New Air Force One Will be 2-3 Years Late; Battle Brewing Over KC-Y

May 19, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak

The VC-25B, or “Air Force One,” replacement will be as late as 36 months, and members of the House Armed Services Committee warned USAF that they plan to push for competition on the KC-Y stage of aerial tanker recapitalization, which Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall has said the service may skip.

Air Force acquisition executive Andrew P. Hunter, testifying before the HASC power projection panel, said the VC-25B is “anticipating a delay to the previously approved schedule on the order of 24-36 months …[or] two to three years.” The previous estimate had been 17 months late.

It’s “quite a significant delay,” he said.

Boeing is the sole-source contractor for the VC-25B and is converting two 747-8s for the job. Hunter said Boeing’s subcontractor to do the interior finishing couldn’t do the work, a problem that’s “been known for some time,” but it’s taken further effort to assess the full effect of that setback on the schedule.

Boeing “had to bring in someone else to do that work” and take some of it in-house, Hunter said.

The two- to three-year delay in initial operational capability “means we will have to sustain the existing aircraft longer,” Hunter said, warning the committee that it will see changes in the fiscal 2024 budget submission to that effect as well as a request for “further resources to cover the gap.” The existing VC-25A fleet is more than 30 years old and suffers from “vanishing vendor” parts issues and general obsolescence, and has already been extended in service.

He added that “I believe we can take care of it within the resources within the program.”

An Air Force spokesperson said the delay “is due to a combination of factors,” including “impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic,” the change of vendors for the interior work, “wiring design timelines and test execution rates.” She said the Air Force “currently expects a 24-month delay” in the program.

The Air Force “recommends” that the “objective”—or goal delivery time—should be set at 24 months, while the “threshold,” or must-have, be set at 36 months, the spokesperson said. The Pentagon’s acquisition and sustainment chief, William LaPlante, will decide on the timing after “an update to the acquisition program baseline,” she said.

“Based on how the contract was written, as the expected completion date moves to the right, the threshold date also moves to the right,” she noted. “The new schedule baseline will contain the updated completion timeline.”

Hunter was warned by several members of the committee that they are unhappy with Kendall’s recent comments that the KC-Y phase of tanker recapitalization may simply be a sole-source to Boeing, and that they will push hard for a competition on that phase.

Rep. Rob Wittman (R-Va.) noted that Kendall has called competition an important tool for driving both quality and lower costs and asked Hunter why the Air Force is “walking away” from that idea on the tanker.

Rep. Jerry Carl (R-Ala.) said the HASC would “go ballistic” in the absence of a competition. Lockheed Martin has said that if it wins the KC-Y contest with its LMXT tanker—based on the Airbus A330 Multi-Role Tanker Transport—it would build the jet in Alabama.

Kendall told reporters on the eve of the fiscal 2023 budget rollout in March that “I want to be very transparent about this. I think that there’s still a possibility of competition out there, but as we’ve looked at our requirements, the likelihood of competition has come down.” Near-term, the requirements for KC-Y “start to look like a modified KC-46 more than they do a completely new design.” The service had previously said it views the KC-Y as a “bridge tanker” to a next-generation aircraft.

Hunter said the Air Force is still “gathering data” on what the KC-Y requirements should be and that the process will be completed in the fall, when a decision will be made as to whether to compete the KC-Y, which will replace both KC-135s and KC-10s.

“We are awaiting inputs from the requirements community,” Hunter said.

There could be “some difference” in the near-term versus long-term requirements for new tankers, Hunter said.

The three-stage KC-X, KC-Y, and KC-Z plan for tanker recapitalization “was formulated probably a decade ago, and the environment has evolved substantially since then,” Hunter said.

The need for “something like KC-Z”—which has notionally been described as a potentially stealthy, next-generation type of aircraft—“is growing more urgent over time, and that’s definitely part of our calculus,” Hunter noted.

However, “we want to deliver capability the warfighter needs in the 2020s timeframe.” That would likely mean sticking with the KC-46 for the next tranche of tanker replacement.

Carl pointed out that Boeing has had severe problems with the KC-46 and claimed that “it only works 85 percent of the time,” conflating mission capability with the fact that the Pegasus is now certified for 85 percent of the planned list of aircraft it’s supposed to be able to refuel. He also pointed to delays on Boeing’s T-7 trainer, a new cost increase on the B-52 re-engining, and the Air Force One delay and said “I’m extremely concerned” about the Air Force “putting all its eggs in one basket” with the tanker.

“Somehow … we still feel comfortable putting all this business in their lap,” he said, adding, “that’s dangerous.”

Carl said the KC-46 “can’t compete” with the “Airbus/Lockheed plane” and insisted that the tanker program be “re-bid.”

Lockheed Martin announced this week that it would build the automated boom for the LMXT in Arkansas.

Rep. Donald Norcross (D-N.J.), whose district includes Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, said buying more KC-46s would get the Air Force more tankers to deal with Pacific theater threats “in the 2027” timeframe.

Space Force Prepares for Decision on Indo-Pacific Command Service Component

May 19, 2022 | By Abraham Mahshie

The Space Force is nearing a Secretary of Defense decision that would create a component command at U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, a move that would strengthen space integration in the combatant command responsible for defending the U.S. against threats from China, said Space Force Lt. Gen. B. Chance Saltzman, deputy chief for operations, cyber, and nuclear.

“We just think space is so critical now that we need a seat at that table,” Saltzman said at a May 19 meeting of the Defense Writers Group.

“With China being the pacing threat, it was essential that we stand up the service component at INDOPACOM,” Saltzman said. “The biggest change is going to be the combatant commander will have a subordinate commander that they can task to effectively integrate space capabilities.”

Adding “senior personnel at strength, with numbers” will help the combatant commander address space concerns such as space integration with exercises or wargames, including regional programs that involve allies and partners.

Today, Guardians at combatant commands reside within Air Force components under the legacy “director of space forces” construct, a Space Force spokesperson explained to Air Force Magazine.

“By moving from Air Components to Space Components, Guardians in theater will be better aligned to execute their Space Force missions, roles and responsibilities,” the spokesperson said. “Presenting forces is an essential element of Joint Force and service business, and when activated, these component commands will help normalize the presentation of space forces.”

Saltzman said standup of component commands is a normal function of the services and that Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III will ultimately make the decisions on when and where Space Force component commands are established.

“Space is important enough now that it warrants that service-level attention,” Saltzman underscored.

Saltzman added that while the Space Force is still small and growing, it will seek to establish component commands first at those combatant commands where the threat to the U.S. homeland is most acute, namely INDOPACOM, U.S. European Command, and U.S. Central command. U.S. Cyber Command would follow.

The Space Force’s only component command to a combatant command, Space Operations Command (SpOC), stood up in October 2020 at U.S. Space Command in Colorado Springs.

“Each of those combatant commands have different thoughts when it comes to space integration, scope, and responsibilities associated with space in operations,” Saltzman said. “With the ongoing operations that were in U.S. Central Command, it was important that we stood up there. And with Russia as an acute threat, if you will, EUCOM is right there.”

The Defense Department’s fiscal 2023 budget request calls for a $2.8 billion investment in the Next Generation Interceptor with clear implications for INDOPACOM’s defense against Chinese ballistic “carrier killer” missiles and hypersonic weapons.

“The next generation of on-orbit, [infrared] abilities will be better against faster, lower-maneuvering threats,” Saltzman said in response to a question about hypersonics defense from Air Force Magazine.

“The missile warning, missile tracking in this budget was like the first one that really pivoted to put serious dollars against the proliferated constellations,” he added. “We are moving rapidly, as rapidly as the system really allows us to get it right.”

Saltzman said the Space Force plans to launch the satellites in the next three to five years.

As far as standing up the INDOPACOM service component, Saltzman said there’s “buy-in across the community that this is a good idea.” Discussions are now taking place at the Pentagon regarding resourcing, manpower, and the budget, he said.

“We don’t want to go so fast that we hang this organization out and it can’t be effective when it’s put in place,” Saltzman said. “We need to deliver planning to make sure it’s successful from Day 1, because it’s so critical.”

Congress Approves $40B in Ukraine Aid, Just as Previous Funding Runs Out

May 19, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

The Defense Department authorized another $100 million in security assistance for Ukraine on May 19, reaching the limit of President Joe Biden’s existing drawdown authorities just as the Senate passed a massive $40 billion aid package to extend them.

In a press release, Pentagon Press Secretary John F. Kirby specified that the latest $100 million will go toward more artillery, support systems, and counter-artillery radars for Ukraine in its fight against Russia, reflecting the conflict’s increased focus on artillery.

In a later briefing with reporters, Kirby confirmed that the aid package “brings to a close the pre-existing authorities that we had,” adding that the equipment will “start to flow very, very soon” into Ukraine.

All told, Kirby added, the DOD has now given Ukraine $4.6 billion in security assistance since President Joe Biden was inaugurated, the vast majority—$3.9 billion—coming after Russia launched its invasion Feb. 24.

That number, however, is set to nearly quadruple in the coming months, thanks to the new package passed by the Senate in a bipartisan 86-11 vote.

Initially, Biden had asked Congress to approve $33 billion in funds, including $16 billion for the Defense Department—$6 billion more for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which procures weapons and systems for Ukraine; $5 billion for additional presidential drawdown authority, which allows for the transfer of material from U.S. stocks; and $5 billion to help pay for security on the NATO eastern flank.

That was on top of the $13.6 billion the House and Senate previously authorized in March.

Congress, however, added to Biden’s new request, boosting the top line from $33 billion to $40 billion. For the Pentagon, the new package keeps the funding for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative level but boosts the drawdown authorities to $11 billion, along with another $9 billion to replenish the equipment stockpiles sent to Ukraine.

It also includes $3.9 billion to support U.S. European Command operations, $600 million to bolster the defense industrial base’s production of missiles such as Javelins and Stingers, and $500 million “to procure critical munitions to increase the stocks of the Department of Defense.”

The House approved the aid package May 10 by a 368 to 57 vote. Passage in the Senate was delayed a week due to objections from Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), leading Kirby to warn that a delay could create “a bubble, a period of time in which there’s just nothing moving.”

Once Biden signs the new package into law, the DOD will have enough drawdown authorities to transfer an unprecedented total of $14.9 billion in security assistance to Ukraine. But this latest $11 billion won’t be doled out all at once, Kirby said.

“We now have some longer runway,” Kirby said. “And so we’re going to meter these out appropriately, so that Ukraine’s getting what it needs in the fight that they’re in. And that fight could change over time.”

Cost of B-52 Re-Engining Jumps By Half in New Estimate of Refit

May 19, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak

The cost of the B-52 re-engining program has increased 50 percent because of integration issues, according to revelations in a House Armed Services panel hearing.

Air Force acquisition executive Andrew P. Hunter acknowledged the B-52 Commercial Engine Replacement Program (CERP) price hike as voiced in a question from Rep. Rob Wittman (R-Va.) in testimony on service modernization.

“We currently believe there is cost growth from our design work that we did originally through the middle-tier acquisition program to what we anticipate we’ll be looking at [in] Milestone B,” which evaluates readiness for entry into the engineering and manufacturing development phase, Hunter said.

The B-52 CERP has been conducted as a middle-tier acquisition program to get underway rapidly and develop a prototype system but is now moving to a “traditional” program, and the Air Force is firming up the costs it expects to pay, Hunter said. The cost increases have more to do with integrating the engines on the B-52, which is a Boeing effort, and has less to do with the engines themselves, which will be built by Rolls-Royce, he added.

“I want to emphasize that a lot of that engineering work is actually inside the airplane, on the support struts, to which the engines attach, versus the engine itself, which is largely a commercial engine that already exists,” Hunter said. The engine needs only “a modest number of modifications,” he said.

“So it’s really about re-engineering 1960s aircraft to perform all the way through” to the end of the B-52’s lifetime, now envisioned as circa 2050.

The Air Force told Congress a year ago that the CERP effort had increased in cost by nine percent because of pandemic-related supply issues, to about $11 billion. Hunter did not speculate on a new cost estimate.

The end of the risk reduction and prototyping phase is rapidly approaching, Hunter said, and when it’s done, “we’ll have an effective design … [that will] allow us to go into an acquisition program to allow us to do that re-engining.”

At Milestone B, “we will … have in our hands the real, full cost of what it will take to do it, and we’ll set the original baseline for the full program … at that point,” Hunter said.

The Air Force will “assess” at that milestone whether “it still make sense to move forward with that program,” Hunter said, adding, however, that “we will need a new engine for the B-52 to get it out to its full lifetime.”

In an email response to a query from Air Force magazine, Boeing said the “50 percent differential in the CERP cost comes from an original, 2017 government estimate produced by the Air Force program office, compared to the latest 2022 estimate.”

The company said it “is our understanding that the government’s estimate has been adjusted over the years from the initial business case analysis, developed at a very early phase of the acquisition, to incorporate additional complexity” as well as “further historical fidelity on similar programs, as well as additional understanding of technical scope and complexity of the design.”

Rolls-Royce North America said through a spokesperson that the company “has been collaborating closely with the Air Force and program integrator Boeing on the CERP program.” There have been “no changes in engine pricing since the contract was awarded.”

The Air Force was not able to comment on the B-52 CERP cost increase by press time.

The CERP seeks to integrate eight new Rolls-Royce F130 engines per aircraft to replace the Pratt & Whitney TF33s, which are original equipment on the B-52Hs, built in 1962. The engines will be digitally controlled, requiring new pylons, new twin-engine nacelles, and wiring to connect the powerplants to the B-52 cockpit. The project is part of an overall modernization of the B-52 fleet that includes digital wiring, new communications, and a new radar, among other improvements.

Biden Supports Sweden’s, Finland’s NATO Bids—Wolters Highlights ‘Exciting Attributes’

May 19, 2022 | By Abraham Mahshie

President Joe Biden stood alongside the leaders of Sweden and Finland at the White House on May 19 to declare his “strong support” for their countries’ NATO bids, while Supreme Allied Commander Europe U.S. Air Force Gen. Tod D. Wolters highlighted the specialized deterrent capabilities the High North partners would bring to the alliance, if the concerns of Turkey are first assuaged.

“This is, in my view and the view of my team, a momentous day,” Biden said in a Rose Garden ceremony.

The president offered “the strong support of the United States” for the applications of the two Nordic democracies that are currently NATO Enhanced Opportunity Partners, the closest cooperative framework for non-members.

Sweden and Finland have for years participated in joint exercises and training and have fought alongside NATO troops in Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Since Feb. 25, the day after Russia invaded Ukraine, Finland and Sweden also began enhanced intelligence sharing with NATO. On May 18, the nations formally applied to the alliance, which requires approval from all 30 current members.

Until then, Finland and Sweden are not protected by NATO’s Article 5 mutual defense clause, but Biden said the U.S. would “deter and confront any aggression while Finland and Sweden are in this accession process.”

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson also recently already voiced a willingness to help Finland and Sweden defend themselves during a NATO accession process.

At the White House, Biden highlighted the benefits Finland and Sweden would bring to the alliance.

“They meet every NATO requirement and then some,” Biden said. “And having two new NATO members in the High North will enhance the security of our alliance and deepen our security cooperation across the board.”

Both nations have Arctic territory and broad training ground for multi-lateral exercises that have increased in recent years, as Russia has heightened its military presence in the Arctic and China has claimed that it is a “near-Arctic state,” with security implications.

Wolters, speaking after a meeting of the military chiefs of defense in Brussels on May 19, highlighted the special capabilities that Sweden and Finland would bring to the alliance as large, forested countries in a cold region that borders the Arctic. Finland, for its part, has a 900-mile border with Russia and is forced to operate within Russia’s anti-access/area denial (A2AD) bubble.

“We will be able to show tactics, techniques, and procedures with Finland and Sweden. They will be able to share with us their unique regional aspects that they have more expertise on than we’ve seen in the past,” Wolters said, noting that the new TTPs will “enhance the overall deterrence capability of NATO.”

“We look at those attributes … as tremendous opportunities to improve our ability to comprehensively deter,” Wolters said. “Those are exciting attributes that Sweden and Finland are going to teach us a lot about.”

Wolters was less effusive about news that Turkish President Recep Erdogan had blocked the start of talks about Finland and Sweden’s NATO entry.

Turkey reportedly wants the opposition Kurdistan workers party, or PKK, declared a terrorist organization by NATO allies, and he wants Turkey to be admitted into the F-35 program, from which Turkey was removed when it adopted Russia’s S-400 missile defense system.

“What we all want the most is for diplomacy to come to the forefront,” said Wolters. “And if that conversation took place, it is my hope as a result of that conversation, we get one step closer to achieving a diplomatic solution.”

Pentagon Press Secretary John F. Kirby said DOD is discussing with Finland and Sweden the security guarantees they may require during the accession period. Russian President Vladimir Putin has in the past warned of consequences should Finland and Sweden join NATO.

“We are actively now talking to them about what kind of security assurances they might need or welcome,” Kirby said.

In Brussels, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army Gen. Mark A. Milley met with both his Finnish and Swedish counterparts, and the DOD said Milley held his first call with his Russian counterpart, Chief of Russian General Staff Gen. Valery Gerasimov, since before the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

“The military leaders discussed several security-related issues of concern and agreed to keep the lines of communication open,” Joint Chiefs spokesperson Col. Dave Butler said in a statement.

Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III also met with his Swedish counterpart at the Pentagon on May 18.

“Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, a free, sovereign, and democratic neighbor, clearly demonstrates the threat posed by Mr. Putin to European security,” Austin said in welcoming remarks. “Our two militaries routinely exercise together. Your capabilities are modern, relevant, and significant, and your addition to the alliance will make us all better at defending ourselves.”

Eielson Celebrates Completion of F-35 Beddown, More Progress to Come

May 19, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska, celebrated the beddown of its full complement of F-35s on May 13, with a ceremony just weeks after the base received the last of its 54 fighters.

The arrival of those F-35s in mid-April gave Eielson the Air Force’s second fully equipped, combat-coded F-35 wing, comprising two fighter squadrons.

The celebration marking the official end of a two-year beddown process featured Gen. Kenneth S. Wilsbach, commander of Pacific Air Forces, and Col. David J. Berkland, commander of the 354th Fighter Wing, as well as officials from Lockheed Martin.

“The task of standing up two new F-35 squadrons was not small,” Wilsbach said during the ceremony, according to an Air Force release. “You made it look easy, but we know it was not. That’s because of the professionalism of the Airmen who work here at Eielson. The Icemen did a fabulous job of standing up this capability here, and the community around Eielson has also been incredibly supportive not only of our Icemen and our mission but this aircraft as well. We’re grateful in so many ways this mission has been so welcomed here.”

The Air Force selected Eielson to be home to the first operational overseas F-35s in 2016, and the 354th Fighter Wing accepted the first two aircraft in April 2020. At Eielson, fighter jets are able to reach anywhere in the northern hemisphere in one sortie and have access to the Joint Pacific Alaska Range Complex, which features more than 75,000 square miles of airspace for training.

While the final jets have arrived, the work of fully integrating and settling the F-35 onto the base is still ongoing.

Berkland previously told Air Force Magazine that the 354th FW maintains a high operations tempo as it looks to build its experience and comfort level with the new fighter—some 44 F-35 training sorties a day. As that training continues, the 354th hasn’t declared initial operational capability yet.

It’s not just pilots that have to adapt to harsh Arctic conditions though—the challenge of maintaining the F-35s when temperatures are frequently sub-zero is one the Air Force has tried to address by spending some $600 million on 39 military construction projects.

Lt. Gen. Warren D. Berry, deputy chief of staff for logistics, engineering, and force protection, detailed some of those projects while testifying to the Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee May 19, explaining how Eielson has created the space necessary, if needed, to ensure that no F-35 has to be parked outside.

“In the 2017 appropriations [bill], we had $161 million to build two 16-bay weather shelter facilities for the F-35s. Those are in place. There are another 18 parking locations indoors for F-35s, and when necessary, the wing can clear out some more space to make room for four, which handles all 54 of the F-35s,” Berry said. “So from what we see, we don’t see a shortfall of storage locations for housing F-35s indoors.”

Still, Berry indicated that more facilities are being worked on to support the F-35 mission.

“We also had in FY20 a project to build storage facilities for the support equipment that goes with the F-35s as well. So that project is underway to provide some indoor storage for those support equipment requirements for the F-35,” Berry said.

Air Force Lt. Col. Samuel Chipman, 356th Fighter Squadron commander (right), briefs visitors to Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska, May 13, 2022. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Jose Miguel T. Tamondong.

Dependence on Russian Aircraft Engines Could Prompt China to ‘Fix Their … Problem’

May 19, 2022 | By Abraham Mahshie

China’s dependence on Russian fighter aircraft engines may soon affect the People’s Liberation Army Air Force fleet if Russia can’t service or provide engines or parts for up to 40 percent of the Chinese fighters, experts at the China Aerospace Studies Institute conference said May 17.

China has yet to wean itself off Russian engines by mastering the technology, experts explained during a panel discussion on military cooperation between China and Russia. If Russia must resupply its own military over the course of a protracted war, that competing demand for parts could prompt China to focus more intently on building up internal expertise.

“China is still quite dependent on Russian components and probably will be for the foreseeable future,” said David R. Markov of the Institute for Defense Analysis.

Russia delivered nearly 4,000 engines for Chinese helicopters and other military aircraft between 1992 and 2019. China has also received Russian S-300 and S-400 air defense systems.

“I think they’re going to continue to buy engines from the Russians, though it’ll be interesting to see whether Russia can now supply these engines in light of the international sanctions,” Markov said, referring to economic blocks imposed by U.S. and European countries that limited Russia’s acquisition of technologies such as semiconductors, used by the Russian defense industry.

The situation gives China a much greater incentive to apply national resources to “fix the engine problem that they have,” he added.

Markov discussed China-Russia aerospace cooperation, tracing the history of Russia’s dual-use and military sales to China, including its technology transfer over the decades since the fall of the Soviet Union.

While China has made significant gains in acquiring key military technologies that helped develop its stealthy J-20 and J-31 fighters, Markov argues that, in the area of fighter engine production, China is still lagging because Russia withheld advanced secrets. China’s struggle in this area isn’t due to a lack of resources devoted to the effort but a lack of domestic expertise, he said.

Many of China’s scientists, engineers, designers, and production managers are in their late 20s and early 30s, and they lack the know-how that comes from apprenticeship programs and decades of specialized experience. To make up for that, China has contracted Russian specialists to work inside Chinese factories.

However, “This isn’t a ‘throw money at the problem’ solution,” he said.

“What they still have yet to understand is, modern aviation engines, particularly supercruise fighter engines, are more art than science,” Markov explained.

Engine workers at producers such as Rolls-Royce, Pratt & Whitney, and General Electric have “tacit knowledge” that the Chinese are still lacking, he added.

“There’s a lot of phenomenology that takes place in an engine that we still do not … understand … with our qualitative computing technology,” Markov explained. “But there’s a guy named Joe who works at Cincinnati Milacron, who’s been working that thing for 30 years, [who] just knows, through experimentation, time, and experience, that you do this thing to make the engine get this outcome. And that’s the part where China just doesn’t have that capability yet.”

Markov believes China’s purchase of Su-35 aircraft from Russia was meant at least in part to get access to the type’s advanced engine and ancillary support and digital control system.

China has made strides, however, developing the WS-10 engine that powers its J-20 stealth fighter.

“The big game changer in much of this was the J-20,” Markov said. “It was the wake-up call to a lot of people following China: of how far they had come, and particularly with Russian talent.”

But China has struggled to develop its WS-15 engine that would give the J-20 supercruise capability, a defense analyst told Air Force Magazine during a sideline interview.

Russia still provides engines for up to 40 percent of China’s air force fleet, the analyst noted, posing the question: “Are they going to be able to sustain current readiness and flying operational capabilities in light of potential spare parts disruptions with this engine manufacturer?”

Hypersonic Missile Defense ‘A Few Years’ Away, Top Brass Tell Senators

May 18, 2022 | By Abraham Mahshie

The Senate Armed Services subcommittee on strategic forces heard testimony from the Defense Department’s top missile defense leaders May 18 and demanded to know why the Missile Defense Agency’s proposed $9.6 billion fiscal 2023 budget will not yield more reliable defense against hypersonic weapons already being fielded by adversaries, including Russia on the battlefield in Ukraine.

The leaders of U.S. Northern Command and the Missile Defense Agency along with the assistant secretary of defense for space policy and others took turns explaining how DOD plans to scale up testing of lasers and other forms of directed energy to counter ballistic missile, cruise missile, and hypersonic missile threats while they optimistically spoke of 2027 for a potential “earlier” delivery of the Next Generation Interceptor (NGI). Instead, defense leaders said the military relies on risky terminal-phase interceptors and new space sensors that will provide “fire control quality” data to weapons.

“Fire what? What are we firing?” subcommittee chair Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) asked MDA director Vice Adm. Jon A. Hill, underscoring the fact that no adequate interceptor yet exists.

“I am gravely concerned about the strategic change in the whole scene of battle that hypersonics represent,” King said. “I want a sense of urgency.”

Hill said the fiscal 2023 budget request calls for $2.8 billion for the NGI and said two contractors are ahead of schedule and may deliver in 2027, before the 2028 planned fielding.

Sen. Deb Fisher (R-Neb.) echoed the chairman’s concern.

“I get really nervous when I hear dates like 2028 for something, and we’re pleased that it’s 2027,” she said. “How are we going to condense the time period and maybe have to accept more risk?”

Hill emphasized that the MDA is “not starting from zero” on hypersonics defense.

“There’s work that’s being done now in that architecture. So, decisions can be made early for that proliferation and planning,” he said.

But Hill admitted that the best defense against a hypersonic weapon remained the Sea-Based Terminal capability fielded by the Navy aboard ships.

“We have an ability with SM-3 [missiles] in the upper tier to take out that threat,” he said, but he admitted that missile defense against hypersonic weapons needs to move “away from the terminal area.”

The terminal phase of a hypersonic weapon’s trajectory is when it descends from a roughly 50 kilometer cruise altitude to its target at a speed of approximately Mach 10, while maneuvering to avoid defenses.

“You have to defend there, but [it] is the most difficult place to engage because you really don’t know where terminal is going to be because it is maneuvering, and it is high speed,” Hill said.

Rather, he highlighted fiscal 2023 investment in the Glide Phase Interceptor, for which DOD will select one of three contractors to develop a system that can target hypersonic weapons in the more vulnerable cruise phase, when the weapon is gliding at about 40 kilometers to 60 kilometers in altitude with the ability to maneuver to evade detection.

Again, King challenged the MDA director on when the capability will be fielded.

“We’re moving towards a demo over the next few years,” Hill said.

Hill made note of another item in the fiscal 2023 request to help address the threat of hypersonic weapons—the $89 million deployment of two satellites to support the Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor, or HBTSS, that will provide fire control data to weapons.

Directed energy was also discussed as a potential solution to the growing missile threats posed by great power adversaries and rogue nations.

“Directed energy, a defense-specific technology, is a key critical technology area we are developing to counter a wide variety of current and emerging threats,” Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering David Honey said in his opening statement.

Honey said the scope of efforts will allow directed energy to counter cruise missiles in the near term; hypersonic missiles in the near and medium terms; and ballistic missiles in the long term. Honey did not specify what he meant by the timeframes provided.

To do that, DOD’s research and engineering office is working to rapidly scale the power of directed energy.

“Countering hypersonic and ballistic missiles will require substantially more laser power,” he said. “R&E will begin scaling laser powers in fiscal year 2023 and is examining opportunities to accelerate the scaling significantly.”

Lawmakers and defense officials acknowledged Russia’s use of hypersonic weapons on the battlefield in Ukraine as a factor that normalizes the use of the weapon.

“Russia has fielded large numbers of long-range cruise missiles, including hypersonic missiles that can cause enormous damage to infrastructure [and] create strategic effects with conventional warheads,” NORTHCOM commander Gen. Glen D. VanHerck said in his opening comments.

While stressing the varied missile threats to the American homeland, VanHerck nonetheless gave an unclassified assessment about the effectiveness of Russia’s use of missiles on the battlefield in response to a question from Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.).

VanHerck said DOD first assessed that the Russian missiles were not working as well as U.S. missiles but then determined that they are “on par” with U.S. capabilities.

“Not all of them—specifically their cruise missiles,” he said. “They’ve had challenges with some of their hypersonic missiles as far as accuracy,” he said.

“I would not take away from a strategic perspective that Russia’s cruise missiles, hypersonic missiles, their strategic capabilities, have severely underperformed.”

This story was updated at 1:53 p.m. May 19 to extend VanHerck’s remarks about Russian missiles.

Challenges for ‘Stagnated’ PME Include Lack of Intellectual Diversity or Data to Best Apply Skills

May 18, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

U.S. professional military education needs to be more rigorous and data-driven, and the military services need to do a better job of actually utilizing the skills service members learn through PME, lawmakers, academics, and Pentagon officials said in a congressional hearing May 18.

The 2018 National Defense Strategy raised some eyebrows when it stated that PME had “stagnated, focused more on the accomplishment of mandatory credit at the expense of lethality and ingenuity.”

Four years later, facing the House Armed Services military personnel subcommittee, a pair of PME experts and two Defense Department officials outlined a number of issues still facing military education.

Summing up their concerns toward the end of the hearing, Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.) laid out three main problems.

“One is whether we are selecting the best and the brightest to go to these institutions,” Gallagher said. “The second is whether the institutions themselves are on par with their civilian counterparts, who have a much fancier name or credential. … And then the third, and perhaps most important, is how we’re tracking our utilization of graduates.”

Who’s Going

Before the Goldwater-Nichols Act became law in 1986, joint assignments were considered a “pariah,” retired Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Robert E. Schmidle Jr. told lawmakers. But when that legislation became law, it transformed the importance of such assignments and joint professional military education.

In a similar way, Schmidle urged Congress to use its powers to reform PME so that officers who take advantage of educational opportunities still have chances to advance in their career.

Joan Johnson-Freese, a professor at the Naval War College, went further in recommending that lawmakers establish a two-track system—a more condensed version for service members looking to fulfill requirements and a more expansive one for those who want to pursue a graduate degree.

Such a system would be valuable, Johnson-Freese argued, because it would offer flexibility to service members who don’t necessarily want an advanced degree but do want to participate in PME. And it would also solve another issue.

“Frankly, there are just students who aren’t interested, for whatever reason, and they don’t add much to the seminar,” Johnson-Freese said. “I had a student say, ‘So I did all the reading, all the work, and I’m going to get an A-, and the man next to me who didn’t spill his coffee every day is going to get a B+.’ Let him take a more condensed version and get him out of the classroom.”

Academic Rigor

Such an approach would also help address another issue the experts raised—academic rigor.

When Schmidle attended the Marine Corps War College as a young officer, he remembers walking into an “academic boot camp” where students felt pressure to excel or face embarrassment in the classroom.

In contrast, Johnson-Freese said that now, too many professors who are retired service members are too focused on “accommodating” students rather than challenging them intellectually.

On top of that, relying too much on retired officers as instructors can shift the focus of classes from the future to the past, stifling innovation, Johnson-Freese argued. And because collaboration with civilian academic institutions has been discouraged in the past, there is less intellectual diversity, she added.

For his part, Schmidle advocated for wargaming to gain an increased focus in institutions’ curricula, saying it would force students to translate theory into practical action and allow the services to identify potential future leaders sooner.

Data-Driven Improvement

The Pentagon does conduct surveys of PME graduates and their supervisors on its impact and usefulness, Vice Adm. Stuart B. Munsch, director of joint force development, told Rep. Jackie Speier. But he did not have the data from those surveys immediately available, highlighting another concern—how to assess PME at all.

To do so, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness Shawn G. Skelly cited the Pentagon’s data strategy, which includes an objective of sharing data broadly across the entire enterprise. Such an approach, Skelly said, is key for PME.

“I am personally looking forward to taking the military education enterprise in that direction, because we’re learning lessons as to how to drive accountability, to make data available, to bring it together,” Skelly said. “Because it’s not just one service’s data and displaying that—it’s how you do the relationships and then create that power in there.”

The goal, Skelly said, is for all PME programs to produce data for analysis. From there, it’s a question of having the right talent management system.

“It’s not just the data itself and governing through that data. … We have to have a personnel management, talent management system that can understand the attributes that all our service members bring when they assess, whether through their high school graduation or their bachelor’s degree, what we impart to them through the education programs they go through, either at the tactical level when they’re more junior, then when they go to staff colleges and war colleges, what we intend to impart to them, what they take away, what they demonstrate through their competencies,” Skelly said.

“That’s the way we have to get after it. It’s the data. It’s the objectives of the education, understanding the impact of it, and then the attributes to the individuals to create an appreciation of the force and whether we have the sufficient knowledge and wherewithal for the positions that need it.”

Making sure the services leverage PME throughout a service member’s career is especially important, Skelly noted, not just in a person’s next assignment.

“We have a history of not making the most out of that and being able to account for it beyond their pay back tour. You get your education, you owe several years,” Skelly said. “But what do we do after that? … How do we know what we’re getting, as to who makes three stars, who makes more, who goes to particular commands that suit their training, or do they just happen to wind up someplace? Especially with regard to cyber, AI, and other technologies that are emerging, we can only impart exquisite knowledge to so many. We have to ensure that they’re put in places to utilize that.”