Supply Chain, Workforce Worries Pose Risks to Modernization of Triad’s Sea Leg

Supply Chain, Workforce Worries Pose Risks to Modernization of Triad’s Sea Leg

Aug. 24, 2022 | By Amanda Miller

The Navy’s program executive officer for strategic submarines said his service’s leg of the nuclear triad is facing workforce and supply chain shortages like much of the rest of the defense industry.

Rear Adm. Scott W. Pappano spoke with the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies’ director of research retired Maj. Gen. Larry Stutzriem in a webinar Aug. 24.

Pappano is overseeing the procurement and sustainment of the Navy’s strategic submarines as the service transitions from Ohio-class to Columbia-class submarines at a time when the Navy will have ramped up shipbuilding fivefold in five years.

The upcoming Columbia class is “the biggest, and it’s the quietest and most capable nuclear submarine our nation will have ever produced,” Pappano said. “It’s really a fantastic machine. It brings the same stealth and survivability at a more advanced level than the Ohio brings.”

Disruptions to the manufacturing supply chain are “the biggest risk right now … on the ‘new’ side of the house” as well as “across a couple of different fronts,” Pappano said.

Likewise, attracting a skilled workforce continues to be a challenge, which Pappano attributed in part to the 1990s’ and 2000s’ emphasis on going to college over learning a trade.

“We need skilled trades feeding our industrial base right now,” Pappano said, arguing that the defense industrial base “is actually part of that integrated deterrence picture. … It ought to drive our ability to deter our peer adversaries.”

He hopes a whole-of-government effort to build regional training pipelines in “core concentration areas” will help to bolster the workforce and said a new additive manufacturing center of excellence will bring together experts from industry, academia, and national labs to try to “lower the barrier to entry” to making parts.

Nationally the U.S. needs to refocus on \skilled trades and engineering, Pappano said—“everything that we need to build back the manufacturing in the nation.”

Collaborative Combat Aircraft May Still Help Bombers, Experts Say

Collaborative Combat Aircraft May Still Help Bombers, Experts Say

Aug. 24, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall has backed off the idea of an unmanned bomber to pair with the B-21 Raider—but there could still be value in building low-cost, less sophisticated drones to accompany the B-21.

That was the key takeaway from a recent three-day workshop conducted by the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies that gathered Air Force leaders, planners, and operators, along with industry partners, to study potential uses for what the Air Force is now calling “collaborative combat aircraft.”

In particular, the workshop focused on the long-range penetrating strike mission of the B-21—another session will be devoted to Next Generation Air Dominance later this year—and tasked three teams with designing unmanned aircraft to aid the bomber in strikes against an air base, a maritime threat, and a transporter erector launcher in a hypothetical conflict with China in 2030.

Adding an unmanned escort for the B-21 was one of seven operational imperatives Kendall introduced in late 2021, but this past July, he seemed to abandon the concept, telling Breaking Defense “the idea of a similar-range collaborative combat aircraft is not turning out to be cost-effective.”

But parsing out Kendall’s comments, there are still potential uses for shorter-range unmanned aircraft to work with the B-21, argued retired Col. Mark Gunzinger, the Mitchell Institute’s director of future concepts and capability assessments and one of the workshop leaders.

“Secretary Kendall did not impeach the idea of a long-range strike family of systems. The B-21 was designed from its outset as part of a family of systems that include unmanned systems, possibly some manned … weapons and sensors and so forth,” Gunzinger said. “So it really does need the rest of that family of systems to achieve the kind of long-range strike effects we need in highly contested threat environments.”

Indeed, while none of the teams in the workshop was prohibited from proposing a long-range escort, none did, said Caitlin Lee, senior fellow for the Mitchell Institute’s Center for Unmanned and Autonomous Systems and another workshop leader.

“Holding costs aside, the teams still preferred to build large numbers of UAVs with disaggregated capabilities,” Lee said. “And that was because they wanted mass, and there were a few different reasons for that.”

One of the key reasons was cost imposition—forcing an adversary to expend more rounds to take down separate platforms.

“If you can cause an enemy to run out of his best weapons, that increases your survivability, your effectiveness, attacking targets and doing other things significantly,” noted Gunzinger.

Other factors included increased complexity for adversaries and increased options for commanders, Lee and Gunzinger said. 

Without the advantages of those large numbers of collaborative combat aircraft, or CCAs, several teams said they didn’t think a mission commander would order their mission to go forward because of the risk involved. Even when the workshop leaders imposed cost restrictions, two of the teams were willing to sacrifice capabilities on their unmanned aircraft to buy larger numbers, Lee said. 

And while Kendall has described a vision of five or so CCAs to pair with a fighter like NGAD, the workshop teams envisioned numbers in the “10s or 20s,” Lee said, depending on the functions of the drones.

Functions such as counter-air and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance were particularly important for teams. 

“ISR is a huge gap in a China fight, and it appears that UAVs may be able to at least partially close that gap,” Lee said. “Another [takeaway] was counter-air UAVs may be able to at least partially close that gap. And another one was that, particularly for penetrating strike missions over the mainland of China, fifth-generation fighters probably don’t have the range required to support those penetrating strike missions. And UAVs may be an option to provide that escort.”

But rather than trying to have that escort fly with the B-21 for the entire mission, workshop participants chose to have their drones be “untethered” from the bomber, taking off from closer in and capable of linking up with—and peeling off from—the manned platform.

“I think we need to open our minds a little bit to think about how the CCAs can be optimized to support the mission, but not necessarily mirror image what the manned aircraft is doing,” Lee said.

In order for such a concept to work, though, the CCAs will likely have to have a level of autonomy—and that was one of the workshop’s most crucial takeaways, Lee said.

“Autonomy is really the long pole in the tent,” Lee said. “Specifically, if you wanted mass, then that mass is just a random herd of cats if it’s not all coordinated and optimized toward a single mission.”

Because of that, workshop participants largely agreed that investing in autonomy and artificial intelligence should take priority, a finding Lee said was “fascinating” given that it came from “a group of engineers who are all about designing airplanes.”

“They stepped back from this, and operators who want new capabilities to build quickly, they all sort of stepped back and said, ‘As much as we want these CCAs on the flight line tomorrow, they won’t be much good if we don’t know how we’re going to control them and optimize them to achieve the specific mission we want them to do,’” Lee said.

Beyond the specific takeaways for long-range strike, Gunzinger said the workshop also demonstrated vital collaboration as the Air Force considers how it wants to proceed with unmanned systems.

“Something I was thrilled to see … is how thrilled our players were,” Gunzinger said. “The operators who came from across the different Air Force communities, including AFRL, with industry, different industry [partners], they all worked together, and they were just pleased as hell that ‘Hey, we never do this. We got war fighters and the planners and the guys who make these aircraft together, thinking about different attributes, doing tradeoffs and costing and so forth.’ There was real value in doing that.”

Biden Directs $2.98 Billion Ukraine Defense Package to Build Future Force

Biden Directs $2.98 Billion Ukraine Defense Package to Build Future Force

Aug. 24, 2022 | By Abraham Mahshie

President Joe Biden is making a bet on Ukraine’s ability to withstand war and deter Russia for years to come, announcing on Ukraine’s independence day, Aug. 24, a $2.98 billion defense package that builds out a future force with high-end air defenses, radar, and counter-unmanned aerial systems that may take years to deliver. A defense official also said combat jets “remain on the table” but are not part of the new package.

The largest defense assistance package yet relies on a lengthier contracting process that buys targeted new weapons for Ukraine instead of drawing down existing U.S. stocks. It also refrains from the longer-range weapons Ukraine seeks to reach Russian supply lines as they adjust to greater stand-off distances.

The Pentagon said the new package will include six additional National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS) with munitions to add to the two NASAMS promised by Biden in a July 1 announcement that have yet to be delivered.

The package also includes 24 counter-artillery radars; Puma unmanned aerial systems (UAS); support equipment for Scan Eagle UAS systems; the VAMPIRE counter-UAS that can shoot down UAS threats; laser-guided rocket systems; and hundreds of thousands of additional rounds of 155 mm artillery and 120 mm mortar ammunition. The package now pushes U.S. defense assistance to Ukraine to more than $13.5 billion since January 2021 and $15.5 billion since Russia invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea in 2014.

“Vladimir Putin has not given up on his overall strategic objectives of seizing most of Ukraine, toppling the regime, reclaiming Ukraine as part of a new Russian Empire,” Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Colin H. Kahl said at an Aug. 24 Pentagon briefing.

“What he has done is lengthened his timeline in recognition [that] he’s off plan,” he added. The new package is not for the current fight. “It’s not relevant to the fight today, tomorrow, next week. It is relevant to the ability of Ukraine to defend itself and to deter further aggression a year from now, two years from now.

The assistance package is expected to arrive to the battlefield within one to two years, demonstrating the bureaucratic hurdles that are required for the contracting and delivery process versus presidential drawdowns. The NASAMS Biden promised in July are expected to arrive in September.

Ukraine ‘Reassured’ as Air Raid Sirens Ring Out

A Ukrainian defense official told Air Force Magazine by phone from Kyiv that the defense package is welcome news but that assistance is needed urgently to defend territory and retake lost ground.

“Everybody is grateful, excited, and reassured—reassured that the military aid to Ukraine from the U.S. will continue,” said Yuriy Sak, adviser to Ukraine’s minister of defense. “It is equipping the Ukrainian army with the means that we need to, first of all, protect our land; and second of all, to begin planning the de-occupation counter-offensives.”

On Ukraine’s Independence day, Sak said air raid sirens rang all day in the capital, with Russian missile strikes detected at civilian targets across the country, including in the regions of Dnipro, Mykolaiv, Poltava, Kharkiv, and Zaporizhzhia.

“We are having too many air raid sirens today. I mean, they keep ringing out. There is one right now in Kyiv,” Sak said at approximately 7:45 p.m. local time Aug. 24. “It’s independence day, but everybody’s on high alert.”

In several areas, Ukrainian air defense systems were able to shoot down Russian missiles or drones, he said. The NASAMS, the same system used to defend Washington, D.C., would help protect civilian populations and vital military assets, once delivered.

Sak also said that while the new aid package helps Ukraine’s transformation to Western, NATO-standard weaponry, some key battlefield needs remain unanswered.

“We have reached the stage of this war where we need a longer firing range of these weapon systems,” he said, noting that High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) given by the United States include precision artillery Guided Multiple Launch Rocket Systems (GMLRS) with a range of 80 km or about 50 miles.

“Even with this firing range, we were able to destroy the ammunition depots of our enemy, to destroy the so-called command and control systems of the enemy, but they are also learning from the battlefield experience,” he said.

Russia has begun to move its supply chains and logistical hubs beyond 80 km.

“Which means right now we need more sophisticated weaponry to be more efficient,” Sak said, describing a Ukrainian request for the Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS), which can fire surface-to-surface missiles up to 300 km, or 190 miles.

“ATACM missiles are something that are very firmly on our wish list, and we will continue to speak to our partners, to the U.S., with a view to getting them,” he said.

Asked by Air Force Magazine why the Pentagon did not include ATACMS missiles in the package, Kahl said DOD had assessed that they were not needed.

“It’s our assessment that they don’t currently require ATACMS to service targets that are directly relevant to the current fight,” he said.

Kahl said DOD has provided hundreds of precision Guided Multiple Launch Rocket Systems (GMLRS) for use with High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS).

“We consulted very closely with Ukrainians about the types of targets they need to prosecute inside Ukrainian territory,” he explained. “The vast majority of those targets were rangeable by HIMARS using GMLRS as opposed to the much-longer-range ATACMS.”

Kahl did not respond to a question about Russia moving back its forces beyond the reach of the HIMARS.

‘Fighter Aircraft Remain on the Table’

As to the lengthy timeframe for delivery of the new systems, Sak pointed to a $775 million presidential drawdown package Aug. 19 that includes additional high-precision HIMARS ammunition.

Sak also said the introduction of AGM-88 High Speed Anti Radiation missiles (HARM), which can be mounted on Ukrainian Air Force MiG 29s, has helped to suppress enemy air defenses.

“Well, they’ve been used very efficiently … to suppress their defense systems in those areas where the intense fighting is going on,” he said.

Sak, however, lamented that the U.S. government has yet to make the political decision to provide Western aircraft or pilot training to better contest advanced Russian fighters and bombers.

“We understand that the political decisions to provide Ukraine with combat aircraft is still in the making, and it’s not an easy one,” he said.

Kahl said DOD’s current aviation priority is assuring that Ukraine can use its Air Force effectively in the current conflict, such as adapting HARM missiles to fire from MiG-29s.

“Fighter aircraft remain on the table, just no final decisions have been made about that,” he said.

Kahl said as it relates to future aircraft, Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III tasked his staff to work with the Joint Staff and U.S. European Command on a “future forces picture” for Ukraine’s force for the mid- to long term in consultation with Ukraine.

Kahl said that even if fourth-generation aircraft were promised now, they would not arrive for years, and it is unclear whether Ukraine would be able to sustain the force without international assistance.

Still, news of the new package is reverberating to other partner nations, Sak said. United Kingdom Prime Minister Boris Johnson, in Kyiv for Independence Day, announced a 54 million British pound, or $63.7 million, defense package to Ukraine.

“The U.S. is taking the lead in assisting the Ukraine militarily,” Sak said. “It kind of encourages other countries to as well come forward and follow suit and provide Ukraine with more military assistance.”

Bearded Airmen and Guardians? Leaked Proposal for Air Force Test Program Would Make It Real

Bearded Airmen and Guardians? Leaked Proposal for Air Force Test Program Would Make It Real

Aug. 23, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

Male Airmen and Guardians dreaming of one day sporting a beard in uniform got a boost of hope recently, as documents for a proposed study of “inclusive male grooming” standards leaked on social media.

But don’t put away those razors just yet. The service says the proposal is still in a draft phase and has not been approved.

The images posted on the popular unofficial Air Force amn/nco/snco Facebook page detail a pilot program in which selected service members can grow facial hair up to a 1/4 inch in length, as long as it is “neat in appearance, shaped appropriately, and not faddish.” Failure to do so would result in ejection from the program. Service members would also be required to provide feedback, photos, and documentation throughout the program.

The results of the program and the “impacts of male facial hair” would then be presented to the Secretary of Defense.

“The screenshots reflect a volunteer’s recommendation for how to proceed if a proposal for a pilot program is approved,” an Air Force spokesperson told Air Force Magazine in a statement. “The proposal is being discussed within the Black/African American Employment Strategy Team, one of the Department of the Air Force Barrier Analysis Working Groups, but has not been approved.”

A proposed start date is included in the images—Sept. 1, 2022—but there is no actual timeline for when the program could begin, as the proposal has not been formally submitted. When it is, it will first go to the Department of the Air Force’s Office of Diversity and Inclusion.

One of the documents shown on social media includes the signature block of Brig. Gen. Devin R. Pepper, the Space Force’s deputy director for strategy, plans, and policy. Pepper is one of three Black men who are general officers in the Space Force, and he is a member of the Black/African American Employment Strategy Team (BEST).

The issue of shaving is of particular interest for that team because Black men often deal with painful razor bumps, caused by ingrown hairs, at a higher rate than other racial groups.

The Air Force has cited razor bumps in the past when making changes to its grooming policy. In 2020, the department extended shaving waivers for those diagnosed with razor bumps from one year to five years.

But advocates argue that more sweeping changes are needed, in part because shaving waivers are often misunderstood and hurt Airmen’s careers.

In May, a slide deck presentation from BEST circulated on the unofficial Air Force Reddit page. Dated Feb. 13, the presentation noted that promotion, retention, and special opportunities are all negatively affected by shaving waivers and that Black Airmen make up the majority of waiver recipients.

The presentation’s proposed solution is to revise Air Force dress and appearance regulations to allow for beards between 1/8 inch and 1/4 inch long. The revised regulation would require Airmen to pass a “mask seal fit test for a mask/respirator, if actively required for occupational duties.” If they fail that fit test, they must either be shaved or disqualified from that duty. Commanders would also be able to temporarily restrict the wearing of beards “to meet safety and operational requirements.”

The presentation is “pre-decisional” and has been “circulating internally” among BEST, an Air Force spokesperson said when asked by Air Force Magazine if the document has been formally presented. 

Air Force leadership has generally seemed reluctant to allow beards across the board, however. In April 2021, Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. and Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force JoAnne S. Bass indicated that they were more inclined to clarify the waiver process, as opposed to changing grooming regulations.

That approach resulted in another 2020 change when the department expanded its grooming policy to allow for Airmen to apply for waivers to wear beards for religious reasons.

Still, many Airmen, especially younger ones, continue to push for a broader change in regulations, so much so that Bass made reference to it in a panel discussion at the AFA Warfare Symposium in March.

“Our Airmen and Guardians are more talented, smarter, innovative, ready to get after it. They have information at their fingertips. In this information age we’re in, many have an attention span of eight seconds. And many just want to have beards,” Bass noted.

Kendall: Australian Ghost Bat Drone Could Pair With NGAD

Kendall: Australian Ghost Bat Drone Could Pair With NGAD

Aug. 23, 2022 | By Abraham Mahshie

Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall indicated that the Air Force could incorporate the Australian-made Boeing MQ-28 Ghost Bat drone into the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) family of systems, according to media reports. Citing China’s technological superiority and aggressive acts in the region, Kendall also said the U.S. may be willing to cooperate with Australia on long-range strike capability.

“I’m talking to my Australian counterparts in general about the NGAD family of systems and how they might be able to participate,” Kendall said about the Ghost Bat drone, formerly the “Loyal Wingman,” the first aircraft to be made in Australia in a half century.

Kendall told Breaking Defense that the United States and Australia are “having preliminary discussions” about buying the MQ-28 Ghost Bat “as a risk reduction mechanism” for NGAD’s drone capability.

“I think there’s a lot of mutual interest in working together. And we’re going to be sorting out the details over the next few weeks,” Kendall said after meeting with newly minted Royal Australian Air Force chief Air Marshal Robert Chipman on Aug. 22.

Australia and the United States, alongside the United Kingdom, deepened their defense relationship in 2021 when President Joe Biden announced the “AUKUS” partnership to share military technology, beginning with nuclear-powered submarines.

In public comments in Canberra, both Kendall and Chipman described China’s air superiority and aggressive actions, including a dangerous Chinese J-16 fighter intercept that damaged an Australian surveillance P-8 over the South China Sea. During the encounter, the Chinese aircraft ejected aluminum chaff that entered the P-8’s engines and damaged its exterior.

“They are as formidable a strategic opponent as I have seen. We are in what I consider to be a race for military technological superiority with the Chinese,” Kendall said, according to local media.

Chipman affirmed that China’s aggression would not deter his Air Force from flying over international airspace.

In a June 9 interview, U.S. Pacific Air Forces Commander Gen. Kenneth S. Wilsbach told Air Force Magazine that the Chinese encounter with the Australian P-8, and a similar encounter with Canadian aircraft, were dangerous.

“That’s not only unprofessional. It’s definitely dangerous and unsafe,” Wilsbach said at PACAF headquarters at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii.

“I call on the Chinese Air Force to step up and be professional,” he added. “The Australians and the Canadians, as well as the U.S. were, are, and do fly in international airspace. They have every right to do that in accordance with international law. And the Chinese don’t have the right to damage an aircraft that is operating in accordance with international law.”

But China doesn’t see it that way.

China believes the airspace over the Taiwan Straits to be its sovereign territory in addition to swaths of airspace over the South and East China seas, where it claims waters in territorial disputes with the Philippines and Vietnam.

Kendall’s trip echoes an August two-week trip across Pacific air bases and meetings with allies and partners made by Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. Kendall’s visit will not include visits to new partners but instead includes stops at Air Force bases in Guam and Alaska and air bases in Australia and Japan.

Kendall said China’s militarization of the South China Sea has implications for Australian national security. China has also signed a basing agreement with the Solomon Islands, east of Sydney, creating a new strategic dilemma for the U.S. ally.

In a September 2021 “2+2 meeting” between the U.S. Secretaries of State and Defense and their Australian counterparts in Washington, D.C., Australian defense minister Peter Dutton responded to a question from Air Force Magazine, saying the U.S. and Australian air forces would have “greater and more frequent engagement.”

In July, B-2s deployed to the Royal Australian Air Force Base Amberley for a bomber task force mission. In Canberra, Kendall signaled that the United States would be willing to cooperate with Australia, should it require an indigent long-range strike capability.

“If I saw you had a requirement for long-range strike [capability], then we’d be willing to have a conversation with [Australia] about that,” Kendall said, according to local media. The comments extended to potential joint development on the long-range B-21 stealth bomber.

“I don’t think that there’s any fundamental limitation on the areas in which we can cooperate,” Kendall added.

Air Force to Expand Synthetic Environment for Mission Rehearsal, Testing, and Training

Air Force to Expand Synthetic Environment for Mission Rehearsal, Testing, and Training

Aug. 23, 2022 | By Abraham Mahshie

Aircraft simulators must evolve to meet the adversary threat, leaders from the 53rd Wing told Air Force Magazine. Once mainly used for initial qualification training, the Air Force is moving toward a paradigm of simulator training known as the “common synthetic environment” that will create non-proprietary, interchangeable training devices and environments for aircrews to train, conduct mission rehearsals, and even test new weapons and other capabilities in a virtual environment.

The development is in the initial stages, with a building constructed to house the Virtual Test and Training Center (VTTC) at the Air Force Warfare Center at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev., and approximately $20 million dollars slated per year through fiscal 2028 for software and new simulators.

The VTTC is expected to be fully operational by 2027, but partnerships with Air Force Material Command and Naval Air Systems Command could advance the timeline, a 53rd Wing public affairs spokesperson said.

Originally slated to begin in fiscal 2024, the Air Force is counting on fiscal 2023 funding to connect the newest platforms to the Joint Simulation Environment, or JSE, a government-owned, non-proprietary modeling and simulation environment.

“They’re already moving legacy devices out of old facilities to make room for new devices that will plug into JSE,” said Lt. Col. David R. Clementi, commander of the 29th Training Systems Squadron at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla.

“What we’re seeing now is a drastic shift in the paradigm of the importance of the synthetic environment, equal to if not in some areas eclipsing the importance of lifelike missions when it comes to mission rehearsal, and some training aspects and test aspects,” he added in a video interview with Air Force Magazine.

The Nellis campus is building out a capability for fourth-generation-plus fighter aircraft from the F-15EX forward to bombers such as the B-21 and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance aircraft such as the Air Force’s newly selected E-7 Wedgetail.

“The synthetic environment has been a huge afterthought,” Clementi said. “When you just talk generically about a common synthetic training environment, we are talking about one environment that is built with the ability to host multiple different devices.”

The VTTC campus at Nellis, under the command of 31st Combat Training Squadron leader Lt. Col. J. Chris Duncan, hosts a variety of simulators that allow pilots and crew to “fly” together in a non-distributed environment, meaning each simulator is located no more than a few thousand feet from each other. The VTTC is also exploring technologies for blending synthetic scenarios with live flying at the Nevada Test and Training Range.

The “vision” is for all of the Air Force’s latest-generation aircraft to have a device that connects to the VTTC campus, running the same software, so the aircraft can train, rehearse missions, and test together, Clementi said.

An Urgent Shift

The urgency of the shift to the synthetic environment has three roots: adversary observation, current range limits, and the need to integrate multiple platforms.

Adversary observation means everything from weapons testing to new tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) can now be seen, particularly by Chinese and Russian satellites passing overhead.

“When you talk about adversary exploitation, I think the unclassified number out there for collection capability is in the minutes that we have a window available to execute without being observed from some sort of collection entity,” said Clementi.

Furthermore, the commander said the Air Force no longer has the technological capability to replicate the sophistication of the adversary threat.

“The [U.S.] aircraft are so sophisticated that they that they know that what is being replicated is not the actual thing,” Clementi said, describing how the F-35 can detect when artificial targets are trying to replicate Russian SA-15 and SA-20 surface-to-air missiles.

The same is true for air targets.

“When you talk a Chinese J-20, we can do our best now with what the 64th Aggressors are standing up, using fifth-gen fighters, using F-35s, to kind of replicate, but it’s still not the same thing,” he said.

Current ranges are also too limited for modern air warfare.

“The standoff that’s required exceeds the capability of the ranges, of the airspace that we have,” Clementi said, describing rehearsals with multiple aircraft and standoff distances in hundreds of miles. “And then, being able to put all of those assets together in one piece of sky is almost impossible.”

Finally, proprietary simulators, each created by the manufacturer of the platform itself, make it expensive and time-consuming to link together multiple platforms and test new threat paradigms.

“Every platform, every device had a different environment,” Clementi explained, giving the example of Lockheed Martin’s F-35 and its simulator.

“So, if you just take one example about an air-to-air threat model, it is built by Lockheed for Lockheed, for that one device,” he said. “Over time, we saw the need to start linking devices together so that they could fly in a synthetic environment.”

Those devices had been connected by the Distributed Mission Operations Center (DMOC), formerly a proprietary system operated by Lockheed Martin. The DMOC hosts the Air Force’s hub for remote combat training exercises, testing, and experimentation. But Clementi said modeling, security, and latency limitations exist for simulators operating at Nellis and Eglin.

“In the last five years, we’ve realized that the requirement has now eclipsed the ability of executing,” Clementi said. “When you pair all of those together, you’re almost left with no choice but to start executing some of this high-end, advanced test, training, and tactics development in the synthetic environment.”

The Air Force Warfare Center has already built some facilities with a desire to incorporate partner and allied nations. Strategic messaging has also begun to get the word out and generate widespread understanding and buy-in.

Clementi said Air Combat Command is even considering re-designating the 29th Training Systems Squadron as a test and evaluation squadron to acknowledge its new role.

“The important part is that the Air Force, ACC, and the Warfare Center—they have finally seen the need to make the synthetic environment a primary focus area,” he said. “Everybody realizes that the future of mission rehearsal and test and training—it’s going to happen in the synthetic environment.”

This story was updated at 11:51 a.m. Aug. 25 to clarify the role of the Distributed Mission Operations Center (DMOC).

B-52s Fly Over NATO Allies in Southeastern Europe

B-52s Fly Over NATO Allies in Southeastern Europe

Aug. 22, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

Having arrived in Europe just a few days ago, B-52s from Minot Air Force Base, N.D., executed low approach flyovers over four NATO allies in the Balkans region Aug. 22.

The pair of B-52 bombers, from the 23rd Bomb Squadron, flew over North Macedonia, Albania, Montenegro, and Croatia over the course of roughly an hour, “to demonstrate U.S. commitment and assurance to NATO Allies and partners located in Southeastern Europe,” according to a release from U.S. Air Forces in Europe. 

“Additionally, this will provide citizens an opportunity to take photos, videos, and enjoy the aircraft flying overhead,” the release stated.

Images from the flight quickly circulated on social media, with the iconic bomber flying over the capitals of North Macdeonia and Albania.

No exercises or integration with those nations were announced as part of the flyover.

The two B-52s form half of the contingent of bombers that arrived at RAF Fairford, U.K., as part of a bomber task force mission. On top of their flight in southeastern Europe, the Airmen and aircraft have also already integrated with fighters from Norway and Sweden.

The bombers’ flyover is the latest sign of U.S. air power in a region where smaller states have requested an increased U.S. presence to counter Russian aggression in the lead-up to and following its invasion of Ukraine.

In March, F-16s from Aviano Air Base, Italy, deployed to Croatia and participated in agile combat employment exercises alongside Croatian MiG-21s. In June, F-35s from the Vermont Air National Guard landed in North Macedonia and ​​performed rapid refueling and crew swaps.

And B-52s have spent time in the region as well. In June, bombers from Barksdale Air Force Base, La., flew on the other side of the peninsula over the Black Sea. And in June 2021, B-52s flew over the Balkans as part of one continuous sweep over every NATO nation.

Airplane-Makers Win Contracts as Part of Next-Gen Engine Prototyping Phase

Airplane-Makers Win Contracts as Part of Next-Gen Engine Prototyping Phase

Aug. 22, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

The Air Force’s propulsion program tasked with producing engines for the Next Generation Air Dominance fighter awarded contracts to a mix of both engine-makers and aircraft-builders Aug. 19, hinting that integration could be a priority in the prototyping process.

Boeing, GE Aviation, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Pratt & Whitney all received indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contracts with a ceiling of $975 million for the prototyping phase of the Next Generation Adaptive Propulsion program. 

As part of the contracts, those companies will focus on “technology maturation and risk reduction activities through design, analysis, rig testing, prototype engine testing, and weapon system integration,” the award states, with work expected to last until July 2032.

The inclusion of GE and Pratt & Whitney in the NGAP program is hardly surprising. John Sneden, director of the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center’s propulsion directorate, indicated as much earlier in August at the Life Cycle Industry Days conference. The two engine-makers are already competitors in the Air Force’s Adaptive Engine Transition Program.

Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman, however, typically don’t make engines. The exact work they’ll be doing as part of NGAP wasn’t specified in the contract award, and none of the three companies immediately responded to inquiries from Air Force Magazine.

But while Sneden has pushed for more competition in the propulsion industrial base—and the contract award states that it is focused in part on “digitally transforming” that base—the three contractors are mostly known for building aircraft, and all three have shown interest in developing a sixth-generation fighter like NGAD.

Their inclusion in NGAP, then, could help steer the prototyping process to ensure that the future engine and fighter integrate seamlessly.

“Any propulsion system has to be built and designed for the specific platform on which it’s operating. And it’s especially true for these adaptive engine systems,” said Mark J. Lewis, executive director of the National Defense Industrial Association’s Emerging Technologies Institute and former chief scientist of the Air Force, in an interview. “So you’d want to develop the engine hand in hand with an airframe. It’s going to be more difficult to make an adaptive engine a sort of a plug-and-play system. Not impossible.”

Lewis was quick to note that his views were speculative. But some of the technological advances coming with the adaptive engines could require fighters built to take full advantage of them, Lewis said. In particular, adaptive engines can transition between modes optimized for thrust and for range.

“Today if you design an airplane, you start deciding, what’s most important. Does it have to have maximum acceleration at this point in its performance? Does it have to be able to fly for a maximum range? And those two requirements, for example, could be at odds with each other,” Lewis said. “With an adaptive engine, you might be able to get the best of both worlds. And so your airframe might reflect that.”

Other considerations, Lewis said, include the third stream of air that is being incorporated into the design of the adaptive engines in AETP. That third stream “changes a little bit the geometry of the engine,” Lewis said.

The development processes of engines and airframes “usually do go hand in hand,” Lewis added, but that can vary substantially depending on the situation. The F135 that powers the F-35, for example, was developed from the F119, which powers the F-22.

But with engines like the ones from AETP and NGAP, industry and Air Force officials have often spoken of a generational jump in capability. And with that jump, Lewis said, it would make sense for the service to ask the companies competing for the NGAD fighter, “If you have an engine that operates along these lines, that can do this differently than previous engines, then what does it mean for the airframe that you’re designing?”

In June, Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall revealed that the NGAD fighter has entered the engineering and manufacturing development phase, but he later clarified that there is still a competition for the program. He did not, however, specify how many contractors are still in the running.

US Includes ScanEagle ISR Drones in Ukraine’s Latest Aid Package

US Includes ScanEagle ISR Drones in Ukraine’s Latest Aid Package

Aug. 22, 2022 | By Amanda Miller

A new $775 million security package to help Ukraine fight Russia includes 15 ScanEagle unmanned aerial systems for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance that a Pentagon official said “will enable the targeting of the whole host of artillery capabilities that Ukraine has available.”

The official said in a press briefing Aug. 19, announcing the latest round of aid, that the ScanEagle systems will “give Ukraine additional ISR to conduct better reconnaissance around the front lines.” It was the first time the U.S. provided ScanEagles, but “another ally … is also providing” the system. The official was unaware of whether ScanEagles had “actually been fielded yet from that ally.”

A mobile USAF ScanEagle system includes four aircraft weighing just under 40 pounds each launched by catapult and recovered after catching on a rope hanging from a 30- to 50-foot pole, according to a USAF fact sheet. It includes ground control and a remote video terminal.

The Air Force says it uses the system, equipped with a camera and thermal imager, for “real-time, direct situational awareness and force protection information for Air Force security forces expeditionary teams.”

Insitu, a Boeing subsidiary, makes the ScanEagle system. Boeing says the system is in service in more than 20 countries plus commercially, with more than 48,000 shipboard flight hours with the U.S. Marine Corps and Navy since 2004. The vehicles can fly at 15,000 feet for more than 24 hours.

The U.S. contribution to Ukraine’s defense now amounts to $10.6 billion—$9.9 billion of it since Russia invaded Feb. 24—according to a fact sheet summarizing the aid as of Aug. 19. In all, UASs have included:

  • 15 ScanEagles
  • more than 700 Switchblades
  • about 700 Phoenix Ghosts
  • Pumas (no number given). 

In terms of Ukraine’s progress, “We haven’t seen a significant retake of territory, but we do see a significant weakening of Russian positions in a variety of locations,” the official said.

The latest round of aid includes:

  • Additional ammunition for High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS)
  • 16 105mm Howitzers and 36,000 105mm artillery rounds
  • 15 ScanEagle unmanned aerial systems
  • 40 MaxxPro Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles (MRAP) with mine rollers
  • Additional High-speed Anti-Radiation Missiles (HARM)
  • 50 armored High-Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWV)
  • 1,500 Tube-launched, Optically tracked, Wire-guided (TOW) missiles
  • 1,000 Javelin anti-armor systems
  • 2,000 anti-armor rounds
  • Mine clearing equipment and systems
  • Demolition munitions
  • Tactical secure communications systems
  • Night-vision devices, thermal imagery systems, optics, and laser rangefinders.