US Prepared to Respond If North Korea Escalates After Ballistic Missile Test

US Prepared to Respond If North Korea Escalates After Ballistic Missile Test

President Joe Biden said the U.S. will “respond accordingly” if North Korea continues to escalate following the March 25 test launch of two short-range ballistic missiles, which he said violated a United Nations resolution.

During his first press conference in office, Biden said the test launches show that North Korea is the top foreign policy crisis the U.S. faces. His administration is consulting with allies, and he is “prepared for some form of diplomacy, but it has to be conditioned upon the end result of denuclearization,” he said.

The two missiles were fired at 7:06 a.m. and 7:25 a.m. on North Korea’s eastern coast, and flew about 450 kilometers before landing in the sea, the Associated Press reported.

“This activity highlights the threat that North Korea’s illicit weapons program poses to its neighbors and the international community,” U.S. Indo-Pacific Command spokesperson Capt. Mike Kafka told the AP.

The test comes just one day after North Korea launched two presumed cruise missiles into the sea to its west. 

North Korea has traditionally ramped up its missile activity in the early stages of a new White House administration. The Biden administration is undergoing a review of the North Korea policy, which could include the resumption of exercises with South Korea.

A senior administration official said March 23 these exercises are “necessary” and that stopping them was “antithetical to our position as the keeper and the maintenance of peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and in Northeast Asia.”

The U.S. Is Playing Catch-Up on Hypersonics. Here’s How.

The U.S. Is Playing Catch-Up on Hypersonics. Here’s How.

Flight-testing U.S. hypersonic missiles is about to take off—perhaps as often as once every six weeks over the next four years—but the Pentagon still has a long way to go to create the “ecosystem” of skilled people, test facilities, and industrial capacity needed to build such weapons at scale.

The urgency is great, because China and Russia have already fielded their first hypersonic weapons, and it’s expected it will take the U.S. several years to catch up. For that reason, the U.S. is on a crash program to field weaponized prototypes in the next two or three years, followed a few years later by more elaborate and mature systems built in larger numbers. However, that won’t happen without building the infrastructure to produce the still-experimental vehicles. 

“There are two major drivers to our hypersonic investment strategy,” said Michael E. White, the assistant director for hypersonics in the office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering. One is that “the adversary has aggressively pursued their hypersonics capabilities and they’re fielding them today.” The other is that those missiles challenge the U.S. in nearly every fighting domain, and to get back in the game, the U.S. has to be able to match them, he said.

On a battlefield of the near future, White observed, “the adversary is launching long-range weapons that travel 500 miles in 10 minutes, and our weapons take an hour to fly 500 miles.” The U.S. “can’t allow” that asymmetry to continue, he asserted. 

The Pentagon and Congress are serious and in agreement about the need to make hypersonics happen, White said.

Budgetwise, “I think we’re in a really good spot,” he said. “We went back and looked at the 2016 budget, and in that budget, we were spending about $340 million. And now we’re spending about $3.5 billion, so we’ve increased, in four years … by a factor of 10.” Congress has been “very supportive,” he said.

China displayed DF-21 “carrier killer” and DF-26 “Guam killer” missiles in a 2019 military parade, and Pentagon officials later judged these were operational, and not just mock-ups. Russia announced operational capability with the Avangard—a maneuvering, nuclear hypersonic glide vehicle carried on an intercontinental ballistic missile—and the Kinzhal, an air-launched tactical hypersonic missile with a range of 1,200 miles. Officials said both China and Russia are working on improved versions of those weapons, while developing numerous variants and other hypersonic munitions.

“They recognized the significance of hypersonics and made the decision to transition into system development before we did, quite frankly,” White said. 

Taking the Lead

The U.S. has developed a portfolio for air, land, and sea launch platforms to “challenge, and if necessary, defeat” other adversary high-end capabilities, according to White. Once the forces that “hold our traditional forces at bay” have been beaten back by hypersonic weapons, “it really opens the floodgates to what we can bring … with our conventional forces.” Hypersonics has become the key enabler, he noted.

“The things that hold you at risk, you’d like to defeat with a weapon you know will get through … and do it quickly.”

But the industrial base to build hypersonic vehicles in numbers doesn’t exist yet.

“If, tomorrow … you said, ‘I want to start building a thousand hypersonic missiles a year,’ we wouldn’t have the capacity to do that,” White said. He’s developed roadmaps that spell out “what … we need to do to ensure that, as we get into the mid-2020s,” the industrial base will be churning out hypersonic rounds.  

White set up a “war room” last year to create the enabling infrastructure and intellectual horsepower to master hypersonics, and “the results … are expected over the next couple of months,” he said. “Program by program, we’ve identified key needs,” and the work done will point industry toward the investments necessary.

Hypersonic missiles will be expensive for the foreseeable future, White said, and “you don’t get to a point where everything becomes a hypersonic weapon.” They will instead be pathfinders.

“Hypersonics … will be the ‘break down the door’ weapon,” said Mark J. Lewis, Executive Director of the National Defense Industrial Association’s Emerging Technologies Institute. Lewis was the Director of Defense Research and Engineering for Modernization, and White’s boss at the Pentagon, until mid-January.

There are “some reasons for concern” about the developing hypersonics ecosystem, Lewis said.  First, “we don’t have the test facilities that we need.” The various hypersonic programs are “kind of climbing over one another to get to get access to wind tunnels,” he observed. 

Propulsion testing is especially problematic. For a combined-cycle engine—one that uses conventional, turbine-like propulsion to get to high velocity, and then transitions to a scramjet for hypersonic speed—“we really don’t have anything that will let us do that adequately on the ground,” Lewis said. For any wind tunnel work in the U.S., “you have very limited choices. … So that’s an area that needs investment.”

Availability of flight-test ranges is another problem. Again, programs are competing for range time, not only with each other but with “all the other things we want to do flight-testing on,” Lewis said. 

“We’ve got some amazing [test] infrastructure, but it’s very old,” said Maj. Gen. Christopher P. Azzano, commander of the Air Force’s Test Center at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif. “We’ve put sustainment money into it over the last few years, but it needs more.”

Azzano said that last year, at the direction of former Air Force Secretary Barbara M. Barrett, “we … prepared a number of different investment portfolios to try to improve our capacity,” both in tunnels and test ranges. But “right now, there are just too many pressures on the Air Force budget to address all of them.”

He acknowledged that the air test ranges are “under some strain,” given the number of competing efforts, and some programs “think they’re ready to go, and they’re not.” To be a good steward of the range space, though, Edwards is compelled to schedule range time at 100 percent. Anything less is “a wasted opportunity,” Azzano observed.

The test center is experimenting with a concept called SkyRange, which uses unmanned aircraft to clear the test space and relay telemetry, he said, in an effort to do more with the range space already available. But hypersonics testing, with “long fly-outs” will be a challenge, Azzano admitted.  

White’s “war room” should deliver a plan on how to address the paucity of tunnels. Though the results may be classified, the answer will include partnering with NASA and academic institutions.

Computational fluid dynamics—simulation—is part of the “three-legged stool” supporting hypersonics development, along with flight-tests and tunnels, White said, but of the three, flight-testing is the most important. “It’s hard to represent everything in a wind tunnel that you’re going to get in flight.”

For high mach numbers coupled with intense heat, there’s only one tunnel—a NASA asset—that can create the environment. But “we’ve made additional investment” in the Arnold Engineering Center at Tullahoma, Tenn., and “we’re evaluating additional investments in partnership with NASA,” White noted. Tunnel investments amount to about $500 million next year.   

Besides the shortage of tunnels and ranges, Lewis is worried that the U.S. has gotten “rusty” on developmental flight-test. It’s “both a science and an art. It takes practice. I worry about our lack of practice, and so we need to get back into that.” 

To “deliver on the time scales required, I think we need to be testing on the ground and in flight at a pretty high pace,” he said. Stepping up the tempo of testing will also make all the steps involved—range safety, telemetry, checklists, etc.—more routine and reduce errors that can stop a program in its tracks. He said the X-15 hypersonic rocket plane program in the 1950s and ’60s was a good model to follow: It flew, on average, every two weeks for nine years, generating a “phenomenal” knowledge base. Without constant testing, “we’re not building the expertise we need.”

More Testing

Lewis thinks it’s also important that “you … take intelligent risk,” on “the ultimate goal of the program.” When the biggest risks lie elsewhere, “you set yourself up for failure. And we’ve seen some of that.” For example, he said, “if you’re going to test something that flies at hypersonic speeds, for cryin’ out loud, you don’t want the biggest risk to be the rocket motor that gets you up to hypersonic speeds.” He also believes flight-testing has gotten too cumbersome. “It’s amazing how many people can say ‘no’ to a flight-test.” Too many competing programs are fighting over range access, he said, and “if you miss your flight window … your next window is going to be two months later. And silliness like that.” 

White said, “We’re going to fly a lot more than we ever did.  … We’ve got between 40 and 50 flight-tests planned for the next four years,” and the Pentagon’s Test Resource Management Center is “investing in ways that will allow us to increase the flexibility and availability of flight-test ranges.” 

However, he doesn’t want to substitute speed for “engineering rigor” in planning and executing tests. Typically, he said, in the interest of speed, “little things … bite you,” and when tests fail, it’s usually not because of some problem with a hypersonic design, but “failing the systems engineering rigor test … over the last decade or so.”

He said he’s “pulled together a team to do a best systems engineering practices for flight-testing,” and the lessons learned will be passed along to the entire flight-test community.

“I will never be satisfied until we’re flying routinely,” White said. “And we’re not flying routinely, yet.” Key contractors have “heard me give them the systems engineering rigor speech more than once,” he added. 

The first test flights of the ARRW, designated AGM-183, were scheduled for March 2021. Captive-carry tests were completed last summer and fall. Giancarlo Casem/USAF

While details are classified, two hypersonic missiles that were to make their first air-launched, free flight late last year didn’t do so. Sources said the snafus were due to amateurish mistakes rather than a failure of the hypersonics technologies.

Contractors are stepping up their investments in hypersonic development, test, and production capabilities, Lewis noted. This includes not only major primes, like Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Raytheon Technologies, but “even if you drop a tier,” there are lots of companies elbowing for position. “Look at companies like Leidos,” which was until recently mainly a consultancy and services outfit. “They purchased Dynetics,” which does high-speed aerodynamic hardware, “so they’re all-in on hypersonics.”

But the U.S. shouldn’t depend solely on the primes and top sub-primes, Lewis said.

“I worry about the diversity of the industrial base,” he asserted. “We’ve got a lot concentrated in a few companies,” and if they are all working on a large number of projects, “it’s hard to see how they could put their ‘A’ team on everything.”

Consequently, the Pentagon has worked hard to encourage and help finance some small businesses that can contribute to the knowledge base. While these smaller companies may not be able to manufacture thousands of weapons, they may have innovative solutions on materials and thermal management; two areas critical to the success of the hypersonics push.

“The current glide bodies leverage high-temperature carbon composite materials that take a long time to build,” White explained. “If we can leverage innovation in the small companies that allow us to do … development … and the buildup process much more rapidly,” it will have “dramatic impact on the ability to reach our capacity goals.”

Thermal management is essential because of the extreme temperatures on the nose and leading edges. 

“We have to have a vehicle skin … that can handle excessive temperatures and stay intact, and not only [that] but maintain its geometric integrity,” so that complex shapes and inlets will function as designed across a flight of hundreds to thousands of miles. 

Making the Grade

White noted that one feared problem—that a layer of plasma around hypersonic missiles would block communications—has not materialized. Plasma layers also seem not to “affect subsystems.”

Lewis would give the materials ecosystem a “B,” when “a couple of years ago, it was a ‘C,’” he said. “Especially in high-temperature materials, … we really took our foot off the gas pedal” in the 2000s and 2010s. The research done was “not nearly enough for a robust ecosystem.” Over the last few years, “we’ve really stepped up in the high-temperature materials, not only in the basic research level, but in development, manufacturing.” He added, “I think we’re doing well, but we should always be doing better.”

To ensure there’s enough talent to go around, the Pentagon has helped create an Applied Hypersonics University Consortium. Under the Joint Hypersonic Transition Office (JHTO), its goal is to attract and grow experts in rocket and air-breathing propulsion, materials, heat management, and systems engineering to meet the demand that will come as hypersonics balloons into a major sector of the aerospace industry. The university lead is Texas A&M, “and they’ve got something like 50 universities now,” Lewis noted. The participants aren’t just the “traditional” aerospace schools, either, but some who are making their entrée into aerospace materials and “people working in controls and system design,” he noted.

The availability of talent is not a crisis, Lewis said. Although industry leaders express concern to him about the hypersonic workforce, they haven’t told him they’re having trouble hiring. 

The 10-person JHTO was set up in April 2020, and has a $100 million annual budget. It moves money around among hypersonics-enabling projects to get “more bang for the buck” and “make sure we’re focusing on the things that will get us … the capabilities we really need,” its director, Gillian Bussey, said in a November 2020 speech at the Technology and Training Corporation. 

Among her tasks, Bussey said, is to help bridge the so-called “valley of death” that stands between promising research and programs of record. University professors were finding that “when their work starts to get somewhere that’s relevant” to the Pentagon’s hypersonics enterprise, “the funding kind of stops” because the research category shifts from the basic research to the applied research accounts, and “it’s a lot harder for them to get funding.” She’s working to alleviate that problem.

The JHTO also facilitates knowledge- and resource-sharing among the services. “We’re reducing waste,” she asserted. “We’re coordinating and collaborating,” getting experts from NASA, the services, and academia working together to solve problems.

Lewis said he’s been struck at the sharing of knowledge among the services. Usually, “they only pay lip service to coordinating, but … I saw absolutely no limits on knowledge sharing. … It’s a really good news story.” The Army and Navy especially are “joined at the hip” in solving their surface-launched problems, he said.

The JHTO is reaching out to other countries as well—notably Australia—and seeks to “tap into nontraditional performers … to help them advance, to help us,” Bussey said.

Besides a long history of “very substantial” contributions to the field of hypersonics, Australia has a “national enthusiasm” for it, Lewis said. Australia also has the Woomera Range Complex, “where you can test early and often and crash on a desert floor and pick it up and look at what happened.” Australia also flies the F/A-18. “That means, anything the U.S. Air Force does with Australia automatically builds in a path for connectivity to the U.S. Navy. So they can … help us with connectivity between our services.”

Further out—perhaps in the early 2030s—White sees reusable hypersonic systems. They could be used for penetrating intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance work—a successor to the SR-71 of the 1960s to 1990s—or possibly as the first stage of a two-stage-to-orbit craft.  Will those systems be manned? White’s unsure, but “the Air Force has got point on putting together a strategy to get us a reusable, long-range hypersonic capability.” 

Lewis said he’s concerned that after all the effort to create the hypersonics ecosystem, a new administration offers an opportunity for opponents of the technology to derail the effort, and put the U.S. at a serious future disadvantage. 

“You still have folks coming out of the woodwork, mischaracterizing how hypersonics would be used,  mischaracterizing their capabilities,” and drawing the wrong conclusions. “That worries me,” Lewis said. 

“The debate is over. Every time we war-gamed the peer competitor scenarios, the difference between having hypersonic capability and not was the difference between winning and losing. It was that simple.”                                                           

Military Sexual Assault Review Aims to Change Culture

Military Sexual Assault Review Aims to Change Culture

The Pentagon’s independent commission to review sexual assault in its ranks has established its members and is looking at “big picture” items to change the military’s culture and prevent sexual assault.

The Independent Review Commission on Sexual Assault in the Military includes 14 members, the majority of whom are women and former military members, though none are currently serving, to ensure the independence of their discussions, the commission’s chair Lynn Rosenthal said in a March 24 briefing.

The commission met with Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark A. Milley, and now has 90 days to review the history of sexual assault cases in the ranks to recommend large changes to address the problem, which Austin has established as a top priority.

Rosenthal said the goal of the commission is to drive “major shifts” in the Defense Department, as opposed to a long series of minor recommendations. The commission was first announced last month, and since then leadership has focused on finding the best members and structuring itself for independent discussions, while providing enough flexibility to include input from the Pentagon and across the military services.

The direction from Pentagon leadership is to look at every possible change, to include possibly removing cases from the chain of command, Rosenthal said.

“This is not a closed door,” she said. “The Secretary and the President have said all options should be on the table.”

The military needs to address deep cultural issues related to sexual assault, including myths about the extent of the problem, unhealthy views of women, and deliberate misunderstandings of the issues. This includes the prevalence of male sexual assault victims, and an over emphasis on how often there are false accusations, Rosenthal said.

The Senate Armed Services Committee on March 24 held a hearing on the issue of military sexual assault, with key lawmakers blasting the Pentagon for not making enough progress on the problem. The Pentagon’s most recent survey on the issue estimated that almost 21,000 service members had been sexually assaulted since 2018, said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.).

“That makes them more likely to be raped by their fellow service member than shot by the enemy in war,” she said. “Since 2013, unrestricted reports of sexual assaults in the military have doubled, yet the rate of prosecution and conviction has halved.”

During the hearing, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) asked Don Christensen, president of advocacy group Protect Our Defenders and a former chief prosecutor for the Air Force, if things had improved since changes to the Uniform Code of Military Justice were implemented in 2013 and 2014. Christensen replied that the situation has gotten worse.

“Military commanders have had their chance. They said they would fix it and they haven’t,” Warren said.

The Government Accountability Office, in testimony at the hearing, said that despite Congressional oversight and the Pentagon implementing more than 100 recommendations to address the issue, reports continue to rise.

“With the exception of some more recent initiatives, the department’s efforts have been largely focused on responding to, rather than preventing, incidents of sexual assault,” the GAO said.

Jennifer Hlad contributed to this report.

Eielson to Get Active KC-135 Component, Four More Tankers

Eielson to Get Active KC-135 Component, Four More Tankers

The Air Force’s tanker presence in the Arctic will grow, with four more KC-135s heading to a new Active component at Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska.

The KC-135s and up to 220 Active duty Airmen will head to the 168th Wing at Eielson, with aircraft expected to arrive in 2023, according to an Air Force release. The move will bring Eielson’s total number of Stratotankers to 12, with the additional KC-135s coming from other units across the Air Force.

The Air Force said the move is in concert with the 2019 Defense Department’s Arctic Strategy to address threats in the Asia-Pacific and it comes on the heels of the department’s first-ever Arctic Strategy that outlined the importance of the region to USAF operations.

The 168th Wing is the Air Force’s only Arctic refueling unit, and its current eight KC-135s transfer more fuel than any other Air National Guard tanker wing, according to an Alaska Air National Guard release.

“The Alaska Air National Guard does an incredible job working with our mission partners in an existing association with shared aircraft and Active duty personnel at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, and we will expand that healthy partnership up north at Eielson Air Force Base,” said Maj. Gen. Torrence W. Saxe, adjutant general of the Alaska National Guard and commissioner for the Alaska Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, in the release. “The additional KC-135s and personnel underscore the growing importance of the Arctic and our mission to protect and defend our state and nation.”

The announcement comes as Eielson’s fleet is already growing, with more F-35As arriving at the base—the first Pacific Air Forces Joint Strike Fighter unit.

Coalition Aircraft, Iraqi Forces Continue Large Offensive Targeting ISIS

Coalition Aircraft, Iraqi Forces Continue Large Offensive Targeting ISIS

Extensive coalition and Iraqi operations targeting the Islamic State group in northern Iraq continued, with aircraft now conducting at least 312 airstrikes on ISIS remnants in the remote mountainous region.

U.S.-led coalition aircraft and Iraqi forces conducted the airstrikes as part of Operation Ready Lion in the Makhmour Mountains, south of Erbil and Mosul. The strikes hit 120 hideouts, and killed 27 terrorists, said Col. Wayne Marotto, spokesman for Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve.

Iraqi Ministry of Defense spokesman Yehia Rasool said Iraqi Counter-Terrorism Service snipers watched ISIS caves, with the airstrikes targeting the cave system and forcing the fighters to flee, according to a translated series of posts on Twitter.

OIR announced the offensive earlier this week, disclosing that U.S.-led coalition aircraft had conducted 133 airstrikes over 10 days in the region.

The pace of strikes so far this month appears to be higher than any other period since March 2019, when ISIS made its last stand in Syria before moving underground to become an insurgency, according to statistics from Air Forces Central Command.

The U.S. estimates that between 8,000 and 16,000 ISIS fighters remain in both Iraq and Syria, according to a February Defense Department Inspector General report.

Wills: Quality Will Bring Acceptance of New-Method Pilot Graduates

Wills: Quality Will Bring Acceptance of New-Method Pilot Graduates

Senior aviators are resistant to the idea of overhauling Air Force pilot training, but the quality of new flyers will sell them on the changes, 19th Air Force commander Maj. Gen. Craig D. Wills said March 23.

“I won’t sugarcoat it, there are a lot of folks in the pilot force that don’t like” the changes being made to undergraduate pilot training, helicopter pilot training, and streamlined ways for certified civilian pilots to take an accelerated path to wings,” Wills told reporters in a virtual media roundtable.

But, “in the Air Force … complaints and criticisms of those programs usually stop with good flyers,” he said. The restructuring is designed not to save money or even increase the production of pilots, but to make better aviators with more relevant and credible flying experience, he noted.

To hasten that socialization, though, Wills said he and his wing commanders are trying to visit every Active-duty flying unit in the next few months, and as many Guard and Reserve flying units as possible, “to talk to them about pilot training transformation.” The objections usually center on shifting real-world flight hours to simulator time, he said. “It’s not going to be popular, and I totally understand that.” But the new system “makes better use of a student’s time” and shifts the instructor-pilot interplay to one more like “a coach-athlete relationship.”

Wills acknowledged, “We’ve got our work cut out for us” in gaining acceptance of the new system.

The new paths to wings include more simulator hours and some shortened phases, but with more personalized attention, going at one’s own pace, and more focus on the kind of specialized flying a pilot will do after graduation.

So far, Wills said, there isn’t much difference between the results of traditional methods and the new system, with about the same number of high-, medium- and low-performing pilots and washouts. His comments came about a week after the first class graduated from Undergraduate Pilot Training 2.5, which uses laptops, tablets, online courses, purpose-built video games, traditional instruction and “TED Talk”-style presentations in a learner-centric model that serves as a halfway point between the old methods and those of the future.

“It looks a lot like a normal class,” he said. Wills noted that one graduate of a pathfinder program is flying F-35s and his unit “seems to think pretty highly of him. So, the No. 1 thing is producing a quality graduate.”

Even though the purpose of the overhaul is to improve pilot quality, Wills said the various programs should help address the pilot shortage in the Air Force.

Pilot Training Transformation
Pilot Training Transformation looks to transform the way USAF trains its pilot, using a learner-centric model to create quality pilots. Air Education and Training Command graphic.

“Our task is to get to 1,500 pilots a year,” he said, reporting that last year, “we produced 1,263,” a downturn from the previous year’s 1,279, which Wills chalked up to COVID-19. The pandemic “cost us about 120 pilots’ worth of production,” he said.

But trends are up, he added, with increased funding from the Department of the Air Force, and “blue-suit instructor manning [will be at] at 100 percent this summer cycle.”

A drag on pilot production is in civilian simulator instructors, who Wills said are reluctant to move to places like Laughlin Air Force Base, Texas, and other out-of-the-way bases. One potential solution will be allowing instructors to teach multiple students virtually in simulators at many far-flung bases. A more immediate fix, he said, is “special salary rate increases” for civilian instructors, “which we hope will allow us to attract more quality candidates.”

Air Education and Training Command needs “high quality simulator instructors … in relevant numbers … to make all our plans a reality,” Wills acknowledged.

Air Education and Training Command graphic.

The “biggest bang” in production from one of the new initiatives will come from Helicopter Training Next, which shifts pilots from learning fixed-wing flying first to going directly to rotary wing instruction. This move will free up more slots in the T-6 trainer fleet and “automatically means 60-80-90 additional grads a year” in fixed-wing, he said. Additionally, HTN means “about six months” off the usual helicopter training period, he said, because pilots won’t have to make a permanent change of station from a fixed-wing UPT base to helicopter training at Fort Rucker, Ala., or to a civilian helo school. It also “shaves” about $250,000 per student off the bill.

Taking the T-1 Jayhawk out of the mobility pilot pathway—shifting to an almost all-simulator track—also will free up aircraft for assessment and training of alternate-source pilot candidates, Wills said. 

“So, between the two of those, we see great potential on the production side.” Attracting civilian pilots to become USAF pilots is a “great unknown,” though, because it’s uncertain how long the current lull in airline hiring will last, and because the Air Force requires that “you be willing to fight and kill and potentially die for your country.”

Another 50-100 additional pilots might come from streamlined paths to wings for ROTC graduates of “aviation-accredited schools” that provide significant flying training, Wills said.

The Air Force is still looking at the track record of experimental versions of the new pilot training programs, checking grades and other factors to see if it has struck “the right balance” of simulator versus real-world flying time, but Wills thinks “we have it about right,” and the resulting pilots will be “safe and lethal.”

He’s also expanding the introductory flight training program, “pushing more hours to the left,” in a light airplane. The program assesses students’ ability to learn flying in a relatively inexpensive way, and by adding more hours—up to 50, with 40 of those flying under visual flight rules and another 10 on instruments—in this phase, USAF can cost-effectively enhance the chance of success.

“We’re probably losing candidates,” that, given more time in the introductory phase, “could do really well” when they advance to the “high performance turboprop” T-6.

Wills also said the Air Force is looking to “completely revisit the scoring method” of pilot applicants, so it doesn’t give undue advantage to those who can afford to rack up a lot of flying hours before entering the program. While such individuals tend to have low attrition, “the concern is, we’re leaving exceptional candidates behind,” he said. Neither grade point averages nor flying hours “tell the whole story,” Wills noted, saying USAF is looking for other indicators “of how well you’ll do at pilot training.” It’s looking for “grit, and determination, and resilience,” and may give greater weight to “someone working three jobs to get through school” versus someone who, with a “credit card, can rack up the hours.”

He insisted that the Air Force is “not going to lower the standard, but why would you exclude someone over something as arbitrary as GPA, or how many flying hours they have? We want the best candidate, … but we have to make sure we’re using the right measures.”

Northrop, Lockheed Selected to Compete for Next-Generation Interceptor Program

Northrop, Lockheed Selected to Compete for Next-Generation Interceptor Program

The Missile Defense Agency on March 23 awarded Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin contracts worth a total of $7.6 billion to develop technology for the Next Generation Interceptor, which will replace aging ground-based interceptors and serve as the first layer of defense against intercontinental ballistic missiles aimed at the homeland.

Lockheed Martin received a total of $3.693 billion with a performance period through August 2025, while Northrop Grumman was awarded a total of $3.932 billion with a performance period through May 2026. The funding for the contract is limited to $1.6 billion through fiscal 2022.

“Allowing a technology development phase will help ensure that the NGI is an efficient and effective part of an integrated Missile Defense System solution by permitting the department to further analyze requirements and make necessary adjustments in preparation for the product development phase,” the contract announcement states.

Lockheed Martin announced it had teamed with Aerojet Rocketdyne for the project, before Lockheed announced it was acquiring the company.

“We are excited and proud the MDA entrusted Lockheed Martin to lead the development of this game-changing system that will greatly improve our nation’s security for decades to come,” said Sarah Reeves, vice president of Next Generation Interceptor Program at Lockheed Martin, in a release. “We have been working toward supporting never-fail missions such as NGI for decades, and our team has the expertise and shared vision required to deliver on the MDA’s need to evolve GMD.”

Northrop Grumman is teaming with Raytheon Technologies for the project.

“There is a critical timeline for fielding this capability and our team brings together the industry’s top missile defense talent, agile design, and manufacturing practices, and state-of-the-art operational factories to support the MDA and our nation’s defense against these evolving threats,” said Scott Lehr, vice president and general manager, launch and missile defense at Northrop Grumman, in a release.

Boeing announced it was entering the competition but did not receive a contract.

Because of Raytheon’s involvement in the program, Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III, a former member of Raytheon’s board, recused himself from the decision. Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks made the decision to proceed with modernizing the current Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system. 

“NGI is the result of the first holistic technical assessment of homeland defenses the department has conducted since initial system operations began in 2004,” MDA Director Vice Adm. Jon Hill said in a release. “By planning to carry two vendors through technology development, MDA will maximize the benefits of competition to deliver the most effective and reliable homeland defense missile to the warfighter as soon as possible. Once fielded, this new homeland defense interceptor will be capable of defeating expected threat advances into the 2030s and beyond.”

USAF Gen. Glen D. VanHerck, commander of U.S. Northern Command and North American Aerospace Defense Command, told lawmakers earlier this month that moving forward on NGI “no later than 2028” is needed to ensure the U.S. can defend against ballistic missile threats from actors such as North Korea and Iran.

Ground based interceptors provides “deterrence by denial” and are needed to provide advanced capabilities to counter new threats, such as decoys in ballistic missile launches, he said.

HHS Asks the Pentagon to House Immigrants at Joint Base San Antonio

HHS Asks the Pentagon to House Immigrants at Joint Base San Antonio

The Department of Health and Human Services on March 23 asked the Pentagon to evaluate two bases to house unaccompanied immigrants, including a vacant dormitory at Joint Base San Antonio, Texas.

Pentagon spokesman John F. Kirby told reporters the Defense Department had “just received this request” on March 23, and the Pentagon is beginning to evaluate the requirements. HHS requests the dormitory and open land at Fort Bliss, Texas, to alleviate strain at other facilities along the border.

HHS officials visited the locations last week in advance of the request, Kirby said. He did not know how many children would be housed at the locations.

A surge of immigrants at the southern border, beginning in late 2020, has overwhelmed Customs and Border Protection facilities in Texas.

It is the second time in about two years that USAF and other DOD installations have been evaluated to house immigrants. In 2019, HHS evaluated Malmstrom Air Force, Mont.; Fort Sill, Okla.; and Fort Benning, Ga., to house unaccompanied children. In 2014, almost 2,000 unaccompanied children were housed at Fort Bliss, according to Military Times.

How USAF is Trying to Reduce Training Mishap Rates

How USAF is Trying to Reduce Training Mishap Rates

The Air Force is improving its supply chain and simulators, expanding the time for pilots to train, and trying to keep seasoned Airmen in to help bring down the rate of training mishaps, but the service’s No. 2 told lawmakers USAF still can’t meet programmed flying hours, even though pilots say they want to fly more.

Gen. David W. Allvin, the Vice Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force, told the House Armed Services Committee during a March 23 hearing on training accidents that preventing mishaps is a “top priority for the Air Force,” and said the rate of the incidents has fallen in recent years.

“The Air Force has made significant strides in reducing training mishaps over recent decades. However, we understand this is an on-going endeavor, and we must continually address emerging hazards with new training programs and aircraft,” Allvin said in prepared testimony. “We are undergoing a review of our aviation training syllabus to ensure we have the most effective and safest training possible. We know that risk is inherent in our aviation training and we must continue to proactively identify and then eliminate or mitigate hazards to the fullest extent.”

The Air Force has sustained more than 1,200 Class C or higher mishaps since 2018, though the overall pace of mishaps has dropped since then, Allvin testified.

In fiscal 2020, there were 72 total aviation mishaps, Air Force Magazine recently reported. There have been several high-profile crashes recently in which Airmen have died, from initial training, to in-unit training, overseas exercises, and in combat.

In December, the Congressionally mandated National Commission on Military Aviation Safety released an extensive report looking into systemic problems across the military. The investigation found that a lack of flying hours and overworked maintainers were the main sources of the problem.

Allvin told lawmakers the report largely agreed with internal Air Force research, and USAF is working toward meeting the bulk of its recommendations.

The specific steps he outlined were:

  • Supply system improvements. This includes changing how spare parts are purchased to increase the inventory, identifying new vendors, and other steps such as conditions-based maintenance.
  • More bandwidth for Airmen to train. Examples include reducing administrative tasks and ancillary training to give Airmen more time to focus on mission-related training. The Air Force has added more than 1,800 administrative support personnel to squadrons and eliminated 46 additional duties from 2016 to 2020.
  • Expand access to simulators. The Air Force is getting rid of outdated simulators and moving toward a common training environment to replace proprietary older systems. Additionally, USAF is expanding access to virtual reality training technologies. However, as the commission report stated, these systems can only be used in addition to actual flight training and not as a replacement.
  • Retaining seasoned operators. The Air Force is using bonuses and other incentives to keep pilots and maintainers around longer in the hopes of growing a more seasoned instructor corps. The goal is to produce 1,500 pilots per year by fiscal 2024, he said.

However, Allvin said the Air Force can’t meet a key goal outlined in the report: an increase in flight hours. Pilots complained that a lack of real flying hours was limiting their effectiveness, and the report called for funding flying hours to fiscal 2010 levels. Allvin told lawmakers the Air Force’s inventory and end strength are not the same as that year. There is a different number of and types of aircraft, and associated personnel, making that goal impossible.

“We would be unable to execute a program 10 percent larger than the current flying hour program with today’s force structure and global commitments,” he said in testimony.

The Air Force has under executed its flying hour program from fiscal 2018 to 2020, and the service is studying its executable flight hours to inform its budget and its overall flight hour program, Allvin said.

“The Air Force continues to carefully manage the execution of the flying hour program and look for additional opportunities to maximize its utilization … within the budget and within the bounds of available aircrew and aircraft,” Allvin said. “Our most significant limitations to growing the flying hour program are enduring overseas commitments, protracted maintenance on legacy airframes, diversion of aircraft into modernization pipelines, and shortfalls in maintenance manning—all of which reduce aircraft availability with which to train.”