USSF’s Bythewood Takes Command of Joint ‘Space Troopers’

USSF’s Bythewood Takes Command of Joint ‘Space Troopers’

Nov. 7, 2022 | By Amanda Miller

SCHRIEVER SPACE FORCE BASE, Colo.—Space Force Brig. Gen. Dennis O. Bythewood took over U.S. Space Command’s Joint Task Force-Space Defense on Nov. 4, becoming only the second commander of the task force’s 300-400 “Space Troopers” at Schriever Space Force Base, Colo. 

Army Gen. James H. Dickinson, the commander of U.S. Space Command, presided over the ceremony. He described Army Maj. Gen. Thomas L. James, the outgoing commander, as “an exceptional officer” and “constant gentleman.” 

James served simultaneously as U.S. Space Command’s director of operations. He assumed the roles the same day the Defense Department reestablished U.S. Space Command in August 2019. The task force, abbreviated JTF-SD, was one of two functional component commands activated the same day.

James characterized the task force’s “unique and absolutely critical national mission” as “protecting and defending our access to key space systems.” The mission includes space domain awareness, warning satellite operators of threats, and “space superiority,” which is to ensure “the conduct of operations at the time and place of our choosing.”

Some of James’ contributions included the “fusion” of commercial and Missile Defense Agency remote sensing data into the military’s space domain awareness; and the creation of “new response options to counter a range of threats,” Dickinson said. “Simply put, Tom was the right leader at the right time for this unique and certainly demanding command.”

James, whose next position will be announced at a later date, previously commanded the Army’s 1st Space Brigade.

Bythewood served as James’ deputy commander of the task force, “so he knows the business and the stakes that are involved today,” Dickinson said. “Dennis displays an intense dedication to the mission and genuine care for his people. Because of his war fighting focus and high integrity, Dennis is ready to assume command of this organization.”

Bythewood said the task force would “continue to innovate as we have the last couple of years to better understand our area of responsibility and execute our space superiority mission.” He said the command is “developing the foundational intelligence needed to maximize our capabilities, and when new ones are delivered, we will synchronize those with support from USSPACECOM.”

Dickinson warned that space’s “strategic and operational environments will only grow more complex.

“And we all know when we see the news every day that the Chinese and the Russians are developing and demonstrating capabilities that can hold our space assets at risk,” he said. “Our freedom of access and action in the domain is not guaranteed.” 

Attending the ceremony in Shriever’s gymnasium were retired USAF Gen. John E. Hyten, the 11th vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Space Force’s Lt. Gen. Steven N. Whiting and Deputy Commander of U.S. Space Command Lt. Gen. John E. Shaw.

This story was updated at 7:49 a.m. Nov. 9, 2022, to correct that James’ next assignment will be announced at a later date.

NASAMS Arrive in Ukraine in US Bid to Bolster Air Defense

NASAMS Arrive in Ukraine in US Bid to Bolster Air Defense

Nov. 7, 2022 | By Chris Gordon

Ukraine has received its first National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS), providing the country with a long-awaited capability as its infrastructure is being attacked by Russian missiles and Iranian-made drones.

Ukrainian defense minister Oleksii Reznikov announced Nov. 7 that the first of the systems, which were purchased by the United States and donated to Ukraine, had been deployed.

The system will “significantly strengthen” Ukraine’s military and “will make our skies safer,” Reznikov said in a tweet.

The delivery of the NASAMS represents a concrete step toward fulfilling recent U.S. pledges to improve Ukraine’s somewhat porous air defenses. The U.S. is providing an initial two NASAMS, with six on order from contractors Kongsberg and Raytheon. Pentagon officials have said the additional six might not arrive for about 18 months.

Throughout Russia’s invasion, Russia’s air force has failed to achieve air superiority due to Ukraine’s successful employment of Soviet-era air defense systems and donated equipment, such as thousands of U.S. Stinger short-range, low-altitude missiles.

“Russia’s aircraft losses likely significantly outstrip their capacity to manufacture new airframes,” Britain’s Ministry of Defense said in a statement Nov. 7. “The time required for the training of competent pilots further reduces Russia’s ability to regenerate combat air capability.”

In response, Russia has begun using long-range cruise and ballistic missiles fired from aircraft flying over Russian territory and ships in the Black Sea. Russia is also employing an increasing number of Iranian-supplied drones. While Ukraine claims it has successfully shot down most of the drones over its territory, Russia has still been able to get past Ukrainian defenses and do substantial damage to Ukraine’s electrical grid to the point that contingency plans to evacuate Kyiv are being discussed in the Ukrainian capital.

In October, U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark A. Milley said the U.S. and its allies would help Ukraine begin building an integrated air and missile defense system because of missile and drone threats, including from Russia’s fleet of low-cost Iranian-designed drones. The U.S. has said that the Russians are piloting them from Crimea with Iranian technical assistance.

The NASAMS are a capability Ukraine has been promised for months. In July, the Pentagon said it would begin purchasing the systems, though the full delivery would take years.

According to a paper released Nov. 7 by the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), a British think tank, Ukraine sorely needs equipment such as NASAMS and the advanced German IRIS-T to augment current capabilities.

“Additional ammunition and more launchers for the highly effective IRIS-T SLM and NASAMS systems are also critical to enable the Ukrainian Air Force to defend remaining electricity infrastructure and protect repair work from higher-end cruise missile attacks,” the paper states. “With rolling blackouts already affecting much of the country and the weather already getting cold, the urgency of these requirements is hard to overstate.”

The two NASAMS Ukraine is now deploying are just one element of improved air defense. On Nov. 4, the U.S. pledged money to refurbish disused HAWK medium-range air defense systems and then donate those to Ukraine.

“The West must avoid complacency about the need to urgently bolster Ukrainian air-defense capacity,” the RUSI report said.

Russia’s increased use of low-cost drones presents an issue for Ukraine’s air defense even if those weapons are shot down, forcing Ukraine to expend its valuable supply of surface-to-air missiles.

One benefit of the NASAMS is the use of adapted air-to-air missiles placed in a ground launcher, known as Surface-Launched AMRAAMs. Newer NASAMS can also launch other normally air-to-air missiles, such as the AIM-9 Sidewinder. The U.S. and its allies have significant stocks of those missiles, according to the Pentagon.

Still, Ukraine has pleaded for more Western systems, and the RUSI report indicates that much more assistance will be needed.

“We continue to insist that countries, wherever possible, provide Ukraine with as much air defense as possible as soon as possible,” Austin said Oct. 27

Here’s What the 2022 Midterm Elections Could Mean for the Pentagon, Air Force

Here’s What the 2022 Midterm Elections Could Mean for the Pentagon, Air Force

Nov. 7, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

As voters head to the polls Nov. 8 for the 2022 midterm elections, major potential changes to congressional power hang in the balance. For the Department of Defense—and the Air Force, in particular—here are meaningful shifts to watch for and new faces to track:

Majority/Minority

As the 2022 campaign has reached its final stages, the growing consensus among political handicappers is that control of the House of Representatives is very likely to flip from Democrats to Republicans. Data journalism site FiveThirtyEight’s model puts such a likelihood at 83 percent; The Economist’s model is at 78 percent; and Politico’s forecast is “likely Republican.”

By contrast, the Senate is wide open. FiveThirtyEight’s model favors the Republicans by a narrow 55-45 margin; The Economist’s is at 57-43; and Politico rates it as a “toss-up.”

Republicans winning control of one or both chambers would set up at least two years of battles between President Joe Biden’s White House and Congress. 

On defense issues, in particular, Republicans have spent much of the past two years hammering Biden on multiple fronts. On spending, they have decried the Pentagon’s last two proposed budgets as insufficient, especially given rising inflation rates; added a sizable increase in fiscal 2022 funding; and are currently trying to do so again for 2023.

Some Democrats have actually endorsed those increases, as well, ensuring their passage even with Republicans in the minority. But if control flips, Republican lawmakers will likely have an easier time adding on to Biden’s budgets as they see fit.

That calculus could be complicated if Democrats hold on to the Senate, however, sparking more inter-chamber debate, especially if Democratic leaders remain committed to keeping the growth of defense spending down.

Aside from money, a change in control would also likely result in clashes between Congress and the White House over issues such as climate change, COVID-19, diversity and inclusion, and abortion—issues that administration officials have said are important to readiness, but which Republicans have frequently pushed back on, arguing that they are political and take focus off lethality.

Many such clashes would likely unfold in the National Defense Authorization Act, the annual policy bill that regularly attracts hundreds of amendments. This past year alone, lawmakers debated provisions that would have protected abortion access for service members, rolled back the Pentagon’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate, and limited diversity programs within DOD. Such amendments usually passed or failed along party-line votes.

Besides the NDAA, a Republican majority would have the ability to call hearings on issues that matter most to them. Pentagon officials and lawmakers have already had high-profile clashes over so-called “wokeness” in the military, and those could increase if Republicans have the ability to call hearings on the matter.

Finally, a switch in majority parties could mean a push toward more aggressive policies against China. House Republicans have pledged to establish a “Select Committee on China” if they take the majority, and the top Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), issued a statement after the release of the National Defense Strategy saying the U.S. needs to “rebuild our naval fleet to deter Chinese aggression towards Taiwan” and calling for the restart of the Nuclear Sea-Launched Cruise Missile program, which the Biden administration canceled in its Nuclear Posture Review.

Key Air Force Changes

The relaunch of the SLCM-N would likely be the biggest change between parties when it comes to the nuclear triad. The Biden administration has reversed course and endorsed the modernization of the Air Force’s land and air legs, a position Republicans support as well.

Similarly, there appears to be bipartisan support on issues such as modernization efforts for the F-22 Raptor, accelerated development of hypersonic weapons, and even long-resisted cuts to the A-10 fleet.

But Republican leadership in the House and/or Senate could still spell significant changes for the Air Force, particularly if funding increases.

Air Force leaders have said they would have bought more F-35 fighters in this past year’s budget if they had had more resources—a beefed-up budget could give the service the opportunity to do just that.

A number of Republican lawmakers have also expressed alarm about the Air Force’s plans to retire older aircraft at a faster rate than it buys new ones to pay for other modernization efforts. It remains unclear how far they would go to change those plans, however.

There also could be a change in how the Air Force handles its tanker fleet—a number of lawmakers have voiced displeasure at Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall’s indications that there may be no competition for a future KC-Y tanker, with the service seemingly prepared to go with a modified KC-46.

Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), the top Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, and Rep. Rob Wittman (R-Va.), the leading Republican on the Seapower and Projection Forces subcommittee, have both critiqued that plan, and Rep. Jerry Carl (R-Ala.) tried to include an amendment in the NDAA that would have forced the service to hold a competition for KC-Y, though it was voted down.

In some ways, the tanker issue is parochial, with both Carl and Rogers representing a state where Lockheed Martin has said it will build the LMXT, its proposed alternative to the KC-46. But nearly every vote in favor of holding a competition came from Republicans, and Rogers has already said he wants to revisit the issue next year. Should he become chair of the HASC—and Wittman chair of the subcommittee—they’ll have the ability to push the issue to the forefront.

Changing Faces

Rogers’ possible ascension to the top spot on the HASC depends on Republicans winning the House, but should that occur, the Space Force would have one of its leading advocates in a key position on Capitol Hill—Rogers was instrumental in pushing for the creation of the new service.

But his Democratic counterpart in that push, Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.), isn’t even on the ballot this November. He announced his retirement earlier this year, and his departure from Congress in January 2023 will create an opening for a new top Democrat on the HASC’s Strategic Forces subcommittee.

Cooper is just one of several top HASC officials retiring after this election. Rep. Jim Langevin (D-R.I.), currently the chair of the Cyber, Innovative Technologies, and Information Systems subcommittee, is leaving, as is Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.), head of the Military Personnel subcommittee. Their departures will set off a mini-leadership shuffle among Democrats on the committee, though Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) is expected to continue as the party’s top lawmaker on the panel. For Republicans, the only change forecast among subcommittee heads is the departure of Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-Mo.), who led her party on the Tactical Air and Land Forces panel.

Meanwhile, up-and-comers Rep. Elaine Luria (D-Va.), Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine), Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), and Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.)—a former Airman and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance pilot—are all in races Politico has rated as toss-ups.

On the Senate side, the Armed Services Committee will get a new top Republican, as longtime leader Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) is retiring. His likely replacement is Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), a former Air Force judge advocate whose constituency includes Keesler and Columbus Air Force Bases. Wicker co-sponsored a proposed amendment for this year’s NDAA that would slow the Air Force from reducing the size of the T-1 Jayhawk trainer fleet until Undergraduate Pilot Training 2.5 has been implemented across the service and USAF submits a date to Congress by which the T-7A trainer will achieve full operational capability.

No other members of the SASC are retiring after this election, but one is in a tough re-election battle. Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) is in a toss-up race, according to Politico, though he does maintain a narrow lead in the polls. Kelly is currently the chair of the Emerging Threats and Capabilities subcommittee, but he is also the most junior Democratic senator on the SASC, meaning that even if he does win re-election, his position on the panel could be in peril if Republicans win a majority.

Elsewhere in the Senate, the powerful Appropriations Committee is set to get new leaders from both parties, as Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) are both retiring. According to reports, they’ll likely be replaced by Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), though Murray is up for re-election and Politico has only rated the race as “Leans Democratic.” Collins, meanwhile, will also take over as the top Republican on the Appropriations Defense subcommittee, while Democrats will still be led by Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.).

Air Force Vets in Congress

At the moment, 15 Air Force veterans are serving in Congress—13 in the House, two in the Senate.

Of those 15, three are retiring at the end of this Congress: Rep. Kaiali’i Kahele (D-Hawaii), Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), and Rep. Pete DeFazio (D-Ore.). Bacon is the only one in a race that is considered competitive.

According to Military Times, 19 other former Airmen are running for Congress, all in the House. Two of them are heavily favored to win: Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) and Donald Davis (D-N.C.).

Another five are in races Politico has rated as either a “toss-up” or “lean”: Chris West (R-Ga.), Zach Nunn (R-Ia.), Keith Pekau (R-Ill.), Sam Peters (R-Nev.), and J.R. Majewski (R-Ohio).

LaPlante: Congress Will Support Multiyear Weapons Procurements

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

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

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

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

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

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.