ACC Revives 15th Air Force for Conventional Ops

ACC Revives 15th Air Force for Conventional Ops

Aug. 20, 2020 | By Rachel S. Cohen

The Air Force on Aug. 20 revived 15th Air Force as its largest organization overseeing conventional weaponry, giving the World War II-era group new purpose for 21st-century warfare.

Air Combat Command is shifting the fighter jets, battle management aircraft, strike drones, and combat search-and-rescue forces from Ninth and 12th Air Forces under the new 15th Air Force. That umbrella organization will manage daily wing operations so the lower-level officials at 9AF and 12AF can focus on supporting U.S. Central Command and U.S. Southern Command, respectively.

“In addition to organizing, training, and equipping ACC’s conventional forces, this new [numbered air force] will also present a deployable joint task force-capable headquarters,” the command said in a release. That joint task force can manage any air combat resources that are contributed to a collaborative effort, just as 9AF oversaw Airmen who led part of the military’s coronavirus pandemic response under the Army.

Maj. Gen. Chad P. Franks, who previously ran 9AF, will lead 15AF at Shaw Air Force Base, S.C. The numbered air force began as a bomber group in the Mediterranean during World War II before taking on other expeditionary and mobility roles in later decades. It was inactivated in 2012 as the 15th Expeditionary Mobility Task Force.

No units will physically move because of the reorganization, and most of the over 45,000 Airmen who work for 15AF will not see changes in their daily operations, ACC said. The command is not considering any other NAF consolidations, according to a spokeswoman.

The changes are intended to streamline aspects like training, tactics, and maintenance that can benefit from bringing similar aircraft together.

Lt. Gen. Gregory M. Guillot, commander of the newly formed 9AF/Air Forces Central Command, gave a nod to AFCENT’s prior experiments with controlling air operations from Shaw rather than its Middle East hub at al Udeid Air Base, Qatar. That sort of split operations could become more of the norm.

“Bringing the headquarters back to Shaw, along with elements of our air operations center, brings additional operational resiliency, ensuring our command can endure any regional crisis,” Guillot said.

Moving 9AF/AFCENT also puts the organization in the same time zone as officials from ACC, CENTCOM, and Army Central, a boon to collaboration as well.

“As 15th Air Force takes on the wings that were previously under 12th Air Force, 12th Air Force will gain the expanded bandwidth required to better focus on their mission as air component to U.S. Southern Command,” ACC boss Gen. James M. “Mike” Holmes added. The organization will tackle violent extremism, rogue states, and influence from Russia and China in South and Central America.

Revamping 15AF is ACC’s latest move toward a less bureaucratic setup in the hope of becoming more responsive and effective. Last year, the command combined its intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, cyber offense and defense, and similar forces into a new “information warfare” group as digital combat evolves.

That organization, 16th Air Force, marked the beginning of full operations last month.

Van Ovost Sworn in as AMC Boss, Becoming Military’s Only Female Four Star

Van Ovost Sworn in as AMC Boss, Becoming Military’s Only Female Four Star

Aug. 20, 2020 | By Brian W. Everstine

When newly commissioned 2nd Lt. Jacqueline D. Van Ovost tossed her cover in the sky as the Thunderbirds roared over Falcon Stadium, she was graduating into an Air Force that would repeatedly tell her “no.”

After a delayed entry to the Academy because of not doing enough pull-ups to meet the requirement, she graduated with a degree in aeronautical engineering. Despite years of flying experience and taking a test pilot short course, the Air Force at the time still wouldn’t put a woman in the cockpit of a combat jet. And after graduating from undergraduate pilot training and asking to fly every fighter in the fleet, she was told to fly an airlifter. She later became a test pilot anyway.

After 32 years in service, including flying 4,200 hours in more than 30 aircraft, and tours in both the Air and Joint Staff, Van Ovost on Aug. 20 became the Defense Department’s only four-star female general—the fifth in Air Force history. During a ceremony at Scott Air Force Base, Ill., she took over that distinction and command of Air Mobility Command from her predecessor and the DOD’s previous only female four-star, retiring Gen. Maryanne Miller.

“Standing in the stadium, in 1988 at the Air Force Academy, about to throw my hat in the air, I never would have thought I [would become] a four-star,” Van Ovost said in an interview. “I was very focused on being a pilot, and being the best pilot I could be, and to make a difference in that way. And here we are, standing at the precipice of what might be called a pinnacle of military leadership. But frankly, it’s not so much a pinnacle. For me, it’s a new beginning. It’s a new opportunity to ask key questions, to shape the force in a way to make sense, and provide clarity to the strategic environment that we live in.”

Incoming Air Mobility Command boss Gen. Jacqueline D. Van Ovost and outgoing AMC Commander Gen. Maryanne Miller talk before the AMC change of command ceremony at Scott Air Force Base, Ill., on Aug. 20, 2020. Photo: Senior Airman Miranda Simpson

Becoming a Pilot

Van Ovost got into the aviation business as early as anyone can. She flew her first solo on her 16th birthday, got her private pilot’s license on her 17th birthday, and one year later got her single and multi-engine instructor rating. During these years, she volunteered with the Civil Air Patrol, which sparked her interest in going into the military, making her want to fly the fastest and best aircraft.

“There’s a real opportunity, that if I grab it, I may be able to fly Mach One with my hair on fire,” she said. “And that was my dream back then.”

After failing the first physical fitness test to get into the U.S. Air Force Academy, she placed a pullup bar in her home to both remind her of the failure and train to pass it the next year. After graduating in 1988, Van Ovost wanted to force the Air Force’s hand. She requested to go to Euro-NATO Joint Jet Pilot Training at Sheppard Air Force Base, Texas. “I made them look at that as my selection, and say, ‘No you can’t, because women can’t be combat.’” She went on to the now closed Reese Air Force Base, Texas, and upon graduating in 1989 she asked “to fly every fighter we had, and kind of made them tell me no, that I couldn’t fly those fighters. But it was on my list because I wanted to slip the surlies beyond Mach One. And I really love the physics, frankly, of what I was doing.”

She was instead assigned to the C-141 Starlifter, the best option of what was “viable at the time” and she spent four years at then-Charleston Air Force Base, S.C. In 1993, the service finally opened combat cockpits for women. At the time, Van Ovost was looking for her next assignment, and it came down to either moving on to fly the F-15E Strike Eagle or follow a goal of flying everything the Air Force has to offer by becoming a test pilot.

At Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., she served both as a test pilot, then later on as an instructor, flying dozens of aircraft, though the A-10 was her favorite because of its legendary gun. “You could not wipe the smile off my face for weeks after that flight,” she said.

What’s Old is New

Key for her current assignment was working closely with the development of the C-17 Globemaster III. While the C-17 now is the backbone of the Air Force’s mobility fleet, it severely struggled in its early years.

As a test pilot, and later as the chief of the C-17 Acquisition Branch and C-17 Program Element Monitor, Van Ovost worked on the Boeing-made heavy aircraft, which had massive developmental problems and a target on its back. The C-17 was “being battered around as a waste of money on [Capitol] Hill” with only 40 planes on contract. It was over budget and had far more “category one” deficiencies [the worst there is] than the Air Force’s current problematic mobility acquisition program, the KC-46, does now.

“Everybody put their nose to the grindstone,” she said. “We were kind of given an ultimatum, and we produced, and we saw real gains met, so we leveraged everything we could, and we turned that airplane around.”

The team focused on concurrent initial operational test and evaluation with developmental test and engineering to fix issues quickly. In those initial test sorties with the C-17, it was put through its paces doing aerial refueling, dirt operations, low altitude operations, and combat-style airdrops. Now, Air Mobility Command is flying those aircraft operationally in the ways it was tested. “To turn around and watch us use it in combat was very, very satisfying for me,” she said.

While there are a lot of similarities between the developmental processes of the two planes, the C-17 was an all-new aircraft and the KC-46 is a “Boeing 767 turned into a refueler. But the parallels of working closely with a contractor and with IOT&E, with our test teams and our developmental test team, and holding people accountable turned [that] airplane around,” she said.

Van Ovost said she will take that experience and focus on a KC-46 that is still years away from being fully operationally capable and deployable. The fix to the aircraft’s problematic Remove Vision System, deemed RVS 2.0, is still years away from being tested, evaluated, and installed, and AMC will “continue to hold Boeing accountable, working hand-in-hand to meet those requirements as quickly as we can.” She said her test background helps to look at the program’s requirements and contract structure, giving some “insight to understand where we can push hard, and where we can’t. So, on this road to ensuring that the airplane can become IOC as quickly as possible.”

The program has seen some progress recently, including flying aeromedical evacuation sorties and refueling the Navy’s Blue Angels during the spring’s “Salute to America” tour.

“As opportunities come up, we like to exercise the portions of the envelope that reopen on this airplane as much as possible with our Total Force that’s flying the airplane,” she said. “We want to accelerate the capability of the training for these aircraft, the simulation capability, so that we can move as much as possible into the simulator and minimize training time on the physical airplane itself.”

Keeping Old Fleets Healthy

As the KC-46’s development moves along, Air Mobility Command is looking at new ways to keep its legacy fleet healthy, especially the Cold War-era KC-135s that currently serve as the backbone of the refueling fleet. Van Ovost said she plans to build on progress using new software-based methods that have shown to be effective in giving the older aircraft and their Airmen rest and maintenance. For example, in recent years AMC used software modeling based on years of air tasking orders in the Middle East to predict the amount of tankers needed to be in theater, letting the command keep more tails and crews home. This has given momentum to developing different readiness generation models, which have shown some gains in readiness in recent months even amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

“We preserved some of the capabilities back at the unit, so they can fly missions and ensure people are current and proficient at the mission,” she said. “And then, we’ve also given more time for our maintainers to [work] on the airplanes, to try to increase the capability rate of the airplane.”

The command also is increasing the use of virtual reality, which has already caught on in other parts of the Air Force, including Air Education and Training Command’s Pilot Training Next initiative. Unlike PTN, which uses VR headsets to simulate flying in the cockpit of a T-6, AMC is developing VR training modules for C-5 loadmasters to practice working in the back of a Super Galaxy without having to have the actual aircraft on the ramp for the training. The command is also developing engine maintenance and cargo loading modules for C-130s.

New Airmen are more comfortable with VR, and the command wants to take advantage of that “as much as possible. We’re not there yet, but we are looking very closely at those investments and trying to accelerate them to get more availability for both training and for missions,” Van Ovost said.

The ability of Airmen to work independently in digital ways is proving useful for the Air Force, and AMC wants to continue down that path by encouraging software development to address issues the command faces, Van Ovost said. “Because they are so talented, and curious, and they want to make a difference,” she said. “We need to give them the platforms to do that with, so they should be comfortable operating in areas that are not just black and white. … We want to give them training to be able to do that.”

The Air Force as a whole is encouraging individual Airmen to learn how to do more than just their main job, letting units deploy with a smaller footprint for combat operations under the “agile combat employment” model. Within AMC, the U.S. Air Force Expeditionary Center and the command’s Contingency Response Wings have led this effort. From 2012-13, Van Ovost was the vice commander of the Air Expeditionary Center with oversight of contingency response and expeditionary tactics development. The center was the source of the doctrine on “what a multi-capable Airman is,” and worked with both Pacific Air Forces and U.S. Air Forces in Europe-Air Forces Africa to build the concept of operations for agile combat development.

“We are key,” she said. “We are the foundation to be able to train the multi-capable Airmen to do the work, whether it’s turning airplanes at a forward location, to determining the feasibility of a forward location to take airplanes from C-130s to helicopters in for the node,” she said. “We are leveraging the experience of our [contingency response wings] and the Expeditionary Center and the folks that teach the doctrine to develop this multi-capable Airman, and then this development and training that would then be exported for all of our Airmen across the Air Force that are going to take part in agile combat employment.”

Reuniting With AMC

Now sworn in, her first order of business is to go with AMC’s new command chief on a listening tour.

“From my perch on the Joint Staff and on the Air Staff, I was always able to hear the great successes of Air Mobility Command, and what they’ve been doing to ensure we had a power projection for our nation,” she said. “But, it’s time for me to listen, the strategic environment has changed since I’ve left this command. And I need to listen to the Airmen to understand the current problems that they face, and challenges, and make sure that we’ve characterized it correctly here at headquarters.”

The listening tour comes as the service, under direction of previous Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force Kaleth O. Wright and former Chief of Staff retired Gen. David L. Goldfein—who Van Ovost served as director of staff for two and a half years—started the service looking inward at issues of prejudice and ways to improve inclusion in the wake of unrest across the nation. The Air Force has diversity inclusion managers at all of its wings and the Air Staff has directed unconscious bias training to address these issues. The command, and the rest of the service, is reviewing tens of thousands of responses to anonymous surveys that have come back detailing Airmen’s experience with racism and prejudice in the ranks.

“We’re carefully, but understandably, teeing up these difficult conversations at the wing level, these small group conversations to get feedback, to ensure that we’re candid, [and] respectfully going after people’s diverse and different ideas about how they’re being treated,” she said.

On the Air Staff, Van Ovost worked with Goldfein and other service leaders to address impediments to career progress that women in the Air Force experience. Recently, this has included changing flight gear and uniforms to better fit women, changing the fitness test schedule for female Airmen who return from pregnancy, and getting rid of restrictions that most in the service didn’t even know existed. For example, she said she wasn’t aware that pregnant Airmen could not fly remotely piloted aircraft or go on alert status as a missileer until she saw the regulations on the books.

“Really, you could have blown me over with a feather, because I guess I wasn’t paying attention, but that regulation was still out there,” she said. “And immediately, we rescinded it. But it just goes to show you that we weren’t thinking, we weren’t questioning.”

AMC plays a large role in this effort, with command representatives serving on the Women’s Initiative Team that is reviewing these issues. The command alone has more than 50 percent of the Air Force’s female pilots, and leads some of the uniform policies and other restrictions in a “cognizant, disciplined manner,” she said. The command does, after all, have the only female four-star leader, but there’s more to do, she said.

“We’ve made good progress,” she said. “I wouldn’t say great. We’ve made good progress.”

California Fire Triggers Personnel, Aircraft Evacuations at Travis

California Fire Triggers Personnel, Aircraft Evacuations at Travis

Aug. 20, 2020 | By Jennifer-Leigh Oprihory

Non-essential personnel and their families evacuated from Travis Air Force Base on Aug. 19 because of the threat of the LNU Lightning Complex Fire, 60th Air Mobility Wing spokesperson Capt. Amanda M. Farr confirmed to Air Force Magazine.

The base also began evacuating its aircraft around 8:30 the same night, with the wing’s C-17s headed to Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Wash., its C-5s to Kelly Field at Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland, Texas, and its KC-10s to Fairchild Air Force Base, Wash., Farr said.

While the fire hadn’t reached the base as of press time, Farr said the commander ordered the mandatory personnel evacuation “out of an abundance of caution based on the current situation,” to ensure the wing had enough lead time to respond. The installation commander made the call in accordance with other mandatory evacuations in Solano County, Calif., a 60th Air Mobility Wing release said.

“All non-mission essential personnel residing in Travis AFB housing or lodging are directed to evacuate immediately,” a 60th Air Mobility Wing release stated. “Egress should be through the South and North Gates. Do not use the Main Gate or Hospital Gates.”

Since the wing is unable to house evacuated Airmen and their families, the release instructed them to seek shelter with relatives or friends, head to an evacuation center, or find a commercial lodging option “outside the evacuation area.”

Airmen who were forced to leave their homes may use their government travel cards to cover lodging, per diem, and mileage, Farr said.

Travis also activated its Emergency Evacuation Assistance Center on the evening of Aug. 19 to help evacuated families with relocation, according to a Facebook update from the wing. Families may contact the center by phone at (707) 424-2486, the post stated.

The wing advised essential personnel to reach out to their chain of command to determine their duty statuses. 

Editor’s Note: This story was updated on Aug. 20 at 1:22 a.m. EDT with additional information about aircraft evacuations and to clarify the circumstances under which Airmen may use their government travel cards.

USAF Rethinks Relationship Between Conventional, Nuclear Weapons

USAF Rethinks Relationship Between Conventional, Nuclear Weapons

Aug. 19, 2020 | By Rachel S. Cohen

The Air Force is crafting new policy that envisions more fluidity between conventional and nuclear weapons, as well as a broader range of options to keep others from using their own nuclear weapons.

The U.S. has long treated conventional and nuclear warfare as separate concepts, but that’s beginning to change, said Lt. Gen. Richard M. Clark, the Air Force’s deputy chief of staff for strategic deterrence and nuclear integration.

Over the past year and a half, nuclear experts on the Air Staff have crafted an overview of “conventional and nuclear integration,” in which American service members must be able to survive a conflict that involves a nuclear weapon.

“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.”

Video: Mitchell Institute on YouTube

A multipolar landscape, where China also poses a top nuclear threat, is the biggest difference from nuclear policy 30 years ago, when defusing tension with Russia was the singular goal, according to Maj. Gen. Michael J. Lutton, who oversees ICBMs as the head of 20th Air Force.

Now, adversaries see conventional and nuclear options as two points on a broader spectrum of conflict, rather than keeping nuclear warfare largely off-limits. Countries like Russia, China, and North Korea seem to understand they are outmatched by America’s non-nuclear bombs and missiles, and are looking for ways to exploit other weaknesses.

“We have to be able to reconstitute our capability. We have to be able to plan and execute integrated operations, multidomain, whether conventional or nuclear, and most importantly, we have to be able to fight in, around, and through that environment to achieve our objectives,” Clark said.

Russia appears to see so-called tactical nuclear weapons as one way to catch the U.S. off-guard in a regional fight, Clark said.

“It is very clear in their doctrine and in the capability, the non-strategic nuclear weapons that they have amassed over the years, it’s evident that that’s in their planning, that’s in their strategy and their thought process,” he said.

China is upgrading its own nuclear arsenal as well. The country has an “ambiguous no-first-use policy,” Clark said, and the U.S. believes China may walk away from that policy for the sake of self-preservation. He added North Korea is another wild card that could bring nuclear weapons to a conventional fight.

The Navy has in response started deploying its own tactical nukes, or those that have shorter ranges and lower yields than the nuclear missiles and bombs now owned by the Air Force and Navy. Experts disagree over whether a distinction should made between tactical and strategic nukes, given the power and long-lasting consequences either would wield. Proponents say tactical nuclear weapons could be an option without escalating to the all-out, last-resort nuclear war envisioned in policymaking.

This approach is different from the nuclear artillery of the Cold War, Clark added.

“What we’re trying to prepare ourselves to do is to respond with whatever force is necessary in a nuclear environment. It’s not so much to fight tactically. Really, the ultimate goal here is to deter,” he said. “We want to raise that threshold of using nuclear weapons, whether strategic or non-strategic … to the highest level possible.”

To do that, Clark argues the Air Force needs ways to stop others from using nuclear weapons in the first place, and options to retaliate if deterrence fails. Technology, training, and command-and-control requirements all need to be updated to support that approach. Legacy weapon systems are part of the puzzle, not just new designs, he said.

His remarks come as the Air Force marks 50 years since it placed the first Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile—the most recognizable Cold War weapon—on alert at Minot Air Force Base, N.D., on Aug. 19, 1970. Those ICBMs will be replaced starting in the late 2020s with Northrop Grumman’s Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent, a modern nuclear missile that could eventually accommodate steerable, hypersonic warheads.

The Air Force is also spending billions of dollars on new nuclear cruise missiles, gravity bombs, and bomber aircraft to replace aging systems, arguing it would be more costly and less effective to update the existing assets and unsafe to ditch them altogether. It will also add nukes to dual-capable aircraft like the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter for more flexibility.

Clark left open the idea that the Air Force could create a non-nuclear version of the Long-Range Standoff Weapon cruise missile. The service has dismissed that suggestion in the past because it is already buying Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile variants with increasingly longer ranges.

“Whether limited or large-scale nuclear, we have to be able to fight through that along the full spectrum of conflict,” Clark said. “That’s why we, as an Air Force and really the Department of Defense, are looking at this concept so we can be prepared to address the threat.”

The Air Force will send a capstone report to Congress and the Defense Department on its efforts to move conventional and nuclear integration ideas forward, and is shaping its acquisition plans accordingly, he added.

Guard C-130s Fighting California Fires

Guard C-130s Fighting California Fires

Aug. 19, 2020 | By Brian W. Everstine

Specially equipped C-130s are supporting fire responses across California, where numerous blazes have destroyed dozens of homes and prompted evacuations throughout the state.

Four C-130s from the California Air National Guard’s 146th, the Wyoming Air National Guard’s 153rd, and Nevada Air National Guard’s 152nd Airlift Wings are activated and flying sorties, dropping fire retardant with the aircraft’s Modular Airborne Firefighting System. The four aircraft conducted 15 sorties on Aug. 18, conducting 12 drops on the Lake Fire north of Santa Clarita, the Salt Fire near Stockton, and the LNU Lightning Complex Fire west of Sacramento, according to 1st Air Force-Air Forces Northern.

“The aircraft are working at a quick pace,” said Col. Gregory Berry, commander of the 302nd Air Expeditionary Group, in a statement. “The C-130 crews are flying an average of six drops a day and about five hours a day depending on the fire.”

The 302nd Air Expeditionary Group is conducting the drops, as requested by the National Interagency Fire Center.

MAFFS-equipped aircraft have dropped almost 300,000 pounds of retardant since late July, according to AFNORTH. This totals 116 sorties and 147.9 flight hours, as of Aug. 13. The first two aircraft were activated on July 22, with the U.S. Forest Service requesting two more in recent days. The aircraft and crews are expected to switch out weekly as the response progresses, according to AFNORTH.

California experienced 10,849 lightning strikes within three days, as the state saw record-high temperatures, California Gov. Gavin Newsom said Aug. 19. There were 367 known fires, 23 of which are considered major or a “complex” of several fires in a single geographic area. The latter are the focus of “aggressive” fighting, he said. 

Coronavirus Returns to USAFA as School Year Begins

Coronavirus Returns to USAFA as School Year Begins

Aug. 19, 2020 | By Rachel S. Cohen

U.S. Air Force Academy cadets are starting a fall semester unlike any other, as the school tries to prove on-campus classes can work amid the coronavirus pandemic.

About 4,400 students are back in class at USAFA in Colorado Springs, Colo., after the academy cut short the spring 2020 semester and sent all but the seniors home ahead of an early graduation.

Cadets and professors are tackling a fall semester where courses are half remote, half in person. Students are spaced out for indoor and outdoor instruction, and face masks are a new part of the uniform. Dining hall time was adjusted so students eat lunch over the course of two hours instead of 30 minutes.

USAFA has tried to keep the back-to-school spirit alive: the usual welcome picnic and softball game are out, socially distanced gatherings are in. Parents Weekend is cancelled.

Still, positive COVID-19 cases turned up over the Aug. 15 weekend, the first weekend after classes began Aug. 12. Academy spokesman Lt. Col. Michael Andrews declined to say how many people have tested positive so far. The Pentagon releases case data by service but does not share where infections are happening within the armed forces.

“Positive COVID-19 cases remain considerably less than 1 percent of our Air Force Academy cadets and Preparatory School cadet candidates,” Andrews said in an Aug. 17 statement. “Proactive testing, almost 750 cadets per week, has allowed us to identify these positive cases quickly, and contact tracing and periodic surveillance testing will keep us informed moving forward.”

Most cases so far have stemmed from cadets who catch the virus before arriving on campus but don’t know they are infected and have mild or no symptoms.

The school randomly tests about 200 cadets and faculty each day, four days a week, and can batch-process 720 swabs for COVID-19 at a time. The biology department then singles out the samples that prove positive to find out who is infected.

USAFA also saw an outbreak over the summer when the freshman class arrived for basic training.

The academy did not provide students for interviews on the subject. No students responded to Air Force Magazine’s interview requests.

“We have a responsibility to continue to operate in the pandemic—not to say that it’s … without difficulty,” Superintendent Lt. Gen. Jay Silveria said during an Aug. 17 Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies event. “There was no checklist on how to run a school in a worldwide pandemic.”

Video: Mitchell Institute on YouTube

The academy can pull several levers to adjust restrictions as needed, Silveria said: where and when cadets can leave campus, how much teaching is online, which activities can go on as planned, and more. USAFA did not provide the cost of cleaning supplies, personal protective equipment, and other coronavirus-related changes on campus.

The academy is closed to visitors, but staff can commute in and students can leave campus to pick up food. All USAFA teachers have the freedom to decide whether to offer their classes in person or online, and can work from home if they or someone they live with are at high risk for coronavirus complications.

“Overall, we’re very, very pleased to be back in the classroom,” said Col. Douglas Wickert, head of USAFA’s aeronautics department. “The cadets are very excited. I think at first, they thought, ‘Hey, I get to go home and attend the Air Force Academy from my parents’ basement.’ And then about a week into that, they realized, ‘There was a reason I left home at 18.’”

USAFA already knows how to handle in-person instruction, and it knows how to run classes entirely online. The hard part, Wickert said, is teaching a class in front of you while meeting the needs of a few students who are tuning in remotely from isolation.

Some parts of the syllabus had to be revamped to use new technology that lets professors virtually “write” on a student’s screen, or to replace certain hands-on projects with online tutorials.

“Particularly with the way we teach engineering, there were certain aspects where we would create an online tutorial that a cadet could watch at their own pace as they’re solving a similar type of multistep problem, and then they could go back and review,” Wickert said. “We’re actually able to remote in with a cadet and see what they’re seeing on the same computer screen, and show them how to use a DOD supercomputer to do computational fluid dynamics.”

If the school year goes well, USAFA can keep using these ideas in the classroom even if a COVID vaccine proves safe and reliable.

“We see the cadets showing up in class more prepared, because they do understand that in the challenges of the new COVID environment, that they’re responsible for their own learning,” making class time more effective, Wickert said.

Educators are trying to replicate the same classroom support as they would give cadets in person. With remote learning, it’s harder to see blank stares from students who don’t understand the lesson.

Professors can quiz students more often to make sure they understand the material, and set up chat rooms for small group work where teachers can “walk” around to help.

“The trick is really to put your finger on the pulse: How is the student progressing?” Wickert said. “Not all of them are necessarily going to be forthcoming.”

He said USAFA hasn’t run into any major technical difficulties with remote classes so far. After stress testing the Internet over the summer, the school says it has enough bandwidth to support the thousands of students and staff who are now videoconferencing at once.

Embracing distance learning could help the school more easily teach cadets who are often on the road for sports or out of the classroom for other reasons.

“I told my cadets that … you probably have had your last snow day, which of course was not a terribly popular sentiment,” Wickert said.

Extracurriculars are adapting to the pandemic era as well. The Mountain West Conference postponed fall sports, but teams are still training. Outdoor clubs like the rodeo team can largely operate as normal, while airmanship programs—a key part of the path toward becoming a pilot—are keeping pairs of instructors and students together for the entire program to minimize how many people each come into contact with in a cockpit.

If the school year goes well, USAFA hopes to graduate about 1,000 second lieutenants into the Air Force and Space Force next spring. That depends on whether the measures in place prove effective, and how responsive officials are if things go south.

Students who test positive are isolated in designated dormitories until they test negative or no longer have symptoms, and their contacts are quarantined as well. People may be isolated elsewhere on campus if cases continue to rise. Cadets continue to live with one or two others in their dorm rooms as usual.

“Medical personnel are available 24 hours a day,” Andrews said of the COVID dorm. “In both isolation and quarantine, cadets have meals delivered, laundry done for them, time outdoors for exercise, and access to mental health professionals 24 hours a day.”

More than 100 upperclassmen are living in hotels in downtown Colorado Springs to make more dormitory space available on campus, though the number of off-campus rooms needed may vary as cases fluctuate.

Still, there are no real consequences for breaking the rules—packing people into a dorm room or getting too close without a mask on. USAFA hopes that, as a military academy, its students will be more compliant than at other state and private schools. The academy is relying on its cadet wing and squadron commanders to model good behavior and reinforce rule-following.

“‘If we don’t do the things that we need to do, we won’t be able to stay here together,’” Wickert said. “That’s a very powerful message when it’s coming from your peer.”

The school will announce by Oct. 1 whether it will skip Thanksgiving break and send students home for the semester on Dec. 11—avoiding spreading the virus through additional travel—or to keep the break and end Dec. 17.

B-1, B-2 Bomber Task Forces Simultaneously Operate in the Indo-Pacific

B-1, B-2 Bomber Task Forces Simultaneously Operate in the Indo-Pacific

Aug. 19, 2020 | By Brian W. Everstine

Two of the Air Force’s three bombers flew simultaneous long-range missions across the Indo-Pacific on Aug. 17, with two different sets of B-1s training alongside Japanese fighters and Navy ships, while stealth B-2s flew their own training mission in the Indian Ocean.

Two bomber task forces are deployed to U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, with B-1s at Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, and B-2s at Navy Support Facility Diego Garcia. On Aug. 17, two B-1s took off from Ellsworth Air Force Base, S.D., and flew to the East Sea, where they linked up with two B-1s from Andersen and four F-15Cs from Kadena Air Base, Japan, as well as Japan Air Self-Defense Force F-15Js, Marine Corps F-35Bs from Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni, Japan, and the USS Ronald Reagan Carrier Strike Group for a large force exercise, according to a Pacific Air Forces release.

A U.S. Air Force 44th Fighter Squadron F-15C Eagle assigned to Kadena Air Base, Japan, participates in a large-scale joint and bilateral integration training exercise on Aug. 18, 2020. Photo: Staff Sgt. Peter Reft

“Our unique strength as an Air Force is our ability to generate integrated actions with our joint teammates and allies and partners to challenge competitors in a time and place of our choosing,” PACAF boss Gen. Kenneth S. Wilsbach said in the release. “These simultaneous airpower missions demonstrated our capacity and readiness to deliver a wide range of proactive, scalable options to quickly deploy our forces to support our mission of ensuring a free and open Indo-Pacific theater.”

After the exercise, all four B-1s returned to Ellsworth, and the fighter jets returned to Kadena.

U.S. Navy Carrier Air Wing (CVW) Five F/A-18 Super Hornets, Marine Corps Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 121 F-35 Lightning IIs, all assigned to Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni, Japan, and a U.S. Air Force 37th Bomb Squadron B-1B Lancer assigned to Ellsworth Air Force Base, S.D., conduct a large-scale joint and bilateral integration training exercise on Aug. 18, 2020. Photo: Staff Sgt. Peter Reft

At Diego Garcia, two B-2s deployed to the Indian Ocean base from Whiteman Air Force Base, Mo., flew “joint interoperability tactics training” and returned to the base, according to PACAF. The simultaneous bomber task force deployments is the largest USAF bomber presence in the Indo-Pacific since the service ended the 16-year-old continuous bomber presence mission at Andersen in April and shifted toward a “dynamic force employment” model in the region.

‘Mayhem’ Will Be Larger, Multi-Role Air-Breathing Hypersonic System for USAF

‘Mayhem’ Will Be Larger, Multi-Role Air-Breathing Hypersonic System for USAF

Aug. 19, 2020 | By John A. Tirpak

The Air Force is seeking a new, air-breathing hypersonic system, nicknamed “Mayhem,” that would be larger than the AGM-183A Air-launched Rapid Response Weapon, and carry multiple payloads, perhaps performing an intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance mission in addition to attack.

USAF intends to solicit concepts for a new hypersonic system exclusively from hypersonics-knowledgeable contractors, namely Boeing, Lockheed Martin’s Skunkworks, and Raytheon, with contracts to be awarded in the first quarter of fiscal 2021, according to an Aug. 5 notice. Any companies that feel they are capable of doing the work and that they’ve been unfairly excluded need to contact the Air Force Research Laboratory within two weeks of the solicitation.  

The system is officially called the Expendable Hypersonic Air-Breathing Multi-Mission Demonstrator Program, but USAF refers to it as “Mayhem,” or “Mayhem System Demonstrator” for short.

The new missile would be an air-breathing system—unlike the boost-glide ARRW—but would still use a solid rocket booster to accelerate to hypersonic speed.  The Air Force wants to get to preliminary design review within 15 months, suggesting it already knows the capabilities offered by the three companies and believes the technology is already largely mature.

The Air Force said the technology will build on efforts in the Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept, or HAWC, a joint program with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, DARPA, as well as the High-Speed Strike Weapon (HSSW) program. In April, USAF solicited industry for a “solid rocket-boosted, air-breathing, hypersonic conventional cruise missile” that could be launched from existing fighters and bombers. It’s likely Mayhem is the same project.

Air Force acquisition executive Will Roper said April 29 the new missile would be pursued with rapid prototyping, as the ARRW and Hypersonic Conventional Strike Weapon, or HCSW, were. The Air Force dropped HCSW from its hypersonic plans in January, opting to devote its efforts to ARRW. Roper said at the time that he was impressed with the level of maturity of scramjet designs and he had previously expected them to come later than boost-glide. “I’m delighted to say that I was wrong,” Roper said. “Scramjet is much more mature and ready to go than I originally thought.”

Though apparently larger than the ARRW, the Mayhem still has to be small enough to be carried by a fighter aircraft, according to the solicitation. In recent discussion of the F-15EX, the Air Force and Boeing have said a large payload of 7,000 pounds or so could be mounted on the jet’s centerline station.   

According to the solicitation, the Air Force wants a “larger-scale expendable air-breathing hypersonic” system, “capable of carrying larger payloads over distances further than current hypersonic capabilities allow.” The missile is to be capable of carrying “at least three distinct payloads” in a “payload bay” for “government-defined mission sets,” and these payloads are to be modular. Given that USAF didn’t use the word “warheads,” the other payloads are likely to be some kind of sensor or communications systems. The whole system is supposed to be expendable.  

The Air Force Research Laboratory has “previously accomplished similar research under multiple efforts, including the Enhanced Operational Scramjet Technology effort,” the solicitation said. The engine will be a scramjet, or supersonic-combustion ramjet.

The Air Force may award two novel “multiple-award (indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity) contracts…split into two groups, each encompassing one propulsion system development and vehicle development and integration.” Each group of contractors would get a “single cost ceiling” with multiple contracts “scoped to each of two focus areas.” These are:

  1. “A larger-scale propulsion development and flight-weight ground test
  2. “Air vehicle design and scramjet integration.”

Later awards would be for fabrication, flight test, and vehicle modification for payload integration.

“Conceptually, two different air vehicle and two different propulsion contactors could be awarded” one of the IDIQ contracts, USAF said, but a single contractor could get an award for both focus area contracts. Teaming arrangements would be necessary and a similar agreement “amongst all contractors is being considered.”

The Air Force said it was limiting solicitation to the three companies because they have the necessary expertise in scramjet propulsion, “stable hypersonic aerodynamics, aero-thermal protection systems, solid rocket motors, warhead/missile integration, advanced hypersonic guidance, navigation, and control including advanced subsystem technologies and communications, and fighter/bomber integration.”

Q&A with Gen. John E. Hyten

Q&A with Gen. John E. Hyten

Aug. 18, 2020 | By John A. Tirpak

Gen. John E. Hyten is Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a position he has held since November 2019. In that role, he heads the Joint Requirements Oversight Council. A Harvard engineer with a master’s in business from Auburn, he has led Air Force space acquisition, served as commander of Air Force Space Command, and as head of U.S. Strategic Command. He spoke with Air Force Magazine Editorial Director John A. Tirpak recently about strategic requirements, roles and missions, budget trades, space, and the industrial base. The interview has been edited for length and clarity.  

Q. Twenty-year hardware programs are a thing of the past. How can you accelerate the JROC process to the speed of relevance?

A. You’d think with the title Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC), that our focus would be on joint requirements, but in many cases we just validate service requirements and try to ensure joint interoperability.

I have a good working relationship with both Undersecretary Ellen M. Lord [head of Defense acquisition and sustainment] and the service acquisition executives. We know we have to do something different. The biggest difference is going to be, rather than the JROC just validating service requirements, it will focus first on joint requirements and then hold the services accountable for meeting them. 

We’ll deliver a new joint warfighting concept late this year, and under that will be a number of joint supporting capabilities: joint all-domain command and control, joint logistics, long-range fires, information advantage. We’re going to figure out how to write joint requirements so the services can go fast, but not require every detailed technical requirement to come up through the JROC. That’s one way we’ll speed things up.

Second, we’ll look at cost and schedule as key performance parameters. In certain cases, that can speed up delivery time. It’s right in line with a number of the service concepts, including Dr. Will Roper’s and the Air Force’s Century Series concept, where you go a little bit at a time, and that’s how you go fast.

The JROC dates back to 1986, and if you look at what Congress meant for it to do, it’s exactly this. We’ve just slowly drifted away from that over time.

Q. All the services are pursuing missions outside their charters. Do you think we need a new Key West Agreement on roles and missions?

A. I’m one of the Air Force officers that does not believe it’s time for another Key West Agreement.

But you’ve hit on the next big transition in military operations, and if we do it right, it will give us a strategic advantage over any future adversary: joint all-domain command and control.

From the very beginning, everything’s been lines on a map. We drew lines to show each service, ‘this is your area’; this is theater; this is immediate, the forward edge of the battle area.  All those terms really come out of Key West.

As we move into the next generation of capabilities, I think the lines on the map will disappear. Because you’ll have Army capabilities that can both defend a maneuver unit or, if used in a different way, can provide theater long-range strike. You’ll have Navy platforms that can defend themselves or provide long-range strike from the same platform. You’ll have the same capabilities in the Air Force. Each service is going to have the ability to do defense as well as long-range strike, from their own formations. 

The Joint Staff and the JROC will have a role in defining long-range fires, but not in terms of dividing it up between services.

Then, we have to seamlessly integrate all those domains—including space and cyber—and command and control them effectively to create the battlespace of the future. That’s why JADC2 is really the key to everything.

Q. How do you avoid unnecessary duplication of effort? 

A. That’s not the role of the JROC; that’s the role of the DMAG, the Defense Management Advisory Group, which does the budget. We have joint requirements that have to be met. If there’s duplication, we’ll eliminate those in the budget.

If we don’t walk over each other, we can make great progress. We tend to try to do everybody’s job. If we just do our own jobs, that’s one of the best ways to move fast.

Q. You’ve complained that the Pentagon “studies the heck” out of space capabilities. How can that be sped up?

A. If the Space Force needs to develop capabilities to defend themselves in their own domain, they really don’t have to come to the JROC for anything. The head of the Space Force can define what he needs, and go as fast as he can, because that’s his domain. If the Space Force is developing capabilities to support the other services and commands, then they have to be integrated, and the JROC is the place where you do that. 

I signed out a JROC memo, 16 July, which made the intent very clear about how that’s going to work. 

Q. The National Defense Strategy is two years old. Is it time to refine it? 

A. The National Defense Strategy (NDS) was well received because it’s coherent—it holds together from beginning to end—but maybe more importantly, it’s the first threat-based strategy that we’ve had in a couple of decades.

Around the turn of the century we transitioned from a threat-based planning structure to a capabilities-based planning structure, because we really didn’t understand what the threat was going to be and, therefore, developed capabilities to deal with any threat that comes along. The problem with that is, you tell potential adversaries what the capabilities are, so they can figure out exactly what to do to counter them. 

The NDS focuses on the threat and defines modernization we need to deal with great power competition. We also have to maintain readiness to deal with the problems of today. The challenge is how to balance the two. 

The only way to pay for that without taking exorbitant near- or long-term risk is by retiring legacy capabilities that are no longer part of our readiness for today or our modernization requirements for the future. We’re going to have to work really hard with Congress to figure out how to do that. 

Q. In the past, whole systems were retired at once, to obtain the savings of shedding their logistics tails. The services don’t seem to be doing that.™

A. It’s more cost-effective to retire whole systems. That’s a fact. If you go back 5 to10 years, various services tried to do that. Congress, I think rightly, criticized us in many cases because the near-term risk of doing so was too great. 

For near-term readiness, you have to maintain a certain amount of legacy capabilities, which will by definition be less efficient than retiring an entire family of capabilities. That means we have to pay a little bit of a premium for them.

But we need to do that consciously, and have a clear plan on when we would retire an entire family in order to reap the full savings.

Q. Even before the pandemic, flat budgets were expected. What will be the priorities in the ’22 budget?

A. The National Defense Strategy defines the nuclear enterprise as being right at the top of the list. We decided as a nation to not modernize the nuclear enterprise when we really needed to, and that was about 15 years ago. So now we’re doing it. It’s affordable—but will be expensive—and we have to make sure we do that right. 

Continuing modernization of our critical capabilities is priority two. Readiness is 2A. Then, acquiring the capabilities we need in space and cyber. 

Q. Can you give us a preview? The trade space is usually modernization, readiness and people. Where can you economize? 

A. We have to figure out what we’re going to stop driving, sailing, and flying, and I don’t think we have to impact readiness if we do that correctly. And we have to retain the right people; otherwise all that ‘stuff’ doesn’t matter. 

Q. Automation and artificial intelligence is surging. Can you do the job with fewer people?

A. In certain areas. The definition of an unmanned platform is there’s no man or woman in the cockpit. But the personnel requirements to operate unmanned aerial systems are actually pretty large. So we have to look at it with a clean sheet of paper.

Space and cyber have huge opportunities for increased automation. The latest littoral combat ship has a very small crew; most of that ship is automated. So we’re going to be increasing automation. But moving to unmanned systems doesn’t solve the problem.   

Q. The Guard and Reserve can scarcely be called a strategic reserve anymore; they’re fully engaged. Should those organizations be rethought?

A. I think it’s time for us to look at the Guard and Reserve with a fresh set of eyes.

About a month ago we had over 100,000 National Guardsmen on Active duty in support of COVID, and in support of governors around the country for all of the issues after the murder of George Floyd. That’s not a strategic reserve; that is an employed force. It puts a huge burden on our civilian employers. At the beginning of the coronavirus, we planned to bring them on for less than 90 days. Well, they’re still on, and they’re probably going to be through the rest of the year.

Over the last few years, we put so much capability—medical capability being one—into the Guard and Reserve that when we have to do an operation, we can’t do it without them. 

We are demanding so much from them. We have to figure out a different model. 

Q. The Air Force is restructuring the Air and Space Expeditionary Force to improve its presentation of forces for global needs. Are you expecting that from all the services?

A. For the last couple of years, the Joint Staff has been looking at a different Global Force Management construct. We’re trying to create blocks of ready forces that can be used both for contingency purposes as well as to support what the Secretary calls Dynamic Force Employment, DFE missions. 

The bombers in the Air Force have been very successful in that and are really leading the joint force in defining that DFE construct. 

If you can maintain your readiness with a different force management construct, and build your readiness at the same time, and still support the combatant commands, that’s the best of both worlds. 

This has been there, on paper, for over a year. But we didn’t really have the readiness in the force to allow it to be fully realized. Now, we’ve reached a maturity in readiness that allows this construct to work. 

Q. Is the creation of Space Force an opportunity to finally get rid of the ‘pass-through’ part of the Air Force’s budget? What are your thoughts on that?

A. I have pretty strong thoughts on that. That’s not the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff’s decision, though.

Budgets have to be transparent. The people responsible for the budget should be accountable for it and with the pass-through—that’s not the case.

I will continue to advocate, as an adviser, for transparency and accountability in our budget. Improvements can be made in the pass-through area. I think we’ll get there someday. It may not be soon.

Q. In the industrial base, the U.S. is down to one or no suppliers in certain key capabilities. Does the U.S. need to go back to 1980s-like surge capacity?

A. It is a huge issue. Over the last 20 years, we’ve allowed the second- and third- tier supply chain to deteriorate significantly. We have to have a concerted effort, structured by Secretary Lord, to get after rebuilding that. We have to invest with our prime contractors to make sure that they can have the second- and third-tier vendors they need to build the supply chain. 

One of the lessons we’ve learned the hard way from the coronavirus, is that when you have a supply chain that is dependent on Asia and China, and you really want to move fast, you have a difficult problem. We cannot have a supply chain that does that, so we have to rebuild it. That’s going to take investment. But we can do that under the programs we have, if we do it smartly. 

That is way up high in my worry list, but it’s not high on my things-to-do everyday list, because I am the requirer, not the acquirer.