In F-16 Dogfight, AI and Human Pilots Are ‘Roughly an Even Fight,’ Says Kendall

In F-16 Dogfight, AI and Human Pilots Are ‘Roughly an Even Fight,’ Says Kendall

May 8, 2024 | By Greg Hadley

The artificial intelligence controlling the F-16 that Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall flew in last week matched up well against an experienced human pilot in dogfights, Kendall said May 8. Kendall said he was surprised by surging media interest in his May 2 autonomous flight at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., and shared new details on how the flight went and how it informed his thinking on AI. 

Speaking at the Ash Carter Exchange, a conference in Washington, D.C., Kendall said the flight demonstrated “within-visual-range engagements” against a manned F-16, piloted by an Airman with “2,000 or 3,000 hours of experience.” Three different versions were tested in about 10-12 situations, with Kendall controlling when the AI took over. The AI then was able to maneuver the aircraft and could simulate an “engagement” with the adversary using short-range missiles or the F-16’s gun. 

“It was roughly an even fight,” Kendall said. “But against a less experienced pilot, the AI, the automation would have performed better.” 

Pilots with 2,000-3,000 flight hours are considered “senior pilots,” one step below the top rating of “command pilot.”

Kendall emphasized the AI is not yet ready to be deployed—but suggested it is well on its way to being so: 

  • “It’s making very good progress” 
  • “We’re on the right path, and we’re going to get to where we’re headed for” 
  • “It’s easy to see a situation where they’re going to be able to do this job, generally speaking, better than humans.” 

Kendall’s enthusiasm for AI, or automation, dates back to a classified book he wrote for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency between stints in the Obama and Biden administrations, he said. In the book, he sought to envision the future of warfare across different domains and kept returning to the theme of automation. 

“There are just inherent limitations on human beings,” Kendall said. “And when we can build machines that can do these jobs better than people can do them, the machines are going to do the job. That’s sort of the whole history of automation and industrialization over the last couple of centuries, quite frankly.” 

The Air Force’s Collaborative Combat Aircraft program seeks to field unmanned, autonomous “wingmen” that will fly alongside manned fighters, augmenting their combat power and complicating the defensive challenges for adversaries. For the Space Force, automation could mean AI monitoring and controlling satellites, jobs computers may be better suited to do than humans.  

But increased reliance on AI raises concerns about human control and whether autonomous weapons—so-called “killer robots”—can take action without active approval from a human. Kendall suggested there are ways to address those concerns while still embracing automation. 

“There’s a lot of discussion in the community about the need to regulate AI, to regulate completely full autonomy,” said Kendall. “We already have rules that govern how people apply violence in warfare. They’re called the laws of armed conflict. But what I think we need to do is figure out how to apply them to these types of issues. At the end of the day, human beings are still responsible for creating, testing, and putting those machines out and using them. So we have to figure out how to hold those people accountable to ensure that we have compliance with the norms we all agree to.” 

On that front, Kendall added, the U.S. may be at a disadvantage if adversaries opt to “turn the dial” on AI and prioritize lethality over minimizing collateral damage—making the software less cautious about whether or not a target constitutes a threat. 

Regardless, Kendall said the U.S. must embrace automation in some form, especially as the complexity and speed of threats grows, outstripping the ability of humans to process and make decisions fast enough. 

“I think the future is becoming clearer,” Kendall said. “I think the only question that really may remain is who’s going to get there first? And what are the constraints we want to place on ourselves that will limit our operational effectiveness compared to our adversaries and how we manage our way through that.” 

New Tech Helping Airmen Think Faster in Training, AETC Boss Says

New Tech Helping Airmen Think Faster in Training, AETC Boss Says

May 8, 2024 | By David Roza

New technologies such as augmented and virtual reality (AR/VR) and remote simulator instruction are helping train Airmen faster and improve graduation rates, according to Lt. Gen. Brian Robinson, the head of Air Education and Training Command. That technology is key to what he calls “the pace of cognition,” where Airmen can quickly take in new information and adapt to changes.

“We haven’t done our best in AETC in defining and codifying and stating out loud the value of cognition in learning,” Robinson said May 7 at the Air Force Modeling & Simulation Summit in San Antonio, Texas. “A lot of these technical tools, technology tools we have today, they up the value, the pace, the intensity of cognition, which is what I think accelerates it.”

One example is in aircraft avionics maintenance tech school, where AR/VR has cut 20 days off the syllabus, he said. 

“That’s money, in terms of man days, and that’s time that they’re out of training and onto their mission from there,” Robinson said. “That is incredible.”

Tech. Sgt. Michael Decorato, 176th Wing environmental systems specialist, reviews a technical order during virtual C-130 aircraft maintenance training at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, Dec. 4, 2021. U.S. Air National Guard photo by Staff. Sgt. Daniel Robles

Another example is virtual reality training for military working dog handlers, which means less wear and tear on the actual dogs, the general said. He also noted that graduation rates for air traffic controller trainees at Keesler Air Force Base, Miss., improved after instructors put simulators in the dorms, which allowed students to get more practice in “at their time and not solely on the instructors’ schedule.”

Simulators and AR/VR are not new to the Air Force training scene, but they may play a larger role as the Air Force looks to radically change how it prepares Airmen for future conflicts. In February, the Air Force announced AETC would expand and be renamed Airman Development Command, which is meant to better train Airmen to work in small independent units and empower ADC to change quickly in response to operational demand. 

While the exact details of ADC are yet to be released, officials have hinted that the training will be more tailored to the needs of each Airman, emphasize operating in austere environments, and keep developing Airmen throughout their careers. 

“To maintain the asymmetrical advantage, we must develop the right mix of Airmen and Guardians with the skills and competencies needed for high-end systems-of-systems combat roles and to ensure technical superiority,” Robinson said in a statement in February. “These changes help us streamline institutional force development responsibilities under one command, significantly improving the Air Force’s ability to produce and retain mission ready Airmen for competition and conflict.”

AETC as a whole took lessons from recent adjustments to undergraduate pilot training, which now uses more simulators, self-paced learning, and artificial intelligence. Most aviators think of simulators as large, expensive, full-motion machines, Robinson said, but the new pilot training courses have shown that smaller, more affordable devices are also effective. They also enable other changes such as using remote simulator instructors to train student pilots at isolated bases.

“We have a hard time getting folks … to Laughlin Air Force Base,” Robinson said. “It’s a fantastic environment, but it’s remote and isolated and in many circumstances, people don’t want to be there or they can’t be there based on health care that’s available. So how do we use technology to bridge that gap so we still have the right amount of instructors to teach our Airmen?”

A student pilot assigned to the 87th Flying Training Squadron, immerses himself into a prototype virtual reality training solution at Laughlin Air Force Base, Texas, Jan. 16, 2019. U.S. Air Force illustration by Senior Airman Benjamin N. Valmoja

Next up, Robinson said AETC is looking into how to prepare pilots for “fifth-gen aviation, versus just aviation.” Partner air forces are already screening pilot candidates for this as fifth-generation aircraft take up a larger portion of their fleets, he said.

“They screen up front not just your hand-eye coordination and dexterity and your aptitude,” the general said. “They’re looking for how you handle large amounts of volume and decision-making coming at you, which is what a fifth-gen platform will do for you and present to you as an operator.”

To pursue some of these changes, AETC will stand up several “centers of excellence” this summer, Robinson said, which “will work with industry, academia, and the learning engineering/learning design spaces to figure out what we should be employing, what we should be going after in that space.”

But new technology requires a workforce ready to use it, and that is not the case yet at AETC, Robinson said. The command aims to “digitally upskill our force” in the years ahead, meaning new requirements for certain positions and new educational tools with which to meet them.

Having first taken command of AETC in May 2022, Robinson is due to step down soon as part of the regular two-year rotation for Active duty officers, though a successor and change of command date has not yet been selected, an AETC spokesperson told Air & Space Forces Magazine. Still, the general hopes that no matter what changes come down the pipe for AETC, they continue to evolve rather than remain fixed.

“How do we set it up in a way that we can continue to iterate?” he asked. “We can no longer accept ‘Hey, this is good for 10 years.’ That is not acceptable, at least to me.”

Drone Swarms Pose New Threat to US Bases, Official Says

Drone Swarms Pose New Threat to US Bases, Official Says

May 8, 2024 | By Chris Gordon

The U.S. military has not seen any drone swarms near its bases since mysterious incidents befell a key Virginia military base last year. But there are still roughly two to three cases a week of drones flying into the airspace around U.S. military bases in America, a senior defense official said May 8.

“You can only report what you see, and so that’s part of the challenge,” the senior defense official told a small group of reporters at the Pentagon when asked about the drone incidents. “But I’d say that’s usually two or three a week, total across the U.S. And it’s never primarily in one part of the country or another. It’s fairly random, or it seems to be random.”

Joint Base Langley-Eustis experienced a number of drone incursions last December—bringing home an issue the U.S. has had to face abroad in the Middle East. It is unclear who was behind the drone swarms. U.S. officials have cautioned the issue is far different than the drone threat in the Middle East or Ukraine, where Iranian one-way attack drones have been used to deadly effect by Iran’s proxies and Russia.

“We haven’t seen anything that indicates they’re nefarious,” the defense official said of the drone incidents in the U.S. The official said they suspected “most of it is hobbyists.”

Nevertheless, the possibility that someone with ill intent could launch an attack or surveillance drone at a U.S. base lingers. The U.S. already has to deal with incursions at its bases on land—though those are mostly by individuals such as lost tourists and end without further incident. But some of those cases have raised alarm. So drone incursions around military bases are cause for concern.

U.S. officials are “paid to be worried about the worst case,” said the senior defense official. “I treat them all as if it’s nefarious until we hear otherwise.”

The U.S. is tracking some small drones around the southern border as well, usually by groups suspected of scoping out the locations of law enforcement personnel, the official said. A few drones are suspected of carrying illegal drugs on behalf of cartels.

“There are very small numbers of ones that carry a small drug payload that have been captured,” the official said. “We haven’t seen any that are weaponized that have come across the border.”

“We really want to see what we can do, interagency, together to see what we can do to limit those incursions,” the official added.

NORAD and U.S. Northern Command’s new commander, Air Force Gen. Gregory M. Guillot, has said he was surprised upon taking command of NORTHCOM by how much focus he needed to put on countering drones, especially compared to his previous jobs as head of Air Forces Central (AFCENT) and deputy commander of U.S. Central Command, where drone threats are pervasive.

“Of course, I knew it was an issue coming from another combatant command where we faced that threat in a very different way because of the environment,” Gulliot told Congress in March. “But I wasn’t prepared for the number of incursions that I see.”

The threat is new for the U.S. homeland, which poses unique challenges. In Iraq, Syria, Jordan, and other locations in the Middle East, the U.S. military usually does not need to deconflict with civilian aviation. The successful takedown of more than 300 ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and drones by Israel, U.S. F-15Es and F-16s, and coalition partners was made possible because some nations closed their airspace, and the U.S. coordinated the movement of coalition aircraft and air defense at the Combined Air Operations Center at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar. But in the U.S., the skies are filled with commercial and general aviation planes, so the military must coordinate with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

“It’s not like in the Middle East,” the official said of the unique challenges posed by drones in the U.S.

But the senior defense official said they were confident the U.S. government understands small drones pose a threat worldwide.

“There is a very genuine desire in this building to not only address it from the military standpoint but also cooperate across the interagency,” the official said. “They [could] go after critical infrastructure, not just bases, but it could be any number of locations. And sharing information, I think, is the key first step in being able to address it, getting some sort of common operational picture, like we do with radars for aircraft. But it just doesn’t exist at this point for UAVs.”

Brown: Doctrine Changes Helped USAF Respond to Iran’s Strikes on Israel

Brown: Doctrine Changes Helped USAF Respond to Iran’s Strikes on Israel

May 7, 2024 | By Greg Hadley

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. still “believes” in his mantra of “Accelerate Change or Lose”—and indicated the doctrinal changes it produced when he was Air Force Chief of Staff played a role in the service’s recent response to Iran’s aerial assault on Israel, he said May 7. 

Speaking at the Ash Carter Exchange conference in Washington D.C., Brown said he recently spoke with U.S. Airmen who helped respond to Iran’s attack on April 13. U.S. Air Force F-15E Strike Eagles and F-16 Fighting Falcons shot down dozens of Iranian drones as they were heading toward targets in Israel. While Iran launched more than 100 ballistic missiles, 30 land-attack cruise missiles, and 150 drones, U.S., Israel, and coalition forces intercepted “99 percent” of them, U.S. and Israeli officials have said.

“Just amazing work by a very talented group of young people and older people as well,” Brown said. 

Brown said during his talk with the Airmen, “We talked about mission command and how they used parts of our doctrine that we changed back in April of 2021.” 

Early on in his tenure as CSAF, Brown released Air Force Doctrine Publication 1, or AFDP-1, distilling two volumes of airpower doctrine down to 20 pages. As part of that publication, the Air Force said mission command “empowers subordinate decision-making for flexibility, initiative, and responsiveness in the accomplishment of commander’s intent.” 

It was an idea Brown repeatedly returned during his time as Chief, imploring Airmen to take action without formal approval from commanders, instead acting based on what they believed their commanders’ intent to be. In 2023, the service released another Air Force doctrine publication devoted entirely to the subject, dubbed AFDP 1-1.  

“While this publication will help build a common understanding of mission command across the force, the culture of mission command doesn’t happen just because it is written in our doctrine,” Brown wrote at the time. “I believe building confidence in mission command, for both leaders and Airmen, requires daily execution in simple scenarios ahead of a complex challenge in conflict.” 

By trying to accelerate the process of change then, Brown added May 7, he hoped he had “broke the inertia to get the momentum going and move things forward.” Helping that push is new CSAF Gen. David W. Allvin, who served as Brown’s vice chief, whose manta is to “follow through.”

“There’s some things we moved forward, and I’m very fortunate but the person who succeeded me was my Vice Chief of Staff,” Brown said. 

Iran’s attack on Israel “puts the region a little bit more on edge,” Brown said, and the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza continues to create tension across the Middle East. But the situation has improved for U.S. forces that faced an onslaught of dozens of strikes from Iranian-backed militias. 

“We’ve been able to defend ourselves, we’ve been able to strike at a time a place of our choosing,” Brown said. “I think we sent back in February a pretty strong message. It’s been 90 days since the last time our forces have been attacked. We take force protection very seriously.” 

The response in February included dozens of airstrikes against Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) Quds Force and Iranian-aligned groups in Iraq and Syria in retaliation after a drone strike killed three American service members in Jordan. 

Posted in Air
B-52s Join in Philippines Exercise, Then Head to Guam for Bomber Task Force

B-52s Join in Philippines Exercise, Then Head to Guam for Bomber Task Force

May 7, 2024 | By John A. Tirpak

Two B-52 bombers are taking part in a Bomber Task Force deployment from Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, for an unspecified period after participating in Balikatan 2024 multiservice, multinational exercise centered on the Philippines, the Pentagon said.

It is the fourth B-52 BTF dispatched to the Indo-Pacific in as many months. There were B-52 BTFs to Guam in February and March, and another B-52 BTF to Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean.

The B-52s launched April 25 from Barksdale Air Force Base, La., and likely played a role in the exercise involving anti-shipping or minelaying, but neither Global Strike Command nor Pacific Air Forces would comment on their specific activities.

In the 16-day exercise—still ongoing and some of which was live-fire—an Air Force AC-130 sank a small fishing vessel.  

According to U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, the wargame’s objective is to practice operations in the “complex littoral and coastal” regions of the Philippines, to “secure and protect [its] maritime terrain, territorial waters and exclusive economic-zone interests.”

The bombers flew to the vicinity of the Philippines from Barksdale, then recovered at Andersen, where they will be based for much of the BTF, Air Force officials said.

Balikatan—meaning “shoulder-to-shoulder”—is an annual exercise involving the U.S., the Philippines, and various other countries. This installment also saw large numbers of U.S. Marine Corps troops, helicopters and armored vehicles deploy, exercise to oppose a hostile landing, and fire HIMARS and other ground-launched rockets and artillery. This edition saw the largest number of participants yet, with 16,000 troops from both the U.S. and Philippines. Large contingents from the Australian defense forces and French Navy also took part.

The annual wargame is conducted under the aegis of the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty between the U.S. and Philippines, a bilateral agreement in which each country pledges to come to the aid of the other in the event of an armed attack. Spokespersons for both countries said the exercise was long-planned and not a response to any recent activities by China, which has recently voiced warnings not to encroach on regions of the sea that it claims as its national waters. China commented on the Balikatan exercise itself, calling it “provocative.”

The exercise covers large swaths of the Northern, Western, and Southern regions of Philippine territory.

Balikatan comprises three elements in one: a Command and Control exercise (C2X)—which this year has an elaborate Cyber Defense element—a Field Training Exercise (FTX), and a Humanitarian Civic Assistance (HCA) element.

The B-52s played a role in the FTX, which is a joint, all-domain wargame involving protection of sea lanes of communication, protection of the islands themselves, airborne assaults, and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance tasks. There was also an elaborate integrated air and missile defense element to the wargames.

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command said a “Martitime Strike” activity would include “joint and combined fires, combined joint dynamic targeting, and multi-domain effects” including the sinking of an adversary vessel.

The AC-130J that carried out the live-fire strike was from the 127th Special Operations Wing at Cannon Air Force Base, N.M.

The wargames also included MQ-9 Reaper remotely-piloted hunter/killer drones.

Countries invited to participate as observers include Brunei, Canada, France, Germany, Great Britain, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam.

In the February BTF, the B-52 trained alongside Philippine Air Force fighters. Separately, a B-52 test-fired a hypersonic AGM-183 Air-Launched Rapid Response Weapon (ARRW) in the region in March, also operating from Andersen.

In recent years, BTFs have flown freedom-of-navigation missions over areas of the open sea that China claims as its airspace, resulting in close interceptions by Chinese aircraft.

Allvin: Air Force ‘Already Drawing the Concepts Up’ for Second Batch of CCA Designs

Allvin: Air Force ‘Already Drawing the Concepts Up’ for Second Batch of CCA Designs

May 7, 2024 | By Chris Gordon

The Air Force is already looking past the initial contracts it has awarded for the first autonomous Collaborative Combat Aircraft and is sketching out plans for the second batch of aircraft, Chief of Staff Gen. David W. Allvin said May 7.

The approach is intended to speed the development of new technology and also ensure the there is plenty of competition in the future.

“We want more competition to come in and say, ‘Well, I may not get selected for this particular design, but I know another one’s coming around the corner,’ which is why we had Increment 1 for our Collaborative Combat Aircraft and very strict key performance parameters,” Allvin said. “Then Increment 2, we’re already drawing the concepts up for.”

Allvin outlined the service’s management strategy in an appearance at the Ash Carter Exchange. The conference is being hosted by the Special Competitive Studies Project in honor of the late Ash Carter, who served as secretary of defense from 2015-2017 and focused on heavily improving the Pentagon’s lumbering acquisition structure.

The defense industry—particularly aerospace—has consolidated through mergers and acquisitions and includes just a handful of the handful of large firms. So part of the challenge the Air Force faces is encouraging competition as it pursues cutting-edge technology. 

“Technology is allowing us—if we’re willing to bureaucratically adapt to it—it’s allowing us to shift the incentive structure, so that’s what we’re doing with our Collaborative Combat Aircraft,” Allvin said. “We want to start incentivizing design.”

Collaborative Combat Aircraft is an important case study of how the Air Force’s acquisition approach is being applied. 

The Air Force recently selected General Atomics, the long-time maker of the service’s drones, and Anduril, a defense startup, to design the first Increment 1 of Collaborative Combat Aircraft. That award, however, is just for the design of the aircraft, and other companies may still try to win the deal to build production aircraft. 

The next batch of aircraft offers more possibilities for competition. The Air Force said that the three other finalists—Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Boeing—could win contracts for future CCA designs, which may have different features. The service has said it wants at least 1,000 of the new drones to bulk up its fleet.

Some aerospace companies are now wary of the large-priced, fixed-priced contracts the Air Force has awarded for the past few decades. With Collaborative Combat Aircraft, the Air Force is seeking healthy competition from companies—even without mature plans for precisely how CCA will be used and deployed. 

“We can also think about how we do things, holding our requirements fast and resisting the temptation to add one more ornament on the tree for another $20 million, etc.,” Allvin said. “This incentive structure that we had given to the aerospace industry about these are going to be long-term commitments, and they’re going to be big procurement programs, and so there’s not going to be very many of them.”

The Air Force, Allvin said, is also thinking about how to exploit autonomy, pointing out Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall’s recent ride in an AI-piloted F-16. “We also are standing up an experimental operations unit to understand not only how we’re going to base and sustain it” but other key details as well, he said.

Allvin said the CCA program is not just a new technical program but also represents a cultural shift for the Air Force.

“As we’re looking at leaning into human-machine teaming and developing these collaborative combat aircraft, we’re trying to do three things in parallel, which sometimes we had done serially,” Allvin said. “We developed a platform … and then afterwards, we’ll figure out how we’re going to do the rest of DOTMLPF [doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, and facilities] spectrum, and how we’re going to actually employ it and how we’re going to base it, etc. We’re doing those all at once now.”

Allvin said the Air Force’s new drones might also result in the service introducing new careers—Air Force Specialty Codes (AFSC)—for Airmen.

“What are new skills sets that we need? Perhaps we’re going to have skilled coders at the tactical edge to be able to take full advantage of it,” he said.

In short, Allvin said the CCA program represents a major change for the Air Force and was not a matter of simply adding new aircraft.

“It’s really about thinking about the way we’ve done our mission totally differently,” Allvin concluded.

Air Force Needs $10 Billion to Repair Guam After 2023 Typhoon

Air Force Needs $10 Billion to Repair Guam After 2023 Typhoon

May 7, 2024 | By David Roza

A year after Typhoon Mawar hit Guam last May, the Air Force estimates it will need nearly $9.7 billion to rebuild and improve its facilities on the island. The amount is more than double the $4.389 billion spent to date rebuilding Tyndall and Offutt Air Force Bases in Florida and Nebraska after those installations were struck by a hurricane in 2018 and flooding in 2019, respectively.

“This is on a scale close to twice what the natural disaster recovery requirement was when a [Category] 5 hurricane directly hit Tyndall Air Force Base in 2018 and then Offutt of course for the flood,” Lt. Gen. Tom D. Miller, deputy chief of staff for logistics, engineering, and force protection, said May 1 at a Senate Appropriations’ Subcommittee hearing on military construction. 

The repairs are so expensive that the Air Force can’t cover the cost out of its normal budget, he told subcommittee chair Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.).

“In my view, senator, there’s no ability for the Air Force baseline budget to absorb the level of magnitude of the disaster that happened from this typhoon,” Miller said. But a supplemental bill could provide that funding and the flexibility to rebuild projects in the right sequence, an approach that has paid off with the Tyndall and Offutt recovery programs, the general said.

“Supplemental, I think, is the only path to be able to absorb this,” he said.

A crew from Marine Aviation Logistics Squadron 16 clear all the fallen trees from around the U.S. Coast Guard property in Guam on May 27, 2023. (U.S. Coast Guard photo by Chief Warrant Officer Sara Muir)

Mawar hit Guam on May 24 with 140 mile per hour winds, two feet of rain, a storm surge, and flooding, which downed trees, shut down utilities, and collapsed buildings. 

“There was debris everywhere, sheet metal awnings were crumpled like a piece of paper, power lines were down, traffic lights were facing every which way, and thick jungles were stripped bare and looked like east Tennessee in winter,” Lt Col. David Seeman, commander of the 506th Expeditionary Air Refueling Squadron, said in a June 2 press release.

Airmen managed to clear the airfield of debris the same day the storm subsided on May 26. By October, much of the debris across Andersen Air Force Base had been picked up, but the road to recovery is long.

“The damage sustained at Guam, specifically Andersen Air Base and Joint Region Marianas, during Typhoon Mawar was extensive,” Air Force spokesperson Laurel Falls told Air & Space Forces Magazine. “Over 90 DAF structures were damaged, with most in need of significant repairs due to high winds and sustained rainfall.”

The current requirements include 42 military construction (MILCON) projects totaling $7.9 billion, which includes planning and design, Falls explained. Another $1.3 billion is required for facility sustainment, restoration, and modernization (FSRM).

“We are not simply restoring facilities back to their previous specifications and requirements from the1960s, ‘70s, or ‘80s,” Falls said. “We need to rebuild with increased resiliency against future storms, as well as increased capacity and capability.”

The Air Force is coordinating the rebuild with the Office of the Secretary of Defense and U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, but the exact nature of the long-term recovery plan and the breakdown of total workload and resource requirements, including all MILCON, FSRM, procurement, research, and maintenance bills, are still in the works, Falls said. 

While the Air Force estimates it needs $9.7 billion for restoring its projects on Guam, the wider Defense Department may need as much as $50 billion, subcommittee ranking member Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.) said at the May 1 hearing.

“A bill like that cannot be absorbed within the traditional MILCON program,” he said. CQ Roll Call reported later that Boozman received the estimate from Pentagon officials in an earlier briefing, though Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told CQ he plans on double-checking that estimate. 

Other critical infrastructure on the island include a $580 million repair for a Navy helicopter squadron hangar and a $600 million repair for a breakwater that allows sea traffic in and out of Apra Harbor, a deep-water port on the island’s western side. 

“If that breakwater fails, then our ability to bring the things that we need … to build the infrastructure to defend Guam is compromised as well,” Assistant Secretary of Defense for energy, installations, and environment Brendan Owens said at the hearing. 

Military construction costs do not appear to be shrinking any time soon: the year 2025 budget requests $17.5 billion, a five percent increase over last year’s request, Boozman said at the hearing.

“It continues the trend of having more expensive projects rather than a higher quantity of projects,” he said. “Unfortunately, this isn’t a surprise as inflation continues to drive up costs and we continue to see larger and more complex projects in the budget.”

But a backlog of projects continues to grow, and the unfunded MILCON priority list—the requests the Pentagon wants but could not fit in its budget—exceeds $7 billion, the highest ever submitted, Boozman said. 

Pilot Unharmed After F-22 Mishap in Georgia

Pilot Unharmed After F-22 Mishap in Georgia

May 6, 2024 | By David Roza

The Air Force is investigating a mishap involving an F-22 fighter jet that took place at about 11:30 a.m. on May 6 at the Savannah/Hilton Head International Airport, Ga. 

One pilot was involved in the mishap but “no injuries were sustained,” the Georgia Air National Guard’s 165th Airlift Wing wrote in a press release. It was not immediately clear if the mishap involved an in-flight emergency or if it took place on the ground.

The F-22, assigned to the 71st Fighter Squadron, 1st Fighter Wing at Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Va., was participating in Sentry Savannah, an annual Air National Guard fighter combat training exercise held at the Air Dominance Center. The exercise will continue as scheduled.

“Thank you to all the first responders who arrived on scene,” Col. Stephen Thomas, commander of the Air Dominance Center, said in a statement. “Sentry Savannah is all about showcasing readiness and today’s mishap affirmed our Airmen’s ability to respond at a moment’s notice.

“The incident is under investigation,” the 165th Airlift Wing wrote in its statement. 

The Air Force has just 185 F-22s: stealthy, fifth-generation air dominance fighters that were originally supposed to replace the older F-15 Eagle. The last mishap involving an F-22 was in March 2022, when a Raptor’s landing gear collapsed while landing at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. An almost identical accident happened a year earlier, also at Eglin.

Though high-tech and expensive, F-22s can recover from mishaps. Last May, a Raptor took to the skies again five years after it suffered extensive damage from a botched takeoff in 2018.

Northrop Gets $7 Billion for B-2 Support Through 2029. After That, Funding Dries Up

Northrop Gets $7 Billion for B-2 Support Through 2029. After That, Funding Dries Up

May 6, 2024 | By John A. Tirpak

Northrop Grumman received a $7 billion indefinite-delivery/indefinite quantity contract on May 3 to support the B-2 bomber fleet through 2029. While Air Force budget documents indicate no further procurement or research and development on the B-2 after that, the service was not immediately able to say if the B-2 will retire at that point or soon after.

Only $21,439 is being obligated for the contract right away, and those funds are fiscal 2023 R&D monies, the Pentagon said.

“This contract provides for B-2 enhancements, sustainment, logistics elements including sustaining engineering, software maintenance, and support equipment. Also included is programmed depot maintenance of the fleet and other interim contractor support,” the Pentagon said in the announcement. Work will be performed at Whiteman Air Force Base, Mo., Tinker Air Force Base, Okla., Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio; Edwards Air Force Base, Calif.; and Hill Air Force, Utah. The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center awarded the contract.

The Air Force is requesting $63.9 million for B-2 procurement in its fiscal 2025 budget, with a total of $207.2 million forecasted through 2029 and no more shown after that. The service is asking for $41.1 million in B-2 research and development in 2025 and just a couple thousand dollars every year after that.

Neither line item covers operations, and most of the potential $7 billion of work thus lies in maintenance, reliability and functional enhancements, and depot visits.

Air Force Global Strike Command has been ambiguous about when the B-1 and B-2 bombers will retire. A bomber roadmap obtained by Air & Space Forces Magazine in 2018 called for the fleet to move to just the B-52 and the new B-21 Raider around 2031-2033, but the Air Force has since described that plan as obsolete, and no successor roadmap has been publicly revealed. The Air Force flies just 20 B-2s, and they are its only penetrating fleet until the B-21 is available for duty.

The B-21 entered low-rate initial production in December, but the rate at which the bomber will enter the inventory has never been disclosed. William LaPlante, undersecretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment, said in February that the B-21 production rate was deliberately kept very low to protect the program from budget cutters.

Pentagon and industry officials, and the Department’s inventory planning documents, suggest that the B-21 may only be built at a rate of up to three per year during LRIP, and not more than 10 per year at peak. The first 21 aircraft will be delivered in five lots, but it’s not clear if lots equal years.

Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall has offered cautious optimism that the program is on track but routinely warns members of Congress in testimony that unforeseen problems and delays with the B-21 could develop, potentially necessitating an extension of the B-2’s planned service life. The Air Force has previously said the B-2 has the structural integrity to fly into the 2040s if necessary.

Assuming a production rate of four Raiders per year is achieved in the next couple of years, there could be enough B-21s delivered by 2029 to avoid any reduction in the Air Force’s bomber inventory if the B-2 is retired in that year. The first B-21 flew last fall; five more are in production, and of the first six, five will be dedicated to flight test activities. After initial flight testing is complete, the flight test articles—typically wired and rigged with specialized test apparatus—are to be converted to an operational configuration. The Air Force plans to buy “at least” 100 B-21s.

“I would be surprised if the B-2 [fleet] is retired in 2029,” said Mark Gunzinger, director of future concepts and capability assessments for the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies. The Air Force needs “all the bomber tails it can get right now and for the foreseeable future,” given that the bomber fleet now numbers only 139 aircraft, he said.

Gunzinger did say, however, that it is possible some B-2s could be retired before the end of the decade if B-21s start to reach operational capability. The size of the fleet is “constrained by funding,” he noted, but replacing B-2s one-for-one “won’t fell the gap” between what analysis shows the Air Force needs and the number of bombers it actually fields. A fleet of 100 B-21s is “not optimum,” he said. Gunzinger has previously recommended 225 B-2s as a more appropriate fleet size, and that building them at a rate of 20 per year should be an Air Force budget priority.

Global Strike Command has said it needs to minimize the amount of time it fields four types of bombers at once—B-1s, B-2s, B-52s, and B-21s—because its long-range planning shows it won’t have enough maintenance manpower to support all four types indefinitely.

Asked to comment on the B-2 award, Northrop Grumman said it funds the Flexible Acquisition Sustainment Team (FAST) III contract, which “provides flexibility to accommodate the broad enterprise of activities associated with the B-2 program.”

These activities cover a huge range of activities, including everything from engineering to cybersecurity to logistics support.

Budget justification documents indicate the bulk of procurement and R&D dollars for the B-2 lie in maintaining and improving the aircraft’s low observable, or stealth systems, with improvements to reduce maintenance man hours and increase aircraft availability, as well as upgrades to communications, the aircraft’s engines and displays. Some of the funds will be used to resolve safety of flight and “vanishing vendor” issues.

The B-2’s Advanced Communications upgrades, “formerly known only as B-2 Advanced Comms Adaptable Communications Suite,” will keep the bomber “ready, effective, and survivable” by keeping up with “growing crypto mandates and mitigating end-of-life systems,” budget documents state.

The suite will also connect with joint all-domain command and control systems and provide secure communications within and outside of line-of-sight conditions, while improving the bomber’s satellite and ultra-high frequency systems.