F-35 Is Now the Air Force’s Second-Largest Fighter Fleet

May 7, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

The F-35A fleet is now the second-largest in the Air Force’s inventory, behind the F-16, surpassing F-15s and A-10s.

There are now 283 Joint Strike Fighters in the Air Force’s arsenal, compared to 281 A-10s, 234 F-15C/Ds, and 218 F-15Es. Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. told the House Appropriations defense subcommittee on May 7 the F-35 reached the milestone within the last week.

The Air Force plans to buy 1,763 of the aircraft, and the numbers of jets have been growing at bases inside the continental United States and Alaska. Jets are expected to start arriving at the first USAF overseas base—RAF Lakenheath, United Kingdom—later this year.

Brown told lawmakers the service is still undertaking a study of tactical aviation requirements to determine the right mix of fifth-generation and legacy fighters.

“The intent here is to take a look at the fighter portfolio we do have today with the seven different fighter fleets and what is the best mission capability as we go to the future,” Brown said. “We need to have a range of fighters to do both the high end and low end.”

The F-35 is the service’s “highest-end” fighter, and since the service doesn’t have its full complement of the aircraft, it needs to balance how it is used.

“The intent here [is to] study a range of options of what the right mix should be as we look at the threat for the future. [That] is part of what that study is going to provide,” Brown said. “So it won’t be there to give us an answer—it will give us a range of answers to take a look at the threat to make sure we have done the analysis to inform ourselves but also to inform our key stakeholders.”

The F-35 has come under intense scrutiny from lawmakers recently. House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Smith (D-Washington) called the Joint Strike Fighter a “rathole” during a March virtual event with the Brookings Institution, suggestion DOD leaders should consider cutting the overall buy. For years Congress has bought more F-35s than the Defense Department requested in its budgets, causing HASC readiness subcommittee chair Rep. John Garamendi (D-California) to cite “enormous concern” about the F-35 fighter’s sustainment, saying Congress may cut back on purchases of the jet to let the sustainment enterprise catch up.

USAF Officials Urge Congress to Allow for More Fleet Cuts, Reinvestment in New Systems

May 7, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

Top Department of the Air Force leaders told lawmakers May 7 they need to divest aging aircraft to make room for more advanced systems, setting up a now familiar budget fight on Capitol Hill.

“America cannot wait to modernize the Air Force any longer, not one year, one month, or one week,” Acting Air Force Secretary John P. Roth and Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. wrote in testimony to the House Appropriations defense subcommittee. “To deter and defeat today’s competitors and tomorrow’s adversaries, we must re-capitalize our Air Force, and we must do it now … The call to accelerate change or lose is not hyperbole—it is a requirement.”

USAF officials face an uphill battle, as Congress in recent years has largely blocked efforts to retire aircraft such as A-10s, legacy refueling tankers, and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance aircraft. Lawmakers also have been critical of new efforts such as the Advanced Battle Management System to replace the E-8C Joint STARS. But with budgets expected to fall in coming years, USAF officials are pressing the urgency.

“We’re going to have to probably make some hard choices and some difficult decisions concerning trying to invest in the future versus continuing to support some of our legacy systems,” Roth told lawmakers during the hearing. “And so we’ve actually been talking about that for two or three years in terms of focusing on the future and taking some additional risks with some of our current systems and some of our legacy capability. My sense is the budget you’ll see is a balanced budget that can support the National Security Strategy with some reasonable risk.”

Because the Biden administration’s 2022 budget request has not been released, USAF officials did not discuss many specifics, so it’s not clear what aircraft would be cut or what future investment plans will be requested.

In prepared testimony, USAF officials once again pressed to allow them to retire old refueling aircraft. Last year, Congress mostly blocked the Air Force from cutting KC-135s, but Air Force officials said getting rid of the aircraft is necessary as the KC-46 comes online.

“The inability to phase the divesture of the legacy tanker fleet shackles funding and manpower resources and hampers the fielding of the more capable KC-46 at the rate required to support combatant commanders,” the testimony states. “This negatively impacts air refueling capacity and tanker advancement. Offsets from legacy tanker divestment in both funding and manpower are critical to the success of the KC-46 and air refueling as a whole.”

USAF leaders also indicated that they have their sights on the RQ-4 Global Hawk fleet for cuts, citing the need for more survivable ISR aircraft. The service wants to cut the RQ-4 Block 30 aircraft, a move that Congress also has blocked before, to repurpose that money for a “penetrating ISR capability.” Future ISR needs to be done by a “family of systems,” including nontraditional assets, sensors, commercial platforms, and a “hybrid force” of fifth- and sixth-generation capabilities, officials said.

“Current ISR platforms have been able to accomplish this task with relative ease because they operated in uncontested and low-threat environments where the United States enjoys superiority across all domains of warfare,” Roth and Brown said in testimony. “Such freedom of action will not be the case in the future. Future threats will challenge the ability of legacy ISR platforms to successfully execute their missions.”

In what is shaping up to be one of the biggest fights of the budget process, Brown and Roth urged lawmakers to continue to support the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent program to replace the aging Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile as some in Congress are looking to cut back on the nuclear triad.

Delayed nuclear modernization means there needs to be a “comprehensive weapon replacement,” the leaders said in testimony. Brown told lawmakers during the hearing that the Minuteman III’s overall infrastructure is aging and that there are not vendors available to rebuild parts needed.

“With the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent, what you will get, then, is something that’s more safe, more secure, more reliable, and then also paces the threat we’re up against to provide that deterrence value,” he said. “The reason why we actually have the ICBM in the first place is provide that nuclear and strategic deterrence.”

In a sign of the upcoming challenge, multiple lawmakers warned the leaders about the dangers of cutting aging aircraft. Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) highlighted an effort by the Air Force in 2014 to cut E-3 AWACS and a Reserve unit at Tinker Air Force Base in his district.

“I know you sometimes got to make changes to reinvest, but please don’t give up capabilities that you might need in the immediate future,” Cole said. “It’s a very dangerous world, as you know better than me, and sometimes you’re going to need those legacy systems.”

Multiple representatives with Guard C-130 units in their districts also warned the Air Force about cutting Hercules aircraft, as the service looks to modernize the fleet and cut old C-130Hs. Rep. Cheri Bustos (D-Illinois) said she is “deeply concerned” with plans to cut “our mobility flexibility and responsiveness, to decrease the number of our tactical airlift workhorses in the inventory.” She said the upcoming, yet-to-be-released Mobility Capabilities Requirements Study would support an Air Force request to lower the number of C-130s needed to 255, down from the 2018 study’s recommendation of 300.

Brown said it is the Air Force’s intent to work closely with the National Guard “to ensure we are doing a good analysis.” National Guard Bureau chief Gen. Daniel R. Hokanson told the same committee earlier in the week that he also would not want to see the number of C-130s in the Guard drop.

“We do have to make some tough decisions, and what I want to be able to do is commit that we’re going to work very closely with the Guard as we start to make decisions going forward with our C-130s,” Brown said.

Richard Says Nuclear Deterrence Connected to All Other DOD Capabilities

May 7, 2021 | By Amy Hudson

If strategic deterrence fails, nothing else will work as intended, U.S. Strategic Command boss Adm. Charles “Chas” A. Richard said during a virtual Brookings Institution event May 7.

“Every operational plan in the Department of Defense, and every other capability we have in DOD, rests on the assumption that strategic deterrence, and in particular nuclear deterrence, … is holding right,” Richard said. “And, if that assumption is not met, particularly with nuclear deterrence, nothing else in the Department of Defense is going to work the way it was designed.”

The United States can no longer separate nuclear and conventional policies, assuming they address separate threats. “You can’t think about it in pieces,” he said. “Nuclear is not separate from conventional; it is not separate from space; [it] is not separate from cyber. They are all linked.”

Last year, Richard said his command was rethinking how it approaches strategic deterrence in light of today’s threats, and Lt. Gen. Richard M. Clark, the Air Force’s deputy chief of staff for strategic deterrence and nuclear integration, said the Air Force was working on a new nuclear and conventional integration policy. China is rapidly building up its nuclear arsenal and has an “ambiguous no-first-use policy,” and Russia is bolstering its so-called tactical nuclear weapons, Clark said.

“The multipolar world is presenting different challenges for us,” Clark said at an Aug. 19 Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies event. “The lines are a bit more blurred between conventional and nuclear, so that’s driven us to start thinking in ways that may be different than we thought about in the last 20 years or so.”

Richard reiterated comments he made on Capitol Hill in April, saying the nation does not have a triad on a day-to-day basis because nuclear-capable bombers were taken off alert after the Cold War. However, he told members of the Senate Armed Services Committee that could change if the decision was made to shift to a dyad approach to deterrence.

He emphasized the rapidly expanding threats, noting that for the first time in history, the United States must deter two peer, nuclear-capable adversaries simultaneously.

“That is a very different stack of dynamics, particularly the fact they have to be deterred differently. We’re working very hard on that here, but I think this is a much broader question that invites serious effort to go think through,” Richard said.

However, the United States has repeatedly delayed nuclear modernization and is now facing a multibillion-dollar bill for new bombers, a replacement for the 70-year-old Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile system, updated nuclear command and control capability, new ballistic missile submarines, and more. The Biden administration has said it wants to take a fresh look at the country’s nuclear capabilities and plans a new Nuclear Posture Review, while some on Capitol Hill are pushing to either eliminate the ICBM leg of the triad altogether or push off modernization yet again.

Richard says this is a mistake and cautioned that the U.S. has only one chance to get this right.

“We have delayed the recapitalization of the triad to the point that in certain infrastructure areas and in certain talent areas—human capital—that if we’re wrong, and choose not to do something, we lose [those capabilities], and we’re not getting them back for five or 10 years,” Richard said. “We don’t normally face those decisions, but I am very confident that we’re trying hard to identify them. I’m confident our leaders, both inside the department and inside the nation, will make wise decisions, but we don’t normally have that consequence to our decisions.”

B-52 Demos Hypersonic Missile Kill Chain at Northern Edge Exercise

May 6, 2021 | By John A. Tirpak

A B-52H bomber demonstrated the steps necessary to fire a hypersonic AGM-183 missile at a target 600 nautical miles away during the ongoing Northern Edge exercise in Alaska, the Air Force reported.

The bomber, on a 13-hour flight from Barksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana, received targeting data from the All-Domain Operations Capability experiment being run as part of the exercise, which in turn was being supplied with targeting data by sensors the USAF did not identify. The B-52 crew then simulated feeding the targeting data to an AGM-183 Air-launched Rapid Response missile. The service said the bomber was not actually carrying an AGM-183. It did not characterize the type of target being attacked.

“We were really exercising the data links that we needed in order to complete that kill chain loop,” 53rd Test Management Group Deputy Commander Lt. Col. Joe Little said. Feedback was then provided “to the players in the airspace that the simulated hypersonic missile was fired and effective,” he said. The event was a demonstration of beyond-line-of-sight kill chain employment, the Air Force said, and it succeeded in the “highly contested and realistic threat environment that Northern Edge provides.”

The ADOC experiment is meant to demonstrate synchronizing joint functions in forward locations “when traditional [command and control] … is degraded or denied,” the service explained. ADOC personnel help facilitate joint long-range fires through an “Advanced Battle Management System approach.” The experiments are designed to accelerate the employment of tactics, techniques, and procedures as well as technologies that can support a major combat operation.

Northern Edge is a high-end wargame taking place in and around Alaska training ranges. It’s experimenting and exercising with multi-domain operations while providing tactical training for individual land, sea, air, and space units. The exercise is trying out “adaptive basing” joint tactics, training, and procedures with live, virtual, and constructive means in support of Indo-Pacific Command.

The exercise also marks the operational debut of the F-15EX, the two brand-new examples of which flew to Alaska from Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, for the wargame last week. They and other F-15s in the wargame are trying out the Eagle Passive Active Warning Survivability System (EPAWSS) electronic warfare suite.

The Air Force has not yet succeeded in launching an ARRW. The missile was not released in a flight test planned for last month. The service said further attempts will be made soon.

Pentagon Doesn’t Plan to Shoot Down Spent Chinese Booster

May 6, 2021 | By John A. Tirpak

Despite no one knowing where a spent, 10-story Chinese Long March 5B booster rocket will fall to Earth, the Pentagon has no plans to try to shoot it down, Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III said May 6.

“We’re hopeful that it will land in a place where it won’t harm anyone,” Austin said during his first press conference as Defense Secretary.

Although “we have the capability to do a lot of things, … we don’t have a plan to shoot it down, as we speak,” Austin added. The fact that the exact time and place of the rocket’s return to Earth is unpredictable at this point, “speaks to the fact that, for those of us who operate in the space domain, there should be a requirement to operate in a safe and thoughtful mode,” Austin said. The disposition of space junk should be taken “into consideration as we plan and conduct operations,” he added.

The Pentagon had previously said that the exact point of impact “cannot be pinpointed until within hours of re-entry.” The rocket is reported to be tumbling as it orbits the Earth.

The rocket body was used to loft the core module of China’s new Tianhe space station into orbit on April 29. The station is planned to host taikonauts for long-term missions, and 10 additional modules will be added in the coming months and years. China’s first space station, Taingong-1—scarcely larger than a space capsule—made an uncontrolled re-entry and impact in the Pacific Ocean in 2016. Tiangong-2, the second such craft, made a controlled entry and burned in the atmosphere in 2019.

Normally, such large first-stage rockets fall into the sea after exhausting their fuel, but the Long March went into orbit, possibly unexpectedly. China has declined to say whether it has any control over the booster’s path. The friction of the atmosphere will eventually slow the booster down, and it will then re-enter.

Austin said the Pentagon predicts the booster will make re-entry “between the eighth and ninth” of May.

Chinese state-run media have suggested the Long March will burn up harmlessly in the atmosphere, leaving no pieces to reach the surface.

The situation is a near-replay of an event that took place last year, when an uncontrolled Chinese rocket landed in the Atlantic Ocean after passing over Los Angeles and New York City.

In 2008, the U.S. raised eyebrows by demonstrating it could shoot down one of its own satellites. The USS Lake Erie, employing a specially modified SM-3 Standard missile, intercepted and destroyed the classified National Reconnaissance Office satellite designated as USA-193. The spacecraft had gone out of control soon after being orbited, and while it wasn’t expected that its return to Earth posed a hazard, its hydrazine propellant did. The missile destroyed the satellite and vented its fuel tank at such an altitude that the debris and hydrazine burned up harmlessly.

Russia and China criticized the operation, code-named Burnt Frost, saying it was a response to China’s test of an anti-satellite weapon against one of its own satellites in 2007, which left thousands of pieces of debris in orbit, creating a hazard to space navigation.

In 1985, the Air Force demonstrated an ASAT missile launched from an F-15A, which destroyed a target in orbit. The test was never repeated, and the missile, designated the ASM-135 and built by Vought, did not go into open production.

DOD Leaders Open to Removing Commanders from Sexual Assault Cases, but Waiting on Commission

May 6, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

As momentum builds within the Pentagon and on Capitol Hill to remove commanders from overseeing sexual assault prosecutions, top Defense Department leaders say they are open to the idea, but they want to give a commission time to finish its work, and they want to have discussions with service leaders before making any changes.

Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III, when he took the position in January, made addressing sexual assault in the military a top priority and convened an independent commission to look into ways to address the issue. A preliminary report from the commission recommends removing the chain of command from prosecuting sexual assault, while a new measure in the Senate has dozens of cosponsors aiming to do the same.

“All options are on the table” to address the issue, Austin said. While the Defense Department has historically handled the issue one way, “We really need to kind of broaden our horizons and begin to look at things differently and be willing to take different paths to improve things.” This will also likely include steps beyond the chain of command issue, he said.

“This is very important to me, and it’s very important to this entire department,” Austin said. “And we’re going to stay sighted on this until we find ways to improve. I think the accountability piece of it is a very important piece, but it’s not the only piece. You know there are climate issues, how we take care of victims issues. There are a number of things that the independent review commission are looking at that will add to this entire picture here.”

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark A. Milley said his view of the issue has evolved and that he’s open to changes such as removing the chain of command from the process simply because the problem has grown so large with no positive changes.

“I was the Chief of Staff of the Army for four years, and I’ve been the Chairman for coming up on two, and … what has caused me to have a change—and I’ve given it a lot of hard thought—[is] we haven’t moved the needle,” Milley said. “That’s the bottom line. We haven’t resolved this issue.”

Recent data, based on surveys, estimates that about 20,000 men and women were sexually assaulted within the military in the past year, Milley said. That amounts to about 1 percent of the total force, and the number has not gone down over time.

“Every one of us wants it solved; 20,000 is a huge number, and we can’t tolerate that,” Milley said. “We can’t tolerate that level of divisiveness in our force. These are assaults. These are blue-on-blue assaults. It cannot stand. It has to be resolved.”

Additionally, surveys have shown that younger troops do not trust their chain of command to handle sexual assault investigations, he said. “We, the chain of command—the generals, the colonels, the captains, and so on—we have lost the trust and confidence of those subordinates in our ability to deal with sexual assault,” Milley said. “So, we need to make a change.”

Top U.S. Defense Officials: Afghan Air Force Capability ‘Key’ After Withdrawal

May 6, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

The U.S. military is looking at new ways to train Afghan forces and for contractors to continue to work on Afghan Air Force aircraft following the full withdrawal of American troops this year.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army Gen. Mark A. Milley, during a May 6 briefing at the Pentagon, said the ability of the Afghan Air Force to continue supporting ground operations against the Taliban is important to ensure the country is not overrun after American and coalition troops leave.

“The Afghan Air Force does 80 to 90 percent of all airstrikes in support of the Afghan ground forces. We’re actually doing very few. We do some, but very few relative to the Afghan Air Force,” Milley said. “The key will be the Afghan Air Force and their ability to continue providing close air support for the Afghan Army.”

The Pentagon is working on its plans to support the Afghan military going forward in addition to its plans for “over-the-horizon” counterterrorism missions and logistics after the withdrawal.

“Maintaining logistic support to the Afghan Air Force is a key task that we have to sort out, doing it over the horizon, but also in country,” Milley said. “It could be done by contractors. A lot of that’s going to be dependent on the … security conditions on the ground, but the intent is to keep the Afghan Air Force in the air and to provide them with continued maintenance.”

The drawdown, as announced by President Joe Biden on April 14, covers U.S. and coalition military personnel along with contractors—“all of our capabilities that we are responsible for,” Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III said during the briefing. Contractors do have the ability to renegotiate their contracts, which could enable some to stay in the country.

Austin said he is hopeful the Afghan security forces will play a “major role in stopping the Taliban.” There has been a high level of attacks in recent days as the Taliban looks to “increase pressure” on U.S. and coalition forces, he said.

“We will continue to support them after we retrograde with funding, with over-the-horizon logistics,” Austin said. “We will remain partners with the Afghan government, with the Afghan military, and certainly hope, through our continued support, the Afghan security forces can be effective. They have a pretty significant capability, but we expect that this will be a challenge for them.”

Milley said it is “not a foregone conclusion” that dire predictions, such as the fall of Kabul, will occur after the U.S. and coalition troops leave. There is a “significant capability within the Afghan government, and we have to see how this plays out.”

“The intent is to keep an embassy open, and to keep supporting the Afghan government, the Afghan security forces, with financial aid,” Milley said. “We’ll also continue to take a look at training them, in perhaps other locations, but I don’t know, we haven’t figured that out 100 percent yet. But also things like maintenance support and perhaps [counterterrorism] support from over the horizon. There’s a lot of ways to do that. We’re very capable of doing it, and we’re working on those plans right now.”

Some B-1s Return to Flight Following Stand Down, Fuel System Inspections

May 6, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

The first B-1B Lancers have returned to flight following a grounding more than two weeks ago to inspect issues with the aircraft’s fuel systems.

Air Force Global Strike Command announced May 6 that an undisclosed number of the bombers are back to flying after the April 20 stand down order. AFGSC boss Gen. Timothy M. Ray ordered the aircraft to stand down to inspect each plane’s Augmenter Fuel Pump Filter Housing as a “precautionary measure” after an April 8 ground emergency at Ellsworth Air Force Base, South Dakota.

During the stand down, depot personnel disassembled the fuel filter housing for a “series of robust inspections using the latest techniques,” AFGSC said in a statement. When the unit is found to be free of any defects, it is reassembled, checked, and returned to service.

“We are proud of the tremendous efforts of our maintainers and B-1 partners in identifying, inspecting, and remediating any potential issues with the B-1B fuel filter housing,” said Maj. Gen. Mark E. Weatherington, 8th Air Force commander, who oversees the Air Force’s bombers. “The aircraft are still safe to fly, and we are confident that this stand-down has resulted in increased safety within the B-1B fleet.”

The command would not say how many aircraft still need to be inspected.

“Individual aircraft will return to flight when they are deemed safe to fly by Air Force officials,” a command spokesman said in a statement. “Returning B-1s to flight is a top priority within the command.”

This stand down comes about two years after the fleet was grounded because of issues with drogue chutes in the bomber’s ejection seats. The entire B-1 fleet also was grounded in 2018 for separate ejection seat problems.

Skyborg Makes First Flight Aboard Kratos Mako

May 5, 2021 | By John A. Tirpak

Skyborg, an autonomy suite of hardware and software meant to develop the Air Force’s use of manned/unmanned aircraft teaming, made its first flight aboard a Kratos UTAP-22 Mako air vehicle on April 29, the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center announced.

The 130-minute test at Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida, represented the first Milestone of the Autonomous Attritable Aircraft Experimentation (AAAx) campaign, AFLCMC said. Skyborg is one of three USAF “Vanguard” programs announced in 2019 as key experiments to rapidly field advanced technologies. The Mako is a derivative of the BQM-167A aerial target. “Attritable” refers to an aircraft that can be used multiple times but is inexpensive enough that its loss in combat would be operationally bearable.

The aircraft performed a “series of foundational behaviors necessary to characterize safe system operation” during the flight, AFLCMC said. The aircraft responded to navigational commands, stayed within set “geo-fences,” stuck to its flight envelope, and “demonstrated coordinated maneuvering.” Both airborne and ground control stations monitored its progress.

The 96th Test Wing carried out the mission at Tyndall.

The flight represents the “first step in a marathon of progressive growth for Skyborg technology,” said Brig. Gen. Dale R. White, program executive officer for fighters and advanced aircraft. “These initial flights kick off the experimentation campaign that will continue to mature” Skyborg, also known as the autonomy core system, or ACS, for so-called “loyal wingmen” unmanned escorts. White described ACS as the “‘brain’ of the Skyborg system.”

White shares leadership of the program with Air Force Research Laboratory chief Brig. Gen. Heather L. Pringle, who serves as the Skyborg technology executive officer. Pringle called the experimental campaign a way to get technology into the hands of operators quickly, giving them a “suite of full mission autonomy on a relevant timeline.”

The next series of events in the campaign will demonstrate manned/unmanned teaming using a crewed aircraft and “multiple ACS-controlled unmanned aircraft,” AFLCMC center said.

The Skyborg effort seeks to integrate full-mission autonomy with “low-cost, attritable” unmanned air vehicles, AFLCMC said. “Skyborg will provide the foundation on which the Air Force can build an airborne, autonomous ‘best of breed’ system of systems” that will adapt and orient to the battlespace and make decisions “at machine speed for a wide variety of complex mission sets,” the center said.

Autonomous UAV technology is advancing on a number of fronts. In August 2020, an artificial intelligence program defeated a human pilot in a series of 50 simulated dogfights, although the AI was provided with information about its opponent’s energy state that a true adversary would not have.

Steve Fendley, president of Kratos Unmanned Systems Division, said the Mako has been involved in a number of technology demonstrations and exercises since it was introduced in 2015 and has served as “a key tactical attritable UAS” and a technology “incubator” for the company’s XQ-58 Valkyrie.

Kratos describes the Mako as having “fighter-like” performance, with an operational ceiling of 50,000 feet and top speed greater than 0.9 Mach. It also says the vehicle can present “flexible vehicle signatures.” The aircraft is launched with a rocket assist from a ground vehicle or pad, allowing it to be operated from locations without a runway, and is recovered by parachute. It has an internal payload volume of 8.5 cubic feet.