DOD Leaders Want More Arctic Funding, But Not Right Now

June 17, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

The Pentagon’s 2022 budget is light on funding for defending the Arctic, but Defense Department officials expect future funding requests to rise with the region’s growing importance.

Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III, testifying before the Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee June 17, said the current fiscal 2022 request provides only “some capability” for the Arctic, adding, “We have to better resource our Arctic efforts in the future.”

The Pentagon is hashing out a new National Defense Strategy, he said, and “my goal is to make sure that our efforts in the Arctic, our requirements in the Arctic, are reflected in the new National Defense Strategy.”

U.S. Northern Command boss Gen. Glen D. VanHerck testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee June 9 that the Arctic region is not getting the funding it needs. “Senator, I think when I look at the FY22 budget, I see an inching along in all of the services, he said. “I’m encouraged: They all have strategies now, and the department has a strategy, and my strategy heavily relies on the Arctic,” the Air Force four-star said. “But we didn’t move the ball very far down the field this year in the budget.”

The DOD budget proposal does not aggregate funding that applies to the Arctic, but the budget overview does articulate the need to prepare for “contingencies associated with a changing climate, including investments to prepare for an opening Arctic and increased peer competition in that region.”

The Department of the Air Force’s request includes $127 million for the Polar MILSATCOM system and $14 million for radio equipment to support command and control in the Arctic. The department released its first Arctic Strategy last year.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark A. Milley, appearing alongside Austin, said the 2022 budget request provides adequate investment “for right now.” But he said the region will become “increasingly important geostrategically” and that DOD has little choice but to “increase resourcing in the Arctic.”

B-52 Re-engining Cost Up 9% Due to Fresh Data, ‘Industrial Realities’

June 17, 2021 | By John A. Tirpak

The total program cost of re-engining the B-52H fleet of 76 airplanes will be about $11 billion, a 9 percent jump over a previous estimate because of more up-to-date data, Acting Air Force Secretary John P. Roth told lawmakers June 17.

Roth told the Senate Armed Services Committee that recent press reports of a 50 percent increase are incorrect. This new number reflects information obtained from virtual prototyping of the system, along with “a reassessment of the requirement” and the inherent complexity of integrating a modern, commercial engine onto the “aging platform that the B-52 is,” he said.

The cost increase also takes into account the “realities of buying from the current industrial base,” Roth said.

The Air Force was not immediately able to provide precise numbers, or whether the 9 percent is a base year or then-year cost.

Roth also said the B-52 Commercial Re-Engining Program is one of USAF’s “Pathfinder” programs for using new congressional authorities to conduct “mid-tier” acquisitions, meaning the programs skip time-consuming steps that add little or no value. Using this approach will shave “about three years” off the B-52 CERP, he said. However, he said the approach requires “rigorous metrics” to determine if the approach is working and the willingness to change course if it’s not.

The CERP is also employing a paperless, digital, side-by-side comparison to evaluate various engine candidates for the program. A request for proposals on the CERP is expected to be released this summer.

The B-52 program was initially estimated to cost about $10 billion, but Air Force Global Strike Command and Air Force Materiel Command have said the program will likely “pay for itself” through an expected 30 percent gain in fuel efficiency and sharply reduced maintenance requirements. The engines likely will never be removed from their wings because the aircraft are expected to retire before the engines need an overhaul.

AFGSC boss Gen. Timothy M. Ray said last week the CERP could produce a disproportionate reduction in the need for tanker support of the B-52, as much as a 50 percent drop “depending on the scenario.”

The CERP is part of a number of B-52 improvements, including a replacement of its radar, connectivity upgrades, and a new digital backbone for the aircraft. The FY22 budget request includes $804 million for B-52 improvements, including CERP, the radar modernization program, adding Link 16 support, and mission data gear.

In the June 17 hearing, USAF Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. said the CERP is one of the ways the Air Force is answering the Biden administration’s directive for the Pentagon to do its part to address climate change, given the sharp reduction in its fuel consumption if the program is successful.

Pentagon Reviewing Deceptive Air Force ‘Pass-through’ Budget Account

June 17, 2021 | By John A. Tirpak

The idiosyncrasy that makes the Air Force’s budget appear to be nearly 20 percent larger than its true size is getting a review by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, acting Air Force Secretary John P. Roth told the Senate Armed Services Committee on June 17.

“We are actually working with the Office of the Secretary of Defense to see if there are some things that could be done” about the situation, Roth said in response to a question from Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.).

Cramer said the Air Force’s stated budget is $212.8 billion, but the service actually controls only $174 billion of that amount, including the Space Force budget. The remaining $39 billion is the “pass -through” account.

“Can’t we do something about this budgeting system that gives this view that the Air Force is getting a whole bunch of money that they don’t control?” Cramer said.

Roth responded that “There’s classified reasons why that exists” and that in fixing the issue, “we need to make sure that we don’t uncover things that ought not be uncovered.” But he said the Air Force is working with the OSD “to see if there’s some ways to do that. … We are discussing what is in the art of the ‘doable’ with the Secretary of Defense.”

The pass-through account is large—more than twice the size of the Space Force’s spending request of $17.4 billion and about five percent of DOD’s whole budget. When Space Force was created in 2018, many expected the “pass-through” would shift to that service because it’s believed that much of the spending in it is for space and space-related classified programs. But Pentagon leaders have subsequently said it’s not all space-oriented, adding further weight to USAF’s argument that it be discontinued in the interest of budget transparency.

A US Space Force Academy? Raymond Weighs In

June 17, 2021 | By Greg Hadley

Go Space Force, beat Air Force?

At least one U.S. Senator has expressed interest establishing a new service academy dedicated to the fledgling service branch. Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) floated the idea June 17 during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, pressing Chief of Space Operations Gen. John W. “Jay” Raymond on the topic.

“I’ve spoken in every Academy in our country, leadership, and organization. I’m very proud of them,” Tuberville said. “And I just hope that … we’ve got great institutions in this country, but I think we need something maybe where just we specialize with space.”

Raymond, however, said he didn’t think such an institution was necessary at this point.

“I think one of the things is, as an independent service, you have to develop your own people,” Raymond said. On the officer side, we only bring in about 300 or so folks a year. I’m very comfortable that the Air Force Academy is developing those people for us.

“In fact, you know, two years ago, before the Space Force stood up, we only got 30 cadets out of the Academy. The first year, last year, out of the Academy, we received 86. This year, 118. So we’re coming up on a little less than half of our total population coming from the Academy. And the talent that we’re getting is really top-tier talent, including a Rhodes Scholar. And so the Academy has a strong astro program—they’ve got a strong space program. I’m very comfortable that they are producing the the officers that we need to cover the Space Force, and they’re doing really good work.”

The Space Force has only existed as an independent service branch since December 2019, and no plans for a service academy were included in the service’s initial proposal. Tuberville, however, represents a state with a strong Space Force connection, as the city of Huntsville, Alabama, was selected as the new headquarters for U.S. Space Command. That decision has been protested and is currently under review.

There are five service academies: the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, the U.S. Naval Academy, the U.S. Air Force Academy, the U.S. Coast Guard Academy, and the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy. Like the Space Force construct, the U.S. Marine Corps commissions officers from the Naval Academy.

While Raymond didn’t sound interested in the idea of a separate Space Force Academy, he did express optimism about the service’s newly launched University Partnership Program, which was initially joined by 10 to 12 schools.

“What we are seeing, and what I am seeing as you go around to the schools, is that there is an increased amount of folks that are applying for space-related STEM degrees, which is important,” Raymond said. “I think it’s going to pay great dividends for our nation. What we’re trying to do with our University Partnership Program is partner with those folks and then attract them to come into the Space program. I’ve talked to [NASA administrator] Nelson—I’d really like to partner with them as well. I think there’s great opportunity here for the youth of America.

USAF, Boeing Resolving Two More KC-46 Deficiencies

June 17, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

The Air Force and Boeing are addressing two previously unannounced Category 1 deficiencies on the KC-46. The issues, affecting the aircraft’s receptacle drain line tubes and Flight Management System, will be fixed at Boeing’s expense.

“There are no operational restrictions on fielded KC-46s due to either of these deficiencies, nor do they affect [Air Mobility Command’s] plan for KC-46 Interim Capability Release,” said USAF spokesman Capt. Joshua D. Benedetti in a statement. “The [System Program Office] and Boeing have established operational processes and maintenance procedures to mitigate impacts and ensure the issues do not add extra risk to personnel, aircraft or operations.”

The air refueling receptacle drain line developed cracks in low-temperature conditions, according to the Air Force, and Boeing is redesigning the drain tube to address the issue.

The aircraft have also suffered isolated incidents of Flight Management System instability during operations. Boeing and subcontractor GE Aviation identified the need for a long-term software fix, and for the short term, Boeing is developing updated procedures to ensure the system’s stability in flight. The system became an issue in a March 3 flight over the Pacific, causing the crew to use other navigation systems to safely land in Hawaii, according to Defense News, which first reported the deficiencies.

While the fixes have been identified, they are still classified as Category 1 deficiencies. Four others relate to the aircraft’s Remote Vision System, fuel leaks, and a “stiff” refueling boom that requires an actuator redesign. An improved Remote Vision System 2.0 is now in preliminary design review, and the Air Force expects installations to begin in 2023.

Earlier this year, the Air Force resolved two other Category 1 deficiencies on the KC-46: a duct clamp that moved excessively and a drain mast on the outside of the tail that could potentially break loose.

Hundreds of less serious Category 2 deficiencies with the aircraft persist, defined as issues that do not impact the safety of flight and have workarounds in place to continue operations. These include a problem with the jet’s Aerial Refueling Software for which the Air Force has developed a workaround, Air Force Magazine reported.

Brown: DOD Needs Up to 5% More Money, Plus Aircraft Cuts, to Compete With China

June 16, 2021 | By John A. Tirpak

Even with a 3 percent to 5 percent increase in the defense budget, losing a conflict with China still becomes a “distinct possibility” without both aircraft cuts and a fundamental change in how the Air Force structures itself for war, Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. warned lawmakers June 16.

Asked by House Armed Services Committee ranking member Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) whether Brown agrees with the 2018 National Defense Strategy Commission’s finding that Pentagon spending should be increased 3 percent to 5 percent, Brown replied simply, “I do.”

Brown said he shares the committee’s concerns over the defense budget’s top line, saying that’s “exactly why I wrote ‘Accelerate Change or Lose’—because I do see risk if we do not.”

The fiscal 2022 budget prioritizes modernization, which drove the Air Force to request retiring some systems now “to ensure that we do not have future risk,” Brown said. He declined to say the Air Force needs a bigger share of the budget despite its key role in deterring China in the Indo-Pacific.

In his opening statement, Brown said the Air Force must bring about change faster because if it continues with “incremental” improvements, “losing becomes a distinct possibility.”

Under questioning from Chairman Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), Brown said he’s confident the budget matches the “vision” of a 10- to 15-year evolution in the fighter force to a more capable fleet able to deal with China’s rise in the Indo-Pacific.

“We are in a position of transition,” Brown said.

The Air Force is replacing the F-15C with the F-15EX because the C model is “really starting to show its age.” Meanwhile, the service is retaining the youngest F-16s, which can serve “another 15-20 years.” The budget calls for cutting 42 A-10s, with the remaining modernized fleet serving “into the middle of the next decade,” he said. The F-35 will remain the “cornerstone” of the force.

The F-22 will receive upgrades to serve for the same timeframe, then the Next-Generation Air Dominance fighter will succeed it. Collectively, Brown refers to this scheme as the “four plus one” fighter fleet plan: the NGAD, F-35, F-15EX, F-16, and A-10.

When asked by Rogers if the committee will receive the service’s Future Years Defense Plan, Roth deferred to the Pentagon.

“You have to understand that as we prepared this FY 22 budget with the Office of the Secretary of Defense,” Roth continued, “given the focus on the short timeframe—and we were late to begin with—but given the short timeframe, the focus was entirely on FY 22. There were no decisions made about the out years, so there really isn’t an out-years FYDP to be provided at this time.”

Under questioning from Rep. Elaine Luria (D-Va.), Brown declined to offer an opinion about whether the U.S. would ever invade China by land or why the “AirSea Battle” concept by the Air Force and Navy, according to Luria, “did not survive first contact with the Joint Staff.” She said a spokesman said the land component was missing from the concept.

“Think about that,” she said. “The missing part of an AirSea Battle concept was the land portion. … I guess the spokesman forgot about the Marine Corps.” Brown said that in the Western Pacific, “Air definitely plays a role.”

He added, “To me, I really do see air and sea, but really, across the Joint team and across all domains is where I expect that conflict to occur.” He said it’s hard to predict if a land invasion would be required but that he wants “to make sure we have options in the future.”

Luria asked Brown if the “1/3, 1/3, 1/3” divisions of funds for the services makes sense in the context of conflict with China and whether he believes “the Air Force and Navy require more resources to deal with this current conflict?” Brown responded that “naturally I’d like to have more” but that the services have to parse out “the redundancies we have” in the context of the Joint Warfighting Concept “to ensure we have the right capabilities for the Joint Force.”

Luria said she wanted to underscore “that I really, strongly believe the Air Force and Navy have a larger role to play in the Western Pacific and was hoping you would come here—just as (Chief of Naval Operations) Adm. (Michael M.) Gilday yesterday—and advocate for that because I think this is truly essential to the defense of our nation and what we might face in the Western Pacific in the future.”

USAF Reaches Out to Industry for ‘Bridge Tanker’

June 16, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

The Air Force is seeking options for a “bridge tanker” to fill the gap in tanker capacity anticipated between the end of KC-46 Pegasus production and development of a future refueler.

USAF’s Life Cycle Management Center on June 16 issued a Sources Sought Announcement seeking qualified, interested companies to provide a commercial derivative aircraft “based on existing and emerging” technologies. While specific requirements are not fully defined, the Air Force said the tanker can be crewed or uncrewed and does not need to be a low-observable aircraft.

The Air Force will release a final request for proposals by the end of 2022 once requirements are locked in.

“The KC-135 will be 70 years old when the Air Force expects to receive its last KC-46 delivery in 2029, and replacing these vital aircraft continues to be critical to the Air Force mission to project Rapid Global Mobility in today’s strategically competitive environment,” the Air Force said in a release.

USAF officials first mentioned the bridge tanker project in late 2020, promising a “full and open competition.”

“The Secretary of the Air Force has committed to a continuous recapitalization of tanker aircraft,” Air Mobility Command boss Gen. Jacqueline D. Van Ovost said at the Airlift/Tanker Association’s October conference. “We’re going to have a bridge tanker—we’ll have a full and open competition—on an aircraft to continue to recapitalize … the KC-135.”

While the sources sought notice is seeking interested companies, just two aircraft are mature enough for the competition: the KC-46 and the Airbus A330 Multi-Role Tanker Transport, which lost to the Pegasus in the previous competition.

The announcement comes amid continued public criticism of the KC-46 program on Capitol Hill. During a June 16 hearing, multiple members of the House Armed Services Committee said the Air Force should consider re-competing the KC-46 program because of extensive delays and performance issues with the Boeing aircraft.

Rep. Rob Wittman (R-Va.) accused the Air Force of paying $226 million for a “lemon.” He said “it is time that something changes.”

Acting Air Force Secretary John P. Roth defended the program and said re-competing the tanker program makes no “economic or business sense.” The best way forward, he said, is to work within current contracts to improve the aircraft to make it “hopefully ready” by 2023 or 2024.

F-16s, C-130s, KC-135s Training in Morocco for Exercise African Lion

June 16, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

Several U.S. Air Force aircraft including F-16s, C-130s, and KC-135s have deployed to northern Africa for the continent’s largest exercise, African Lion.

The exercise drew 7,000 participants from nine nations and wraps up June 18 with USAF aircraft flying alongside Moroccan aircraft for close air support training and C-130s airdropping personnel.

“The arrival of fighters and tankers adds another level to this already dynamic exercise,” said Gen. Jeffrey L. Harrigian, U.S. Air Forces in Europe-Air Forces Africa commander, in a release. “Every flight brings another opportunity to work closely with our partners and exchange best practices so we can better pursue our shared goals.”

F-16s from the 31st Fighter Wing at Aviano Air Base, Italy, and KC-135s from the 100th Air Refueling Wing at RAF Mildenhall, United Kingdom, arrived in Morocco on June 14. C-130Js from the 86th Airlift Wing at Ramstein Air Base, Germany, deployed even earlier.

The F-16s conducted an Agile Combat Employment training event June 16, flying from Ben Guerir Air Base in Morocco, engaging in close air support missions at a nearby range, then landing at Guelmim Airfield to reload and refuel. The aircraft took off again, flew another mission, and returned to Ben Guerir. All told, the F-16s dropped seven 500-pound bombs, according to a release.

The C-130s flew weapons, support equipment, and personnel to Guelmim as part of the ACE event.

“The teams down at African Lion are taking ACE to the next level by executing it in Africa for the first time,” Harrigian said. “Demonstrating these capabilities in new austere locations solidifies our unmatched ability to rapidly deploy combat-credible forces to any location.”

This year’s event is the first since 2019; the 2020 exercise was canceled because of the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition to Morocco, Tunisia and Senegal also hosted activities as part of African Lion.

Brown: NGAD Will be a Multirole Fighter

June 16, 2021 | By John A. Tirpak

The Next-Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) system—the fighter that will succeed the F-22—will have ground attack capability possibly for its own protection, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. told lawmakers June 16.

Testifying before the House Armed Services Committee on the fiscal 2022 budget request, Brown said he wants the NGAD to have “multirole” capability, emphasizing that the aircraft’s primary role will be air dominance but with the ability to strike ground targets as well.

Compared to the F-22, Brown said the NGAD will have “increased weapons load [and] … increased range” necessary to operate at the great distances required in the Indo-Pacific theater.

The NGAD will have “some air-to-ground capability to ensure, one, that it can survive, but also to provide options for our air component commanders and for the Joint Force,” Brown said, suggesting that the NGAD will be able to shoot at air defense systems that threaten it.

Retired Gen. James M. Holmes, former of Air Combat Command, has said there may be two variants of NGAD: one with long range and payload for the Indo-Pacific and one more oriented to the relatively short ranges between possible battle areas in Europe.

The NGAD is described as a “family of systems” that allows the Air Force to control the sky at times and places of its choosing, but its centerpiece will be a fighter aircraft. Other parts of the system are likely to be unmanned escort aircraft to carry extra munitions and perform other missions.

During the hearing, Brown also confirmed that the Air Force’s reason for not including more F-35s on its unfunded priorities list is that it prefers to wait for the more advanced Block 4 version of the jet.

“The F-35 we have today is not necessarily the F-35 we want to have that goes into the future, that will have Tech Refresh 3 and Block 4 against an advancing … Chinese threat,” Brown said.

The Air Force has put more F-35s on its unfunded priority list for the last several years, and Congress has obliged, adding 12 jets every year to the Air Force’s request for 48. However, members of the HASC in previous hearings this year have said they would fight against adding more F-35s to USAF’s request because the previous adds have exacerbated parts shortages and lowered the aircraft’s mission capable rates.

Brown emphasized that, while there were F-15EXs in the unfunded priority list, that move is meant to swiftly try to reduce the average age of the fighter fleet, which now is about 29 years old.

“Even with the unfunded priority list, the majority of new fighters we’re going to buy will be F-35s,” Brown said. But the Air Force did put F-35 sustainment items in the list because improvement in this area is a critical priority, he said.

Internal documents obtained by Air Force Magazine have shown the service intends to reduce its F-35 buy through the rest of the Future Years Defense Program to about 43 per year, in anticipation of Block 4 aircraft, which start coming off the production line sometime after 2025. The Government Accountability Office recently reported further slips in that timeline.

Editor’s note: This story was updated at 3:13 p.m. June 18 to correctly attribute the statement that there could be two variants of NGAD to former Air Combat Combat boss retired Gen. James M. Holmes.