Northrop Grumman Offers New B-21 Raider Details Ahead of Rollout

Northrop Grumman Offers New B-21 Raider Details Ahead of Rollout

Nov. 29, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak

Days before the first B-21 Raider is set to emerge from Northrop Grumman’s Palmdale, Calif., factory, the company revealed new details about the seven-year-old, largely classified bomber program. Northrop described complementary elements of the B-21 “family of systems”; confirmed a “digital twin” version of the aircraft; and, in a break with previous programs, eliminated the “block upgrade” approach to modernization.

The airplane is due to roll out of Plant 42 on Dec. 2, with its first flight forecast in mid-2023.

The bomber “has … been designed as the lead component of a larger family of systems that will deliver intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, electronic attack and multi-domain networking capabilities,” the company said in a Nov. 29 release.

The statement confirms that the B-21—which Northrop Grumman describes as a “sixth-generation” combat aircraft—will rely on external support platforms or systems, although whether these are escort aircraft, bomber-launched vehicles, satellites, or some other technology is unclear. In recent months, Air Force officials have begun describing the B-21 as an ISR node deep within enemy-controlled airspace.  

Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall recently announced he was abandoning plans to develop autonomous, long-range, collaborative combat aircraft meant to escort the B-21 deep into enemy territory, but that did not rule out the bomber launching decoys, jamming vehicles, or ISR-collecting drones.

The company said it has successfully demonstrated migration of B-21 ground systems data to “a cloud environment.” This demonstration included “the B-21 digital twin, that will support B-21 operations and sustainment. This robust cloud-based digital infrastructure will result in a more maintainable and sustainable aircraft with lower-cost infrastructure.”

A “digital twin” is a finely detailed digital model of a system that allows changes—and their ramifications—to be explored by engineers with far greater fidelity and speed than were possible using older design and development technology.

Because it has an open architecture, the B-21 will forego the usual pattern of block upgrades, Northrop Grumman noted.

“To meet the evolving threat environment, the B-21 has been designed from day one for rapid upgradeability,” the company said. “Unlike earlier generation aircraft, the B-21 will not undergo block upgrades. New technology, capabilities and weapons will be seamlessly incorporated through agile software upgrades and built-in hardware flexibility. This will ensure the B-21 Raider can continuously meet the evolving threat head on for decades to come.”

The statement added that, as a “digital bomber,” the B-21 “uses agile software development, advanced manufacturing techniques and digital engineering tools to help mitigate production risk” and “enable modern sustainment practices.”

The company said maintainability was set as “an equally important requirement to stealth performance” at the beginning of the program; and “long-term operations and sustainment affordability [have] been a B-21 program priority from the start,” the company said. Working collaboratively on maintainability with the Air Force, the company said it’s “driving more affordable, predictable operations and sustainment outcomes.” There are six examples of the B-21 in various stages of construction, the company noted.

Northrop Grumman described the B-21 as a “sixth-generation” aircraft, a term which has yet to be clearly defined. A fifth-generation aircraft employs a high degree of stealth in all aspects, and sensor fusion for a high degree of situational awareness.

Various descriptions of “sixth generation” circulating in industry would improve on that by adding an “optionally manned” capability—which the B-21 is meant to have—even better situational awareness, better stealth, and, potentially, use of directed-energy weapons, among other possible attributes.

On stealth, the company said it’s applying “continuously advancing technology, employing new manufacturing techniques and materials to ensure the B-21 will defeat the anti-access, area-denial systems it will face.”

The B-21 “benefits from more than three decades of strike and stealth technology,” the company said, referring to its work on the B-2 Spirit bomber, the YF-23 fighter prototype, the Tacit Blue stealth demonstrator, the AGM-137 Tri-Service Standoff Missile, and presumed numerous classified programs.

“It is the next evolution of the Air Force strategic bomber fleet,” Northrop Grumman asserted, describing the B-21 as a “visible and flexible deterrent.”

Developed “with the next generation of stealth technology, advanced networking capabilities and an open systems architecture, the B-21 is optimized for the high-end threat environment. It will play a critical role in helping the Air Force meet its most complex missions.”

The Raider “will provide the Air Force with long range, high survivability and mission payload flexibility. The B-21 will penetrate the toughest defenses for precision strikes anywhere in the world,” crucial for demonstrating the nation’s “resolve.” It will give regional commanders the “ability to hold any target, anywhere in the world at risk.”

Calling the B-21 the “backbone of the future for U.S. airpower,” Northrop Grumman said the B-21 will “deliver a new era of capability and flexibility through advanced integration of data, sensors and weapons. Capable of delivering both conventional and nuclear payloads, the B-21 will be one of the most effective aircraft in the sky, with the ability to use a broad mix of stand-off and direct attack munitions.”

Northrop Grumman said it has built a supplier base of 400 companies “across 40 states,” comprising a “nationwide team” of 8,000 people “from Northrop Grumman, industry partners and the Air Force.”

The company noted that the B-21 was named “Raider” to commemorate the B-25 Doolittle raiders that bombed Japan early in WWII.

“The actions of these 80 volunteers were instrumental in shifting momentum in the Pacific theater,” and the mission served as a “catalyst to a multitude” of future achievements “in U.S. air superiority from land or sea.”

Austin to Lawmakers: Continuing Resolution Costing Pentagon ‘at Least $3 Billion’ Per Month

Austin to Lawmakers: Continuing Resolution Costing Pentagon ‘at Least $3 Billion’ Per Month

Nov. 28, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

With less than three weeks left before Congress’ latest continuing resolution funding the government runs out, Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III sent a letter to leading lawmakers, urging them to pass a spending bill before the start of 2023. 

Austin sent copies of the letter Nov. 28 to the top Republican and Democrat in both the House and Senate, as well as the chairs and ranking members of the Appropriations Committees in both chambers. 

Politico and Punchbowl News first reported the delivery of the letter, and a spokesperson for the Senate Appropriations Committee confirmed its details to Air & Space Forces Magazine. A Pentagon spokesperson declined to comment. 

In the letter, Austin pleads with Congress to “complete a full-year, whole of government funding bill before the end of 2022,” warning that “failure to do so will result in significant harm to our people and our programs and would cause harm to our national security and our competitiveness.” 

In particular, Austin wrote that for every month the Pentagon operates under a continuing resolution—which keeps funding frozen at the previous year’s level—the Defense Department loses “at least $3 billion” compared to its 2023 budget request. 

Congress approved $728.5 billion for the Pentagon in its 2022 omnibus spending bill, while DOD’s 2023 request was for $773 billion—and there has been bipartisan interest in boosting that number even higher to deal with the effects of inflation.

But that interest has been tempered by political realities, a common refrain on Capitol Hill in recent years, as Republicans and Democrats still have not agreed to a spending bill. A continuing resolution was needed in late September to keep the government from shutting down through Dec. 16, and recent reports indicate that another might be necessary as negotiations drag on. 

While that happens, the Pentagon is stuck in a holding pattern with which it has become all too familiar over the past few decades, unable to start new programs or enter into new contracts, as funds are stuck in old accounts. And that delay, as much as any reduced spending power, carries consequences, Austin said. 

“The CR costs us time as well as money, and money can’t buy back time, especially for lost training events,” Austin wrote in his letter. “Under the CR, Congress prohibits the military from commencing new initiatives, such as those requested by our theater commanders in the Indo-Pacific and around the world or in support of service members and their families at home.” 

Austin’s warning is just the latest in a long line from Pentagon and Air Force leaders over the years. In May, Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall made the case that a CR in fiscal 2023 would be “particularly negative” because it would limit the department’s ability to mitigate inflationary pressures. 

Those warnings, however, haven’t stopped Congress from passing at least one CR every year since 1997. In fiscal 2022, a full budget wasn’t passed until March, more than five months into the fiscal year. 

Austin referenced that pattern while pointing to the threat posed by China, the top priority identified in the recently updated National Defense Strategy. 

“We can’t outcompete China with our hands tied behind our back three, four, five or six months of every fiscal year,” Austin wrote. 

For what it is worth, Congressional leaders still say they want to pass a full spending bill before 2023 starts and a new Congress begins Jan. 3. 

“[Senate Appropriations Committee chair Sen. Patrick Leahy] is determined to produce a twelve-bill omnibus with Ukraine and disaster funding before the end of this Congress,” a Senate Appropriations Committee spokesperson told Air & Space Forces Magazine in a statement. “At a time when inflation is impacting every American family and our national security, a CR is simply unacceptable.” 

Time, however, is running short, and other pieces of legislation may take up time before. One such bill is the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act—leaders still hope to debate and pass the annual policy bill in early December. 

Air Force Advancing ACE in Italian-Hosted F-35 Exercise

Air Force Advancing ACE in Italian-Hosted F-35 Exercise

Nov. 28, 2022 | By Chris Gordon

The U.S. and allied air forces engaged in a two-week exercise with F-35s over the skies of Italy and the Mediterranean Sea as part of a push by the U.S. Air Force to work better with allies and to operate from more bases in the region. An accompanying meeting of F-35 air chiefs included 11 countries.

The exercise Falcon Strike 2022 wrapped up Nov. 25 and involved a mix of American, Italian, and Dutch stealth F-35 fifth-generation fighters flying alongside American fourth-generation F-16 Fighting Falcons. Italian command and control aircraft, tankers, and other assets supported the sorties. In total, the nations contributed more than 50 aircraft to Falcon Strike, according to the Italian Air Force.

“Falcon Strike prepares our F-35 pilots to carry out missions against current and future threats worldwide,” Maj. Mirko van Meerlant of the Royal Netherlands Air Force said in a news release.

U.S. Air Forces in Europe (USAFE) supported the exercise with F-35As from the 48th Fighter Wing based at RAF Lakenheath in the United Kingdom and F-16s from the 31st Fighter Wing at Aviano Air Base in Italy. USAFE said the exercise focused on integrating advanced F-35s—and the ever-expanding number of countries that fly the jet—with existing capabilities in the region such as the F-16. A spokesperson for USAFE said Falcon Strike 2022 is one of the largest exercises the command’s F-35s have taken part in since arriving in Europe in December 2021.

Amendola Air Base, the main air base that hosted the event, also held a meeting of top leaders of many air forces that operate the F-35 to “crosstalk” ways to employ the fighter and to give updates on how each nation is using its aircraft, according to USAFE.

For the U.S., the exercise advanced a broader goal for the Air Force. Agile combat employment, or ACE, was top of mind for the Americans at Amendola. ACE aims to move toward distributed operations and the ability to operate with a smaller footprint. The Air Force sees ACE as the way ahead as large American air bases may be at risk from missile attacks or other strikes from China or Russia, which present the main security challenges according to the National Defense Strategy.

“Our partnerships in the European theater provide the backbone of USAFE’s Agile Combat Employment doctrine,” a spokesperson for USAFE said of the exercise.

Gen. James B. Hecker, the USAFE commander, said Falcon Strike and the accompanying air chiefs meeting would help the U.S. draw on allied resources in the future.

“There might be times when a U.S. F-35 has to divert to another air base, or maybe we can even plan on going to another air base and we don’t have the maintenance or the equipment to go with them,” Hecker told reporters at the air chiefs meeting in Italy, according to USAFE.

Hecker said such flexibility is a necessity, not a luxury.

“I think it’s really a war fighting imperative to be able to do that,” Hecker said of ACE.

The meeting of F-35 air chiefs included top air force leaders from the U.S., Italy, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Israel, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, and the U.K. The Lockheed Martin-made F-35 has strong demand in Europe. Germany recently committed to buying 35 F-35s in light of Russian aggression.

“We looked at various options, and the F-35 is already being flown in Europe, and thus Europe has grown together,” German Parliamentary State Secretary Siemtje Möller for the Ministry of Defense told Air & Space Forces Magazine. “The F-35 was a big opportunity. We needed something we could buy now. We wanted to join the family of user nations. It will provide interoperability and shared capability throughout Europe and NATO.”

By 2034, more than 600 F-35s will be operating in Europe, according to Hecker, who also leads NATO Allied Air Command. In its statement on Falcon Strike, the Dutch Ministry of Defense said the event was “above all” focused on the F-35. Around 1,000 service members from the Netherlands, Italy, and the U.S. participated in the exercise, operating from multiple air bases on the Italian mainland and a training range in Sardinia.

Hecker hopes eventual deployments of U.S. F-35s to foreign bases can advance the goal of ACE. He said the U.S. and its allies aim to make the F-35 employable across Europe, irrespective of which air bases or air forces are involved.

“We’re trying to make it interoperable, so if any F-35 nation can work with any F-35, no matter what nation it comes from, it can work on it—not just refuel it, but rearm it as well,” Hecker said. “We want to get to that stage in the game, and this is the beginning of that.”

Air Force Announces Pause of Much-Maligned ‘myEval’ Platform

Air Force Announces Pause of Much-Maligned ‘myEval’ Platform

Nov. 28, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

Less than a year after announcing the rollout of a new online platform for evaluations, the Air Force is pausing use of the system amid a deluge of complaints from Airmen. 

The service initially promised that the platform, dubbed myEval, would be a “21st century IT application” and eventually include functions such as “click to sign” for forms, the auto-population of information directly from the Military Personnel Data System, and “integration with other myFSS applications, such as myFitness, to auto-populate performance-related data.”

Such features, however, were not available upon launch in February, and complaints quickly began emerging on Reddit, Facebook, and other social media platforms.

On Nov. 19, the Air Force Personnel Center seemingly yielded to those complaints, announcing that it would “pause using the current version of myEval to create and process all enlisted and officer evaluations.” Instead, Airmen will use PDFs from e-Pubs to complete evaluations, processed through the Case Management System. 

“This pause also allows our A1, AFPC, and Digital Transformation Activity teams to focus on the future myEval so it provides the trust, reliability, transparency, and simplicity we need moving forward,” AFPC said in a Facebook post. 

The agency gave no timeline for when myEval might be relaunched or used again, and the Air Force did not respond to a Nov. 22 query from Air & Space Forces Magazine. 

The move to shelve the system ends a tumultuous 11 months since the Air Force first rolled out myEval. The Air Force did not immediately detail how many complaints it received from Airmen about the application, or any other data about the feedback it received, but the overwhelming consensus was that it was confusing, buggy, and frequently failed. 

Among the issues Airmen have publicly noted, many said it often took multiple attempts to perform a single step before forms or changes were recorded; data that was pulled was incorrect and hard to change; character limits and spacing created appearance issues on performance reviews; and other problems. 

Issues with the system were so prolific and widespread that Vice Chief of Staff Gen. David W. Allvin and Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force JoAnne S. Bass acknowledged the problem in a Sept. 1 “Coffee Talk” livestream on Facebook.

“I think everyone would say it’s not as well executed as it could be,” Allvin said at the time. “We own that.”

Bass once more acknowledged the problems in a Nov. 21 post confirming that myEval has been paused. 

“We get it, folks. We have seen the memes and the jokes … more importantly, we have seen the legitimate concerns and feedback about myEval,” Bass wrote. “As it stands now, the system is not able to seamlessly process reports into a member’s official records.” 

Bass even poked fun at the system herself, posting a meme from the 2014 film “The Babadook,” with a mother asking her child, “Why can’t you be normal?” and the child being labeled “myEval.” 

Airmen across the service posted plenty of memes and jokes about myEval over the last several months, but there was also concern that the system’s problems would have very real effects on service members’ careers—potentially costing promotions, assignments, or awards—to say nothing of the day-to-day headaches and stress that dealing with the system caused. 

Yet while many Airmen have clamored for myEval to be shelved for months now, the shift to PDFs and the Case Management System could potentially create new headaches, as some Airmen posted on social media that they had labored through myEval to finish evaluations, only to now have to restart the process. 

Q&A: The New Chief of Space Operations on Empowering the Force 

Q&A: The New Chief of Space Operations on Empowering the Force 

Nov. 27, 2022 | By Tobias Naegele

Gen. B. Chance “Salty” Saltzman became the second-ever Chief of Space Operations on Nov. 2, bringing with him a resume unlikely ever to be repeated. A space operator most of his career, he was the deputy air component commander at U.S. Central Command and the first Space Force S-3 operations czar. He spoke with Air & Space Forces Magazine Editor in Chief Tobias Naegele a few weeks after taking over as Chief. 

Q: Every new Chief brings ideas and concerns that grew out of personal experiences in the service over the course of a career. What was one of those for you?  

A: I think one overriding thing that I was always frustrated by in the space community is how high up the chain decisions have to be made. Lack of trust, of lower-level [staff] … Some of what I thought were the most simple decisions, you had to defer up the chain. I thought that slowed us down. I thought that it didn’t train our junior members to be a good decision-makers. And I just said, we have got to figure out how to empower our younger members—I’m thinking about the skills of officers here, but this equally applies to the enlisted corps positions—how do we push this down? When we say Mission Command, do we mean it? Or is that just kind of the phrase of the day? And if you mean it, it’s how you respond when they make bad decisions; it’s how you respond to not being comfortable that you don’t get to make a decision because it’s more important that the right person at the right organizational level makes this decision—even if you think you might be able to make it better. … Rather than pulling the decision and authority up, [leaders should] mentor down. Train them how to make the better decisions. It’s the ‘teach a man to fish’ kind of thing. … 

There’s a Thomas Jefferson quote that I have hanging on a placard back at home: ‘I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control … the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education.’ … That’s the way I see Mission Command. …  I’m going to delegate down. I’m going to empower … and they’re going to get some stuff wrong. They’re going to do things not how I would do it. And I can respond one of two ways: I can pull those authorities away from them and pull them up. Or I can educate, train, build, and show them how to do better the next time and just live with the fact that it was not quite as good as I want them to be. And then hope they do that at the next echelon, and the next echelon after that. It’s hard sometimes. When people make mistakes, I could be embarrassed. At some point, the Chairman’s going to yell, or the Secretary of the Air Force, and I’m going to be embarrassed, probably in a public forum, for something that somebody else did, that I could have done better. … And I think it would be a very human response to get mad down the chain and say, ‘All right, you’re never doing that again—I’m doing it.’ That’s the real test. Do I have the conviction of this approach to say, ‘Hey, I got embarrassed by this,’ and use that as the training and mentoring opportunity [it should be]. … I hope I have the patience to take the deep breath and have a mature response when that happens. 

Q: Many Americans are still unaware we have a Space Force, or if they are aware, why we need one. How can you change that? 

A: You know, I was at the Washington Commanders game [after Veterans Day] and they were doing a salute to service. All of the services are holding their seal with members of the service, and the Space Force was right there with all the others, and they played the medley, and they played the Space Force song. It wasn’t a packed house, but it wasn’t inconsequential, either, and it’s on TV. You chip away, right? I can’t educate 300 million people, but we can chip away at it. We just have to make ourselves available. … One of the little things I like, is I’m gonna encourage our people to wear uniforms in the airports when they travel. It says Space Force. The times I’ve done it, people notice, they say, well, ‘That’s a real thing? I’ve never seen a Space Force guy.’ … So no big campaigns, just kind of keep chipping away. 

Q: You’re operating in a new sphere as a four-star and as a service chief. And I imagine there are still some who don’t think the Space Force merits equal status. So your challenge is to prove you belong on the team. How? 

A: What I have working for me are facts. Over the last 20 years, the other services have been able to save money by buying different kinds of equipment in smaller numbers, because of space capabilities. Whether it’s precision with weapons—you know how a B-17 drops 200 bombs and hits 0.5 targets, while one B-2 hits 80 independent targets because of GPS. … So … we will deliver force structure because [we] recognize now that our adversaries see the asymmetric advantage that space provides for the joint force. They are holding at risk our space capabilities. And they built their own space capabilities to do over-the-horizon targeting, new capabilities to create this very defensive bubble for themselves.

I will argue that what we bring as a new service is focus. You don’t have time to focus on how to get it right in space, because you’re doing the air campaign, or you’re doing the land campaign, or at sea. So don’t worry about it. I’ve got you. We know the nuances, and if we don’t know, we’re going to study, and we’re going to dedicate ourselves to learning them. From the time you’re a brand-new technician or a second lieutenant, we are thinking about the space domain, and where the vulnerabilities are, and how you could shore those up. It’s just dedicated focus, and that’s going to make the joint force better. … Every time we say those words, nobody disagrees with us.

Q: So that makes you the indispensable force? 

A: I don’t think we’re the indispensable force. I think they’re all indispensable, because the problems we’re going to face are multidomain problems. So the joint force has to collectively think about vulnerabilities, attack vectors, opportunities, weights of effort from all the domains to create problems. … The bad analogy is like a cake. What’s indispensable? The flour? The eggs? So my job is just eggs. That’s what I do. But if we think about how it comes together when you mix it, is a joint force. 

Q: Size is an issue. The Space Force is still too small to send the right level leaders to all the meetings and places they need to be, too small to fill all the jobs you probably need. What’s the right size for the force? Do you have a hard number in mind?

A: There are still some substantial growth areas. … I think our headquarters is still not the size that it needs to be to effectively integrate into the Department of Defense. There are still some gaps. I don’t believe our general officer corps is the size it needs to be. The tip of that pyramid kind of starts to define what the rest of the structure needs to be. We have our service components that are going to the combatant commands, that are going to be responsible for integrating space capabilities. … We’re talking about two dozen people right now in EUCOM. That’s not going to be sufficient. … We don’t have the test community that we need. We don’t have the training infrastructure that we need. Our institutional force is not the size it needs to be to maintain the quality of training and education, doctrine, and operational concepts. That’s all new for us. We lived with Air Force operational concepts. Now we’ve got to build our own. We lived in the margins of Air Force tactics validation. Now we’ve got to develop our own. So these are all growth areas. Would it surprise me if five, six, seven years from now we’re twice as big? No.

Q: Within your service, you have just two four-star general billets, the chief and the vice, and until you have someone commanding U.S. Space Command, you’re not going to have a third. Do you have a picture of how many general officers you think you need?

A: I looked across all the services and said, OK, if you have this many general officers, what does a healthy pyramid look like? And it’s actually pretty consistent. For two four-stars, you would need six three-stars, 12 two-stars, and 16 one-stars. That’s kind of the planning factor the other services use, and if we had that, that would work. So that’s 36. We now have 21. It would be a big increase.

Q: And that would build the structure to give you the numbers you need?

A: The problem is that Congress could throw billets at us tomorrow, but we’ve got to grow people to fill those positions. Everything I just mentioned, those are not entry-level positions. If you’re going to be a tester, you’ve got to have some operations background. If you’re going to represent space in the combatant commands, integrated into our plans, you’ve got to have an operational background. So when the hole in your force is that mid-grade to senior grade, the only way out is either pull from other forces, other services, civilianize, or allow time to grow the force. And it’s a combination of all three … take a program manager in Space Systems Command—should that program manager be a GS-15 or an O-6? Because if it’s an O-6, it’s going to take me 18 years to produce one of those, because every O-6 starts as a second lieutenant. And if it’s a GS-15, I might be able to pull somebody that’s got program management experience from commercial industry or another place and pull them straight over.

Q: What is your guidance, then, to the force?

A: My priorities start with a resilient, ready, combat-credible force. And I know exactly what that means. But when I talk to some of the junior and senior officers, they don’t necessarily know in detail what that means. My experience, from the Weapons School and employment of air power, has given me a very, very clear understanding of what needs to be done. That means it’s my job to make sure they understand, to train them, to document my guidance and help them understand. Because this is the shift to a mindset of contestability that most of these officers didn’t grow up learning. They grew up in engineering—’How do I make the system last as long as possible?’ ‘How do I make decisions for longevity?’—not ‘How do I make decisions for attribution and attrition and other things you think about in a contested domain?’ So it’s my responsibility to convey that … so that they’re ready.

Q: The Space Force is roughly 50/50, officers to enlisted. That’s a very different model than what you see in other services. Do you anticipate it will stay that way? 

A: This is where we have to go back and do some things that the other services haven’t had to do for a long, long time: Ask what, exactly, is the purpose of your enlisted corps? … The answer is that technical is always the bedrock of the enlisted force. We have a highly technical workforce. And if we can continue to give them the experience and longevity in certain areas, you create this technical competency, … the systems operators … the technical corporate knowledge. On the acquisition side, I think that the technical skills to accomplish the JCIDS [Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System] process can be heavily weighted on the civilians. Again, longevity … grows over time. So you have these two technical skill sets: For operations, it’s the enlisted. On the acquisition side, it’s the civilians. And your officers, they are the leaders. They have to understand all of that, but they have to make decisions. And that’s a fundamentally different skill set. You have to train them for that, to take all these inputs and [decide] … this is what we’re going to do. That’s what the officers bring. 

Q: At the Space Systems Command campus in Los Angeles, you see banners posted that say, ‘The Threat is Real.’ The implication is that people either hadn’t believed it or weren’t thinking about it. Your focus is similarly on warfighting. What are you doing to build that part of the culture? 

A: I was with the 18th Space Defense Squadron—they’re the ones that maintain the space catalog [of satellites on orbit]. And I’m talking to this specialist. He’s great. And he is so excited about his job, right? He’s tracking the mega constellations. So a StarLink launch is up and 60 spacecraft fly off. And I don’t know if you know how they do that, but they just tumble the rocket body and … because the velocities are slightly different, that’s hard to differentiate quickly, when you’re just using radar. So it’s a processing problem. He says ‘the last time they did this launch, it took us, you know, like 48 hours before we even saw 60. And this time, we did it like 16 hours, because we use a slightly different radar looking angle.’ … And I go, ‘Hey, what can the enemy do to take advantage of this and hide their activities?’ … And he didn’t know how to answer. So I say thanks, and then I grab the squadron commander, and I say, ‘He doesn’t understand the threat. He doesn’t understand what I need from him, [or] that there’s an adversary who is trying to prevent him from doing his job.’ Because—I know, we don’t have the simulators to simulate that, and I don’t have the procedures and tactics to quantify that, and that’s my job. But we’ve got to start having these discussions with these kids. That’s the shift. It’s not about the catalog—that’s what it always was about before. It’s about threat. It’s about our need to understand the domain. And the adversary is trying to prevent us from understanding it.

Q: There’s a great line in the movie “Dr. Strangelove” where the point is made that the Doomsday weapon cannot deter anything if no one knows it exists. The Space Force is ultimately playing a very high-level strategic game. How much do you let adversaries know? And how much does holding information secret limit you from getting the money you need to be effective?

A: So this is ‘the Space Force Theory of Success.’ I’m writing it. And you don’t get to see it yet. 

Q: It says ‘unclassified.’ You’re not going to let me see it?

A: You’re going to see it eventually. But not yet. Because if we don’t describe what we’re trying to do, how do we know what to build? How do we know where to go, where to put our resources? And this is so complicated, it’s so technical. We have to be able to describe this in an unclassified way to say, ‘This is what the problem is,’ and ‘this is our approach to addressing it.’ And ‘Here’s what we need to focus on, and buy, and invest in. … Here’s how I see my role in how we’re doing the business of the Space Force. I’ve watched too many times the senior leader issue guidance and direction and a strategy that becomes an action plan. And then some director of staff somewhere starts tasking it out. We’ve all seen this with varying degrees of success. … I’m going to try to kill two birds with one stone, proving that the Pentagon supports empowerment and giving you [military and civilian Guardians] a broad understanding of where we’re headed. I want to give some left and right guardrails. And then you owe me all of the activities that support it. The activities are going to be broad enough that it requires all of them to do something. There is a training and readiness piece to this; there is an operational piece to this; and an acquisition piece. I’m not going to write any big lines of effort that don’t affect everybody. So, therefore, now you come back to me. … I want to see your plan for implementing my vision.

Q: So is it implicit that you expect your commanders to push that request down to the next level, and so on? 

A: It’s not implicit—it will be explicit. I have no reason to believe that you can do this if you hold the authorities to yourself. You have to pass this down. And [those subordinate organizations] organically determine the opportunities, activities, and investments that are needed at their level, for their piece of the puzzle, and that aggregates up under your vision, which aggregates up under my vision. So there’s going to be buy-in because it’s their ideas, their initiatives. We’re going to provide enough guidance so that we’re happy with whatever they come up with.                                  

Largest Distinguished Flying Cross Ceremony ‘in Decades’ Honors More Than 50 Airmen

Largest Distinguished Flying Cross Ceremony ‘in Decades’ Honors More Than 50 Airmen

Nov. 23, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

Air Mobility Command boss Gen. Mike Minihan awarded 51 Distinguished Flying Cross awards at Joint Base Charleston, S.C., on Nov. 21—one of the largest DFC ceremonies in recent history.

All of the awards were given to Airmen who participated in Operation Allies Refuge, the noncombatant evacuation out of Kabul, Afghanistan, in the summer of 2021, as the Taliban seized control of the country and tens of thousands of civilians were airlifted to safety. 

Among those honored were Airmen who rescued hundreds amid chaos as civilians breached the airfield at Hamid Karzai International Airport, aircrew from the very final flights out of Kabul on Aug. 30, 2021, and service members who helped deliver a baby aboard a C-17. The awardees also included the very first Black women to ever be given the Distinguished Flying Cross, the nation’s fourth-highest award for heroism. 

A press release from the 628th Air Base Wing deemed the ceremony “the largest of its kind in decades.” The Distinguished Flying Cross was first established in 1926.

distinguished flying cross
Distinguished Flying Cross awards are lined up prior to the DFC ceremony at Joint Base Charleston, S.C., Nov. 21, 2022. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Alex Fox Echols III.

The 51 DFCs represent the majority of the awards related to Operation Allies Refuge announced by Air Mobility Command in October—96 total. Many of the Airmen honored Nov. 21 are from the 437th Airlift Wing, with some from the Air Force Reserve’s 315th Airlift Wing. 

“The men and women from this installation were ready to do whatever it took to deliver the forces needed to secure the Kabul airport and then to evacuate and save as many lives as possible,” Minihan said at the ceremony. “It’s what they did next that displayed heroism and selfless devotion to duty—the reason for today’s ceremony.” 

Virtually every stage of the evacuation was represented among those honored, from flying crew chiefs that kept the C-17s going amid an unprecedented workload and challenging conditions, to a loadmaster and flight nurse who assisted an Afghan woman giving birth midflight, to pilots who landed and took off in the dead of night while facing flares and heavy machine gun fire, transporting the very last U.S. troops off Afghan soil. 

Those decorated ranged in rank from Senior Airman to Lieutenant Colonel. The breakdown of awards included: 

  • 22 C-17 pilots, including Lt. Col. Alexander Pelbath, director of C-17 special operations for the 437th Operations Group, and Capt. Rhea McFarland, one of two Black women to become the first given the DFC; 
  • 18 loadmasters; 
  • 6 maintenance special operations Airmen; 
  • 4 flying crew chiefs; 
  • 1 flight nurse, Capt. Leslie Green—the second of the two Black women honored. 

Most of the awards were given with the “C” device for combat, given only when the service member “was personally exposed to hostile action or under significant risk of hostile action.” 

distinguished flying cross
Air Force Gen. Mike Minihan, commander of Air Mobility Command, speaks to 51 Distinguished Flying Cross recipients during a ceremony at Joint Base Charleston, S.C., Nov. 21, 2022. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Alex Fox Echols III.

The full list of 51 Airmen given the DFC follows: 

  • Lt. Col. Trey Adams, 701st Airlift Squadron C-17 pilot 
  • Lt. Col. Braden Coleman, 15th AS C-17 pilot 
  • Lt. Col. Alexander Pelbath, 437th Operations Group director of C-17 special operations 
  • Maj. Jay Campbell, 8th AS C-17 pilot  
  • Maj. Justin Cherry, 43rd Operations Support Squadron C-17 pilot 
  • Maj. William Cuchens, 701st AS C-17 pilot 
  • Maj. David Gantt, 701st AS C-17 pilot 
  • Maj. Joseph Granatelli, 429th Expeditionary Operations Squadron C-17 pilot 
  • Maj. Ryan Versen, 156th AS C-17 pilot 
  • Maj. Kirby Wedan, 14th AS director of operations and C-17 pilot 
  • Capt. Mark Altobelli, 15th AS C-17 pilot 
  • Capt. Charles Armstrong, 16th AS C-17 pilot 
  • Capt. Howlett Cohick, 16th AS C-17 pilot 
  • Capt. Dennis Connor, 701st AS C-17 pilot 
  • Capt. Spencer Dewey, 437th OSS C-17 pilot 
  • Capt. Kenneth Di Giovanni, 16th AS C-17 pilot 
  • Capt. Amanda Edgren, 14th AS C-17 pilot 
  • Capt. Derrin Gelston, 437th OSS C-17 pilot 
  • Capt. Leslie Green, 375th Air Expeditionary Squadron flight nurse 
  • Capt. Kevin Hart, 14th AS C-17 pilot 
  • Capt. Chris Hoffman, 15th Airlift Squadron C-17 
  • Capt. Rhea McFarland, 14th AS C-17 pilot 
  • 1st Lt. Jon-Michael Hollarn, 16th AS C-17 pilot 
  • Master Sgt. Joshua Martin, 437th OG loadmaster 
  • Master Sgt. Liam McPhail, 14th AS loadmaster 
  • Master Sgt. Leah Schmidt, 701st AS loadmaster 
  • Tech. Sgt. Jerry Daniels, 16th AS loadmaster 
  • Tech. Sgt. Chase Gautschi, 62nd Aircraft Maintenance Squadron flying crew chief 
  • Tech. Sgt. Dennis Gonzalez-Furman, 354th Special Warfare Training Support Squadron student and flying crew chief 
  • Tech. Sgt. Jacorey Grimes, 860th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron flying crew chief 
  • Tech. Sgt. Dennis Hiott, 701st AS loadmaster 
  • Tech. Sgt. David Riggins, 437th OG loadmaster  
  • Tech. Sgt. Ethan Schaffner, 437th AMXS MASOP 
  • Tech. Sgt. Brett Yoakum, Air National Guard, 155th AS loadmaster 
  • Staff Sgt. Kevin Coleman, 437th AMXS flying crew chief 
  • Staff Sgt. Robert Gillespie, 437th OG loadmaster 
  • Staff Sgt. Emmanuel Gomez, 14th AS loadmaster 
  • Staff Sgt. Alexander Herman, 16th AS loadmaster 
  • Staff Sgt. Zach Lewis, 14th AS loadmaster 
  • Staff Sgt. Matthew Link, 16th AS loadmaster 
  • Staff Sgt. Brandon Malacara, 437th OG loadmaster 
  • Staff Sgt. Sean McPadden, 437th AMXS MASOP 
  • Staff Sgt. Nicholas Miller-Assous, 14th AS loadmaster 
  • Staff Sgt. Dane Schulte, 728th AMXS, MASOP 
  • Staff Sgt. Cody Schultz, 437th OG loadmaster 
  • Staff Sgt. Tyler Slavin, 437th AMXS MASOP 
  • Staff Sgt. Samuel Weaver, 736th AMXS MASOP 
  • Staff Sgt. Trevor Woods, 437th AMXS MASOP 
  • Senior Airman Christian Hoffman, 16th AS loadmaster 
  • Senior Airman Christopher Symes, 14th AS loadmaster 
  • Senior Airman Christopher Warman, 437th OSS loadmaster 
Distinguished Flying Cross recipients stand in formation after receiving their medals from Air Force Gen. Mike Minihan, commander of Air Mobility Command, during a ceremony at Joint Base Charleston, S.C., Nov. 21, 2022. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Alex Fox Echols III.
CNAS Report: Defense Budget Must Better Match Strategy, Increase Precision Munitions Purchases

CNAS Report: Defense Budget Must Better Match Strategy, Increase Precision Munitions Purchases

Nov. 22, 2022 | By Chris Gordon

The Department of Defense must do more to make sure its budget matches up with the needs of its overall strategy, according to a new report from the Center for a New American Security. The report places particular focus on the fiscal 2023 budget request, which was submitted to Congress in March before the unclassified National Defense Strategy was made public in October. The National Defense Strategy defines China as the “pacing” longer-term threat and Russia as an “acute” and more temporary challenge.

But the fiscal 2023 budget and the current five-year Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) lack the proper investment to counter those adversaries over the next five years, especially in the area of high-end munitions and in establishing a stronger overseas posture, the report’s authors Stacie Pettyjohn and Hannah Dennis write.

“This report concludes that while the FY23 request makes some strides on both issues, more must be done today to improve the United States’ chances of deterring and, if necessary, defeating the adversary tomorrow,” says the CNAS report, released Nov. 17.

The U.S. needs to do much more, according to the report. A major one is the daunting nature of a potential conflict with China, which is building up its military. Not only would China present a vast array of potential targets, but its extensive air defenses would intercept some U.S. weapons, adding to the U.S. need for a substantial stockpile, according to CNAS.

“In the event of a war with China, deep stockpiles of the right munitions and a distributed and resilient posture will be necessary to deny a quick victory and to then sustain combat operations should the war become protracted,” the report said. “On both accounts, the Department of Defense has urgent work to do.”

With an eye to great power dangers, the CNAS report said, the Air Force has pivoted to purchasing more long-range Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles (JASSMs) over guided bombs such as the Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs), and plans to buy around 500 JASSMs a year, according to data analyzed in the report. The service has a program to fire those weapons from cargo planes to increase the service’s flexibility to employ guided cruise missiles.

But the service has not yet purchased a large amount of Long-Range Anti-Ship Missiles (LRSAMs). It plans to purchase 28 in fiscal 2023, ending up with an inventory of 179 in 2027, according to figures in the five-year defense plan CNAS analyzed. That number is insufficient if the U.S. has to face off against China in wartime, the CNAS report argues.

“Since China has numerous cruisers and destroyers with sophisticated surface-to-air missiles, one must assume that some of the LRASMs would be intercepted by these air defenses; in addition, some would hit decoys or other ships, and some would miss and fail, leaving a very small number of the 179 to penetrate defenses and hit Chinese amphibious ships,” the report says.

Another reason why the report says U.S. faces a potential munitions shortfall comes from lessons of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and previous U.S. conflicts in the Middle East, which have shown that major conventional war consumes enormous amounts of ordnance.

“The ongoing war in Ukraine has elevated the issue of munitions stockpiles to front-page news as both Ukrainian and Russian forces continue to consume high volumes of key weapons,” the CNAS report said.

The U.S. has provided around $19 billion in military aid, which has mostly come from U.S. stock but also includes contracts with the defense industry. U.S. aid has included precision munitions, such as GPS-guided Excalibur artillery rounds, High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS), Stinger man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS), and Javelin anti-tank weapons.

More rudimentary weapons, such as small arms and howitzers, have also been heavily used by both Russia and Ukraine. The war in Ukraine has depleted Russian artillery stocks to the point they have turned to North Korea to replenish their arsenal, U.S. officials have alleged. And they have also eaten into U.S. stocks as well. According to a report by The Wall Street Journal, the U.S. is seeking to purchase 155 mm artillery shells from South Korea that it planned to donate to Kyiv so Ukrainian forces can carry out their fight with the Russians.

The main campaign against ISIS, Operation Inherent Resolve, which began in 2014 and culminated in the retaking of Mosul, Iraq, and Raqqa, Syria, in 2017 provides another example of how quickly precision guided munitions (PGMs) can be expended in war.

The U.S. Air Force was heavily involved in airstrikes against ISIS militants and in support of ground operations by the U.S.’s Iraqi and Syrian partners. A 2021 RAND report assessed that 115,983 weapons were released in coalition airstrikes. Those strikes “depleted precision-guided munition stockpiles” of JDAMs and Hellfire laser-guided-missiles, according to RAND.

“This extended war stressed U.S. weapons supplies and the ability of the defense industry to meet unexpected and prolonged demand for PGMs,” the CNAS report said of Operation Inherent Resolve.

For all of the lessons, however, the CNAS report says its analysis of the Pentagon budget shows that the U.S. is not keeping up with the challenges.

CNAS’s report said while the DOD’s overall 2023 budget request of $24.7 billion in “missiles and munitions” was higher than previous years, only $5.7 billion was for conventional PGMs, excluding strategic nuclear-capable assets such as the Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile and Trident submarine-launched ballistic missile.

“PGMs have not received the same overall increase over the last eight years as the larger category of ‘missiles and munitions,'” the CNAS authors wrote.

The CNAS authors are not the only experts to express concern over the DOD munitions stockpiles should the U.S. engage in a war with China.

Michèle Flournoy, the former undersecretary of defense for policy, and Michael Brown, the former director of the Pentagon’s Defense Innovation Unit, argued in a recent Foreign Affairs article that “the Pentagon’s leadership must urgently address the gap between what the United States has and what it needs to deter China in the near term,” including working to determine which current unfunded priorities need more resources, such as “addressing critical munitions shortages.”

First F-16 Block 70 Emerges From Lockheed Martin’s New Factory—128 More on Order

First F-16 Block 70 Emerges From Lockheed Martin’s New Factory—128 More on Order

Nov. 22, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak

The first F-16 of the Block 70/72 configuration has rolled out of Lockheed Martin’s Greenville, S.C., facility in preparation for first flight early in 2023. The factory is geared up to build at least 128 more of the jets through the end of this decade.

The jet, destined for Bahrain, should be accepted by the U.S. government early in 2023 and will undergo flight testing at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., before it’s delivered under the Foreign Military Sales program. It completed final assembly and checkout (FACO) and painting at Greenville on Nov. 21.

The rate of work on Block 70s under construction at Greenville will “increase significantly” in fiscal 2023, building to a production rate of up to four aircraft per month, a company spokesperson said. Five countries are on contract for the Block 70/72: Bahrain, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Taiwan, and “one other,” the company noted. Jordan has also signed a letter of offer and acceptance for eight aircraft; when awarded, that contract will bring the backlog to 136 aircraft. Bulgaria has also begun the process of buying additional aircraft. Greenville has “multiple other jets” in various stages of work, a Lockheed Martin spokesperson noted.

The company got an indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract in January worth up to $64.3 billion for production of new F-16s for FMS customers as well as upgrades of 405 jets in foreign hands to the F-16V configuration, if all potential work materializes.

Lockheed Martin moved its F-16 production line to South Carolina from Fort Worth, Texas, in 2019 in order to free up space there for increasing F-35 production activities. In addition to producing new F-16s, the Greenville plant is performing modifications and refits on older F-16 models. Moroccan F-16s, for example, will get an upgrade to Block 70/72 configuration at the plant. The company said its backlog will ensure production of factory-new F-16s “through the mid-to-late 2020s.”

When Lockheed Martin moved to restart the F-16 line at Greenville, there was an “uptick” in FMS interest in the jet, Col. Anthony Walker, senior materiel leader, international division, at the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, said in May. A number of countries requested “detailed information and requests for government sales,” he said.

The U.S. Air Force indicated last year that according to its “4+1” fighter roadmap, it plans to keep flying the F-16 well into the 2030s, assuring potential buyers of a strong pipeline for parts and support into the next decade. USAF has indicated it may retain as many as 600 F-16s into the 2030s. The service has also apparently deferred plans to seek a program for a new multirole fighter—not as sophisticated as the F-35—to be called the MR-F or MR-X. That aircraft was expected to have capabilities comparable to those of the F-16.

While Lockheed Martin has tooled for four aircraft a month, “we are always evaluating and looking at ways to increase production to meet customer needs,” the spokesperson said.

“New digital engineering technologies have been implemented into the production line to maximize efficiency and decrease span time. Additionally, we have added more suppliers for certain components, such as our Johnstown, Pennsylvania, facility, to allow us to meet current program needs and future opportunities for new production F-16s,” she said.

The Block 70 is being marketed to countries that either want to expand their existing F-16 fleets or are not customers for the more sophisticated and stealthy F-35 fighter.

The most advanced version of the F-16, the Block 70/72 mounts the APG-83 active electronically-scanned array (AESA) radar, a new electronic warfare suite called Viper Shield, a more powerful mission computer, an updated cockpit with larger color displays—including zoom and the ability to rearrange displayed information—an uprated engine, capability for most modern weapons, conformal overwing fuel tanks and an infrared search-and-track system and targeting pod capability, improved data links, precision GPS navigation, and an automatic ground collision avoidance system (GCAS), among other improvements. The Block 70/72 also has a structural service life of 12,000 hours, about 50 percent longer than previous F-16s, meaning the type could stay in service until 2060 or so.

The U.S. Air Force bought its last new F-16, a Block 50 model, in 2005. Air Force F-16s are getting some of the improvements available in the Block 70, such as the AESA radar, but the service shifted its acquisition focus on new aircraft first to the F-22 and then the F-35. The service has said it will retire all its early-model, or “pre-block,” F-16s in the next few years.

Slovakia is planning to acquire 70 Block 70/72 F-16s, and that country has offered to give a dozen of its retiring MiG-29 aircraft to Ukraine. However, sources have reported that Ukraine has sought to buy F-16s of its own. There has been discussion of providing F-16s from U.S. stocks to Ukraine, but no firm plans have been announced.

The F-16 has been in the U.S. Air Force operational inventory since 1978, when the F-16A entered service. The aircraft is a development of the YF-16 prototype fighter, which won the Lightweight Fighter Competition in 1974. More than 30 countries have since operated the F-16, and 25 are flying some version of the jet today.  More than 4,550 F-16s have been produced.

PHOTOS: Kadena Lines Up Six Kinds of Aircraft for Elephant Walk

PHOTOS: Kadena Lines Up Six Kinds of Aircraft for Elephant Walk

Nov. 22, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

Three dozen aircraft assembled on the flight line for an “elephant walk” at Kadena Air Base, Japan, on Nov. 22, in a show of air power. 

The capabilities demonstration included six different kinds of aircraft, all stationed at Kadena at the moment—F-15C Eagle and F-22 Raptor fighters, HH-60G Pave Hawk helicopters, a KC-135 Stratotanker, an E-3 Sentry, and an RC-135 Rivet Joint. 

According to images shared by Kadena, the exact breakdown of aircraft included in the elephant walk: 

  • 23 F-15Cs
  • Eight F-22s
  • Two HH-60Gs
  • One E-3 Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS)
  • One KC-135
  • One RC-135

All but the F-22s are part of the 18th Wing, Kadena’s host unit, which has roughly 80 aircraft total. The Raptors are from the 3rd Wing at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, and recently deployed to Kadena after the Air Force confirmed that it will be removing the base’s 48 F-15C/D Eagles over the next several years.

The service has said the F-15C/Ds will initially be replaced by a rotation of deployed fighters, while a permanent replacement has not yet been named, though it is likely to be the F-15EX. F-16s from Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany, are expected to follow the F-22s. 

The display of air power and capabilities at Kadena came on the same day U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III met with his Chinese counterpart, Defense Minister General Wei Fenghe, in Cambodia. During that meeting, Austin called on China “to refrain from further destabilizing actions toward Taiwan,” according to a Pentagon readout.

Kadena, located on the island of Okinawa, is the Air Force’s closest land-based location to Taiwan, some 450 miles away. China considers Taiwan, a self-governed island, to be part of its territory, and tensions between the U.S. and China over Taiwan have been steadily growing as of late. 

A visit to the island by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi earlier this year sparked a series of aggressive exercises by the Chinese around the island, and in June, Australia claimed that a Chinese fighter jet released chaff in front of an Australian P-8, a move the Australian government described as a “dangerous maneuver.” 

Austin raised similar concerns in his meeting with Wei, citing “the increasingly dangerous behavior demonstrated by [People’s Liberation Army] aircraft in the Indo-Pacific region that increases the risk of an accident.” 

In addition to the Nov. 22 capabilities demonstration, aircraft at Kadena recently participated in Keen Sword 23, a biennial exercise involving the U.S., Japan, Australia, and the United Kingdom.