NORTHCOM’s Budget Priority: Longer Warning Time

April 14, 2021 | By John A. Tirpak

Sensors and longer warning time, the ability to deter, and joint all-domain command and control are the top budget priorities for U.S. Northern Command, its commander, Gen. Glen D. VanHerck, told the House Armed Services Committee on April 14.

In a hearing on military activities affecting North and South America, VanHerck was asked what his top three budget priorities are in the fiscal 2022 budget.

“Domain awareness is at the top,” he said, “and that would include over-the-horizon radar capability to see beyond where our legacy systems do today.” Second on his “integrated list” would be undersea surveillance to “ensure we know what’s going on” when underwater craft approach North America, “and then obviously that domain awareness and information” that will “give us options” before having to defeat an attacking system with kinetic weapons.

VanHerck said new sensors will “allow us to see further than we have in the past.” He wants to fuse those data with that generated by existing intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance systems, as well as machine learning and artificial intelligence capabilities to assess open-source, social media, and personal traffic. This will “move decision-space left” and buy time to let national leaders engage in “deterrence … and messaging” activity that can stop a kinetic attack before it begins.

Much of the data VanHerck wants in the mix already exists, but is in “stovepipes … where there may be laws or policies that don’t allow us to share that data and information.” He views data and information as “a strategic asset that will enable us to … win” in a future conflict “if we have to, but more importantly, take us further left in the competition to deter and de-escalate in a crisis.”

He said the Pentagon is now talking about “all-domain command and control,” which, “If you put a bow around [it, is] what I’ve been talking about.”

It will be crucial to have policies in place that remove restrictions on critical information sharing before the new JADC2 system is fully developed, to avoid investing in a system that can’t be used, VanHerck said.

“We have to move forward with machine learning and artificial intelligence from a policy perspective and get our arms around this,” he said. “What we can’t do is field capabilities and then wait until the end, and [not] have … the policy and laws that go with it to enable us to support it.” JADC2 needs to be focused on giving leaders from the tactical to national level actionable information, he said. At the operational and strategic level, VanHerck said he, “as an operational commander, could posture forces to create deterrence or the President or the Secretary of Defense could use messaging to create deterrence as well.”

VanHerck also sees “tremendous value in looking at the possibility of an underlayer” of missile defenses to bridge the gap until the next-generation missile defense system arrives circa 2030. It would enhance the ability to defeat incoming missiles “and give us options to create deterrence during competition.”

If the U.S. does create such an “underlayer,” then “it should not be focused on a single threat, such as a ballistic missile. It should focus on everything from small unmanned aerial systems all the way to ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, everything in between. We can’t afford any longer to build stovepiped systems with capabilities for only one threat.”

Asked about defenses against cruise missiles, VanHerck allowed that he’s “trying to get a policy on what must we defend kinetically in our homeland.” The list likely includes “continuity of government, nuclear capabilities, command and control, ability to project power forward, and our defense industrial base.”

Again, though, he wants to be able to deter cruise missiles from being fired, which requires more exquisite knowledge and prioritization of that knowledge by machine systems.

“I don’t want to be shooting cruise missiles down in our homeland,” he said. “Endgame defeat is not where I want to be.” The same will be true of hypersonic missiles, especially since they can strike in half the time of ICBMs, he said.

VanHerck said there’s been a significant uptick of Russian activity in the Arctic, re-activation of a dozen Russian Cold War bases in the region, and a greater need to observe that activity. He supports building more Navy and Coast Guard icebreakers—only one is active, versus dozens in Russian service—and supported a greater operating tempo for U.S. forces in the region.

Asked about difficulties imposed by climate change, VanHerck said it is making Arctic waters more navigable for competitors, while thawing permafrost threatens some U.S. facilities, makes reaching others more difficult, and makes it harder to build new ones.

Biden: ‘It’s Time to End the Forever War’

April 14, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

The U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan will begin on May 1 and finish before the 20th anniversary of 9/11, to allow the American military time to focus more on global terror and increasing threats from China, President Joe Biden said.

During an April 14 address formally announcing the planned end to America’s longest war, Biden said, “We can’t continue the cycle” of keeping troops in Afghanistan and “hoping to create the ideal conditions for withdrawal. It’s time to end the forever war.”

Biden spoke from the White House’s Treaty Room, the same room where former President George W. Bush announced the first strikes on the Taliban in Afghanistan in October 2001. Biden said he is the fourth U.S. President to oversee the war in Afghanistan, and “I will not pass this responsibility on to a fifth.”

Unlike previous announcements on the U.S. presence in the country, the new September deadline is not “conditions-based.” Biden said that would be a “recipe” to stay in the country forever. Instead, the American focus needs to be on global threats of terror in other places, including in the Middle East, Africa, and beyond.

“The terror threat is now in many places, and keeping thousands of troops grounded and concentrated in one country at the cost of billions each year makes little sense to me and our leaders,” Biden said.

CIA director William J. Burns told members of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence earlier in the day that after years of “sustained counterterrorism pressure” neither Al-Qaida nor ISIS in Afghanistan have the “capacity today” to target the homeland, but there are other terrorist groups, such as Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, that pose a “much more serious threat.”

The decision extends the deadline laid out in the February 2020 deal with the Taliban, which called for all U.S. troops to leave by May 1.

The withdrawal will start in weeks and will not be done in a “hasty” manner. Biden warned the Taliban that if the group conducts attacks, the U.S. will use “all the tools at our disposal” to respond.

U.S. and international NATO forces will draw down inside the country together. During a meeting at NATO headquarters in Brussels, Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said allies have agreed together to the same drawdown timeline.

“We face a dilemma,” Stoltenberg said. “Because the alternative to leaving in an orderly fashion is to be prepared for a long-term, open-ended military commitment with potentially more NATO troops. This is not the end of our relationship with Afghanistan, but rather the start of a new chapter.”

Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III, speaking alongside Stoltenberg, said U.S. forces have accomplished the mission they set out to do—to “greatly diminish” the threat to the homeland and make possible civil and political progress.

There is still “too much violence to be sure,” Austin said, noting the Taliban will likely seek to reverse this progress. The U.S. will continue its support for the Afghan Air Force and special mission wing, along with paying the salaries of Afghan security forces to maintain their capability. Additionally, the U.S. will maintain counter terrorism capabilities in the region, he added.

“It is also a fact, however, that after withdrawal, whenever that time comes, the CIA and all of our partners in the U.S. government will retain a suite of capabilities—some of them remaining in place, some of them that we’ll generate—that can help us to anticipate and contest any rebuilding effort,” Burns said.

The new mission, however, is to “responsibly draw down forces and transition to a new relationship with our Afghan partners,” Austin said.

Afghan President Ashraf Ghani said in a statement that he spoke with Biden on April 14 about the decision. Afghanistan “respects the U.S. decision and we will work with our U.S. partners to ensure a smooth transition,” he said.

After Biden finished his speech, he visited Arlington National Cemetery to pay tribute to those killed in the war. The whole country is “forever indebted to them and their families” for their sacrifices, he said.

“We owe them. They’ve never backed down from a single mission that we’ve asked of them,” Biden said of U.S. troops who fought in Afghanistan. “They’ve never wavered in their resolve. They’ve paid a tremendous price on our behalf, and they have the thanks of a grateful nation.”

Editor’s Note: This story was updated at 7:32 p.m. to include comment from CIA Director William J. Burns and again at 8:30 a.m. to correct a date.

Air Force Magazine correspondent Amanda Miller contributed to this report.

AMC Addressing Lavatory Problems on the KC-46

April 14, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

Air Mobility Command is modifying the palletized lavatory and galley systems to avoid possible “spillage” as KC-46s take off and land, after issues arose with the system during operations.

The Air Transportable Galley-Lavatory is a palletized combination lavatory and galley that provides additional toilets, beverage production, and refrigeration for multiple mobility aircraft on long-distance missions with additional passengers. The system is not a part of the KC-46 itself. It has been in service since the 1980s and has been used extensively on various platforms, though the KC-46’s cargo loading layout has caused some problems.

The Pegasus has “unique floor cargo loading restrictions” that require the system to be flown on a narrow axis, instead of the wider axis that can be used in other aircraft, such as the C-17 and C-130. This has caused spillage problems “during steep ascents and descents,” AMC spokeswoman 1st Lt. Emma Quirk said in an April 14 statement.

In response, AMC is testing a potential solution to fix the problem. The KC-46 program office will modify six of the ATGL systems over the next 12 weeks, and the systems will be evenly divided between three KC-46 bases—McConnell Air Force Base, Kan.; Pease Air National Guard Base, N.H.; and Seymour Johnson Air Force Base, N.C.

The redesign comes as AMC plans to begin flying the KC-46 in limited operational roles. In the meantime, crews will use the aircraft’s built-in lavatory, AMC said.

USAF also is addressing two more problems with the ATGL system. First, since the system has been in use for about 40 years and is used extensively, many of the units are “unserviceable or partially mission capable,” Quirk said. AMC and the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center are working to continue a sustainment contract. Secondly, the systems require a restraint modification upgrade to ensure they remain safely attached to their floor pallet, according to AMC.

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) raised the issue with U.S. Transportation Command boss Gen. Stephen Lyons, after multiple groups of lawmakers flew on the aircraft from nearby Joint Base Andrews, Md. Lyons said he was not aware of operational impacts arising from the issue.

F-15C Records Longest Air-to-Air Shot in Test

April 14, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

An F-15C Eagle set a record for the longest air-to-air kill, but we won’t know what the record is.

In March, an F-15C fired an AIM-120D Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile at a BQM-167 targeting drone in the longest known air-to-air missile shot to date, resulting in a “kill” of the target from the farthest distance recorded, the 53rd Wing said in a release. However, the wing would not release the length of the shot, or the previous known record.

The 28th Test and Evaluation Squadron and 83rd Fighter Weapons Squadron partnered for the test, which took place out of Tyndall Air Force Base, Fla., as part of Weapons Systems Evaluation Program-East.

“This test effort supported requests from the [Combat Air Forces] for ‘long-range kill chain’ capabilities,” said Maj. Aaron Osborne, with the 28th TES, in the release. “Key partnerships within the 53rd Wing enabled the expansion of capabilities on a currently fielded weapons system, resulting in warfighters gaining enhanced weapons employment envelopes.”

The 53rd Wing said since the event took place with WSEP and in partnership with the 83rd FWS, the 28th TES conducted the test “at a relatively low-cost.” The test also “exercised existing long-range weapons testing infrastructure and laid the ground work for modernizing range capabilities in support of future long-range weapons testing” at the Eglin Gulf Test and Training Range.

KC-46 Deliveries Slow, But TRANSCOM Optimistic About Refueling Capacity

April 13, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

Boeing missed planned KC-46 delivery dates in March and early April, leading to a slower than expected acceptance rate.

Despite this slow delivery rate, the head of U.S. Transportation Command told lawmakers on April 13 he is comfortable with the current aerial refueling capacity, noting there are more legacy tankers flying and the KC-46 could potentially begin flying limited operations this summer.

The Air Force accepted just two new tankers so far this year, significantly less than the two per month it had expected. There has not been a KC-46 delivery since early February, when Pease Air National Guard Base, N.H., received its 12th and final tanker. The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center said in an April 13 statement that subsequent deadlines passed without deliveries.

“Boeing has been unable to present aircraft in a delivery configuration to support planned/potential delivery dates for March and April,” AFLCMC said in a statement to Air Force Magazine. “The Program Office projects moderate risk for the next projected delivery on April 30th of one aircraft to Seymour Johnson [Air Force Base, N.C.].”

Air Mobility Command said earlier this year it has slowed the acceptance rate because the aircraft are not operational, and there’s a lack of qualified crews to fly them since pilots are sticking with legacy aircraft longer.

“As we bring them on, we’re going to do our due diligence at the different bases, but for right now, I don’t need to be in a hurry to take them at a faster rate than about two a month,” AMC boss Gen. Jacqueline D. Van Ovost said in early February.

Boeing delivered 14 tankers in all of 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic and other issues. The year before, the company delivered 28.

“We are working to deliver KC-46 aircraft at a pace that meets the needs of the U.S. Air Force,” Boeing said in a statement. “As we, along with our industry, continue to navigate through the pandemic, Boeing is aligned closely with the Air Force to deliver on our commitments.”

In October 2020, another KC-46 delivery slipped because of electrical issues on the plane, though the aircraft made it to Pease in November.

One year ago, U.S. Transportation Command publicly opposed the Air Force’s plan to retire legacy refueling tankers and said the mission is its most stressed. However, TRANSCOM Commander Gen. Stephen Lyons told the Senate Armed Services Committee the 2021 defense policy bill’s restriction on retiring KC-135s and KC-10s, coupled with Air Force steps to increase Guard and Reserve tanker capacity, means the command is in a “much better position.”

“I am comfortable, and aligned with the Air Force’s position on this,” Lyons said during an April 13 hearing. “Boeing has a long way to go to deliver a fully operational weapon system, but in the interim I’m confident in the day-to-day.”

USAF originally planned to retire at least 26 of the tankers in its budget request, and TRANSCOM asked Congress to buy back 23 of the planes to avoid a gap in its capability as the KC-46 comes on line.

The KC-46 program is in a better place, with the Air Force and Boeing agreeing on a way ahead to fix the aircraft’s remote vision system. The RVS 2.0 upgrade, with new cameras and other hardware, is expected to begin rolling out in 2023.

Air Mobility Command announced earlier this year that it will free up some KC-46s for limited operational missions—flying sorties in areas that it has been cleared for in testing such as refueling with its drogue system. TRANSCOM has said these missions could come as early as June. The tanker will not, however, be cleared for any combat missions in the short term.

During the April 13 hearing, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) said the KC-46’s galley and lavatory system has new problems, though Lyons said he was not aware of operational impacts. AMC in a statement said there is an issue with the roll-on Air Transportable Galley-Lavatory, not with the KC-46 itself. The system also is used on other mobility aircraft.

DOD Sending More Troops to Germany in Reversal of Trump’s Planned Drawdown

April 13, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

Five hundred more U.S. personnel will be based in Germany starting later this year, in a reversal from the Trump administration’s plans to draw down the number of troops in the country.

Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III announced the increase during a visit to Germany’s Ministry of Defense on April 13, saying it “underscores our commitment to Germany and the entire NATO alliance.” It comes amid a broader freeze of U.S. force structure changes in Europe as part of a global posture review.

“Germany is one of our staunchest allies, and our relationship is built on shared values of freedom, democracy, human rights, and the rule of law,” Austin said. “Today, those principles are increasingly under duress. Amid shifting global dynamics and a challenging security environment, Germany will continue to be an important security and economic partner for the United States in the years ahead.”

German Defense Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer said the shift was “great news” and a “very strong signal of our partnership and friendship.”

U.S. European Command boss USAF Gen. Tod D. Wolters told the Senate Armed Services Committee on April 13 that the Soldiers are part of long-distance fires capability that will “improve our ability in all domains” and “increases our ability to deter.”

In July 2020, then-Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper and Wolters announced the broad force structure changes, which would have removed 12,000 troops from Germany, including shifting F-16s from Spangdahlem Air Base and stopping the planned move of tankers and special operations aircraft from RAF Mildenhall, England, to the country. The announcement received strong criticism from Capitol Hill, with lawmakers blocking funding for the move in the 2021 defense policy bill. Wolters announced in February the plans were on hold as the new administration reviewed the decision and it’s impacts.

Airman Killed While ‘Joy-Riding’ in ATV at Kuwait Base, Investigators Find

April 13, 2021 | By Amy Hudson

Two Airmen were “messing” around on a single all-terrain vehicle in the cargo yard at Ali Al Salem Air Base last September when the driver lost control and the ATV rolled over, pinning the passenger to the ground and killing him instantly.

Staff Sgt. Ronald J. Ouellette, 23, of Merrimack, N.H., died in the Sept. 14, 2020, crash. An autopsy cited blunt force trauma to the head as the cause of death. The driver, also a staff sergeant, was treated for minor injuries and released. Neither Ouellette nor the driver—both assigned to the 386th Expeditionary Logistics Readiness Squadron—were wearing seatbelts or helmets.

Accident investigators said the Airmen were driving the Polaris Ranger all-terrain utility vehicle at about 15 mph, 10 mph over the posted speed limit in the cargo yard. The driver told security forces the two were “just out joy-riding” and “hit the turn too hard.” He said he took his foot off the gas before turning the corner, but he did not remember hitting the breaks.

When the vehicle rose onto two wheels in the midst of the turn around 5 p.m. local time, the driver attempted to right the vehicle, but failed. He exited the passenger compartment through the protective roll cage, according to the ground accident investigation report, released April 13. Investigators believe Ouellette also attempted to jump from the ATV, but didn’t make it.

The driver found Ouellette pinned under the protective roll cage, but was unable to lift it off of him. He called his supervisor for emergency support and security forces and first responders arrived on the scene at 5:02 p.m. Ouellette was declared dead on arrival.

Ouellette was an aerial porter in the Air Force Reserve. He joined the Air Force on Oct. 10, 2014 and was a member of the 42nd Aerial Port Squadron at Westover Air Reserve Base, Mass.

“Ronald was a valued member of the Patriot Wing and there are no words that can heal the pain his loss brings,” said Air Force Col. Craig C. Peters, commander of the 439th Airlift Wing at the time, which includes Ouellette’s unit, according to Stars and Stripes. “The loss of our own, or any service member, is never easy. During this difficult time, our priority is to do all we can to lift and support his family, friends, fellow Airmen in his squadron, and loved ones who are struggling.”

The fatal accident occurred just two days after another deadly accident. Senior Airman Jason Khai Phan was killed while patrolling Ali Al Salem. Accident investigators concluded Airmen were not wearing seatbelts at the time of that crash and were inexperienced with the Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected All Terrain Vehicle they were driving. Phan was assigned to the 66th Security Forces Squadron at Hanscom Air Force Base, Mass., and was deployed to the 386th Expeditionary Security Forces Squadron at the time.

US Forces to Leave Afghanistan by the 20th Anniversary of 9/11

April 13, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

U.S. forces will leave Afghanistan by Sept. 11—the 20th anniversary of the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Biden administration officials said.

President Joe Biden is expected to formally announce the plan, which is not “conditions based, unlike previous decisions on troop levels, on April 14. A senior administration official, who spoke with reporters on background, said sticking with the conditions-based approach is a “recipe” for U.S. forces to stay in the country forever.

However, Biden’s hard deadline, is still more than four months after the May 1 deadline for American troops to leave the country, under the February 2020 deal with the Taliban. U.S. officials have long said the Taliban’s level of violence remains too high to completely withdraw forces, although the U.S. already has drawn down to about 2,500 in Afghanistan, from a peak of more than 100,000 in 2011.

“We went to Afghanistan to deliver justice to those who attacked us on Sept. 11 and to disrupt terrorists seeking to use Afghanistan as a safe haven to attack the United States,” a senior administration official said in a call with reporters, which was obtained by Air Force Magazine. “We believe we achieved that objective some years ago. We judge the threat against the homeland now emanating from Afghanistan to be at a level that we can address it without a persistent military footprint in the country and without remaining at war with the Taliban.”

Extending the deadline will give commanders the “time and space” needed to safely withdraw from the country, the official said. The timeline is “what is required” in the judgement of military leaders, the official said.

“We have communicated with the Taliban in no uncertain terms that if they do conduct attacks against us or allied forces, as we carry out this drawdown, … we will hit back hard and that we will hold them accountable for that,” the official said.

There is no “military solution” to the problems in Afghanistan, and ongoing peace talks need to play out to end the war, the official said.

The administration has notified NATO of the plan and “we remain in lockstep with them as we undergo this operation,” the official said. Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III is set to meet with NATO officials this week.

Withdrawing from Afghanistan will allow the U.S. military to focus more on global threats, and “we have to focus on those aspects of a dispersed and distributed terrorist threat even as we keep our eye on the ball to prevent the re-emergence of a significant terrorist threat from Afghanistan.”

After Sept. 11, the remaining military presence will be focused on protecting the diplomatic presence in the country. The official did not say what size force would be needed for that mission.

Some on Capitol Hill quickly criticized the Biden administration for the plan. Senate Armed Services Committee Ranking Member Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) said in a statement the hard deadline is a “reckless and dangerous decision,” maintaining that withdrawal needs to be conditions based.

Unleashing the Potential of the US Space Force

April 13, 2021 | By Thomas D. Taverney

It is undeniable the U.S. Space Force (USSF) has hit the ground running and has made significant advances in its first 16 months of existence. 

The most critical need for the Space Force now is to respond to the threats posed by Russia and China in our space systems, especially in the speed at which we field capability.  Today’s environment is characterized by rapidly emerging and evolving threats to our space enterprise, and rapidly emerging and evolving opportunities to combat these in a responsive fashion.

The Space Force and U.S. Space Command, along with the Space Development Agency (SDA), the Space Rapid Capabilities Office, SpaceWerx, the assistant secretary of defense (space), and the assistant secretary of the Air Force (space) were all created to posture us to succeed in this environment.  

Having a Space Force alone is not enough. It needs the authorities commensurate with its responsibilities to be effective. While there are numerous issues to solve, I will focus here on the two most critical: improved acquisition and Space architecture authorities.

To fully meet all of the promise of a new service dedicated to space, we need to change both “WHAT” we acquire and “HOW” we acquire it.  While “HOW” we buy systems is clearly the responsibility of the Secretary of Defense and Service Secretaries, the Chief of Space Operations is ultimately responsible for the organizations and people executing on acquisition, and most importantly the CSO and the Guardians have a huge stake in how fast and effectively that happens. These systems are acquired in support of the CSO and the USSF & USSPACECOM missions. “WHAT” we acquire is more clearly in the CSO’s wheelhouse, and therefore responsibility for defining the architecture it supports needs to be with the CSO.  

The imperative is to do business differently. I believe we have a unique opportunity to forge the normally stove-piped enterprises of requirements, architecture, resource allocation, acquisition, and moving the systems into a new and resilient capabilities to respond to our adversaries. 

Positively, the U.S. Space Force now has a dedicated budget and its Head of Contracting Authority is now at the Space and Missile Systems Center.  The Space Force staff is working with the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Joint Requirements Oversight Council on developing a more agile and streamlined requirements process.  SDA is buying mature, commercial technology, and innovating to get high-performing systems more rapidly and affordably into orbit.  As senior acquisition executive and senior procurement executive responsibilities move to full-time dedicated Space Force personnel, further streamlining of processes and the delegation of Milestone Decision Authority to the acquisition organizations, at the lowest level feasible, should continue.     

Acquisition

USSF and the ASD (Space) and ASAF (Space) have definitely been aggressive in providing a series of 10 changes that will help us transition the Space Force from building very few, expensive, longlife systems (that are fat juicy targets), to a future of building affordable, shorter-lived, leading-edge technology systems in larger numbers to inhabit proliferated and resilient constellations. 

To counter the current and growing threat environment we need to build systems that are responsive to changing threats and agile enough to adapt to changes in JROC requirements.  The requirements process is moving to become faster and more flexible. Up to now, the path to arriving at JROC-validated requirements for space systems has been a multi-year, tortuous process, because space touches all parts of the joint forces. Vice Chairman USAF Gen. John E. Hyten wants the JROC to issue more narrative-like requirements statements that would imply the need for contributing systems to evolve as the threat to the force changes. Likewise, the systems we are building and deploying must be able to rapidly adapt to changing requirements, so we do not need to change gears and build totally new systems every time our adversaries update the threat.

Modern software and firmware mean satellites can now be reprogrammable, and ongoing production contracts with multiple contractors can assure on-going competition. Both can be elements to a comprehensive solution. This requires changes beyond just acquisition, but accelerating acquisition processes is vital. The Space Force must turn technology into systems within the same three- to four-year window now used by our adversaries. .

Some of the 10 capabilities USSF seeks in the Alternate Acquisition Report would help in acquiring a greater number of less-expensive satellites (proliferated constellations, etc.).  Other elements assist in clearing resource allocation hurdles related to smaller numbers of systems.  We need to be able to acquire both large and small constellations when applicable to assure flexibility.  More importantly, we need to be able to rapidly on-ramp technology, regardless of its origin, whether that be commercial, U.S. Government, or allied, without having to start over. 

The Space Force and Department of the Air Force developed and forwarded these changes for approval in the USSF Alternate Acquisition Report, but thus far there has not be closure. OSD and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) did not agree with the report and never formally released it, releasing a draft report to Congress instead.

USSF is now trying again, and another version of the Alternate Acquisition Report is in coordination. It’s probably safe to say that the Department of the Air Force complied with the call from Congress for recommendations, but disagreements within DOD and OMB have prevented any formal recommendations from emerging.  

How can we demand and expect that the Space Force responds to today’s threats without untying its hands and giving them the acquisition tools to do it?

The Space Architecture

The second biggest issue to solve is the role of defining the space architecture across the Department of Defense. The USSF is not the only organization building space systems and their architectures. There are too many organizations that think they are in charge in space, and with so many organizations building satellites, nobody knows what the architecture is and who owns it.  This should be a Space Force responsibility, and to achieve it, it must also have the authority to do so. There is no better place than the service that was formed for this very mission.

The Space Force should be uniquely responsible for defining the operational architecture needed to accomplish its assigned missions—missile warning, space-based precision navigation and timing, satellite communications, space-based environmental monitoring, space superiority, and space domain awareness.  The Space Force should also be responsible for the underlying architecture and for the command and control of these space systems. 

The Missile Defense Agency is building satellites for their assigned mission of missile defense/missile tracking, while also partnering and collaborating with USSF to fly the satellites. Likewise, SDA is closely collaborating with USSF on fitting their satellite capabilities into an integrated architecture. This collaborative approach allows the Space Force to define the interface into the operational architecture for their sensors (and, where it makes sense, see if we can get synergy).

Despite the positives with MDA and SDA, overall, the architecting problem is getting worse. Congress gave SAF/SP the space architecture and integration job and now SAF/AQ has been re-labeled Chief Architect of Air and Space Forces. The Air Force sees a need for integrated Air and Space architectures, which is good, but we also need integration with Air and Land (including both the Army and Marines), with Air and Sea (with the Coast Guard and Navy), and Intelligence and DoD Space (with the IC community and DOD).

An air and space architecture should not be created in a vacuum, but rather in concert with the other architectures; the single logical place for that is in the Space Force, which is the only organization that can assure all these architectures are compatible and supportive of each other. The assistant secretary of the Air Force (Space) should support the CSO and help prioritize and align the national-level policy and strategy for the force design work led by the Space Warfighting Analysis Center, advocate for the necessary resources, and, very importantly, ensure that individual programs comport with approved architectures. Architecture without sufficient resources are simply aspirations.

The Space Force should define what it needs to solve military problems, and the Secretary of the Air Force and acquisition chains should work to figure out the best way to buy it and get it fielded at the speed required by the CSO. 

Good “mission area” architectures are effectively strategic plans.  If done correctly, they help us to understand where we can and cannot afford risk; where we can make resource, performance, and requirements trades BETWEEN programs within a mission area; and where we can fill gaps by buying services or relying on partners. Further, an integrated, cohesive space architecture can help our Space Force synchronize capability development, so they can deliver the entire capability on a relevant and synchronized timeline.

Unlocking USSF’s Full Potential

The Space Force should be authorized to unify the department so that everyone can plug in to a single vision of a unified space architecture, even when they need to pursue their own military problem sets. The Space Force has accomplished much in just its second year of existence.  We must allow it to unlock its full potential, by providing it with the tools and authorities to accomplish its mission.

The USSF has done much in its first 16 months. Let’s provide it with the critical authorities to match its responsibilities in order to unleash the full capabilities of the United States in space.

Thomas “Tav” Taverney is a retired Air Force major general and a former vice commander of Air Force Space Command.