NDAA Proposals Address Joint Force Integration in Indo-Pacific

June 23, 2022 | By Abraham Mahshie

Amendments in a House version of the fiscal 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) would strengthen U.S. posture and resourcing at U.S. Indo-Pacific Command.

One proposal to create a new joint command in Hawaii or Guam comes amid questions as to whether INDOPACOM is doing enough on its own to improve joint force integration in the Pacific theater.

Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.) pushed for INDOPACOM initiatives to strengthen America’s posture toward China.

“This year’s NDAA learns from the failure of deterrence in Ukraine and moves with a sense of urgency to better resource America’s posture in the Indo-Pacific,” Gallagher said in a statement released after the House Armed Services Committee passed its version of the NDAA after midnight June 23.

The ranking member of the HASC subcommittee on military personnel also helped secure an extra $1 billion to “turbocharge urgently needed infrastructure and posture-related efforts” at the command, and he called for a study to review how a joint task force (JTF) or sub-unified command in Honolulu or Guam could strengthen command-and-control structures before a crisis erupts.

INDOPACOM is already slated for $6.1 billion in the NDAA as part of the Pacific Deterrence Initiative (PDI), which would do everything from build new infrastructure to increase the number of exercises and training events with partners and allies in the region. Hawaii and Guam would be major beneficiaries of the new funding.

“Guam and Hawaii provide the operational capability and logistical capacity to generate airpower for both contingency and humanitarian assistance/disaster relief operations,” a Pacific Air Forces spokesperson told Air Force Magazine in a written statement. “Their defensive posture will be significantly bolstered by the build-out plans.”

In an interview at PACAF headquarters at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii, PACAF commander Gen. Kenneth S. Wilsbach told Air Force Magazine that the 2022 defense budget jumpstarted Air Force efforts to pre-position material and conduct agile combat employment (ACE) in the theater.

“The ‘22 budget provided for additional funds for ACE for construction that we needed that helps us to execute ACE and gives us airfields that are more capable and viable for conducting operations in the Pacific,” Wilsbach said.

“We need to stay the course to give us the capability to be able to deter, and if deterrence fails, to be able to prevail if conflict happens here in the Pacific,” he added. The PACAF commander added, however, that he needed the Army to step up and do its job to protect air assets and bases.

PDI military construction funds proposed in the fiscal 2023 budget include design and construction projects on the island of Timor and U.S. territories Wake Island and Tinian. The Tinian projects add capacity for airfield operations including refueling, takeoff, landing, and parking where no capacity currently exists.

Guam is already slated to host a future command-and-control center funded by the Missile Defense Agency that would benefit PACAF by creating an integrated air picture.

Gallagher’s proposed amendment calls on the INDOPACOM commander to study the creation of a joint task force or sub-unified command to better facilitate planning and execution of a contingency response should crisis arrive in the Indo-Pacific region.

Some current and former sub-unified commands are Alaskan Command under U.S. Northern Command, U.S. Forces Korea under INDOPACOM, and U.S. Forces Afghanistan, which ran the war there under U.S. Central Command.

Work Underway on Joint Force Integration

At the Hickam meeting, Wilsbach stressed his efforts to strengthen the Joint Force, something the NDAA amendment seeks to address should a JTF be created.

“The good news story is a lot is working,” Wilsbach said, describing a June 3 joint demonstration for INDOPACOM commander Adm. John C. Aquilino at PACAF’s 613th Air Operations Center (AOC). “We’re about as jointly integrated as I’ve ever seen, right now, every single day.”

While the Defense Department continues to develop technology to achieve joint all-domain command and control (JADC2), which would enable integration from all branches of the military, Wilsbach said the exercise at the AOC demonstrated that even with current technologies, the services are executing JADC2.

In the joint demonstration, air fires from the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps; surface-to-air fires from the Marine Corps and use of its radars and aircraft; and simulated surface-to-surface fires from the Army were employed together.

“We can integrate that all in time and space from the AOC,” Wilsbach said. “On a day-to-day basis, the operations are all very similar to that. They’re being integrated, and perhaps on a day-to-day basis, they’re not always a strike, or a simulated strike, but they could be.”

Retired Lt. Gen. David A. Deptula, dean of AFA’s Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies, said standing up a JTF before a crisis erupts is a good idea, but that he is not convinced INDOPACOM is preparing for a joint fight in the Indo-Pacific.

“Is PACOM really serious about preparing for potential conflict with China in the South China Sea?” he posed. “And then if they are, where’s the evidence of a unified, truly joint approach in doing so?”

Deptula said problems he sees today existed two decades ago when he served at PACAF headquarters. One is a lack of a means for attacking moving ships in all weather. Another is sufficient munitions stocks to execute major regional conflict in the Indo-Pacific, but construction is underway in Guam to address the munitions storage shortfall. He also called for hardening of aircraft shelters in Guam. But instead, the Missile Defense Agency is working with the Army to create a 360-degree, multi-layered missile defense of Guam. Likewise, Deptula called for a plan for how the Army would provide air base defense and how it would travel with the Air Force to ACE locations at islands across the Pacific.

Deptula said all the service components would participate in a JTF, if stood up, but the key force would be air power. Whether a hypothetical JTF commander is an Air Force officer or a Navy officer would indicate whether INDOPACOM is “serious” or “stuck in the past,” he said. “To conquer the tyranny of distance of the Pacific, one needs to go 600 knots, not 20 knots—not to mention having the flexibility for rapid response, optimal survivability, lethality.”

“I’m pretty convinced that ‘Cruiser’ Wilsbach is on top of it, in my view,” Deptula said. “He’s very realistic and has a good grasp of the situation, but I can’t say that about the rest of the service components in the Pacific.”

INDOPACOM did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) international security fellow John Schaus agreed that the services are not thinking in a joint manner.

“None of the services spend enough time thinking about how they are going to contribute to a joint force in a joint fight to achieve national objectives,” Schaus told Air Force Magazine in a recent interview.

One way services practice joint integration is through exercises. But all too often, Schaus said, a service won’t participate unless the exercise meets their internal needs.

“Each of the services has requirements for training and proficiency. And if that exercise helps you, but it doesn’t help me, I don’t have an incentive to participate,” Schaus said. “That leaves each service less joint.”

HASC Won’t Force the Air Force to Hold a Bridge Tanker Competition

June 23, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

Several lawmakers on the House Armed Services Committee were disappointed in their effort to force the Air Force into a competition for its KC-Y “bridge tanker.” Their proposed amendment failed to make it into the committee’s markup of the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act.

The panel did agree, however, to limit the service’s move to retire half its E-3 Sentry fleet before finally passing its version of the NDAA shortly after 2 a.m. June 23 by a bipartisan 57-1 vote.

KC-Y

Deep into the lengthy 16-hour markup process that started the morning of June 22, Rep. Jerry Carl (R-Ala.) introduced an amendment that would have prevented the Air Force from awarding any contract for its bridge tanker “unless such contract is awarded using full and open competition.”

Carl’s provision came in response to Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall’s remarks in recent months that the likelihood of a competition for the KC-Y—to bridge the gap between the KC-46 and the long-term vision for a “KC-Z”—has declined as the Air Force has done more work on the program.

“As we look for requirements, look further out, the requirements start to look like a modified KC-46 more than they do a completely new design,” Kendall told reporters in March. “So we’re working our way through finalizing those requirements. Again, we’ll be doing due diligence market research analysis.

“… I want to be very transparent about this. I think that there’s still a possibility for competition out there. But as we’ve looked at our requirements, the likelihood of a competition has come down.”

Thus far, only two companies appear to be interested in bidding for the contract. Lockheed Martin and Airbus have proposed their LMXT platform based on the Airbus A330 Multi-Role Tanker Transport, and Boeing is set to re-enter the KC-46 Pegasus.

The KC-46, however, has been plagued by a number of serious deficiencies, most prominently with its Remote Vision System, which has caused issues with refueling.

“We don’t have aircraft that work,” said Carl, citing those problems. “We do not have aircraft that fulfills 100 percent [of requirements]. … And now we’re being asked to turn the checkbook over to the Air Force. I refuse to allow that to happen. I encourage everyone to think and think hard on this one. We cannot let the DOD, the Air Force, any branch of the government, to continue to run away with our checkbook and do what they want to do. They have to be responsible.”

Carl represents Alabama’s 1st District, which includes Mobile, where Lockheed Martin has said it will build the LMXT.

On the other side of the issue, Rep. Donald Norcross (D-N.J.) proposed an amendment to Carl’s amendment effectively stripping it of its intent, allowing the Secretary of the Air Force to award a sole-source contract.

“The idea that somehow we’re just going to throw a check out the window and say, ‘Yeah, just keep buying them,’ is nowhere near the truth,” Norcross said. “We’re looking at unknown requirements that will probably not be here at the earliest until the end of the year. Yet we’re trying to make a decision that will box that in, telling you how you’ll have to do it, even before you know what we’re doing.”

In many ways, the debate over the proposals broke along parochial lines—Rep. Mike Rogers (R), also from Alabama, spoke in favor of Carl’s proposal, as did Rep. Anthony Brown (D) from Maryland, where Lockheed Martin is headquartered. Meanwhile, Rep. Rick Larsen (D-Wash.) and Rep. Joe Courtney (D-Conn.) advocated for Norcross’ amendment—Larsen represents Everett, Wash., where the KC-46 is built, and Courtney’s district borders Middletown, Conn., where the KC-46’s engines are made.

HASC chair Rep. Adam Smith, also from Washington, voiced support for letting the Air Force award a sole-source contract if it wants to, saying that doing so would allow the service to avoid contract protests that could drag the process out. He did, however, include a caveat.

“We will drive up the costs if we force them into a competition and force them into that more lengthy process,” Smith said. “Now, if we’re sitting here a year from now, and that camera doesn’t work and it’s not moving forward, we don’t have a choice at that point. We’ve got to go get something else.”

Ultimately, Norcross’ amendment was approved by a 36-22 vote, putting it in the NDAA that was passed by the entire committee, but the opposition warned it isn’t going away anytime soon.

“Just know this: If we lose today, this is coming back next year,” Rogers said before the vote.

E-3 Sentry

One provision also added to the NDAA that proved far less controversial was an amendment from Rep. Stephanie Bice (R-Okla.) that would restrict how and when the Air Force can start to retire its aging E-3 Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) fleet.

Language regarding the E-3 was already included in the chairman’s mark of the NDAA released June 20 that called for allowing just 10 E-3s to be retired until the Air Force reported back on its future airborne warning and control plans, and on developing air moving target indication, battle management, and command and control capabilities; the impact of retiring 15 AWACS planes; and a detailed comparison between the E-3s and the Air Force’s planned replacement, the E-7 Wedgetail.

Bice’s proposal, adopted as part of a package of amendments in a simple voice vote, would go beyond that, putting a hard cap of 13 aircraft that can be retired. And of those 13 planes, five could be retired only after the Air Force entered into a contract to procure the E-3’s replacement, the E-7 Wedgetail. That deal is not expected until at least fiscal 2023.

On top of that, Bice, whose district borders Tinker Air Force Base, where part of the E-3 fleet is located, called for two of the AWACS aircraft to be designated as training aircraft.

Gulfstream: A Historical Partner in Critical Transportation for Senior Leaders

June 23, 2022

Gulfstream has been a critical Department of Defense partner throughout its history. While Gulfstream first delivered its modified Gulfstream GII aircraft to the U.S. Navy in 1967, the company has been directly supporting the U.S. Air Force since 1983.

“Almost 40 years ago, we delivered the first C-20B Gulfstream GIII aircraft at the 89th Airlift Wing at Joint Base Andrews to support critical transportation for executive airlift command and control mission,” said Troy Miller, regional vice president for military and special mission sales at Gulfstream. “We’ve been providing Gulfstreams around the world ever since.”

Since then, Gulfstream has continued to provide aircraft, logistics, and maintenance support to securely transport senior political and military leaders.

“Recently, we have also expanded our support by modifying special missions’ aircraft, most notably our modified G550s to support the EC-37B Compass Call program,” Miller said. “We’re modifying those aircraft for the mission system’s prime contractors: L3Harris and BAE Systems. Together, we’re addressing the critical airborne electronic attack requirements that the Air Force has made clear it requires in the EC-37Bs that are slated to replace the current fleet of EC-130Hs.”

Gulfstream’s support of executive airlift command and control is vital to ensuring senior leaders stay connected when they travel.

“Over the years, we’ve improved the secure communications capabilities of our aircraft,” Miller said. “Our C-37As and C-37Bs are equipped with secure communication suites that enable our senior military and government leaders to conduct business securely during those long-range flights.”

Gulfstream’s experience in developing business jets prepared them to continually innovate to enhance their aircraft.

“As a leading business jet manufacturer worldwide, Gulfstream focuses first and foremost on safety,” Miller said. “But we also focus significantly on innovation by developing and implementing new capabilities and technologies into our aircraft to improve communications, navigation, and environmental conditions in the cabin.”

As an example, Miller offers the modifications made to secure communication capabilities for the senior leaders, including combatant commanders.

“Our aircraft provide reliable, safe, and productive air transportation over long ranges and high altitudes of operations at high speeds,” Miller said. “In response to increased demand for secure communications, we provide a work environment that senior leaders can conduct their critical business, particularly command and control missions, in-flight.”

In 1999, the General Dynamics Corporation purchased Gulfstream, enabling Gulfstream to innovate and expand its product lines to meet the demands of the future with aircraft like the new Gulfstream G700, which is currently undergoing flight testing.

“The G700 offers increased range, speed, and 56 percent more space in the cabin compared to the G550,” Miller said. “A larger cabin provides air transportation for more people and the ability to accommodate additional crew rest capability or galley capability for the special missions. We’re excited to have our newest aircraft address the Air Force’s emerging and evolving requirements.”

This addition is significant considering Gulfstream’s G550 continues to be one of the most prolific contributions the company has made to the Air Force, as evident by its recent incorporation into the C-37B fleet.

“With more than 600 G550s in service, that aircraft continues to be our most productive,” Miller said. “The C-37Bs are based on the G550 and recently, the Air Force has taken delivery of two additional C -37Bs. Without question, the G550 has been the workhorse that best represents Gulfstream addressing the needs of the Air Force to date.”

Gulfstream is a proud historical partner of the Air Force. Recently, two G550s delivered to Joint Base Andrews were selected to honor the Tuskegee Airmen and the Berlin Airlift, respectively, on their tails.

“Considering the Air Force’s emphasis on historical significance, it was humbling and a joy for our aircraft to receive a tail number that represents these historical events and figures,” Miller said.

It was a poignant reminder of the Air Force’s rich history, motivating Gulfstream to continue supporting the Air Force’s needs far into the future.

“Gulfstream’s next-generation aircraft family, including the G400, G500, G600 and G800, along with the G700, represent industry-leading capabilities and technology, and different segments of the performance spectrum in terms of ranges, sizes, and capabilities,” Miller said. “As we continue to develop new aircraft and modify our products, we will continue to support the executive airlift command and control needs and the special missions needs of the U.S. Air Force over the next 75 years.”

House Panel Approves Space National Guard, More EC-37Bs, and a Big Topline Boost to 2023 NDAA

June 22, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

One of the Air Force’s top unfunded priorities and a renewed push for a Space National Guard were both approved by the House Armed Services Committee on June 22 as part of the panel’s marathon markup of the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act.

The committee also voted to increase the top line of the 2023 NDAA by $37 billion on top of the $773 billion requested by the Pentagon. But in a concurrent hearing, the House Appropriations Committee, which actually controls the purse strings, voted for a much smaller increase, setting the stage for what is likely to be a fierce debate in the coming months.

Space National Guard

Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.) was responsible for introducing the amendment for the Space National Guard, which was included in a package of non-controversial amendments and approved by voice vote.

It’s an issue he tried to address in last year’s NDAA—his amendment then was also approved by the committee, but it contradicted language in the Senate Armed Services Committee’s version of the bill, and when it came time for leaders to draft a compromise version, it was left out.

The White House’s Office of Management and Budget has also come out against a separate Space Guard, releasing a statement of administration policy saying it “strongly opposes” such a move as it would create unnecessary bureaucracy and increase costs by up to $500 million annually. The Space Force, meanwhile, has proposed creating a “Space Component” that is a combined hybrid of full-time and part-time Guardians.

In May, though, a bipartisan group of Senators introduced legislation that would create a Space National Guard, formed from the eight states and territories that currently have Air National Guard units with space missions. Advocates say a new entity is needed because members of those Air National Guard units don’t have a direct connection with the Space Force and have essentially been “orphaned” by the Air Force, and argue that the costs have been overestimated.

But while Crow’s amendment would seem to have some support in the Senate, the SASC did not address the issue in its own markup of the 2023 NDAA. Should the House and Senate adopt their respective versions of the bill unchanged, a conference committee will have to draft a compromise.

Unfunded Priorities Partially Fulfilled

The second-highest unfunded priority the Air Force included in the annual list it sent to Congress in April was also its most expensive one—$978.5 million to procure four more EC-37B Compass Call electronic warfare aircraft.

That ask was, for the most part, fulfilled as part of a sweeping amendment offered by Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine) and approved in a 42-17 vote. Golden’s amendment provides $884 million for four additional aircraft to bring the total fleet to 10. It also puts the HASC’s bill in line with its Senate counterpart.

Golden’s amendment also partially addresses what the Air Force identified as its top unfunded priority—$579 million for weapons system sustainment—by adding on nearly $379 million.

Other unfunded priorities, however, such as the addition of seven more F-35As to the Air Force’s buy of 33, were not included in Golden’s amendment nor the HASC chairman’s mark. The House Appropriations Committee also did not change the F-35’s procurement this year, despite protests from Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah) and Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), who called the total of 61 aircraft “simply not enough to keep up with what we’re facing.”

Top line

The main impact of Golden’s amendment was to increase the top line of the 2023 NDAA by $37 billion, nearly 4.8 percent. A large chunk of that increase is devoted to combatting the effects of rising inflation, a common theme throughout this year’s budgeting process.

In particular, Golden’s amendment would give an “inflation bonus” of 2.4 percent to service members making less than $45,000, an addition projected to cost $800 million. Another $6 billion or so is devoted to addressing inflation’s impact on military construction and fuel costs.

But while the House Armed Services Committee is ready to boost spending, the House Appropriations Committee is not. The key panel stuck with the total of $762 billion in the 2023 NDAA (which doesn’t include military construction) proposed by defense subcommittee chair Rep. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.), a total that is roughly in line with the Pentagon’s request.

“What we choose to spend our defense dollars on is … incredibly important. We must modernize our force to compete with our peer adversaries, but the latest weapon systems and platforms are only effective if they can be used appropriately and if they can be maintained appropriately and in the long term,” McCollum argued.

Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), the chair of the HASC, made a similar argument in his committee hearing, pushing back against proponents who say that maintaining large numbers of less capable platforms has a quality of its own.

“That’s one of the dumbest damn things I’ve ever heard,” Smith said. “If I have 100 different things that are incapable of doing anything, you’re not better off if you have 200. Now we can debate whether there is quality here … but please don’t give this ‘Well, we’ve got a lot of them, so we must be in good shape, right?”

Smith and McCollum, however, will face opposition from Republicans—and some Democrats—who want to increase defense spending. Indeed, HASC’s $37 billion increase is actually smaller than the $45 billion added by the committee’s Senate counterpart; and Rep. Elaine Luria (D-Va.), who voted for Golden’s amendment, called the $37 billion “a start,” adding that she hoped the compromise process with the Senate would land on a total “somewhere north” of it.

This is the Best Time to Take Risks, Brown Says

June 22, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak

The Air Force is trying to strike a balance between fight-tonight readiness and future capabilities, and the current situation offers the most favorable conditions to focus more on investment, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. said in a think-tank presentation.

“This is probably the best opportunity” to accept some risk in day-to-day readiness versus long-term investment, Brown said in a Hudson Institute streamed event. He also commented on how Russia is prosecuting its air war in Ukraine by keeping its air units close to ground units and not venturing far from them.

The Air Force has to “balance risk over time,” Brown said, and trade off the needs of the service with those of combatant commanders, who are charged with developing here-and-now operational plans, Brown said.

“I don’t think the combatant commanders should take all the risk,” he said, nor should the services, which are trying to prepare for the future.

“If we had a rheostat where we could move things back and forth, you could see, this is probably the best opportunity to do this,” Brown said. He also said the services should not all be “in a bit of a valley” at the same time, with regard to readiness or investment.

“That’s why it’s important for the Joint Force to see ourselves” as a whole, he said.

Brown has previously argued for new metrics to assess readiness, and he did again, saying, “the way we measure readiness … is usually based on availability of platforms and trained Airmen … but if you continue to use it at this rate today, what’s it going to look like tomorrow? That part, I think we need to do a better job on.”

The services should constantly be asking themselves, “What do you need to be ready for?” he said.

“I just think we can do this better. We have data, we have tools … and models” that can better assess readiness, he said, “and do a little better job at forecasting, which will inform your decisions … and see what the future may look like.”

He argued for revamping the Global Force Management system, saying that when he was at U.S. Central Command, heavy use was made of carrier battle groups, but he was told that continuing to use them at that rate would result in shortages later.

“We don’t pay attention to things over time to see the readiness trends,” he said. “You may drive yourself into the valley … and wonder how you got here.”

Brown said he’s made a point to engage with members of Congress and their staffs on various Air Force initiatives, to explain what the service is thinking and doing, and why. Asked if he believes his “4+1” fighter plan will be allowed to proceed, Brown said, “I think it will.” The security situation is changing, calling for “increasing dialog,” he said, but he believes Capitol Hill is onboard.

“We’ve been pretty successful for the last two years” in getting Congress to go along with the Air Force’s plans, he said.

He said he has also impressed on all levels of the service the need to “be all on the same page in terms of our message” so that Congress gets a unified perspective from the service. He has told commanders to look beyond their “functional areas” and see things “across the enterprise … What’s best for the United States Air Force.” That was successful in the last National Defense Authorization Act, “and you’re seeing [that] … again in this round, this year.”

Brown declined to say whether he sees a greater emphasis on long-range strike, again saying he’s trying to find the “sweet spot … mix of capability and capacity.” Shorter-range assets such as fighters will be important for the “campaigning” aspect of the new National Defense Strategy, he said, as they provide an opportunity to work with partners and allies. Both long- and short-range platforms will have greater utility with longer-ranged weapons that are in development, he said.

The Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS) will be crucial, though, “to not only get the information for almost all those targets” but passing that information on to “those long strike platforms or a shorter-range fighter.”

Finding that sweet spot entails constant wargaming and analysis, he said, and is subject to frequent change.

“Moving the levers back and forth” of investment in capability versus readiness will provide the best possible answer, but no plan is perfect, and no plan “survives contact” with an enemy, Brown allowed.

Brown was asked if the Air Force is doing any “lessons learned” analysis of Russia’s campaign in Ukraine, and he said that effort is ongoing.

“How we would do it,” Brown said, is to attack air defenses and establish air superiority over a broad area of operations where U.S. ground forces were operating.

“That’s not the way the Russians have operated,” though, he said. Russian forces have kept their air forces “more closely [to] where they had ground superiority. So, based on their doctrine, they’ve stuck … where their ground forces are, and don’t venture very far from them.”

The Ukrainians have been successful in denying air superiority to Russia in part by not keeping their air defenses “static,” Brown said.

“They stay fairly dynamic, which made it more difficult” for Russia to find and destroy Ukrainian air defense systems.

“If you can’t do dynamic targeting very well, you’re going to have a hard time,” he said. This is “something we do, I think, … really well. And something we’ll continue to work on.”

He also expressed surprise that Russia is having such a hard time countering Ukrainian air defenses, noting that they are Russian-made systems.

“They’re going against their own” system, he said. “They should know how to defeat them.”

Space Force Needs ‘Bodies’ at Pacific Commands to Meet Rising Threats

June 22, 2022 | By Abraham Mahshie

JOINT BASE PEARL HARBOR-HICKAM, Hawaii—In past Pacific exercises, space capabilities came into the picture after the fact—supposition over what Air Force Space Command might have done had it been involved.

Since the creation of the Space Force, however, small teams of Guardians assigned to Pacific Air Forces and U.S. Indo-Pacific Command have been tasked with assuring that space effects are incorporated into all exercises, but some work is falling through the cracks.

Current Space Force leaders at PACAF say the small number of Guardians planning exercises and advising both INDOPACOM commander Adm. John C. Aquilino and PACAF commander Gen. Kenneth S. Wilsbach are not enough. What’s more, as allies and partners stand up their own space components, Space Force Guardians are needed to coordinate the joint force, allies, and partners to unite efforts against rising threats posed by China, Russia, and North Korea.

“We’re short-handed all over, but we look at our allies and partners” to supplement, said PACAF deputy director of space forces Space Force Lt. Col. Walt Priebe.

“Hopefully, here over the next couple of years, we’re going to grow in our manning to be able to handle the workload, because right now, with the small staffs we have out here between PACAF and INDOPACOM, [there is] just way more work than we can handle,” Priebe told Air Force Magazine during an interview at PACAF headquarters at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii.

“Where does the work happen?” Priebe posed. “It happens down at the action officer level. So, by bringing in more Guardians, now we can get more folks down to those action officer levels for mission planning pieces, for strategy development—when it comes to exercises, getting space integrated more into each of the scenarios and events.”

The deputy director, who spent two decades with Air Force Space Command before becoming a Guardian in September 2021, said leadership has taken note. But before billets can be created and Guardians trained, decision memos need to be signed at the most senior levels of the Pentagon.

“Senior leadership in Space Force and [U.S. Space Command], they see it, they know it, and it’s just a matter of trying to get bodies,” he urged.

Leveraging Allies and Partners

The shortage of space operators at the Defense Department’s Pacific commands is also keeping the U.S. military from leveraging the power of regional allies such as Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand. All have launched space assets that can be shared in a way that better protects the global community from bad actors in space, and most have stood up their own space defense groups.

“All these things are huge movements forward into the greater community of supporting each other and bringing capabilities together to make everybody better off,” Priebe said.

“It’s very expensive and very complicated—there’s just too much out there,” he said of the space threat and components needed to respond. “So, being able to have our joint partners supporting us in these endeavors is very important.”

The Space Force now has over 8,000 Guardians and a budget proposal of $24.5 billion for fiscal year 2023, but China has invested heavily in space capabilities in recent years while the United States was preoccupied with the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. U.S. objectives in space are broad but limited by personnel and assets.

“That’s where we come in as the Space Force,” Priebe explained. “Our international engagements … try to help those other countries, support them as they grow, but also bring them into the fold so that we can all work together to cover the globe when it comes to space.”

The Space Force currently has about 200 Guardians on Oahu island advising the PACAF and INDOPACOM commanders on key space capabilities and working to integrate space into exercises. The Guardians’ duties include planning, communications, and intelligence.

“We make sure space is getting integrated into the exercises,” Priebe explained. “In the past, there was a lot of hand waving just because people didn’t know how to either request the support or what the effect would look like. So, they just kind of said, ‘Well, we would have done this.’ And something that we’ve been striving [for] over the last decade is changing that.”

The increased tasking has demonstrated a need for more Guardians in the theater so that PACAF and INDOPACOM can conduct joint exercises that leverage the Space Force and the space capabilities of the other services.

In recent weeks, Space Force Lt. Gen. B. Chance Saltzman, deputy chief for operations, cyber, and nuclear, has said that the Defense Secretary is nearing a decision that would create a Space Force component command at U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, a move that would strengthen space integration across the services operating in theater.

“The biggest thing with that is just there’s going to be such a larger footprint of Guardians on island than we currently have,” Priebe said.

The establishment of the service component and an estimated 50 additional billets will allow the Space Force to adapt new policies, procedures, and ways of doing things “at the speed that space happens.”

“When you’re fighting in a space war, you don’t have days or a day to readjust, you’ve got hours, maybe minutes to readjust things,” Priebe said.

Priebe has already noticed that the Space Force’s flat structure is streamlining decision-making. While the Air Force must go from squadron to group to wing to reach a decision-maker, the Space Force structure moves from delta to field command to Chief of Space Operations Gen. John W. “Jay” Raymond.

“The speed at which we can have communication, make things happen, is absolutely wonderful,” Priebe said. “We’re just really waiting on the bodies to get here to be able to support better.”

While Priebe focused on the required growth in Guardians at PACAF and INDOPACOM in Hawaii, he said having Guardians with detachments at key ally locations such as Australia, South Korea, and Japan would demonstrate U.S. commitment to growing and better integrating with those partner forces. Presently, three Guardians are in South Korea and one is in Japan supporting U.S. commanders. Their primary responsibility is not a security cooperation job, which is designed to work closely with a partner nation.

“So, we put a heavy ask on them to kind of step outside their lane and go do these things for us,” Priebe admitted.

Deterring China in Space

China and adversaries have “taken notice” of the creation of the Space Force and the stand up of allies’ space components, Priebe contended.

“By having people there on the ground, we understand what our allies are going through. We can see what’s happening to them,” he said. “Or, more importantly, here’s what our allies are bringing, and we can feed that into our larger Space Force.”

China has demonstrated and wants to be a pacing country for space launch, Priebe explained. Likewise, China maintains a space station that has rotated two crews and received five resupply modules.

“It’s showing China that they can’t just steamroll over other countries,” he said. “It’s showing them that it’s not just one competitor they’re going against anymore. It’s globally.”

With the F-22’s Future Uncertain, Hickam Airmen Reflect

June 22, 2022 | By Abraham Mahshie

JOINT BASE PEARL HARBOR-HICKAM, Hawaii—Just behind the F-22 maintenance shop at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii, a tall chain-link fence blocks access to a lengthy roadway leading to 13 sunshades, each standing more than 30 feet high.

Their corrugated metal roofs protect both maintainers and the F-22 fighter aircraft flown by the Hawaii Air National Guard’s 199th Fighter Squadron and the Air Force’s 19th Fighter Squadron.

For a dozen years, thousands of Hawaiian maintainers have supported, and hundreds of pilots have flown, the fifth-generation aircraft from Hickam’s strategic Pacific location. But in recent months, a tinge of sadness and uncertainty has radiated through the F-22 support team and pilots as Air Force leaders called for the retirement of 33 of the 186 F-22s in the fleet to make way for investments in next-generation fighters.

None of Hickam’s F-22s, which represent 20 percent of the combat-capable platforms, would be affected, but the signal from Air Force leaders is clear to all those at this proud place: The F-22 will eventually be phased out.

“There’s nothing that compares to it,” said Hawaii Air National Guard Master Sgt. Ryan Morita, superintendent for the power support systems of the 154th Maintenance Squadron that supports the F-22.

Commander of Hickam’s 19th Fighter Squadron Lt. Col. Paul Lopez referenced the poem “High Flight” by John Gillespie when describing the experience of flying an F-22. Staff photo by Abraham Mahshie.

“Look at it—it just looks like it’s bowed up. It’s ready to go,” Morita said with a hard laugh during a recent Air Force Magazine visit to Hickam. Morita has served in the Guard for 31 years and supported the F-22 ever since it arrived July 1, 2010.

Arguments that defense dollars should be set aside for newer generation F-35s did not phase the Hawaii native as he made the long walk from the workshop to the sunshades, his smile beaming ear to ear the whole way.

“But, this is the faster one, and this is the better one. This is the more agile, and it’s a more powerful one. This, this is the dominant one,” he said, pointing to the F-22’s two engines, compared to the F-35’s one, and the F-22’s larger weapon-carrying capacity. “It’s sad.”

More than $4.1 billion is set aside to upgrade the remaining F-22s over the next five years according to the fiscal year 2023 defense budget now before Congress. In recent weeks, first the Senate, then the House pushed back on Air Force plans to reduce the F-22 fleet.

On June 16, the Senate Armed Services Committee passed a version of the National Defense Authorization Act that ruled out retiring the 33 oldest F-22s, which are used for training, and which the Air Force deems too expensive to maintain. On June 20, the chair of the House Armed Services Committee followed suit, releasing a markup for debate that goes further, calling for the full fleet to remain and the older jets to be upgraded at a cost of $1 billion.

The 19th Fighter Squadron in the Pacific

Commander of Hickam’s 19th Fighter Squadron Lt. Col. Paul Lopez, who has flown the F-22 since 2011, told Air Force Magazine that the platform is highly maneuverable and optimized for air-to-air combat.

Each week, he lifts off from Hickam Field on the southwest corner of Oahu island and flies to training areas either north or south to rehearse aircraft handling characteristics and confidence maneuvers such as the cobra, the pedal turn, or a high angle of attack loop.

Hickam pilots borrow the surfing term “Hang 10” to describe the initial maneuver for all three moves, a full 90-degree heavenward nose climb. In the pedal turn, the aircraft executes a minimum radius turn, or making a turn in the smallest possible ground area. In the high angle of attack loop, the aircraft rises, flips upside down, and loops back, all in less than a quarter of a mile. In the cobra maneuver, the aircraft abruptly climbs then levels off, the maneuver forming the shape of a poised king cobra.

“It’s almost like you put on the brakes and they’ll fly right by,” said Lopez of the cobra move. The squadron commander from Virginia Beach, Va., flew the F-22 at Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Va., before arriving to Hickam in 2021.

Practicing the maneuvers in Hawaii’s awe-inspiring beauty has been a spiritual experience for Lopez.

“It’s just like that poem, ‘High Flight’ by John Gillespie, where it’s like anytime he flies, like, you’re touching the face of God,” Lopez said, referring to the World War II-era Canadian aviator and poet.

The squadron commander also praised the maintainers who keep the F-22 safely flying.

“They’re out there sacrificing their blood, sweat, sometimes their tears, and their time just to get that pilot in the jet,” he said.

“When it all comes to fruition, when you pull back on the stick at rotate speed, you leave mother Earth, you see the ground getting smaller as you’re going up in the sky, you raise the landing gear handle, the doors close, and now you’re looking at Diamond Head [crater], at Waikiki [beach]. Do a right hand turn out on the departure, now you’re looking down on Ala Moana [beach], you’re looking essentially inside Diamond Head, and on a clear day, you can see Moloka’i, the Big Island of Hawaii, with [volcanoes] Mauna Loa and Mauna Kea, and West Maui, like, ‘Man, this is the best job in the world,’” he said. “It’s humbling, one, to wear the uniform, but then to also do it in this capacity of flying the aircraft, and just to be having that be my role on the team.”

Lopez was more contemplative when asked about the proposed retiring of 33 Raptors.

Before answering, he allowed a lengthy pause and looked down, his arms akimbo.

“My first thought was that thank God we have more Raptors to fly,” he said, jokingly.

“I would say that, you know, that decision is being made based on strategic vision that leadership has,” he added, because “… with anything in any organization, in order to advance the agenda, the vision, … sometimes a divestment needs to happen in order to create space for something else.”

The Air Force has not specified the exact upgrades that would be realized for the remaining F-22 fleet. However, indications are that the investment would go to upgraded sensors, electronic warfare, stealth coatings, and improved connectivity with F-35s, other aircraft, and satellites.

Pacific Air Forces Commander Gen. Kenneth S. Wilsbach said the proposed divestment would not impact his fleet, but he declined to address the overall decision.

“No, it doesn’t really hurt us,” Wilsbach told Air Force Magazine during a June 9 interview at his PACAF headquarters office.

Wilsbach regularly flies the F-22 himself and maintains the first flight suit locker visible upon entering the squadron locker room.

“It can maneuver, and it’s extremely fast, and has got fantastic stealth capability,” he said, describing the platform. “It has the capability of going toe to toe with anybody, same thing with the F-35.”

Lopez, meanwhile, hopes to one day achieve his F-22 dream.

“I’m still trying to find that perfect sortie,” he said.

“I want to have a flight so perfect, where I don’t make any mistakes,” he described. “The radio calls are pristine. I’m on altitude. I’m on airspeed. I’m in formation. I’m talking to the right radio, executing the tactics the way they’re designed to be executed, and I’m flying the jet to the best of my ability.”

Space Force Lacks a ‘Credible’ Five-Year Budget, Congressional Report Says

June 21, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

The Space Force is running the risk of starting more programs than it can afford, at least according to its five-year budget plan that isn’t “credible,” according to a key congressional panel.

The House Appropriations defense subcommittee offered that stark warning as part of the report it submitted alongside its 2023 appropriations bill, which will be considered by the full committee June 22.

Looking to address those financial concerns, House appropriators included a provision in their bill that would require the Secretary of the Air Force, through the assistant secretary for space acquisition and integration, to conduct a risk assessment analysis of the “projected cost, affordability, and executability” of the entire Space Force portfolio of programs and activities and to present the results to lawmakers by Oct. 1.

The bill would also trim the Space Force budget request for military personnel; operations and maintenance; and research, development, testing, and evaluation, with the biggest difference being to the RDT&E budget—nearly $358 million less than what the service asked for.

Such changes would modestly change the overall top line of $24.5 billion in the 2023 Space Force budget request—that total was a substantial $6.5 billion increase over the $18 billion enacted by Congress for fiscal 2022. House appropriators noted that a chunk of that increase is a result of the Space Development Agency integrating into the service as well as more inter-service troop transfers. Still, even after adjusting for those changes, the committee report pegged the growth at roughly 20 percent.

Another increase is projected for fiscal 2024, according to the Pentagon’s Future Years Defense Program, which projects spending five years in advance. After that, however, the top line is projected to decrease—and lawmakers are concerned.

“The Space Force’s ambitious plans for new architectures, programs, and mission areas, do not appear to be backed up with credible budget projections in the outyears to actually deliver these capabilities,” the HAC-D committee report states.

With smaller budgets supposedly coming, the Space Force may be overextending itself, the report adds.

“The Committee cautions the Space Force against starting more programs than it can afford,” the report says. “The lack of a credible five-year budget raises fundamental questions about whether any serious analysis or long-term planning has been done to assess the realism and affordability of the entire portfolio of programs—not just individual programs—or to set priorities among programs, including deciding not to start programs if they are not affordable within projected budgets.”

The chair of the defense subcommittee, Rep. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.), questioned Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall on this topic when he appeared before lawmakers in May. Kendall indicated that he thought the FYDP would wind up changing over time, saying he did not believe future budgets “will remain flat or go down for the Space Force—quite the opposite.”

But Kendall’s answers were seemingly not enough to satisfy lawmakers’ concerns, with the report stating that the Space Force’s budget fails to meet the committee’s expectation that its “plans and programs must be based on rigorous technical analysis matched with executable plans resourced by realistic budgets.”

In particular, the committee report takes aim at the Space Force’s plans to significantly boost spending on its missile warning enterprise.

All told, the service wants more than $4.5 billion for missile warning in 2023, including billions of dollars for Next-Generation Overhead Persistent Infrared geosynchronous satellites, hundreds of millions of dollars for the Tracking Layer of SDA’s National Defense Space Architecture in low Earth orbit, and more than a billion dollars for a “Resilient Missile Warning/Missile Tracking” program.

While applauding the Space Force for trying to build a more resilient architecture spread across different orbits, the committee report warned that the service “has not provided sufficient information on the expected life-cycle cost of the new architecture, the cost to recapitalize a proliferated architecture every 3–5 years, potential risks and challenges in the supply chain, the ability of the Space Force to scale up capabilities to command and control a much larger number of satellites, the applicability and ability to meet stringent requirements for missile warning certification, cybersecurity, and resilience against reversible and irreversible kinetic and non-kinetic attacks.”

Looking to address that, the committee is asking for a life-cycle cost estimate for the proposed Resilient Missile Warning/Missile Tracking program by January 2023, as well as quarterly updates on that program and Next-Gen OPIR.

USAF Doesn’t Expect New Aggressor F-35s’ Camo to Interfere With Stealth

June 21, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak

Editor’s note: This story was updated at 6:59 p.m. Eastern time June 21 with additional information from the Air Force.

The new “Splinter” camouflage on aggressor F-35s at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev., shouldn’t negate or interfere with their low observability, meaning they can truly play the role of a stealthy sparring partner for USAF fighters, according to a Nellis spokesperson.

The first two F-35s to appear in camouflage were revealed June 9 at a Nellis ceremony to reactivate the 65th Aggressor Squadron, wearing a paint scheme reminiscent of both the Russian Su-57 Felon and Chinese J-20 fighters.

“Nellis maintenance personnel applied alternate paint to create the unique camouflage scheme after coordination with the F-35 Joint Program Office,” the Nellis spokesperson said in an emailed response to a query.

“While the application of the alternate paint is a first, we do not anticipate it will have any adverse impacts on the F-35’s low-observable properties,” the spokesperson said. “The alternate paint can be removed at any time to return our aircraft to the original configuration.”

However, he later added, “Further testing will be required to discern if there is a difference in the
low-observable properties. A standard Air Force aircraft paint was used for
the paint scheme, and [Lockheed Martin] engineers approved the use and process
of paint application.”

F-35 aggressors — Lt. Col. Brandon Nauta, new commander of the 65th Aggressor Squadron at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev., speaks at the reactivation of the unit June 9, 2022. Pictured at left of the F-35’s vertical tail is a radar cross section enhancement device used to prevent adversaries from assessing the F-35’s true stealthiness in normal training operations. Air Force photo.

A Lockheed Martin spokesperson said the company was “not involved in selecting or applying the paint.”

Since the first F-35s began coming off the production line, with the exception of national insignia, all F-35 aircraft have had the same finish, although a production line change from a few years ago replaced the light-gray raised material over some panel lines with material of a darker color. Lockheed Martin has explained that the gray-on-gray finish results from the special materials, paint, and coatings required to achieve a low-observable effect. Some of these coatings have a dull, flat appearance, while others are somewhat more glossy. The finish around panel lines is different, for example, from finishes on dielectric surfaces, such as the radome and leading edges. Under certain lighting conditions and from some angles, the underlying silver metallic sheen of the F-35 shines through.

However, the camouflage on the 65th’s aggressor F-35s is limited and does not cover the entire aircraft. No camouflage has been applied to the underside of the jets.

The exact function of the F-35’s paint and coatings is classified but is known to help reflect radar energy from some directions while absorbing, attenuating, or altering it in others, to reduce the aircraft’s radar return. The dull gray color also makes the F-35 harder to see at night.

The F-22—also a fifth-generation stealth fighter—has a different camouflage, which sources have said plays a role in confusing adversary imaging infrared systems. The application of the darker F-22 camouflage shapes, known within Lockheed Martin as “the amoebas,” is an extremely precise process requiring robots to ensure that the paint has no high or low spots that would affect the aircraft’s radar reflectivity.

Unexplained is why, in some air-to-air images, one of the aggressor F-35s is fitted with radar reflection enhancers, positioned on the fuselage near the trailing edge of the wings, and the other is not.

The 65th has used F-5s, F-16s, and F-15s to simulate adversary aircraft in the past but was disbanded in 2014 due to financial restrictions imposed by the Budget Control Act. In 2019, the Air Force said it was planning to reactivate the unit and that it would have some F-35s.

The two F-35s painted in the new scheme are of an older batch and will not be upgraded to the Block 4 configuration, an Air Force official said. Their degree of stealth makes them a good stand-in for China’s J-20 or FC-31, he said.

The Air Force has also recently changed course regarding the use of commercial aggressor platforms. Several companies have been fulfilling ADAIR (short for “adversary air”) contracts for the Air Force, but the service recently decided that third- and fourth-generation types such as the Mirage F-1 and even F-16s are no longer sufficient for Air Force pilots to train against.

“What we’re finding, now … is these contracts aren’t very effective at Nellis at the high-end training”, said Lt. Gen. David S. Nahom, deputy chief of staff for plans and programs, in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee on May 17. The older aircraft “are not providing us what we need,” he said, and USAF doesn’t plan to renew all such contracts when they expire.

China, Nahom said, has “stepped up” the capability of its combat air forces, so “we have to step up our replication” at the two “high end” threat-simulation exercises that run at Nellis and the Joint Pacific Alaska Range Complex in Alaska. The contract ADAIR companies may continue work at fighter training units, where they are “very effective,” he said.

Aggressor pilots study and employ the tactics used by potential adversaries, with the goal of giving USAF fighter pilots multiple experiences at realistic air combat before the students ever go into actual battles. The “Red Baron” studies of the 1970s determined that the survival rate of fighter and attack pilots went up dramatically after 10 missions, and the aggressor program was intended to give pilots those 10 missions in a safe but stressful environment. USAF fighter pilots have reported that real-world combat has been less taxing than the tough encounters they had at Red Flag and other high-end, live-fly wargames.

Nahom also said USAF is stepping up its investment in live, virtual, and constructive (LVC) exercises because it can’t reveal all its fifth-generation tactics in an open-air, live-fly setting.