweeping changes to officer promotions, creating six competitive categories rather than having officers compete for promotion in a single group. The new system was supposed to make it easier for non-rated officers in logistics or intelligence, for example, to compete for advancement against rated officers, such as pilots and navigators. The service also eliminated “below the zone” promotions for officers early in their careers. 

Since then, majors “in the zone,” or on the typical schedule for promotions, have seen their promotion rate jump, reaching a new high of 78.5 percent this year that is a full 3.4 percent jump over last year. “Above the zone” promotion rates, for officers later in their careers, declined some from last year to 10.7 percent this year, but is still higher than before 2020. 

Generally speaking, the six different Line of the Air Force categories have ranked in the same order for combined “in the zone” and “above the zone” promotion rates since 2022: 

  1. Cross functional operations: Includes foreign area officers and multi-domain warfare officers 
  2. Combat support: Includes munitions, maintenance, security forces, contracting, and more 
  3. Information warfare: Includes intelligence, cyber operations, information operations, and public affairs 
  4. Air operations and special warfare: Includes pilots, air battle managers, drone operators, TACPs, and combat rescue 
  5. Force modernization: Includes engineers, scientists, and acquisition management 
  6. Nuclear and missile operations 

    In 2022, nuclear and missile operations was slightly higher than force modernization, but the nuclear rate dropped precipitously this year, making the category the only one where less than 40 percent of majors were selected from “in the zone” and “above the zone” combined. 

    Combining “in the zone” and “above the zone,” promotion rates ticked up for air operators and combat support—the two largest categories across the service. Information warfare, the next biggest category, saw an increase in its “in the zone” rate, but a dramatic fall in “above the zone,” from 19.3 percent last year to 4.4 percent this year, causing its overall promotion rate to dip. 

    Air operations posted its highest “in the zone” promotion rate since 2021, and tied its highest “above the zone” rate since 2020. The category saw its smallest number of those considered ever and accounted for most of the declines in those considered and selected, though information warfare also saw drops as well. 

    The number of combat support majors considered and selected surged, helping it become the second-largest category—though still less than half of the air operations category. 

    2024 Lieutenant Colonel Promotions

    CategoryTotal ConsideredTotal SelectedRate
    Air Operations & Special Warfare114554747.8%
    Nuclear & Missile Operations732939.7%
    Information Warfare45423251.1%
    Combat Support47228059.3%
    Force Modernization27612344.6%
    Cross Functional Operations754762.7%
    TOTAL2495125850.4%