Working from ‘Clean Sheet,’ China Building Up Space Power at ‘Incredible Rate,’ USSF Leaders Say

Oct. 25, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

China is building up its space capabilities at an “incredible rate”—and it has done so by embracing needed principles the U.S. has historically been slow to adopt, top Space Force officials said Oct. 25.

Speaking at the Mitchell Institute’s Spacepower Security Forum, both Vice Chief of Space Operations Gen. David D. Thompson and Space Development Agency director Derek M. Tournear used the analogy of a “clean slate” to explain how the Chinese have been able to rapidly build out their architecture of satellites.

“What the Chinese have done is they have started with a clean sheet and they have built a military space reconnaissance strike enterprise that starts in space, with the ability to collect intelligence—now, by the most recent count, more than 260 ISR satellites,” Thompson said. “They have connected data relays. They have created their own global precision positioning, navigation, and timing system, the BeiDao, to the tune of 49 satellites today. And they have demonstrated that they learned the importance and the value of space power, and they intend to use those capabilities against us should it come time.”

That clean slate has been particularly important when compared to the U.S.’s own satellites. In recent years, Pentagon officials have frequently expressed concern that existing American military satellites, while providing exquisite capabilities, are relatively few in number and largely defenseless—“big, fat, juicy targets,” as Air Force Gen. John Hyten once referred to them, or “Battlestar Galactica,” as Tournear put it.

In contrast, the focus in future plans has been on proliferated constellations of cheaper, less capable satellites that, taken together, provide a mesh network and greater resiliency. In many ways, Tournear has led the charge on that front with SDA’s planned National Defense Space Architecture.

The two keys of the approach, Tournear said Oct. 25, are proliferation and “spiral development”—constant, regular updates to the architecture instead of waiting years to meet requirements.

“They clearly have embraced those pillars … before we have,” Tournear said of the Chinese. “And that’s kind of their model going forward, and they use that. And so the only thing I’d say about that is they also didn’t have all of the legacy that had given them the exquisite capabilities up to date. So they kind of started with a cleaner slate [and] were able to do that.”

Tournear was quick to note that the U.S.’s space architecture was born out of the time and technology in which it was fielded, and Thompson added that the Pentagon has done “a tremendous job” of adapting that architecture as needed to “push those space capabilities and effects … as far down as we could to individual Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines in some cases.”

As a result, Thompson argued, the Pentagon still has an advantage in space with the existing architecture. But the gap is closing.

“They are building and fielding space capabilities at an incredible pace. … Their latest version of BeiDou, they have built and fielded over the course of about five years,” Thompson said of China. “Their space capabilities are still not quite as good as ours. But they are really, really, really good.”

When asked if the Space Force is projecting a timeline for when China might match or surpass the U.S. in space, though, Thompson demurred.

“I can’t really sit here and tell you today, at this point in time, when will they be a threat? They are a threat today,” Thompson said. “Are they better than us? Are they not as good as us? Will we win—will they win? Are we at parity? I can’t say that. All I can say is they are a serious challenge. They are a serious threat. They are serious about what they need to do. Their capabilities are close to ours. We simply need to do what we need to do, to continue to resource and field new capabilities, resilient capabilities, train our forces and be prepared, first to deter, but if necessary, to win.”

Former Defense Secretary Ash Carter Dies at 68

Oct. 25, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak

Ashton Baldwin Carter, who served as the 25th Secretary of Defense from 2015 to 2017, during the presidency of Barack Obama, died Oct. 24 at the age of 68. Carter served in national security roles and held numerous academic research, teaching, and leadership positions.

During his tenure as Defense Secretary, Carter directed the anti-ISIS special operations and air campaign in the Middle East—”Operation Inherent Resolve”—which ultimately led to the defeat of ISIS in Iraq and Syria. He also opened combat jobs to women and permitted transgender individuals to serve in the U.S. military.

From 2011 to 2013, Carter was deputy secretary, charged with managing the department’s response to the Budget Control Act sequestrations and reform of the Pentagon’s export control system, which had stymied some commercial and many military exports. He also directed the U.S. military’s “shift to Asia,” which put greater emphasis on the Indo-Pacific and reapportioned U.S. forces accordingly.

From 2009 to 2011, Carter served as undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology, and logistics. He counted as one of his signature accomplishments the provision of more than 1,000 Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles to U.S. troops, who had been taking heavy casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan from roadside bombs and improvised explosive devices (IEDs). He also oversaw the selection of the KC-46 in the KC-X aerial tanker competition and instituted the “Better Buying Power” acquisition reforms.

From 1993 to 1996, under President Bill Clinton, Carter served as assistant secretary of defense for international security policy, crafting nuclear policy, particularly as it applied to the former Soviet republics and North Korea; and working on other strategic issues. He oversaw the 1995 extension of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the 1996 Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, and “Project Sapphire,” which removed nuclear weapons and fissile material from several former Soviet states.

Carter ordered the opening of all military jobs to women in 2015 after a three-year study, which determined in part that many military women were already serving in combat positions, but were not receiving commensurate pay, career recognition, command opportunities or appropriate decorations due to their non-combat specialty codes. The change permitted women to compete for special operations, fighter pilot, and other frontline combat positions.

In 2016, Carter lifted a ban on transgender personnel openly serving in the military, saying anyone who could meet the military’s standards “should be afforded the opportunity to compete to do so.”

Graduating summa cum laude from Yale with degrees in physics and medieval history, Carter worked in the Congressional Office of Technology, returning to the John F. Kennedy School of Government in 1984 to chair the International and Global Affairs faculty.

Carter did research on quarks and charmed particles at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory and the Brookhaven National Laboratory. He was a Rhodes scholar and received his doctorate in theoretical physics from the University of Oxford. He did postdoctoral research at Rockefeller University and the MIT Center for International Studies. He taught at Harvard University from 1984 to 1990.

He received five awards of the Defense Department Distinguished Public Service Medal, as well as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Joint Distinguished Civilian Service Medal and the Defense Intelligence Medal.

Carter wrote 11 books on ballistic missile basing and strategy, missile defenses, international security, and defense management.

At the time of his death, Carter was the director of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, where he taught public policy.

Space Force to Get New CSO, INDOPACOM Component in November, Vice Chief Says

Oct. 25, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

The Space Force is poised for two major changes in November, with a new Chief of Space Operations (CSO) taking on the role early in the month and the service’s component for U.S. Indo-Pacific Command standing up a few weeks later.

Vice Chief of Space Operations Gen. David D. Thompson announced the dates for both developments at the Mitchell Institute’s Spacepower Security Forum on Oct. 25. The former will mark the first change of responsibility for the Space Force’s top job, while the latter will result in the service’s first component for a combatant command outside of U.S. Space Command.

New CSO

First, retiring Chief of Space Operations Gen. John W. “Jay” Raymond will pass the baton to Lt. Gen. B. Chance Saltzman “a week from today,” Thompson said.

The Space Force later confirmed that the ceremony will take place Nov. 2 at Joint Base Andrews, Md. That’s in line with prior Space Force projections of a change of responsibility ceremony in early November.

Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark A. Milley, and Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall will all attend the ceremony.

Saltzman was first nominated to succeed Raymond as head of the Space Force in late July. He appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee for his confirmation hearing in mid-September, stressing the need for investment in test and training technology. The full Senate confirmed him in an uncontroversial voice vote Sept. 29.

“I’m humbled and honored to be confirmed as the next Chief of Space Operations,” Saltzman said in a statement after his confirmation. “I look forward to leading the U.S. Space Force and building on the strong foundational leadership Gen. Raymond has provided for almost three years.”

“Congratulations to Chance Saltzman on his confirmation to serve as the next Chief of Space Operations,” Raymond said in a statement. “I couldn’t be more excited for the Saltzmans and for our Space Force. The team is in great hands.”

Saltzman will take on the role of CSO after previously serving as the deputy chief of space operations for operations, cyber, and nuclear, a job he first took on in August 2020. He has also commanded at the squadron, group, and wing levels in the Air Force.

Raymond, meanwhile, will retire after making history as the Space Force’s very first Guardian and Chief of Space Operations. Through the service’s first three years, Raymond oversaw numerous milestones and markers, as the Space Force stood up, defined its structures, strategies, and operational procedures, and consolidated many space-focused units and personnel from across the Pentagon.

Still more work awaits Saltzman. In the coming years, the Space Force plans to launch a new resilient constellation of satellites in low Earth orbit and build up its “lethality” and capability to respond to aggressive actions by competitors such as Russia and China. At the same time, the service must also refine and finalize its plans for essential personnel issues such as a “holistic health” program to replace traditional PT tests, and the organization of Reserve and part-time elements.

INDOPACOM Component

As Saltzman takes the reins from Raymond, he’ll oversee major developments in how the Space Force integrates with the Joint force, starting with the establishment of a service component within U.S. Indo-Pacific Command.

According to Thompson, Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III “just recently” authorized the component’s establishment. This follows on comments from Saltzman this past May that a decision was imminent and necessary “to effectively integrate space capabilities.”

“On the 22nd of November, [INDOPACOM commander Adm. John Aqulino] will establish and hand the Space Force component flag to Brig. Gen. Tony Mastalir and establish the first true Space Force component, built on the foundation and the structure of the Space Force that we developed with the Air Force over decades,” Thompson said.

Brig. Gen. Anthony J. Mastalir was confirmed as a general officer by the Senate in May. He previously served as commander of Space Launch Delta 30 at Vandenberg Space Force Base, Calif.

While INDOPACOM will be the first earthbound combatant command to get a Space Force service component, it won’t be the only one—components for U.S. European Command and U.S. Central Command will follow “very quickly thereafter,” Thompson said.

Such moves will allow the Space Force to move beyond its work with U.S. Space Command to ensure it collaborates “closely with other combatant commanders to make sure that not only can we understand what they need in terms of space capabilities, but they truly and deeply understand the full suite of capabilities available to them in the United States Space Force, from other military services, to our IC partners, and through the commercial sector,” Thompson said.

LaPlante: DOD Won’t ‘Kick the Can’ on F-35 New Engine Decision; Won’t Break Up JPO

Oct. 25, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak

The Pentagon will soon decide whether to move ahead with a new engine for the F-35, and officials won’t simply table the issue indefinitely, Defense Department acquisition and sustainment chief William LaPlante said at an acquisition conference. He also said calls to break up the F-35 Joint Program Office and distribute its development functions to the services are premature but that he supports the services taking over sustainment of their own F-35 fleets.

“It’s predecisional. We’re in the middle of lots of meetings” on the Adaptive Engine Transition Program, or AETP, LaPlante said at an Oct. 25 acquisition conference sponsored by the Potomac Officers Club. But, he pledged, “We are not going to kick the can. We are going to make a decision,” he said, suggesting that the choice will appear in the fiscal 2024 budget request. “And that’s what’s going on right now.”

The Pentagon has been debating for more than a year whether some or all of the F-35 fleet should be refitted with new engines, after some members of Congress urged the Pentagon to pursue such a program. General Electric has prototyped the XA-100 and Pratt & Whitney the XA-101, both of which can fit the F-35A, but which are less easy to fit to the F-35B and C models.

The Joint Program Office has said that if the Air Force wants an AETP engine in its F-35As, it will have to pay for the development and integration itself, because the rules of the international F-35 partnership are, “you have to pay to be different,” former JPO director retired Lt. Gen. Eric Fick said in 2021.

Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall said at the fiscal 2023 budget rollout that he’s been talking to the Navy about going in on the AETP together but has not commented recently on the progress of those discussions.

GE Aviation has been pressing for the AETP to be fitted to the F-35 fleet in the Block 4 version of the F-35, saying it can have the engine ready by 2027. GE has been locked out of the F-35 engine market since Congress voted to terminate GE’s alternate F136 engine for the fighter in 2011. Pratt & Whitney—part of Raytheon Technologies—has said it can also provide its AETP engine, but has been pushing for an upgrade of the existing F135 powerplant, which it alone makes. The AETP was originally envisioned as not only exploring more powerful and efficient engines, but potentially setting up an annual engine procurement competition between the two companies.

Some members of Congress have also come out against refitting the F-35 with an AETP powerplant, saying it would be cost-prohibitive for the Air Force to do it alone and that it would undercut the commonality of aircraft among the various users that the program has painstakingly preserved.

LaPlante said the AETP initiative has “in my view … done everything it was advertised to do, in terms of getting efficiencies both in power and potential for range and fuel savings.” The only thing standing in the way of a production program, he said, is “just money.”

It’s a matter of “whether we take it and go to the next phase—which is going to some of degree of serious engineering and manufacturing development—and then cut that in” to the production line, “or do another option.” The F135 update is the other option.

However, “Doing nothing on the F-35 engine is not an option … We have to do life extension” on the engine, and “We have to do something about its ability to generate power. And, we may have to do something—or want to do something—on performance. Which gets you to AETP,” he said.

“All of those factors are under consideration right now,” LaPlante added.

He dismissed the idea of disbanding the F-35 JPO in the near future as “pretty stupid.”

The F-35, he said, is “still in development” with the Block 4 version. “You don’t break up a program office that’s doing development … We need the JPO to finish development,” something he predicted would happen in about five years. “Then,” he said, “we can revisit it.”

The Pentagon is, though, trying to “get the sustainment back to the services … to make sure the services own the sustainment … So that’s where I see that moving.”

An important consideration, he added, is the F-35 international partners, eight of which are “plank holders” who have been part of the program since its inception.

“This is not FMS,” he said, referring to Foreign Military Sales. The international partners are “part of the governance” of the F-35, and “They love the JPO.”

They view the JPO as “an honest broker … trying to balance the equities between the partners, and maybe even our services in this country,” and they would likely object to the JPO’s being undercut. This fact “doesn’t get much attention in Washington.”

“The fact of the matter is, the JPO does incredible work” keeping the partners informed and involved on the program’s progress, LaPlante said.

“The partners trust the JPO, and it’s one of the most successful programs, I think, ever in the history of DOD.” For now, he said, “in the sense of moving to the next phase,” it will only be about moving the sustainment of the F-35 “back to the services.”

Lockheed Martin Says LMXT Still a Possibility for KC-Y Program

Oct. 25, 2022 | By Chris Gordon

Lockheed Martin says it is still pitching its LMXT tanker to the Air Force amid a looming requirements announcement for the KC-Y tanker program. Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall has cast doubt on whether a KC-Y program would field a wholly new aircraft and has said the program may end up being an upgraded KC-46 Pegasus.

However, the KC-46 and its manufacturer Boeing face growing disquiet over numerous delays and problems with the aircraft. The KC-Y is the so-called “bridge tanker” envisioned for production between the current KC-46A and a next-generation KC-Z family of aerial refueling systems.

While the company does not yet know what the requirements of the KC-Y will be, Lockheed Martin said the Air Force has expressed possible interest in a “KC-Y plus,” which the company says could be its LMXT.

“We see this airplane as already being in that KC-Y plus scenario—it is already embodying next-generation technologies,” Lockheed Martin’s LMXT director Larry Gallogly told reporters Oct. 25. “I would certainly say that that’s a potential outcome.”

The Air Force recently announced that necessary updates to the KC-46’s problematic Remote Vision System (RVS) will not be complete until 2025. Lockheed Martin says its offering, which is based on the Airbus A330 Multi-Role Tanker Transport—in service or on order by over a dozen countries—already has the many kinks worked out.

“This is kind of backwards for the U.S. government,” Gallogly said of the LMXT’s development process. “Normally, the U.S. government invests in a weapons system, and we go through all of these growing pains with their weapons system. We get that weapon system up to speed, and our friends and allies get to take advantage of all of that development that we’ve done on that … But our friends and allies have made all of that investment. Now we’re going to get to take advantage of that.”

Lockheed Martin highlighted the fact that the Airbus-designed refueling system for LMXT has undergone numerous improvements over the past decade. Like the KC-46’s RVS, the LMXT uses a screen-based system for operating the main refueling boom.

Lockheed Martin makes the case that the LMXT, a derivative of the commercial Airbus A330 wide-body jet, can also help the Air Force shift toward the Pacific, which it says presents a “tyranny of distance.” Aircraft will need more pit stops to refuel to cover the large area. The Air Force wants to develop the concept of agile combat employment, which means having dispersed operations. Lockheed Martin claims the larger LMXT would support that. With a 271,000-pound fuel capacity, the larger LMXT would carry about 60,000 more pounds of fuel than the KC-46, land at the airbases, and then could operate as a ground refueling station. It could also refuel KC-46s and free them up for other missions. Kendall has repeatedly reiterated his focus on improving the U.S.’s ability to counter China.

“This aircraft does that, I believe, more than any other of the assets that we have,” Gallogly said. “Gas is going to be king.”

As part of the Air Force’s push for flexibility, it plans to use KC-46 as a communications node. Lockheed Martin says the LMXT will have its own dedicated communications hub set up for joint all-domain command and control (JADC2) operations. It will also have a permanent aeromedical suite. This would limit time on the ground needed to configure a plane during which a lumbering tanker could be subject to attack. Airbus’s automatic air-to-air refueling system, which the LMXT would retain, could help reduce the number of crew, or at least their workload. Under Gen. Mike Minihan, Air Mobility Command is pushing for longer sorties with smaller crews.

“Our answer was we’ve designed the configuration so that in 90 percent of the situations, you won’t have to reconfigure this airplane ever,” Gallogly said. “It has all of that all of the time, so it makes it much, much more effective in a combat environment where that time on the ground is critical.”

Still, Lockheed Martin faces a challenging environment if it hopes to sell the LMXT to the U.S. government. The Air Force hopes to push up the timeline on the KC-Z program, which will feature a family of systems for aerial refueling, with some work on the program beginning as soon as 2023. However, if dissatisfaction with Boeing grows over KC-46 delays, Congress could compel the Air Force to have a competition for the KC-Y to prevent the service from relying on a sole source that is already plagued with issues. If not, Lockheed Martin says the LMXT would not die.

“If the competition doesn’t go forward [on the KC-Y], I’m not convinced that the next competition would be for a Z,” Gallogly said. “They may just say, ‘Hey, we’re going to have a competition for the next-generation tanker, and here’s what we want it to do.’ And then we’ll evaluate those requirements and see, does this airplane fit that criteria?”

Ultimately, Lockheed Martin and Boeing are awaiting decisions from the Air Force on what will happen with its future tanker programs.

“Only they know for sure,” Gallogly said.

Officials: US Nuclear Posture Unchanged Despite Russian ‘Dirty Bomb’ Claims

Oct. 24, 2022 | By Chris Gordon

The U.S. and its Western allies expressed concern that fresh Russian allegations against Ukraine—that it plans to use a radioactive so-called “dirty bomb”—may be a pretext for a major escalation in Moscow’s war with its neighbor.

But U.S. officials said they had detected no signs that Russia is planning to use nuclear arms and therefore had no reason to raise the alert level of U.S. nuclear forces.

“We see no reason to change our strategic nuclear posture,” White House National Security Council strategic communications coordinator John Kirby said Oct. 24.

Apprehensions about Russia’s strategy emerged Oct. 23 when Russia’s Defense Minister, Sergey Shoygu, called Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III and three other NATO defense chiefs and charged that Kyiv was preparing to use a dirty bomb, which combines radioactive material and conventional explosives.

Russia’s foreign affairs ministry echoed the allegation the next day, as did Gen. Valery Gerasimov, the chief of the Russian General Staff, in calls with Gen. Mark A. Milley, the U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Adm. Tony Radskin, Britain’s Chief of Defense Staff.

The governments of the U.K., France, and the U.S., all nuclear powers, issued a joint statement that said the allegation against Ukraine was false and warned Russia not to “use this allegation as a pretext for escalation.” Russia’s forces were in an increasingly precarious position as they pushed back against a Ukrainian counteroffensive in the east and south of the country.

U.S. officials said they were unsure about Russia’s motivations for making the charge. The allegations, they said, could be an attempt to pressure the West to curtail its military support for Ukraine, might be a propaganda exercise, or could be an indication that Russia might be preparing to use a dirty bomb of its own or other weapons of mass destruction.

“We have seen in the past that the Russians have, on occasion, blamed others for things that they were planning to do,” Kirby said. “We don’t have any indication that that’s the case, but it is a play that we have seen before.”

State Department spokesperson Ned Price reinforced that message. “It would certainly be another example of President Putin’s brutality were he to use a so-called dirty bomb,” Price said Oct. 24. “There would be consequences for Russia, whether it uses a dirty bomb or a nuclear bomb.”

Ukraine also rejected the allegations and invited the International Atomic Energy Agency to Ukraine to inspect any claims. Concerned about the Russian statements, top Western defense and military officials began a flurry of consultations, including with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.

“You can expect to see a series of phone calls with allies and partners in the days ahead as well,” a U.S. military official told reporters.

Top U.S. and Russian defense officials had not talked since May until Shoygu and Austin spoke on Oct. 21 at the request of the U.S. On Oct. 23, Shoygu initiated a series of calls to the defense ministers of the United Kingdom, France, and Turkey, as well as Austin.

The latest flare-up between Moscow and the West comes as NATO is in the middle of its Steadfast Noon tactical nuclear exercise. The exercise is held annually, and NATO and U.S. officials announced some details in advance, such as the presence of American B-52 bombers from Minot Air Force Base, N.D. U.S. and NATO officials said the exercise was unrelated to real-world situations and have also said Russia will soon conduct its annual Grom nuclear exercise.

Kirby said the U.S. has not seen “physical preparations” for the use of a nuclear weapon by Russia.

“We have been nothing but honest with all of you that we take that rhetoric seriously,” Kirby said. “We have to. It would be irresponsible if we didn’t.”

Nearly 100 Airmen to Get Distinguished Flying Crosses for Afghanistan Evacuation

Oct. 24, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

Nearly 100 Airmen will receive Distinguished Flying Crosses and a dozen more will get Bronze Star Medals for their actions in Operation Allies Refuge, the noncombatant evacuation out of Kabul, Afghanistan, in the summer of 2021 that garnered worldwide attention.

Additionally, the 621st Contingency Response Group, from Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, N.J., will receive the Gallant Unit Citation.

The announcement, made by Air Mobility Command on Oct. 21, marks the largest batch of medals—96 DFCs and 12 BSMs—yet approved for the operation.

AMC will release more details and citations for individual awards in the weeks to come, a spokesperson told Air & Space Forces Magazine, but a major command release specifically cited the 621st CRG for how it was able to “rapidly repair and run airfield operations at Hamid Karzai International Airport while surrounded by hostile forces.”

In August 2021, some members of the 621st Contingency Response Wing had recently returned home from Afghanistan after closing down bases across the country before they were recalled to assist with evacuating U.S. civilians and allies from Afghanistan, fleeing from the advancing Taliban.

As the Taliban seized territory and pushed Afghan national government forces back, the situation in Kabul became increasingly desperate, 621st CRG commander Col. Gregory Cyrus recalled in March at the AFA Warfare Symposium.

“HKIA was the only airfield and only runway in Afghanistan at the time. So [it was] very important that we maintain that hub, that spoke, whatever you want to call it, in order to ensure that the airlock remained open to get those evacuees out of Afghanistan,” Cyrus said.

On Aug. 15, the Taliban entered Kabul, and chaotic scenes unfolded at the airport as Afghan citizens breached the airfield, with some attempting to climb on U.S. Air Force C-17s.

The 621st CRG, led by Cyrus on the ground, helped restore order and secure the airfield, and began directing air traffic with the help of other units to allow evacuations to resume.

“You need to get out there and keep that airfield open. You need to assume senior forward authority and we need to take those [aerial porters] and those Marines and make sure that they can do multi-capable ops,” Cyrus said of the mission that commanders charged his unit with. “We had aerial porters expediting aircraft, marshaling aircraft. We had the Marine air traffic controllers, obviously providing security of the ramp, at the same time landing aircraft and taking off aircraft. It was a pretty amazing thing to watch on the ground, being a leader there for the [contingency response] forces and for the operation that happened.”

Over the course of about the next two weeks, mobility Airmen helped to evacuate 124,334 people from Kabul, including U.S. citizens, Afghan nationals, and other allies and partners. Especially in the early phases of the evacuations, some Air Force aircraft faced small arms fire from the ground.

Already, the Air Force has awarded a handful of medals for the operation. An Oklahoma Air National Guard Member received the DFC in December 2021, followed by four more Airmen in April and another in June.

Those Airmen are not part of the group of 96 Distinguished Flying Cross recipients announced by AMC on Oct. 21, a spokesman clarified. The DFC, the nation’s fourth-highest award for heroism, is given for heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight.

Of the 96, seven will be awarded with the “V” device for valor, given for acts of heroism “above what is normally expected while engaged in direct combat.” Another 74 will be awarded with the “C” device for combat. Two of the 12 Bronze Star medals will be given with the “V” device.

“The world witnessed history during that airlift, borne on the shoulders of mobility heroes,” Gen. Mike Minihan, commander of AMC, said in a statement. “This recognition is long overdue for what our heroes did during those historic 17 days.”

The wait of more than a year for those awards was due in part to a backlog that required Air Forces Central, the reviewing authority, to get a waiver, AFCENT commander Lt. Gen. Alexus G. Grynkewich told reporters at AFA’s Air, Space & Cyber conference in September.

“In the process of how long AFCENT had the authorities to process awards, the authority that has been delegated to us expired, so we were at a bit of a stop,” Grynkewich said.

At the time, Grynkewich pledged to “go full court press” on processing award submissions, saying “we owe it to those service members to get those processed as quickly as we can.”

That led to a September awards board led by AFCENT. The board approved more than 350 individual awards, AMC noted in its release. And more still could come, Grynkewich said in September.

“If [the board] were to disapprove, we give feedback on why it was, which can sometimes result in resubmissions,” Grynkewich said. “The only reason I highlight that is even though my intent is to get this done very quickly, I would suspect that we’ll have some additional awards packages that come in, so resubmissions potentially in the future.”

The awards that have been announced will be officially given in the coming weeks, with Minihan scheduled to award both Distinguished Flying Crosses and Bronze Star medals at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in November.

B-1s Land in Guam to Start Bomber Task Force in Indo-Pacific

Oct. 21, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

An undisclosed number of B-1B Lancers arrived at Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, on Oct. 18 tfor a bomber task force mission in the Indo-Pacific, Pacific Air Forces announced.

The B-1B crews from the 28th Bomb Wing at Ellsworth Air Force Base, S.D., will take part in “several” training missions during their deployment, integrating with allies while doing so, PACAF said in a statement.

Airmen from the 28th Bomb Wing began arriving in Guam several days earlier, according to images posted by PACAF.

This marks the second time in 2022 that B-1s have landed on Guam. In June, the 28th Bomb Wing sent four B-1s on a bomber task force rotation that included training exercises with the Japanese and Australians. That rotation ended in early July.

“Bomber Task Force deployments and missions provide key assurances and cooperation with joint and partner Allies in the region,” Lt. Col. Daniel Mount, 37th Bomb Squadron director of operations, said in a statement. “The B-1 is an especially capable platform in this region, being able to travel large distances and bear significant firepower with precision and standoff munitions.”

Almost exactly a year ago, B-1s from Ellsworth deployed to Naval Support Facility Diego Garcia for the first time in 15 years.

But the B-1 isn’t the only bomber that has been deployed to the Indo-Pacific lately—the Air Force sent four B-2s to Australia in July. Those B-2s stayed in the region until August, conducting multiple training exercises.

Air Force leaders have stressed in the past that bomber task force deployments are planned in advance. But the B-1s’ arrival in Guam comes amid increasing tension in the region, especially between the U.S. and North Korea, which has conducted a barrage of missile tests recently and flown warplanes near the border with South Korea.

China’s ruling Communist Party, meanwhile, is in the midst of its congress, which takes place every five years, and leader Xi Jingping has called for faster military development and “reunification” with Taiwan, leading some, including Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken, to express concerns that the Chinese may be speeding up their timeline to seize the island.

New Mitchell Institute Paper Argues Space Force Must Take Lead Role in JADC2

Oct. 21, 2022 | By Chris Gordon

The Space Force must be given leadership over disparate elements of the U.S. military’s joint all-domain command and control (JADC2) effort, according to a new policy paper from AFA’s Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies.

JADC2 is an effort by the Department of Defense to improve command and control by collecting more data and sharing that information across the services down to the tactical level. This joint effort, however, is being developed separately by the individual services, each coming up with its own concept of how JADC2 could work. What JADC2 will become in practice is still somewhat amorphous.

In the paper, the Mitchell Institute’s Senior Fellow for Spacepower Studies Tim Ryan suggests these efforts be consolidated under the Chief of Space Operations, with the power to define key authorities and standards of JADC2 efforts. In Ryan’s view, the CSO should be given “the primary responsibility of overseeing the integration of the entire JADC2 system.” Without better coordination among the services’ efforts, JADC2 programs risk being neither joint nor all-domain.

Because the Space Force’s satellites will be part of the “transport layer” of JADC2 that the U.S. military says will underpin its future operations, the service needs more precise strategic guidance about its mission, more responsibility, better training, and increased funding, according to Ryan. The goal would be to empower the Space Force to help make JADC2 a reality and to fulfill its vital role as a facilitator of U.S. operations by giving it the means to protect its assets.

“This sounds very expensive,” Ryan said during a roundtable with reporters to preview the paper. “It sounds very complex. I understand that. And I agree that it is.”

America’s adversaries, primarily China, have their own military space components. The People’s Liberation Army’s Strategic Support Force wants to be able to disrupt an enemy’s command and control networks in space.

“It is much, much cheaper to do it right the first time because, quite frankly, I don’t think we’re going to get a second chance on this,” said Ryan. “The second chance is we lose.”

U.S. military leaders, inside and outside of the Space Force, have begun voicing concern that America’s space assets, which include capabilities as fundamental as GPS, could be disrupted by an attack. The Biden administration is pursuing improved global norms in space, such as a ban on testing most anti-satellite weapons and stricter rules requiring operators to deorbit their defunct satellites. States such as China, however, often ignore international agreements, even if they are enacted, especially the current non-binding efforts the U.S. is pursuing.

Ryan’s paper argues that the DOD must articulate the need for, and Congress must approve, funding for the defense of space assets critical to JADC2. American military and civilian officials publicly acknowledge that space will become contested in future conflicts. Senior Space Force leaders have begun to float concept of “space superiority.”

“What that really means is the ability to take a punch and to continue to fight,” said Lt. Gen. Nina M. Armagno, the director of staff of the Space Force, at AFA’s Air, Space, & Cyber Conference in September.

Missing from that statement is an explicit ability for America to fight back directly when it is attacked in space, as it does in other domains.

Ryan, a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel who served in a variety of space roles and also worked as a civilian on the Space Force staff at the Pentagon, recommends in his paper that the Space Force receive authorization and funding to “develop space-based weapons systems that are specifically designed to defend the JADC2 space transport layer against kinetic and non-kinetic acts of aggression.”

While the Biden administration’s efforts to improve the safety of space operations through international norms are laudable, the U.S. still needs a clear space deterrent as America’s adversaries may be willing to ignore international norms, according to Mitchell Institute experts.

“Where’s the hard power in the current construct? It really doesn’t exist,” said Douglas A. Birkey, the executive director of the think tank. “Otherwise, we’re actually risking an increased likelihood of conflict in space because there are no real consequences they’re going to care about.”

Established in 2019, the Space Force is mainly made up of systems and personnel from other services. The President’s budget request for fiscal 2023, which Congress has not yet passed, allocates $24.5 billion for the Space Force, a $7 billion increase over 2022. These budget increases, however, do not necessarily reflect new capabilities, as other services have shifted the burden and the cost of space assets to the Space Force.

According to Ryan, a larger budget is required. However, he acknowledged that putting that into legislation would be challenging.

“Any current increase in the current Space Force budget [has] been primarily done through stand-up actions and being able to integrate the other services’ capabilities into the Space Force,” Ryan said. “At the end of the day, quite frankly, the money has not been equal to the demands that are being placed on the Space Force and the increased demands that it will have with JADC2.”

In the view of Birkey, space cannot be seen as devoid of consequences on Earth if U.S. space assets are attacked and systems go down.

“We have got to get real because everything else is going to fall offline fast and lives will be on the line,” he said.