Draft NDAA Would Let the Space Force Absorb Guard Units—with Restrictions

Draft NDAA Would Let the Space Force Absorb Guard Units—with Restrictions

May 14, 2024 | By Greg Hadley

A draft version of the 2025 National Defense Authorization Act would allow the Department of the Air Force to transfer Air National Guard units with space missions into the Space Force—but the language is not without compromise in light of the fierce pushback the proposal has faced in recent weeks. 

In his chairman’s mark of the defense policy bill, House Armed Services Committee leader Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) largely adopts the language proposed by the Air Force, which would fold all Guard units with space missions into the Space Force’s new hybrid full-time/part-time structure. 

The bill does, however, differ from the Air Force proposal in a few ways: 

  • It limits the number of personnel that could be transferred to “not more than 580 members of the Air National Guard.”  
  • If any service member prefers to stay in the Guard, the bill would require the Air Force to provide retraining and reassignment to a different ANG job, instead of merely allowing it as laid out in the Air Force proposal. 
  • The Space Force will be required to continue performing the mission of any transferred unit in the state where it currently resides, with the bill eliminating a provision of the legislative proposal that would have allowed the Air Force to move missions after it has informed and justified the move to Congress. 

It remains to be seen whether these changes will be enough to stem the tide of criticism levied at the Air Force proposal—the National Guard Association of the United States, the governors from every state and territory, and 85 members of Congress have expressed opposition to the idea.  

These critics have argued that the move would defy precedent and undermine governors’ authority over their National Guards and go against the wishes of Guardsmen, with internal surveys showing a majority do not want to transfer to the Space Force. 

Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall has insisted such fears are overblown, saying the number of affected personnel would be small and the Space Force will not force personnel to move. He and Chief of Space Operations Gen. B. Chance Saltzman say the switch will provide more flexibility for the service and allow Guardians to move between full-time and part-time status. 

A recently released Air Force analysis found that only nine ANG units would move to the Space Force, with 578 full-time and part-time billets. Those numbers are lower than what Space National Guard advocates have cited—the report says that Airmen who perform support functions would stay in the ANG no matter what. 

POLITICO previously reported that Rogers, who supports the Air Force proposal, said, “unless it becomes apparent to me that it’s not going anywhere, it will be in [the NDAA] and then somebody can just try to take it out” during the House Armed Services Committee markup process. 

Spokespeople for Reps. Jason Crow (D-Colo.) and Joe Wilson (R-S.C.), who helped spearhead a letter from lawmakers criticizing the Air Force proposal, could not immediately offer a comment. 

Even if the proposal makes it through the HASC markup process, it still must survive an amendment process in the full House and a negotiation with the Senate to make it into law.

Commercial Space 

In the strategic forces subcommittee mark of the NDAA, there are three sections aimed at bolstering the Space Force’s relationship with commercial space companies.  

The first would formally establish a Commercial Augmentation Space Reserve (CASR)—essentially a space version of the Air Force’s Civil Reserve Airlift Fleet, allowing the Space Force to use commercial satellites in times of crisis or conflict.  

The exact nature of when the CASR could be called upon is left up to the Secretary of Defense, but the program’s establishment is likely to play a key role in the Space Force’s broader plans to work with the growing private sector in space. The service released its Commercial Space Strategy in April, and lawmakers included another provision in the draft NDAA encouraging the Space Force to expand the number of mission areas where it integrates commercial capabilities and requiring a yearly briefing on the strategy through 2029. 

Finally, the draft NDAA proposes the creation of a pilot program of a “hybrid space architecture” for satellite communications—connecting military communications satellites with commercial ones across different orbits to improve resiliency. The bill includes $2 million for the demonstration. 

A GPS III satellite in orbit. Courtesy of Lockheed Martin

Budget Moves 

With the Space Force budget facing its first-ever reduction in 2025 after several years of rapid growth, the draft NDAA proposes cuts in authorized spending for research and development and procurement. 

On the R&D side, the big cut is a $139 million reduction for classified programs. For procurement, the single big cut is to the GPS III Follow-On program, with a proposed drop from $647.2 million to $332.6 million. 

In an accompanying explanation, lawmakers wrote that the reduction would eliminate one of the two proposed GPS IIIF satellites the Space Force wants to buy in 2025, because “the committee is concerned about the delays to launch currently available space vehicles and that the procurement funding is out of sync with the cadence of launch.” 

The explanation also notes that the Space Force is exploring ideas for “building smaller, less expensive GPS space vehicles to augment the current architecture and provide distributed resiliency,” an initiative dubbed GPS Lite. Lawmakers expressed enthusiasm for the idea and are asking for a briefing with more details. 

T-6 Instructor Pilot Dies After Ejection Seat Goes Off on the Ground

T-6 Instructor Pilot Dies After Ejection Seat Goes Off on the Ground

May 14, 2024 | By David Roza

Editor’s Note: This story has been updated with information identifying the pilot.

An Air Force instructor pilot died early in the morning on May 14 from injuries sustained when the pilot’s T-6A Texan II training plane ejection seat activated during ground operations the day before, the 82nd Training Wing at Sheppard Air Force Base, Texas, announced in a press release.

“An investigation into the cause of the incident is underway,” wrote the wing, which later identified the pilot as Capt. John Robertson, a member of the 80th Operations Support Squadron.

“This is a devastating loss for Captain Robertson’s family and loved ones, and for the entire 80th Flying Training Wing,” Col. Mitchell J. Cok, the acting wing commander, said in a statement. “Captain Robertson was a highly valued Airman and instructor pilot. Our deepest condolences go with all who knew and loved him.”

Cok thanked first responders on the base, who “immediately provided life-sustaining care” and “allowed time for Captain Robertson’s family to be at his side when he passed.”

The 82nd is the host unit at Sheppard, while the 80th Flying Training Wing runs the Euro-NATO Joint Jet Pilot Training (ENJJPT) Program, a multinational school where students and instructors from across NATO learn and teach the basics of flying.

The wing flies the T-6, a two-seat propeller plane often used for basic aviation lessons in undergraduate pilot training, and the T-38, a two-seat jet typically used to teach future fighter and bomber pilots. Two years ago, 76 T-6s and 203 T-38s were grounded due to concerns about potentially faulty ejection seat parts. The grounding affected 40 percent of the T-38 fleet and 15 percent of the T-6 fleet.

At the time, Air Force Materiel Command said the explosive cartridges used in the ejection seats may suffer from “quality defects.” Each seat has multiple and redundant explosive cartridges. Two months after the stand-down, the Air Force had found no faulty cartridges on any of the T-6s, Breaking Defense reported at the time.

“Our primary concern is the safety of our Airmen and it is imperative that they have confidence in our equipment,” Maj. Gen. Craig Wills, then-head of the 19th Air Force, said at the time.

t-6
T-6 Texan trainer aircraft line up for an elephant walk on April 7, 2023 at Sheppard Air Force Base, Tex. (U.S. Air Force courtesy photo)

The average age of the T-6 fleet is 17 years old, according to 2023 data. While spry compared to the T-38’s average age of about 56 years, senior Air Force leaders say the age of trainer aircraft is slowing down pilot production.

“From the time they [student pilots] are commissioned—because of the challenges we’re having with T-6 and T-38—we have a little bit of a backup. It can be as many as four years,” then-Vice Chief of Staff Gen. David W. Allvin told the House Armed Services Committee in 2023. “So almost an 18 month- to 24 month-wait just to get into pilot training.” 

A T-6 made an emergency “belly flop” landing at Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph, Texas, on April 3 after its pilot declared an in-flight emergency. No one was injured in the incident. 

This is a developing story and will be updated as more details become available. 

Canadian Defense Minister: China Spy Balloon Was ‘Wake-Up Call’ to Modernize

Canadian Defense Minister: China Spy Balloon Was ‘Wake-Up Call’ to Modernize

May 13, 2024 | By Chris Gordon

Canada’s defense minister said a Chinese spy balloon‘s infamous weeklong path over North America in 2023 was a “wake-up call” for his country, as he shuttled around Washington to sell Ottawa’s bolstered defense strategy to his American allies.

“The balloon incident, I think, was a good wake-up call for all of us that we needed to do more,” Bill Blair told Air & Space Forces Magazine from the rooftop of the Canadian embassy during a news conference with the Capitol dome looming in the background May 13. “It really put a lot of energy behind NORAD modernization, for example, because we saw the limitation of our existing domain awareness assets.”

On May 13, Blair met with Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III at the Pentagon and spoke to the military press corps before jetting to the Canadian Embassy for a think tank discussion attended by academics, aides, and defense attachés, pledging that Canada will be a more robust military power in the future.

Blair and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau unveiled “Our North, Strong and Free: A Renewed Vision for Canada’s Defense” in April.

In 2023, Canada spent just 1.38 percent of gross domestic product on defense, far short of NATO’s two percent target. The government now says Canada’s defense spending will be 1.76 percent of GDP by 2029-2030—still short of NATO’s target. However, much of the investment is in capabilities that can help the U.S.

“Continental defense is the primary focus,” a senior U.S. defense official told reporters of Canada’s plans last week, highlighting investments in airpower, over-the-horizon radar, and surveillance. “I’m very encouraged across the board with everything I’ve seen out of Canada.”

The plan includes $38.6 billion strengthen NORAD over the next 20 years. As Blair indicated, North America is no longer a sanctuary from nefarious aerial activity, highlighted by the Chinese spy balloon’s path over Alaska, Canada, and the continental United States in January and February of 2023.

“Some of the investments we are committed to making are in many ways justified by the concerns raised in that incident,” Blair said. “Standing up for the principle of integrity and sovereignty of borders also requires us to put action behind our words.”

While there has not been a foreign balloon incursion into the U.S. since, the new boss of NORAD, Air Force Gen. Gregory M. Guillot, has said Chinese aircraft could be flying near the U.S. airspace by the end of the year. China has declared itself a “near-Arctic state,” to the concern of U.S. officials and Blair, who repeatedly highlighted the threat of more Russian and Chinese submarines coming towards North America as global warming opens up waterways.

“There is a great deal of work that needs to be done between Alaska and Norway,” Blair said during a Defense Writers Group event. “A great deal of that responsibility is Canada’s. I’m absolutely committed now. It’s clearly articulated in our defensive policy update that we’re about to step into that space.”

As for aerial threats, Canada’s fighter fleet comprises aging, unreliable CF-18 Hornets and too few experienced pilots to operate them. After the Chinese balloon incident, what turned out to be a likely harmless balloon crossed into Canadian airspace in the days afterward. It was American F-22 Raptors, not Canadian fighters, that took the object out over Canada on Trudeau’s order. NORAD provides for the common defense of North America by the two countries’ militaries.

To bolster its own airpower capabilities after years of delayed modernization, Canada ordered 88 F-35s, its first purchase of the type, in 2023, despite having been a partner in the Joint Strike Fighter program—later dubbed the F-35—since the 1990s.

“I need to be able to fly new fighter jets that we’re acquiring into that space to fulfill my responsibilities,” Blair said. “I’ve got a lot of work to do and I’ve commitments to the United States that that we’re going to step up into that space. I want the Canadian Armed Forces to be persistently present in the north. I think even defending our own sovereignty requires more than occasionally flying a plane overhead.”

Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III and Canadian Minister of National Defense Bill Blair participate in a bilateral exchange at the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., May 13, 2024. DOD photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Alexander Kubitza
Can the Air Force Do More to Shelter Its Aircraft from a Potential China Strike?

Can the Air Force Do More to Shelter Its Aircraft from a Potential China Strike?

May 13, 2024 | By Unshin Lee Harpley

A group of lawmakers are pushing for the Pentagon to move with more urgency in fortifying ground protection of U.S. aircraft across the Indo-Pacific, arguing it is necessary to defend against the threat of China.

Rep. John Moolenaar (R-Mich.)—the chair of the Select Committee on U.S.-China competition—Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), and 13 other lawmakers all sent a letter last week to Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall and Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro about the issue, comparing China’s investments in hardened aircraft shelters to the U.S. and asking for more information on the Air Force and Navy’s plans for such structures.

A hardened aircraft shelter (HAS), typically made of concrete or other durable materials, provides enhanced protection for aircraft against strikes. These shelters vary in size, from single-aircraft protection to modern facilities incorporating maintenance capabilities within the shelter.

“It would require weapons such as ground penetration or bunker buster bombs to breach these thick, reinforced concrete barriers,” Daniel Rice, China military and political strategy subject matter expert at the Krulak Center for Innovation and Future Warfare, told Air & Space Forces Magazine. He added that the shelters mitigate fragmentation from precision-guided bombs or other munitions aimed at damaging runways, therefore aircraft can survive even when an initial strike hits the runway, allowing for rapid runway repairs.

In the letter, lawmakers referenced ongoing research highlighting a disparity in the construction of hardened aircraft shelters between China and the U.S. According to the studies, China has built over 400 aircraft shelters in the last decade, compared to only 22 by the U.S. in the Indo-Pacific region.

Lawmakers also cited a 2023 wargame conducted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies looking at a potential Chinese invasion of Taiwan, which found that approximately 90 percent of aircraft losses for the U.S. would occur on the ground in the scenario, rather than from air combat. Rice echoed these concerns.

“If the Sino-U.S. relationship devolves into conflict, and there is some sort of preemptive or first strike on specifically U.S. facilities, the survivability factor that hardened aircraft shelters provide is currently highly lacking, while China maintains a more hardened and survivable posture with these shelters and underground facilities,” said Rice. “It also suggests that any strike against Chinese targets would likely be less effective or require more munitions to achieve similar effects.”

Rice stressed the urgency of building these shelters on a key location like Guam. Currently, there is no HAS on Guam, and the 22 shelters the Pentagon has built in the last 10 years in the region were limited to South Korea and Japan. Guam, a largely exposed island with no mountains, is often a favorable deployment site for costly assets like bombers and fighters for regional exercises.

“There are strategic assets in places such as Hawaii or Alaska, but there is also a much higher political cost for China to strike those locations,” said Rice. “Guam, on the other hand, while serving as a focal point for U.S. forces flowing in and out, it is not a U.S. state. So it is more vulnerable and less politically costly for China in the scenario of conflict.”

Lawmakers also noted a reduced DOD military construction budget for the Indo-Pacific region from fiscal 2023 to 2024. Of the Pentagon’s $15.7 billion budget for military construction worldwide in 2024, less than two percent is allocated for base resilience projects in the region. Rice, who has written about China’s expansion of hardened aircraft shelters, noted that building hardened aircraft shelters and bunkers is a cost-effective way that doesn’t require high-tech to protect limited forces.

“It depends on the project scale, but generally, it can be easily built within a year or two, as long as funding is available and contracts are in place to proceed with construction, along with the necessary workforce,” said Rice.

Given the large losses expected in a possible conflict with China and the costs of replacing existing aircraft with newer ones, the U.S. Air Force and other services should focus on the survivability of their current stocks, Rice said.

“If there is a conflict between China and the U.S., there’s always a high level of attrition between both sides,” said Rice. “It’s a losing fight in terms of cost proposition and then time to reconstitute the force that is used. So anything that we can do to help cost curve and resource curve is beneficial. And if you multiply that across numerous hardened shelters and underground facilities for other critical resources, such as fuel, that’s a huge win when you’re trying to flow forces that will help us sustain any sort of conflict or power projection into the area.”

In their letter, members of Congress requested the secretaries provide them with information by May 29 on:

  • What steps the Air Force and Navy have taken to bolster their passive defenses
  • What plans they have to build hardened aircraft shelters or underground bunkers in the Indo-Pacific
  • Whether they plan to request extra funding for those projects
  • Whether there are any ways to increase the speed of these military construction projects
USAF Will Retire, Not Repair, Damaged B-2; Fleet Shrinking to 19 Aircraft

USAF Will Retire, Not Repair, Damaged B-2; Fleet Shrinking to 19 Aircraft

May 13, 2024 | By John A. Tirpak

The Air Force has decided it is too expensive to fix the B-2A Spirit bomber that crashed at Whiteman Air Force Base, Mo., in December 2022, and will retire it from service, Air & Space Forces Magazine has confirmed. The decision is likely driven by the cost and duration of a potential repair.

An April force structure report issued by the Pentagon said the aircraft “is being divested in FY 2025 due to a ground accident/damage presumed to be uneconomical to repair.” No cost estimate was provided. Aviation Week was the first to report the notice.

The action will reduce the B-2 fleet to 19 aircraft, out of the 21 originally built. The Spirit is the Air Force’s only penetrating bomber, meaning it is able to get past a peer adversary’s integrated air defense system.

In 2010, another B-2 crashed at Andersen Air Force Base, Guam. After months of effort, Airmen and Northrop Grumman personnel made it flyable and returned it to Northrop for full repair. That aircraft returned to service, but only after four years of work and a price estimated to be more than $100 million. At the time, the Air Force said it could not tolerate the loss of a single B-2, and that the effort required to bring the aircraft back to service was necessary and justified.

The Air Force’s fiscal 2025 budget request, along with a subsequent contract to Northrop Grumman to sustain the fleet, indicates that the B-2 fleet won’t serve very long after 2029. If the repairs needed on the December 2022 mishap aircraft are comparable to those required for the one that crashed at Guam, the Air Force likely decided the expense wasn’t worth the return, given that B-2 being retired would likely have only served a year or two before being replaced by the B-21.

The Air Force has only budgeted B-2 procurement and research and development through fiscal 2028, indicating it doesn’t plan to retain the type much beyond 2030. Northrop Grumman received a sustainment contract for the B-2 on May 3, valued at up to $7 billion, which only runs through 2029.

Asked if this funding profile maps the sunset of the B-2, an Air Force spokesperson said “the System Program Office determines the contract period of performance that best meets the needs of the effort. The Air Force remains committed to sustaining and modernizing the B-2 to maintain combat effectiveness until a sufficient number of B-21s are operational.”

Both R&D and procurement together for the B-2 are only estimated to be about $250 million through the future years defense plan, but the Northrop contract also includes depot maintenance and other sustainment.

As to how much of the $7 billion is expected to be exercised, the spokesperson said “the ceiling of the Flexible Acquisition and Sustainment Team (FAST) III contract is determined by the B-2 System Program Office … by several factors and is intended to provide the Air Force with the flexibility necessary to meet operational requirements. The ceiling is a not-to-exceed amount and is deliberately set to accommodate any possible modernization or sustainment efforts.”

The Air Force has declined to say whether B-2s will be replaced by new B-21 Raiders on a one-for-one basis as they become available, but phase-out of the B-2 by 2029 would align with the anticipated delivery of the first 21 B-21s, which will be built in five fixed-price lots.

The first B-21 flew last November, and Northrop received a low-rate initial production contract for the Raider in December.

The B-2 being divested crashed on Dec. 10, 2022. After the crew declared an undisclosed in-flight emergency, the aircraft landed, ran off the runway, and caught fire. It remained on the side of the runway for some time, shutting down B-2 operations at Whiteman for a week afterwards. The fleet was grounded—the service called it a “safety pause”—for six months as the accident was analyzed, but a cause was not disclosed. The Air Force said the rest of the B-2 fleet could fly if needed during the flying stand-down.

In September 2021, another B-2 made an emergency landing at Whiteman and, again, veered off the runway when the left landing gear collapsed. That aircraft was patched up enough at Whiteman to fly to Northrop’s California facilities for further repair.

One B-2 has been lost in service. In 2008, a Spirit crashed on takeoff at Andersen, the accident later attributed to condensation in the air data system which gave faulty indications of the aircraft’s attitude, prompting the computer to command an excessive pitch-up. The bomber stalled and crashed, but the crew ejected and survived.  

While the B-2 fleet numbers 20 aircraft, not all of them are available for combat at any time. Typically, at least one is in long-term depot maintenance at Northrop while two or three more are in heavy maintenance at Whiteman, and up to two are in flight test at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif. The Air Force has said it usually has 12-14 B-2s available for combat.

It hasn’t been decided yet what will be done with the condemned aircraft, a service spokesperson said. Depending on its condition, it might be used as a maintenance trainer, for engineering fit checks, or displayed, possibly at the Museum of the U.S. Air Force in Dayton, Ohio, or as a pole-mounted gate guard at Whiteman.

Biggest Space Flag Ever Takes On Operational Focus

Biggest Space Flag Ever Takes On Operational Focus

May 13, 2024 | By Greg Hadley

The Space Force’s premier exercise was restructured and expanded for its latest iteration, as planners emphasized Guardians’ ability to integrate into a larger operational plan. 

The thee-week Space Flag 24-1 brought together 400 participants at at Schriever Space Force Base, Colo., in April—up from 250 or so in the biggest prior Space Flag event.  

“It is important that Space Flag expands,” Lt. Col. Scott Nakatani, commander of the 392nd Combat Training Squadron, told Air & Space Forces Magazine. “It needs to expand to cover down all of the mission areas and those critical units that are preparing to be presented. So we expanded greatly. We definitely maxed out our spaces.” 

Participants of SPACE FLAG 24-1 pose for a group photo at Schriever Space Force Base, Colo., April 19, 2024. U.S. Space Force photo by Judi Tomich

More than size, Space Flag also expanded beyond tactical training for the first time, include operational support for warfighters.  

“Space Flag in the past has been tactical mission plan, tactical execution—plan, execute, plan, execute,” said Capt. Lane Murphy, exercise director. “So now it’s kind of transitioned to, instead of advanced training, it’s more operational readiness to execute effective support of an [operations] plan.” 

In prior years, mission planning and execution were conducted on the tactical level, but this year, the entire first week was devoted to developing overarching operational plans, which were then passed on to mission commanders. The next two weeks focused on collaborative planning efforts from approximately 20 units across Space Operations Command to execute the plan, which were then tested in “fly-out” simulations against a thinking adversary, according to a Space Training and Readiness Command release. 

“We did that to be more realistic,” Murphy said. By bringing planners and different operators together, he added, teams can see how their actions affect other units and adjust accordingly. 

Nakatani declined to say exactly what scenarios Guardians faced in this Space Flag, but he did say they were meant to emphasize integration into broader operations. 

“It was informed by two real world O-plans, and we based them off of the most likely and most dangerous intelligence assessments of how those O-plans would execute,” Nakatani said. “And this is the first time that we have gone down a hard O-plan-informed scenario. We may have previously seen tasks that would be called out in an O-plan make their way into Space Flag. But this is the first time that we ran down as though the forces were expected to support an ongoing operation.” 

Space Flag’s evolution seeks to align the exercise with the Department of the Air Force’s broader effort to “re-optimize for great power competition,” Nakatani added. Back in February, the department announced among its 24 decision that it wanted to “conduct a series of nested exercises in Space Force that increase in scope and complexity, fit within a broader DAF-level framework, and are assessed through a Service-level, data-driven process to measure readiness.” 

Space Flag was the first major example of that effort. 

“Space Flag still teaches integrated mission planning, but it’s more focused on how those space forces come together into an integrated sortie to meet combatant commanders’ intent,” Nakatani said. “And all of that’s directly in line with our direct marching orders, our new direction from the secretary, from the CSO.” 

U.S. Space Force Chief Master Sgt. Jacob Simmons, U.S. Space Command command senior enlisted leader, meets with participates of SPACE FLAG 24-1 at Schriever Space Force Base, Colo., April 17, 2024. U.S. Space Force photo by Judi Tomich
Air Force’s New ‘Doomsday’ Plane Will Be Converted from Korean Air Passenger Jets

Air Force’s New ‘Doomsday’ Plane Will Be Converted from Korean Air Passenger Jets

May 10, 2024 | By John A. Tirpak

Sierra Nevada Corporation, which received the $13 billion contract in April to build the Air Force’s Survivable Airborne Operations Center fleet, has secured five Korean Air 747-8 passenger jets to host the system.

Reuters first reported the aircraft sale, valued at about $674 million, which was concluded May 8.

The aircraft were built circa 2015 and will be about 15 years old when the first ones enter USAF service. The specific tail numbers have not been disclosed, but most of the late-model 747-8s owned by Korean Air have been parked for at least two of the last five years during the worldwide slowdown in air traffic associated with the COVID pandemic. The aircraft will be delivered to SNC by the third quarter of 2025. The fully operational SAOC aircraft are scheduled for delivery by 2036.

The E-4B National Airborne Operations Center (NAOC)—known as “Nightwatch” or the “Doomsday plane”—is USAF’s four-aircraft fleet of flying command posts, each of which can command and control U.S. nuclear and conventional forces. It dates to the late 1970s/early 1980s and suffers from parts obsolescence, deteriorating reliability, and “vanishing vendor” syndrome. An E-4B usually transports the Secretary of Defense and his staff on long trips, but in recent months, that mission has frequently shifted to other aircraft as the E-4B’s availability has declined. The most recently published data from the Air Force pegs the E-4B’s mission availability at just over 55 percent.

An E-4B National Airborne Operations Center stands ready at Royal Air Force Mildenhall, England, April 12, 2023. The NAOC aircraft has several missions, both operational and training, which require travel to a wide variety of locations, both within the United States and around the world. (U.S. Force photo by Karen Abeyasekere/This image has been altered for security purposes

The Air Force has said it’s comfortable with using a “Commercial Derivative Aircraft” for the requirement, one that will be “hardened and modified to meet military requirements.”

The Nightwatch aircraft are heavily hardened against electromagnetic pulse and are structurally strengthened to keep flying if buffeted by a distant nuclear blast. The new aircraft will be similarly equipped and have redundant analog systems to ensure their continued operations in an EMP environment.   

The amount of communications and other gear required for the mission necessitates a large, four-engined aircraft, but the two jumbo aircraft builders, Airbus and Boeing, have stopped building new A380 and 747 aircraft, respectively, that can contain the system, requiring SNC to buy secondhand aircraft.

Boeing, which is building the new “Air Force One,” bought 747-8s for that mission from a Russian charter company. Unlike the Korean Air jets, the ones that will serve as Air Force One never carried passenger traffic. There will be commonality between the SAOC jets and Air Force One.

It’s not clear if SNC will build five SAOC aircraft or replace the existing fleet of four Nightwatch jets on a one-for-one basis and use the fifth airplane for engineering mockup, fit and installation checks. The Air Force had said it might buy up to 10 Nightwatch jets. The company did not respond to queries.

SNC will do at least some of the conversion work at Dayton, Ohio, where it has a hangar sized to accommodate 747-8s.

The SAOC is required to be developed with an open systems architecture that will allow other companies to compete for future upgrades to its systems, and the Air Force will own the technical baseline for the system.

Service and industry officials said Boeing was ruled out of the SAOC competition late last year when it wouldn’t agree on data rights/intellectual property aspects of the contract or accept fixed-pricing on some aspects of the system. Boeing has in recent years lost more than $8 billion on the KC-46 tanker, MQ-25 Stingray carrier-based Navy tanker, and the Air Force T-7 Red Hawk trainer, all of which are fixed-price contracts.

The SAOC buy marks the second time the Air Force will have acquired secondhand passenger jets to fulfill a vital mission. In the 1990s, the service bought Boeing 707s that had served with Iran Air and converted them to become the E-8 Joint STARS fleet. Although high-time aircraft, the Air Force reasoned that the aircraft could be overhauled to “zero time.” In practice, the JSTARS fleet suffered from far greater structural fatigue and corrosion than other types. The 707 was chosen to achieve a degree of commonality with the KC-15, E-3 AWACS and RC-135 Rivet Joint fleets.   

Air Force Gen. Charles Q. Brown, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, told the Senate Appropriations Committee on May 8 that the SAOC is needed to ensure “we have a viable platform that we can sustain from a maintenance standpoint.”

“At some point,” Brown said, “it gets more costly to maintain than to move into a new capability.”

Brown said the SAOC will not merely be a fresher version of the Nightwatch, but will have “the most advanced capabilities that the nation has to offer.”

In its fiscal 2025 budget proposal, the Air Force asked Congress for $1.69 billion for SAOC development.

PHOTOS: USAF F-15s Return Home from Middle East With Kill Markings and Nose Art

PHOTOS: USAF F-15s Return Home from Middle East With Kill Markings and Nose Art

May 10, 2024 | By Chris Gordon

A few weeks after downing swarms of drones to defend Israel from Iran, the 494th Fighter Squadron is back home at RAF Lakenheath, U.K.—and sporting some intriguing new paint.

Publicly released photos from the Air Force show the F-15E Strike Eagles returning to their home at the 48th Fighter Wing with vivid nose art as well as missile and bomb kill markings alluding to their exploits in the region.

Photos of an F-15E nicknamed “Hellcat” show the aircraft painted with over two dozen bomb markings, suggesting that it dropped a hefty amount of ordinance. The plane was also decorated with nine red missiles, indicating numerous air-to-air engagements. An F-15 named “RAWR” sports more than a dozen missile and bomb markings. Another jet, “El Jefe,” carries multiple bomb markings and one missile marking. “Mullet” carries nine missile markings and numerous bomb markings. The double ace “Dutchman” carries at least 10 missile markings and even more bomb markings. Yet another F-15 has nine missile markings and five bomb markings. Those are just some of the F-15s that recently returned to their home base.

Photos released by the Air Force show the first jets arrived May 8, and a spokesman for Air Forces Central (AFCENT) confirmed on May 10 that the 494th Fighter Squadron had returned to RAF Lakenheath.

Violence in the Middle East flared following Hamas’s attack on Israel on Oct. 7 and Israel’s subsequent military operation against the group in Gaza, stirring unrest throughout the region.

In February, the U.S. conducted airstrikes on targets in Iraq and Syria in response to more than 170 attacks on U.S. troops and recently helped Israel fend off a massive drone and missile attack from Iran.

In April, U.S. Air Force aircraft shot down more than 70 drones Iran launched against Israel on the night of April 13 and the early morning hours of April 14. Those planes included F-15Es from the 494th Fighter Squadron and the 335th Fighter Squadron from Seymour-Johnson Air Force Base, N.C., as well as American F-16s.

“I’m very confident and proud of our joint force and what they were able to do with our allies and partners,” Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. told reporters on April 26.

U.S. Air Force Brig. Gen. Joseph Campo, 48th Fighter Wing commander, welcomes back the return of the 494th Fighter Squadron at RAF Lakenheath, U.K., May 8, 2024. U.S. Air Force photo by Austin Salazar

The 494th Fighter Squadron first arrived in CENTCOM in October, just days after Hamas’ attack. More F-15Es were rushed to the region on April 12, just a day before Iran’s attack.

“One of the fighter squadrons showed up, like, a day prior, and they were right in the middle of the flight, and that says something to our level of training, our level of capability,” Brown said.

The 335th Fighter Squadron from Seymour-Johnson is now the sole F-15E squadron in the region, deployed to the Middle East along with F-16s and A-10s. The A-10s from the Maryland National Guard’s 104th Fighter Squadron and F-15Es from Seymour-Johnson recently completed a three-week Desert Flag exercise.

“Maintaining multi-capable and ready teams is critical to accomplishing the mission,” AFCENT commander Lt. Gen. Derek C. France said in a May 9 statement reflecting on his first month in command. “I’ve been blown away by the level of dedication in the Airmen at AFCENT. They have been operating beyond my expectations, and I’m extremely proud to be a part of this team.”

U.S. Air Force Capts. Claire and Matthew Eddins, 494th Fighter Generation Squadron pilots, return from deployment at RAF Lakenheath, England, May 8, 2024. F-15E Strike Eagles and their aircrews from the 494th Fighter Squadron, along with supporting units from the 48th Fighter Wing, returned from a seven-month deployment to an undisclosed location in Southwest Asia. U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Renee Nicole S.N. Finona
New Report: Space Force Should Develop Its Own Targeting Satellites

New Report: Space Force Should Develop Its Own Targeting Satellites

May 10, 2024 | By Greg Hadley

A new study argues the Space Force should build its own targeting satellites rather than try to collaborate with the National Reconnaissance Office.

Three years after then-Chief of Space Operations Gen. John W. “Jay” Raymond announced in May 2021 that USSF and the NRO were working together on satellites to track moving ground targets, Todd Harrison of the American Enterprise Institute writes in “Building an Enduring Advantage in the Third Space Age” that the U.S. is ahead of Russia and China in space launch frequency, payload capacity, and satellites in orbit, but risks losing its edge if it fails to “seize this moment and build an enduring advantage in space.”  

The risk is especially acute in space-based intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, where bureaucratic processes are holding up progress, Harrison told Air & Space Forces Magazine.

In the three years since the joint Space Force-NRO effort was launched, he said, “They still have not passed Milestone B, and Milestone B is actually the formal start of the acquisition process…. they haven’t actually started the program yet. What that tells me is the traditional acquisition process and all the interagency coordination that they’re doing has effectively lost us three years in the competition. We can’t let that continue.” 

Policy, not technology, is the issue, Harrison said. Questions over who will control the satellites and who will have the ability to task them with data collection are keeping things from moving forward. 

The NRO and other intelligence agencies have traditionally controlled ISR satellites, but military users have complained that they can’t get data to operators fast enough to use in combat. In recent months, officials from both organizations have indicated they have agreed on a plan for the NRO to lead the acquisition process and for the Space Force and NRO to fly the satellites “shoulder to shoulder,” while combatant commands will have authority to task them. 

But reports emerged this week suggesting those issues are not fully resolved. At the GEOINT 2024 Symposium, Space Operations Command Lt. Gen. David N. Miller Jr. used a keynote address to insist military operators must have direct access to targeting data, without it being filtered and possibly delayed by intelligence agencies, according to SpaceNews. Meanwhile, Vice Adm. Frank Whitworth, the director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, told Breaking Defense that raw targeting data needs to be processed to help operators make sense of it. 

Harrison said the debate risks obscuring two fundamentally different needs. 

“The NRO has its mission: It’s strategic intelligence, it’s indications and warnings, it’s keeping track of the big picture stuff, the critical stuff that the whole intelligence community and national security enterprise needs,” he said. “Tactical ISR is different. It’s about supporting the warfighter down at the lowest echelons of force structure. We ought to have a capability where a Soldier in the field with a Link 16 radio can task a collection on a satellite and receive the processed data back down on that Link 16 radio.” 

That inherent difference is why his report argues that “it is time for the Space Force to move ahead independently of the NRO to develop a tactical ISR capability that is owned and operated by the Space Force.” 

Harrison said the Space Development Agency is well positioned to take on that task. SDA already is building USSF’s Proliferated Warfighter Space Architecture, having awarded contracts for more than 450 satellites in low-Earth orbit. Including missile tracking/missile warning, communications, and data transport missions, those satellites have begun to be deployed, and the program will continue launches over the next five years.

The PWSA also includes plans for a “Custody Layer,” which would leverage data transport satellites to connect with other ISR spacecraft to more rapidly move their information around the globe. 

Harrison suggested that Custody Layer could be expanded to include ISR satellites for targeting, following SDA’s proven model of acquiring and launching satellites in “tranches” to rapidly gain capability while proving and enhancing systems over time.

“That [approach] will start getting capability up there within a few years, and the NRO can continue doing what they want to do,” he said. 

With the Space Force focused on tactical ISR for the warfighter in lower orbits, Harrison said, the NRO should continue to focus on strategic intelligence, using the U.S.’s emerging super-heavy launch vehicles like SpaceX’s Starship to launch mammoth specialty satellites in geostationary orbit. 

“Your ability to sense is directly a function of the size of the aperture you can put up and the power level of the satellite,” Harrison said. “So it’s all about size and weight. And we’re uniquely going to have the super-heavy launch capability that China and Russia and others are not going to have for at least a decade.” 

The Space Force fears that such large, exquisite satellites risk becoming high-value targets in a conflict, but Harrison said they remain highly valuable in a state of competition and could help deter conflict when deployed in conjunction with more proliferated architectures. 

Yet Harrison is not ignoring smaller satellite opportunities. Noting that Phase 3 of the National Security Space Launch program will include opportunities for smaller launch providers, Harrison argues for encouraging still greater competition by allowing providers to be certified on a rolling basis, rather than once annually, and contracting for launches individually, instead of assigning multiple launches at a time to individual launch vendors, such as SpaceX and ULA.