Austin Warns of Yearlong CR as China Invests Heavily in Military Technology

Dec. 6, 2021 | By Abraham Mahshie

Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III outlined Dec. 4 the vital importance of U.S. defense investment keeping pace with that of China before issuing a statement warning that such competition would suffer “irreparable” damage if Congress opts for a yearlong continuing resolution, a real possibility being discussed by lawmakers after a second short-term fix that funds the government until mid-February.

“Some have even suggested a CR could last an entire year,” Austin said in a statement released by the Pentagon on Dec. 6.

The Secretary warned that such a continuation of current fiscal year 2021 funding would be an “unprecedented move that would cause enormous, if not irreparable, damage for a wide range of bipartisan priorities—from defense readiness and modernization, to research and development, to public health.”

Austin highlighted how a yearlong CR would stymie innovation priorities in cyber, artificial intelligence, and hypersonics.

In keynote remarks at the Reagan National Defense Forum on Dec. 4, Austin said China was uninhibited in its own defense investments and pursuits.

“China is pouring state funds into key sectors,” he said. “The PLA is rapidly improving many of its capabilities, including strike, air, missile-defense, and anti-submarine measures. And it’s increasingly focused on integrating its information, cyber, and space operations.”

President Joe Biden’s proposed defense budget includes the largest-ever investment in research and development, some $112 billion for fiscal year 2022.

Austin said that includes work on stealthy and unmanned platforms as well as improved resiliency under sea, in space, and in cyberspace. Investments such as the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, slated for $5.1 billion, would invest in 100 military construction projects, some with partners and allies in the Indo-Pacific region to improve base access and ramp up joint exercises.

But no new investments will happen with a yearlong CR.

“Not being able to start those initiatives will definitely have an impact,” Pentagon Press Secretary John F. Kirby said during a Dec. 6 briefing in response to a question from Air Force Magazine.

Kirby referred to Austin’s comments at the Reagan forum in explaining how planned DOD investments are specifically targeted to counter “the kinds of threats that could emanate from places like Russia and China.”

“I understand the interest in hypersonics, but it goes beyond that,” he said. “When you can’t start new programs, when … you don’t have that money to spend on that sort of investment, it absolutely will affect your capabilities going forward.”

China’s Impact on the Evolving US Footprint in CENTCOM

Dec. 6, 2021 | By Amy Hudson

The recently completed Global Posture Review directed further analysis to determine the right force mix in the U.S. Central Command area of operations, but one thing is certain, the command’s director of operations said Dec. 6: The U.S. footprint won’t look like it has in the past.

Through its Belt and Road Initiative, China intends to grow its overseas military capabilities, expanding into Central Asia, Europe, the Middle East, the Persian Gulf region, and Africa, with the overall objective of “adjusting the global order,” said Maj. Gen. Alexus G. Grynkewich, U.S. Central Command director of operations, during an AFA Air and Space Warfighters in Action virtual event.

“China cannot achieve their objectives without going through the U.S. CENTCOM AOR,” Grynkewich said. “So, as we look at what our posture is in the Middle East, we need to recognize China as an aspiring global power—they’re not just a regional problem—and think about what a sufficient force level is in CENTCOM. Again, it’s going to be nothing like it was in years past, with a couple of ground wars at their heights a decade ago or so. But it certainly is not zero.”

China also gets about 50 percent of its hydrocarbons, the main component in petroleum and natural gas, from the Central Asia region. “That means something,” Grynkewich added. “It means that the central region is important to China. And if it’s important to China, it probably ought to be important to us, as well.”

Grynkewich did not offer specifics of what the classified Global Posture Review revealed, but he did say that in the short term to expect a reduced force presence, something that is already coming to fruition with the withdrawal from Afghanistan. There will also be a shift to a more dynamic operating concept.

The drawdown in Afghanistan resulted in a downsizing of U.S. forces in the region. Grynkewich noted that the two fighter squadrons previously based in Afghanistan are no longer in the command and that the U.S. tankers and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets that previously supported those operations have been repositioned.

In the future, he said, the U.S. is more likely to rotate forces into CENTCOM on an as-needed basis, depending on the situation on the ground. “In other words, rather than having a Carrier Strike Group in U.S. CENTCOM all the time, you’ll see a Carrier Strike Group come and go as the situation dictates,” he said.

Grynkewich said as the airpower and overall force posture changes, it’s “natural” to also re-evaluate the value of key operating locations such as Ali Al Salem, Kuwait; Al Dhafra Air Base, United Arab Emirates; al-Udeid Air Base, Qatar; and Prince Sultan Air Base, Saudi Arabia—all key launching pads for counterterrorism operations.

“It’s very meaningful to those nations that we have a presence there,” he said. “They view it as important to their own security that the Americans are there with them. And, so, it’s critical. That doesn’t mean that the installations are going to stay static. Certainly the number of Airmen at those locations, the number of Guardians, and others at those locations will change as our footprint changes.”

The 2020 ballistic missile attack on al-Asad Air Base, Iraq, also re-enforced the potential vulnerability of bases in the region to Iranian ballistic missiles and attacks by Iranian proxies.

“I think those nations are very aware of that,” Grynkewich said. “It’s not just a threat to our Airmen that are there, if you will. It’s a threat to the capital cities of many of those countries, and so they’re very keen to think about what it means to them … from a defensive perspective to have U.S. capabilities.”

At the same time, he noted, U.S. Central Command continues to think about the importance of building relationships with host nations, and operationally, what those host-nation agreements might mean for future contingency planning.

“We’re always going to be re-evaluating exactly what the footprint is, and do we have the bases where we want them to be,” he said. “I think given the importance that those bases have to the relationship, any decision to shutter a base or something like that would certainly be made at a higher level than U.S. Central Command, just because of the implications on the relationships that it would have.”

Space Force Focuses on Culture in ‘Intimate’ New Orientation Course

Dec. 6, 2021 | By Amanda Miller

The Space Force’s orientation course for people transferring into the new service—civilian and military alike—draws from the “welcoming and intimate” formats the Air Force’s major commands offer in their chiefs’ orientation courses for chief master sergeants.

Space Training and Readiness Command held the first Guardian Orientation Course the week of Nov. 15-19. The course is “expected to be offered to all current and future transferees within a year of their transfer” in hopes of “accelerating their contributions,” according to a news release.

The Space Force expects about 960 transfers from other military services or government agencies over the next year.

“Our competitors are increasing their activities, such as the recent Russian [anti-satellite] test, which was a significant event,” STARCOM commander Air Force Brig. Gen. Shawn N. Bratton said in the release. “Our job is to prepare you all for these actions and the doctrine to support it.”

STARCOM plans to offer the weeklong course 12 times a year at Peterson Space Force Base, Colo.’s National Security Space Institute, with up to three more at other sites, according to the release.

Peterson is STARCOM’s temporary home, referred to as “provisional,” pending a formal decision on where to base the headquarters. Space Force Chief of Space Operations Gen. John W. “Jay” Raymond led the command’s activation at a ceremony in August.

The weeklong Guardian Orientation Course provides “29 hours of instructor contact over a 40-hour period” to 50 students at a time, according to the release. It addresses the Space Force’s organizational structure and how the service relates to the Air Force and the Defense Department’s unified combatant commands. Students will tour USSF facilities and get briefed on a range of topics, such as history, culture, and promotions; and will receive introductions to the Space Force’s personnel strategy, The Guardian Ideal, and its Space Capstone Publication doctrine statement.

“This is the first time a branch will have been created with members from all armed services,” said Space Force Lt. Col. Ryan Durand, provost of the National Security Space Institute, in the release. “We have the unique opportunity to build and define what our culture will be.” The institute describes itself as the Space Force’s “focal point for space continuing education.”

In the lead-up to establishing the STARCOM field command—the organizational equivalent of an Air Force major command—Bratton told Air Force Magazine his vision for the orientation course was a “space-specific kind of acculturation training” to help promote a sense of belonging among interservice transferees coming from a mix of backgrounds. They’ll also receive job-specific training.

Reaper Drone Crashes on Runway at Holloman

Dec. 6, 2021

An MQ-9 Reaper drone was taking off from Holloman Air Force Base, N.M., when it crashed on the runway at about 7:55 a.m. Dec. 6.

The 49th Wing at Holloman said no injuries had been reported and access to the base was not affected, according to preliminary information released by email.

First responders were “on the scene to ensure safety and security,” and the cause of the crash was under investigation.

A Reaper assigned to the wing was damaged in a previous accident when it skidded off the runway Sept. 2, 2020, also during a takeoff attempt.

With Russia on Multiple Fronts, DOD Team in Ukraine Assesses Air Defense Needs

Dec. 3, 2021 | By Abraham Mahshie

A Defense Department team is on the ground in Ukraine assessing what the country needs to protect itself from air, naval, electronic, and cyber warfare threats as Russian troops gather on multiple fronts, a senior Ukrainian defense official told Air Force Magazine, describing an emphasis on what assistance can be delivered “today.”

Ukraine has been engaged in a low-intensity conflict with Russian-backed separatists in the eastern Donbass region since 2014, when Russia invaded and annexed the Crimean peninsula. Presently, an estimated 40 Russian battalion tactical groups and more than 115,000 personnel surround Ukraine after a second front was opened on the 600-mile northern border with Belarus following the joint Zapad exercises between Belarus and Russia in September.

“Russia doesn’t need only Donbass,” a senior Ukrainian defense official said on condition of anonymity. “If we are talking about Russian long-term goals, they want all Ukraine.”

The U.S. has sought to protect Eastern Europe’s largest democracy, a non-NATO partner, by stepping up defense assistance and calling on Russia to explain the buildup of more than 100,000 troops on Ukraine’s border. In terms of what defense assistance can be immediately provided by the United States, the Ukrainian official said: “This is a political question.”

During Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s August visit to Washington, President Joe Biden announced an additional $60 million in anti-tank javelin missiles, which have in the past helped push Russian tanks farther from the frontline. The assistance is part of $400 million in assistance over the past year and some $2.5 billion since 2014. But the greatest Russian threat is now perceived to be from the air.

Speaking at the Dec. 2 Atlantic Council discussion “Will Russia Invade Ukraine Again?”, former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine John E. Herbst said he believed immediate defense assistance to Ukraine is possible and should be covertly transferred to the country.

“We should be able to get certain weapon systems to Ukraine right now,” he said. “We should be thinking seriously about stronger anti-air defenses, including perhaps Patriots. We should be thinking about anti-ship missiles, things that would make it clear that … there’ll be great Russian casualties if they move.”

U.S. European Command declined to reveal where Patriot missile batteries are located in the region and told Air Force Magazine that it supports “de-escalation in the region and a diplomatic resolution to the conflict in Eastern Ukraine.”

U.S. Transportation Command declined to discuss specific countries or operations but said it was conceivable to move a Patriot battery via air.

“We prefer to move a battery via surface,” TRANSCOM spokesperson Scott Ross told Air Force Magazine. “When we need to move a battery or any other kind of cargo or organization and it needs to be there quicker because of mission priorities, we will use military lift, or commercial lift, depending upon what course of action makes the most sense for that particular event.”

Ross, out of operational security, declined to describe the transportation aircraft that would be used to move a Patriot battery.

The Ukrainian official said the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense and DOD are talking about what defense assistance is possible. Any decision on immediate assistance would be up to the White House.

“We are in [the] process and the Pentagon is under consideration what can be supplied to Ukraine in [the] short term,” the official said.

The official confirmed a Defense Department working group is in Ukraine evaluating the country’s defense needs, and he described a November meeting between Ukrainian Minister of Defense Oleksii Reznikov and Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III. He also said Reznikov received support from a bipartisan group of American lawmakers during his visit.

“Everyone said, ‘Yes, we support you. We are going to push. We are going to increase,’” the official said of proposals to increase foreign military financing to Ukraine.

No matter what the largesse of Congress can provide, once the National Defense Authorization Act passes, defense purchases take time, and Ukraine’s needs are urgent.

“Something which we need tomorrow we cannot buy right now,” the Ukrainian official said. “In fact, we needed it yesterday, but if you want to buy it, it’s quite a long process to procure.”

Balancing Immediate and Long-Term Needs

Ukraine has medium-term plans for upgrading its air defense systems, but the urgent need to protect its borders from a possible Russian invasion has prompted a foreign military sales request and negotiations for immediate deterrence capabilities.

Congressional aides involved in Reznikov’s visit told Air Force Magazine that Stinger anti-aircraft weapons were recommended as a bridging solution. The Ukrainian defense official said that with a 13,000-foot altitude range, the system could help defend against a threat from attack helicopters.

“What about jets who are flying above?” the official posed. “So, this is very short range. To some extent, in trenches it’s good equipment.”

The Ukrainian Army currently maintains trench positions in the southeastern Donbass region, where it faces off against the Russian-backed breakaway republics of Donetsk and Luhansk.

“It depends what we are going to protect. If we want to protect a big city, we need kind of long range,” he said. “We need to assess every situation, and we are doing this with the U.S. side.”

The Ukrainian military official would not confirm the precise systems requested, such as long-range Patriot missile batteries or Stinger short-range air defenses, saying instead Ukraine has requested from the United States “capabilities.”

“We are talking about what type of capabilities we need, what we need urgently, and our defense team works with [the] American air defense team to find out decisions for short term, for longer term,” he said. “It doesn’t mean we don’t have them. But to deter aggression, we need to improve them.”

From a practical standpoint, it is air defenses and not aircraft that Ukraine needs most urgently.

Ukraine has Europe’s seventh-largest Air Force at approximately 144 platforms, but much of its fleet is aging Soviet-made aircraft. Ukraine combat aircraft include MiG-29s and Sukhoi Su-25s and Su-27s. Upgrading to American F-16 aircraft would require “five to 10 years,” the official said, using the example of Poland’s transition to a modern American Air Force.

Strong Words of Support

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, following a foreign ministers meeting in Riga, Latvia, on Dec. 2, voiced the political support of the alliance but said it was up to each NATO partner to negotiate defense assistance with Kyiv.

“Ministers made clear any future Russian aggression would come at a high price and have serious political and economic consequences for Russia,” Stoltenberg said in a press briefing, noting potential increased economic and financial sanctions as well as political restrictions.

The NATO Secretary General also pointed to the alliance’s reaction to the 2014 invasion of Crimea, which led to the deployment of battle groups in the Baltic region and Poland and an increased presence in the Black Sea, including air policing, rotational troops, and more exercises.

Stoltenberg did not promise military assistance.

“We provide support to Ukraine with capacity building. Allies provide training, equipment, and advice. And also share information with them,” he said.

Following a meeting with his South Korean counterpart Dec. 2, Austin described the danger Russia poses but declined to speculate on a potential U.S. response.

“Russia has a substantial amount of forces in the border region, and we remain concerned about that,” he said, adding that information warfare is being used by Russia to undermine Zelensky’s legitimacy.

The Ukrainian defense official said Ukraine has asked other NATO allies for defense assistance. In some cases, domestic law prohibits it. At the NATO defense ministerial level, Ukraine commission discussion has been blocked by Russian ally Viktor Orban, Prime Minister of Hungary, he added.

“It’s quite complicated with NATO. NATO doesn’t have itself weapons, its weapons of nations,” the official said. “We are working with all possible NATO nations, but some countries legally cannot sell us any weapons.”

Security analysts have theorized that Russian President Vladimir Putin needs a land bridge through the Donbass to the Crimean peninsula, which it currently spends billions of dollars to support and militarize.

The Ukrainian official said the Ukrainian port city of Mariupol on the Azov Sea stands in the way of such a tactical move, and it is well defended. Ukraine’s larger concern, rather, is Russian troops poised northeast of Kyiv and across the border in Belarus. Russian aggression may be the beginning of an escalation that ultimately seeks to make Ukraine part of Russia, as in Soviet times.

“We need to protect all our country,” the official said, noting concerns related to the new front to the north. “There is no chance we are not fighting. We are going to fight.”

Raymond Cancels Trip After COVID-19 Contact

Dec. 3, 2021 | By Greg Hadley

Chief of Space Operations Gen. John W. “Jay” Raymond has canceled a trip to California this weekend after having close contact with multiple individuals who tested positive for COVID-19, the Space Force confirmed Dec. 3.

Raymond was scheduled to appear at the Reagan National Defense Forum, hosted by the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute in Simi Valley, Calif., to participate in a panel discussion on the Space Force and the “new space economy.” Vice Chief of Space Operations Gen. David D. Thompson will go in his place, Space Force spokesperson Lynn Kirby told Air Force Magazine.

“Gen. Raymond recently came in close contact with multiple individuals who just tested positive for COVID-19,” Kirby said in a statement. “Out of an abundance of caution and following the advice of medical professionals, he will no longer travel to the Reagan National Defense Forum. … Gen. Raymond has been tested within the last 24 hours, and we have no positive results to report at this time. He is fully vaccinated and has received the booster.”

Kirby declined to say whether Raymond is quarantining after the exposure. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s guidelines state that close contacts of a COVID-19 case do not need to quarantine if they are fully vaccinated unless they show symptoms. Regardless, they should be tested and wear a mask indoors in public.

Raymond’s announcement comes on the heels of the announcement that Gen. Daniel R. Hokanson, chief of the National Guard Bureau, has tested positive for the virus this week and is currently self-isolating.

Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. is also scheduled to appear at the Reagan National Defense Forum, for a panel discussion. An Air Force spokesperson confirmed to Air Force Magazine that he is still attending the conference.

Both Raymond and Brown have gone through COVID scares before—in October 2020, they both had to quarantine for two weeks after Coast Guard Vice Commandant Adm. Charles Ray attended high-level meetings at the Pentagon and subsequently tested positive. Later that month, Thompson, the No. 2 officer in the Space Force, tested positive. At that time, Raymond did not quarantine.

23,000 Airmen and Guardians Unvaccinated as Deadline for Guard and Reserve Passes

Dec. 3, 2021 | By Greg Hadley

More than 23,000 Airmen and Guardians across the Total Force remained unvaccinated against COVID-19 as the deadline for the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve passed Dec. 2.

Out of more than 500,000 Total Force members, 95.3 percent are at least partially vaccinated against the novel coronavirus, according to data released Dec. 3 by the Department of the Air Force—the first military department to set a deadline under Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III’s vaccine requirement.

However, that still leaves more than 10,000 Air Force and Space Force service members seeking religious accommodations to the vaccine requirement; 2,323 who have received a medical exemption; 2,515 with an administrative exemption; and 3,233 who are recorded as having verbally refused the vaccine. Another 4,782 are noted as simply having not started the vaccination process.

Even though the reserve component had an extra month after the Active duty’s Nov. 2 deadline, the Guard and Reserve’s vaccination rate still lags behind—96.9 percent of the Active duty were at least partially vaccinated by their deadline, and that figure has now risen to 97.3 percent. Of the approximately 175,000 Guard and Reserve service members, 91.7 percent are at least partially vaccinated.

That’s been a consistent theme of DAF vaccination data released over the past few months, and other services have reported similar trends. The Navy and the Marine Corps’ deadlines for Active-duty service members passed Nov. 28, with 97.2 percent of Sailors and 95 percent of Marines at least partially vaccinated—but only 88 percent of Reserve Sailors and 79 percent of Reserve Marines, who have until Dec. 28, are vaccinated.

The Army’s Active-duty deadline is not until Dec. 15, and its Guard and Reserve components have until June 2022—96 percent of Active-duty Soldiers have started the vaccination process compared to just 69 percent of the reserves.

When the Air Force COVID-19 vaccine deadline for the Active duty first passed, roughly 800 Airmen and Guardians were said to have verbally rejected the vaccine, putting them at risk of punishment or even separation over refusal to follow a lawful order. Now, 1,108 Active-duty members and 2,125 Guard/Reserve members have verbally refused.

Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall has taken a hard line on the issue, saying it is a “pretty straightforward” question as to whether those who refuse the vaccine will be booted from the service. He also questioned whether those who remain unvaccinated, even with an approved exemption, will be deployable. Those who are unvaccinated will not be able to PCS to a new assignment, according to a recently issued Air Force memo.

Meanwhile, as thousands of Airmen and Guardians seek religious exemptions to the vaccine rule, their chances of success appear to be slim. The Air Force has yet to approve a single exemption request, and the Navy and the Marine Corps haven’t granted any, either, according to their most recent data.

Even if not granted, the requests still pose a logistical issue for the department. Its policy calls for a decision within 30 days on requests for religious exemptions to mandatory vaccines from Airmen and Guardians within the continental U.S. But that policy was written with only a few requests at a time in mind, an Air Force spokesperson previously told Air Force Magazine.

When the Active duty’s deadline passed in early November, the Air Force recorded 4,933 religious exemption requests. A month later, that figure had only dropped to 4,754, with an extra 5,804 Guard and Reserve members now added to the pile.

Air Force Looking at Ways to Electrify Airfield Operations

Dec. 3, 2021 | By Greg Hadley

The Air Force uses billions of gallons of fuel every year, the vast majority of it aviation fuel to power its fleet of aircraft.

But as the Defense Department seeks to increase its energy efficiency and secure its power grids, the department’s biggest consumer of fuel is looking at ways it can transition to other kinds of more sustainable energy, the Air Force’s deputy chief of staff for logistics, engineering, and force protection said Dec. 2.

Lt. Gen. Warren D. Berry, testifying before the House Armed Services readiness subcommittee on operational energy and logistics, told lawmakers that USAF wants to move from diesel fuel to electric batteries or solar cells for several key airfield operations.

“A large part of our support equipment that we use to generate air power [runs on] diesel. … There’s a great capability as we look at leveraging what commercial industry is doing with electrification, to use perhaps photovoltaic cells to provide lighting on the airfield, as we do aircraft operations or munitions loading operations, to electrify loaders that put munitions on aircraft,” Berry said.

Such a move, he argued, isn’t just about trying to be more environmentally friendly. It enables the service to build “resiliency and redundancy” and not be “beholden” to petroleum, oil, and lubricants. Lawmakers and generals at the Dec. 2 hearing noted that diesel fuel refined in different parts of the world does not always meet the same standards and can lead to engine issues.

As a whole, operational energy requirements have become an increasingly important consideration across military planning, said Air Force Lt. Gen. Sam C. Barrett, director of logistics for the Joint Staff. That’s especially true on the “tactical edge” in places such as the Indo-Pacific region, which covers massive swathes of territory.

“From our wargames and exercises, it is apparent that we have a persistent shortage of intra-theater distribution assets,” Barrett testified. “So if we look at the Pacific theatre, and I would dare say it’s not limited to the Pacific, but that is a significant focus—we are getting after that problem set.

“We define that problem set in terms of the last tactical 1,000 miles, because the theater is so big, but we have got to look at solution sets for intra-theater distribution going forward,” he added.

That issue, Barrett said, is linked to another takeaway from recent wargames and exercises: the need to treat operational energy as a global system. The Pentagon is working on an “end-to-end energy … common operating picture” so the Joint Staff can better develop requirements and oversight to ensure solutions.

And it’s not just an inter-service enterprise. Barrett said his final lesson learned from recent wargaming was “the importance of allies, and partners, and industry.”

“It jumps off the page at us on what we would need to do [going] forward,” Barrett said. “So we conducted numerous engagements with our allies and partners. They possess unique capabilities to help us diversify our energy needs in the Pacific theater and other places around the globe.”

House Armed Services Committee/YouTube

Rocket Cargo Ideas Heat Up as One Possible Provider Hits a Snag

Dec. 2, 2021 | By Amanda Miller

Reports of production troubles on the SpaceX rocket that could contend for military cargo deliveries happened to coincide with a different company’s concept receiving an early nod—one that might not require a rocket at all.

Text of an email reportedly by SpaceX CEO Elon Musk to employees, first published by the website Space Explored, acknowledged a “production crisis” involving the company’s Raptor engines built to power both its in-development Starship space vehicle and the Super Heavy booster to launch it. SpaceX is still testing both, so Starship hasn’t gone to space yet.

“The consequences for SpaceX if we can not get enough reliable Raptors made is that we then can’t fly Starship,” Musk reportedly wrote.

SpaceX didn’t respond to a query by Air Force Magazine asking to confirm the email contents or to comment on how a “genuine risk of bankruptcy” cited in the email might affect the company’s military business under the National Security Space Launch program. The company hadn’t publicly disputed the email contents by press time.

An illustration depicting the Air Force Research Laboratory’s Rocket Cargo “Vanguard” concept shows a vehicle that resembles Starship, which sources have pointed out could fit the bill in regularly getting cargo aloft because of the reusability of its design. AFRL seeks only to prove whether “rocket-based transportation is viable, affordable, and advantageous for agile global DOD logistics,” according to the solicitation.

In an emailed statement Dec. 2, AFRL’s Rocket Cargo program manager Greg Spanjers said AFRL is “actively seeking to work with the broadest possible industry base.” According to the solicitation, the program is “solely focused on leveraging commercial rocket capabilities as a leased service.”

Meanwhile, the same day, the lab announced at the conclusion of its Hyperspace Challenge another concept that had already caught its eye. California-based startup Varda Space Industries won first place, among 13 startups chosen to compete, in part for its concept answering the contest’s “mission need” of “rocket cargo technology for agile global logistics.”

This year’s Hyperspace Challenge invited 13 startups and 11 universities to compete in pitching ideas for six mission needs. Varda’s idea for rocket cargo: “affordable payload capsules”—borrowing existing NASA designs—“to be deployed from hypersonic vehicles,” according to the news release announcing winners. The company’s focus is on building “the world’s first commercial zero-gravity industrial park.”

In an email to Air Force Magazine, Muk Pandian, who works in business development for Varda Space Industries, said its capsules—designed to return from orbit at Mach 22—could “conceivably be launched from any aircraft.”

The original announcement of the Hyperspace Challenge said the most viable concepts would receive the contest’s $100,000 “in cash prizes … to expedite follow-on activities related to establishing government acquisition contracting opportunities.”

Hyperspace Challenge Winners (Startups):

First place: Varda Space Industries, Torrance, Calif., for “addressing orbital manufacturing and down mass needs with orbital return capsules. Looking to solve pressing rocket cargo challenges, the technology will provide affordable payload capsules to be deployed from hypersonic vehicles,” according to the news release.
Second place: Scout, Alexandria, Va., for “working to provide better in-space situational awareness through their … space-based optical sensor and computer payload system build for collision avoidance and in-space object detection.”
Third place: Neutron Star Systems USA Corp., Cologne, Germany, for “developing superconductor-based electric propulsion systems that deliver greater efficiency, scalability, and operational flexibility for applications that range from satellite refueling and maintenance to debris removal and decommissioning.”

Hyperspace Challenge Winners (Universities):

First place: Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, N.J., for “developing an [artificial intelligence]-driven edge computing router that provides timely mission-critical data and information to terrestrial first responders in emergency environments and has the potential to assist space responders in accurately sensing, detecting, and tracking the growing number of space objects.”
Second place: SUNY Polytechnic Institute, Albany, N.Y., for building “computer brains with a ReRAM Memristor synapse technology created to handle and process information that will assist in the automation of on-orbit servicing, assembly, and manufacturing.”
Third place: Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas, for exploring “the effects of vibration during micro-gravity production of ZBLAN, a heavy-metal fluoride glass, and the potential telecommunication, sensor, and power-transmission applications for the material.