New Report: Space Force Should Develop Its Own Targeting Satellites

New Report: Space Force Should Develop Its Own Targeting Satellites

May 10, 2024 | By Greg Hadley

A new study argues the Space Force should build its own targeting satellites rather than try to collaborate with the National Reconnaissance Office.

Three years after then-Chief of Space Operations Gen. John W. “Jay” Raymond announced in May 2021 that USSF and the NRO were working together on satellites to track moving ground targets, Todd Harrison of the American Enterprise Institute writes in “Building an Enduring Advantage in the Third Space Age” that the U.S. is ahead of Russia and China in space launch frequency, payload capacity, and satellites in orbit, but risks losing its edge if it fails to “seize this moment and build an enduring advantage in space.”  

The risk is especially acute in space-based intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, where bureaucratic processes are holding up progress, Harrison told Air & Space Forces Magazine.

In the three years since the joint Space Force-NRO effort was launched, he said, “They still have not passed Milestone B, and Milestone B is actually the formal start of the acquisition process…. they haven’t actually started the program yet. What that tells me is the traditional acquisition process and all the interagency coordination that they’re doing has effectively lost us three years in the competition. We can’t let that continue.” 

Policy, not technology, is the issue, Harrison said. Questions over who will control the satellites and who will have the ability to task them with data collection are keeping things from moving forward. 

The NRO and other intelligence agencies have traditionally controlled ISR satellites, but military users have complained that they can’t get data to operators fast enough to use in combat. In recent months, officials from both organizations have indicated they have agreed on a plan for the NRO to lead the acquisition process and for the Space Force and NRO to fly the satellites “shoulder to shoulder,” while combatant commands will have authority to task them. 

But reports emerged this week suggesting those issues are not fully resolved. At the GEOINT 2024 Symposium, Space Operations Command Lt. Gen. David N. Miller Jr. used a keynote address to insist military operators must have direct access to targeting data, without it being filtered and possibly delayed by intelligence agencies, according to SpaceNews. Meanwhile, Vice Adm. Frank Whitworth, the director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, told Breaking Defense that raw targeting data needs to be processed to help operators make sense of it. 

Harrison said the debate risks obscuring two fundamentally different needs. 

“The NRO has its mission: It’s strategic intelligence, it’s indications and warnings, it’s keeping track of the big picture stuff, the critical stuff that the whole intelligence community and national security enterprise needs,” he said. “Tactical ISR is different. It’s about supporting the warfighter down at the lowest echelons of force structure. We ought to have a capability where a Soldier in the field with a Link 16 radio can task a collection on a satellite and receive the processed data back down on that Link 16 radio.” 

That inherent difference is why his report argues that “it is time for the Space Force to move ahead independently of the NRO to develop a tactical ISR capability that is owned and operated by the Space Force.” 

Harrison said the Space Development Agency is well positioned to take on that task. SDA already is building USSF’s Proliferated Warfighter Space Architecture, having awarded contracts for more than 450 satellites in low-Earth orbit. Including missile tracking/missile warning, communications, and data transport missions, those satellites have begun to be deployed, and the program will continue launches over the next five years.

The PWSA also includes plans for a “Custody Layer,” which would leverage data transport satellites to connect with other ISR spacecraft to more rapidly move their information around the globe. 

Harrison suggested that Custody Layer could be expanded to include ISR satellites for targeting, following SDA’s proven model of acquiring and launching satellites in “tranches” to rapidly gain capability while proving and enhancing systems over time.

“That [approach] will start getting capability up there within a few years, and the NRO can continue doing what they want to do,” he said. 

With the Space Force focused on tactical ISR for the warfighter in lower orbits, Harrison said, the NRO should continue to focus on strategic intelligence, using the U.S.’s emerging super-heavy launch vehicles like SpaceX’s Starship to launch mammoth specialty satellites in geostationary orbit. 

“Your ability to sense is directly a function of the size of the aperture you can put up and the power level of the satellite,” Harrison said. “So it’s all about size and weight. And we’re uniquely going to have the super-heavy launch capability that China and Russia and others are not going to have for at least a decade.” 

The Space Force fears that such large, exquisite satellites risk becoming high-value targets in a conflict, but Harrison said they remain highly valuable in a state of competition and could help deter conflict when deployed in conjunction with more proliferated architectures. 

Yet Harrison is not ignoring smaller satellite opportunities. Noting that Phase 3 of the National Security Space Launch program will include opportunities for smaller launch providers, Harrison argues for encouraging still greater competition by allowing providers to be certified on a rolling basis, rather than once annually, and contracting for launches individually, instead of assigning multiple launches at a time to individual launch vendors, such as SpaceX and ULA. 

What Kinds of Jobs Can Part-Time Guardians Expect?

What Kinds of Jobs Can Part-Time Guardians Expect?

May 10, 2024 | By David Roza

Those hoping to join the Space Force on a part-time basis may find jobs involving test, evaluation, training, or planning, or which involve being called to temporary full-time status for deployments or multiweek TDYs the same way Reservists in other services are placed on Active orders, according to the top enlisted Guardian.

Speaking at an AFA Warfighters in Action fireside chat on May 10, Chief Master Sergeant of the Space Force John F. Bentivegna said the service is still working through the details of what a part-time force would look like under the Space Force Personnel Management Act, a bill signed in December which does away with “regular” and “reserve” components in favor of a combined full-time and part-time system.

The advantage of such a system, Bentivegna said, is that it gives Guardians the ability to adjust to changing life circumstances more easily, rather than jump through the bureaucratic hoops of switching between components.

“It adds optionality to the Guardians, so we can still leverage that deep expertise that Guardians bring to the table,” he said. It also clears up any chain-of-command conflicts that might arise from having two components in such a small service, which “isn’t necessarily beneficial for unity of command or readiness.”

The Space Force aims to open up full-time positions this summer for currently-serving Air Force Reservists. That’s the easy part, Bentivegna said, since the branch already has the pay, benefits, and other systems for full-time Guardians. The tricky part is doing the same thing for part-time Guardians.

“Where we have to work on is: define part-time … and not only defining it, but also how do I pay you, how do the systems track you? We don’t have that build yet,” he said.

The Space Force Personnel Management Act gives the service five years to figure it out, but the top enlisted Guardian said the goal is to move much faster than that, perhaps in a year or so. In the meantime, they are figuring out what jobs would work best under the part-time construct. Chief of Space Operations Gen. B Chance Saltzman first hinted at those jobs in a March memo.

“I don’t anticipate part-time Guardians maintaining mission-ready status in 24/7 employed-in-place operations,” he wrote. “Instead, we will leverage their expertise in institutional and service-retained functions like education, training, and test units or key staff positions.”

But Guardians are eager for more details. When asked what concerns he hears most from Guardians about the part-time/full-time construct, Bentivegna said that many of the questions “are based on us explaining our vision on full-time and part-time.” 

“The employed-in-place mission sets when you have to be combat mission-ready, and the commit phase that we talked about, we don’t know whether or not that really is conducive to a part-time Guardian,” he said. “They may not be ‘Well, I’m a crew dog and I work shift.’ Maybe that’s not part-time.”

Instead, the part-time model “really fits in on deployable capabilities,” Bentivegna explained. “That’s a traditional model where you come on full-time orders from part-time, you spin up, you pack up your gear, you maybe go downrange some place, you do your six or seven months, you come back and reconstitute and then you go back to part-time.”

That work might include testing and evaluating a new weapons systems or acting as an adversary at a Red Flag or other major exercise for a few weeks, missions which put to good use the expertise part-timers bring from their civilian jobs, Bentivegna said. Now the service has to communicate to Guardians and potential part-timers what that looks like and “paint the vision where they can see themselves.”

“I want to be able to tell those stories and get the part-timers, if you will, excited about where we really need them in the future under this Personnel Management Act vision,” he said. 

F-35s Lead 50 USAF Aircraft in NATO Air Defense Exercise

F-35s Lead 50 USAF Aircraft in NATO Air Defense Exercise

May 10, 2024 | By Chris Gordon and Unshin Lee Harpley

Stealthy U.S. Air Force F-35s, accompanied by NATO allies’ aircraft, are flying across Europe in an air and missile defense exercise, as the threat from ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and drones has grown throughout the world, U.S. Air Forces in Europe said.

The U.S.-led exercise, dubbed Astral Knight, runs from May 6-21. U.S. Air Forces in Europe (USAFE) said “recent conflicts, such as those in Ukraine and Israel,” stressed the urgency of promptly countering aerial threats. NATO has also put a renewed focus on conducting more realistic training scenarios since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine brought the reality of a large-scale war to Europe.

The training involves live-fly and simulated combat operations involving some 50 U.S. aircraft over Poland and the Baltic nations. U.S. aircraft are operating out of Poland, Lithuania, and Romania. Six NATO countries, including Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, the U.K., and the U.S., are participating in the exercise, with personnel from Denmark and Greece observing.

U.S. aircraft include:

  • F-35 Lightning IIs from RAF Lakenhealth, U.K.
  • F-16 Fighting Falcons from Aviano Air Base, Italy, and Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany
  • HH-60G Pave Hawk helicopters from Aviano Air Base, Italy
  • KC-135 Statrotanker aerial refueling aircraft from the Kansas Air National Guard and the 100th Air Refueling Wing at RAF Mildenhall, U.K.
  • MQ-9 Reaper drones from Whiteman Air Force Base, Mo.
  • RQ-4 Global Hawk drones from Grand Forks Air Force Base, N.D.

“Recent events show our most probable threats today and in the foreseeable future could target our main operating bases, making IAMD (Integrated Air and Missile Defense) and ABAD (Air Base Air Defense) that much more important,” James Shaw, USAFE-AFAFRICA’s Integrated Air and Missile Defense deputy division chief, said in the release.

The F-35s, based at RAF Lakenhealth, U.K., were deployed for the exercise. Four Lakenhealth F-35s were already forward deployed to Poland as part of the U.S. commitment to safeguard the skies over NATO’s eastern flank, though those aircraft are not slated to participate in the exercise. The fifth-generation stealthy jets are a particularly tough test for air defense systems.

Both NATO as a whole and the U.S. have conducted a series of exercises involving fighters and bombers to bolster the region’s sovereignty, as the alliance has sought to strengthen itself after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

While Ukraine is not yet a member of NATO, the alliance’s secretary general has stated that it is “inevitable” for Kyiv to join in the future, though that will not happen during the active conflict.

Russian attacks that have stressed Ukraine’s air defenses with relatively cheap Iranian-designed drones, Iran’s massive missile and drone attack on Israel, and at least 170 drone, rocket, and missile attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq, Syria, and Jordan since October have reinforced the critical need for such an exercise, USAFE noted in a press release on the exercise.

Improving NATO’s IAMD has been a top priority of Gen. James B. Hecker, who leads NATO Allied Air Command and U.S. Air Forces in Europe-Air Forces Africa, especially with the proliferation of drone attacks. Israel’s recent successful defense of over 300 ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and drones was supported by the U.S. and coalition partners, allowing Israel to more effectively employ its multi-layered, sophisticated air and missile defense systems.

For Hecker, recent events—even before Iran’s attack on Israel—highlighted the “need for a very sophisticated integrated air and missile defense system,” he said at AFA’s Warfare Symposium in February. “That’s something that we need to continue to get better at.”

USAFE has put a renewed focus on air defense and as well countering it, including practicing taking out anti-air systems that could be used against the U.S. and its partners if necessary.

Astral Knight will “focus on testing the deployment and sustainment of IAMD assets and capabilities while exercising defense plans for distributed air operations” by using the USAF’s Agile Combat Employment concept, USAFE said. Operational control of some U.S. assets and personnel will also be transferred to NATO authority.

“Astral Knight demonstrates the collective defense capabilities of NATO allies and partners across Europe,” Hecker said in a statement. “By fostering early collaboration and integration in air and missile defense efforts among USAFE-AFAFRICA and NATO nations, we enhance our ability to deter and respond effectively to shared threats.”

The training is part of the Department of Defense’s Large Scale Global Exercise 2024 which runs through June and complements NATO’s separate Steadfast Defender exercise. A component of the Steadfast Defender series called Swift Response began its airborne phase on May 7, with paratroopers from the U.S, Spain, Hungary, and Italy commencing their training in Sweden, which marks Sweden’s inaugural participation in a NATO exercise since becoming a member nation in March.

“Presence matters. You have to be with your allies,” Air Force Lt. Gen. Steven Basham, the deputy commander of U.S. European Command, said during a May 10 event hosted by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. “To be able to integrate, you have to be with your allies to campaign, to exercise. And by the way, it can’t be just episodic where you just come in at the last minute because that’s actually not working toward deterrence.”

Air Force Delivers Report to Congress on Options for ANG Space Units. What Comes Next?

Air Force Delivers Report to Congress on Options for ANG Space Units. What Comes Next?

May 9, 2024 | By Greg Hadley

The Department of the Air Force has delivered a report to Congress recommending the transfer of Air National Guard units to the Space Force, calling it “by far the most advisable” option studied—even as growing opposition from lawmakers threatens to derail the idea.

The report, obtained by Air & Space Forces Magazine, was compiled from analysis and reporting gathered by 30 officers from the National Guard Bureau, Air National Guard, Space Force, Air Force, National Reconnaissance Office, and Office of the Secretary of the Air Force. They used eight factors to compare three scenarios for the space-focused units within the ANG: 

  • Remaining in the ANG as they have since the establishment of the Space Force 
  • Moving into the Space Force with its new personnel management system for managing part-time and full-time Guardians 
  • Establishing a separate Space National Guard 

The move to the Space Force was the only one deemed “advisable” by Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall and Chief of Space Operations Gen. B. Chance Saltzman, the report concluded. However, all three scenarios were deemed “feasible.”

Kendall already acknowledged that recommendation during Congressional testimony last month, and the Air Force has submitted a legislative proposal for the move. But the delivery of the report, mandated in the 2024 National Defense Authorization Act, represents the most thorough accounting the Air Force has released for its position. 

Looking at all three scenarios, the report authors considered eight factors: 

  • Readiness 
  • Unity of Command 
  • Unity of Effort  
  • Feasibility 
  • Simplicity 
  • Timeliness 
  • Cost 
  • Recruiting/Retention 

Status Quo 

Leaving ANG units as they are would require “the least amount of disruption, time, and organizational change to implement,” the report states. But it would not address ongoing readiness, unity of command and effort problems that Guard units have been raising for years now. For example, the Air Force and Space Force use different force generation models, requiring extra coordination for handling Guard units. The two branches also have different “Specialty Codes” for managing their career fields, and the Guard units currently fall under Air Force chains of command. 

“With policy changes and a formal structure of workarounds, Air National Guardsmen could continue to successfully conduct space missions serving under an ANG chain of command in peacetime,” the report states. “Doing so will necessitate additional Air Force and Space Force coordination, beyond what is currently in place.” 

Space Force 

Transferring the Guard units into the Space Force would result in “a more complex transition period,” the report notes, with a projected timeline of five years. But it would solve the unity of effort and command problems and be relatively cost-neutral, with some potential savings possibly by reducing bureaucratic overhead. It would also be in line with the Space Force Personnel Management Act, which gave the service the ability to have part-time and full-time Guardians in one single component. 

A number of Air National Guardsmen have said they do not want to transfer to the Space Force, either because they want to be available for state-level missions, they see better opportunities for career advancement in the Guard, or they don’t want to have to relocate. One internal survey found at least 70 percent of affected Guardsmen would not make the switch to the Space Force. 

However, the report echoes comments Kendall has made that fears about the transition are being overblown. 

“Specific options have not been presented at this point … nor have affected members been informed that the transition will be largely seamless and not require fundamentally different service arrangements, unit changes, or relocation,” the report states. 

And while there is risk that Guardsmen may still choose not to transfer, the report notes that the Space Force has handled risks like that before as it accepted Army and Navy space missions without the guarantee of all those Soldiers and Sailors transferring with the missions. 

Space National Guard 

In preparing the report, the department determined that only nine Air National Guard units and roughly 700 personnel perform Space Force functions. Those are both lower numbers than Space National Guard advocates have cited—the report says that Airmen who perform support functions would stay in the ANG no matter what. 

Given the small number of personnel, the report presents a notional organization of “cross-state” Deltas under which the Space Guard units would fall. But the size of the Guard presents issues, the report concludes. Such a small force, in support of the smallest military branch, would offer few chances for career advancement and may have trouble advocating for its priorities against the Pentagon’s much larger organizations. 

The report does concede that a separate Space Guard could be stood up faster than integrating the units into the Space Force, and that costs would be relatively equal to the status quo. That marks a significant acknowledgement given that a previous Congressional Budget Office estimated the cost at $500 million annually, a figure that critics frequently cited in arguing against a Space Guard. 

“If the Space National Guard grows beyond the initial nine units there could be cost increases,” the report states. “Such growth is only speculation at this time.” 

Finally, the report authors argue that a Space National Guard is unnecessary given the part-time/full-time construct the Space Force is creating, and that option may actually hurt recruiting for the Guard by forcing them to compete against each other. 

What’s Next 

Ultimately, the report’s recommendation states that, “Given its small size and the lean philosophy the Space Force has taken in its organizational approach, the burden of a separate Reserve or Guard component—in any form—would detract from the ability of the Space Force to execute its critical mission.” 

Yet the report closes with a nod to the debate that continues to rage over these units: 

“The National Guard Bureau … have consistently stated and remain of the opinion that the transfer of covered space functions from the ANG into a new Space National Guard component provides the best option for Airmen performing space missions in the ANG today. The Department of the Air Force, the Department of Defense, and the Administration disagree with this position.” 

The NGB has gained momentum for its argument in recent weeks. Governors from all 55 states and territories have come out against the Air Force’s legislative proposal, saying it would disregard gubernatorial authorities over Guard units. On May 6, 56 House members and 29 senators sent a letter to the congressional armed services committees also pushing back against the proposal. Even one of the plan’s top backers, House Armed Services Committee chair Rep. Mike Rogers, told Military.com that the Air Force needs to sell its skeptics on the plan. 

An Air Force spokesperson told Air & Space Forces Magazine that the department has had contact with lawmakers who oppose the legislative proposal. On May 9, the chair and vice chair of the National Governors Association—Govs. Spencer Cox of Utah and Jared Polis of Colorado—released a statement saying they had spoken with Kendall and he did not commit to withdrawing the legislative proposal. 

“The continued failure of the Air Force to meaningfully consider gubernatorial authority is very concerning,” they said. 

In a letter to Cox obtained by Air & Space Forces Magazine, Kendall wrote that “the proposal does not authorize the transfer of any other units from the National Guard, nor is it meant to set a precedent for the transfer of other units or disregard the critical role of governors.” 

Austin Says North Korea Helped Russia ‘Get Back Up on Its Feet’

Austin Says North Korea Helped Russia ‘Get Back Up on Its Feet’

May 9, 2024 | By Unshin Lee Harpley

Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III told lawmakers North Korea’s weapon supply bolstered Russia in its war with Ukraine, part of a broader coalition that has aided Moscow’s efforts including Iran and China.

“We saw Russia engage North Korea, who provided quite a bit of munitions and missiles, and the drones provided by Iran really helped to begin turning the tide there for Russia a bit, and allowed them to get back up on their feet, in addition to them increasing their production in their industrial base,” Austin told the Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee on May 8.

The White House reported that North Korean-produced ballistic missiles were fired into Ukraine from Russia in January. The following month, it disclosed that since September 2023, North Korea had delivered more than 10,000 containers of munitions to Russia. Experts have noted that arms sales likely began in 2022 during the initial stages of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

“Without the help from Iran, North Korea, and China, this probably would not have occurred to the degree that it has occurred,” Austin said, referring to the current scale of the prolonged war.

Recent findings have cast doubt on how effective these weapons are. On May 7, Kyiv’s top prosecutor told Reuters nearly half of the Pyongyang-made missiles fired at Ukraine by Russia between December and February “lost their programmed trajectories and exploded in the air.” Experts note this isn’t surprising, given Pyongyang’s outdated weapon production skills and some of their stocks dating back to the Cold War era.

However, it does pose concerns for the U.S. and its allies, as North Korea can effectively “test” its missiles in Ukraine, which could lead them to enhance munition production and provide better arms to Russia and others in a few years.

“North Koreans can learn about how effective their weapons are,” Andrew Yeo, senior fellow at the Brookings Institute, told Air & Space Forces Magazine. “I can’t say these improvements will be made immediately, but I would say over the course of a year or two, that they could make improvements to their missiles.”

Yeo added that for Russia, simply having more missiles in their arsenal is crucial at the current war stage. And the longer the conflict goes on, the more opportunities for North Koreans have to enhance their production capabilities.

In exchange for missiles, Russia is believed to be giving North Korea economic aid and military technology. This could also could extend to the exchange of military equipment.

“The question is if Russia would help them with industrial production and provide them with weapon parts or components,” said Yeo. “These all violate sanctions, but it seems clear Russia doesn’t care too much about upholding international sanctions.”

Austin said that the Pentagon is being “as effective as we can” by being engaged in the right channels to meet these challenges through sanctions. But he added that the effort “continues to be a work in progress.”

Yeo said sanctions remain a vital tool for slowing production.

“It makes some companies and individuals think twice if they want to do business with North Korea,” said Yeo. “We don’t know how much more would be entering and exiting North Korea if sanctions were completely removed, so there’s still some impact of having sanctions. But because much of the trade in resources like energy is coming from Russia and China, and the big players aren’t enforcing them, they are just not as effective.”

According to Yeo, the continuous illicit arms trade is a lifeline for “cash-strapped” North Korea. With demand rising from conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, the regime profits from selling ballistic missiles, small arms, and other weapons. The revenue then funds its missile, space, cyber, and nuclear programs.

What Drives the General Who Ordered Missile Cancer Study: ‘If I Don’t Care, Who Does?’

What Drives the General Who Ordered Missile Cancer Study: ‘If I Don’t Care, Who Does?’

May 9, 2024 | By Chris Gordon

The Air Force general who oversees the nation’s land-based nuclear intercontinental ballistic missile fleet said he is strongly committed to an ongoing study of cancer cases among crews who worked around ICBMs.

“I’m the commander of this mission, and if I don’t care, who does?” Gen. Thomas A. Bussiere, commander of Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC), told Air & Space Forces Magazine. “It’s my job.”

He also has a personal stake in the issue. 

“When I was at Langley Air Force Base flying F-15s, several of my colleagues got different types of cancers, a couple of them died. I got cancer,” he said. “When I was a captain, I asked the Air Force to look into things like that. And quite frankly, you know, we were not interested in doing that.”

In 2021, the Air Force released a study on increased rates of some cancers among fighter pilots. That led to a broader 2022 DOD review of aviators’ cancer rates that drew similar conclusions.

The type of cancer Bussiere had was one of the most common among aviators, he said.

In early 2023, long-held concerns among the ICBM community came to the fore, and Bussiere ordered the Missile Community Cancer Study, led by the U.S. Air Force School of Aerospace Medicine.

Airmen who served in underground bunkers in 24-48 hour shifts, as well as those who served in missile fields as security forces, maintenance jobs, and more, have long suspected that cases of non-Hodgkin lymphoma and other health issues may be linked to their service. 

But the Air Force dismissed those concerns based on studies conducted in 2001 and 2005. Bussiere said those studies were not rigorous enough, though it is too early to draw sweeping conclusions from the ongoing study.

“I read the two previous reports, and to say they were wanting in their deliberate, disciplined approach to review the issues in that career field is an understatement. I was not happy with the 2001 and 2005 reports that were done,” Bussiere said in a recent interview, speaking alongside AFGSC’s top enlisted Airman, Command Chief Master Sgt. Melvina A. Smith.

Bussiere, who has a son in the Air Force, said that he has a responsibility to Airmen who may not have high-level connections.

“What if your dad’s not a two-star or four-star?” Bussiere said. “Who’s going to be your advocate, as Airmen in the Air Force? That’s me. That’s Chief Smith. So that was kind of how I approached it.”

Airman 1st Class Mikhail Ayala, 90th Operational Medical Readiness Squadron bioenvironmental engineering apprentice, takes samples at L-01 missile alert facility, or MAF, near Stoneham, Colorado, July 13, 2023. U.S. Air Force photo by Joseph Coslett Jr.

The study Bussiere ordered—a decision he said was strongly supported by Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall and then-Chief of Staff of the Air Force Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr.—is designed in two parts. There is an epidemiological review, which involves combing through health data, and an environmental sampling process for all three Active Minuteman III ICBM bases—Malmstrom Air Force Base, Mont., F.E. Warren Air Force Base, Wyo., and Minot Air Force Base, N.D.—as well as Vandenberg Space Force Base, Calif., a Minuteman III ICBM test launch facility.

“We are also having outside independent verification of everything we do through different professional medical organizations,” Bussiere said. “That’s part of being transparent and credible, is that you don’t just go, ‘Well, I looked in the mirror and I’m good.’”


So far, the study team has found indications of higher rates of prostate cancer and breast cancer—but not higher rates of non-Hodgkin Lymphoma—and some hazardous chemicals at ICBM bases, though service officials caution they have only examined a limited pool of Airmen’s health records so far.

Global Strike Command has shared regular updates on the study through town halls with Active members of the force or other individuals currently tied to the military. But reaching veterans is a tougher task.

U.S. Air Force Gen. Thomas Bussiere, Air Force Global Strike Command commander, and Chief Master Sgt. Melvina Smith, AFGSC command chief, conduct an all-call during a base tour at Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota, Aug. 16, 2023. U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Kyle Wilson

“We’ve had great participation,” Bussiere said. “It’s a little more complicated for people that have separated or retired. For that, we’ve used the missile associations, keeping them informed. We’ve used our public-facing portal platform that has all the information in the studies and press releases.”

Recently, however, Bussiere said the decision was reached to open the town halls up using video teleconferences such as Microsoft Teams or Zoom, in addition to updating nonprofit associations of former missileers and posting information and slides from the town halls online.

“We’re going to transition into a platform that people that are not in the government or not in a federal VTC system can dial-in for our town halls so that we can keep those folks updated,” he said.

As for current Airmen, Air Force Global Strike Command says it is confident it has been open enough to make people feel comfortable finding out information and reaching out to their commanders.

“They trust the fact that we’re pushing information to them, and saying, ‘Give me all your questions,’ so we can answer them,” Smith said.

Gen. Thomas Bussiere (left), commander of Air Force Global Strike Command, briefs Airmen from across the intercontinental ballistic missile community about the initial results from the Missile Community Cancer Study, Barksdale Air Force Base, La., Aug. 7, 2023. U.S. Air Force Photo by Capt. Joshua Thompson
How to Shorten the 12,000-Child Waitlist For Military Child Care

How to Shorten the 12,000-Child Waitlist For Military Child Care

May 9, 2024 | By David Roza

The chair of the Senate Armed Services personnel subcommittee wants the Pentagon to bump up pay for military child care staff, which she sees as a key factor contributing to long waitlists at military child care centers around the world. About 12,000 children were on those waitlists last year, while staff was short about 3,900 caregivers, said Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who estimated the number is likely higher due to families who give up on the wait list entirely.

“Think about what that means,” she said May 8 at a personnel hearing with top officials from the services and the Pentagon. “That’s more than 12,000 parents struggling to find out how to meet their military obligations when they have small children at home that need care.”

Military child development centers (CDCs) are accepting 30 percent fewer children than they could if they were fully-staffed, the senator added.

“I know there are a lot of ideas about how to improve child care access for military families, but clearly staffing up has to be the number one focus,” she said. “Hiring more people would let us increase the overall capacity literally by tens of thousands of children, if we just hire up to all of the spots we’ve got.”

The Air Force feels the problem; Lt. Gen. Caroline Miller, the branch’s deputy chief of staff for manpower, personnel, and services, said the Air Force has a 20 percent deficit of child care providers, which affects Airmen’s ability to do their jobs.

“The first thing you do when you get a [permanent change of station] assignment is you look at, if you have children, where are my children going to go? What is the access to child care? How do I get on the list as soon as possible,” she said. “I mean, it is mission readiness.”

But bringing more CDC workers to military bases has proven difficult. The bases are often remote and far from robust health care networks, and many parents work odd hours to meet training and operational requirements. Better pay could help. The Defense Department requested $33.5 million in its fiscal year 2025 budget request “to modernize the child care workforce,” according to budget documents, in part by redesigning child care provider compensation.

Warren applauded the move, saying that the pay scale for child care workers has not been reworked in 30 years. A report on military quality of life published last month by the House Armed Services Committee found that CDC employee wages are competitive with their civilian counterparts, but that those wages “are comparable to the average wages of workers in the food services industries and below the average wages of workers in retail industries, despite child care workers often requiring advanced training.”

The report called for paying child care workers more; standardizing benefits, such as waiving child care fees for CDC workers’ children; and studying whether hiring authorities for child care workers can be improved. 

Last month, Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) introduced a bill that would address several of those concerns and allow the Defense Department to create 12 partnerships with private and public child care centers on or near military bases. The hope is that these first-of-their-kind partnerships, along with new incentives and authorities to recruit and retain child care providers, will drive up capacity at those locations.

Investing in those community partnerships is crucial to provide flexibility for military families, Katharine Kelley, the deputy chief of space operations for human capital, said at the May 8 hearing.

“Clearly, additional top line to cover increased pay is crucial, as is taking advantage of some of the other options that are out there because the situations are so unique for individual, at least in my case, Guardians, that we want to make sure that we’ve got multiple options to try to combat this issue,” she said.

But providing those options takes money. Marine Corps Lt. Gen. James Glynn, the deputy commandant for manpower and reserve affairs, said all the services would waive 100 percent of child care fees for the first child of CDC workers “if we could all afford 100 percent.” 

“And our job is to make sure you can afford 100 percent,” said Warren.

At a time where the military faces fierce competition with private industry to attract and retain service members, officials at the hearing described child care as a matter of national security.

“It is a readiness issue, and right now we are facing peer competitors that we have not seen since probably World War II and Russia, you know, during the Cold War,” Miller said. “So it is critical now.”

B-21 Bomber and LRSO Nuclear Missile Flight Testing ‘On Track’

B-21 Bomber and LRSO Nuclear Missile Flight Testing ‘On Track’

May 9, 2024 | By John A. Tirpak

While the land leg of the Air Force’s nuclear modernization effort faces escalating costs and a slipping schedule, two key parts of the air leg—the B-21 bomber and the Long-Range Stand-Off nuclear missile—are both in flight testing and making good progress, Air Force acquisition chief Andrew P. Hunter told lawmakers May 8.

The B-21 flight test program “is proceeding well,” Hunter said in response to questions from Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.). “It is doing what flight test programs are designed to do, which is helping us learn about the unique characteristics of this platform, but in a very, very effective way.”

Hunter added that the B-21 is working its way through test objectives and “I’m encouraged with how that’s progressing.”

Looking ahead, “there are some key points still to come this year,” Hunter said of the tests, but he did not elaborate on what they are.

“I’m looking forward very much to talking to you when we can come back with data on those efforts and let you know where we stand,” Hunter told lawmakers, before adding that “as of today, good progress is being made. We believe we are on track.”

The B-21 made its first flight, which was not announced in advance by the Air Force, on Nov. 10, 2023. On that initial sortie, the aircraft took off from Northrop Grumman’s plant at Palmdale, Calif., and made a winding flight around southern California, landing at Edwards Air Force Base after about 90 minutes.

The service confirmed another flight took place Jan. 17 but declined to say whether that was the second ever flight of the test aircraft, nicknamed “Cerberus.”

Air Force officials have said that other flights have taken place, but the number of hops and the activities are being kept secret. The service has not even released any in-flight photographs of the B-21, its first new bomber in 30 years. Those available were taken by private photographers.

After first flight, the Pentagon awarded Northrop a contract for low-rate initial production of the B-21, but details of the award have been withheld. Northrop said it will absorb a $1.56 billion loss on the first five lots of B-21s, which are being built on a fixed-price basis. It has attributed the loss to inflation, higher-than-expected labor costs and supply chain issues.     

Cotton later asked if the B-21 was the “first airplane … that would be considered to be fully digitally designed.” Hunter said it was probably not.

The “true experts on this topic” would question whether some elements were “really digital,” Hunter responded. “I would say it is the first aircraft where it is far more digital than not” among aircraft that “we’ve taken … into this stage of production and are moving towards fielding.”

Digital design has “helped us with being as on track as we are,” he added. The digital architecture has demonstrated “that the aircraft that we have built to test is meeting our requirements,” and that will lead to “I think, higher fidelity and higher likelihood of success.”

Other things that have contributed to the B-21’s success include enforcing “quite a bit of discipline in setting requirements and looking for mature technology.”

Cotton also asked for the status of the equally-classified AGM-181 LRSO, the nuclear missile that will succeed the AGM-86B Air-Launched Cruise Missile and equip both the B-52J and the B-21.

Hunter said the LRSO is “tracking well. The program is definitely on track to meet its timelines and deliver to the warfighter need date. And we are also doing well on cost for that program as well.”

RTX’s Raytheon Technologies is developing the LRSO, beating out Lockheed Martin for the work in 2020. Raytheon was selected even before the Technology Maturation and Risk Reduction (TMRR) phase of the program had concluded, with the service saying it was already clear at that point that the Raytheon offering was superior, and that time could be saved by advancing directly into the engineering and manufacturing development phase. Air Force officials have reported numerous test flights of LRSO have already taken place, and it is to be operational on the B-52 by the end of the decade. The Air Force has yet to reveal a photo or artist’s concept of the LRSO.

Brown: Aircraft Age and Need for New Tech Driving Need for ‘Doomsday’ Replacement

Brown: Aircraft Age and Need for New Tech Driving Need for ‘Doomsday’ Replacement

May 8, 2024 | By Unshin Lee Harpley

It is critical that the Air Force move forward on the replacement for its E-4B “Doomsday” aircraft to keep the capability “viable” into the next decade and beyond, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. told lawmakers May 8.

Last month, the Air Force gave the Sierra Nevada Corporation a $13.08 billion contract to build the Survivable Air Operations Center as a replacement for the E-4, officially known as the National Airborne Operations Center.

The NAOC acts as a critical communication hub for directing U.S. forces from the skies during emergencies, ranging from the destruction of ground command centers to nuclear warfare. The current fleet, a militarized version of Boeing’s 747-200 platform, consists of four aircraft, each with seating for up to 111 people. The Air Force aims to retire the E-4B by the early 2030s, replacing it with the SAOC.

At a Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee hearing, Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) asked Brown, the former Air Force Chief of Staff, why is was necessary to replace the E-4. Brown cited the fleet’s age as the primary reason.

“We have to ensure that we actually have a viable platform that we can sustain from a maintenance standpoint,” Brown said. “Because at some point, it gets more costly to maintain than to move into a new capability.”

Air Force budget documents have noted the NAOC fleet suffers from “capability gaps, diminishing manufacturing sources, increased maintenance costs, and parts obsolescence.” The fleet’s mission capable rate has been steadily declining, reaching a low of 55.4 percent in 2022, the most recent year for which data is available. 

An E-4B National Airborne Operations Center stands ready at Royal Air Force Mildenhall, England, April 12, 2023. U.S. Force photo by Karen Abeyasekere/This image has been altered for security purposes

Brown also tied the SAOC effort to the Pentagon’s broader effort to modernize its overall nuclear command, control, and communications (NC3) enterprise.

“It’s very important in that it not only puts command and control in for the leadership of the nation, but also for our nuclear command and control as well,” Brown said. “So, it plays a key role to provide the President and national use of options to continue to operate when we have any type of crisis or contingency.”

But the SAOC won’t just replace the NAOC with a new airframe to keep flying.

“As technology advances, we want to make sure we have the most advanced capabilities that the nation has to offer and the platforms that we use, not only for our command and control, but also for our warfighters.” said Brown.  

The Air Force is seeking $1.69 billion for fiscal 2025 for work on the SAOC.

The service first initiated SAOC in 2019, but the process has been delayed several times, with lawmakers expressing concerns about the progress and the E-4 fleet’s capability. To keep the NAOC flying until its scheduled phase-out, the Air Force has invested in virtual reality training for the E-4, using a 3-D scan of the interior and exterior to create training modules for maintainers and operators.

Like its predecessor, the SAOC aircraft will be built to fly outside the continental U.S. and withstand a nuclear attack to keep the government running from the air during a crisis. Work will be performed across four states, including Sparks, Nev., where the company’s headquarter is located, and is expected to be completed by July 2036.