VIDEO: Kendall on the State of the Forces at AFA’s Air, Space & Cyber ’21

VIDEO: Kendall on the State of the Forces at AFA’s Air, Space & Cyber ’21

Air Force Association

Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall spoke at the Air Force Association’s Air, Space & Cyber Convention on Sept. 20, addressing a packed auditorium in National Harbor, Md. Here is a video and a transcript of his prepared remarks.

Good morning. I’m delighted to have the opportunity to speak to you this morning as your Secretary of the Air Force. I’ve been on the job almost two months…it’s been a pretty interesting start. 

Let me begin by thanking the Air Force Association for working with me and the Department of the Air Force to put on this event, and to do so in a way that balances health risks and the value of coming together to discuss the current state and future of our Air and Space Forces. 

Sadly, we are still contending with a disease that should have been well under control long ago. The tools exist to defeat that disease, but unfortunately those who have opted to spread or reinforce disinformation, instead of uniting our country around facts and serving the greater good, have kept us from being one team and from winning that fight – so far. 

There’s a lesson for us all there somewhere isn’t there? President Biden routinely says that there is nothing, nothing Americans cannot do if they work together. He’s absolutely right, but when we don’t work together it becomes very hard if not impossible for us to prevail. 

The person who was perhaps our wisest President once said “a house divided against itself cannot stand.” Our national motto, “E Pluribus Unum” echoes the same refrain. It would be beyond presumptuous by light years for me to compare myself to President Lincoln or the founding fathers, but the mantra I’ll be using in my new position, “One Team, One Fight”, which I expect you will get sick of hearing, is intended to send a very similar message. 

I arrived two days before the proposed Department of the Air Force Fiscal Year 23 budget and five-year Future Years Defense Program plan was due to the Office of the Secretary of Defense.

With the approval of Deputy Secretary of Defense Hicks, I put my staff through an intense exercise to review and modify the Department of the Air Force’s proposed plan. The Air and Space Force staffs and the Department’s Secretariat responded very professionally and I’m deeply appreciative of the effort they put into supporting the review that Under Secretary Jones and I conducted. As part of that exercise I provided guidance to the staff, some of which I can share with you.

Now, for the industry representatives and reporters in the room and those watching virtually, please don’t get too excited – I won’t be discussing any specifics about this pre-decisional submission to the Office of the Secretary of Defense. What I can tell you is that the final Department of the Air Force Program Objective Memorandum was compliant with the guidance we had been given by the Secretary, and that it was focused on acquiring capabilities that will improve our posture against the pacing threat, which in case you haven’t been paying attention, is China.

I can also tell you that this submission to the Office of the Secretary of Defense, for their program and budget review, did not comply with every piece of direction the Department of the Air Force has ever been given by Congress, which seems to have some very strong views on the importance of retaining aircraft that we no longer need and that do not intimidate China. The costs of these aircraft are consuming precious resources we do need for modernization.

I also arrived approximately one month before America’s Air Force, with no lead time, was asked to execute the largest evacuation of people in US history. I will confess that I was more an awed observer than contributor to that mission, but I cannot say enough about the remarkable accomplishments of the Total Force Airmen and Guardians who were involved in this amazing feat. 

While we did not foresee the speed and completeness of the collapse of the Afghan Army, we did demonstrate the strength, capacity, and professionalism to react immediately and to pull off massive operations with no notice. It is a big mistake to underestimate the power and capability of the United States’ Air and Space Forces. 

Our operations, which you will hear a lot more about during the conference, included the airlift itself, of course, but also the movement of our ground forces into and out of Kabul, continuous surveillance from Space and the Air, overhead protection of our teammates on the ground, and simultaneously the establishment of housing and support for thousands of Afghans fleeing the Taliban and transiting to our bases in the region, to countries around the world, and also into the United States.

Noncombatant Evacuation Operations like this and force disengagements in hostile territory are extremely challenging and risky military operations. Our “one team” performed fantastically. Let’s give that team a roaring round of applause.

There is a lesson from the fall of Afghanistan to the Taliban that we as Americans, and we as Airmen and Guardians, should not miss. Historians and policy analysts will be trying to sort out what happened and why, after 20 years of American and allied support, the Afghan government fell so quickly.  

One thing, however, is painfully clear: The Afghan government and military were not “one team” they were not engaged in “one fight.” Even when faced with an existential threat to their freedom, they could not overcome their internal divisions and unite against a common enemy. As a direct result, the people of Afghanistan have lost their freedom.

Today, America and its allies are faced with a less direct or immediate, but nevertheless equally serious, competitor. Since 2010, I have been pounding the drum about how serious a threat The People’s Republic of China’s military modernization program is to the ability of the United States to project power into the Indo Pacific, and more broadly our ability to protect our interests and values around the world. 

The competition aspect of our relationship with China is strategic; it is not just about military power. But as Chairman Mao and many others have mentioned, military power is the basis upon which other elements of strategy depend.

Way back in 2010, I came back to government after spending fifteen years in industry. When I saw the intelligence on China’s military modernization program it was eminently clear to me that China was well down the road of acquiring specific capabilities designed to defeat the United States’ ability to project power into the region, into the Western Pacific. 

The desire to contribute to America’s response to this rapidly growing threat is what has brought me back to the Pentagon for my third tour of duty. And once again, this time after a four year interval, I have had the opportunity to catch up on the intelligence about China’s modernization programs. If anything, China has accelerated its pace of modernization, and taken it in some disturbing directions. 

The press has recently reported on China’s expansion of its nuclear arsenal. For decades China maintained a small nuclear force that was clearly intended to be a minimal deterrent and a second strike capability. In my view this was a wise and prudent policy. It provided China with more than adequate deterrence and it kept the risk of unintended nuclear use very low. There is now strong evidence that this approach has changed and that China is pursuing a significantly expanded inventory of nuclear weapons, especially silo-based ICBMs, as publicly available information does demonstrate.

Whether intended or not, China is acquiring a first strike capability. No one could rationally desire or plan to initiate a nuclear war, and I’m convinced that China does not. But as a person who grew up during the Cold War, and served in the military for the last twenty years of it, I saw the world come far too close to nuclear exchanges between the Soviet Union and the United States, and I am deeply concerned about the implications of China’s change in policy for nuclear stability and the potential for a catastrophic mistake.

China also continues to advance its conventional capabilities. While there are a number of areas in which the US maintains strong leads, China has invested smartly in Anti-Access Area Denial systems designed to defeat US power projection. First on this list are precision weapons of steadily increasing range. For about 20 years, I’ve watched the range and target set for these weapons, their sophistication, and their inventories, increase. 

They have now gone from a few hundred miles to thousands to literally around the globe. They have gone from a few high value assets near China’s shores to the second and third island chains, and most recently to intercontinental ranges and even to the potential for global strikes…strikes from space even. Their addressable conventional target set has expanded from aircraft carriers, air bases, and logistic nodes in their near abroad… to American and allied high value assets located anywhere on the planet and anywhere in space. 

Simultaneously, China is increasing inventory levels and the sophistication of their weapons and modernizing centers and command and control networks throughout the kill chains that support their weapons. Hypersonic weapons, a full range of anti-satellite systems, plus cyber, electronic warfare, and challenging air to air missiles are all part of the growing inventory of Chinese capabilities.

Several years ago I briefed the National Security Advisor Susan Rice on China’s military modernization programs. My short summary for her was “America is the dominant military power on the planet, but when one gets close to the shores of China this starts to change.” While America is still the dominant military power on the planet, we are being more effectively challenged militarily today than at any…any other time in our history. 

I will tell you something few political appointees will admit – I worked hard to get this specific job. I did so despite having been an Army officer and a West Point graduate, and despite being an avid sailor and having a father who served on US Navy destroyers throughout WW II. If our “one team”, America and its allies, is going to win the “one fight” to keep our freedom, it will be because of the success of our Air and Space Forces, and that’s why I’m standing here speaking to you today. 

Our sister services will contribute much to any fight; they bring formidable capabilities to any battlefield or campaign, and I don’t mean to disparage them at all, but without control of space and the air, their missions become all but unexecutable.

Only the Air and Space Forces have the ability to control the global high ground. Only the Air and Space Forces can project power on short notice to anywhere that it is needed. Only the Air and Space Forces have the ability to confront and defeat aggression immediately, wherever it occurs. Only the Air and Space Forces have the ability to come to the aid of our global allies and partners with little or no notice wherever aggression occurs.

So what are my intentions now that I have this job? At breakfast on Capitol Hill shortly after I was sworn in, I was asked by Senator Jon Tester what my priorities were. My answer, which was a little bit glib, was that I had three; China, China, and China. He seemed to like the answer and gave me a fist bump. And by the way if you’ve ever gotten a fist bump from Jon Tester, you’ll remember it. He’s a pretty big guy.

It isn’t quite that simple, however. I also resonate completely with Chief of Staff CQ Brown’s dictate “Accelerate Change or Lose.” Chief of Space Operations Jay Raymond has also articulated a clear list of five priorities for the Space Force, with which I am in full agreement. At a high level, however, I could not top Secretary Austin’s triumvirate of “mission, people, teams” which he stated elegantly and clearly in his March 2021 memo.

The Department of the Air Force exists for a purpose; to provide conventional and strategic forces to combatant commanders that will enable them to deter and defeat aggression, now and for the foreseeable future. The mission is bigger than any of us, and it is what unites us in service to the nation and defense of the American republic and its Constitution.

My most fundamental priority is to improve the ability of the Air and Space Forces to deter and defeat our pacing threats so that when I leave office we are stronger, and will continue to be stronger than those threats, well into the future.

To be stronger we are going to have to change. Our strategic competitors have studied how we fight and they have taken asymmetric steps to exploit our vulnerabilities and to defeat us. We have to respond with a sense of urgency, but we also have to take the time necessary to make smart choices about our future and our investments.

One observation from this Cold War veteran is that today we are not accustomed to contending with a capable peer competitor. Even our most senior military leaders have little-to-no experience dealing with a peer competitor. 

We have had 30 years of unprecedented military superiority and we have lost much of our “muscle memory” of what it means to have a well-resourced, thoughtful, and strategic opponent. We have also been focused on a category of threat, violent extremists, which demand a very different set of capabilities from a peer competitor. 

We need a strong sense of urgency, but change for change’s sake isn’t the answer. If we don’t get the direction of change right, our actions will be counterproductive and we will continue to squander our most precious resource, time.

We also live in an era of dramatically expanding technical knowledge. To get change right we must improve our ability to analyze and understand the operational possibilities that technology is providing. We must be open-minded and objective about the operational doors that technologies like autonomy, artificial intelligence, advanced micro-electronics, data analytics, and others can open for us. 

My observation from outside of government for the last few years is that the Departments of Defense, and of the Air Force, have embraced the idea of innovation and the pursuit of innovation without adequate attention to how innovation should be harnessed to specific operational performance requirements. 

We should not be doing demonstrations and experiments unless we can link them to true operational improvements and unless they move us down the field to lower-risk acquisition programs. I intend to strengthen these linkages and to use state-of-the-art analytical tools to help do so. 

A case in point is the Advanced Battle Management System, or ABMS, the Department of the Air Force’s component of Joint All Domain Command and Control. My early observation is that this program has not been adequately focused on achieving and fielding specific measurable improvements in operational outcomes.

To achieve effective change we must keep our eye on the ball. For me that means focusing on the fielding of meaningful military capability into the hands of our operational users. It does not mean one or two leave-behind unmaintainable token prototypes that came out of an experiment. I am all for meaningful experimentation and prototyping if it leads efficiently to sound decisions about risk and value, and to real military capability.

One case in point here is the Air Force’s Next Generation Air Dominance program. The roots of this program are in a technology demonstration program from the Obama Administration that I initiated called the Aerospace Innovation Initiative. This program was put on contract with industry in 2016. That classified but acknowledged program has demonstrated key technologies in an experimental risk reduction prototype that is directly on the path to Next Generation Air Dominance.

Next Generation Air Dominance is more than just a next-generation tactical aircraft however; it is a coordinated systems-of-systems approach to air dominance. Those roots go back even further, to the Air Dominance Initiative study.

A more mature example of programs leading to real military capability is the B-21 Raider, which will become the backbone of the Air Force bomber fleet. The B-21 had its origins in an extensive “family of systems” study that was led by Ash Carter early in the Obama Administration. Most of you in the audience know that our allied partners do not own or operate long range bombers, and that the US hasn’t had an active bomber production line in over 20 years. 

We have been living off of bomber fleet investments made many decades ago, but that is rapidly changing. As I speak here there are now 5 test aircraft being manufactured on the B-21 production line at Air Force Plant 42 in Palmdale.

You will never hear me make optimistic predictions about programs; all programs have risk and the same is true of the B-21, but at this point at least, the program is making good progress to field real capability. This investment in meaningful military capabilities that project power and hold targets at risk anywhere in the world addresses my number one priority.

Another recent, smaller example is in the field of artificial intelligence and data analytics. This year the Chief Architect’s Office deployed AI algorithms for the first time to a live, operational kill-chain at the Distributed Common Ground Station and Air Operations Center for automated target recognition. In this case, moving from experimentation to real military capability in the hands of operational warfighters significantly reduced the manpower-intensive task of manually identifying individual targets, shortening the kill-chain and accelerating the speed of decision making.

As a final example, the Space Force is pursuing a space-based ground moving target indicator capability, or GMTI. The space-based GMTI system will replace a portion of the JSTARS sensing capability. It will surpass the range limitations of current air platforms, and will provide resilient capabilities in both contested and non-contested environments.

I will be looking for other opportunities to rapidly and efficiently move the applications of advanced technology, from any source, down the field as quickly as possible to get meaningful military capabilities into the hands of our operators.

No mission can be performed without skilled and dedicated people. When the mission is daunting and must be performed with urgency, this is especially true. The challenges the Department of the Air Force faces can only be met if we attract America’s best to serve, and give these people the opportunity and environment in which they can make the greatest contribution they are capable of. I couldn’t be more proud of the people who are currently serving in the Air and Space Forces, not just as Department Secretary, but as an American citizen. I’ve had quite a few chances to meet with Airmen and Guardians over the last two months. 

I’ve made the time to travel to INDO-PACOM, SPACECOM, NORTHCOM, and STRATCOM, and to meet the Airmen and Guardians serving in these Combatant Commands and their associated Component Commands. Just a week ago I had the opportunity to be with the Air Force Academy cadets as they beat Navy in football. Go Falcons!

I’m especially looking forward to being at the Army/Air Force game this year. By the way it’s my West Point 50 year anniversary reunion, which will make it quite an interesting weekend. I’m looking forward to traveling to other major commands soon and meeting with more of the professional men and women who are serving their country with such dedication and commitment. 

High on my list are the people of Air Mobility Command who just pulled off such an amazing feat, as well as the Airmen at Holloman AFB, Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, and those serving overseas who are doing such a fine job supporting the Afghan people we evacuated from Kabul.

I intend to be relentless in supporting our Airmen, Guardians, Civil Servants, and their families across the Total Force. I am committed to seeing that they have what they need to be successful. I’m also aware, however, that we have some areas where change here is needed here as well.

Just recently, I released two reports dealing with disparity in our ranks. The data is very clear that we are not doing as well as we should be in ensuring that every Airman and Guardian has the opportunity to achieve their full potential, and can—to the full extent of their capability—contribute to our team and to our shared missions. 

There is significant disparity in almost every aspect of the Air Force experience between the outcomes and the perceptions in areas such as promotions, law enforcement, sexual harassment, and assignments between members of less well represented groups and the white male majority. One notable perception gap is between a majority that generally thinks things are fine, and everyone else where there is a strong perception that it is not all fine.

Disturbingly, one-third of female Airmen and Guardians who responded to the Inspector General’s survey for the disparity review reported experiencing sexual harassment during their career. Almost every morning I learn of incidents in which we have lost someone to suicide, in accidents, or to COVID. We cannot just accept these situations and losses. We must look for every opportunity to improve. 

There was also a recent report in the media of instances where domestic abuse involving our people was not treated with the concern and seriousness with which any such incident should be treated. We can do much more to prevent these crimes, and we can certainly respond more effectively and compassionately whenever they occur. 

My intent is to actively address each of these issues. There are some programs already ongoing in each of these areas. The Department has not ignored them by any means, but I believe we can do better. 

With regard to disparity, we have more than enough data to begin working to address the disparities that we know exist. In some areas, we need to refine our understanding of potential contributing causes, but we don’t have to wait to start acting. Over 100K of our Airmen and Guardians responded to the latest survey in that review—I read that as they trusted us to act. And that is exactly what we should do. 

In some areas, such as the disparity in perceptions between white males and everyone else about the existence of disparate treatment, – news flash – it does exist, the data isn’t ambiguous about that. 

For sexual assault and harassment, we will be implementing the Independent Review Commission’s recommendations and any statutory guidance regarding separate reporting and prosecution channels that comes out of the Congress this fall. I intend for the Department of the Air Force to be ready to implement that guidance immediately once it becomes law.

I want to take a moment to recognize that today marks 10 years since the DoD stopped enforcing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. While LGBTQ Airmen have been serving honorably and courageously since the first days of the Air Force, for too long they had to so do while hiding a key part of themselves, of their identity. We’re a stronger Department of the Air Force—we’re a stronger country—because that discriminatory policy no longer exists.

As I speak, Under Secretary Jones, who is the living embodiment of the importance for changing that policy, is attending a White House meeting commemorating this event.

Another area of particular concern to me is that the Air Force and Space Force have the people with the technical expertise needed to prevail against the pacing threat (yes, China). I particularly noticed the great round of applause that recognized the teacher this morning. Her efforts on STEM are really to be admired. We really need more of that, and I thank her for her contributions and all the other teachers out there who are doing the same sort of thing. Our strategic competition is as much about intellectual capacity in critical technologies, engineering expertise, and the application of cutting edge cybersecurity technology as it is about flying skills and tactics. I will be looking for creative ways to bring more of the needed expertise and potential into the Department and to keep it there.

If pacing strategic competitors are the “one fight” we must be ready for, there are a number of valid interpretations of the “one team” part of the mantra I’m employing. Within the Department of the Air Force it applies to the shared services that the Air Force is supplying to the Space Force, as well as to the integration of Air and Space operational capabilities. 

As a Joint team member, the Space Force provides and defends a number of capabilities used by all the other Services. As I mentioned, we will be moving forward with new services such as Ground and Surface Moving Target Indicator capabilities from space, and we will be moving to more resilient space architectures in general so that our Joint teammates can be assured of the support they have come to depend on from space and from the Department of the Air Force.

As a Joint team member, the Air Force provides surveillance, control of the air, air mobility services, all that enable the other terrestrial Services to perform their missions. To this end we will continue to modernize our tanker fleet, provide the air mobility services all combatant commanders depend upon, and transition to more resilient surveillance capabilities that are applicable to high-end threats.

We will also be working with other parts of the US Government and with our friends and allies around the world to integrate and improve our combined capabilities as we all contribute to what Secretary Austin has dubbed “integrated deterrence.”

One of my observations after spending a few years working with defense contractors, private industry, and non-profit organizations, is that the Department of the Air Force isn’t taking enough advantage of the intellectual capital and expertise available from these sources.

While there has been a lot of emphasis on new sources of technology from places like Silicon Valley, certainly a worthy initiative, there has not been enough effort to tap into the capabilities that exist in both major defense contractors and defense-oriented non-profit organizations. 

That intellectual capital is formidable, it is more cutting edge than many may realize, and it is well-positioned to attack and help solve our operational problems which those communities do understand very well. We will be doing more to bring these capabilities on to the team to help us address our most pressing operational requirements.

Effective change also means close and constructive cooperation between operational and technical communities operating as “one team.” It’s commonplace in the commercial world for customers and product developers to work closely together in integrated teams. Within the Department of the Air Force I will be insisting on that cooperation and I will do everything I can to bring the same approach to our shared joint capabilities.

I would be remiss if I did not mention another member of our “one team,” the United States Congress. I have one request of the Congress; help us to focus on the one fight, the strategic competitive fight, that we must win.

Let me give all of you a fictional headline to imagine; “Today in Hunan province the ranking delegate to the Chinese National People’s Congress announced that he would oppose the retirement of 10 aging J-10 fighters based in Hunan. Those fighters are critical to the defense of China and should not be retired until they are replaced by new J-20s.” Can any of you imagine that headline in the South China Morning Post? I cannot.

Our democracy and our values are a great strategic advantage; they make the United States an attractive partner, but all politics are local and our local politics can be counterproductive to national security.

It was a frequent occurrence during my confirmation process to have a Senator agree with me about the significance of the Chinese threat, and in the same breath to tell me that under no circumstances could the -take your pick – C-130s, A-10s, KC-10s, or MQ-9s in that Senator’s state be retired, nor could any base in his or her state ever be closed or lose manpower that have an impact on the local economy. 

We will not succeed against a well-resourced and strategic competitor if we insist on keeping every legacy system we have. Our one team cannot win its one fight to deter China or Russia without the resources we need and a willingness to balance risk today to avoid much greater risk in the future.  I do understand the political constraints here, and I’m happy to work with Congress to find a better mechanism to make the changes we need, but we must move forward.

As I did several years ago, I will be soon seen on Capitol Hill carrying a classified briefing on the current and emerging threats we face. If anyone wants to see that briefing, please let me know. When you see the specifics, I think it will make you open your eyes.

Several years ago my message to members of Congress, and to anyone who would listen, was that we were running out of time; today we are out of time. In the words of one of my favorite fiction writer’s protagonist from another era of strategic competition, “There is not a moment to lose.”

While we are at this conference, and after we leave it, we should be proud of what we do every day and what we have done recently in Afghanistan, globally, and in space. But we should not be complacent, anything but. We must all continue our work with the sense of urgency that it demands. One team, one fight. Thank you.

VIDEO: Brown on Accelerating Change to Empower Airmen at AFA’s Air, Space & Cyber ’21

VIDEO: Brown on Accelerating Change to Empower Airmen at AFA’s Air, Space & Cyber ’21

Air Force Association

Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr spoke at the Air Force Association’s Air, Space & Cyber Convention on Sept. 20, addressing a packed auditorium in National Harbor, Md. Here is a video of his remarks.

VIDEO: Raymond’s Space Force Update at AFA’s Air, Space & Cyber 2021

VIDEO: Raymond’s Space Force Update at AFA’s Air, Space & Cyber 2021

Air Force Association

Chief of Space Operations Gen. John W. “Jay” Raymond spoke at the Air Force Association’s Air, Space & Cyber Conference on Sept. 21, addressing a packed auditorium in National Harbor, Md. Here is a video of his remarks.

New Longer-Range Missiles Needed to Preserve Stealth Advantages

New Longer-Range Missiles Needed to Preserve Stealth Advantages

The range of current Air Force weapons compels pilots of stealth aircraft to get too close to their targets, risking that they’ll be seen and shot down, Air Combat Command boss Gen. Mark D. Kelly said Sep. 22. The service must have longer-range “fifth-generation weapons” to go with its fifth-gen combat aircraft, he said.

“We [take] a lot of bang out of our low-observable force because we push them into ranges where everyone”—even stealth aircraft—“is observable,” Kelly told reporters during a press roundtable at AFA’s Air, Space & Cyber Conference. That means “we’re not going to get a good return on our investment” in fifth-gen or better fighters. Fifth-generation weapons “allow us more range, whether it’s new air-to-air or air-to-ground,” he said. The Air Force considers its F-22, F-35, and B-2 bombers to be “fifth generation” systems.

“I’m happy if it moves fast,” he said, because “any time we pull the trigger … we have to assume the target’s going to move between the time [the weapon] leaves the rail and the time it shows up at the target. And hypersonics and closer range shorten that time of flight.”

But, “it’s not exclusively hypersonics. We just have to make sure we can reach out and touch folks at a range that is equal to or exceeds their ability to reach out and touch us.”

The longest-range dogfight weapon in USAF’s inventory is the AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile, which Kelly noted goes back more than 25 years.

“The AIM-120 we have today is significantly improved, in all fairness,” he admitted, “but we’ve squeezed most all we can out of that capability.”

The People’s Republic of China Army Air Forces already field an AMRAAM-like weapon, the PL-15, with much longer range than AMRAAM, negating much of USAF’s so-called “first look, first shot” advantage. That prompted the Air Force to pursue the AIM-260 Joint Advanced Tactical Missile, a new dogfight weapon.

The AIM-260 “gets us there” in terms of range, Kelly said.

The Air Force needs to take an “enterprise-wide solution” to its weapons, Kelly said. Not doing so poses the “greatest risk to the fighter force.”

Kelly explained that “when we field any kind of capability, it has to be an enterprise-wide solution. And so … if you field a fifth-gen asset—a fighter, bomber, ISR, etc.—and you don’t have fifth-gen sustainment, and you don’t have fifth-gen Airborne Moving Target Capability, and you don’t have fifth-gen weapons with it, that rate-limits the capability of that weapon system. It just does.”

The AIM-260 isn’t the end solution to air dominance, though, Kelly said.

“We can’t take our eyes off the follow-on capability,” he insisted. “Our adversaries do not sequentially develop and design weapons.” While China is developing a near-term weapon, work is already well underway on “multiple lines” of potential successors, Kelly said.

“We can’t, sequentially, heel to toe, start working on solving Problem A and not even eyeball Problem B. We’ve got to keep looking forward,” he said.

Ortiz Jones Says Diverse Air Force Talent Necessary to Confront Adversary

Ortiz Jones Says Diverse Air Force Talent Necessary to Confront Adversary

Undersecretary of the Air Force Gina Ortiz Jones recently gathered service members in the Pentagon courtyard to take a photo commemorating the 10th anniversary of the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell,” but she was surprised by the age of those present: They did not seem old enough to have served under the policy that silenced gay service members.

“When I showed up, I was like, ‘Oh, some of these folks look pretty young,’” Ortiz Jones recounted during a panel on developing the next generation of Guardians and Airmen at the Air Force Association’s Air, Space & Cyber Conference in National Harbor, Md.

“My team told me, ‘Actually, the vast majority of these folks wanted to be part of this picture because … they joined because ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ was repealed,” said Ortiz Jones, a member of the LGBTQ community who, in order to keep her Air Force ROTC scholarship, was forced to sign an agreement promising not to engage in homosexual behavior. On Active duty in the Air Force from 2003 to 2006, she deployed to Iraq as an intelligence officer and served under the policy.

Ortiz Jones told the story as an example of department policies that could be changed or modified to attract and retain diverse talent.

Ortiz Jones, along with panelists retired Gen. Edward A. Rice Jr., who served as commander of Air Education and Training Command from 2010 to 2013; Space Force Chief Human Capital Officer Patricia Mulcahy; and Lt. Gen. Brian T. Kelly, Department of the Air Force deputy chief of staff for manpower, personnel, and services, made the case that diversity and inclusion in recruiting, retention, and promotion are necessary to confront America’s adversaries.

“We need talent as diverse as the opportunities and challenges we face as a country,” Ortiz Jones said. “The threat, our ability to address that, is certainly based on the talent we have within our Space Force and our Air Force.”

Air Force leaders on Sept. 16 discussed the results of a racial and gender disparities survey released by the Air Force inspector general that found wide disparities in recruitment, retention, and promotions affecting women, Asian Americans, Native Americans, Latinos, and Pacific Islanders. The study followed a December review that had identified many of the same inequities for Black Airmen.

Kelly expanded on the idea of inclusiveness and dismissed claims that recent changes to physical fitness testing requirements lower female standards in the interest of gender diversity.

“We’ve done the work, we’ve had a scientific team come in and help us work through that,” he said of the new options the Air Force is offering as options to replace sit ups and a mile-and-a-half run.

As to new allowances for women to wear their hair in ponytails, braids, and down, Kelly made a joke about China’s People’s Liberation Army.

“As if there’s some generals over in the PLA who are going, ‘We’ve got ‘em now, they’re letting their women wear their hair down,” he said.

“What they’re probably more … excited about is if we have policies that do not allow us to maximize our potential, right? Do not allow us to maximize the talent that we can bring in,” he said. “The power and strength of America is our diversity.”

Mulcahy said the gender gap in the Space Force is among the largest in the services, with just 19 percent women.

“We see this as an issue in the Space Force,” she said, noting the Space Force will recruit far fewer Guardians than the Air Force will Airmen, some 400 compared to the 27,000 the Air Force will intake. “So, we should be approaching things a little bit differently.”

Mulcahy called for the Space Force to take a closer look at medical exemptions and other potential policy changes.

“We, being as small as we are, could take a look at making use of those policies and granting exceptions,” she said.

Kelly brought the argument about diversity back to making the force stronger:

“If we were less inclusive and less diverse, and that led to us being a less talented Air Force, then I do think there are generals in the PLA who are celebrating going, ‘Good, let them operate that way.’”

Air Force ‘Making Some Progress’ on Pilot Production With Diversity, Training Changes

Air Force ‘Making Some Progress’ on Pilot Production With Diversity, Training Changes

The Air Force’s pilot production numbers stayed relatively steady from fiscal 2019 to 2020 despite the COVID-19 pandemic, Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. said, an encouraging sign that the service’s efforts to speed up that pipeline are working.

“Our numbers didn’t really drop as far as production,” Brown said in a media roundtable at AFA’s Air, Space & Cyber Conference on Sept. 22. “In fact, they were really close, within about 10 or so. So that to me is a good indicator that we’re actually making some progress, even with COVID.”

In 2019, the Air Force produced 1,279 new pilots, according to a report from Air Force Times. In 2020, that number was 1,263, Stars & Stripes reported, with the number expected to increase by roughly 100 in 2021, Lt. Gen. Marshall B. “Brad” Webb said.

That progress could be especially key in the next few years. While the pandemic isn’t over yet, commercial airlines have expressed optimism about a rebound in travel and their long-term futures. Growth for those companies would mean more competition for pilots, which has caused shortages for the Air Force in the past—the pandemic provided a little relief on that front, with civilian jobs drying up and many pilots staying in the service. Indeed, United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby, who also spoke at the conference, has warned of a looming pilot shortage for both commercial industry and the military.

Part of solving the production issue, both Brown and Kirby said, will be providing opportunities for those who wouldn’t typically get the chance to ever train as a pilot. In the military, Brown said, that means changing the pilot candidate scoring mechanism so that private flying hours will only be rewarded up to 60 hours. On the commercial side, Kirby said United is taking a similar approach with its flight academy, looking to identify candidates with no flying experience. 

“[Outside of the military], you kind of have to get your parents to spend $150,000 to get you enough hours to kind of get to the point where you can start the pilot [career path],” Kirby said. “There’s very few people who have the opportunity to do that.”

Approaches like that, the two men agreed, will be key for everyone.

“As the airline issue starts to open back up, that’ll be something we’ll have to continue to work on. And I think we have to work it as a nation, because this is a key skill set,” said Brown.

For the Air Force, the change to the scoring mechanism is just one of a raft of changes that Air Education and Training Command is making to address the racial disparity among its pilots, a disparity that limits the number of candidates. The other changes allow candidates to:

  • Use their highest composite scores from any Air Force Officer Qualifying Test (AFOQT) rather than the most current score.
  • Complete the Test of Basic Aviation Skills (TBAS) up to three times, with the third requiring a waiver.
  • Re-take the AFOQT and TBAS after 90 days, instead of the 150 days previously required for the AFOQT and 180 days for the TBAS.
  • Participate in study sessions with other individuals who haven’t taken the test if they have also never taken the AFOQT.

Brown also touted other initiatives and changes that the service has made in the past few months and years, among them Undergraduate Pilot Training 2.5 and Helicopter Training Next, aimed at reducing the amount of time the Air Force needs to train pilots.

The service is also looking to be more flexible in its training—civilian simulator instructors can now monitor the simulations remotely; students who are excelling now have the ability to graduate from pilot school early; and training courses can be tailored based on what skills students master fastest. 

“Instead of having a kind of a road system that basically says, this is the same approach for every single candidate that comes through pilot training, [we’re] able to use some of the data and look at the ability. If you absolutely master a skill faster, … we can kind of tailor the training you get, so that by the end, you get everything you need. And that takes a little bit of artificial intelligence using data,” Brown said.

ANG Boss in Limbo With Space Guard as White House ‘Strongly Opposes’ Idea

ANG Boss in Limbo With Space Guard as White House ‘Strongly Opposes’ Idea

While a congressional debate brews about the future of a potential Space National Guard, the officer who currently oversees the National Guard’s space units is living in a little bit of limbo.

Lt. Gen. Michael A. Loh, Air National Guard director, is on the record as supporting a separate Guard component for the Space Force, which was established in December 2019 with no Guard or Reserve. Back in February 2020, when he was the adjutant general for the Colorado National Guard, Loh said he couldn’t see “how we have a Space Force without a Space Guard.”

Since then, other military leaders have expressed a preference for a Space National Guard and developed plans for one. But the issue was thrown into doubt when Congress started debating the 2022 National Defense Authorization Act. The Senate Armed Services Committee approved its markup of the bill, which would simply change the name of the Air National Guard to the Air and Space National Guard. The House Armed Services Committee, meanwhile, adopted an amendment establishing an entirely new Guard. Both bills have yet to be approved by the full chambers, but presuming they are, negotiators will have to resolve the issue in conference.

Then, on Sept. 21, the White House’s Office of Management and Budget released its statement of administration policy on the NDAA, in which it said it “strongly opposes” the creation of a separate Space National Guard, saying the new component would create unnecessary bureaucracy and increase costs by up to $500 million annually.

With those political entities all wrangling, Loh, speaking at AFA’s Air, Space & Cyber Conference on Sept. 22, said he’s stepping back from the issue.

“I am awaiting somebody else’s decision. It’s above me,” said Loh. “We’ll see what happens as those three groups get together and decide if they’ll create a Space National Guard.”

Loh did, however, take issue with the notion that a new Guard would create more bureaucracy. At the moment, he said, the Air National Guard’s units with space missions have Air Force Speciality Codes that no longer exist, because those jobs have been transitioned over to the Space Force. With no direct connection to Active-duty units that share their missions, problems arise.

“There are some gaps that have occurred because of this,” Loh said. “It’s training, it’s exercises, … and the workaround, quite frankly, is actually establishing a bigger bureaucracy.

“Because the streamlined bureaucracy goes through to the bigger bureaucracy [and says], I have to translate Space Force requirements into Air Force requirements, get it funded through the lead MAJCOM, which is Air Force Materiel Command, … and then I have Air National Guard space professionals on a space weapon system in [U.S. Central Command].”

War With China Will ‘End Badly’ if USAF Gives Up Air Supremacy

War With China Will ‘End Badly’ if USAF Gives Up Air Supremacy

The U.S. is in real peril of losing a potential war with China if the Air Force cannot shed obsolete gear and rapidly regain a solid advantage in control of the air, Air Combat Command’s Gen. Mark D. Kelly told attendees at AFA’s Air, Space & Cyber conference.

“We have to focus our fighter force to the basic realities of a new threat environment,” Kelly said in his ASC21 speech. “And that requires the fighter force to change to be successful.” Kelly said the joint force “requires air superiority” and doesn’t know how to fight or function without it—so this mission area should get priority for resources.

Kelly explained the the “four-plus-one” concept for the future fighter force—an improved F-22, making a “hot handover” to the Next Generation Air Dominance circa 2030; the F-35 as the “cornerstone” of the fleet; the F-15E and F-15EX as “big weapon” carriers; F-16s to provide capacity, especially in lower-end conflicts; and the A-10 as the “plus one,” with a fleet of 218 airplanes for close air support that sunsets in the early 2030s.

Incremental change will not keep the Air Force ahead of its Chinese counterparts, he said.

“You don’t just wake up one day and find yourself in the ‘lose’ column.” First, he said, the force finds itself increasingly in the “irrelevance” category, which is where USAF will be if it doesn’t retire legacy systems that no longer intimidate China. China is the “apex peer adversary” with vast capabilities in electromagnetic spectrum operations, Kelly said, and USAF could lose such a fight.

“The fighter roadmap represents change,” he said. “If you don’t like change, you’re really going to dislike ‘irrelevant.’ … If you don’t like irrelevant, you’re really not going to like defeat.”

The “cold, hard realities” are that the Air Force was superbly prepared and trained to defeat a peer adversary—Russia—30 years ago, then achieved a highly lopsided victory in Iraq, Kelly said. But in the last 20 years, USAF was optimized for combat in a “permissive environment” that didn’t test the force. During that same time, China was focused completely on “the high-end fight, and fighting us.”

China’s force structure and systems are “designed to inflict more casualties in the first 30 hours of combat than we’ve endured over the last 30 years in the Middle East,” Kelly said.

As the Air Force inventory has aged and diminished, the balance with China has tilted more toward Beijing, he added. Kelly said Russia has been able to annex Crimea and China has claimed parts of the South China Sea “without firing a shot” because contesting those situations has become harder thanks to adversary air defenses.

To regain the advantage—“to be a resolute world power”—the U.S., through its Air Force, has to be able to penetrate “highly contested sovereign [airspace],” Kelly asserted. China’s mastery of the EMS must also be challenged, he said.

Paraphrasing British Gen. Bernard Montgomery, Kelly said, “If we lose the war in the electromagnetic spectrum, we lose the war in the air, and we lose it quickly.” China’s EMS capability threatens to “break the Blue kill chain,” he said.

China is also “not debating the value of sixth-generation air superiority” within its senior leadership, he said, to the point where there is a “government ministry” dedicated to obtaining sixth-gen capabilities and wresting air dominance from the U.S.

If China gains sixth-gen capabilities before the U.S. Air Force, “it will not end well,” he asserted, adding, “Air superiority is a terrible place to receive a silver medal.” The U.S. should consider regaining air superiority “with margin” as its top military priority, deserving of a “kind of Manhattan Project” focus, funding, and emphasis.

The NGAD tops Kelly’s list of critical ACC fighter requirements, followed by the F-35, which “must have” the Tech Refresh 3 upgrade and Block 4 Suite of improvements, he said. The F-15E and F-15EX provide near-term capacity but have to have significant electronic warfare upgrades, Kelly said. The F-16 also “addresses risk” by providing capacity, and it, too, must have electronic warfare improvements.

Kelly dismissed talk of “F-35 vs F-15EX,” insisting, “I need both.”

Retaining more A-10s than needed, however, “takes us off the road” to a modernized Air Force and displaces capabilities the service needs to win, Kelly insisted.

Air Force On Pace to Hit All Recruiting Goals for First Time in More Than Five Years

Air Force On Pace to Hit All Recruiting Goals for First Time in More Than Five Years

For the first time in more than five years, the Air Force Recruiting Service is on target to meet its goals for the entire department, the unit’s commander said Sept. 22. At the same time, trends indicate a challenging future for the Air and Space Forces as they go after the next generation of Airmen and Guardians.

With just a few days left in fiscal year 2021, the Active-duty Air Force, Air Force Reserve, Air National Guard, and Space Force were on the verge of hitting their total goal of 42,000 additions, Maj. Gen. Edward W. Thomas Jr., head of AFRS, told reporters at AFA’s Air, Space & Cyber Conference.

For the regular Air Force, this is nothing new—the Active-duty component has met its recruiting goals every year since 1999, Thomas said. But the Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard have had less success in recent history. In particular, the Air Force Reserve missed its goal in each of the past five years, and the challenging circumstances of the past year made reaching its goal even more impressive.

“The reason why, for five years, it’s been hard to make goal, is it is a very complex orchestration of how we gain people in the Air Force,” Lt. Gen. Richard W. Scobee, chief of the Air Force Reserve, told reporters in a different roundtable. “So if less people are getting out of the Active component, it’s harder for us to make our numbers.”

With the uncertainty of the COVID-19 pandemic, retention in the Active-duty ranks has been high, but Scobee credited the stability of the Reserve and its ability to work through the pandemic as key.

“Have to say, I’m pretty excited about making end strength for the first time in my tenure,” Scobee said.

The success, however, may be hard to continue long term. Thomas cited a report from Joint Advertising Marketing Research & Studies, or JAMRS, that found that just 11 percent of American youth reported a desire to serve in the military, down from 13 percent. And that decline is not an anomaly, Thomas said.

“The long-term trends are concerning. And the reason is America’s youth are becoming ever more disconnected from the military,” said Thomas. “I can go into all the reasons why … smaller military, bigger population, less moms, dads, aunts, and uncles, people who serve people, people they know. So we have to be really serious about playing the long game.”

To that end, Thomas said, AFRS is working to understand Gen Z—young people born between 1997 and 2012—as the main generation that will be joining the Air Force and Space Force for years to come. And in doing so, they’ve already drawn some conclusions.

“This is a group of folks that, there’s things that motivate them differently than the prior generations,” Thomas said, adding that their guiding ethos is, “I want my work life and the things I do to be able to line up with what I believe personally, my personal life. So I need my nine to five to be … more closely aligned with my five to nine.”

As a result, Thomas said, the service’s advertising focus has shifted. There are still images and videos of kinetic attacks and fighter jets. But there’s also a new message: “Don’t just make your mark, make many. Come make a difference.”

That big-picture, philosophical approach also has to be balanced by practical concerns. Because fewer young people have regular contact with the military, their questions are often basic, said Barry Dickey, director of marketing for AFRS.

“Can I have a dog? Can we date? … We got a whole section on our website dedicated to “Ask an Airman,” Dickey said. And what we’ve discovered is that Generation Z doesn’t want any fluff. They want to hear it straight from an Airman.”

That strategy can lead to some less-than-flattering answers, Thomas and Dickey admitted. But the philosophy is that long term, transparency on issues will help with both recruiting and retention.

“[Ask an Airmen] will tell you the good, the bad, and the ugly,” Dickey said. “And we put that out there because we want to be truthful in all of our messaging. We know that that resonates with the audience that we’re after.”

Some of the issues are more trivial—it can be cold on the flightline, Dickey acknowledged with a laugh—but others are more serious. Questions about sexual harassment and assault, as well as racial and ethnic discrimination in the ranks, are hard topics that have left an impact, especially in recent years when protests against racial inequality and reports of high sexual assault rates have received significant attention.

“The JAMRS study definitely indicated sexual assault, racial disparity, … are areas that cause us concern,” Thomas said.

There’s only so much the Air Force can do about that, given the public and high-profile nature of these issues in the ranks.

“The challenges that we have as a Department of Defense is that the speed of information can be pretty powerful,” Chief Master Sgt. of the Air Force JoAnne S. Bass said in a separate roundtable. “And so for every good story that we have on the military, on the greatness that we provide all Americans, there’s 15 of the articles that come out that say otherwise, that there are sexual assaults occurring, that we are not taking care of Airmen and families when it comes to domestic violence.”

In the end, though, Thomas expressed optimism that transparency will work as a long-term strategy, both for the overall force and for AFRS.

“We’re very honest and very transparent about where some of our problems are and our barriers are. … There can be a short-term, negative impact on recruiting,” Thomas said. “In the long term, though … we do believe that the long game here is, we expose our problems. We deal with them, and we move on, and we get better for it. And then in the long game, our recruiting is going to benefit from the transparent approach that we are taking.”