Slife: Air Superiority, Base Defense Must Adapt to Modern War

April 24, 2024 | By Unshin Lee Harpley

Small one-way attack drones widely used on the frontlines of Ukraine and against U.S. outposts in the Middle East have fundamentally altered the definition of air superiority, Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force Gen. James C. “Jim” Slife said April 24.

“Our traditional conception of what things like air superiority means have changed,” Slife said at a panel discussion at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“One thing that you can look at in Ukraine is the return of firepower—the reason that it has become so bloody is because of the lack of ability to maneuver,” he said. “One component of that is the inability of both sides to achieve air superiority in the face of a proliferated air threat and formidable air defenses. I think there’s some lessons that we can be learning.”

Slife cited the defense of Israel against Iranian drone attacks earlier this month as an example of an effective layered air defense, where the U.S. and its partners intercepted missiles and drones launched from Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. On April 13, U.S. Air Force F-15E and F-16 fighters shot down more than 70 drones during the attack, which involved over 100 ballistic missiles, 30 land-attack cruise missiles, and 150 drones. U.S. and Israeli officials claimed to intercept “99 percent” of the drones and missiles, with Israel taking out the majority of the threats, in part by intercepting ballistic missiles in space.

“Our coalition forces had a pretty successful weekend a couple of weekends ago against a really concerted Iranian attack on Israel,” said Slife. “Some of what was shot down was shot down with bullets. It was 20-millimeter shells coming out of the front end of a fighter. That’s a pretty favorable cost exchange right there.”

However, Slife cautioned against relying on individual platforms. U.S. fighters were already staged and ready for the attack, and Israel has an extensive network of detection methods and interceptors.

Slife noted that historically, each service focused on the set of requirements for each platform. In the case of the Air Force, that would entail things such as an aircraft’s speed or a missile’s range.

“We’re really, really good at it,” said Slife. But the U.S. must shift from a platform-centric approach to better integration among different systems to respond to a myriad of threats.

“There’s a shift underway to system-level integration where the sensor is in a different place than the shooter, [which] is in a different place from the electromagnetic spectrum effects that we’re going to generate,” said Slife. “All of these things have to be integrated at a system-level and it becomes a much less service by service, platform by platform approach to how we’re going to fight.”

This is crucial for future warfare, Slife said. In recent years, tensions in the Pacific have escalated due to China’s stance on unifying Taiwan with Beijing, which also protests American and allied operations in the South China Sea.

For regional defense, such as protecting Guam, Slife said the U.S. military’s ability to fight as one force, rather than as individual branches, is an advantage over its adversaries. He said the Army and the Air Force are working particularly closely on how to defend air bases from air attack.

“We’re not trying to build the best services on the planet, we’re trying to build the best joint force on the planet because we don’t fight as services we fight as a joint force,” he said.

Boeing Takes $222 Million Loss on T-7, KC-46

April 24, 2024 | By David Roza

Boeing lost $222 million on two key Air Force programs in the first quarter of fiscal 2024: $128 million on the KC-46 aerial refueling tanker and $94 million on the T-7A Red Hawk trainer, where the total losses already exceed more than $7 billion and $1 billion, respectively.

Despite the hits, Boeing’s Defense Space & Security (BDS) sector reported a 6 percent bump in revenue from about $6.5 billion in the first quarter of 2023 to nearly $7 billion in the first quarter of 2024, thanks in part to orders for P-8 maritime patrol aircraft for the Royal Canadian Air Force and German Navy, a final contract for 17 F/A-18 fighter jets for the U.S. Navy, and a cost-type contract modification from the Navy for two more test examples of the MQ-25 aerial refueling drone.

“Our game plan to get BDS back to high single-digit margins by the 2025, 2026 time frame remains intact,” Boeing Chief Financial Officer Brian West said April 24 during the company’s 2024 first quarter earnings call, echoing a statement he made at the last quarter’s earning call.

“Overall, the defense portfolio is well-positioned,” he added. “As seen in the initial FY25 presidential budget, there’s strong demand across the customer base. The products are performing in the field, and we’re confident that our efforts to drive stability will return this business to performance levels that our investors recognize.”

Much of the losses in those programs trace back to Boeing’s zeal to win defense competitions in the last decade, which made it “accept too much risk” on fixed-price programs, Chief Executive Officer David Calhoun has previously said. But West said progress is being made.

“Despite the relatively modest updates in the quarter, we continue to retire risks and remain focused on maturing these programs quarter in and quarter out,” he said. A Lot award for the KC-46 expected later in the year should also help with cash flow.

Retiring risk is the name of the game: West looked forward to delivering two VC-25Bs, better known as “Air Force One.” That program has cost Boeing more than $1.3 billion, and delivery will not take place until at least 2027.

“We’re retiring risk every day, particularly on a program like VC-25B,” West said. “We will deliver two airplanes, and then that will be over as a program.”

The executive expected more de-risking as the T-7 moves through flight testing and the KC-46 program receives more orders later this year.

Meanwhile, Boeing is still hammering out the specifics for possibly acquiring Spirit AeroSystems, the aerospace subcontractor being investigated after a Jan. 5 accident involving a door plug the company installed on an Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 fuselage blew out mid-flight. Spirit was already fighting a shareholder class-action lawsuit, lodged in December, alleging an “excessive” amount of work defects at the company, based on whistleblower reports.

Spirit makes components for a range of military aircraft including the KC-46 tanker, the P-8, and the B-21 Raider stealth bomber. The discussions between Boeing and Spirit are ongoing, West said.

“As with any large and complex deal, there are a number of terms and issues we need to work through, including price, financing and other key items. And the best approach to handling and potentially divesting certain work that Spirit does for other customers,” he added. “We believe in the strategic logic of a deal, but we’ll take the time needed to get this right before we decide to enter into agreement.”

‘More EW Than We Have Ever Seen Before’ in Ukraine, Space Force Official Says

April 24, 2024 | By Chris Gordon

The Space Force must invest in high-level training based on the lessons learned from an unprecedented level of electronic warfare (EW) used by both Russia and Ukraine in the conflict there, one of the service’s top EW leaders said on April 24.

“What we have seen in the Ukraine-Russia conflict is more EW than we have ever seen before,” Col. Nicole Petrucci, the commander of the USSF’s combat-ready forces as head of Space Delta 3, said during an AFA Warfighters in Action event. “We’ve actually been studying this very carefully to see what’s going on to see how we can help or not help—and that is unofficially, just because we’re trying to see what was the environment like.”

Ukraine and Russia have engaged in a cat-and-mouse game to jam each other’s systems. Ukraine has tried to use electronic warfare to help its air defenses confront Russian drones and missiles. Russia has interfered with signals in an attempt to disrupt global positioning system satellites that help Ukraine employ guided aerial and artillery munitions, many of which have been provided by the U.S.

The Space Force’s assessment of the Russia-Ukraine conflict may mean “we need to exercise some different tactics, some different techniques to get after what the environment looks like now,” said Petrucci, who commands roughly 600 personnel in Delta 3.

U.S. officials have acknowledged even the high level of electronic warfare in Ukraine could dwarf what the U.S. could face in a conflict with China, which would likely attempt to interfere with the satellites the U.S. military relies on for basic functions such as navigation and timing—perhaps kinetically.

China is “really looking at how has the U.S. military been able to successfully execute combat operations, what are its key enablers, and how do I as an adversary go out and break those key enablers,” a DOD intelligence official told reporters earlier this week. “The PRC has also deployed and continues to develop an expansive electronic warfare suite that is really designed to disrupt our ability to effectively use our C4ISR [command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance]. C4ISR, they’ve identified as being a key node within the U.S. way of war, that, if they are able to disrupt it, we can’t effectively execute operations in their mind.”

“They prioritize this idea of electromagnetic spectrum control,” the intelligence official added of China’s People’s Liberation Army. “Electronic warfare capabilities as well have also been deployed that are designed to target space.”

But the U.S. is not resigned to sitting idly by, Petrucci noted.

“We’re always looking to the future: ‘What does the EW look like?’” she said. “We’ve been doing it in the Space Force for four years now, but through the Air Force for at least the last 20 years in space.”

The issue is a lack of real-world experience, a primary concern of service leaders, including Chief of Space Operations Gen. B. Chance Saltzman.

“The biggest thing is getting people the right training,” Petrucci said. “You need the right simulators, you need those right ranges to do that, and you need to be able to adequately look like a high-end threat … and it means that you have to have instructors that are good enough and understand the environment.”

The need for better training is not just about spending money on a new kit, however. The service’s new force generation model, SPAFORGEN, is built upon a need to take Guardians off the front line of day-to-day work and allow them time to build up their expertise through a readiness phase devoted to training. Saltzman and other service leaders have said the threat the military imagines in the future is the primary driver of that need. The Space Force has also has Space Delta 11’s space aggressor squadrons, which Petrucci said could provide valuable insights across the service.

While space has been normalized as a warfighting domain, America still has yet to fight a war in space. Unlike the pilots in the Air Force, which has continuously provided airpower for decades, the Space Force has been built around professionals who hope never to have to use all the tools in America’s arsenal in a possible future conflagration.

“Really, what we’re looking for is how can we push this in the future?” Petrucci said. “You’re going have to have a better system. You’re going to have to have better tactics and techniques. And you need to have those operators trained well enough to be able to recognize it and then make changes while they’re in that conflict.”

Classified Lockheed Program to Lose $1 Billion Before Becoming a ‘Franchise’

April 23, 2024 | By John A. Tirpak

Lockheed Missiles and Fire Control took a $100 million loss on a classified program in the first quarter of 2024, company officials said April 23. That program will incur another $225 million loss across the rest of the year and over $1 billion in losses cumulatively, they said, but they’re convinced the mysterious program will be a “franchise” for all the military services and be highly profitable starting in 2028.

“We did have the $100 million dollar loss provision” in MFC for the classified program in the first quarter, Lockheed Chief Financial Officer Jay Malave said on the company’s April 23 first quarter results call. “There’s in the range of another $225 million in the back half of the year…Depending on other factors as the year goes on.” Those factors include a “technical milestone achievement.”

He said that Lockheed is prepared for losses in “excess of a billion dollars” but added that the timing of that “is still to be determined.”

Jim Taiclet, Lockheed Martin’s president and chief executive officer, said the classified program “will have very, very, long legs. There’s going to be many, many years, we believe, of orders to follow. … But I think if you look [at] the curve for the life cycle, it’s going to be significantly positive. And so we want to get there as efficiently as we can.

“This is a long-run franchise program that I think the U.S. government is going to support for a very long time,” Taiclet asserted.

Taiclet said “it’d be about 2028” when the program “flips positive” for cashflow.

The program in question isn’t likely to be the same one referenced in mid-2021, when Taiclet also announced a $225 million charge against a classified program. That project was characterized as a Lockheed Aeronautics project, while the April 23 announcement was associated with the Missiles and Fire Control sector. In the 2021 statement, though, Taiclet used similar phrasing, saying that project “will be a good program for Lockheed Martin” in the long run.

Taiclet also reiterated that Lockheed is taking a harder look at how it bids programs, is avoiding being too aggressive, and thinks government needs to acknowledge that companies aren’t going to do loss-leaders anymore.

The “highest risk” in contracting is “fixed price production on something that’s not been designed yet,” he said.

South Korea’s F-4 Phantoms Fire AGM-142 Popeye Missiles One Last Time Before Retirement

April 23, 2024 | By Unshin Lee Harpley

South Korea conducted the final live-fire drill with its F-4 Phantoms amid the largest U.S.-ROK air exercise of the year.

The Republic of Korea Air Force’s F-4 Phantoms fired the precision-guided AGM-142 Popeye air-to-surface missiles on a range near the Yellow Sea on April 18, according to a service release.

These last training sessions marked the nation’s farewell to its remaining Phantoms before the fleet is phased-out on June 8, as well as a goodbye to its AGM-142 Popeyes, as the F-4 jets were the country’s sole aircraft capable of carrying the missiles.

ROK Air Force F-4 Phantom fighters equipped with AGM-142 missiles conducted their last live-fire exercise on April 18, 2024, near the Yellow Sea. Courtesy photo/ROK Air Force

The F-4 Phantom took its inaugural flight in 1958. The highly versatile jet concurrently served as the front-line tactical aircraft for the U.S. Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps from the Vietnam War to the Gulf War of the 1990s. Nearly four decades after its inception, the fleet was retired in 1996 from the U.S. Air Force—the last American branch to operate the jets.

Following the U.K. and Iran—which was a major buyer of U.S. weapons before the pro-American Shah was overthrown in 1979—South Korea became the third country to acquire the Phantoms in 1969. Among its variants, the F-4D was hailed as one of the world’s most powerful fighters at the time, far ahead of North Korean fighter jets. Until the introduction of the KF-16—the license-built South Korean version of the F-16—in 1994, the nation employed the Phantom as its primary fighter jet.

South Korea has operated approximately 220 Phantoms and their variants to date, including upgraded versions such as the F-4E and the reconnaissance aircraft RF-4C. Currently, there are only about 10 operational F-4s, all due to be retired in the coming months.

ROK Air Force F-4 Phantom fighters equipped with AGM-142 missiles conducted their last live-fire exercise on April 18 near the Yellow Sea. Courtesy photo/ROK Air Force

The AGM-142 “Popeye” missiles fired by the F-4 jets in simulated attacks last week were originally developed in the early 1980s by the defense technology firm Rafael. Later, they were redesignated as the AGM-142, known as “Have Nap” in the U.S. In 1987, the U.S. assessed the munition for equipping its B-52G/H bombers with a standoff precision strike capability, initiating procurement in 1989.

The U.S. initially imported the missiles from Israel but later began co-production of the AGM-142B-F commencing several derivatives of the Popeye, buying 294 AGM-142 missiles before their withdrawal from service in 2003.

Between 1997 and 1999, South Korea ordered over 216 of these air-to-surface missiles and their variants, including Popeye 1 and AGM-142C/D, from the U.S., with the country’s Air Force integrating the missiles in 2002. The missile is capable of striking targets over 60 miles away and can deliver a payload of 770 pounds. ROK Air Force explained that its range was crucial as it was the only missile capable of precisely targeting Pyongyang for years. The closest air base in South Korea from North Korea’s capital is Osan Air Base, located about 50 miles away.

The farewell ceremonies took place amid the largest annual U.S.-ROK Air Exercise of the year, KFT (Korea Flying Training) exercise, which aims to improve interoperability between the allies. This year’s edition saw more than 25 different types of aircraft totaling 100 from both nations.

U.S. fighters, tankers, reconnaissance and transport aircraft, including F-16s, F-35Bs, A-10s, E-3s, U-2s, MQ-9s, KC-135s, C-17s, C-130J and the Army’s MQ-1C drone, arrived from locations both on and off the Korean Peninsula for the exercise. The ROK contingent included F-35As, F-15Ks, F-16s, FA-50s, C-130s, CN-235s, and KC-330s.

“KFT is a critical training event due to the sheer size of the exercise, the amount of aircraft and people involved from across the joint and allied forces, and the complexity of the training,” Col. Charles G. Cameron, the 7th Air Force’s director of operations and plans said in a release. Cameron highlighted that the exercise provides “the most realistic opportunity” for the joint forces to rehearse tactics through challenging scenarios while bolstering defensive posture in the region.

The U.S. and South Korea are “ready to respond to any threat or adversary,” said Col. Matthew C. Gaetke, the commander of 8th Fighter Wing commander at Kunsan Air Base.

F-35 Tech Upgrade Slips to 2025; ‘Truncated’ Version in the Fall

April 23, 2024 | By John A. Tirpak

Deliveries of full-up Tech Refresh Three-equipped F-35s, previously expected in the middle of this year, now won’t come until 2025, Lockheed Martin officials reported on their April 23 first-quarter earnings call. In the meantime, they hope to deliver a so-called “truncated” version of the hardware/software package this fall.

Chief Executive Officer Jim Taiclet said there will be two releases of TR-3: a “combat training-capable” version that should be delivered in the third quarter of this and a “fully combat-capable” version in 2025. Lockheed has been storing newly-built F-35s with the TR-3 pending completion of testing and integration. Some 70 aircraft are in storage at an undisclosed location, awaiting a green light for delivery.

The Joint Program Office has said for several months that it has been discussing release of a “truncated” TR-3 package in order to get deliveries moving again and prevent further disruption to the units in a number of countries that have been waiting for their F-35s.

The delays are due to supply chain issues with TR-3 components as well as ongoing testing of the configuration, which comprises a processor and software package, along with other new gear that underwrites the F-35 Block 4 upgrade of the international fighter.

“We are wringing out all of the software through all of the new hardware and integrating it into all the aircraft,” which has “taken longer than our team predicted,” Taiclet said.

Meanwhile, the F-35 program office says the Block 4 program will be “reimagined,” with many of the planned capabilities now deferred to the 2030s.

As a result of the testing and supply delays, Taiclet said only 75 to 110 F-35s will be delivered in calendar 2024, versus a goal of 156. He noted that even a more modest schedule assumes “timely receipt” of components.

Taiclet said the F-35 program is highly concurrent, with “development, production, and sustainment” all happening simultaneously, which can lead to bottlenecks.

“We are bringing all relevant resources across our company and collaborating closely with our customers and suppliers to fully implement the TR-3 capabilities that everybody’s looking forward to getting,” he said.

System stability is improving from prior software versions into “the combat training capable configuration” and flight testing of this configuration is now underway, he said. Lockheed was “maturing the system with approximately 95 percent of TR-3 capabilities in this flight test program,” Taiclet added, with “continual software updates to support capability insertions over the Block 4 program and beyond.”

The truncated capability means Lockheed Martin “can get these jets in the hands of squadron, wing and regional commanders so that they can start training their pilots on them and training their maintenance organizations, and also get their base infrastructure, spare parts, tools, everything else.” The final software load for this release will be available “sometime in the next few months.” However, he insisted those jets “could be deployed into actual combat operations” if necessary.

The JPO said Release 1 is called 40P01 and will go out “when the code is stable, capable, and maintainable to deliver TR-3 configured aircraft for use in combat training,” but only with Release 2—40P02—will full combat capability be realized.

The F-35 partners and other “stakeholders” have approved TR-3 truncation acceptance criteria,” the JPO said.

When TR-3 is fully delivered, users will already be well-versed in “the operational patterns and procedures on how to actually fly the jet in combat,” Taiclet said.

He noted that, despite the TR-3 delays, the F-35 remains a good seller. The Czech Republic recently became the 18th country to buy the jet, and the U.S. agreed to sell additional jets to Singapore.

The Lockheed estimates jibe with that of F-35 Program Executive Officer Lt. Gen. Michael Schmidt, who told the House Armed Services Committee tactical air panel on April 16 that the whole Block 4 program must be “re-imagined” due to supply and testing delays and shifting requirements.

In a 25-page prepared testimony for the hearing, which closed shortly after it began, Schmidt said that a “Technical Baseline Review” of the F-35 “assessed that numerous Block 4 capabilities will not deliver until the 2030s due to technical complexity, software efficiency, human and financial resourcing, flight test capacity, lab quality and capacity, and a lack of defined requirements.”

The Government Accountability Office has urged on several occasions that Congress separate Block 4 from the overall F-35 program and make it a Major Acquisition Program in its own right; due to its cost and complexity, and the better to highlight troubles. Schmidt said the JPO plans to create that “subprogram” next year.

Schmidt acknowledged to the House panel that “TR-3 has taken far too long to deliver.”

He explained that the TR-3 hardware design is not yet fully mature, and this is a “significant complicating factor in software integration.” The result is “low manufacturing yields of parts necessary for aircraft production.” That in turn has led to “using software to overcome hardware design maturity challenges.” An independent review of the software architecture found “we have a solid software architecture, but until the underlying hardware is fully mature, the F-35 program will continue to struggle with software integration efficiency.”

Taiclet said there’s a silver lining to the situation and that the company is adapting to imposed program changes, so there will be incremental “step function increases in capability every few years.” He noted the DOD recently extended the expected service life of the aircraft

Lockheed chief financial officer Jay Malave said the two-stage TR-3 release “really keep our production on track here in 2024″ by decreasing the aircraft Lockheed has to keep in storage.

Malave also acknowledged that the extension of TR-3 into two releases could hurt profitability on Lots 15-17, given that the timing of deliveries affects progress payments and incentive fees.

Lockheed is pursuing “anti-fragility” efforts with the F-35 supplier base to ensure multiple vendors of parts and components, Taiclet said.

The COVID-19 pandemic underscored that “we need to have second and maybe third sources and geographic diversity … having single sources outside the U.S. is probably not the best idea,” even if more supplies drive up prices, he said.

For example, the supply of F-35 canopies is “one of the big degraders we have,” Taiclet said, suggesting that the company relies on only one supplier for that element.

In his prepared HASC testimony, Schmidt said the JPO has been working on reducing concurrency in the program, and that the “reimagined” Block 4 has “established Capability Decision Points (CDPs) to rigorously assess the technical maturity of hardware and software and the readiness for introduction into F-35 aircraft production lots.”

The re-imagined upgrade now includes 88 “must-have” capability improvements, he said, and these include “common capabilities for electronic warfare; communication, navigation and identification; sustainment,” new weapons for the partners as well as U.S. service-unique weapons, and “partner-unique capabilities.”

Block 4 will have to consist of “what industry can actually deliver,” Schmidt said.

Saltzman: New Space Force Readiness Model Will Be ‘Drastic Change’

April 23, 2024 | By Chris Gordon

Chief of Space Operations Gen. B. Chance Saltzman said reforms underway to the Space Force’s deployment and training model are the “most drastic change accompanying the establishment of the Space Force” in a note distributed to Guardians on April 19.

“It fundamentally alters how we prepare for operations,” Saltzman wrote in one of his “C-Note” updates.

Service leaders argue that the Space Force does not currently follow a model that properly prepares Guardians for a real-world fight. Saltzman has previously likened the USSF’s changes to turning a Merchant Marine into the U.S. Navy—that is, turning a peacetime force into one that is ready and equipped to go to war.

“Expecting Guardians to accomplish a combat mission they are not ready to perform betrays the trust the American people have placed in the Space Force,” Saltzman wrote. “That’s why building readiness is a central obligation of our service.”

Under the Department of the Air Force’s efforts to “re-optimize” for the so-called great power competition, the USAF and USSF are implementing new deployment models. For the Air Force, that means packaging forces in more holistic, deployable units that already train together under the AFFORGEN force generation model. The goal, ultimately, is to have Airmen who are more ready to fight on short notice.

The Space Force shares that goal but faces a different way of fighting since most Guardians are deployed in place with the same unit.

Saltzman has emphasized improving realistic training so that Guardians are prepared to fight. But personnel cannot do their day jobs and train at the same time—or at least they won’t be doing so in the future, Saltzman wrote. That is why the service needs the new Space Force Generation (SPAFORGEN) model, he said.

“It is based on the straightforward observation that day-to-day space operations do not prepare Guardians for the challenges they will face in a high-intensity combat environment,” Saltzman wrote. “Balancing operations with readiness requires a different approach than the ‘all-in, all-the-time’ construct we used before.”

SPAFORGEN, which was first previewed by Saltzman in a C-Note late last year, will follow three phases through which Guardians will rotate. First is the “Prepare Phase” for Guardians to learn their assigned roles. Second is the “Ready Phase,” during which Guardians will “participate in advanced training to equip them for high-intensity conflict,” Saltzman wrote. Finally is the “Commit Phase,” in which Guardians will be part of a combat squadron or combat detachment.

The Air Force is following a similar concept with AFFORGEN, which has four six-month cycles. That model has already been implemented, with the first Airmen deploying under it last fall.

Retired Air Force Col. Stuart Pettis, who worked on the Space Force headquarters staff and served as chief of training for Air Force Space Command, said SPAFORGEN is addressing a known but vexing issue.

“The challenge is providing white space for crews to do advanced training because they are fully employed doing to day-to-day operations,” Pettis said.

Now, the Space Force will have a more coherent approach to training, the service says.

“Under SPAFORGEN, both officers and enlisted in mission squadrons will continue to rotate in and out of operations while assigned to the unit, creating a more experienced, capable, and threat-focused crew force,” Saltzman wrote.

Guardians and an Airman manage the 25th Space Range Squadron’s “closed-loop” range environment during a test of the Remote Modular Terminal (RMT) in Colorado Springs, Colo., April 4, 2024. U.S. Air Force photo by Capt. Charles Rivezzo

Charles Galbreath, a retired Space Force colonel, said SPAFORGEN would be a helpful construct to help judge whether the Guardians are adequately prepared for their mission.

“Understanding the metrics to monitor readiness is critical and will likely continue to evolve as the Space Force refines its thinking,” said Galbreath, a senior fellow at the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies.

Indeed, Saltzman said SPAFORGEN will help the Space Force understand itself better—an argument Air Force leaders have also used for their force generation model.

“SPAFORGEN is another example where the Space Force is prioritizing combat effectiveness over organizational efficiency,” Saltzman wrote. “It allows headquarters staffs to accurately measure and resource readiness. Doing so creates the capacity to perform today’s mission while also preparing for tomorrow’s fight.”

While Saltzman has previously articulated the need to switch to the SPAFORGEN model, his recent C-Note takes the argument directly to Guardians whose lives will be affected by the changes.

“Big changes are never easy, and there is still a tremendous amount of work needed to fully implement SPAFORGEN across the service,” Saltzman wrote. “My hope is that, by sharing the principles here, leaders at every level can aggressively resource and normalize the SPAFORGEN model to maximize our combat effectiveness.”

Why a C-130 Crew Braved a 26 Hour Flight to Guam

April 23, 2024 | By David Roza

An Air Force C-130J Super Hercules crew braved a long flight around half the planet earlier this month as part of an experiment testing how quickly they could respond to a crisis in the Indo-Pacific.

Dubbed Hazard Leap, the test kicked off on April 18 when two full crews—three pilots and two loadmasters each—in a C-130J assigned to the 40th Airlift Squadron took off from Dyess Air Force Base, Texas, bound for Guam, a U.S. territory in the western Pacific that serves as a key military hub. The flight took 26 hours and 33 minutes, including a stop for gas in Hawaii along the way. The C-130J had a toilet on board, but the crew also took a quick bathroom break in Hawaii during the refueling stop, a Dyess Air Force Base spokesperson said.

The “remarkable” journey demonstrated the C-130J’s “ability to operate for extended periods without stopping,” Dyess wrote in a press release. The four-engine turboprop plane could fly even longer than usual thanks to external fuel tanks slung beneath its wings. The tanks added about 17,000 pounds of gas—roughly four extra hours of flying—according to Capt. Anna Santori, a pilot who flew the Hazard Leap mission.

The 40th Airlift Squadron is not the first to fly a C-130J with tanks, but, according to the release, it is the first in Air Mobility Command to use them in a maximum endurance operation (MEO), the term for very long flights meant to test the capabilities of the crew and the aircraft. Units across the Air Force have flown MEOs in recent years to prepare for a possible conflict with China over the vast Pacific Ocean, where Air Mobility Command will be hard-pressed to provide airlift, aerial refueling, and aeromedical evacuation to the rest of the military.

“There is too much water and too much distance [in the Pacific] for anyone else to do it relevantly, at pace, at speed, at scale,” AMC boss Gen. Mike Minihan said in 2022. “Everybody’s role is critical, but Air Mobility Command is the maneuver for the Joint Force. If we don’t have our act together, nobody wins.”

Past MEOs included a 36-hour KC-46 flight over the Pacific and a 72-hour KC-135 mission back and forth over the continental U.S. Part of the challenge is the physical and mental strain of flying an aircraft for a long period of time. Air Mobility Command is working on new solutions to help crews develop better awareness and diagnostics of their fatigue and alertness levels, much the same way the plane’s performance is measured by cockpit instruments.

“The status quo is we just ask the crew, ‘Hey, how’s everyone feeling?’” Maj. Nate Mocalis, who took part in the 72-hour KC-135 flight, said in January. “But as humans, we’re really poor judges of objectively assessing our actual fatigue and risk due to our levels of alertness.”

Another part of the challenge is connectivity: mobility aircraft have to be able to send information over vast distances in order to arrive at the right place and time as part of a complex battle plan, but today much of the mobility fleet relies on old-fashioned voice-to-voice communication, which takes a while and is vulnerable to misunderstandings. Minihan is pushing to adopt available technology that allows for secure beyond line of sight data exchange.

“I can just look at a tablet or a screen and I can see it,” Minihan told Air & Space Forces Magazine in February. “I can know which airfields have been bombed or damaged. Then I don’t have to just show up, look at the runway, and say that one’s not for me today. These things are all essential.”

Airmen at Little Rock Air Force Base made progress on the connectivity challenge during a separate MEO earlier this year. Maintainers with the 19th Airlift Wing installed a satellite communications terminal, called the SD/R4i Tactical Removable Airborne Satellite Communications solution, onto the hatch of a C-130J, then the crew successfully tested it during a 26-hour, 20-minute flight, according to the manufacturer, SD Government.

Am image of the SD/R4i Tactical Removeable Airborne Satellite Communications (TRASC) BLOS solution successfully tested by a C-130J crew from the 19th Airlift Wing during a 26-hour flight. (Photo via SD Government)

“Performed as part of Exercise Gnarly Explodeo, the maximum endurance mission recorded 100 percent reliability and availability from the TRASC system as it facilitated secure command and control data communications, defense applications, intelligence updates, electronic flight bags, video conferencing, voice over internet and WiFi calls,” the manufacturer, SD Government, wrote in a press release. Col. Denny Davies, commander of the 19th Airlift Wing, seemed to agree.

“This platform enables global command and control, providing our crew with unparalleled situational awareness,” Davies said in the release. “It makes the C-130 much more resilient and capable in the vastness of the Pacific, reinforcing the Air Force’s core tenant of distributed control.”

It was not clear if the 317th Airlift Wing also tried out new connectivity methods during Hazard Leap, but they have more challenges coming up, such as working with U.S. Marines in the Philippines during Balikatan, an annual exercise that started on April 22 this year. The mission sets there will likely include landing at blacked-out airfields, loading and off-loading High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS), and forward area refueling, the Dyess spokesperson said. Hopefully those challenges will not look so difficult compared to 26 hours spent aboard a C-130 for Hazard Leap.

“The successful completion of Hazard Leap is a testament to our team’s dedication and the remarkable capabilities of the C-130J Super Hercules,” Maj. Alex Leach, mission commander and 40th Airlift Squadron assistant director of operations, said in the release. “This operation set a new standard for our squadron and this airframe; it serves as a stepping-stone for future missions.”

US Confirms First Attack on American Troops in Months as Drones Shot Down in Iraq

April 22, 2024 | By Chris Gordon

The U.S. thwarted a drone attack on American forces at Al Asad air base in western Iraq on April 22, marking the first time that American troops have been targeted since February, U.S. officials said.

“We can confirm it was an attack on Al Asad,” a defense official told Air & Space Forces Magazine. “There were no injuries or damage to infrastructure.”

Another defense official said that two one-way attack drones had been shot down.

The episode comes on the heels of an incident the day before in Syria in which a coalition fighter destroyed a rocket system that was firing in the vicinity of a U.S. base in Rumalyn, Syria. Pentagon Press Secretary Air Force Maj. Gen. Patrick S. Ryder described the episode as an act of “self-defense” and a “failed rocket attack.”

The U.S. has not officially categorized the militia rocket firings in Syria as an attack because the projectiles did not land close to American forces and it is not clear where they were aimed.

“In this particular case, you had a truck with rockets on it that was shooting rockets all over the place, some type of malfunction,” Ryder said. He added the incident was still under investigation.

U.S. officials did not say which nation’s aircraft blew up the rocket system. American, British, and French fighters are known to fly missions over Syria as part of Operation Inherent Resolve, the campaign against the Islamic State.

“They clearly detected it, and so, took it out in self-defense,” Ryder told reporters.

U.S. forces had not been attacked since Feb. 4. Before that, there had been at least 170 attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq, Syria, and Jordan since mid-October, including a militia attack in late January in which three Soldiers were killed at Tower 22 in Jordan, just across the border from the U.S. Al Tanf base in eastern Syria.

The U.S. launched retaliatory airstrikes on Feb. 3. against 85 targets in Iraq and Syria affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and Iranian-aligned militias. That was the Biden administration’s largest use of force against Iran-backed militia groups in Iraq and Syria. It succeeded in deterring further attacks against U.S. forces in those countries until this week.

There are some 2,500 U.S. troops in Iraq and 900 in Syria advising partner forces and conducting operations against the Islamic State. The U.S. and Iraqi governments are negotiating over the future of the U.S. presence in Iraq.

“I think that deterrence is always temporal,” CENTCOM boss Gen. Michael “Erik” Kurilla told the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 16. “So you can deter for a period of time and then it will wane.”

The episode follows a nail-biting moment earlier this month when Iran launched its first-ever direct attack on Israel, which involved about 330 drones, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles. Only four or five projectiles hit Israel and none did significant damage, U.S. officials say.

“We’ve seen these attacks, obviously, in the past,” State Department spokesman Matt Miller told reporters on April 22. “We have made quite clear to Iran, we’ve made quite clear to Iran’s proxy groups that we will defend our interests, we will defend our personnel, and that continues to be the case.”