Alternate Fighter Plan: Cut F-15EX, Extend F-22, Buy New Stealth Jets, More F-35s

Oct. 26, 2021 | By John A. Tirpak

The Air Force’s “4+1” fighter plan for the 2020s, unveiled in recent months, will leave the service with a fleet that’s too small and improperly configured to deal with peer threats. What’s needed is a plan that emphasizes stealth aircraft; rapidly retires non-stealthy and expensive-to-maintain “legacy” airplanes; and doesn’t create gaps in USAF’s ability to control the air in a conflict, according to new analysis from AFA’s Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies.

Mitchell released a paper Oct. 25 offering an alternate fighter roadmap, saying the Air Force’s plan is budget-driven rather than strategy-driven.

“When you look at where we are today, and the Air Force’s plans for how they intend to get to the fighter force of the 2030s, there’s going to be a significant gap, a decrease in capacity—and, in some cases, capability—before we get to” the 2030s fighter force the service envisions, said Heather Penney, Mitchell senior resident fellow and author of the study, in a briefing for reporters. Mitchell’s plan offers an alternative path to the fighter force USAF seeks, she said. The report is titled, “The Future Fighter Force Our Nation Requires: Building a Bridge.”

Mitchell recommends the Air Force do what’s necessary to bring on at least 200 new fighters a year, just to keep the force at its current numerical levels. Current rates “are nowhere near this level,” Penney wrote.

The “4+1” plan spelled out in recent months calls for the F-22, closely followed by the Next-Generation Air Dominance fighter, as one leg; the F-35, the “cornerstone” of the fleet, as another; the F-15E/EX as a supplement to carry big weapons as a third; and F-16s to serve as a force-capacity maintainer. The A-10s are described as the “plus one” for close air support needs, as it can neither dogfight nor penetrate enemy airspace. Both the F-22 and A-10 would phase out in 2030, USAF has said.

The faults in USAF’s strategy are that it doesn’t buy F-35s fast enough; it retires the F-22 before its replacement is in hand; and it spends scarce dollars on non-stealthy and “increasingly irrelevant” F-15EXs that should go to an all-new fighter than can survive and be built in numbers, said retired Lt. Gen. David A. Deptula, dean of Mitchell. The Air Force must also plan for combat losses unlike what it has experienced in the last 20 years, he said, due to the accelerating capability of adversaries such as China.

“The Air Force must revisit its decision to slow production rates” of the F-35, Penney said in the report. Numbers must be increased so that legacy aircraft that are no longer up for peer fights can be retired “one for one” with new jets, she said. Meanwhile, investing in the F-15EX—which, despite being updated with new flight controls and electronic warfare, will remain a non-stealthy aircraft—should be abandoned in favor of a rapid program to introduce a stealthy new and less expensive force—a multirole fighter complement to NGAD. The Air Force has referred to this airplane as a generation “4.5 plus or 5.0 minus” aircraft. The airplane is roughly analogous to the F-16 as the “low-end” fighter to the F-15’s “high end” in the 1980s.

Retiring the F-22 before a full force of NGADs is in hand—what Mitchell described as “gapping the force”—would allow China “the fait accompli it seeks” in potential conflicts such as with Taiwan, Deptula said, because the Air Force would not be credibly able to challenge it.

The Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies presented an alternative fighter force roadmap during a virtual rollout event on Oct. 26. Top left to right: Mitchell Senior Resident Fellow Heather Penney and John Venable, senior research fellow for defense policy at The Heritage Foundation. Bottom left to right: Retired Lt. Gen. David A. Deptula, dean of the Mitchell Institute, and retire Lt. Gen. John Michael Loh, former commander of Air Combat Command.

Mitchell’s eight recommendations to the Air Force are:

Develop a “planning force” that actually meets the National Defense Strategy’s requirements to deter peer adversaries while having enough in reserve to deal with a possible second conflict. This would “go a long way in educating the American public and the Congress” in understanding USAF’s fighter force structure requirements; and explain the risks of not building the requisite inventories.
“Extend legacy F-16s, wholly divesting the F-15C/D, A-10C, and F-15E inventories as F-35 production ramps up.” The F-16s can still function in “permissive environments” and can affordably provide multirole capacity in the near term, wrote Penney, a former USAF F-16 pilot, but the other airplanes “should be fully divested on a one-for-one replacement rate” as F-35s are built. The money saved would be put toward buying F-35s and procuring the NGAD.
Kill the F-15EX and use the funds to launch a “new, stealthy, general-purpose fighter design” that USAF has tentatively dubbed the MR-X. The Air Force “accepted the F-15EX not because it will be relevant to future warfare” but because of a desire for a competitive production line to spur operating cost reductions on the F-35. The MR-X would be affordable and “relevant to the threats of the future,” whereas the F-15EX, because it is not stealthy, would have to “stand off” so far from enemy territory that it would “negate” the value of standoff weapons strapped to it. Mitchell said the F-117 and YF-16 are models of how USAF can “advance new designs and capabilities affordably.”
Ramp up the F-35, offsetting F-15C/D, A-10C, and F-15E retirements. Penney told reporters that while Lockheed Martin has negotiated a peak production rate of about 155 F-35s a year, the additional tails needed could be obtained “by adding a third shift.” The Air Force has said it prefers to wait for the Block 4 version of the F-35, but Penney wrote that those aircraft now in production “have the foundation” for Block 4 and could be updated later. Increasing F-35 production also “provides some hedge” if NGAD is delayed. Mitchell documents assert that “every F-35A that is not bought between now and [2030] is one less Block 4 aircraft in the Air Force’s 2030 inventory.”
Close the F-35 Joint Program Office. Deptula said the JPO as now structured—run by a committee of F-35 users, both U.S. and international—takes too long to reach decisions and moves too slowly to stay ahead of threats. The services all have their own F-35 “integration offices,” so this wouldn’t be hard to accomplish, Penney said, and the result would be more focused on each user’s needs, particularly those of the Air Force.
Keep and modernize the F-22. Deptula noted that telling Congress the F-22 will retire in 2030 means the jet would not get needed upgrades in the late 2020s, because Congress would not want to fund improvements that would go into airplanes about to phase out. Rather, Penney wrote, the F-22 provides meaningful capability for “both the European and Pacific theaters,” and USAF should not let go of the F-22 until the NGAD is fielded and operational. The air superiority mission “must not be gapped,” Deptula said.
Accelerate “and remain steadfastly committed to” the NGAD. Penney called NGAD the “foundation of the future fighter force” but noted it won’t be fielded until the 2030s. USAF must remain “wholly committed” to seeing it through.
Abolish the “pass through” section of the Air Force budget. Deptula noted that the pass-through—monies that appear to be part of USAF’s budget but are not controlled by it, being diverted immediately to classified DOD programs, mostly in space—give Congress the impression that USAF’s budget is about 20 percent bigger than it is. Deptula said that since the 1991 Gulf War, it appeared as if the Air Force has “received nearly $1 trillion more” than it actually has; and that removing this idiosyncrasy would better illustrate how underfunded the service is, relative to the other services. Moreover, “Space Force was basically an unfunded mandate,” which the Air Force is paying for out of hide, with little additional appropriation, even though it is absorbing space functions of the other services, he said. Given general agreement that dealing with China is mainly an Air Force problem, abetted by the Navy and to a much lesser degree the Army, budget proportionality is needed, he said; in buying power, USAF has been last among the services for more than 30 years.

“The Air Force faces a crucial transition,” Penney wrote. While USAF leaders are struggling to recapitalize “core missions while staying within serious budget restraints”—the Air Force must in the same timeframe recapitalize three-fourths of the nation’s nuclear deterrent—it’s been pushed to delay fighter programs so much that its “ability to fulfill its national defense responsibilities” is threatened. The Air Force has grown “too old and too small” to meet all the missions demanded of it, and past efforts to cannibalize the force, paying for new programs by retiring still-relevant capabilities, “have not worked.”

Flatly, she said, the Air Force “does not have the combat aircraft capacity” to cover its global responsibilities while functioning in “a high operational tempo of a complex and multipolar world.”

Slowing the F-35, and buying the “50-year-old” F-15EX design is “not a sound means to build the fighter force the nation needs,” she said. Though “well intentioned” and attempting to live within political reality, the Air Force’s 4+1 plan “only widens the gaps in foundational … capabilities” at a time when the world is getting “increasingly complex and dangerous.” Fighter recapitalization “cannot be put off any longer.”

ISIS-K Could Have Ability to Strike Outside Afghanistan in Six Months, DOD Official Says

Oct. 26, 2021 | By Greg Hadley

The Islamic State’s Khorasan branch, responsible for the suicide bombing that killed 13 U.S. service members during the evacuation from Kabul, could develop the capacity to strike outside Afghanistan within “six to 12 months,” the Pentagon’s policy chief warned Oct. 26.

Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Colin H. Kahl, testifying to the Senate Armed Services Committee on the security situation in Afghanistan, added that al-Qaida could develop the same capacity within one to two years. Both terrorist groups, he said, already have the intent to strike the U.S.

Back in July, John T. Godfrey, the acting U.S. Special Envoy for the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, warned that ISIS-K remains a “serious threat” and said he agreed with military officials that the group could reconstitute capabilities within two years.

That assessment, however, was before the final withdrawal of American troops and the collapse of the Afghan National Security Forces, leading to the Taliban seizing control of the country. Now, the threats posed by ISIS-K and al-Qaida highlight the uncertainty surrounding future terror threats from Afghanistan.

ISIS-K and the Taliban are each other’s “mortal enemies,” Kahl said, but the Intelligence Community is not yet sure of the Taliban’s ability to prevent ISIS-K from developing capabilities. In the Doha agreement signed in February 2020, the Taliban agreed to renounce al-Qaida, but officials have testified that it never abided by that condition of the deal. Kahl indicated Oct. 26 that the two groups’ relationship remains complicated but said the Taliban is “wary” of letting al-Qaida use Afghanistan to launch external attacks due to fear of international reprisals.

The timeline Kahl articulated for ISIS-K and al-Qaida was based on estimates from the Intelligence Community, but “those estimates … are based on no U.S. or coalition intervention,” said Army Lt. Gen. James J. Mingus, director for operations for the Joint Staff. “The goal would be to keep those time horizons where they’re at now or push them even further.”

Right now, the only way for the Defense Department to monitor that threat and intervene is through “over-the-horizon” capabilities, the closest of which are stationed in the Persian Gulf area.

Mingus, echoing comments by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Army Gen. Mark A. Milley and U.S. Central Command boss Marine Corps Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr., said conducting counterterrorism efforts from the Gulf, a several-hours flight from land-locked Afghanistan, is “harder, but we believe we have the assets in place right now if necessary to disrupt and or degrade the terrorist networks in Afghanistan.”

“We are deploying ISR over Afghanistan every single day,” Kahl added. “We also have national technical means. … We are sharing intelligence with regional partners and with our other partners, the U.K. and others, who are very focused on this problem set. So we will get after this challenge and we will try to grow our capability to get after it.”

As part of the effort to grow capabilities, the U.S. has had conversations with Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, two countries that border Afghanistan, about basing agreements, Kahl said, though he declined to discuss more details in an unclassified setting. Pakistan, another Afghanistan neighbor, has also been “pretty good” in working with the U.S. on counterterrorism negotiations, Kahl added.

“Pakistan is a challenging actor, but they don’t want Afghanistan to be a safe haven for terrorist attacks, external attacks, not just against Pakistan, but against others,” Kahl said. “They continue to give us access to Pakistani airspace, and we’re in conversations about keeping that airspace open.”

NGAD, New Weapons, E-3 Replacement Among Air Combat Command’s Top Priorities, Kelly Says

Oct. 25, 2021 | By John A. Tirpak

The Next-Generation Air Dominance Fighter is Air Combat Command’s top priority, because without it, the Air Force can’t provide the control of the air the whole military depends on to operate, Air Combat Command chief Gen. Mark D. Kelly said. He also named a replacement for the E-3 AWACS, new weapons, and command and control improvements among the command’s top needs.

Speaking at a Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies virtual event, Kelly said NGAD is his No. 1 requirement. He described it as a sixth-generation air superiority system able to operate at long ranges—farther than would be encountered in the European theater. Kelly said NGAD is “designed to operate beyond a single spectral band of the RF [radio frequency] spectrum, to thrive in a multispectral environment,” and it also “senses” the battle space and “connects” the rest of the force, so “that I can put [it] in the adversary’s back yard.”

The NGAD is really a multi-service requirement because the other services are “not remotely—remotely—designed to operate without” control of the air, Kelly noted. “Everyone’s counting on the Air Force to provide that.”

Kelly’s other priorities include:

Fulfilling the “fighter roadmap,” which he laid out at the AFA Air, Space & Cyber conference in September. This includes F-35s, F-15s, F-16s and, until around 2030, A-10s and F-22s;
“Fifth-generation AMTI,” or airborne moving target indicator capability; a replacement for the E-3 Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS);
Air base defenses—possibly including directed energy systems;
“Fifth-gen weapons for our fifth-gen Air Force”;
And, investment in joint all-domain command and control.

Not Soon Enough

The E-3 is “unsustainable without a Herculean effort,” Kelly said, and while there are “miracle workers” in the maintenance force that keep it flying, “there’s only so many miracles [they] … can pull off before physics come into play on a 45-year-old airframe.” The AWACS of today is “outdated and only getting older” and also “just not interoperable with what we need to do” in a multispectral battle, Kelly said. Getting a new platform “can’t happen fast enough.”

The Air Force made its first move toward a new AWACS, the Boeing E-7A Wedgetail, last week in an industry solicitation, but Kelly could not provide a timeline for acquiring it. “I want them in the inventory … two years ago,” Kelly said. “Not to be flippant, but that’s actually the answer I would give Congress and anybody else.”

He said that neither he nor the Air Force have done a good job “of unambiguously articulating the no-fail [nature] of the air domain sensing piece.”

He said he’s in constant contact with the acquisition organizations of the Air Force, “and we’ll defer to them with regards to how fast it can actually happen,” but, he said, “I don’t think it will happen in 2022 or 2023, but I can guarantee you I’ll be talking to them on a weekly basis to make sure we get it as soon as we can.” The Air Force, he said, needs “a modern sensing grid.” He also said he’s agnostic about other potential solutions, but “if you know of one, send me an email, because I don’t know of any.”

Though Kelly did not mention the new Advanced Tactical Trainer among his top priorities, this, too is an important new program, he said. The T-38s used in that mission now “have 1960s-era tail numbers,” he said, and every day, it becomes “more disconnected” from the modern systems fighter pilots need to learn. “We can’t fill that void fast enough.”

Asked if acquiring the system—the requirements of which are very similar to the capability in the new T-7 trainer—will have to wait until the T-7 buy is complete, Kelly said the ATT won’t necessarily be a T-7 variant.

The T-7 program of record is 349 airplanes, Kelly said, and Air Education and Training Command needs those as soon as it can get them, to train the youngest aviators.

“There could be a different solution out there,” he said, but “I need to get our aviators, as soon as I can, something that is not such a leap” from 1960s technology in the T-38 to 2021 technology in the F-35. “Right now, I’m putting that tactical bridge on the shoulders of our young instructors on the flight line.” But he has, again, signaled the acquisition community that the fighter trainer needs to come sooner than later. He needs something cheaper than $20,000 per hour flying cost, but “closer to $2,000-$3,000 an hour.”

Making Progress on F-35

While Kelly admitted that the Air Force is chronically short of engines for the F-35 due to parts supply issues, he said great progress has been made in reducing the shortage from as many as 48 F-35s that were grounded “for power modules or some engine issues” to less than 40 aircraft. That is “not a trivial accomplishment,” Kelly said, “because every day, they’re introducing more jets to the system. So, it’s not a small improvement, it’s an exponential improvement, and I expect that trend to continue to zero.”

Getting there, however, required Kelly to “curtail some of our airshow schedule” to make sure “we don’t over-consume our engines for not a good return on our training investment.”

Kelly said he is satisfied with about 200 training hours for F-35 pilots per year, supplemented with simulators, and said that 65 percent aircraft availability is also acceptable, because it can be surged to over 70 percent. He said, the 65 percent figure is “a steady state line” for him.

Engine Issues

While he’s aware of “pressure” on the supply of engines for F-15s and F-16s, Kelly said he’s meeting all of the demand. Where engine issues are serious, he said, are on TF33 powerplants used on the E-3 AWACS, E-8 JSTARS, and B-52. Those engines are so old and hard to get parts for that aircraft are being cannibalized “before those engines cool down” to feed others.

Reaper’s Future

The MQ-9 Reaper will persist in the force, and ACC is moving to give it the capability to take off and land autonomously in bad weather, Kelly said. That will also reduce the manpower needed for the launch and recovery effort.

The Reaper will be “a key contributor to our sensing grid” for years to come, Kelly said, due to its ability to carry a “pretty decent” weapons load and Gorgon Stare long-dwell intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance pods.

As for what comes after the MQ-9, Kelly touted a new program for a low-observable unmanned adversary air system that could also carry sensors and perform an operational role outside of training.

AFRL, Industry to Launch Fourth-Generation Spacecraft Thermal Control

Oct. 25, 2021 | By Amy Hudson

The Air Force Research Laboratory will soon have the first operational oscillating heat pipes flying in space, marking the first operational application of fourth-generation spacecraft thermal control. The technology was previously tested aboard the secretive X-37B reusable spaceplane, AFRL said.

The laboratory is partnering with ThermAvant Technologies and its system integrator, Maxar Technologies, to develop and deploy the technology, which is lighter weight, “highly-efficient,” and more affordable than the thermal management subsystem used today, according to an AFRL release. Satellites need to dump heat generated from their own electronics and from the sun to avoid ruining their systems, including optics and atomic clocks.

“Oscillating heat pipes have flown in space before, but now OHPs are being relied upon to serve a mission purpose,” said Jon Allison, the thermal thrust lead for the Spacecraft Component Technology Branch of the AFRL Space Vehicles Directorate. “The on-orbit operation of OHPs marks an important milestone in the technology transition.”

AFRL began looking at OHPs in 2008. ThermAvant, based in Columbia, Mo., developed the OHPs through a Defense Department Small Business Innovation Research contract, and AFRL’s Space Vehicles Directorate designed and built the hardware, along with a few other companies, for an orbital test in 2012. The technology flew again aboard the fifth X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle flight in 2017, which stayed in orbit for a record-setting 780 days.

The heat pipes themselves are static, but the fluid inside oscillates causing the heat transfer, according to the release. “The OHP is a simple, wickless heat pipe capable of rejecting more than 200 times the maximum heat load of an axially grooved heat pipe, and transporting more than 45 times more heat than copper,” according to AFRL.

Allison said this new technology could be used in space for the next 20 years.

“We have seen how every generation heralds a new era in spacecraft thermal control by introducing a new, revolutionary technology,” Allison said. “The first generation used only thermal conduction, the second generation introduced heat pipes, and the third generation introduced loop heat pipes. The advent of each new generation enabled larger, more powerful spacecraft.”

However, Allison predicts the fourth-generation technology will do the opposite, focusing instead on “smaller and more powerful spacecraft.”

More than 53,000 Afghan Evacuees on US Bases as Pentagon Monitors Readiness

Oct. 25, 2021 | By Greg Hadley

More than 53,000 Afghan evacuees remain at eight military bases throughout the continental U.S., but despite the resources needed to support that population, the military’s readiness has not been adversely affected, the Pentagon’s spokesman said Oct. 25.

Defense Department Press Secretary John F. Kirby, speaking during a press conference, detailed the distribution of Afghan special immigrant visa holders, applicants, and other evacuees across geographic combatant commands, with the vast majority in the U.S.

“In the Central Command area, there are just over 3,000 Afghan evacuees. In the European Command area, there is 463. And then here at CONUS bases under NORTHCOM’s authorities, there are 53,157 at eight locations,” Kirby said. “Thus far, 6,689 of them have been released for resettlement, and they’re on their way to their new lives.”

At the start of September, U.S Northern Command commander Gen. Glen D. VanHerck told reporters 25,000 Afghans were at the eight bases, which include Joint Base McGuire–Dix–Lakehurst, N.J., and Holloman Air Force Base, N.M. VanHerck also said the bases would eventually be able to house up to 50,000 as they built up infrastructure akin to “eight small cities.”

Nearly two months later, Kirby acknowledged the time and effort it is costing the military to maintain the infrastructure to support the evacuees and said the DOD continues to monitor for any impact on readiness.

“We’re very proud of the role that we’re playing and of the terrific job, the compassion that our men and women are showing every day—not just here at home but overseas—and in making sure that these evacuees have a safe and secure environment to live and to work on their process towards citizenship,” Kirby said.

“But obviously we also have a commensurate responsibility to defend this country, and one of the things that we’re constantly reviewing is the degree to which our readiness to do that is being affected by this fairly sizable mission set. And we don’t believe now … that our readiness to defend the nation is being adversely affected, but clearly there are assets, resources, time that are being devoted to this, that are in some cases not being devoted to other things, and so we’re watching that very closely.”

Kirby also reiterated that all evacuees have to pass through a security screening process and receive the necessary vaccines before being transported to the U.S., where they will eventually be resettled in communities. The Associated Press reported Oct. 23, however, that a number of Afghans who “triggered potential security issues during security vetting” have been sent to Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo.

“We’ve surged resources and we deployed some additional personnel from relevant departments and agencies overseas to Camp Bondsteel to effectively vet individuals who require further processing before onward movement, and there are a range of Afghan evacuees at Bondsteel to include many Afghan families, women, and children who we’ve definitely prioritized being able to keep them together,” Kirby said, adding that the U.S. had agreed to relocate all Afghans from Kosovo within 365 days.

US Supports ‘Stronger and More Capable’ European Defense, Austin Says

Oct. 22, 2021 | By Greg Hadley

The U.S. supports “a stronger and more capable” European defense, but that defense should not duplicate the functions and capabilities of the NATO alliance, Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III said during an Oct. 22 press conference in Brussels.

Austin, speaking at his first in-person NATO Defense Ministerial, was responding to a question regarding recent efforts by some European Union members to expand the bloc’s military units with a rapid reaction force.

Germany, Finland, the Netherlands, Portugal, and Slovenia proposed the initiative, according to German broadcaster Deutsche Welle, which would include “space and cyber capabilities, along with special forces and air transport.” French President Emmanuel Macron has also backed the idea of a European army, according to the BBC.

While Austin demurred when asked what kind of capabilities he’d like to see the EU develop, he did say that “we certainly support a stronger and more capable European defense, and one that contributes positively to the trans-Atlantic and global security that’s compatible with NATO.”

Austin’s comments echo those made by President Joe Biden during a phone call with Macron last month—a joint statement issued afterward said that “the United States also recognizes the importance of a stronger and more capable European defense, that contributes positively to trans-Atlantic and global security, and is complementary to NATO.”

Both Austin and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said Oct. 22 that the EU and NATO should ensure their capabilities work together, instead of duplicating each other.

“We’d like to see initiatives that are complementary to the types of things that NATO is doing,” Austin said. “So we see, hopefully, these two organizations working together to enhance security in the region and ensure that that trans-Atlantic bond remains strong.”

“What is needed are more capabilities, not new structures,” Stoltenberg said. “Our trans-Atlantic alliance remains the bedrock for our security.”

The EU and NATO share 21 common members, out of 27 and 30 total, respectively. Another four NATO members are currently candidate countries to join the EU. According to the Congressional Research Service, U.S. European Command has more than 70,000 personnel permanently stationed in the region.

Biden and Macron’s discussion of European defense last month was prompted by the AUKUS deal, with the U.S., U.K., and Australia agreeing to a pact highlighted by the sharing of nuclear submarine technology with Australia. That agreement was widely interpreted as an attempt to counter China in the Indo-Pacific but angered France, who had a previous deal with Australia for submarine tech.

Coming out of the Defense Ministerial, however, Austin said the U.S. and its NATO allies remain dedicated to contesting China’s influence.

“We’ve seen increasing interest in our allies and partners to ensure that they engage our partners in the Indo-Pacific and work with our partners to ensure that we collectively work to ensure that the Indo-Pacific area, or region, remains free and open, and the international rules-based order remains in place here,” Austin said.

While Austin and other top defense officials have continually stressed China as the U.S.’s pacing threat in recent months, Austin’s visits ahead of the Ministerial, to Georgia, Ukraine, and Romania were largely focused on the threat of Russia.

“I think what President Biden wants out of any kind of relationship with Russia is predictability and stability. And I think with nations like ours, I think that’s very, very important,” Austin said Oct. 22 in response to a question about Russian deterrence. “Again, we want to make sure that we continue to support our allies and partners in their desire to protect their sovereign territory and their desire to increase their resilience. So you’ll see us continue to do that. You’ll see us continue to work with our NATO allies and partners.”

New Hampshire Guard Selected as U.S. State Partner to Republic of Cabo Verde

Oct. 22, 2021 | By Amy Hudson

The New Hampshire National Guard will be the official U.S. state partner to the Republic of Cabo Verde, an archipelago off the northwestern coast of Africa, after a “highly competitive” months-long selection process, the Guard announced Oct. 21.

“This is great news for New Hampshire,” said Gov. Chris Sununu in a release. “We are safer as a state and a country with strategic partnerships across the globe.” The New Hampshire National Guard has had a similar relationship with El Salvador since 2000.

The State Partnership Program launched in 1993 following the end of the Cold War, as former Soviet-linked militaries sought American ties. Latvia wanted U.S. help to adopt a citizen-soldier model, similar to the U.S. At the same time, the U.S. government was looking for a way to expand military-to-military cooperation in central and Eastern Europe without threatening the new Russian Federation. The National Guard seemed like the obvious choice.

The program now includes 83 partnerships, or about one-third of the world’s nations. New Hampshire is among several state Guard organizations that partner with more than one country.

“We have the experience and knowledge to build a strong partnership with Cabo Verde,” said Maj. Gen. David J. Mikolaities, adjutant general of New Hampshire, in the release. “Beyond the shared benefits for Cabo Verde and New Hampshire, we have an opportunity to play a strategic role helping to maintain stability in the region.”

The partnerships have helped some nations become NATO members, the release said.

Rep. Chris Pappas (D-N.H.) advocated for New Hampshire’s selection. “This strategic partnership will support our national security by building lasting alliances and ensuring our two countries can work alongside each other to counter transnational organized crime operations,” he said. “I’m grateful for the role the NHNG plays in keeping our communities safe and look forward to the opportunities this partnership will bring our state.”

Cabo Verde, which is located about 300 miles off the coast of Senegal, is a seven-hour flight from Boston’s Logan International Airport. The island nation gained its independence from Portugal in 1975. Its military, which consists of a National Guard and Coast Guard, focuses primarily on combating international drug trafficking.

Discover ‘Weapons & Platforms,’ Air Force Magazine’s New Digital Database

Oct. 22, 2021 | By Greg Hadley

Ever wondered when the B-52 bomber made its first flight? What armaments are on the F-35 fighter? Just how many thousands of pounds a C-17 transport can haul? Authoritative answers are now a few clicks away.

Air Force Magazine’s new Weapons & Platforms database builds on our annual Air Force & Space Force Almanac and combines that with recent and relevant news coverage of the system in a new digital format, creating a valuable resource that Airmen and Guardians, as well as content researchers and aviation enthusiasts, can leverage. You’ll find the database on the main navigation bar on every page of this website.

Initially, this new section is limited to 30 aircraft types currently in the Air Force’s inventory—every fighter, bomber, tanker, airlifter, helicopter, and trainer. Additional aircraft, space systems, and munitions will be added in the coming weeks.

Organized by category, each individual airframe has its own page, including an overview of its history, dimensions, capacities, and performance details, and more. The latest news reports related to the airframe follow.

From the VC-25 Air Force One to the A-10 Warthog, you now have a reliable go-to source for insight on Air Force aircraft. Got comments or concerns? Write to Letters@afa.org.

Kessel Run Signs ‘Historic’ Agreement With ACC. Here’s What It Means

Oct. 22, 2021 | By Greg Hadley

As part of a continued overhaul of the Air Force’s approach to software acquisition, the service’s Kessel Run software factory signed what officials called a “historic” agreement with Air Combat Command.

The user agreement, signed Sept. 30 and announced Oct. 20, marks the first time one of the Air Force’s software factories has signed such a deal with a major command.

In previous years, Kessel Run worked with ACC and other agencies mostly through the Middle Tier of Acquisition process, Kessel Run commander Col. Brian Beachkofski told Air Force Magazine in an interview. However, that process, designed for capabilities that can be rapidly prototyped or fielded within five years, still wasn’t quite right for the software that Kessel Run was developing.

Acting Air Force acquisition boss Darlene Costello then moved the detachment to the DOD’s Software Acquisition Pathway, first unveiled in October 2020.

One of the requirements in the Software Acquisition Pathway’s process is a signed user agreement, leading to the announcement between Kessel Run and ACC.

“What’s most important about this is it highlights an area where the acquisition structure and the acquisition roles are making substantial changes to enable software delivery,” Beachkofski said. “There was always this tension in JCIDS and waterfall and static requirements, that it’s hard to do software development for a changing world in a structure that’s built to deliver aircraft and large systems with 20-year acquisition timelines.”

Under the new agreement, the relationship between the MAJCOM and the software factory has been redefined so there is “oversight defined in a way that’s relevant to software as opposed to hardware,” Beachkofski added.

Also required in the Software Acquisition Pathway is a Capability Need Statement, which will be updated yearly, as opposed to just once. That’s necessary, Beachkofski said, because the goal with software is to constantly update and change as needed.

The new user agreement with ACC covers four programs under development, with the largest being the modernization of the Air Operations Center Weapon System program. The Kessel Run All Domain Operations Suite constitutes roughly 80 percent of Kessel Run’s budget authority, Beachkofski said.

KRADOS, a suite of software programs aimed at overhauling how ACC approaches command and control planning and execution, has been in development for some time now. In April, under the old Middle Tier of Acquisition process, it was declared a minimal viable product.

“So Block 20 is the new system that we’re developing, and the software within it are a suite of applications that enable the AOC operators to do their workflows more efficiently and have a common data layer behind all of them,” said Beachkofski. “Essentially, one of the issues with the [old] system is it’s a system of systems where everything is tightly integrated. So it’s hard to make updates and changes to the system and modernize it. So we’re moving to a more modern microservice architecture, where you can make changes, and they’re not tightly coupled with all the other systems so you can keep it modernized more affordably and easier.”

The 609th Air Operations Center at Al Udeid Air Base, Qatar, became the Air Force’s first AOC to operationally use KRADOS to build an air tasking order in May, and the system was once again used during Operation Allies Refuge, which included the noncombatant evacuation operation out of Kabul, Afghanistan, Beachkofski said.

Currently, the 609th is using KRADOS to plan operations for U.S. Air Forces Central. By March 2022, Kessel Run hopes to have the actual execution of air tasking orders operating on the system as well. After that, the goal is to roll it out to all the AOCs, Beachkofski said.