Report: Instructor’s ‘Overconfidence’ Blamed for 2023 Wyoming UH-1 Crash

Nov. 25, 2024 | By Greg Hadley

The Air Force blamed the loss of a $5 million UH-1N helicopter on a civilian flight instructor and the Air Force pilot whose actions precipitated the August 2023 crash at Cheyenne Regional Airport, Wyo., according to a new Accident Investigation Board report.

The pilot, an experienced member of the 37th Helicopter Squadron at F.E. Warren Air Force Base, Wyo., with 1,500 flying hours—almost all in the Huey—was practicing an emergency landing procedure following a three-month break from flying for medical reasons at the time of the crash. The civilian instructor had 4,000 hours of experience.

Officials faulted the instructor pilot for failing to properly assess the risk and clearly order recovery steps, determining the instructor was overconfident in the pilot, fixated on specific cues, and task saturated at the time. The investigation also faulted the pilot for not having control of the helicopter and failing to perform a power recovery as instructed. Also on the flight was a current and qualified flight engineer.

After taking off from F.E. Warren, the crew performed a series of maneuvers without incident and then made the short flight to Cheyenne Regional Airport to finish the sortie by executing a 180-degree autorotation landing. This emergency procedure is used to land safely in the event of an engine failure, and requires the pilot to make a 180-degree turn, then descend, using the resulting air flow to keep the helicopter’s rotors moving. To practice the maneuver, crews put the engine into idle.

When the pilot executed the turn, however, it was with “excessive right bank, excessive nose low attitude, and uncoordinated flight (being out of trim),” the report stated.

Instead of descending at no more than 3,000-feet per minute, as called for, the helicopter descended rapidly, averaging 4,185 feet per minute; at one point, it was falling at 5,200 feet per minute. Even so, the instructor “relied on an overconfident assessment of [the pilot’s] ability to fix the attitude despite the rapidly decreasing timeframe,” investigators wrote.

While the instructor told the pilot to “watch your nose down”—and the pilot told investigators he brought the nose up—flight recorder data indicated he did not. The instructor did not realize the extent of the risk until, at only about 200 feet, calling for the pilot to “go around.”

It was too late. With the engine still in idle, the aircraft could not generate power, and continued to sink; the instructor tried to execute a flare, but the bank, lack of power, rotor speed, and forward airspeed left the aircraft unrecoverable.

The last-ditch effort to flare caused the helicopter’s tail to hit the ground first, and the aircraft bounced back and forth between its tail boom and its skids until both broke off. Freed of the tail boom, the helicopter spun and rolled, its rotor pounded the ground and broke off, and the main fuselage spun several more times before coming to rest upside down.

Miraculously, the military crew members escaped with minor injuries (so did the civilian instructor, but that individual’s medical records were not released to investigators.)

Investigators said the instructor “was ultimately responsible for the [aircraft] and the mission” and determined the instructor failed in not explicitly calling for a power recovery. But they also faulted the pilot for poor flight control and causing the excessive sink rate in the first place, and cited the entire crew for failing to properly execute a power recovery once the instructor called for a “go around.”

The aircraft was a total loss.

The Air Force has flown the UH-1N since the Vietnam War, but plans to phase out the aging choppers in favor of the new MH-139 Grey Wolf. F.E. Warren has yet to receive its first of the new aircraft.

341st Security Forces Group tactical response force Airmen get dropped off by a 40th Helicopter Squadron UH-1N Huey while participating in Advanced Recapture Recovery Operational Warfighter at Camp Guernsey, Wyoming, Aug. 15, 2024. U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Sarah Post

How the Air Force Can Evaluate Officers Better

Nov. 25, 2024 | By David Roza

A recent watchdog report found that the Air Force has one of the best officer performance evaluation systems among the services, but it falls short in two key areas: aligning performance expectations with organizational goals, and reviewing officer evaluation systems for bias and accuracy.

“By revising policy or guidance to direct raters to explicitly align individual officer performance expectations with organizational goals, the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force can better ensure that officers’ daily activities and performance are cascading upwards to meet the goals of the organization,” the Government Accountability Office wrote in a Nov. 13 report.

GAO developed 11 key practices after reviewing publications on performance evaluation in the private and public sectors. The Air Force had fully incorporated eight out of the 11 practices, more than any other service. But only the Army had aligned its officer performance expectations with organizational goals, while the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps had not.

air force officer evaluation — The Government Accountability Office scored the military services based on 11 key practices for performance evaluation. (Screenshot via GAO)

Every year, Air Force officers receive an officer performance brief (OPB), where superior officers assess them in four performance areas: executing the mission, leading people, managing resources, and improving the unit. Between those four areas are divided 10 Airman Leadership Qualities. Raters write their assessment of the officer’s performance in each area in just a few sentences.

While “executing the mission” and “managing resources” sound like goals, GAO classified the four areas as organizational values—the moral code of an organization—not organizational goals, which are end results expected to be achieved within a specific period.

When the end results are not spelled out, it leaves raters to decide whether the officer actually achieved them, explained Dr. Bradley Podliska, an associate professor at Air University who co-wrote an article for War On The Rocks in March about improving the Air Force commander selection process.

“‘Executing the mission’ can or possibly cannot be related to organizational goals. It’s up to the individual rater whether to make that determination,” Podliska told Air & Space Forces Magazine, adding that his views do not necessarily represent those of the Air Force or the Department of Defense.

“The GAO is saying that these reports have to make it explicitly clear what the organizational goals are, so therefore that officer is going to be rated based on that standard,” he said.

For example, at Air University, teachers are expected to teach a certain number of courses and achieve a minimum positive student evaluation score, among other distinct goals, Podliska said. At an aircraft maintenance squadron, the organizational goal might be to reach a certain aircraft mission-capable rate. But under the current system, when an officer achieves those metrics, it might not necessarily factor into their rater’s assessment of them, Podliska said.

“You would assume that that’s how they’re being evaluated, but because it’s not explicitly clear with the organizational goals, it’s dependent on that individual rater how well they are actually doing in the evaluation,” he said. “I would think, if you talk to any officer, they are going to have stories about how what their rater wrote down about them had almost absolutely nothing to do with what they did. Anecdotally, everybody has stories like that.”

OPBs also require stratification, where officers of the same grade are ranked one through five, for example. The ranking makes it easy for promotion boards to select a winning officer, but without concrete performance metrics, they may be based on “basically useless data,” Podliska said.

The GAO made a similar argument and pointed out that organizational goals can help align officer training and provide concrete starting points for evaluating the effectiveness of a squadron, group, wing, or other organization.

Replace the Abstract

GAO is not the first to call for changes to the Air Force officer evaluation system. Col. Jason Lamb, then using the pseudonym Col. Ned Stark, sparked renewed interest in the topic from 2018 to 2020 when he wrote a series of essays on improving Air Force officer promotion and leadership development.

“We have some great leaders in our Air Force, but we need to do a better job of finding and developing more of them while weeding out toxic leaders before they have a chance to do significant harm to our Airmen and missions,” Lamb wrote in one essay.

The Air Force is not alone in its soul-searching: in 2020, the Army launched a Battalion Commander Assessment Program, where candidates are evaluated based on a five-day series of cognitive tests, interviews with a psychologist, communication assessments, reports from peers and subordinates, and other tests.

So far, the results are promising: under the first BCAP, 34 percent fewer officers were chosen for command than under the old system, which was just a board reviewing personnel files. Many Soldiers rejected under the first BCAP came back the next year after learning from their mistakes. Ninety-four percent of the participants said BCAP was a better way to select battalion commanders than the old system, and 97 percent said the Army should continue BCAP.

In their March article, Podliska and his co-author, Air Force Maj. Maria Patterson, pointed out that BCAP is part of a larger Army effort to identify specific command leadership attributes in its doctrine, then use objective data to assess how close Soldiers are to the mark. The Air Force needs to spell out its own command leadership attributes to guide development, they said.

“Within the Air Force, a plethora of doctrine, regulations, instructions, manuals, and technical orders exist, ranging from how to properly use a chair to developing a strategy for modern international warfare with near-peer threats,” wrote Podliska and Patterson. “Still, one of the most critical aspects of the military foundation is neglected—leadership in command.”

A complementary effort would be to align individual performance expectations with organizational goals, so that the Air Force could better identify high-performing officers with objective data, Podliska said.

“Let’s replace the abstract with actual metrics,” he said. “What does it mean to lead people? How do you actually define that in terms of quantifiable variables? Let’s look at some of the research.”

Numbers may not account for everything, Podliska cautioned, which is why more abstract values could still play a role, particularly for taking care of subordinates. But if the Air Force does decide to change its system, it needs a way of checking to see if it works; the GAO reported that none of the services had fully incorporated such a mechanism.

“[T]he Air Force makes incremental changes—such as policy updates—to the performance evaluation system as needed and has a process for ensuring completeness of performance evaluation reports,” the report said. “However, it has not regularly evaluated the system’s processes and tools to help ensure the effectiveness, accuracy, and quality of the system, and it does not review ratings or related trends to ensure fairness or accuracy of individual ratings.”

For its part, the Air Force partially concurred with GAO’s recommendation to explicitly align officer expectations with officer goals.

“The Air Force recognized that there can be confusion between the core values and organizational goals as they relate to the evaluation system and noted that the service would examine how to incorporate the requirement most effectively into its policy,” GAO noted. “[W]e are encouraged by the Air Force’s stated commitment to examine how to clarify its organizational goals and align those goals with officer expectations in policy.”

Competition Gets Tougher for Space Force Senior NCO Promotions

Nov. 25, 2024 | By Greg Hadley

While promotion rates took off for the Space Force’s junior noncommissioned officer corps in 2024, their senior NCO counterparts weren’t as lucky, as the service released statistics and a list of those selected on Nov. 21.

All told, the Space Force is minting:

14 new chief master sergeants out of 68 eligible Guardians, for a rate of 20.6 percent

25 new senior master sergeants out of 435 eligible Guardians, for a rate of 5.75 percent

A list of those selected is available on the Air Force Personnel Center website.

The total number of promotions to chief master sergeant has held steady for the last three years at 14-15 Guardians, after a few cycles ramping up following the service’s founding in 2019. But the pool of those eligible has been on a continued upward trajectory—the 68 Guardians in this cycle was the most ever.

Accordingly, the promotion rate was the lowest since the Space Force’s first ever cycle in 2020, when two of eight senior master sergeants were selected.

Another notable point released in AFPC’s statistics is the time in service of those promoted was 19.42 years, the first time that has dipped below 20 years.

The competition to become a senior master sergeant is also getting tougher. The pool of 435 eligible was the biggest ever and a third more than as recently as 2022. At the same time, the service is also selecting fewer people for promotion, even accounting for the small sample size, going from 35 promotions in 2022 to 30 in 2023 and 25 this year.

Unsurprisingly, the 5.75 percent promotion rate was the lowest ever for the grade.

These promotion rates stand in marked contrast to the middle tier of NCO ranks in the Space Force. Back in June, the service announced it was promoting 95.66 percent of those eligible to sergeant, and 63.87 percent of those eligible to technical sergeant. Both were the highest marks ever for those ranks in the Space Force’s short history.

The service did announce at the time that it was promoting just 21.34 percent of those eligible to master sergeant, a decline from last year and a harbinger of the lower rates for senior NCOs.

With its small size and young history, the Space Force has spent much of the past few years building out its ranks and developing its structure. In September, though, Chief Master Sergeant of the Space Force John F. Bentivegna unveiled an ambitious project to transform the career paths for the 4,900 enlisted Guardians. The project could include changes to everything from recruiting to tech school to career advancement, a phrase Bentivegna prefers over promotion, which he believes has a more competitive connotation.

Making things even more complex is the Space Force’s plan to fold Air Force Reservists into its ranks as part on a single component in which Guardians can work part-time or full-time. The service is still working on the HR systems for that change—and on how it will handle promotions.

Air Force, Boeing Agree on $2.4B Deal for 15 New KC-46 Tankers

Nov. 22, 2024 | By Greg Hadley

The Air Force and Boeing agreed to a nearly $2.4 billion contract for a new lot of KC-46 aerial refueling tankers on Nov. 21.

The deal, announced by the Pentagon, is for 15 new aircraft in Lot 11 at a cost of $2.389 billion—some $159 million per tail.

All told, USAF has awarded contracts for 158 of 179 planned tankers. The service may still buy a more upgraded Pegasus as part of its KC-135 recapitalization program. In a release, Boeing said it has delivered 89 aircraft to the U.S. Air Force, plus four to the Japan Air Self-Defense Force.

The new deal is good news for Boeing, which has suffered $7 billion in losses on the program and faced issues with both its defense and commercial divisions in recent months. The lot cost is up $64 million from last November, when the Air Force and Boeing struck a deal for Lot 10.

The KC-46 program as a whole is making gradual progress after years of problems and multiple deficiencies related to the aircraft’s refueling system. Deliveries resumed in May after a two-month hold related to the tanker’s boom, and the first KC-46 operational deployment started in October when tankers from Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, N.J., landed in the Middle East.

In its release, Boeing noted that the KC-46 has “flown more than 100,000 flight hours and offloaded more than 200 million pounds of fuel.”

The Air Force, meanwhile, is contemplating its future tanker plans as part of a broader look at how it approaches the air superiority mission—the service had envisioned a somewhat stealthy Next-Generation Aerial Refueling System (NGAS) to accompany the Next-Generation Air Dominance fighter into contested airspace, extending the fighter’s range.

But Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall has admitted that with its current budget, the service cannot afford to buy NGAS, NGAD, and its planned Collaborative Combat Aircraft. Without more resources, leaders will have to decide what to prioritize.

KC-46s Take a While to Start. These Airmen Want to Fix It

Nov. 22, 2024 | By David Roza

Airmen at McConnell Air Force Base, Kan., are working on a device that will start up the KC-46 refueling tanker faster and cut down the time it takes for crews to take off and gas up aircraft in need.

First delivered in 2019, the KC-46 is the Air Force’s newest tanker. But despite its youth, the two-engine aircraft takes much longer to start up than its four-engine cousin, the KC-135, which is about 61 years old on average.

The difference is the auxiliary power unit (APU), a smaller engine that helps start up the main engines. APUs also get the aircraft’s climate control and other systems running, and they can be used as an emergency power source to restart the engines in flight. The APU on the KC-46 has “a substantially slower start/initialization time” than the one on the KC-135, John Van Winkle, chief of public affairs at McConnell’s 22nd Air Refueling Wing, told Air & Space Forces Magazine.

“This means that the crews have to start the APU when arriving at the aircraft and wait for it to run its initialization and diagnostics prior to applying battery power or attempting to start the aircraft engines,” he said.

kc-46 apu — U.S. Air Force Staff Sgts. Tamlin Soucy and Alexander Desmarais, both engine mechanics with the 157th Air Refueling Wing, use fish pole lifting equipment to lower an auxiliary power unit from a KC-46A Pegasus at Pease Air National Guard Base, New Hampshire, Sept. 27, 2022. (U.S. Air National Guard photo by Staff Sgt. Victoria Nelson)

Winkle could not share exact times due to security concerns, but the wait was long enough that two Airmen at McConnell wanted to do something about it. Staff Sgt. Hunter Diedrich and Senior Airman Douglas Vargas are part of the 22nd Air Refueling Wing’s Innovation Lab, a space for Airmen to whip up fixes and inventions.

Diedrich and Vargas invented the APU Remote Start System (APURSS), a device that physically presses the APU start button remotely before the crews get aboard the KC-46. Vargas worked out the device’s software while Diedrich handled its physical design.

“We were relieved when the APURSS worked the first time because we had a few unknowns if the actuator would be strong enough to press the button and if the unit was going to be able to stay on the aircraft,” Diedrich said in a Nov. 19 press release.

The prototype is already making an impact, Capt. Timothy Schwanke, chief of the Innovation Lab, said in the release.

“This has already proven to significantly reduce the alert time for the KC-46 crews as they are conducting routine training,” he said. “Prior to this, the KC-46 had a severe disadvantage to alert timing in comparison to its KC-135 Stratotanker counterpart, and the APURSS device has effectively reversed those statistics.”

Senior Airman Douglas Vargas, 22nd Air Refueling Wing Innovation Lab intern, works on the KC-46A Pegasus Auxiliary Power Unit Start System (APURSS) at McConnell Air Force Base, Kansas, Nov. 14, 2024. (U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Paula Arce)

The signal is so strong that crews can trigger the APURSS from several states away, Diedrich said, though Van Winkle clarified that the intent is for the control module to stay at the same base as the APURSS. McConnell continues to use APURSS in operational exercises, “but it is anticipated that all KC-46 units will want this device once it is developed at a larger scale,” Schwanke said.

For now, the device is still the early stages of prototyping and creating proof of concept for the Air Force, but the Innovation Lab has already partnered with a few organizations to develop the idea.

Those partners include FirePoint Innovations Center, a defense technology hub at nearby Wichita State University, and the Defense Innovation Unit, which secured $250,000 to research and develop APURSS. FirePoint and Innovation Lab are also working with a Wichita company called PWI, which will take the lead on research and development, prototyping and commercialization of APURSS for the entire KC-46 fleet. How long that will take is not yet clear.

“It really will depend on when the funding officially comes in from DIU and how fast PWI can design and build a product for us to use on a larger, more robust scale,” Van Winkle explained. “Higher headquarters will be the ultimate authority on if and when the APURSS will actually be utilized real world.”

In the meantime, the partnerships are a promising start.

“We hope that with this funding from DIU, and business partnership with PWI, we can build a suitable product that the Air Force will want to purchase for fleet-wide implementation,” Van Winkle said.

A McConnell Airman marshals a KC-46A Pegasus at McConnell Air Force Base, Kansas, July 1, 2024 after the KC-46 circumnavigated the globe. (U.S. Air Force photo by Airman Paula Arce)

Seeking New Options for GPS, Space Force Eyes Multiple Orbits

Nov. 22, 2024 | By Greg Hadley

The Space Force’s best-known mission is often spelled out with just three letters: GPS. The world relies on U.S. military satellites for precise navigation and timing, and the Space Force delivers with its Global Positioning Satellite constellation.

But increasing use of jamming to block GPS signals and the risk that an adversary could seek to take out some or all of its 30 GPS satellites or distort signals in future conflict has Space Force leaders seeking back up alternatives.

The Department of the Air Force selected in April an alt-PNT project as one of two new “quick start” programs it would pursue using new authority that allows it to progress without waiting for congressional approval. By September, Space Systems Command had selected four companies to compete to develop Resilient GPS solutions. USSF intends to launch eight small satellites by 2028.

Congress members have faulted the program for focusing solely on new satellites while overlooking the need for jam-resistant encrypted M-code signals for military operations. But SSC Commander Lt. Gen. Philip A. Garrant pushed back on that criticism in Washington, Nov. 21.

“It’s focus is really to bolster the civil code for added resiliency, but also it’s a different orbital regime,” he said. Because the new satellites “won’t be in the same planes as GPS,” Garrant added, the PNT enterprise will gain “orbital diversity.”

Just as the Space Force has constellations operating in multiple orbits to bolster resilience, having PNT systems in low-Earth or geosynchronous orbits in addition to medium-Earth orbits, offers advantages: LEO satellites are far closer to the surface of the Earth, enabling a strong signal, and GEO satellites offer the benefit of a constant, steady presence overhead.

The Space Development Agency, which is fielding a resilient space architecture of low-Earth orbit satellites, has already begun “embedding” PNT signals into its first data transport satellites. These nodes include information about position and timing while transmitting communications—not unlike a clock in the background of a video call.

Looking ahead to future tranches of satellites, SDA will go a step further, providing a separate PNT signal from low-Earth orbit, said SDA Director Derek S. Tournear at an AFA Mitchell Instititue event on Nov. 19.

“We’re going to provide a lightweight signal service, PNT service,” Tournear said. “We’re working with the Army on exactly what that looks like. It will either be an L-band or S-band signal that goes out for things like munitions and things like that.” He defined “lightweight” as requiring “very low processing to receive the signal.”

The Air Force Research Laboratory is also poised to launch its NTS-3 demonstrator satellite, but is waiting for the launch vehicle, ULA’s Vulcan Centaur, to be certified. NTS-3 will go to geosynchronous orbit and test new technologies like reprogrammable signals and a phased array antenna that can direct signals without physically moving the satellite.

These developments point to a new-look GPS approach in the future, Garrant said: “I think it will in the future be a multiorbit phenomenology. We are very interested in alternate means of PNT.”

A Space Force official, speaking on background Nov. 21, said commercial interests are also looking to develop their own PNT alternatives.

“There are a couple companies that are going and actually building out an exquisite alt-PNT constellation,” the official said. “They have found a commercial base, especially when you’re looking at potentially autonomous vehicles coming into play, so they definitely want to capitalize on that. Also, our airline companies are looking to potentially make sure that they have an alternate PNT signal.”

Airline operators have had challenges with GPS in contested areas near Ukraine and the Middle East over the past year, as signal jamming increased.

Another potential way for commercial industry to tap into the market isby adding PNT signals to satellite communications networks, the official said. “Don’t offer it as an a la carte service, just make it kind of fundamental into the capability you’re providing, and then just amortize the cost or something like that.”

Such an approach would have value to the Pentagon, the offficial said. “We would pay a little bit more for that.”

SpaceX, which operates the massive Starlink constellation, is already looking in that direction. The official said SpaceX’s presentation is “very logical.”

All told, the Space Force may ultimately gain as many as a half-dozen or more GPS alternatives to choose from. Yet Garrant made clear that the existing GPS constellation remains “healthy.”

“We’re not moving away from the traditional GPS constellation,” he said.

Indeed, USSF has several new GPS III satellites stuck on the ground awaiting launch and is eager to get them into orbit. Garrant said Space Systems Command is looking “at options to go faster.” Though he did not say so directly, that could mean moving some satellites assigned to launch on ULA’s rocket to launch instead on SpaceX rockets so they get into orbit faster.

Air Force Historical Foundation Reveals Winners of Prestigious Awards

Nov. 22, 2024 | By Patrick Reardon

The Air Force Historical Foundation (AFHF) announced the 2023-2024 winners of its prestigious annual awards honoring individuals and units “dedicated to the making and documentation of Air Force and Space Force history.” In addition to the standard collection of awards, this year’s honors include the first-ever Lifetime Achievement for Space Award.

The AFHF will present the awards on May 22, 2025, at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum, Udvar-Hazy Center in the Space Hangar.

Unit Awards

Gen. James H. “Jimmy” Doolittle Award

AFHF’s Doolittle Award recognizes an active Air Force or Space Force unit for accomplishing its mission with aplomb while under difficult and hazardous conditions in multiple conflicts. This year’s winner is Space Delta 4, the first Space Force unit ever to win the accolade. DEL 4 is headquartered at Buckley Space Force Base, Colo., and is responsible for providing strategic and theater missile warning to the United States and its international partners.

Outstanding Training Unit Award

In recognition of a unit whose primary mission is training, the 2024 Outstanding Training Unit Award goes to the 56th Fighter Wing at Luke Air Force Base, Ariz. Part of Air Education and Training Command (AETC), the 56th graduates more than 400 pilots and 300 air control professionals every year. It is the largest fighter wing in the world, serving as the home to 24 squadrons with both F-35 and F-16 aircraft.

Lifetime Service Awards

Gen. Carl “Tooey” Spaatz Award

AFHF’s Spaatz Award recognizes an individual’s lifetime contributions to Air Force or Space Force history. This year’s winner is Lt. Gen. David Deptula, USAF (Ret.), dean of AFA’s Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies. Among a litany of achievements noted by AFHF was Deptula’s authorship of the seminal Air Force White Paper, “Global Reach—Global Power,” and his instrumental role in developing the concept of “effects-based operations,” which he successfully applied in planning Operation Desert Storm’s air campaign.

“For decades I’ve held the Air Force Historical Foundation in the highest regard for keeping aerospace history alive and relevant, so to receive their Spaatz Award is an honor of my lifetime,” Deptula said.

**Left**: Lt. Gen. David Deptula, USAF (Ret.); **Right**: Gen. Kevin Chilton, USAF (Ret.)

Lifetime Achievement for Space Award

This is the AFHF’s first-ever lifetime achievement award focused exclusively on contributions to space. The inaugural winner is Gen. Kevin Chilton, USAF (Ret.), the Explorer Chair for the Mitchell Institute’s Spacepower Advantage Center of Excellence (MI-SPACE). Chilton spent 11 years as a NASA astronaut advancing space exploration and technology, including the deployment of satellites crucial to national defense. He later commanded Air Force Space Command and U.S. Strategic Command.

“I was both surprised and humbled by the announcement, especially for an inaugural award focused on space,” Chilton said. “By creating this award, the Air Force Historical Foundation underscores space’s pivotal role in our military history. It is an incredible honor to receive the award on behalf of all the giant pioneers of Space on whose shoulders I stand.”

Maj. Gen. I.B. Holley Award

The I.B. Holley Award recognizes an individual for “sustained, significant contributions to the documentation of Air Force and Space Force history during a lifetime of service.” The 2024 winner is Roger Launius, a civilian historian who has authored more than 20 books and 100 articles on the history of aerospace. Launius is the former chief historian for NASA and most recently served as the Associate Director for Collections and Curatorial Affairs at the Smithsonian Institution’s National Air and Space Museum.

Launius’ latest publication, “NACA to NASA to Now: The Frontiers of Air and Space in the American Century” is available for free to read online.

Literary Awards

Air Power History Book Prize

Dr. Sean Maloney, Emergency War Plan: The American Doomsday Machine, 1945-1960 (2021). Purchase the title from University of Nebraska Press.

Space History Book Prize

Aaron Bateman, Weapons in Space: Technology, Politics, and the Rise and Fall of the Strategic Defense Initiative (2024). Purchase the title from Amazon, or read online for free courtesy of MIT Press.

Book Prize for Space (Series)

Dr. John Klein, Understanding Space Strategy: The Art of War in Space (2019) and Fight for the Final Frontier: Irregular Warfare in Space (2023). View and purchase his works on Amazon.

Best Article Award

John Schell, “The SA-2 and U-2: The Rest of the Story” (2023). Read the story from the Journal of the Air Force Historical Foundation.

Special Medal for “Old School” Technical Research

David K. Stumpf, Ph.D., “Ballistic Missile Shock Isolation Systems” (Winter 2022) and “Operation Button Up: Security at Minuteman Launch Facilities” (Fall 2023), both from the Journal of the Air Force Historical Foundation.

Space Force Ready to Sign with Commercial Reserve Satellite Partners

Nov. 21, 2024 | By Greg Hadley

The Space Force is finalizing its first contracts for the Commercial Augmentation Space Reserve and plans to award them early in 2025—giving the service access to commercial satellites and other space systems in times of conflict or crisis—officials said Nov. 21.

The idea for CASR, often described as a space version of the Air Force’s Civil Reserve Airlift Fleet, was first raised publicly by then-Lt. Gen. Nina M. Armagno in October 2022 as a way to “surge” capability when needed. Since then, officials have spent the better part of two years refining the concept.

Now the Space Force is on the verge of launching the concept, Space Systems Command boss Lt. Gen. Philip A. Garrant told reporters Nov. 21.

“We’re actually writing clauses for our contracts that would incorporate some of … the framework that allows us to go into crisis and conflict with these partnerships,” Garrant said, speaking at a session organized by the Defense Writers Group. A Space Force official speaking to reporters on background at the Pentagon later confirmed the service is “on track to have our first set of contracts by early next year.”

“We have two ongoing mission areas that we’re looking at: commercial space domain awareness, as well as commercial SATCOM,” the official said. “We’re still figuring out the mission area analysis for commercial SATCOM. We’ve done a lot of the analysis already for the commercial space domain awareness.”

The initial deals aren’t quite “full” CASR contracts, the official added. “We are still figuring out when we start talking about priority of service, denial of service, but also working out the contract clauses on what a full CASR member means,” the official said. “What you’ll see in those contracts will be a level amount of capability on contract during peace time and pre-priced surge, so we know how much it’ll cost.”

An artist’s rendering of a Starlink satellite. Courtesy of SpaceX

USSF got more than 80 responses to a request for information recently, but while industry leaders have expressed interest, some have also voiced concerns about whether agreements might block companies from working with other partners during surge periods and about whether the Pentagon will act to protec companies should participation lead to their assets being targeted in a conflict.

Garrant sees clear benefits for all.

“The advantage to the commercial companies is … participation in more games and exercises, so we are practicing ahead of time, access to threat data at the highest classification that companies can receive—and we can help them with clearances once we have those contracts—as well as cyber defense,” Garrant said. “Of course, the [benefit] to the government is we’ve pre-negotiated that access, and it’s not being done after the fact. So we believe it’s a real relationship. There’s real value, and it’s worth pursuing sooner than later.”

Benefits will kick in fast for the first contract awardees—the Space Force official described plans for a CASR wargame in February.

On top of that, the official noted that the service would be willing to help CASR companies monitor their supply chains for weaknesses.

“These companies are like, ‘Oh, so you’re going to do some free supply chain stuff for us?’ Yeah, I mean, I need it,” the official said. “Why wouldn’t I share that? It dovetails into threat sharing. I need you to have information on this so that you can inform your investments so you know what’s going on in the AOR. So that if you’re going to be a supplier for us, we need you to continue to operate.”

Officials also say the CASR relationship will go beyond extreme emergencies. Just as the Air Force relies on commercial carriers from the Civil Reserve Air Fleet to move much of its passengers and cargo on a day-to-day basis, the Space Force wants to work closely with its commercial providers so the relationship doesn’t have to go “zero to 60” in a crisis, the official said.

The service is drawing another lesson from CRAF: the need to build out a “readiness plan” so that the Space Force can be confident in how to utilize commercial capabilities when the time comes. Garrant wants to extend that thinking to planning and acquisition officials across the Space Force’s mission areas, he said, so they can fully integrate commercial into their strategies.

Lockheed and F-35 Program Office Have Handshake Deal on Next Two Lots

Nov. 21, 2024 | By John A. Tirpak

Lockheed Martin and the F-35 Joint Program Office have reached a handshake deal on a contract for the next two production lots of the multiservice, multinational stealth fighter. The agreement, which has not yet been finalized, comes about a year later than expected, a delay which required the company to expend significant out-of-pocket funds to keep production going.

Notifications of the agreement on Lots 18 and 19 were sent to Congress on Nov. 21, but, uncharacteristically, the JPO did not publicly disclose the per-aircraft prices that will be paid for each of the three variants of the fighter. Although most previous contracts covered three lots, Lot 20 will be negotiated separately, because it could be the first under a long-planned multiyear contract.

“We have reached an initial agreement as part of ongoing negotiations for the Lot 18/19 Air Vehicle Production Contract,” the JPO and Lockheed said in joint response to a query from Air & Space Forces Magazine. “We will share the aircraft quantity and cost figures when a final agreement is signed.”

Sources said the agreement will likely cover about 300 aircraft.

Lots 15-17 came in at about $82.5 million for the Air Force F-35A version, with the B and C variants costing more. Inflation is up about 8 percent since the 2022 deal, suggesting a new price could boost the per-jet cost by $6.6 million, to a total approaching $90 million.

Long-lead funding for Lot 18 ran out in the third quarter of the year, and Lockheed, rather than shut production down, has been paying for production with its own funds ever since.

On the company’s Oct. 22 earnings call, company chief executive officer Jim Taiclet said continuing production was necessary to avoid serious supply chain disruptions.

The decision to keep producing was “essential for the health of lower-tier suppliers,” Taiclet said. The company incurred expenses of $400 million to continue production in the third quarter, and had to cover “an additional $300 million of impacts across the supply chain,” it said in a press release. Officials warned that if F-35 negotiations dragged into 2025, the company would be late in booking over $1 billion in sales and revenues from 2024.

Complicating and extending negotiations on the Lot 18 and 19 prices was the yearlong hold on F-35 deliveries, which started in late summer 2023 and ended in July 2024. Aircraft were produced with the Tech Refresh 3 upgrade, but the hardware and software package has not been fully developed and tested, preventing the Defense Contract Management Agency from approving deliveries.

The JPO also withheld payments of $7 million per jet from Lockheed during the delivery hold, and the company forfeited some $60 million in award fees.

The delivery hold was lifted in July, when JPO director Lt. Gen. Michael Schmidt was satisfied that the new TR-3 software was sufficiently stable and safe to release the aircraft for delivery and operations.

At peak, an estimated 120 aircraft were stored awaiting delivery. Lockheed recently reported it is managing to deliver about 20 F-35s per month, which includes both stored and newly produced jets. A company spokesperson said a previous estimate that 75-110 F-35s would be delivered in 2024 had been raised to 90-110. Company officials have said they expect to deliver more than 156 F-35s per year starting in 2025.

Aircraft now coming off Lockheed’s Fort Worth, Texas, production line now have the Tech Refresh 3 upgrade and will soon start getting some of the more than 80 improvements planned in the Block 4 version of the jet.

Though prices have not yet been officially disclosed, sources said the unit cost of the F-35 under Lots 18 and 19 will be significantly higher, after a steady year-over-year decline. The increase is due to the triple whammy of inflation since the last multi-lot deal, greater complexity and capability inherent in current and future configurations of the jet, and the military services reducing their yearly buys of the F-35.

At the same time, international sales remain strong. Lockheed announced on Nov. 21 that Romania has agreed to buy 32 F-35s, making it the 20th country to select the fighter.