LaPlante: Congress Will Support Multiyear Weapons Procurements

Nov. 4, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak

Congress is of a mind to allow the Pentagon to do more multiyear procurement—in the billions of dollars—particularly of munitions, given the situation in Ukraine and its implications for other potential conflicts, Pentagon acquisition and sustainment chief William LaPlante said.

“We’re going to have multi-year authority, I believe, from the Congress,” LaPlante said at a Nov. 4 acquisition conference held by George Mason University.

“They are supportive of this. They are going to give us multi-year authority, and they are going to give us funding to really put into the industrial base … billions of dollars … to fund these production lines. That, I predict, is going to happen,” he said.

He noted that members of Congress have written to him expressing surprise and distress that many weapons being supplied to Ukraine—Javelin anti-tank missiles, Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, and High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (which LaPlante said are being called “St. HIMARS” because they are having such a huge effect in Ukraine’s success)—have long been out of production, which cannot easily be restarted.

LaPlante reiterated his recent comments that “production is deterrence” and that his priority is neither experiments nor prototypes, but instead capabilities that can be put into the hands of operators “at scale.” Ukraine’s partners can supply that country with munitions while Russia is running low, he noted.

There will be no need to “incentivize” companies to build greater production capacity, LaPlante said, because the Pentagon is going to show people “we’re serious about it” in a way that “we have not done since the Cold War.”

At a recent NATO Armaments Directors meeting on Ukraine chaired by LaPlante, members said they’ve heard that companies want to see a solid “demand signal” for high-volume production before investing in capacity.

He acknowledged that they’ve been burned before.

Paraphrasing what he’s heard from companies, LaPlante said, “‘ Sure, you’re going to put a lot of money against this now—in the midst of a crisis—but two years from now, you’re going to leave me holding the bag. And if you say, you’ve never done that to me—you’ve done it to me before.’ So that gets back to the multiyear.”

He continued that “It’s pretty simple” how to get companies on board.

“You put it in the RFP [request for proposals], and you do it.” The Pentagon needs surge production, and “we’re going to have to contract for it.”

LaPLante said he’s been “very vocal” about the need for multiyear procurements on munitions.

“When people see that there are multiyear contracts coming along for munitions and that we’re going to put production lines at higher capacity, and we’re going to pay for it, and we’re going to put it in the RFP, and we’re going to award to it, they’ll pay attention,” he said.

He also said the armaments directors agree that NATO needs not just interoperability, but interchangeability, with multiple plants in multiple countries making identical items in order to have greater surge capacity.

LaPlante said an industry official told him, “‘To be honest with you, you’re going to have to make us do it. We will not do it on our own, because it actually puts us at a disadvantage to our competitor. If my stuff is interchangeable with another company’s stuff, then I’ve just lowered the barrier of entry.’” Nevertheless, it will be done because it will be part of the contract, he said.

Similarly, the Pentagon will have to put open architectures into contracts, because “otherwise, it’s not going to happen.”

LaPlante said there’s also fatigue among the allies for highly complex weapon systems that take a long time to develop at great cost. The allies and partners are agreed that they will, where possible, take advantage of the investments they have all made in new systems to reduce costs and broaden production.

“An example would be the E-7, which the Air Force is interested in … It’s a Boeing plane that Australia paid the non-recurring [costs] for, to fit it up as an AWACS replacement.” With a little extra investment for communications, “it’s done,” LaPlante said. “You’ve got yourself an airplane. It’s in production—imagine that. People are going to want to do more of that.” There will be more co-production agreements, and the U.S. and its allies will also “share more information,” he said.

The new National Defense Strategy extensively features “integrated deterrence,” LaPlante said.

“If I was somebody we were trying to deter, I would pay a whole lot of attention if a [U.S.] production line showed up in Australia and Japan for capabilities that previously had only been produced in the United States.”

Missile Defense of Guam Is ‘Big Issue,’ DOD Official Says

Nov. 4, 2022 | By Chris Gordon

The U.S. is “clearly committed” to its plans to significantly improve its missile defense of Guam, a senior defense official said Nov. 3, expanding on a key theme of the recently released Missile Defense Review.

“Missile defense of Guam is a big deal,” John Plumb, the assistant secretary of defense for space policy, said at an event hosted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “It’s going to require persistent layered defenses. We have cruise missile threats. We have ballistic missile threats, general air threats. So doing that is a big issue, and we are very clearly committed to it.”

The U.S. territory in the Western Pacific is a major U.S. military and logistical center that may be within the range of Chinese missiles. The 2022 National Defense Strategy, released jointly with the Missile Defense Review for the first time, called China the “pacing threat” to America over the coming “decisive decade.”

If the U.S. were to enter a conflict with China, Guam would be critical to support U.S. operations. China has been increasingly aggressive in its claims over Taiwan. President Joe Biden has pledged to defend the self-governed democratic island that Beijing claims as its own. As the home of Anderson Air Force Base, as well as a major naval base, Guam is key to supporting large U.S. air operations in the Pacific. B-1 bombers and A-10 close air support aircraft have recently been operating from Guam, the westernmost part of U.S. soil.

“The defense of Guam, it’s clearly about China,” said Plumb, whose portfolio includes missile defense. “Just no beating around the bush. That’s what it is. Guam is a power projection hub for us. We have military forces there. We have U.S. citizens there, and we’re going to protect it.”

Guam is a U.S. territory, not a state, but the Missile Defense Review clarifies that it should not invite China or any other nation to view an attack on Guam, one-fourth of which is land owned by the U.S., as less significant.

“We’ve also very clearly stated an attack on Guam is, in fact, an attack on the U.S. homeland in case there had been any misunderstanding about that by the adversary,” Plumb said.

However, unlike the continental U.S., Guam does not have fixed air defenses. Currently, the island is primarily protected by an ad-hoc system of Army Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) systems and Navy ships off its coast with Aegis systems.

THAAD “gives us protection from ballistic missiles, and some of the other missiles as well, but it is somewhat limited in scope,” Navy Rear Adm. Benjamin Nicholson told Air & Space Forces Magazine in June.

U.S. commanders have expressed a desire for a comprehensive system that can detect and destroy ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, drones, hypersonic weapons, and other threats. If the U.S. Air Force is to fight a high-intensity conflict in the Pacific, Guam will be crucial to stage, refuel, repair, and rearm aircraft. To counter threats to major hubs such as Guam, the Air Force hopes to adopt what it calls agile combat employment (ACE), or distributed operations. But the vastness of the Pacific ocean means constructing new airstrips in the region will not be easy and that Guam will play a significant role as the Air Force moves forward with ACE.

“I can’t get it soon enough,” Pacific Air Forces Gen. Kenneth S. Wilsbach said of improved missile defenses. “So I need them to push it up—hurry up and field those capabilities for them and for us.”

Those concerns have been heard by civilian leaders at the Pentagon and were formally backed up in the Missile Defense Review, Plumb insisted. The Department of Defense has proposed over half a billion dollars in fiscal 2023 to build a 360-degree, integrated air and missile defense system for Guam.

“We are going to fund that, and we’ve addressed it kind of head-on, and we’re investing in it to a significant tune, and we’ll continue to do so to make sure that we can do it,” Plumb said. “That is new because it’s the difference between saying we should do things and actually doing them.”

AMC Investigating Class A Mishap That Damaged KC-46 Boom, Fuselage

Nov. 4, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

Air Mobility Command is investigating a potential Class A mishap involving a KC-46 Pegasus tanker that left the plane’s boom and fuselage damaged in October.

The incident, which occurred Oct. 15, was first reported by Air Force Times after images circulated on social media showing the refueler with a cracked boom and a dented tail cone. AMC spokesperson Capt. Natasha Mosquera confirmed the details to Air & Space Forces Magazine.

The KC-46 in question belongs to the 305th Air Mobility Wing from Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, N.J., and was flying back to the base from the United Kingdom when it experienced an “in-flight emergency after experiencing a problem with the refueling system, causing damage to the boom and fuselage,” Mosquera said.

Air Force Times reported that the problem occurred while the KC-46 was refueling an F-15 due to the two planes flying at such different speeds that the boom forcibly broke away from the fighter and hit the KC-46.

Mosquera told Air & Space Forces Magazine that the cause of the problem had not been determined, with an investigation scheduled to conclude in late November.

The Air Force defines Class A mishaps as those that result in a death or permanent disability, cause more than $2.5 million in damage, or result in the destruction of an aircraft. No injuries were reported from this mishap.

The final cost of the incident, however, won’t be determined until the investigation is complete. After that, AMC may convene an Accident Investigation Board to study the issue further.

The 305th AMW first began accepting KC-46s just shy of a year ago.

The Pegasus has endured a high-profile series of problems that limited the tanker’s operations for months and delayed declaration of initial operational capability by years. It was only this past September that the Air Force declared the aircraft ready for worldwide deployments and combatant commander taskings, including in combat, with the sole exception of the A-10.

Among those issues, the Air Force determined several years ago that the KC-46’s boom was too stiff, meaning it “would not extend or retract during flight testing unless subjected to more force” than some aircraft could manage, according to a Pentagon inspector general’s report.

At the same time, the service also uncovered problems with the aircraft’s Remote Vision System, the setup of cameras and monitors the boom operator uses to connect the tanker to the refueling aircraft. The system has been found to wash out or black out in certain conditions, such as in direct sunlight, and sometimes causes problems with the operator’s depth perception. That creates the risk of the boom operator accidentally hitting the aircraft the KC-46 is refueling.

Both the boom and RVS problems have been labeled Category 1 deficiencies, the most serious, and are still unresolved. Mosquera confirmed to Air & Space Forces Magazine that fixes for both issues are still years away.

However, it is still not clear whether either of those problems contributed to the recent mishap, and Mosquera indicated that there have been no extra alerts or precautions put in place because of it.

“AMC is confident in the KC-46’s ability to project and connect the Joint force worldwide and will continue to meet global taskings in support of combatant command requirements,” she said.

C-17 Crew That Rescued 823 From Afghanistan Awarded Distinguished Flying Crosses

Nov. 4, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

Ten Airmen, including the C-17 crew who flew a record-breaking 823 people to safety during the noncombatant evacuation out of Afghanistan last August, received the Distinguished Flying Cross on Nov. 1.

Every member of that famous C-17 flight, call sign REACH 871, received a DFC with a “Valor” device, denoting “an act or acts of heroism by an individual above what is normally expected while engaged in direct combat with an enemy of the United States … with exposure to enemy hostilities and personal risk.”

Air Mobility Command boss Gen. Mike A. Minihan awarded the Distinguished Flying Crosses, the military’s fourth-highest award for heroism, along with eight Bronze Star Medals in a ceremony at Joint Base McGuire–Dix-Lakehurst, N.J.

The awards are part of a larger batch of medals and decorations approved by AMC in October for Operation Allies Refuge, the name given to the evacuation from Hamid Karzai International Airport in Kabul, Afghanistan, as the Taliban seized control of the government and thousands of desperate Afghan nationals, American citizens, and individuals from partner nations scrambled to leave the country.

Members of the 621st Contingency Response Wing, who received the Bronze Star Medals given Nov. 1, helped to restore order and secure the airfield, and began directing air traffic, with the help of other units. The 621st Contingency Response Group will also receive the Gallant Unit Citation.

At HKIA, chaotic scenes unfolded Aug. 15, as Afghan citizens breached the airfield, with some attempting to climb onto U.S. Air Force C-17s.

Before that, however, the crew of REACH 871, from the 305th Air Mobility Wing, made the decision to take off with as many Afghan evacuees as possible, despite the lack of an official manifest, due to the deteriorating security situation.

The flight quickly made international headlines—audio of the crew informing an Air Force control center that they had 800 passengers on board circulated on social media, as did a photo showing hundreds of evacuees crammed into the C-17’s cargo bay.

A photo from the inside of Reach 871, a U.S. Air Force C-17 flown from Kabul, Afghanistan, to Qatar on Aug. 15, 2021. USAF

AMC initially said 640 people had been rescued, before revising that number to 823 after counting the children on board the flight. That far exceeded the previous record of 670, and more than doubled the typical maximum of about 300 people when the C-17 is outfitted for large passenger loads.

The flight also produced the photo of a young Afghan child sleeping beneath an Airman’s jacket—a powerful image that went viral and has been highlighted by many Air Force leaders as symbolic of the service’s contribution to the evacuation.

The Airman to whom the jacket belonged, now-Senior Airman Nicolas Baron, was one of seven crew members on REACH 871 who received the Distinguished Flying Cross. The others were aircraft commander Lt. Col. Eric Kut, pilots Capt. Cory Jackson and 1st. Lt. Mark Lawson, loadmaster Tech. Sgt. Justin Triola, and flying crew chiefs Staff Sgt. Derek Laurent and Senior Airman Richard Johnson.

An Afghan child, covered with a USAF Airman’s jacket, sleeps on the floor of a C-17 as it leaves the chaos in Kabul, Afghanistan. **CMSAF JoAnn Bass via Facebook**

Three other Airmen involved in the evacuation received DFCs from Minihan, all with the “Combat” device: Capt. Andrew Perrella, a C-17 pilot, Capt. Jedd Dillman, a flight nurse, and Master Sgt. Matthew Newman, a respiratory therapist.

Dillman and Newman are the first aeromedical evacuation Airmen in AMC history to receive the Distinguished Flying Cross, and Laurent and Johnson are the first two flying crew chiefs, according to an AMC release.

The following Airmen from the 621st Contingency Response Wing received Bronze Star Medals, which are awarded to those who distinguish themselves “by heroic or meritorious achievement or service, not involving participation in aerial flight, in connection with military operations against an armed enemy”:

Col. Colin McClaskey
Lt. Col. Joshua Johnson
Maj. Michael Sattes
Maj. Adam Cooper
Master Sgt. Dustin Sanderlin
Master Sgt. Bryan Masters
Master Sgt. Brian Cantu
Tech. Sgt. Gabrielle Di Clementi

Air Force Airmen assigned to the 621st Contingency Response Wing pose with Gen. Mike A. Minihan, Air Mobility Command commander, after being awarded the Bronze Star Medal at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, N.J., Nov. 1, 2022. The Bronze Star Medal is a United States Armed Forces decoration awarded to members of the United States Armed Forces for either heroic achievement, heroic service, meritorious achievement, or meritorious service in a combat zone. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Joseph Morales,

Report: Lethal Autonomous Weapons Could Intensify Wars; US Backs Limits

Nov. 3, 2022 | By Amanda Miller

The emergence of lethal autonomous weapons could intensify military competition, according to a report published Oct. 31 by the Stimson Center. It follows a meeting of the United Nations First Committee in which the U.S. became one of 70 countries to favor limiting the weapons.

The authors of the policy brief “Bolstering Arms Control in a Contested Geopolitical Environment,” Michael Moodie and Jerry Zhang, advocate for reinforcing the world’s fracturing arms control framework.

Disruptive new technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), “heightened competition” among world powers, and a “rapidly deteriorating security environment” have already exerted “stiff pressure” on the “global arms control regime,” according to the report—the United Nations Conference on Disarmament “unable to reach a single meaningful new agreement” for 20 years.

At the same time, the authors acknowledge “plausible scenarios” in which AI “plunges the world into a devastating war by error,” concluding that lethal autonomous weapons—employing AI, nanotechnology, and advanced sensors—“could exacerbate competition and make conflicts more destructive.” Already, “the risk grows that they will fall into the hands of terrorists, criminals, warlords, or other malign actors.”

After opposing a treaty to govern such weapons in 2021, the U.S. became one of 70 countries to provide the Joint Statement on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems to the U.N.’s First Committee on Oct. 21. The statement urges the adoption of “appropriate rules and measures, such as principles, good practices, limitations and constraints” on autonomous weapons to help allay “serious concerns from humanitarian, legal, security, technological and ethical perspectives.”

The statement praises, despite a lack of “concrete outcomes,” the “important” work being done to explore the implications of lethal autonomous weapons by a U.N. Group of Governmental Experts. It stresses the need for “human beings to exert appropriate control, judgment and involvement in relation to the use of weapons systems in order to ensure any use is in compliance with International Law, in particular International Humanitarian Law, and that humans remain accountable for decisions on the use of force.”

In remarks to the U.N. Security Council on Nov. 3, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned that the “world is transforming at breakneck speed” and that lethal autonomous weapons together with cyber warfare “are presenting risks we barely comprehend and lack the global architecture to contain.”

Former Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert O. Work said in a call with reporters in September that Western militaries “see AI primarily as a means to help humans make better decisions”—that autonomous weapons are not being “designed to supplant the human decision-maker.”

Work was vice chair of the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, which completed its work in 2021. He now serves as a member of the Board of Advisors for the AI-oriented Special Competitive Studies Project and is listed as chairing the board of AI contractor SparkCognition Government Systems.

“In the U.S. conception, our AI systems will be able to create their own courses of action to complete a task assigned to them by a human and choose among them,” Work explained. “But we are staying far away from any system that could choose its own goals and choose among them.”

However, he acknowledged that a weapon’s ability to “set its own objectives” is “going to be central to competition.

“We don’t know how authoritarian countries will view this. Perhaps they will assign more decision-making authority to machines than the West would be comfortable doing … and it might be a fruitful area for discussion among all the competitors.”

Arms control talks could help “make sure we don’t get to the most dangerous systems that I think of,” Work said—“and those are systems that might be able to unilaterally order a preemptive or a retaliatory strike. That would be extraordinarily destabilizing, and I think it would be in the interest of all competitors to stay away from those type of systems.”

In a speech to Air Force Academy cadets in February, the Space Force’s Vice Chief of Space Operations Gen. David D. Thompson told Cadets the U.S. will need machines that decide to kill—and that confronting the inherent ethical dilemmas “can’t wait.”

The Vatican’s Archbishop Gabriele Caccia, permanent observer of the Holy See to the United Nations, delivered a statement to the First Committee on Oct. 12 arguing that lethal autonomous weapons “cannot maintain compliance with International Humanitarian Law” if they separate “the unique human capacity for moral judgment from actions that could result in bodily harm or even death.”

US, South Korea Extend Air Exercises After North Korean Missile Tests

Nov. 3, 2022 | By Chris Gordon

The U.S. and South Korea agreed to extend the exercise Vigilant Storm hours after North Korea continued its barrage of missile tests, Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III announced Nov. 3 in a joint press conference with his South Korean counterpart.

The joint air exercise Vigilant Storm was already one of largest held on the Korean peninsula. Originally planned for Oct. 31-Nov. 4, the exercise was meant to involve about 1,600 sorties and 240 aircraft, U.S. Air Forces Korea said. About 100 of those aircraft are U.S. Air Force planes.

Austin did not say when the exercise will conclude. In a statement, Pacific Air Forces, which is supporting the exercise, said it was “ready to respond to any crisis” but did not give further details about its future plans.

The decision to extend the exercise followed North Korea’s launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile and other provocative steps, including North Korean artillery fire into areas near its maritime border with South Korea.

“We have administrations in Washington and Seoul that are intent on demonstrating resolve,” said Robert Einhorn, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and the former assistant secretary of state for nonproliferation. Dictator Kim Jong-un “is reacting to that. I think he sees he may be up against a determined combined adversary. And he is trying to intimidate them. I don’t think it’s going to work. But I think that’s his goal.”

The growing tensions on the Korean peninsula come as South Korean Defense Minister Lee Jung-sup said North Korea might conduct another nuclear test, its seventh nuclear test since 2007, in the coming weeks.

Echoing words from the U.S.’s recent Nuclear Posture Review, Lee cautioned Pyongyang that any attack with a nuclear weapon would “result in the end” of Kim Jong-un’s regime “by the overwhelming and decisive response of the alliance.”

In September, Kim vowed he would “never give up” his regime’s nuclear weapons and has since conducted dozens of missile tests, including ICBMs.

The Vigilant Storm exercise features operations from U.S. installations in South Korea, including Osan and Kunsan Air Bases and the Army’s Camp Humpherys in South Korea; and South Korean military bases. The U.S. Air Force has fighters, tankers, cargo planes, and ISR planes participating in the drills, including F-16s, F-15s, A-10s, U-2s, and C-130s.

Fifth-generation F-35 stealth fighters from the U.S. Marine Corps and the South Korean military, as well as U.S. Navy and Army assets, are involved. Australian aircraft are also taking part.

Vigilant Storm practices “major air missions such as close air support, defensive counter air, and emergency air operations 24 hours a day,” Air Forces Korea said before the exercise.

Lee was in Washington for previously scheduled meetings with Austin and other defense leaders. In a joint communique issued by the Department of Defense and South Korea’s defense ministry, Austin and Lee pledged to “return to large-scale field exercises” in 2023.

“One of the things that sends a strong deterrent message is our ability to work together and to be interoperable and our ability to train our troops to a high level of capability and also maintain a combat-credible force in the region,” Austin said. “Most recently, you’ve seen us focus on that in a major way again.”

The USS Ronald Reagan has been conducting exercises in the region since September, including joint drills with South Korea and the first port call of a U.S. aircraft carrier to South Korea in four years.

The U.S. and South Korea paused major military exercises during the administration of President Donald Trump, who sought to achieve a diplomatic breakthrough to denuclearize the Korean peninsula with the Kim regime. Two summit meetings were held, but those efforts failed.

“Kim Jong-un has a very ambitious nuclear and missile program,” Einhorn said. “He’s methodically going about achieving those goals. And they require lots of testing. So far, it’s involved missile testing, but I think sooner or later, and probably sooner, it’ll involve nuclear tests as well. One reason for this barrage of missile tests is to verify the performance of these systems. But the artillery is a different story. They know the artillery performance. I think that’s showing North Korea’s defiance of the joint U.S.-ROK military exercises.”

At his press conference, Austin said the U.S. would not permanently deploy more assets to South Korea, such as the Air Force’s nuclear-capable fighters and bombers.

“We don’t have a plan to change our permanent positioning or stationing of assets on the peninsula currently,” Austin said. “But you’ll see assets move in and out on a routine basis.”

Austin’s visit with Lee featured a visit to Joint Base Andrews where the two defense chiefs observed B-1 and B-52 bombers.

F-16s From Spangdahlem May Head to Kadena After Alaskan F-22s

Nov. 3, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak

F-22s from Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska, will initially fill in for F-15Cs as they begin to leave Kadena Air Base, Japan, but the Air Force is eyeing a later and longer deployment of F-16s from Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany, to reinforce the island base, Pentagon officials said.

It would be the second time in as many years that F-16s from Spangdahlem were considered for relocation. The aircraft were to be consolidated with F-16s at Aviano Air Base, Italy, in 2021, but the Pentagon’s Global Posture Review nixed the plan, along with designs to replace them at Spangdahlem with tankers and special operations forces.

The Air Force won’t discuss deployments and won’t comment officially on its plans to backfill the F-15s at Kadena, or any other base, according to a service spokesperson.

“We don’t discuss deployments until the aircraft arrive at their deployed locations,” said the spokesperson, who could not immediately say whether the 44th and 67th fighter squadrons at Kadena, which are giving up their F-15s, will be inactivated.

However, she did say the Air Force is responsible for backfilling the F-15s, and that other services won’t be tapping their aircraft for the mission.

Which aircraft will replace the F-15s “is an Air Force decision. The DOD will use the Global Force Management process to provide backfill decisions that maintain regional deterrence and bolster our ability to uphold our treaty obligations to Japan,” the spokesperson said. “We are doing a phased retirement, to ensure we have enough resources” to meet obligations.

The Global Force Management Process is a Joint Staff function that apportions forces to regional commanders to meet their stated requirements.

Air Force officials have said the preferred approach is to replace the F-15Cs in Japan with new-build F-15EXs. However, having reduced the planned buy of F-15EXs from 144 aircraft to 80, there won’t be enough of the new aircraft to replace the Kadena jets as well as Air National Guard jets based around the U.S.

The Air Force funded 24 F-15EXs through fiscal 2022 and has requested funds for 24 in both fiscal 2023 and ’24. Deliveries will lag funding by several years, however.

Given Russia’s aggression in Ukraine, pulling F-16s from Europe would be a curious solution to the Kadena backfill problem.

But “it’s another symptom of the Air Force not having been adequately funded to recapitalize its forces in a timely fashion,” retired Lt. Gen. David A. Deptula, dean of AFA’s Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies, said in an interview.

The Air Force will increasingly find itself “unable to contribute to its portion of what’s required by our National Security and Defense strategies.” Forward engagement is “fundamental” to those strategies, Deptula said. “If you don’t have the forces available to be forward, you can’t execute that portion of the critical elements that are fundamental to our nation’s security.”

An expeditionary deployment of E-8C Joint STARS ground moving target indicator aircraft ended at Kadena in September without an immediate replacement. However, Air Force officials and outside experts said they don’t see the two developments as an indication that the U.S. or the Air Force has a longer-term plan to shift forces away from Okinawa.

Though Kadena will doubtless be targeted by hundreds of accurate Chinese missiles in the event of a conflict with the U.S. regarding Taiwan, for reasons of forward presence, engagement with regional allies and partners, and intelligence-collection activities, the U.S. is unlikely to abandon the base, Deptula said.

In the event of a conflict, or imminent bombardment, aircraft at the base would likely be evacuated to other locations, he noted.

Adm. John C. Aquilino, head of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, “wants all these aircraft to stay there,” Deptula said, but “they’re unmaintainable” and the Air Force is also short of fighter pilots.

“The situation is only going to get worse,” Deptula said, because the Air Force plans to divest “a thousand more aircraft by 2027.”

Some members of Congress have asked the Air Force to provide a special briefing on the Kadena situation because of concerns that USAF is reducing forward capability in the region at a critical time.

Air Force Looks to Increase ‘Lethality Per Gallon’ With Energy and Climate Goals

Nov. 3, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

In early October, the Department of the Air Force released its climate action plan, setting out ambitious goals to slash emissions across its installations, non-tactical vehicles, and aircraft fleets in the coming years.

By December, the department may be ready to release details on how it will go about achieving those goals, acting Assistant Secretary for Energy, Installations, and Environment Edwin Oshiba said Nov. 3—and in doing so, will lay out a path for how to achieve more “lethality per gallon.”

“We are still working on our implementation plan,” Oshiba said in a webinar hosted by the Center for Climate & Security. “My personal goal is to get it out there by mid-December, which is really aggressive. But again, we’ve been doing this stuff for a while—it’s not like we’re starting from scratch here.”

The 24-page action plan identified three main priorities for the DAF:

Maintain air and space dominance in the face of climate risks.
Make climate-informed decisions.
Optimize energy use and pursue alternative energy sources.

To respond to those priorities, the plan identified aspirational goals, supported by more specific objectives in turn broken down into “key results” that the service wants to acheive.

That approach, Oshiba said, has helped the speed with which the implementation plan has been written.

“When we wrote our climate action plan, it was written … in a way that was sort of outcome-based, with key results that, if achieved, would allow achievement of the objectives, which would then allow achievement of the goals,” Oshiba.

As an example, Oshiba cited a “key result” to which the Air Force has attached a particularly aggressive timeline—a pilot program to ensure that by 2026, 10 percent of the aviation fuel at two Air Force operational locations is sustainable and costs the same or less than traditional fuel.

“It’s written in a way that’s specific in its timing,” Oshiba said. “And so it kind of has sort of a built-in measure, if you will.”

However, the department still needs to provide a roadmap for how to implement such a program. That’s where the implementation plan comes in.

“My goal in writing the implementation plan is to then provide the actions necessary to achieve the key results and then monitor the progress in completing those actions, and most importantly, determining ‘Hey, did we achieve the outcome we thought we would, if we would do these actions?’” Oshiba said.

That last part will be critical, Oshiba said, indicating that certain actions in the implementation and key results could be changed or modified as needed if the desired objective isn’t reached.

“I don’t want to measure completion of the actions. I want to measure the outcome. Are we achieving the outcomes we thought we would by doing those actions? And if it doesn’t, that’s OK. We’ll learn from it. We’ll adjust the implementation of climate goals,” Oshiba said.

To that end, the department has implemented a governance structure for the implementation of the climate action plan, with a goal of meeting at least four times per year, Oshiba said.

“I told the folks, ‘Hey look, the implementation plan isn’t etched in stone. We’ll learn as we go … and then we’ll make adjustments. And my idea is to at least look at doing those kinds of adjustments once a year, so that we understand what’s going on with the progress we’re making or not making, look and see what’s going on in the environment, in terms of both the fiscal environment, the security environment, the technology environment, and be adaptive as we move forward,” Oshiba said.

Many of the goals, objectives, and key results the Air Force is seeking in its action plan, however, will take years to realize. For example, the action plan calls for the department to reach net-zero emissions across its installations portfolio by fiscal 2046, more than two decades from now. By fiscal 2030, the department is aiming for all its electricity to be carbon pollution-free.

Some observers have noted that such goals could be hampered, however, by the political state of play in Congress and the White House. With the midterm elections less than a week away and a presidential race that will kick off in earnest in 2023, a shift in political power could result in different priorities, noted moderator John Conger, a senior adviser to the Council on Strategic Risks, a security policy institute.

But Oshiba, along with other energy, installation, and environment officials across the Pentagon, argued that there is bipartisan consensus on the need for things such as energy and the environment given potential impacts on fiscal resources, readiness, and lethality.

The Air Force in particular, needs better energy efficiency, Oshiba said, noting that the department accounts for 45 percent of the Pentagon’s total energy consumption, with 80 percent of that 45 percent—more than a third overall—going toward operational fuel for aircraft.

“So if we can figure out ways in which we can be more energy efficient, we’re basically increasing lethality per gallon,” Oshiba said. “What that translates to is more time on target if you’re talking about aircraft refueling or a fighter aircraft. It means more cargo per mile if you’re talking about moving cargo across the Indo-Pacific theater. So that is one area that we definitely need to continue our work on, no matter who is in office. Again, it’s about increasing our combat capability moving forward.”

These USAF Units Are Flying in the Large, Joint US-South Korea Exercise

Nov. 2, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

Fighters, tankers, airlifters, and ISR aircraft from every U.S. Air Force base in South Korea and Japan are flying in Exercise Vigilant Storm, the large joint aerial training event between the U.S. and South Korea happening this week—even as North Korea fires off record numbers of ballistic missiles.

All told, approximately 100 USAF aircraft are participating in Vigilant Storm, with the goal of “enhancing interoperability of our forces to work together to defend the Republic of Korea and our allies in the region,” Pentagon Press Secretary Brig. Gen. Patrick S. Ryder said Nov. 1.

A Pacific Air Forces spokesperson detailed to Air & Space Forces Magazine the following U.S. aircraft that will be involved in the exercise:

F-16s from the 8th Fighter Wing, Kunsan Air Base, South Korea
F-16s and A-10s from the 51st Fighter Wing, Osan Air Base, South Korea
U-2s from the 5th Reconnaissance Squadron, Osan Air Base, South Korea
F-15s and KC-135s from the 18th Wing, Kadena Air Base, Japan
An E-3 from the 961st Airborne Air Control Squadron, Kadena Air Base, Japan
F-16s from the 35th Fighter Wing, Misawa Air Base, Japan
C-130Js from the 374th Airlift Wing, Yokota Air Base, Japan

In addition, the Navy is sending EA-18Gs, the Marine Corps is sending F-35Bs and F/A-18s, and the Army is participating with a variety of helicopters and the MQ-1 Predator drone.

The Republic of Korea Air Force, meanwhile, will fly F-35As, among other aircraft, and the Royal Australian Air Force has deployed a KC-30A aerial refueler, PACAF has said. The exercise began Oct. 31 and will run through Nov. 4.

PACAF’s list of participating aircraft does not include the B-1B bomber, a number of which the Air Force recently deployed to Guam as part of a Bomber Task Force mission, or A-10s from Moody Air Force Base also deployed to Guam.

The large number of aircraft participating in the exercise was “long scheduled,” Ryder said, but North Korea has treated it as a major provocation, with officials claiming it is preparation for an invasion and issuing veiled threats of a “terrible price” for the U.S. and South Korea, according to Yonhap news agency.

Those threats were followed by a barrage of 23 ballistic missiles Nov. 2, reportedly a record for a single day. One landed in an ocean “buffer” zone, less than 20 miles from the countries’ maritime border, according to the Associated Press.

The missiles resulted in air raid sirens and some South Korean civilians sheltering in underground bunkers.

In a statement, however, U.S. Indo-Pacific Command said the launches do not pose “an immediate threat to U.S. personnel or territory, or to our allies.”

“We are aware of the DPRK ballistic missile launches and are consulting closely with our allies and partners,” the statement reads. “While we have assessed that this event does not pose an immediate threat … the missile launches highlights the DPRK’s reckless behavior and the destabilizing impact of its unlawful WMD and ballistic missile programs. The U.S. commitments to the defense of the Republic of Korea and Japan remain ironclad.”

Still, South Korea responded to the missile launches by having fighter jets fire three air-to-surface, precision-guided missiles in an exercise, according to its ministry of defense.