[Senate Hearing 117-967, Part 4]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 117-967, Pt. 4
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION
REQUEST FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2023 AND THE FUTURE YEARS DEFENSE
PROGRAM
=======================================================================
HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
S. 4543
TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023 FOR MILITARY
ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CON-
STRUCTION, AND FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR
SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
__________
PART 4
AIRLAND
__________
MAY 10 AND MAY 17, 2022
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via: http: //www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
59-836 WASHINGTON : 2025
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
JACK REED, Rhode Island, Chairman JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut TOM COTTON, Arkansas
MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota
TIM KAINE, Virginia JONI ERNST, Iowa
ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine THOM TILLIS, North Carolina
ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia RICK SCOTT, Florida
TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
JACKY ROSEN, Nevada JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
MARK KELLY, Arizona TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama
Elizabeth L. King, Staff Director
John D. Wason, Minority Staff Director
_________________________________________________________________
Subcommittee on Airland
TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois, Chair TOM COTTON, Arkansas
ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan THOM TILLIS, North Carolina
JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
JACKY ROSEN, Nevada RICK SCOTT, Florida
MARK KELLY, Arizona JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
_________________________________________________________________
may 10, 2022
Page
Army Modernization............................................... 1
Member Statements
Statement of Senator Tammy Duckworth............................. 1
Statement of Senator Tom Cotton.................................. 5
Witness Statements
Bush, Hon. Douglas, Assistant Secretary of the Army for 3
Acquisition, Logistics and Technology.
Richardson, Lieutenant General James M., USA, Deputy Commanding 6
General, United States Army Futures Command.
Grice, Colonel Christopher A., USA, Director of Materiel, Force 7
Development, Deputy Chief of Staff of the Army, G-8.
Questions for the Record......................................... 26
may 17, 2022
Air Force Modernization.......................................... 33
Member Statements
Statement of Senator Tammy Duckworth............................. 33
Statement of Senator Tom Cotton.................................. 54
Witness Statements
Richardson, Lieutenant General Duke Z., USAF, Military Deputy, 34
Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics.
Questions for the Record......................................... 75
(iii)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION
REQUEST FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023 AND THE FUTURE YEARS
DEFENSE PROGRAM
----------
TUESDAY, MAY 10, 2022
United States Senate,
Subcommittee on Airland,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC.
ARMY MODERNIZATION
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:38 p.m., in
room 222, Russell Senate Office Building, Senator Tammy
Duckworth (Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding.
Subcommittee Members present: Senators Duckworth,
Blumenthal, Peters, Kelly, Cotton, Scott, Blackburn, and
Hawley.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR TAMMY DUCKWORTH
Senator Duckworth. The Airland subcommittee will come to
order. I would like to welcome our witnesses to the hearing
this afternoon, Mr. Douglas Bush, Assistant Secretary of the
Army for Acquisitions, Logistics and Technology. It is good to
see you again. Lieutenant General James Richardson, Deputy
Commanding General, Army Futures Command, welcome, and Colonel
Christopher Grice, Director of Materiel, Force Development,
Army G-8.
I welcome each of you and thank you for your service and
willingness to appear before us today. As we meet today to
explore the Department of the Army's investment and
modernization strategy as presented in its fiscal year 2023
budget request, I would like to take a moment to acknowledge
work that soldiers are doing across the globe and express my
gratitude for military families and the vital role that they
play.
Soldiers and their service counterparts remain engaged in
operations and training events that test equipment and identify
needed capabilities. Today, thousands of soldiers are deployed
to the European continent in support of Ukraine and deterring
expansion of Russian aggression. These missions validate the
importance of pre-positioned stocks and the complexity of
contested logistics. Operations in Ukraine demonstrate the
criticality of competent combined arms operations for a ground
force and the power of joint and collation operations for our
Nation.
As we begin work on the 2023 National Defense Authorization
Act (NDAA), we recognize that the Army is operating with a
largely flat budget. In this budget submission, the Army
continues to prioritize its signature modernization efforts,
slowing procurement of enduring capabilities. Reduced
procurement quantities of capabilities critical to today's Army
drive something significant--sometimes significant increases in
cost per unit.
The committee plays a crucial role in the oversight of
these programs and would like to better understand how the Army
is ensuring it makes best use of its resources with this
strategy. The recently submitted classified national defense
strategy sets out the Department of Defense strategic
priorities and identifies the ways that the Department would
advance its goals.
The NDS [National Defense Strategy] ranks China as the most
consequential strategic competitor and the pacing challenge for
the Department. Russia remains an acute threat. Additionally,
the Department must manage persistent threats such as North
Korea, Iran, and violent extremist organizations. We are
interested in the specific investments and capabilities the
Army included in its fiscal year 2023 budget request that
support implementation of the 2022 NDS.
The Army continues its modernization effort across its six
modernized Nation priorities, long range precision fires, next
gen combat vehicles, future vertical lift, the Army network,
air and missile defense, soldier lethality, and its rapid
capabilities development efforts in hypersonics, directed
energy, indirect fire protection, and mid-range capability. We
understand that 24 of the Army's priority efforts are set to be
in soldiers hands, systems, or prototypes by 2023.
Successful introduction of these capabilities will be in
part due to significant employment of digital design and
digital prototyping. This practice helps to validate
capabilities and refine requirements in advance of physical
prototyping. Soldier centered practices such as soldier touch
point in the prototyping phase and try before you buy
partnerships with industry improve functionality and soldier
acceptability and make more rapid fielding possible.
I applaud the Army's progress in this area. A
transformation of capability this significant will certainly
trigger changes to Army structure, operating concepts and
postures in order to best meet the threat environment. We are
interested to hear what changes the Army is considering.
Additionally, we must understand the impact of these
decisions on the modernization of the Army National Guard and
Army Reserves, critical components of the total Army. Finally,
I want to acknowledge the Army's recently published organic
industrial base modernization strategy. This plan would invest
$16 billion over the next 15 years in facility modernization,
with the mission to enable current material readiness, maintain
surge capacity, and to support future weapons platforms for the
Army and Joint Force.
The organic industrial base remains critical to the Army's
modernization strategy. We would like to better understand how
the Army is nesting its material modernization efforts with
this industrial base initiative. The Army continues to make
both steps in its effort to modernize, but hard decisions lie
ahead.
I have great confidence in you all and look forward to
another productive year as we continued to field a world class
Army. I am--do we have time in for Senator Cotton by any
chance? If not, we will continue and let the witnesses provide
their statements and then I will reserve time for the ranking
member to give his remarks. I will start with----
[Laughter.]
Senator Duckworth. I am glad it wasn't me. We will begin
with Mr. Bush.
STATEMENT OF HON. DOUGLAS BUSH, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY
FOR ACQUISITION, LOGISTICS AND TECHNOLOGY
Mr. Bush. Chair Duckworth, thank you for that statement and
your kind words about what our soldiers are doing every day
overseas. That is a great reminder for all three of us that
that is what we are here. That is what our job is to actually
get them equipment. So thank you for mentioning that.
Thank you for the invitation today to appear before you to
discuss the Army's modernization programs and resources
requested in the President's Budget for fiscal year 2023. I am
pleased to be joined today by my teammates, Lieutenant General
James Richardson, Jim from Army Futures Command, and Colonel
Chris Grice from the Assistant--or the Deputy Chief of Staff,
G-8.
We appreciate your making our written statement a part of
the record for today's hearing. Chair Duckworth, the Army
continues to transform and provide the Joint Force with the
land warfare capabilities needed to accomplish the missions of
the Department of Defense.
The Army's fiscal year 2023 budget and can be described in
two words, continuity and momentum. It maintains the readiness
of the Army and establishes a sustainable path to transform to
the Army of 2030.
Our transformation requires a strategic pivot from two
decades of counterinsurgency operations toward adaptation to
meet our top pacing challenge in China, and the acute threat of
Russian aggression, all while continuing to defend the homeland
and be prepared for other missions around the world.
As outlined in a written statement, we remain committed to
our six modernization priorities, long range precision fires,
next generation combat vehicles, future vertical lift, the
network, air and missile defense, and soldier lethality. The
Army's budget also continues modernization and procurement of
our enduring platforms, albeit in some cases at reduced levels,
as you noted, in aviation, ground combat systems, intelligence,
logistics, and ammunition.
Overall, I believe the budget request reflects an approach
that prioritizes our most important modernization efforts.
However, all budget proposals require making choices, and this
one is no different. One of the questions asked of us in the
hearing invitation was, ``how the Army is managing risk while
prioritizing future capability over enduring force
modernization efforts.'' That is a critical issue, so let me
address that briefly.
As you are aware, in order to protect the Army's highest
priority modernization efforts, the Army did reduce requested
funding in other areas, specifically in the pace of
modernization of our armored brigade combat teams. That
decision was not made lightly. I am confident that Army leaders
understood the potential challenges of that approach.
However, in doing so, the Army sought to ensure that we
didn't go so low on any systems that we put the industrial base
at risk to a degree that it forecloses the ability of the Army
to ramp back up someday if more funding becomes available. In
short, we sought to ensure that we did not close off options
for Army leaders or Congress to make adjustments to our plans
in the future, if they judge that is the right thing to do.
That is a careful balance to strike, and I acknowledge we
don't always get it exactly right. So I look forward to working
with you and other Senators on your views of where the Army
landed on this issue. A second question asked in the hearing
invitation was management of risk in the industrial base.
There are two parts of that important issue I can address.
First, the Army must monitor the privately owned industrial
base, that base of suppliers and manufacturers owned by our
industry partners. As I mentioned, one way we manage that risk
is during the budget process, carefully analyzing the potential
effects of the industrial base of any changes we are
considering.
That includes trying to ensure that we understand the
downstream effects on second and third level suppliers. Often,
what we see is little--is less risk at the level of the largest
companies, but greater risk as we look further down the supply
chain. The second aspect of the industrial base is the organic
industrial base you mentioned in your statement. The depots,
arsenals, and ammunition facilities that are Government owned.
In this case, the Army recently completed a new 15 year
modernization plan that seeks to significantly upgrade our
capabilities to match 21st century needs, prioritizing improved
safety and expanded capacity within our current facilities.
This plan also led to a historically high level of funding in
the budget for upgrading these facilities across the board. For
example, the Army is requesting more than $200 million in
upgrades just for Watervliet Arsenal in fiscal year 2023.
That facility is one of the only places in America where
gun tubes and cannons can be made, so it is a vital single
point of failure in the supply chain that we have to protect.
We also include, if you look across the fight hub, about $500
million a year in upgrade efforts for the Army's ammunition
plants.
The Army is the single manager for conventional ammunition,
and that is primarily a joint responsibility because most of
what we produce in energetics, for example, goes to the Navy
and Air Force for their needs. That is an Army responsibility
we take very seriously, and this budget invests more in that. I
worked closely with General Daly at Army Materiel Command on
this effort, and I think it is a well done plan for improving
the industrial base.
A final issue I would mention is the Army is trying to use
all of the new acquisition authorities provided by Congress in
recent years to make the Army's acquisition system more
responsive to the needs of soldiers and to get equipment into
their hands much more quickly than in the past.
In particular, the use of the new urgent need pathway,
middle tier acquisition pathway, and software acquisition
pathway provide the Army with greatly expanded options to move
faster. As an example, as you cited, many of the more than two
dozen systems the Army plans to field to soldiers in 2023 use
those new authorities to move at accelerated timelines. I know
change in the DOD [Department of Defense] can be very slow. You
should know that it can happen and that it is happening in the
Army.
The Army is changing and is committed to continuing this
approach in the future with the support of members. As Senators
consider the fiscal year 2030 legislation, I would ask you to
be cautious about adding additional complications or additional
elements of the acquisition system, as adding anything to the
system that is already difficult to move quickly and can
sometimes slow it down further.
I am aware, however, that that is a balance, and that
oversight matters, and taxpayer dollars must be protected, and
the Army must use these authorities responsibly, and that is
something I am committed to.
In closing, I would like to say thank you for the funding
provided to support our many modernization efforts in recent
years, and we believe that the fiscal year 2023 budget request
builds on this progress we have made across all modernization
priorities.
Thank you for your time today and I look forward to your
questions.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you. At this time, I would like to
recognize the ranking member for any opening statement.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR TOM COTTON
Senator Cotton. Thank you, Chairwoman Duckworth, and thanks
to the witness for your service. We appreciate your willingness
to take on substantial challenges the Army faces, but I want to
cut to the chase.
The recently released defense strategy rightly highlights
the accelerating threat of communist China and its
unprecedented military modernization, and recognizes Russia
remains an acute threat given its invasion of Ukraine. But the
Administration's budget request falls far short of providing
the resources required to face these threats.
The Administration's budget not only doesn't keep pace with
the rate of China's modernization, it doesn't even keep pace
with our own inflation. Specifically for the Army, the
Administration request cuts to the research and development
budget by 6 percent and cuts Army procurement by 7 percent from
the most recently enacted levels.
Army leadership absorb these cuts by dramatically slowing
the modernization of critical, enduring capabilities, such as
the Abrams tank that are the backbone of our armored brigade
combat teams, deterring further Russian aggression in Europe at
this very moment.
Unfortunately, the substantial quantity reductions requests
in this budget also drive up the per unit cost of these
multimillion dollar platforms, somewhere between 15 and 40
percent. I suspect that Army leadership would not have taken
this pennywise and pound foolish approach if they had been
given an adequate top line by the Office of the Secretary of
Defense, the Office of Management and Budget, or the White
House.
Unsurprisingly, therefore, the Army's unfunded priorities
list seeks to restore $5.1 billion in critical requirements to
mitigate the risk of the inadequate request for the Army. We
have a lot of work to do to ensure that the Army receives the
resources it needs to modernize for the threats we face.
So I look forward to the hearing from our witnesses--from
hearing from our witnesses today about the progress the Army is
making on its highest modernization priorities, such as long
range precision fires, and what we can do to overcome the
challenges we are experiencing in replenishing advanced
munitions transferred to Ukraine.
Again, I think Chairwoman Duckworth for calling the
hearing, and I look forward to the testimony.
Senator Duckworth. I thank the ranking member. General
Richardson?
STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL JAMES M. RICHARDSON, USA,
DEPUTY COMMANDING GENERAL, UNITED STATES ARMY FUTURES COMMAND
Lieutenant General Richardson. Chair Duckworth, Ranking
Member Cotton, distinguished members of the subcommittee, on
behalf of the teammates here at this end of the table and the
soldiers and civilians of Army Futures Command, thank you for
the opportunity to testify about Army modernization.
Our country is engaged in strategic competition with
determined adversaries. Part of that competition is the
struggle among the militaries to out-innovate one another. Army
Futures Command and our partners are on the front lines of that
struggle. Innovation is about more than materiel.
Armies win or lose by a combination of their doctrine,
organization, and equipment. All three start with AFC. We
develop concepts that become doctrine, design future
organizations, and develop requirements for materiel all based
on assessments of the future operational environment, emerging
threats, and technologies.
The soldiers and civilians of AFC are making significant
progress in each of these areas. AFC, working very closely with
our ASO partners in supporting the delivery of 24
transformational systems into the hands of soldiers by 2023,
based on the Army's six modernization priorities.
Through soldier centered design and strong support from
Force Comm, we are getting equipment into the hands of soldiers
early so that we can inform requirements before significant
investments are made. In fiscal year 2021 alone, we conducted
113 soldier touchpoints.
Looking ahead, we are seeking even more opportunities to
integrate the lessons from the operational force, such as the
continuing and collaboration of 18th Airborne Corps, III Corps,
and I Corps. AFC leads Project Convergence, the Army's campaign
of learning and experimentation, which informs requirements,
concepts, and future force design.
In Project Convergence 21, we learned that we must take a
system of systems approach in developing our requirements
documents. We also learned that we need to move from
interoperability to integration of systems with the Joint Force
and our allies.
In Project Convergence 22, we will scale the technologies
we are testing, integrate our allies and partners, and build on
the lessons of Project Convergence 21. AFC is helping pave the
way to a data centric Army, fully integrated into a data
centric Joint Force.
PC 21 taught us that data is the new ammunition, and the
network is the center of gravity of the future fight. We are
working to fully implement common data standards and joint
message formats in our requirements documents to ensure a
systems approach among the Army, Joint Force, and our allies
and partners.
Furthermore, we are moving the Army towards a future
network that is transport agnostic, cyber resilient, and
underpinned by a modernized security architecture. AFC is
designing the Army of 2040 and supporting the delivery of the
Army of 2030. We start by describing the future operational
environment.
Then, through our future studies programs, we bring
together concept writers, intelligence professionals, and S&T
experts to build our next concept, focused on how the Army of
2024 will organize, equip, and fight. Stable and consistent
funding from Congress supports our ability to serve our Nation,
take care of our people, and continue the momentum of our
modernization efforts.
Thank you for your consistent support of our Army and our
families. I look forward to answering your questions.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you, General, and now taking the
place of General McCurry, Colonel Grice, thank you for stepping
up.
STATEMENT OF COLONEL CHRISTOPHER A. GRICE, USA, DIRECTOR OF
MATERIEL, FORCE DEVELOPMENT, DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF OF THE ARMY,
G-8
Colonel Grice. Thank you, Chair Duckworth, and thank you,
Chair Duckworth and Ranking Member Cotton, distinguished
members of the Senate Armed Services committee on Airland. On
behalf of Lieutenant General Peterson, Brigadier General Mac
McCurry, and the headquarters Department of the Army Deputy
Chief of Staff G-8 team, thank you for the invitation to appear
before you to discuss Army modernization and the resources
request for the President's Budget for fiscal year 2023.
Our requested investments in modernization for fiscal year
2023 reflect a deliberate, multi-year effort to accelerate
focused modernization and place transformational capabilities
in the hands of our soldiers. These capabilities support our
national defense strategy for integrated deterrence, active
campaigning, and help us build and maintain an enduring
advantage over peers and potential adversaries.
The Army's efforts contribute directly to the Joint Force's
ability to deter, and when called upon, fight and win
decisively. Modernized capabilities reduce risk imposed by an
increasingly aggressive competitors and foes to help us achieve
decision dominance, range, and lethality that provide overmatch
against any adversary.
The Army remains committed to maintaining momentum for our
modernization priorities while sustaining our enduring fleets.
We continue to invest in upgrades to our enduring systems that
will fight alongside our modernized capabilities.
Through 4 years of prioritization, the evaluation of
capabilities, and difficult decisions on funding, we maintain
that momentum to achieve a sustainable strategic path to the
Army of 2030.
We are grateful to Congress for the stable funding provided
to support our modernization efforts, and with your sustained
support, we will deliver advanced capabilities that enable the
Joint Force to win in large scale combat and multi-domain
operations.
Thank you for your time today and I look forward to
answering your questions.
[The joint prepared statement of The Honorable Douglas R.
Bush, Lieutenant General James M. Richarson, and Colonel
Christopher A. Grice follows:]
Joint Prepared Statement by The Honorable Douglas R. Bush, Lieutenant
General James M. Richardson, and Colonel Christopher A. Grice
introduction
Chair Duckworth, Ranking Member Cotton, distinguished Members of
the Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Airland, thank you for your
continued support and enduring commitment to our soldiers, our
civilians, and their families. On behalf of the Secretary of the Army,
the Honorable Christine Wormuth, and the Army Chief of Staff, General
James C. McConville, we thank you for the invitation to appear before
you today.
Our shared mission is to make sure that the Army continues to
achieve overmatch against all potential adversaries, ensuring that our
Army can fulfill its mandate to compete successfully, deter, and, if
necessary, fight and win our Nation's wars as part of the Joint Force.
The Army's fiscal year 2023 budget request both maintains the
readiness of the Army and establishes a sustainable path to transform
into the Army of 2030. This transformation will require a strategic
pivot from two decades of focus on counterterrorism, toward adaptation
to meet our top pacing challenge in China and the acute threat of
Russian aggression. The Army is boldly transforming to provide the
Joint Force with the speed, range, and convergence of the cutting-edge
technologies that will be needed to provide future decision dominance
and overmatch for great-power competition.
the strategic environment
The new classified 2022 National Defense Strategy highlights the
People's Republic of China as our most consequential strategic
competitor and the pacing challenge for the Department of Defense. It
also recognizes the acute threat posed by Russia, as illustrated by its
brutal and unprovoked further invasion of Ukraine. Both states are
applying all instruments of national power, including military
modernization, as they compete aggressively with the United States.
China continues to progress in artificial intelligence (AI),
robotics, and cyber research and development. Advancements in
hypersonic technology add to its strategic reach, endangering some of
our traditional force projection assets. Both China and Russia have
committed to an increased pace and scope of military exercises, honing
their joint warfighting capabilities. In its further invasion of
Ukraine, Russia has brought a level of brutality and destruction to the
continent of Europe at a scale not seen in a long time. The Army's
modernization efforts take these new realities into account as we
define capability requirements and develop new concepts.
how we fight
Our Multi-Domain Operations (MDO) concept describes how we fight--
by continuously converging effects across all domains to create and
exploit relative advantages over the adversary. The Army is currently
codifying MDO into doctrine to ensure the Army is capable and ready to
support Joint Force operations. At the same time, we are developing a
new future operating concept--how we will fight beyond MDO--based on
future threat assessments, emerging Science and Technology and
experimentation.
what we fight with
The fiscal year 2023 budget request puts the Army on a strategic
path to modernize our organizations and equipment and build the Army of
2030. Front and center in this effort is our commitment to our six
modernization priorities: Long Range Precision Fires, Next Generation
Combat Vehicle, Future Vertical Lift, Network, Air and Missile Defense
(AMD), and Soldier Lethality. The Army will continue to focus on
building a multi-domain force by putting 24 new systems into the hands
of soldiers by fiscal year 2023, in the form of either prototypes for
soldier feedback or the initial equipping of units.
We are grateful to Congress for the stable funding provided to
support our modernization efforts. The fiscal year 2023 budget request
builds on the progress we have made across all modernization
priorities. Within each area, we highlight our partnership, recent
progress, and the way forward with continued, steady funding.
Long Range Fires Programs:
The Army demonstrated the Precision Strike Missile's
(PrSM) capability to achieve ranges well beyond legacy Army Tactical
Missile System.
We successfully tested the Land Based Anti-Ship Missile
seeker and Extended Range Propulsion ramjet, setting conditions for
subsequent increments of the PrSM program.
We have demonstrated that the Extended Range Cannon
Artillery (ERCA) can now shoot in the 70-kilometer range with accuracy
and are on track to field the first ERCA battalion in fiscal year 2023
to support an Operational Assessment in fiscal year 2024.
The Army's Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies
Office, in a partnership with the Navy, plans to deliver the first
hypersonics battery in fiscal year 2023.
We also anticipate delivering the Army's Mid-Range
Capability (MRC) initial hardware to the unit in 1st quarter fiscal
year 2023. The MRC prototype effort leverages existing Service
missiles, launchers, software, and hardware to fill a critical
capability gap identified by the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command.
Next Generation Combat Vehicle Programs:
The Army remains fully committed to the Optionally
Manned Fighting Vehicle program, executing a multi-phased acquisition
approach to maximize competition.
The Robotic Combat Vehicle (RCV) program continues to
make progress, informed by extensive experimentation with the RCV-Light
Full-System Prototype effort.
We are on track to field the first Armored Multi-
Purpose Vehicles in 2nd quarter fiscal year 2023, to replace the 1960s-
era M113 Family of Vehicles.
The Mobile Protected Firepower (MPF) program will begin
low-rate production this year, with first fielding of MPF vehicles
planned for fiscal year 2025.
We are supporting the Army's climate strategy and the
administration's greenhouse gas policies with the Bradley Hybrid
Electric Vehicle, High Mobility Multi-Purpose Hybrid Wheeled Vehicle,
and Joint Light Tactical Vehicle Hybrid Electric Vehicle projects.
Future Vertical Lift Programs:
The Army is committed to ensuring both the Future
Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA) and the Future Long Range Assault
Aircraft (FLRAA) achieve First Unit Equipped in fiscal year 2030.
FARA will close the gap left by retirement of the Kiowa
with transformational battlefield reach, lethality, and survivability.
FLRAA will provide more lethal and effective Assault
and MEDEVAC capabilities with increased speed, range, payload, and
endurance.
The Future Tactical Unmanned Aerial System is
leveraging a year-long Soldier Touchpoint ``Buy, Try, Inform'' effort
to replace the RQ-7 Shadow with a runway independent, CH-47F
transportable, and weather hardened system with advanced acoustics.
The Army is also developing Air Launched Effects, a
critical component of the FARA ecosystem, providing a low-cost
asymmetrical advantage that will transform the battlefield geometry
against our near-peer adversaries.
Network Programs:
The Army is currently fielding Capability Set 21 to
Infantry Brigade Combat Teams (BCTs) and a modernized tactical network
transport tool suite to Expeditionary Signal Battalions-Enhanced.
We have also fielded modernized network technology,
such as upgraded mission command and fires applications, mobile mission
command upgrades, resilient satellite communications equipment and
modernized cryptographic systems.
Air and Missile Defense (AMD) Programs:
The Army is leveraging the Integrated Air and Missile
Defense Battle Command System (IBCS) to integrate the full suite of Air
and Missile Defense capabilities, including both theater and short-
range air defense.
The Army is improving the Maneuver-Short Range Air
Defense capability with requirements to add future kinetic effectors.
The Army continues to make progress on its Directed
Energy Maneuver-Short Range Air Defense effort, a 50 kilowatt-class
laser on a Stryker.
We are advancing directed energy efforts for Indirect
Fire Protection Capability (IFPC) by pairing high-energy lasers with
high-power microwaves for a layered defense of fixed and semi-fixed
sites against an array of threats.
The Army Integrated Air and Missile Defense initial
operating capability is planned for 1st quarter fiscal year 2023, with
fielding on track for one battalion.
We have produced two Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense
Sensor (LTAMDS) prototypes, with fielding scheduled to begin in fiscal
year 2022 and initial operating capability anticipated in fiscal year
2024.
We have accepted delivery of two batteries of Iron Dome
Defense System-Army from the Israeli Government and have learned from
the deployment of that demonstration system.
The Army will receive 16 prototype launchers and
associated missiles for the Enduring IFPC Inc 2 program in 4th quarter
fiscal year 2023.
Soldier Lethality Programs:
The Army is working with Microsoft Corporation to
refine Integrated Visual Augmentation System (IVAS) sensors and display
functionality before conducting Operational Testing in 3rd quarter
fiscal year 2022, and we are on track for delivery to the first Unit by
4th quarter fiscal year 2022.
We have equipped five brigades with the Enhanced Night
Vision Goggle--Binocular (ENVG-B). ENVG-Bs are currently in production,
which will continue through fiscal year 2024.
Production of the Next Generation Squad Weapon (NGSW)
Rifle, Automatic Rifle, General Purpose Ammo and improved sight system
will begin in fiscal year 2022, with First Unit Equipped expected in
4th quarter fiscal year 2023.
Synthetic Training Environment (STE) Programs:
The Army will validate its foundational simulation
capability for the STE Information System (STE-IS) and Reconfigurable
Virtual Collective Trainers (RVCT) at the company level at Fort Hood,
Texas in fiscal year 2022.
We continue fielding of One World Terrain, a key
component of STE-IS, which is already in the hands of soldiers and
units.
We continue progress on developing the Squad immersive
Virtual Trainer which, when paired with IVAS, will allow our soldiers
to simulate any location on the planet right from their combat goggles.
The Army is working to accelerate the delivery of the
next generation of live training systems prior to fiscal year 2026 to
ensure they will converge onto the STE-IS foundational system.
Assured Positioning Timing and Navigation (PNT) and
Space Programs:
The Army will begin transition to M-Code Global
Positioning System and alternative PNT beginning in fiscal year 2024,
following the first fielding of Mounted Assured PNT System GEN II.
We are currently fielding the directed requirement for
our Dismounted Assured PNT System.
The Army continues to invest in the ground segments of
space-based technologies that close operational gaps in deep sensing
and targeting activities.
The Army's budget request also continues procurement and
modernization of our enduring equipment for our operational Aviation
platforms, Ground Combat Systems, Intelligence programs, Logistics and
Ammunition. We carefully balanced the overall Research, Development and
Acquisition portfolio, including fine-tuning between Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation funding and Procurement funding, as we
transition from enduring systems to our new modernized systems.
Our Aviation portfolio continues to modernize and upgrade the
Apache, Black Hawk and CH-47 helicopters, munitions, and aircraft
survivability. Apache modernization and upgrade efforts include
Improved Turbine Engine integration, crypto-modernization, and Modular
Open Systems Architecture. The Army remains on track to complete full
divestment of Black Hawk UH-60As by fiscal year 2022 for the Army
National Guard and fiscal year 2024 for the active component. We are
continuing to procure the MH-47G Block II Chinooks for our Special
Operations units. The Army is ramping up Joint Air-to-Ground Missile
production to replace the aging Hellfire missile and investing in
Aircraft Survivability Equipment, a suite of systems that protect Army
aircraft from threat infrared missiles, radar guided missiles, and
LASERs through detection and defeat systems.
Armored Brigade Combat Team (ABCT) Modernization and combat vehicle
protection remain a priority. With this budget, the Army will procure
44 Abrams M1A2SEPv3s Tanks, equaling one half of an ABCT; 102 Strykers,
or approximately one third of a Stryker Brigade Combat Team; 36 Bradley
A4s; completing the procurement of the fourth ABCT set; 27 Self-
Propelled Howitzer Paladin Integrated Management (PIM) vehicle sets;
and 6 Joint Assault Bridges, or one and a half ABCTs. We are also
continuing to pursue improved Vehicle Protection Systems for the Abrams
and Bradley.
Our Intelligence portfolio is focused on closing capability gaps in
deep sensing with programs like the Tactical Intelligence Targeting
Access Node for deep sensing, analysis, and early warning; the
Terrestrial Layer System at the Brigade and echelon above Brigade
levels for signals intelligence and electronic warfare; the Multi-
Domain Sensing System; and the Multi-Function Electronic Warfare-Air
Large that will be mounted on multiple platforms to gather intelligence
or conduct electronic warfare operations.
The Air and Missile Defense portfolio continues to invest in
Counter small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-sUAS) in addition to those
programs detailed in the Air and Missile Cross-Functional Team (CFT)
portfolio above. During fiscal year 2022, we will procure C-sUAS for
two Divisions and 29 fixed sites, and fiscal year 2023 would procure
one Division and 17 fixed sites to cover globally prioritized critical
sites.
Our Command and Control portfolio is procuring Manpack and Leader
Radios and related equipment to support five BCT type formations; a Low
Cost Tactical radio that will replace legacy Single Channel Ground and
Airborne Radio System and meet National Security Agency cryptographic
modernization requirements; a Unified Network Operations prototype to
enable common planning, configuration, monitoring, provisioning,
management, and defense of the Network; and continues to procure and
develop improvements for the Joint Battle Command-Platform.
Finally, the Logistics portfolio continues the procurement of Joint
Light Tactical Vehicles, High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles
(HMMWVs) and HMMWV antilock braking system/electronic stability control
kits to improve our tactical wheeled vehicle fleet and address vehicle
rollover and safety concerns; invests in Army Watercraft, a significant
combat multiplier in support of Army operational concepts and the
Geographical Combatant Commander in Large Scale Combat Operations; and
realigns funding to support critical ammunition program lines and Army
Training Strategies to ensure contractual requirements are met to
maintain Industrial Base Minimum Sustainment Rate capacities.
how we organize
We are developing new organizations as we transition from
modernization concepts to tangible sources of strategic readiness. The
Multi-Domain Task Force (MDTF) is one example, providing long-range
precision fires in conflict and long-range precision effects in
competition. The MDTF participated in Project Convergence 21 to
experiment on its ability to synchronize long-range fires and effects
with the Joint Force and will continue to participate in 2022 with
joint and coalition forces to provide lessons for future employment of
this capability.
The Army uses Army 2030 and Army 2040 to describe what our force
will look like in the near and distant future. We are refining those
descriptions through experimentation and analysis of the impact
emerging technology will have on the character of war. The investments
are included in the fiscal year 2023 budget request and will inform the
changes we need to provide a combat credible force of the future.
how we do business
Soldier Centered Design drives the entire process. Taken from
industry best practices, this concept allows the Army to get feedback
from soldiers and commanders early in the development process. This is
accomplished by getting prototype equipment into the hands of soldiers
from the operational force early, through Soldier Touchpoints, in order
to refine requirements before significant investments are made. The
Army, through the efforts of our CFTs and Program Executive Offices
(PEO), conducted 113 Soldier Touch Points in fiscal year 2021, and we
aim to continue that momentum in the coming years. We are also seeking
additional opportunities to integrate lessons as our units and Army
Service Component Commands conduct focused experimentation and
wargames.
Instrumental to the Army's transformation is Project Convergence,
the campaign of learning that brings everything together. Project
Convergence is a Joint and increasingly combined series of experiments
we conduct over the course of the year, culminating in a month-long
field experiment. Working closely with our counterparts from the other
Services, we identify Joint warfighting problems to solve.
Experimentation objectives, operational scenarios, and data collection
plan are managed by the Project Convergence Board of Directors, which
includes representatives from all the Services, the Joint Staff, and
coalition Partners. We also leverage the Army's Joint Systems
Integration Lab and experimentation events ``in the dirt'' to connect
with our Joint Partners. Project Convergence 21 (PC21) incorporated
Joint Partners to help inform Army 2030, the DoD Joint All-Domain
Command and Control, and the Joint Warfighting Concept. PC21 made it
clear that we must adapt to a system-of-systems approach that moves
from ``interoperable systems'' to ``integration of systems.'' Building
off the lessons of PC21, PC22 will integrate Allies and Partners and
aim to scale technologies previously tested.
The Army continues to implement the reform initiatives granted by
Congress, which were designed to streamline and gain efficiencies in
the acquisition process. These initiatives, which have reduced
bureaucracy and helped the Army accelerate the delivery of capabilities
to the field, include the granting of Middle Tier Acquisition (MTA)
Authority, which allows for both rapid prototyping and rapid fielding
efforts, and the expanded use of Other Transaction Authority (OTA),
which now can be extended to include production. OTAs are simplified
contractual mechanisms that lend themselves to working with small
companies and non-traditional contractors, two known sources of
technological innovation. The Army is using these authorities to
accelerate select Army modernization priorities including ERCA, LTAMDS,
PrSM, NGSW, IVAS, and MPF. The Army is using MTA rapid fielding
authority to quickly field production quantities of new or upgraded
systems with minimal development, potentially resulting in faster
capability delivery and lower costs. In all, the MTA pathway enables a
``try before we buy'' framework that reduces risk, reduces cost, and
accelerates capability development and deployment.
The Army effectively utilizes OTA to streamline the acquisition of
basic and advanced research activities, prototype projects, and follow-
on production efforts. In fiscal year 2021, the Army awarded more than
1,700 OTA agreements valued at $10.9 billion. Two of the modernization
priorities highlighted above, IVAS and NGSW, have moved into production
awards based on the success of competitive prototyping efforts. In
November 2021, the Army updated its OTA Policy to promote consistency
in practice and increase transparency.
The Army also benefits from two additional authorities provided by
Congress. The Software Acquisition Pathway (SWP) is a new acquisition
pathway being used to facilitate rapid and iterative delivery of custom
software capabilities to users, recognizing that technology development
cycles are more rapid in software systems. Programs using the SWP will
demonstrate the viability and effectiveness of the capability within 1
year. Congress also made the authority for Commercial Solutions Opening
(CSO) authority permanent. Since its establishment as a pilot program,
the Army has leveraged the CSO authority to obtain innovative
commercial products and solutions to fulfill requirements, close
capability gaps, and provide technological advances. The streamlined
nature of the CSO procedures also serves to lower barriers to entry and
incentivize small and non-traditional vendors who have not previously
worked with the Department. The Army used CSO authority extensively as
part of its pandemic response efforts.
In addition, in the fiscal year 2016 National Defense Authorization
Act, Congress encouraged delegation of Milestone Decision Authority
(MDA) for most acquisition programs from the Office of the Secretary of
Defense to the Military Departments. The Army further delegated MDA for
some of these programs to the PEO level and below, when appropriate.
This delegation allows the Army to appropriately align program
oversight with risk, resulting in reduced bureaucracy and increased
efficiency.
All these initiatives, when used alone or in combination, allow for
better and faster modernization decisions and faster requirements
development.
conclusion
The Army is nearly 4 years into the biggest transformational change
since the early 1980s, modernizing and building a multi-domain-capable
force that delivers speed, range, and convergence of emerging
technologies. To be clear, the Army will never be ``done'' modernizing.
As we deliver Army 2030, Army 2040, and beyond, we are laying the
foundation to persistently modernize in response to emerging
technologies, evolving challenges, and our adversaries' actions.
Thank you again for this opportunity to discuss Army Modernization
and for your strong support of our soldiers, civilians, and their
families.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you. I now recognize myself for
five minutes of questions. Mr. Bush, what Army modernization
efforts are most critical to the Army fulfilling its roles as
outlined in the NDS [National Defense Strategy] and why?
Mr. Bush. Thank you for the question, Senator. I think I
will start, and then if you allow it, let General Richardson
add in a bit from an Army operations concepts requirement. I
can tell you that the Secretary, given China's pacing threat,
has focused particularly on three areas, long range fires, air
and missile defense, and the network, all three of which we
believe are foundational to anywhere the Army fights, but in
particular, improving capabilities in those areas are vitally
important for fulfilling the Army's role in a potential
contingency with China.
Lieutenant General Richardson. Senator, I would echo that
from Mr. Bush. Those three priorities are critical. We have
been experimenting, and we have been also watching the news of
what is going on in the Ukraine and the Soviet Union--and
Russia have taught us a lesson. Number one, that our
modernization priorities are correct. Long range precision
fires is critical.
As I think all of you have been briefed on, we have three
aspects of the long range critical--long-range precision fires
that is on track to be delivered in fiscal year 2023. That is
the extended long range cannon, PrSM, and our hypersonics
missiles.
So as it relates to the Army priorities and how it relates
to what is going on in the world today, I do believe that we
have our modernization priorities, and they are on track.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you. Mr. Bush, while the Army's
fiscal year 2023 budget request both maintains the readiness of
the Army and maintains the modernization priorities of the Army
of 2030, it does so with a largely flat budget, we have already
mentioned this, and at the expense of enduring modernization,
particularly those required for the Armored Brigade Combat Team
modernization effort, as my--as our ranking member has
mentioned. How is the Army balancing risk in the current force
to enable this prioritization?
Mr. Bush. Thank you, Senator. I think it is--from an
equipping standpoint alone, I think, as I mentioned, the first
thing we look at is industrial base to make sure we don't go
too low to where should a contingency arise or more funding
become available, those decisions can be reversed, and we can
pick things back up and move faster.
So that is one way to mitigate risk. The second way is to
be careful about and thoughtful about where we do add funding.
Every year, there is a tremendous amount of churn inside the
Army just on new initiatives and new things being--wanting to
be funded. We took the process we just went through, and the
process went through last year, exceedingly careful to look at
anybody wanting to add something new in order to protect
funding where resides. So a second way we mitigate risk.
The other one is the many other things that the U.S. Army
brings to the fight, which is better leadership, better
training, better logistics, which, while they can't overcome
every equipment difference, can make a big difference in terms
of the overall combat effectiveness of Army units, as General
Richardson was mentioning.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you. But let's get back to the
equipment. Colonel Grice, how is the reduction of procurement
quantities of modernization capability such as the Abrams,
Bradleys, and Paladins impacting the cost per unit?
Colonel Grice. Chair Duckworth, we are managing that as we
go through and develop our program each year. and for ABCT
modernization, while we did take cuts, we are still achieving
7--modernized 73 tanks in this budget, in 2023, and 9 BCTs by
fiscal year 2027. As we looked at those reductions to focus on
modernization, we analyzed those costs, analyzed programmatic
impacts, and made the best decision we could to continue to
focus funding toward our modernization capabilities that have
been discussed.
Senator Duckworth. Secretary Bush.
Mr. Bush. Yes, ma'am. So one thing to keep in mind, it
varies by contract type. So some things, we were in a fixed
price contract environment where the cost of the item is the
cost of the item. In other cases, there is range pricing
depending on the quantity of the Army's orders, which as you
pointed out, if we are at the low end of that pricing range,
the unit quantities are higher.
We seek to mitigate that also by trying to spread out
orders so it is a level set of orders not going up and down
with the defense industry so they can do their long lead parts,
ordering more efficiently. But there is no perfect solution
to--buying less sometimes does increase costs.
Senator Duckworth. Okay. The Secretary of the Army
describes the Army's role in the Pacific in part to sustain the
Joint Force over vast distances by providing secure
communications, establish intra theater distribution networks,
and maintaining munitions stockpiles, as well as for arming and
refueling points. This all gets to the importance of contested
logistics.
Mr. Bush, how does the fiscal year 2023 budget invest in
Army logistics capabilities, and what operations have we
learned from--what lessons have we learned from operations in
Europe?
Mr. Bush. So Senator, I will start. I can answer the budget
question and then let General Richardson talk about Europe, if
that is okay. So this budget does modestly increase funding for
some areas of logistics, for example, tactical wheeled
vehicles. If you look inside there, the JLTV program, for
example, is up by about a third this year. That is progress.
Some of our other truck lines are also up slightly.
But I--you are right that overall there is a lot of level
effort there. One area of increase is watercraft modernization,
pacific in particular. The Army's relatively small but
important watercraft fleet will be important part of the joint
logistics capability we provide. Modernization funding for that
is up modestly in this budget request as well.
Lieutenant General Richardson. Senator, as you mentioned,
the Army has the specified role and Title X tasks to support
not only the Army, but all of the other services as it relates
to fuel, as it relates to ammunition, the distribution, and the
protection of our lines of communication. Obviously, the number
one priority within the Army is from a contested logistics
perspective, is to set the theater.
Some of the things--and we are learning a lot, and you have
been briefed on sensor to shooter. I label it now sensor to
shooter to sustainer, and those are some of the lessons that we
learned. The lessons I have learned personally is we need to
take a better look at our--you have seen what is happening in
Ukraine. The lesson that we took at AFC is, we really have to
take a look at our requirements documents and look at
reliability, because if you have a reliable weapons system, you
don't need as many parts.
You need to look--from a requirements perspective as well,
you need to look at fuel and the standards as well as
maintainability. So that is one aspect that we have learned and
applying it in our requirements documents today early on. The
second aspect is predictive logistics. We have got to be able
to predict when our systems are going to fail, put sensors on
them, and have a common operating pitch in one of those
systems. That will free up the supply lines.
Then lastly, we have to have an understanding, a common
understanding--a common operational picture on the battalion
all the way to the enterprise level, so when we are shooting
ammunition or using gas or our need fuel, we have the same
common operating picture, you know, at the battalion as you do
back at the enterprise level, and they are able to push that
logistics forward.
That was a big--a large aspect that we learned from the
Ukraine fight and some of the things that we are applying today
of where we are going to the future.
Senator Duckworth. I just have concerns that this flat
budget isn't going to allow us to meet some of these
requirements. I am going to recognize the ranking member for
his questions.
Senator Cotton. I very much share your concerns. Mr. Bush,
as I mentioned in my opening statement, this budget cuts
research and development by 6 percent, procurement by 7 percent
from the enacted fiscal year 2022 amounts. Could you explain to
me how the Army absorbed these actual reductions in such
critical fields?
Mr. Bush. Senator, I can offer some thoughts there. First,
I would, of course, point out that we are not the only part of
the Army's budget in play. So the people part of the Army's
budget and the training part are, of course, also things that
sometimes take away from our accounts is all part of the
tradeoff.
Senator Cotton. I think we cut in strength by 12,000,
didn't we?
Mr. Bush. Yes, sir.
Senator Cotton. That is not good either. I know it is not
your responsibility.
Mr. Bush. Sir, that is for members to judge. I would say
that those--the reductions to our accounts, I think a lot of
good work goes into that. It doesn't make it easy. I think what
you end up seeing, and you have identified it, is places where
we couldn't ramp up production or we even had to go down, and
we worked through what those risks are. But those are never
easy choices, sir.
Senator Cotton. Okay. Let's turn to our ammunition
stockpile. I find it very worrisome for the United States, for
Ukraine, for Taiwan. The reports have indicated that we have
sent one-third--one-fourth to one-third of our javelin and
stinger stockpile to Ukraine, but we aren't capable of
replenishing those systems at a reasonable rate.
Mr. Bush, does our munitions industrial base provide the
surge capacity that we would need for a protracted fight in
Ukraine, in addition to satisfying our own needs and the need
to defend Taiwan?
Mr. Bush. So, Senator, I think given enough time, the
innovative American private sector industrial base, combined
with our organic industrial base, can meet the needs. However,
that would require funding to ramp up those aspects of those
things so we can sustain those rates. Specific to your
question, we have sent those munitions.
The Army does have a plan to replenish those. We are, I can
assure you, pushing on all doors and looking at every option to
make that process go much faster than some of the timelines you
have heard for preferred munitions.
Senator Cotton. Your phrase at the beginning was the very
important caveat, which is given the time. I am afraid that
Ukraine may not have the time, and for that matter, Taiwan may
not have the time. Some of the assessments I have heard of the
time it would take to replenish these stockpiles are shockingly
long.
Even if they are off by a factor of two or three or four,
it still seems pretty long to produce not an aircraft carrier
or not even a tank, but a missile that a private can carry and
learn how to effectively employ in the span of an afternoon.
Can you help us understand where the bottlenecks are in
this system and what we can do as the committee to help
accelerate the production?
Mr. Bush. Yes, sir. So a couple of things I would offer for
members to consider. The first one is production timelines for
advanced weapons, including ones that we make like Stinger and
Javelin, have often hovered in the 18 months to 30 months range
for some time, only getting much faster than that when
production rates are very high, and the entire supply chain can
feed it.
However, we mitigate that risk by maintaining stockpiles,
as you pointed out. We are now in a circumstance where we have
provided some of that to a third party in Ukraine, and we are
refilling our own stocks.
But our munitions levels, sir, and we can provide all the
numbers on every single item, I think you will see a wide
range. In many areas, we are still in good shape, even given
what we have sent. In other areas, there are areas of concern,
and happy to work with you on those. In terms of what the
committee could do, one thing is advanced procurement.
The Army doesn't use that very much, other services do,
which is it buys long lead parts 1 year ahead of when the end
item is ordered. That is something that I believe we could
possibly use in this case to shorten those timelines. So we
could buy long lead items this year to support deliveries that
would be put on contract next year, and that could compress
things, sir.
That would require working with the committee on adjusting
our budget request.
Senator Cotton. I think we should do that. Even, you know,
18 to 30 months as you said, it is a conversation I have had
with a lot of Arkansans, and I think most of them just find it
astonishing that it takes our defense industrial base that long
to produce such a relatively simple weapon. I mean, old timers
talk about how many ships and aircraft were churning out at the
height of World War II.
Whether it is some of those bench stalk items that you can
use in advance if you procure them or more time running these
lines, I am sure all the workers would be happy with overtime,
we need to find solutions that produce these weapons at a much
faster rate than I have seen assessed in classified settings. I
think suspect most people on the committee would want to work
with the Department on that.
Senator Duckworth. I like that idea. Senator Peters.
Senator Peters. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair and
Ranking Member Cotton. You talked about World War II and
turning out more material. It reminds me of the Arsenal of
Democracy in Detroit in the Willow Run facility that turned out
B-24 bombers--several B-24 bombers every single day, came off
the assembly line, so it is something to be considered.
Mr. Bush, the Army has made great progress in developing an
open system architecture approach to ground vehicle autonomy
software development, which, as you know, allows for
collaboration with a wide range of industry leading partners,
both traditional and nontraditional.
Last week, Secretary Wormuth released the Army Directive
2022-07, which redefined the roles and responsibilities around
Army modernization activities. The directive rescinds language
from the previous Army Directives, establishing the Army
Futures Command as, ``the leading the modernization
enterprise,'' and states that the Army's science and technology
laboratories now fall under the control of the Assistant
Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology
instead of the Army's Futures Command.
So my question for you, Mr. Bush, is how do you anticipate
that this new directive is going to support the transition of
technologies out of our S&T laboratories, but particularly in
key Army modernization areas such as robotics and automation?
Mr. Bush. Yes, sir. So one thing I would offer is that the
directive really didn't shift that much, it simply clarified
lines of authority, most of which are set in statute in terms
of which organizations do what in the Army. With regard to S&T
labs in particular, one thing it did not change, this is
important, that those labs still fall under the operational day
to day control of Army Futures Command.
My role and my organization's role at the Army headquarters
is to oversee that, provide oversight guidance and set policy.
So it is a teamwork effort, sir, and I think that teamwork will
continue unabated. To your specific question, one of my
priorities as Assistant Secretary is to work with General
Richardson and his team to formalize and improve our batting
average, so to speak, on exactly what you said, which is
transitions from S&T to programs of record.
I brought in a new Deputy Assistant Secretary to help me do
that, who actually came from Army Futures Command. So building
those bridges between the organizations to make sure things
work better is one of the things I am committed to, sir.
Senator Peters. All right. Thank you. General Richardson,
as we approach the fielding of hypersonic missile batteries, I
am curious how you expect this new capability will impact the
Army's overall artillery portfolio in the coming years.
Do you expect these newly fielded capabilities will be an
enduring complement to our current array of cannon and rocket
artillery, or is some other--are some of our current arsenal in
need of further modernization or divestiture?
Lieutenant General Richardson. Senator, thank you for the
question, and as everyone in here realizes, long range
precision fires is our number one priority in the United States
Army. It is really broken down by three aspects. One is that
the tactical level, the operational level, and the strategic
level.
As we look to hypersonics being fielded and a battery in
2023, it is going to provide a tremendous offensive capability
that we have not had in the past. That combined--and we fight
as a joint team. Those fires, combined with the other services,
give us greater lethality and any country we may face. As it
relates to affecting programs within the operational aspect or
the tactical aspect, it hasn't, sir, at this time, because LRPF
is number one.
We are on track with PrSM, fully funded. Delivered a
capability, a PrSM capability that far exceeds our ATACMS
rounds today, in fiscal year 2023. We are very optimistic about
the future for PrSM as it relates to distance and range and
maneuverability, and so truly, Senator, to answer your
question, it does not have an impact. It complements what we
are doing.
When we take what we are doing in all three aspects of long
range precision fires combined with the joint--into the joint
fight, it gives a capability that far exceeds any of our
competitors.
Senator Peters. Right. General Richardson, last week I
asked Secretary Wormuth about the Army's plan regarding active
protective systems to protect our cutting edge platforms from
relatively inexpensive threats that we are seeing from drones
and anti-tank guided missiles.
Given what we are witnessing right now in Ukraine, it seems
like we would be wise to invest in technology in order to
preserve the lives of our service members and also safeguard
our multi-million dollar platforms.
So my question for you is, how do lessons learned from
contemporary conflicts like what we are seeing in Ukraine get
incorporated into both our current and future capability
requirements?
Lieutenant General Richardson. Thank you, Senator. We were
looking at this for the last couple of years and developed an
active protection strategy. What we are seeing is reinforcing
our strategy as it relates to top down attacks or the systems
that are required. We have a number of ongoing S&T programs
that are on track to be delivered in the short term to increase
our survivability.
What we have done, as you know, GBSC has--plays a large
part in that active protection program, as well as the aviation
aircraft survivability programs. A lot of these programs are
top secret or SAP related, but the key thing behind active
protection is bring in what we have learned in aviation, what
we have learned and ground, bringing it together as a system
that in the future will be very successful. From a money
perspective, from an ASO perspective timeline.
Mr. Bush. Yes, Senator. So the--we first of all, partly
because of Congress's urging, which was prescient, was the Army
did procure sets of active protection systems, limited set,
number of brigade sets for M-1 Abrams tanks. What we are
looking at now and we are doing the R&D work now to understand
is when we can do that for Bradleys and Strykers. I think that
the question for us in coming years will just be the ability or
pace of fielding to do that. I think the threat is clear.
We have got a requirement. It is just, how does this stack
up against our many other needs? Then there is a question of
how much do we put into active protection systems like Trophy
versus passive protection technologies like better camouflage
and electronic measures. That is an ongoing conversation, sir.
Senator Peters. Right. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you, Mr. Peters. Mr. Blumenthal.
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you, Madam Chair. I really
appreciate your giving me the opportunity to ask some questions
this afternoon, and thank you to the men who are here. Thank
you for your service. I want to talk a little bit about the
future of vertical lift. Very important to the Army and really
to all of our services.
The Army's Future Vertical Lift Program is in effect a
pivotal modernization of all Army aviation, and it will affect
all our services because the H-60 Black Hawk has been
ubiquitous across the services. It has been the workhorse. The
most dependable helicopter asset that we have for the Army,
Navy, and Air Force, over four decades, and its replacement,
the future long range assault aircraft, FLRAA, hopefully will
deliver improvements in survivability, range, and lethality.
I understand you can't talk about the FLRAA contract to be
awarded. I understand probably sometime July or August, in that
timeframe, maybe you can clarify that point as well. I hope
that you will provide the committee with your intention about
what the requirements of the contract will be.
In my view, a lot of the most recent contracts, too many
have involved very large sustainment costs that are
inadequately captured in the contract requirements. In other
words, the costs of sustaining isn't adequately captured in the
contract. But I am deeply concerned right now with some of the
level of uncertainty between the Department and Congress about
what platforms should be divested or stopped in order to invest
in modernization.
Most particularly, the disruptions to our industrial base.
You can't turn it on and turn it off like a light switch, as
you well know. Let me give you an example. The Air Force's
combat rescue helicopter. The budget calls for canceling the
program after fiscal year 2023 at two-thirds of the planned 113
helicopters. I fought for this program, and I believe it is
absolutely necessary to assure that our aviators and everybody
who flies can be rescued if they are down somewhere.
That is the reason why I worked to recapitalize our aging
Pave Hawk fleet. It has been the cornerstone of combat search
and rescue. Losing that assurance is devastating to our armed
services, but it also is potentially a threat to our industrial
supply base, which we need to keep in the fight until FLRAA is
awarded. Again, not a light switch you can turn on and off.
As I know from Sikorsky being in my home State of
Connecticut with the most skilled industrial base of helicopter
makers in the country, if I may say so. So I would be
interested in your assessment, Secretary Bush and General
Richardson, in evaluating FLRAA proposals.
What consideration should the Army give to the need to
maintain and improve the Black Hawks, which are going to be
essential for decades to come, and what can be done to assure
the future capabilities of our defense industrial base?
Mr. Bush. Thank you, Senator. I can address your--a couple
of your specifics there. First of all, for the FLRAA contract
award, I believe, September is probably a more likely timeline.
But we can provide you with more details when we know the exact
timing. Second thing with regard to H-60, this committee
provided our multi-year authority.
For that multi-year, we still need Black Hawk aircraft and
we going to keep producing them. That multiyear award, I just
checked on it yesterday actually, is now on track, has to go
through some hoops at the Office of Secretary of Defense, but
we are on track and on time to make sure there is no disruption
to the production work there.
I think that will give us certainty for that 5 year multi-
year period to make sure that that manufacturing capacity
remains. The point you--point at, sir, the risk area is the
transition potentially from one platform to another. Always
difficult, especially difficult with aircraft because of the
advanced nature of that manufacturing, and of course, the very
high standards we maintain.
I can assure you that the Army is going to, in its plans,
assure that we don't have some kind of gap. So any future
transition to a different platform, there has to be overlap
essentially to make sure that the industrial base and the
suppliers, some of which will be the same, are still healthy
and able to produce on schedule.
If I could turn to General Richardson to talk briefly about
how the Army is trying to reduce cost via better requirements
for sustainment, if I could, sir.
Lieutenant General Richardson. Senator, I agree with all
your comments. FLRAA are critical programs within our cross-
functional teams. I am an Army aviator, so I am very familiar
with that program. You talk about the Pave Hawk helicopter. I
mean, I am here today because of that--the United States Air
Force coming to get me when we were down. So it is an important
aspect.
The way we are doing this is different than the way we have
done it in the past. We are flying before we buy. We are going
out and prototyping. We are learning what is working. We have,
you know, aviators, crew chiefs, maintainers out with industry,
looking at these platforms, learning, providing feedback. It is
helping inform us as the requirements generator for the
aircraft.
So we have learned a lot over the past couple of years. We
are going to be flying a prototype here pretty shortly in 2023
as it relates to FLRAA. It is about 85 percent built. It is
being built that--you know, and our soldiers are coming back to
us and telling us, you know, what needs to be changed. So it is
extremely important. This is an extremely important program. It
is a program that is required.
We are still going to continue to need the UH-60 Black
Hawk. We also have the victor model that we are building, a
great upgrade to the Black Hawk. But it will--you will have
both of these programs for years to come. So the Black Hawk
just won't go away, you know, in 2023 or 2035.
We will have the Black Hawk for some time. Will need to
sustain the Black Hawk as we move to the future vertical lift.
But I think the path that we are on from an AFC perspective,
learning to--flying before we buy is one that we need to
continue not only for that program, but for all of our
programs.
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you. I appreciate those
responses, and I--my time has expired, but I would really
appreciate an opportunity to talk with you further, get
together at your convenience. Thanks, Madam Chair.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal. Senator
Kelly.
Senator Kelly. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I want to
follow up on Senator Blumenthal's questions about future
vertical lift and the future attack reconnaissance aircraft.
When the Air Force developed the F-35, the A version, they
decided not to put the F-35A through an OPEVAL program.
As a former developmental test pilot, I still see the value
in a thorough and comprehensive OPEVAL for any military
aircraft, especially combat aircraft. General Richardson, can
you tell us what your plans are for OPEVAL for the future
attack reconnaissance airplane?
You talked about bringing all this information back from
the warfighters and have people go to the factory. But I would
like to find out what the current plans, because I heard that
you may decide not to put the airframe through a full OPEVAL.
Lieutenant General Richardson. Senator, thank you for the
question, and I totally agree with you. We are on track with
the future attack reconnaissance aircraft, and Mr. Bush can
answer these questions, but I can assure you that from a test
perspective and an operational evaluation, we are not cutting
corners with our aircraft.
We are going to have our testers there as it goes through
the, you know, EMD, engine manufacturing, and as well as an
operational assessment by Army aviators before it gets in the
hands of our soldiers. Mr. Bush.
Mr. Bush. Yes, Senator. I mentioned it up front that the
Army is trying to go faster with programs. However, one area
that is non-negotiable is testing, and especially any testing
that relates to safety.
So that is a charge we have from the Chief, and I take it
very seriously. I was here in Congress, working with members on
oversight of F-35. I remember that exact issue, and we are
going to do a full OP test program to make sure this is the
helicopter the Army needs.
Senator Kelly. Okay. Not only safety, but operational
effectiveness, the ability for it to do its job in a combat
environment. Just got a couple more minutes here. I want to
follow up on a question about the Apache. So I was out in
Phoenix, might have been about ten months ago now, and I got
the opportunity to fly the latest version of the Apache.
Some things I really loved about it. There were some, a
couple of issues, but it is a great and very effective
airframe, and it has been. You know, I think it is the greatest
combat helicopter that has ever been built. The Army has
identified the Apache as the number one enduring aircraft for
upgrades.
But I am only seeing about $10 million for Apache mods over
the next couple of years, and it doesn't seem like there's
anything beyond that. How can the Army realistically maintain
global attack helicopter dominance for the next few decades
without continuing to invest in the Apache program?
Mr. Bush. Senator, I will have to check on that exact
number you just cited, because that sounds very low, given the
importance of that program to the Army. However, I can assure
you that, like Black Hawk, we got authority for a new multi-
year for Apache from this committee in Congress last year.
Greatly appreciate it.
We are on track toward that multi-year contract which will
provide 5 more years of production. Along with that should be
constant upgrade programs both in the production program, but
also just the normal mods we do to address ongoing issues as
the aircraft matures and just goes through its paces.
So I think if you look at the Army's budget broadly, there
is still a very strong commitment to Apache, since it is still,
as you cited, the world's greatest attack helicopter. If I
could add--General Richardson, add anything you want to.
Lieutenant General Richardson. Senator, I would just echo
it is the greatest attack helicopter in the world, and I have
flown that for 30 years. When we look at, from an Army Futures
Command perspective, when we look at the Army of 2030 and the
Army of 2040 that we are looking at today, the H-64 aircraft is
a major aspect of our operational concept and how we are going
to fight in the future.
So I see the Apache sticking around for a while because the
future attack reconnaissance aircraft is really our scout
aircraft and working together as a team will dominate the
forces--our competitors in the future.
Senator Kelly. All right. I have got one observation for my
one hour flight time in the targeting system with the
monocular--I think we could upgrade that and make it a little
bit more capable. I will yield back.
Lieutenant General Richardson. I agree, sir.
Senator Duckworth. I got to represent for the assault
pilots, man. Let me just say that there might be a critical
mass of people in this room who have sat on the ground waiting
to be picked up by an assault--by a utility helicopter. Would
that be true, Senator Cotton? Yes, how many people here sat on
the ground--you waited to be picked up by--yes, okay. Just----
[Laughter.]
Senator Duckworth. We are going to do a second round of
questions. The vote has been called. I will ask my questions. I
hand it over to the ranking member who will then close us out
after he is done with his questions if no one else comes. I
want to go back to the organic industrial base. This year, the
Army published a 15 year, three phase, $16 billion
modernization strategy. This effort refines the Army's
priorities and focuses on modernization efforts most critical
to supporting current readiness.
If implemented and resources planned, it will ensure the
Army has the manufacturing and production capabilities to meet
current and future requirements, including its significant
modernization efforts.
My question, Mr. Bush is, what are your thoughts on how to
maintain capacity and expertise, that is the critical part, the
expertise part, during this significant reduction between
periods of contingency operations or robust manufacturing
investments? Because that expertise is really easy to lose and
really hard to get back.
Mr. Bush. Yes, Senator, thank you. I think the best way to
keep expertise is to keep them busy doing what they are best
at. So that means providing meaningful, critical work for the
organic industrial base to do, both the depots but also the
arsenals, to ensure that that workforce is--we can maintain it.
So when we make decisions on where we are going to do work,
it is something I am always conscious of in terms of make or
buy decisions. One thing I think we could consider, and Senator
Cotton's question regarding how do you balance risk during a--
with the industrial base, is the entire organic industrial base
is essentially an insurance policy.
We maintain that in case of a short notice contingency, in
case there is something the private sector doesn't do. That is
why we have the organic industrial base. It is an insurance
policy. We could increase the capacity of that as one way to
mitigate long term risk, both in terms of the size and amount
of activity it does.
The modernization plan, as you pointed out, merely
modernizes what we have. I think there is a big policy question
about the size of it and the size of that workforce, which
won't be inexpensive to maintain, but in certain contingencies
proves absolutely vital to have in short term, you know, with
the short term notice for a large Army fight.
Senator Duckworth. Well, so let's get into that. I mean,
the Army submitted $5.1 billion in unfunded requirements.
Within that, the Army made a decision to privatize future
capabilities at the expense of ongoing modernization efforts of
enduring capabilities, leaving just under $2.5 billion, right,
$2.4 billion for modernization and equipping in unfunded
requirements.
What are the top modernization projects included in this
list? Then, how are you ensuring enduring capabilities receive
sufficient priority to support deterrence, or if necessary,
emergent requirements? If you can address how these decisions
impact the National Guard and Army Reserves as well.
Mr. Bush. So, Senator, I will start and then turn to the
team here for some help with the expertise here. So the first
part of that question is, if you just look at the Army Chief of
Staff's unfunded priority list, it is numbered. It is in order.
My personal opinion in terms of modernization things, if you
look on there, there are ads for additional SHORAD capability.
So we are rebuilding our entire air defense, SHORAD
capability almost from scratch. Those additional ads would be
very much in my mind for members to consider, but also the
Abrams production numbers that are in there also would be a
helpful risk mitigator. But also there is one critical research
and development line, and that has to do with the missile that
comes after Stinger.
That R&D would help us accelerate that program to ensure we
don't have a gap between current Stinger production and future
missiles. So those would be my top three, ma'am.
Senator Duckworth. Enduring capabilities for emerging
threats?
Mr. Bush. Yes, ma'am. So I think--so I think the budget
does strike a balance, and I think we do maintain enough
enduring capability, production capacity in the industrial
base. That doesn't make it easy for our companies who are doing
those projects, but we did really carefully try to strike that
balance.
If members gathering information identify places we got it
wrong, I am happy to work with you and your staff on that to
make sure we get it right by the time we are done with this
process, ma'am.
Senator Duckworth. Then Guard and Reserves.
Mr. Bush. Guard and Reserve. Overall, I can just tell you
that attention to Guard and Reserve needs, now that I have seen
this process from the inside, is--they are fully integrated in
our budget, my part of the budget design efforts, and they are
in the room for everything.
We pay constant attention to make sure that that is
covered, and their needs are fulfilled. Aviation in particular,
I think the Chief has enacted--informed all of us to make sure
we keep the Guard completely integrated and part of our plans,
and that they are seeing everything, and they are comfortable
with what we are doing. General Richardson.
Lieutenant General Richardson. Senator--I will speak to the
Guard. The guard is tied into everything that Army Future
Command is doing. I have over 20 National Guard representatives
that work full time in Army Futures Command as we look toward
the future.
Whether it is aviation, air and missile defense, we work
together as a team in describing the future, the requirements,
and we work with Mr. Bush and our senior leaders of where these
items should be fielded--we make our recommendations. As it
relates to the Chief's unfunded requirements, Mr. Bush is
correct. M-SHORAD is an unfunded requirement, and he has three
entries within that.
M-SHORAD from the start, from an idea until we fielded it,
ma'am, was 3 years, and we fielded a platoon in Europe. We have
a directive requirement for four battalions of M-SHORAD in the
United States Army. That UFR helps us by those four battalions.
The second part of the UFR is the increment.
One--the missile on the M-SHORAD is the Stinger, and so we
have different increments, number one, to buy more Stinger.
Number two, to fulfill the obsolescence issues that we are
having for the Stinger.
I just signed a new requirements document for an upgraded
Stinger, which is also a part of it. So, ma'am, to answer your
question, M-SHORAD at the top, a CFT program under air missile
defense, and I think--the Chief got it right.
Senator Duckworth. Senator Cotton.
Senator Cotton. General Richardson, the Secretary, issued a
directive last week about Army Futures Command. It appeared to
remove a lot of the commands acquisition authorities. Could you
explain to me more about that directive?
Lieutenant General Richardson. Yes, Senator. I received the
memo and I worked personally with the Undersecretary of the
Army on the memo. I will tell you that modernization is a team
sport, and a lot of people focus on the materiel aspect. But
when you look across the team, our job is to deliver concepts.
Our job is to deliver organization, the design of those
organizations. So there is more to it than just materiel. I
spend a majority of my time on the future organizations and
experimentation. The day to day work at AFC is not changing. If
you really read the memo, AFC is the engine for Army
modernization, and we are the Command that executes Army
modernization for the United States Army.
We spoke earlier about science and technology. Actually it
gave me greater capability. Now I have all the laboratories in
the Army under Army Futures Command, where I only had one
command. So now I have to integrate and synchronize across five
different S&T commands. But we do this as a team. Every day, we
are with Mr. Bush's people, they provide oversight. We develop
a PLM together.
We develop the strategy, the S&T strategy together. So is
it--you know, from an Army Futures Command perspective, we
didn't lose any authority in that memorandum? I think we-- it
just clarified some of the roles that are already provided in
law.
Senator Cotton. Mr. Bush, do you have anything to add?
Mr. Bush. [Technical problems]--sorry, Senator. I would
emphasize the teamwork part. The Army is a big place. No one
command, even as charged, could possibly do all of our
modernization. So I think the Secretary wanted to lay out the
many different components beyond even what you see here at the
table and mentioned General Daly, Army Materiel Command, a
vital part of Army modernization.
Acquisition authority is in Title X assigned to the
Civilian Secretary and then to me from the Secretary. So I
didn't really move. It was just--the Secretary was just trying
to clarify to make sure everyone had her guidance on how she
wants things to work.
Her biggest charge to me is to emphasize the teamwork
aspect, and everybody has to work together, and I think that is
what is taking place.
Senator Cotton. So, I appreciate all those points. What was
the problem she was trying to solve? Seems to me that Futures
Command has been pretty successful since it stood up on rapidly
fielding a lot of different systems. So what was the problem
that she was trying to solve?
Mr. Bush. Yes, sir. So I believe the key issue was she was
making sure was absolutely clear that ultimate acquisition
authority resides in the civilian chain of command by law. That
was it, sir. My observations since I arrived a year ago is that
there hasn't been a problem there per say, day to day. I think
she just wanted to codify how things have been working,
certainly since I arrived, which I believe has been in line
with the law.
Senator Cotton. Okay. I am going to have to go vote. Thank
you all. One more thing. Are you all going to name these
things? I mean when you get close to the extended range--
artillery----
Mr. Bush. Sir, I--am not.
Senator Cotton. You are not going to make a private shoot
something called the ERCA, are you?
[Laughter.]
Mr. Bush. No, sir, and I have ideas on all of those.
Actually my goal is for, at AUSA, after I coordinate across the
entire Army, to roll out a bunch of new names for things so we
have things, as you pointed out, that soldiers can be proud of,
from ground vehicles to air defense vehicles to canon systems.
The Army traditionally waits a long time to assign names,
but that is an Army choice. We could name things earlier to
make sure that members become familiar with them. The other
services do it. We can do it as well.
Senator Cotton. All right. Thank you, gentlemen, for your
testimony. Appreciate it.
[Whereupon, at 3:43 p.m., the Committee adjourned.]
[Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Jacky Rosen
risk management framework
1. Senator Rosen. Mr. Bush and Lieutenant General Richardson, the
Department of the Army's Cybersecurity Program adopted a new evaluation
and approval process for information technology in 2019, known as the
Risk Management Framework (RMF). I know of at least one situation where
a product has been in this review process for 2 years. Do you have any
insight into why the RMF process has such long timelines? Is there
something Congress can do to help improve the length of time it's
taking the National Guard with the RMF process?
Mr. Bush and Lieutenant General Richardson. The Department of
Defense (DoD) transitioned from the DoD Information Assurance
Certification and Accreditation Process (DIACAP) to the Risk Management
Framework (RMF) in 2016. Since then, all of the Services have struggled
with a very time consuming compliance-based process associated with
RMF. Challenges also are found in recruiting, hiring, and sustaining a
highly-skilled cybersecurity workforce. The Army has recently reformed
this implementation with the Army's RMF 2.0. This reform effort
includes streamlining the current process by prioritizing threat,
technology, and adding automation. Army RMF 2.0 has provided up to a
70% improvement in the assessments required for approval and provided
automated tools to replace manual processes. The Army will assist the
Army National Guard (ARNG) with transition to the RMF 2.0
implementation.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Dan Sullivan
army arctic strategy
2. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Bush and Lieutenant General Richardson,
this past March, the United States Northern Command conducted exercise
Arctic Edge 2022, a bi-national, multi-service exercise held every 2
years aimed at increasing interoperability in the Arctic. In after-
action discussions following the exercise, it was revealed that several
of our systems and equipment items did not function adequately due to
the severe conditions. Where does the Arctic fit into the Army's top
six modernization priorities?
Mr. Bush and Lieutenant General Richardson. The Army is committed
to defending our Arctic interests and we must have weapon systems and
equipment to operate effectively in extreme cold-weather, mountainous,
and high-altitude environments. For example, the Army is currently
procuring advanced Cold Weather, All-Terrain Vehicles (CATVs) capable
of navigating the Arctic environment. As we move forward, the Army is
carefully analyzing training exercises and conducting war games to
better understand the strategic and operational environment to develop
more detailed plans for force development and modernization.
3. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Bush and Lieutenant General Richardson,
Secretary Wormuth announced last week in her testimony before this
committee that the Army would be re-branding U.S. Army Alaska as the
11th Airborne Division and making it an operational headquarters. Given
these significant changes, can we expect to see an increased focus on
Army modernization in the Arctic?
Mr. Bush and Lieutenant General Richardson. The activation of the
11th Airborne Division reaffirms the Army's commitment to its recently
announced Arctic Strategy, which outlines the service's plan to equip,
organize and train with partner units to establish military dominance
in the region. The Styker Brigade Combat Team based at Fort Wainwright
will transition to become a more mobile, infantry-based brigade combat
team bolstered with a stronger air assault capability and the skills to
maneuver effectively in extreme cold weather environments. As we move
armored Stykers out of Alaska, we will continue to acquisition of Cold
Weather, All-Terrain Vehicles (CATVs).
army future vertical lift
4. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Bush and Lieutenant General Richardson, as
one of the service's top six modernization priorities, the Army's
Future Vertical Lift program aims to provide the next generation of
vertical lift aircraft for the United States Armed Forces. I understand
the current area of focus is finding a medium transport platform
capable of succeeding the Army's UH-60 Black Hawk and Marine H-1 Huey
utility helicopters. In detail, how will the capabilities of these
modernized platforms enhance our warfighting capabilities in a Europe
and INDOPACOM scenario?
Mr. Bush and Lieutenant General Richardson. The Future Vertical
Lift (FVL) ecosystem--consisting of the Future Attack Reconnaissance
Aircraft; Future Long Range Assault Aircraft; Air Launched Effects
(ALE); an adaptive Command and Control network; Artificial Intelligence
decision agents; and lethal and non-lethal effects--is a purpose built
capability. These capabilities are set to become the tip of the spear
for the Army's Multi-Domain Corps and Multi-Domain Division in the era
of great power competition involving both a EUCOM and INDOPACOM
scenario.
With transformational speed, range and the ability to converge Army
and Joint sensors and shooters to enable decision dominance, FVL is
poised to provide the Joint Force threat penetration at the outset of
large-scale conflict. In addition, FVL will provide overmatch
capability and capacity to out-tempo the enemy at all Army echelons to
win the close fight.
Relevant for both EUCOM and INDOPACOM, but in particular China's
investment in creating a dense network of anti-access/area-denial (A2/
AD) capabilities throughout the Pacific island chains presents a
complex problem. It prevents the United States from projecting military
power, erodes Joint freedom of maneuver, and ultimately diminishes
credible deterrence.
Dominating in the lower tier of the air domain, the FVL ecosystem
provides a unique advantage against A2/AD systems such as integrated
air defense systems (IADS), enemy long-range fires, and threat command
and control systems. Hidden by surface clutter while operating at lower
altitudes, FVL will also outmatch radar and observation with the
standoff and swarming capability of its ALE with Electronic Warfare and
lethal strike capability. Joint Force aircraft and follow on maneuver
units can then exploit this penetration to destroy other critical
targets once FVL destroys or neutralizes the IADS barrier.
fiscal year 2023 budget/end-strength
5. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Bush and Lieutenant General Richardson,
the recently released 2022 National Defense Strategy highlights the
threat from the PLA's unprecedented military modernization. With an
overall real budget cut for the Army, including significant reductions
in Research and Development, do you believe the President's fiscal year
2023 budget adequately enables the Army to meet strategic competition
requirements, especially in the Indo-Pacific?
Mr. Bush and Lieutenant General Richardson. This budget request
will enable continued transformation to the Army of 2030 as we pivot
from two decades of focus on counterterrorism to an Army that's adapted
to meet our top pacing challenge of China and the acute threat of
Russian aggression. The investments requested will help the Army meet
the National Defense Strategy requirements for integrated deterrence,
support our active campaigning measures, and help us build and maintain
an enduring advantage over peers and potential adversaries. This budget
request will fund the Army modernization priorities while
simultaneously investing in our sustainment facilities, equipment,
people, and the Army's Organic Industrial Base.
This budget request will allow the Army to deliver our hypersonic
long-range weapon prototypes and leverage existing missile technology
to deliver a Mid-Range Capability prototype. We are transforming the
force by fielding our third Multi-Domain Task Force, which integrates
fires, cyber, electronic warfare, and information warfare capabilities
in an unprecedented way. It will continue to invest in Project
Convergence 22 which combines our experimentation and exercises with
partners and allies to help promote interoperability of our weapon
systems. It will support the continued rotations of our Security Force
Assistance Brigades to build partner capacity, funds Pacific Pathway
exercises in the Indo-Pacific, and Defender Europe exercises to assure
our allies and partners across the regions.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Josh Hawley
6. Senator Hawley. Lieutenant General Richardson, then-commander of
Army Futures Command (AFC) General Murray told me last year that AFC
was rightly focused on DOD's pacing scenario--a Chinese fait accompli
against Taiwan. Can you confirm AFC remains is continuing to prioritize
this scenario?
Lieutenant General Richardson. I agree with General Murray's
testimony last year that ``our forces have to be able to defeat a
Chinese fait accompli scenario.''
7. Senator Hawley. General Richardson, what are the most important
Army capabilities when it comes to deterring or denying a Chinese fait
accompli against Taiwan?
Lieutenant General Richardson. The Army provides many capabilities
to the theater commander in the Indo-Pacific that are critical to
mission success. It starts with our continuous engagement with
militaries throughout the region to nurture a shared commitment and
common understanding and to facilitate access. As we have learned time
and time again, the only challenge more difficult than conducting
military operations with our friends and allies is trying to win on our
own. Regional friends and allies are critical to our theater objectives
and strategy. Army forces positioned forward, as part of the U.S. joint
force, coupled with our ability to rapidly deploy additional forces
contribute to deterrence across the region.
Army capabilities are vital to ``setting the theater'' for the
entire joint and combined force, including intelligence,
communications, command and control, and logistics. Army long-range
precision fires provide the theater commander with responsive
operational reach to hold at risk enemy forces and capabilities, and
Army air and missile defense protect critical assets. Nearly every Army
capability is required in the IndoPacific, although in different
proportions than in other regions, like Europe. Every theater is
unique.
8. Senator Hawley. Mr. Bush, you and others have spoken about the
importance of Army Long-Range Precision Fires, particularly when it
comes to deterring a Chinese fait accompli against Taiwan. Of our
current long-range fires programs, the Precision Strike Missile seems
to be the most relevant for that scenario. This in mind, what are the
options available for accelerating development and fielding of
Precision Strike Missile Increments 2, so we can take advantage of its
anti-ship capability as soon as possible?
Mr. Bush. The Army has already invested in a Science and Technology
effort to accelerate the technology maturity and concept demonstration
of the seeker to satisfy Precision Strike Missile (PrSM) Increment 2
requirements. This technology maturity effort will transition to the
PrSM program in fiscal year 2024. We are working closely with industry
on the interface requirements to ensure the seeker technology being
demonstrated is compatible with and more easily integrated into the
base PrSM missile for final system development.
9. Senator Hawley. Mr. Bush, when is Precision Strike Missile
Increment 4 expected to reach the Initial Operational Capability, and
what can we do to accelerate that timeline, so we can take advantage of
that system's extended range as quickly as possible?
Mr. Bush. Increment 4 technology is being matured by Army Combat
Capabilities Development Command (DEVCOM) as quickly as prudently
possible. DEVCOM is targeting fiscal year 2026 for maturing the
component capability to Technology Readiness Level 6, and he Army
anticipates fielding an early operational capability in fiscal year
2027.
10. Senator Hawley. Mr. Bush, has the Army done an analysis to see
what kinds of forces or capabilities the Army is currently providing in
Europe that Germany or other NATO allies could provide over the next 5
to 10 years, thereby relieving demand on our forces?
Mr. Bush. We are always looking for and encouraging our Allies to
do more to provide for their common defense. It is reassuring that many
of our European Allies have increased their defense budgets and I hope
that this trend continues. However, it is clear that the United States
Army is the foundation of European defense, and will be for decades to
come. Our German and NATO Allies are fantastic but they simply do not
have the same capacity to generate the trained and ready combat forces
that the United States provides. That said, I support the continued
presence and recent increase of rotational forces into Europe in
support of NATO. Maintaining access and overflight enhances the dynamic
employment options of United States forces to mitigate future NATO
mission critical shortfalls over time.
11. Senator Hawley. Mr. Bush, in your opinion, what are some of the
things United States Army forces are currently providing in Europe that
our NATO allies may able to provide on their own, either using forces
they currently have or by using forces that they can realistically
develop and field?
Mr. Bush. In my opinion, the United States Army has a historic lead
role in addressing the Russian threat and conducting training with NATO
Allies and partners. In particular, the training of Ukrainian forces by
both United States conventional and special operations forces has
demonstrated a return on investment far exceeding initial expectations.
Notably, the U.S. Army is doing this in conjunction with our allies and
partners who are also providing training and equipment. Further,
providing weapons, ammunition, and vehicles to the Ukrainian armed
forces has demonstrated the United States Army's ability to rapidly
support logistics requirements.
12. Senator Hawley. General McCurry, how will the Future Vertical
Lift capability improve the Army's ability to deter or respond to a
Chinese assault on Taiwan, given that that's DOD's pacing scenario?
Brigadier General McCurry. Future Vertical Lift (FVL) possesses the
speed, range, and endurance at the range required for large-scale
combat operations against near-peer adversaries at distances our
current Army aircraft cannot achieve. Additionally, FVL aircraft and
their subsystems provide the lethality and survivability required for
threat overmatch against advanced anti-access/area denial technologies
such as integrated air defense systems that our current platforms and
systems lack.
Numerous internal and external studies, high fidelity physics based
modeling, and live demonstrations at our nation's western test ranges
validate FVL capabilities and advanced concept development set against
our pacing theaters as part of credible deterrence in competition and
decisive lethal action in conflict as required.
13. Senator Hawley. General McCurry, what kind of payloads will
Future Vertical Lift platforms be able to carry, and what kind of
ranges would you expect them to operate at?
Brigadier General McCurry. The Future Attack and Reconnaissance
Aircraft (FARA) ecosystem consists of the FARA aircraft, Air Launched
Effects (ALE), and Long Range Precision Munition (LRPM). Payloads for
ALE focus on the ability to detect, identify, locate, and report
threats, represent a credible decoy, disrupt threat communication,
targeting and acquisition systems, and deliver lethal and non-lethal
effects. ALE will have two primary form factors: ALE Small and ALE
Large that would provide ranges of over 50km and 250km respectively.
LRPM is a lethal munition with range objectives well over 30km.
Both ALE and LRPM provide greatly increased survivability and
lethality due to standoff from threat systems. Additionally, a modular
open system approach to the FARA ecosystem (both hardware and software)
enables rapid integration and employment (analogous to ``plug-and-
play'') of additional capability at speeds required to maintain
overmatch against evolving adversaries' threat systems.
14. Senator Hawley. General McCurry, will a Future Vertical Lift
platform be able to act as a shooter, for instance, by firing weapons
based on cues from other Army or Joint sensors?
Brigadier General McCurry. Yes, the Future Attack Reconnaissance
Aircraft's clean sheet design, modular open systems approach, and next
generation technological advancements set the conditions for
transformational interoperability and convergence within Joint,
Combined integrated fires and intelligence warfighting environments as
part of an overall Joint and Combined kill chain.
15. Senator Hawley. General McCurry, how will Future Vertical Lift
platforms enable the Army's deployment and operation of Long-Range
Precision Fires, specifically, in the Indo-Pacific theater?
Brigadier General McCurry. Current Army aviation capabilities lack
the range necessary to enable systems like Long-Range Precision Fires
in the Indo-Pacific. The Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft
ecosystem is uniquely suited to provide threat detection and other
effects in support of Army and Joint fires due to its extended reach
(speed and range) with enhanced tailorable payloads.
16. Senator Hawley. Mr. Bush, the Army states that the Future Long
Range Assault Aircraft will provide increase maneuverability, agility,
and reach. Currently only Army Special Operations helicopters are
capable of conducting aerial refueling. Will the Future Long Range
Assault Aircraft have this capability?
Mr. Bush. Future Long Range Assault Aircraft base capability will
enable aerial refuel operations via an optionally installed aerial
refuel probe.
17. Senator Hawley. General Richardson, on the topic of the Indo-
Pacific theater, allies and partners will be key for any fight in the
Pacific. That in mind, how is the Army thinking about enabling or
promoting interoperability as it works through Project Convergence?
Lieutenant General Richardson. Allies and partners are a critical
element of our defense strategy. We cannot win without them. That's why
our Project Convergence experiments this year, PC 22, include some of
our closest allies. As we learned in PC 21, interoperability is not
adequate. We must pursue ``integration'' of capabilities within the
joint force, as well as with our closest allies.
18. Senator Hawley. General Richardson, one of the Army's
functional modernization priorities is Assured Position Navigation and
Timing. How will Assured Position Navigation and Timing allow our
combat forces to operate in contested environments, especially in the
case of a potential conflict in the Indo-Pacific?
Lieutenant General Richardson. Our Assured Positioning, Navigation,
and Timing and Space cross-functional team (CFT) works very closely
with the Army G-2, Army G-6, our Network CFT, and others to identify
challenges to operating seamlessly in contested environments and then
experimenting with potential solutions to those challenges. And of
course we are incorporating the challenges associated with contested
environments into our Project Convergence series of experiments. The
Army's PNT modernization efforts include the incorporation of the U.S.
Space Force's new GPS Military Code signal, other radio frequency (RF)
and non-RF sources of PNT as well as a modular architecture. We would
be happy to provide you and/or your staff with a classified detailed
briefing of the progress we are making in this arena.
19. Senator Hawley. General Richardson, the Indo-Pacific theater
poses unique logistical challenges, particularly given the vast
distances our forces will need to travel to get there. How does the
Army's budget request for this year reflect the need for the Army to
support the logistical requirements necessary to posture ``blunt''
forces located to the west of the International Date Line, in order to
deter or defeat Chinese aggression?
Lieutenant General Richardson. The Army fiscal year 2023 request
continues to modernize logistics capabilities necessary to support
INDOPACOM. For instance, it significantly increases requested funding
for the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, maintains our investments in Army
Watercraft Systems ensuring we can conduct contested logistics in
INDOPACOM, and invests nearly $300 million in fiscal year 2023 alone to
procure logistics enablers to include fuel and water storage and
distribution systems, materiel handling equipment, and field medical
equipment and over $360 million is being invested in bulk and tactical
fuel delivery systems over the next 5 years.
As for positioning forces, the Army must be able to deliver forces
and supplies across extended distances to meet INDOPACOM requirements.
Army Watercraft play a significant role in meeting that challenge. The
Army is requesting funding for the Landing Craft Utility Service Life
Extension Program, as well as funding to upgrade navigation and
communications equipment through the Modular Integrated Bridge Program.
The Army also requested $2.5 million in RDTE funding to support
affordability & feasibility studies that will inform the requirements
for the Ship to Shore Logistics Vessel that is intended to provide
increased capability and longer service life than the aging Logistics
Support Vessel.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION
REQUEST FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023 AND THE FUTURE YEARS
DEFENSE PROGRAM
----------
TUESDAY, MAY 17, 2022
United States Senate,
Subcommittee on Airland,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC.
MODERNIZATION EFFORTS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m., in
room 222, Russell Senate Office Building, Senator Tammy
Duckworth (Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding.
Subcommittee Members present: Senators Duckworth, Peters,
Rosen, Kelly, Cotton, Tillis, Sullivan, Scott, and Hawley.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR TAMMY DUCKWORTH
Senator Duckworth. [Technical problems]--here today to
discuss Air Force modernization are Lieutenant General David
Nahom, Deputy Chief of Staff for Plans and Programs, Lieutenant
General Joseph Guastella, Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations,
and Lieutenant General Duke Richardson, Military Deputy Office
of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition,
Technology and Logistics. Welcome, gentlemen.
I want to extend a warm welcome to and thank each of our
witnesses for appearing before this Subcommittee today. I look
forward to hearing your testimony. Last week, the Subcommittee
heard from the Army witnesses about challenges in the Army
modernization program.
I look forward to hearing from our Air Force witnesses
about the challenges and opportunities they face in modernizing
the Air Force, as we finish our scheduled hearings before we
mark up the Department of Defense Authorization Request for
Fiscal Year 2023.
Our witnesses this afternoon face huge challenges as they
strive to balance the need to support ongoing operations and
sustained readiness with the need to modernize and keep the
technological edge that is so critical to successful military
operations.
I am especially interested in examining how the Air Force
plans to manage multiple major modernization programs. After
all, it is not just the F-35s, the B-21, and the KC-46. The Air
Force is seeking to modernize these platforms while also
launching new programs, including procuring so-called Wedgetail
aircraft to replace some of the E-3 airborne warning and
control system aircraft, and replacing JSTARS' [joint
surveillance target attack radar system] capability with
advanced battery management system.
It is vital that we strike the optimal balance between
swiftly delivering capabilities to our warfighters, protecting
taxpayer dollars, and avoiding irresponsible program risks that
may jeopardize the Air Force's ability to support combatant
commander requirements.
One area in particular I would like to draw attention to is
the Air Force's plan to truncate the HH-60 Whiskey program
after fiscal year 2023. That would leave the Air Force roughly
40 percent short of its original plan to modernize the combat
search and rescue or CSAR fleet of aircraft. We need to hear
how this change will affect the Air Force's ability to conduct
CSAR [combat search and rescue] operations in future conflicts.
Shifting focus to procurement policy, the Air Force has
been aggressively implementing accelerated acquisition
authorities, including for major defense acquisition programs.
However, it remains to be seen whether expedited procedures
will be the silver bullet to unlocking dramatic improvement and
meeting milestones, reducing cost overruns, and most
importantly, delivering promised capabilities.
Notably, the Air Force began its program to replace the B-
52's engines under accelerated authorities but has agreed to
shift that program back to the normal acquisition process at
the next acquisition milestone review. I will close by stating
the obvious. The Air Force will be critical in determining
whether we successfully implement a new National Defense
Strategy.
I was not surprised that the President proposed providing
the Air Force with the largest increase of all the services in
the fiscal year 2023 budget, and I look forward to examining
how meeting the request for an additional $13.5 billion above
fiscal year 2022 enacted appropriation would enhance the Air
Force's modernization efforts.
Again, I want to thank our witnesses for their service and
for appearing before the Subcommittee this afternoon. I am
going to reserve some time for the Ranking Member, Senator
Cotton, but in the meantime, in light--to just expedite
matters, I am going to go ahead and move on to the witnesses
and ask you to go ahead and provide us with your opening
statements.
Lieutenant General Richardson. Thank you, Senator. I was
going to give a single opening statement for all three of us.
Senator Duckworth. Okay.
STATEMENT LIEUTENANT GENERAL DUKE Z. RICHARDSON, USAF, MILITARY
DEPUTY, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE FOR
ACQUISITION, TECHNOLOGY, AND LOGISTICS
Lieutenant General Richardson. Chair Duckworth, Ranking
Member Cotton, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for
having Lieutenant General Nahom, Lieutenant General Guastella,
and I here to provide testimony on the Air Force's fiscal year
2023 budget request. In recent years, the Air Force's combat
advantage over potential peer adversaries has been under
pressure.
With completion of the 2022 National Defense Strategy, the
strategic direction for the United States Air Force is clear,
we must modernize our air and ground forces and capabilities to
overcome the pacing challenges posed by the People's Republic
of China and deter the threats of other strategic competitors.
Through the lens of Secretary Kendall's Seven Operational
Imperatives, we continue to look critically at our investments
to ensure our resources are properly aligned to a force design
that will give our adversaries pause. The Air Force has had to
make a number of tough decisions to strike a balance between
short term and future risks.
This budget request is a result of a thoughtful and
deliberative process that responds to the rapidly evolving
threat. We sincerely appreciate Congress's approval to divest
80 percent of requested aircraft in fiscal year 2022, allowing
over $1 billion to be invested in other top Air Force
priorities.
In 2023, fiscal year 2023, we welcome the opportunity to
once again work with Congress to accelerate the development of
a more modern and operationally relevant fighting force and
deliver capabilities to the warfighter at the pace with which
the current strategic environment demands. I would like to take
a moment to highlight a few key points in our 2023 budget
submission. Readiness and relevance require training
improvements in both the live and synthetic domains.
We are fully committed to advancing and modernizing our
live and synthetic programs to provide relevant and realistic
training for tomorrow's force. The Air Force is continuing
investment efforts in its trainer platforms, including critical
modernization programs for the T-6 and T-38 fleets. Earlier
this year, we conducted the rollout of the first T-7A training
aircraft.
The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget Requests continues
the T-7A program's EMD [engineering and manufacturing
development] and early aircraft flight test efforts, and
procures long lead support equipment, ensuring we meet the 2026
initial operational capability milestone.
Nuclear modernization is our top priority. GBSD [ground-
based strategic deterrent], LRSO [long-range stand-off], and B-
21 are key to the Air Force plan. The Air Force remains focused
on achieving a fighter force mix that provides a capable,
sustainable, survivable, and affordable force that can operate
across the entire range of mission sets. Our proposed four
platform fighter fleet achieves just that.
Together, the F-35, the NGAD [next generation air-
dominance] family of systems, the F-15 and the F-16, provide
complementary capability and capacity to meet worldwide
demands. The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget Request
decreases the F-35 procurement quantity as we prioritize
investments in the F-35 fleet, seeking modernization,
infrastructure, and advanced weapons.
The Air Force will continue to work with the F-35 Joint
Program Office, the Navy, and industry to identify and evaluate
opportunities to increase depo repair capacity and further
reduce the cost of material and manpower.
Hypersonic weapons provide an important capability for
combatant commanders. The Air Force is committed to ensuring
our long range strike platforms can employ these systems. We
are pleased to report on the 14th of May 2022, the Department
of the Air Force successfully completed booster test flight 2b
of the ARRW [air-launched rapid response weapon] from a B-52
Stratofortress.
The next booster test flight is scheduled for later this
summer. Winning in future high end conflict requires
accelerating investments, and that includes transitioning our
ISR force structure into a connected, persistent, and
survivable force. In fiscal year 2023, we request funds for two
production representative prototype E-7, 8 aircraft to support
testing evaluation efforts as we work to replace the aging E-3
AWACS [airborne warning and control system].
It is critical that we deliberately modernize our tanker
fleet through continuous recapitalization of KC-135s and
procurement of the KC-46. Keeping KC-10 divestment actions on
track will not only free up ramp space to allow for delivery of
the KC-46, but it will also free up the airmen we need to
continue maturing the KC-46. The KC-46 is currently cleared for
85 percent of the missions tasked by U.S. TRANSCOM [United
States Transportation Command], including bombers, tankers,
airlift, ISR, and fighters.
Our airlift fleet is the envy of air forces around the
world, and this year's budget continues to invest in the C-5,
C-17, and C-130 fleets. We look forward to working with this
Subcommittee to ensure the Department of the Air Force
maintains sufficient military advantage to secure our vital
national interests and to support our allies and partners in
fiscal year 2023 and beyond.
We stand ready to address your questions.
[The joint prepared statements of Lieutenant General Duke
Z. Richardson, Lieutenant General David S. Nahom, and
Lieutenant General Joseph T. Guastella follow:]
Joint Prepared Statement by Lieutenant General Duke Z. Richardson,
Lieutenant General David S. Nahom, and Lieutenant General Joseph T.
Guastella
introduction
Chair Duckworth, Ranking Member Cotton, and distinguished members
of the Subcommittee, thank you for having us here today to provide
testimony on the United States Air Force modernization efforts. The
leadership and support of this Subcommittee is critical to our
achievement of national security priorities to defend the homeland,
deter nuclear and non-nuclear strategic attacks, deter aggression and
be prepared to prevail in conflict, and build a resilient joint force.
The Department of the Air Force consists of approximately 700,000
airmen and guardians that enable our country to meet the challenges
associated with the full range of national security threats. Providing
our airmen and guardians with the capabilities they need to deter, and
if necessary, win is our most sacred obligation. The advancements of
China's military modernization efforts and Russian aggression in
Eastern Europe highlight the pacing challenges we face and the urgency
with which we must act.
The Department of the Air Force's Fiscal Year 2023 President's
Budget request aims to accelerate the development and fielding of a
more modern and operationally relevant force that the current strategic
environment demands. Our budget request balances the risks of
maintaining the current operational requirements of combatant commands
with the need to develop and deliver the Air Force needed. The aircraft
we seek to retire have served us well and exceeded the requirements
they were developed to meet. However, they are not well-suited for
today's contested environments or future high-end conflicts. The
average age of the Air Force fleet is 29 years with many aircraft
flying beyond their intended lifespan and becoming significantly more
expensive to sustain.
With congressional support in fiscal year 2022, the Air Force was
allowed to begin the transition to better face our pacing challenge.
While grateful for this support, we continue to face restrictions on
the retirement of outdated fighter, tanker, cargo, and command and
control aircraft. These restrictions impede investment in the necessary
capabilities to deter competitors and win future conflicts. We are
conscious of the difficulties associated with these changes and are
eager for continued collaboration with Congress, industry, and the
communities that support our Air Bases to ensure our Nation's security.
air force in demand
Global Force Management
The Air Force attempts to optimize force capabilities for
operations against peer competitors, fulfill combatant commander
requirements, and provide stability to the Total Force through Joint
Staff-led Global Force Management (GFM) processes. We are actively
working GFM issues through the Joint Staff as the Department of
Defense's (DOD) global command-and-control mechanism to adjust the
distribution of forces and conduct global force strategic planning.
As in previous years, during fiscal year 2022 the Air Force was
employed in unique and disparate locations across the globe at all
levels of conflict. Our limited supply of capability will never satisfy
the global joint force demand for air power. Through GFM, the Air Force
worked hard to balance near-term and long-term risks. We have
maintained our unique global flexibility to rapidly deploy with
scalable, tailorable forces to all combatant commanders while ensuring
our readiness to face peer competitors in the future.
The Air Force is the nation's ``9-1-1'' force. The preponderance of
our Total Force is required within the opening days of any conflict. We
have repeatedly demonstrated our ability to employ air power within
hours, at any point on the globe. Looking forward, the Air Force will
continue to refine our equities and contributions within GFM processes.
We will mature concepts such as Dynamic Force Employment (DFE) and
Agile Combat Employment (ACE), and utilize our new force presentation
model, Air Force Force Generation (AFFORGEN). Through these
initiatives, the Air Force is postured to meet strategic guidance,
enhance Total Force readiness, enable modernization, and balance
current operations with future requirements.
Dynamic Force Employment
The 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS) introduced the concept of
DFE as a Secretary of Defense resource to provide options for proactive
and scalable employment of the Joint Force to compete, deter, and win
in great power competition. Since fiscal year 2019, the Air Force has
leveraged DFE as a more effective means of using air power for
strategic effect, while recovering and building peer adversary
readiness in accordance with the NDS. The 2022 NDS advocates achieving
department goals through integrated deterrence, campaigning, and
building enduring advantages. Our DFE actions directly support
deterrence as well as the synchronized and inter-related military
campaign efforts needed to undermine the coercive actions of
competitors or potential adversaries.
Through the application of DFE within GFM processes, the DOD can
proactively shape the strategic environment, while modernizing,
testing, and gaining readiness to respond to contingencies, and ensure
the long-term viability of the Joint Force. Compared to the
traditional, readiness-decreasing, heel-to-toe rotational presence, DFE
is a better utilization of air power that rapidly meets Combatant
Command requirements and assures Allies and Partners. Air power's
inherently dynamic, agile, and strategic attributes enhance DFE effects
to expand competitive space beyond regularized patterns while providing
maximum responsiveness to emergent priority missions. DFE is also a
valuable resource for the Air Force to explore, experiment, and refine
rapid employment concepts such as ACE and the Bomber Task Force (BTF).
These concepts advance air power's global ``enhanced maneuver''
effectiveness and resiliency. For all these reasons, we continue to
receive more requests for DFE than we can satisfy. This demand will
continue, and highlights the importance of adhering to national
strategy, GFM processes, and the successful fielding of AFFORGEN to
maintain a sustainable ready Air Force that can compete and overmatch
peer adversaries.
Agile Combat Employment
Changes to the modern operational environment and rapid
technological improvements require the Air Force to adjust its scheme
of maneuver. Our response to these challenges is to continue to refine
the ACE concept. ACE is the ability to quickly disperse and cluster
tailorable force packages to a cooperative security location and
conduct operations across all domains, while maintaining operational
flexibility and increasing resiliency. The operational unpredictability
of ACE will present our adversaries with multiple dilemmas and
targeting challenges during both day-to-day competition and potential
future conflict. ACE requires a revolutionary change in how the Air
Force thinks about and conducts operations within the modern
environment. To initiate the shift, we recently released our first
doctrinal publication on ACE and are studying the many challenges
inherent in its implementation. Ultimately, our multi-capable airmen
(MCA), infrastructure and pre-positioning efforts, and Allies and
Partners should ensure ACE viability as the concept matures.
Multiple exercises are continuing to validate ACE's ability to
project air power and shift combat operations using advanced, agile,
and adaptive logistics. For example, in 2021, airmen from Lakenheath
Air Base, United Kingdom, exercised this concept as part of Exercise
BALTIC TRIDENT. This event showcased ACE-enabling concepts such as MCA,
interoperability with Allies and Partners, smaller manpower footprints,
and reduced reliance on prepared airfields. Earlier in 2022, airmen
from Air Combat Command participated in an ACE exercise out of Seymour
Johnson Air Force Base, North Carolina. This exercise tested the 4th
Fighter Wing's ability to operate from different locations with varying
levels of capacity and support, which ensured airmen and aircrews were
postured to respond across the spectrum of military operations.
Continued infrastructure development will help ensure ACE viability.
Planned fiscal year 2022 military construction investments in European
and Pacific theaters support this concept's development. Air Force
policy guidance in the form of an enterprise-wide tasking order will
prioritize activities and investments to support ACE, and is scheduled
for release this summer.
Air Force the Nation Needs (Readiness)
Our readiness posture has been flat for almost 3 years, and
indicators suggest it will trend lower in the future as we continue to
invest in overdue modernization. This condition represents the
confluence of 30 years of compounding issues. Continuous contingency
deployments, generally flat budgets with declining real buying power,
war bills paid with Operations and Maintenance (O&M) dollars, delayed
modernization, and personnel cuts have left the Air Force at a
readiness deficit. This deficit cannot be recovered overnight and must
continue to be balanced against the priority to modernize the force for
the pacing challenge.
Building back readiness will take time and requires continued
congressional support to make tough choices, including divestment of
less relevant systems in order to maximize our resources for the
nation's defense. Modernization efforts will yield greater capability,
but will also require investment in manpower, the sustainment
enterprise, training infrastructure, and a healthy flying hour program.
These investments will enable a force that is ready and capable of
employing and winning with the advanced capabilities we are acquiring.
However, this cannot be realized without stability in GFM levels, which
is necessary to properly train and sustain the Air Force.
As we transition to the force the nation needs, continued
operational demand for Air Force capabilities combined with NDS
modernization priorities are driving difficult resource tradeoffs. In
order to be ready and relevant for the great power competition ahead,
we must transform the force and its training infrastructure to provide
the capabilities the NDS demands. We must balance the risk and demands
of the current environment with the need to arrive in the future with
the capacity and capability we require. As we transition to the future
force, it is essential to modernize and eliminate costly and less-
capable legacy systems. These actions will lower operating costs,
improve availability, and provide essential capabilities to present a
combat-credible and ready force to meet the demands of great power
competition.
Operational Training & Test Infrastructure
Experience and experimentation have taught us that combat crews are
more lethal and less prone to attrition when they train against the
actual or representative threats they will encounter in combat.
Therefore, we are fully committed to advancing and modernizing our live
and synthetic programs to provide relevant and realistic training for
tomorrow's force.
Readiness and relevance require training improvements in both the
live and synthetic domains. The live domain includes airspace and
ranges, and modernizing the replication of current and future
adversarial threats. Additionally, it encompasses real-time data
processing and control and evaluation of combat training engagements.
The synthetic domain requires the creation of a capability that
provides all users a complete, relevant, and realistic peer/near-peer
synthetic training environment containing an accurate representation of
threats, terrain, weather, and friendly forces.
In the live domain, our range priority remains our two largest
ranges: the Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR) and the Joint
Pacific-Alaska Range Complex (JPARC). We will upgrade both ranges to
replicate a Level 4, peer/near-peer adversary threat environment. With
current and programmed funding, NTTR and JPARC are projected to achieve
Level 4 by fiscal year 2030. Additionally, we intend to upgrade six
Primary Training Ranges, in both CONUS and OCONUS, to a Level 3
capability by fiscal year 2033.
Our range modernization approach also addresses the encryption and
movement of data to improve the realism of our training events. We will
procure the Navy's Tactical Combat Training System II (TCTS-II) to
modernize our Combat Training System (CTS) requirement. In addition to
addressing the pending obsolescence of our P5 CTS pod, this will
provide an ability to share encrypted data for training. Data sharing
will allow our 4th and 5th generation, and future platforms to train
together in a manner not achievable with current technology.
Concurrently, we are pursuing a Live Mission Operational Capability
(LMOC) to standardize and modernize our training ranges. This
capability allows us to tie legacy threat systems together to create a
more realistic adversary Integrated Air Defense System and eliminates
manpower-intensive processes.
Our range modernization approach will ensure our live ranges
provide both realistic and relevant training environments to our future
force. Live training will always be the cornerstone of Air Force
readiness. However, the live training environment is constrained by the
geographic limitations and technological improvements of both current
and future adversary capabilities. These limitations mandate a shift in
portions of our combat training to the synthetic training environment.
The synthetic environments will allow aircrew members to fully use
their capabilities and effectively practice the tactics, techniques,
and procedures they will employ against future adversaries. Shifting
advanced training to the synthetic arena requires us to replace
disparate, legacy synthetic environments with a training environment
that is common across multiple generations of aircraft and associated
training systems.
The development of this environment will provide a Level 4 (peer/
near-peer) training capability for all operational units while allowing
our advanced platforms to exercise capabilities they cannot use in a
live environment. The synthetic environment will be the only arena
where Air Force, Joint, and Coalition units can train together using
their full capabilities in realistic scenarios.
We are confident these tailored improvements to our live and
synthetic training capabilities will provide our crews with the ability
to maximize the lethality advantage of current and future weapon
systems.
Pilot Production
The Air Force remains focused on improving overall pilot inventory.
Today, the Air Force is short approximately 1,650 pilots; half of that
shortfall is in the Air Reserve Components. In the Regular Air Force,
it resides in Company Grade Officer (CGO) ranks due to previous UPT
under-production over the past decade. To align pilot requirements with
production, we must reliably and sustainably produce 1,500 pilots per
year, 1,100 of which must be for the Regular Air Force.
Substantial short-term increases in production to improve the
overall inventory sooner are not manageable and can quickly create
force management problems with oversized year groups. The production-
to-experiencing of pilots is a closed-loop and interdependent system.
The Air Force must deliberately plan and pace production increases to
approximately 1,500 pilots, and then maintain it for the foreseeable
future. It has taken many years of under-production to create the pilot
shortage we currently have, and it will take 10 years of producing to
the CGO requirement to right-size the force while retaining Field Grade
Officers (FGO) to right-shape the force of the future.
The Aircrew Task Force (ACTF) has developed a four-part strategy
for recovery. The strategy includes: 1) increasing the production plant
capacity to align with requirements; 2) reducing risk within the
production plant; 3) maximizing retention to meet FGO requirements and
mitigate previous underproduction; and 4) ensuring production and
retention efforts deliver a right-sized and shaped pilot force.
Additionally, Air Education and Training Command has instituted
production initiatives that aim to maximize resources and leverage
technology platforms. These include UPT 2.5, Helicopter Training Next,
and Alternate Path to Wings. These initiatives modernize pilot training
to improve the quality of new pilots for the challenges of 5th
generation aviation; streamline the helicopter pilot production path;
adjust the training program for those candidates with extensive civil
aviation experience or completion of accredited aviation programs;
improve simulator instructor recruitment and retention, and evaluate a
remote simulator instruction concept. In all of these efforts, we
leverage technology to improve the training experience, conduct
training earlier, and augment our proven production methods. The
quality of our graduates remains critical to our long-term success and
readiness. As we deliberately expand production at a methodical pace,
the Air Force will not sacrifice quality within our pilot production
enterprise.
Air Force Force Generation
The Air Force is transitioning to a new force presentation and
force generation model (AFFORGEN) that provides the Service the ability
to present a sustainable force offering. AFFORGEN rebuilds high-end
readiness for peer competition and major combat operations in
accordance with the NDS. Due to air power's inherent flexibility, our
previous force presentation and force generation models could not
easily define the Service's sustainable capacity and capability limits.
Nor could it easily articulate modernization requirements needed for
rapid force employment concepts to develop future force readiness. As a
result, over the past 20+ years, Air Force force elements were over-
consumed responding to the ``tyranny of now'' at the expense of
readiness and modernization for the future. The Air Force lacked the
ability to present an easily understood model that reflected all facets
of airpower and that could communicate how the Air Force was being
consumed faster than it could rebuild readiness.
To address these issues, and to get after the heart of General
Brown's Accelerate Change or Lose initiatives, AFFORGEN has become the
Service catalyst for a paradigm and cultural shift in how we prepare
and present credible and capable air power. Aligning to a narrative
that we can no longer sacrifice future readiness for the sake of
responding to constant global demand, AFFORGEN provides the Service
with a standardized, easy to understand, and defendable model that
builds readiness over time. It clearly predicts the impact of GFM
actions to future force offerings, readiness, and modernization.
Institutionalizing AFFORGEN will take leadership at all levels. In
close consultation with the Joint Planning and Execution Community, we
have begun the hard work today, setting conditions to establish Initial
Operational Capability (IOC) in fiscal year 2023, maturing through
fiscal year 2024 and fiscal year 2025.
current capacity and capability
Following National Defense Strategy (NDS) guidance, the Air Force
seeks to invest in technologies and field systems that are both lethal
and survivable against tomorrow's threats. This ultimately means
transitioning away from many legacy platforms in order to free up
manpower and resources to modernize and field more capable systems. If
we are to modernize to address the emerging threat, we must use
resources tied to our legacy platforms and weapons systems that are
decreasing in relevance today and will be irrelevant in the future.
Retaining systems that have either limited contributions, or are simply
not relevant in the future fight, delays modernization and exacerbates
future capability gaps. If deterrence fails, our airmen must have the
training, tools, platforms, and operating systems required to win. We
must strike a balance between risk in the near-term and risk in the
future.
Bomber / Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) Force Structure
Our budget request supports the NDS's call for a full-scope
modernization of nuclear delivery systems, to ensure a safe, secure,
and effective nuclear deterrent to backstop our integrated deterrence
approach. Our nuclear deterrent underpins U.S. strategy and diplomacy,
as well as every operational plan. It safeguards the homeland, assures
allies, and deters adversaries. Sentinel provides an evolutionary
capability that enables the U.S. to address growing current and
evolving future threats, while simultaneously increasing the safety,
security, and reliability of the U.S. Intercontinental Ballistic
Missiles (ICBM) force. Air Force bombers anchor the air leg of the
Nation's Nuclear Triad. As a unique national security capability, the
B-21 represents the future of this bomber force. As modernization
continues, the Air Force it will gradually transition the current
three-bomber fleet to a two-bomber fleet of next-generation B-21s and
modernized B-52s to provide nuclear and conventional global strike
options for decades to come.
B-21
The B-21 Raider will form the backbone of our future bomber force
and is the centerpiece of the Secretary of the Air Force's sixth
operational imperative. As China and Russia develop new weapons and
defenses, it is imperative we maintain the capability to hold at risk
any target on the planet. The B-21 underscores our national security as
the most flexible leg of the Nuclear Triad and supports combatant
commanders across the range of military objectives as both a nuclear
and conventional bomber. The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget
includes $3.25 billion in Research, Development, Test & Evaluation
(RDT&E) funding that continues to fund Engineering and Manufacturing
development activities. Additionally, the budget includes $1.79 billion
in aircraft procurement to procure the first lot of low rate initial
production B-21s, spares, support equipment, and long lead items for
the second lot of low rate initial production. There are six B-21 test
aircraft in flow on the manufacturing line, which are being built using
the same tooling processes and technicians who will build the
production aircraft.
In parallel, beddown preparations at Ellsworth Air Force Base
(AFB), South Dakota remain on-track. The Fiscal Year 2023 President's
Budget requests $168 million to support one new military construction
project and funds the third increment of the Low Observable Maintenance
Facility at Ellsworth AFB. The first B-21s are projected to arrive at
Ellsworth AFB in the mid-2020s with base infrastructure ready to
support. A second Environmental Impact Statement began in calendar year
2022 to assess the final two basing locations, Dyess AFB, Texas and
Whiteman AFB, Missouri.
The Air Force is committed and on track to meet its key performance
parameter of building B-21s with an average procurement unit cost of
$550 million (Base Year 2010) / $639 million (Base Year 2019), assuming
a minimum fleet of 100 aircraft.
B-52
While the last B-52 Stratofortress entered service in the U.S. Air
Force in 1962, we expect to continue operating the B-52 through 2050.
We will continue to invest in modernization programs to keep the
platform operationally relevant. Major modernization efforts include
the Commercial Engine Replacement Program (CERP), the Radar
Modernization Program (RMP), integration of the long-range standoff
(LRSO) nuclear air-launched cruise missile, and installation of
Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) secured satellite
communication capabilities.
The Air Force's number one priority for the B-52 is to ensure
platform viability through 2050 and the CERP enables us to achieve this
goal. CERP will replace legacy engines (TF33-PW-103) with new military-
derivative commercial Rolls Royce F-130 engines. It is important to
note that CERP is more complex than just a standard commercial engine
refit. CERP includes new engines, flight systems, and cockpit throttles
and displays. The RMP is also necessary to ensure viability through
2050 and will modernize the current Strategic Radar (AN/APQ-166), which
is based on 1960s technology modified in the 1980s.
Finally, integration of the LRSO and AEHF will bolster the
continuation of the B-52's role in the airborne leg of the Nuclear
Triad. The Air Force remains committed to B-52 modernization to ensure
the nation's oldest and most versatile frontline long range bomber
remains relevant through 2050 and beyond.
B-1
The B-1 is a long-range, supersonic multirole bomber capable of
flying intercontinental missions with the largest payload of guided and
unguided weapons in the Air Force inventory. This budget focuses
resources on sustaining and modernizing the remaining combat-coded B-1s
greatly facilitated by the retirement of 17 B-1s as authorized in the
Fiscal Year 2021 National Defense Authorization Act. We will ensure the
B-1s remain lethal and viable until B-21s are operational in sufficient
numbers. The completed Integrated Battle Station upgrade enhances crew
situational awareness and precision engagement capabilities and is the
B-1's largest modernization effort ever. The first aircraft with this
upgrade was delivered in January 2014 and the last aircraft was
completed in September 2020. Additional efforts to update the B-1's
communication systems are ongoing and ensure the B-1 remains the
backbone of the Air Force's long-range bomber force until the B-21
arrives.
Lastly, the B-1 is the Air Force's threshold platform for the Long
Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM). Integration of this weapon, coupled
with the B-1's long range, high speed, and large payload capacity,
postures the B-1 for an important role in any conflict in the Indo-
Pacific region.
B-2
The B-2 is the only long-range strike aircraft capable of
penetrating and surviving advanced Integrated Air Defense Systems to
deliver weapons against heavily defended targets. Its unique attributes
of intercontinental range, precision strike, large conventional or
nuclear payloads, ability to penetrate defenses, and low observable
profile allow it to execute Nuclear Deterrence Operations, Nuclear
Response, Global Strike, and Global Precision Attack missions. The Air
Force will ensure the B-2 remains effective until the B-21 is
operational. Because delays in the Defensive Management System
modernization effort would have limited the operational utility of the
system by the time it would have fielded, the Air Force de-scoped the
Defensive Management System modernization program. Instead, we are
replacing the B-2's unsustainable cathode ray tube displays with modern
sustainable displays as part of the B-2 Displays Modernization program.
The Air Force reached Full Operational Capability to re-host the
Stores Management Operational Flight Program software in the Flexible
Strike program. This enables the B-2 to take advantage of advanced
digital weapon interfaces, including those used by the B61-12 nuclear
weapon. Other on-going B-2 modernization programs include Adaptive
Communication Suite upgrades, enhancement of the Identification Friend
or Foe (IFF) system, replacement of the Crash Survivable Memory Unit,
integration of hardware upgrades for employment of the B61-12 nuclear
weapon, and software upgrades to allow the B-2 to carry the extended
range variant of the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM-ER).
Finally, the B-2 will continue sustainment efforts for the on-going Low
Observable Signature and Supportability Modification effort to improve
aircraft maintainability and availability.
Hypersonic Weapon Integration
Hypersonic weapons provide an important capability for combatant
commanders, and the Air Force is committed to ensuring our long-range
strike platforms can employ these systems. In-line with the Air Force's
two bomber fleet strategy, we will ensure these weapons are capable of
being delivered via our modernized B-52 fleet. In the near-term, the
Air Force will utilize the fiscal year 2022 $10 million congressional
add to continue maturing the capability to externally carry hypersonic
weapons utilizing the B-1. The speed, responsiveness, and range of air-
launched hypersonic weapons combined with bomber payload capacity
provide a necessary and compelling response to meet and surpass the
pacing threat of China and Russia.
Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) Modernization
ICBMs are integral to U.S. nuclear deterrence. The Air Force is in
the initial stages of replacing the 1970s-era Minuteman III capability
with the LGM-35A Sentinel Weapon System through the Ground-Based
Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) acquisition program. The GBSD is the most
cost effective option for modernizing the ICBM leg of the Nuclear Triad
and supports the NDS to modernize the capability of nuclear forces.
This weapon system will extend and improve the capabilities of the
ground-based leg of the Nuclear Triad, providing a credible and
responsive deterrent capability against current and emerging
adversaries through 2075. The new weapon system will provide improved
nuclear surety, safety, and effectiveness with enhanced security
features. The new weapon system will provide more efficient operations,
maintenance, and security by modernizing critical infrastructure and
decreasing lifecycle costs.
The GBSD acquisition program remains on track in pursuing a low
risk, technically mature design and is using innovative digital
engineering and acquisition strategies to increase development speed
and ensure on-time delivery. Deployment is scheduled to begin in the
late-2020s in order to resolve capability, attrition, and age-out
concerns with the Minuteman-III weapon system, as well as meet
warfighter requirements. The nation is focusing investment on these new
missiles and the associated infrastructure and accompanying re-entry
systems.
Fighter Force Structure
The Air Force must continue to evolve its fighter force to meet the
pacing challenge posed by China and the acute threat posed by Russia
and ensure the capability and capacity to meet worldwide demands today.
Extensive gaming and analysis using the most difficult problem (China)
and the most difficult scenario (Taiwan) at the most difficult time
(2035), shows that the Air Force must adjust the future fighter force
structure mix by changing investment priorities to provide the
capability, capacity, and affordability required to defeat any peer
threat. The threat will not allow the Air Force to just retain and
modernize our current fleets. Modernization programs cannot transform
our current 4th generation fighters into 5th generation fighters, or
our current 5th generation fighters into Next Generation Air Dominance
(NGAD).
In realistic budget projections, we must balance the need for high
end technology with affordable capacity. To attain this desired fighter
fleet, the Air Force must continue to right size current aircraft
inventories to expedite the transition away from less capable, aging
aircraft and emphasize investment in future capabilities such NGAD and
F-35 modernization. The desired Air Force fighter fleet should match
capability and capacity of both platforms and weapons to mission
requirements. As part of its force structure change, the Air Force must
transition its fighter fleet from seven platforms (i.e., F-35, F-22, F-
16, F-15EX, F-15E, F-15C, A-10) to four (i.e., NGAD, F-35, F-15EX, F-
16).
On the path to achieving the desired future fighter fleet, the
Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget proposes a net change of minus 84
fighter aircraft in fiscal year 2023, and a total FYDP net change of
minus 346 fighter aircraft. These divestitures are critical to building
a relevant future force capable of meeting our NDS peer competitor.
Resourcing those future capabilities and modernizing our remaining
force demands both money and manpower currently tied up in our legacy
systems and platforms.
Fighter Force Structure Studies
Our fighters are becoming significantly more expensive to sustain
as they age. The average age of the USAF fleet is 29 years which is
significantly higher than all other Services. Weapons System
Sustainment (WSS) costs have increased approximately 40 percent above
inflation over fiscal years 2016 to 2027. We need new platforms and
weapons to replace an aging force, but also must invest in cutting edge
technology needed to confront and pace threats.
Both internally and alongside Office of the Secretary of Defense,
the Air Force has performed a TACAIR analysis to evaluate how
efficiently different force mixes meet future warfighting challenges in
the 2035-2040 timeframe. Specifically, this study focused on fighter
force mixes and quantities that were both affordable and militarily
effective. The Air Force TACAIR Study was an initial step in creating a
long-term plan for our fighter force. While this study was not
published, it was used internally by the Air Force to inform both
fiscal year 2023 and future year programming efforts.
Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD)
The Air Force is investing in technologies as part of a family of
capabilities to assure air dominance in the future. NGAD capabilities
enable counter-air missions in highly contested operational
environments in order to protect and support the Joint Force and
replaces the F-22.
The requirement to establish and maintain air superiority within
the battlespace cannot be understated as it underpins the joint force
operations in any theater. NGAD is our program that supports studies,
analyses, technical maturation, and prototyping activities leading to
enhancements in lethality, survivability, interoperability, and
persistence to ensure air superiority. The Air Force is ensuring
affordability and cost control on NGAD through sustained competition
for the vehicle and mission systems, adoption of a government-owned
open architecture, and digital engineering that stretches into
operations and sustainment. The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget
requests $1.66 billion in fiscal year 2023 to fund the continued
development of a next generation open mission system architecture,
advanced sensors, cutting-edge communications using open standards, and
integration of the most promising technologies into the family of
capabilities. Furthermore, this program incorporates novel agile
acquisition practices through its competitive industry consortium
approach that is yielding favorable results and providing greater value
for the taxpayer. Our efforts are being shaped by multiple analyses,
including recommendations from the Chief of Staff of the Air Force-
approved Air Superiority 2030 Flight Plan, recently completed NGAD
Analysis of Alternatives, and several others from renowned analytic
organizations. Continued investment in NGAD technologies is critical to
ensuring continued air dominance within emerging threat environments
for all future joint operations.
Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA)
CCA are a part of the NGAD family of systems. These un-crewed
weapon systems will be designed to work in conjunction with current and
next-generation manned aircraft. CCA development draws from and matures
autonomous technologies developed in the Air Force Research
Laboratory's (AFRL's) Skyborg Vanguard program. The next phase of CCA
development will pursue a streamlined concept refinement activity to
identify employment concepts, operational requirements, and cost. These
concepts are expected to span the design space across expendable,
attritable, and exquisite capabilities. The concept refinement phase is
ongoing now, leveraging and expanding the diverse range of industry
partners developed for the NGAD program, to discover the state of the
art.
F-35
The F-35 is the cornerstone of our future fighter fleet. The F-35
today is dominant, purpose built, and equipped with advanced weapons
for the contested environment. In the near-term, we must concentrate on
achieving the F-35 capability needed for advanced threats. While the F-
35 is a formidable platform today, the Air Force must confront key
development, interoperability, sustainability, and affordability
challenges to acquire, upgrade, and retrofit the F-35A fleet to obtain
the minimum required capability and capacity as quickly as possible
within projected resource constraints. To keep pace with the threat in
future contested scenarios, follow-on modernization efforts centered on
``Block 4'' enabled by Technical Refresh 3 (TR-3) hardware must be
affordably realized on competition-relevant timelines.
The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget request decreases the F-35
procurement quantity in fiscal year 2023 to 2033 from the fiscal year
2022 enacted position of 48 aircraft. The Air Force is prioritizing
investments in the F-35 fleet, seeking modernization, infrastructure,
and advanced weapons in this budget request. Commitments include $4.5
billion to procurement, $1.1 billion, to development and $12.3 billion
to fund necessary sustainment. This increased investment ensures
maximum future viability of the fleet, albeit with lower procurement
numbers.
The Air Force has fielded 340 F-35A aircraft with 29 awaiting
engines, power modules, or fan modules. The two largest cost drivers
the Air Force controls are the number of aircraft possessed and
programmed flying hours, and the major cost categories are parts,
people, energy, and consumables. Our F-35A Sustainment Affordability
Target for cost-per-tail-per-year (CPTPY) is $4.1 million (BY12$) based
on 1,763 F-35As. The current 2020 Joint Service Cost Position is $7.8
million (BY12$) at steady state (2036-2041). The Air Force will
continue work with the F-35 Joint Program Office, Navy, and industry to
identify and evaluate opportunities to increase depot repair capacity
and further reduce the cost of materiel and manpower.
Adaptive Engine Transition Program
The Air Force remains focused on completing planned testing of the
prototype adaptive cycle engines and is engaged in the on-going F-35
Joint Program Office Business Case Analysis to inform acquisition
planning for upgrading its F-35A aircraft propulsion, power, and
thermal management systems. Both Adaptive Engine Transition Program
contractors, General Electric Aviation and Pratt and Whitney (a
Raytheon Technologies Company), have commenced testing of their
respective flight-weight, prototype engines. Test results continue to
substantiate significant performance gains in fuel efficiency (up to 25
percent), thrust (up to 10 percent), and thermal management capacity,
as well as a significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions (up to
25 percent) are achievable. The on-going F-35 Joint Program Office
Business Case Analysis, along with a companion Air Force operational
analysis, will address questions regarding life cycle costs and
affordability of equipping F-35A with an adaptive engine. On-going
acquisition planning is using the results from these activities to
finalize an acquisition strategy.
F-22
The F-22 is the only operational multi-mission air superiority
fighter aircraft that combines stealth, supercruise, maneuverability,
and integrated avionics to make it the world's most capable air
superiority aircraft. The F-22 Block-20s are now in their third decade
and they have the highest operating costs of any Air Force fighter, and
they do not possess the combat capabilities resident in the F-22 Block-
30/35. Remaining committed to ensuring air superiority for the Joint
Force in the highly contested environment against a peer adversary, it
is imperative to modernize the F-22 to preserve its advantages while
concurrently developing Next Generation Air Dominance. In order to
resource both, the Air Force seeks to divest the oldest and least
capable F-22s (33 F-22 Block-20s) in fiscal year 2023. In the near
term, three heavily modified F-22 Block-20s will be kept for testing.
Additionally, the Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget request includes
$1.37 billion in fiscal year 2023 for modernization efforts essential
to gain and maintain air superiority against evolving threats. The
Rapid Prototyping and Rapid Fielding efforts follow an agile
acquisition construct, and combine former TacLink16, Tactical Mandates
(TACMAN), Low Drag Tanks & Pylons, Electronic Protection, and GPS M-
code programs to deliver slices of each capability on an annual release
cadence for capabilities as they mature. Future modernizations will
continue to leverage the agile construct as a vehicle to rapidly
prototype and iteratively field critical enhancements with capabilities
delivered to the fleet in order to ensure ``first look, first shot,
first kill'' capability in highly contested environments. Funds
garnered from the divestment of F-22 Block-20s have been reinvested in
NGAD development across the FYDP. The transition timeline from F-22 to
NGAD is dependent on the progress of NGAD development efforts.
F-15
The F-15C/D supports both Homeland Defense and the air superiority
mission. Our F-15C fleet is aging, with two-thirds of the fleet past
its designed service life. The 186 F-15C/Ds in the Air Force inventory
will reach the end of their design service life in the next six to 8
years, and our analysis shows additional service life extension
programs are not cost effective. The Fiscal Year 2023 President's
Budget request divests 67 F-15C/Ds from the Active fleet. We have
already started to replace this fleet with a modernized successor by
purchasing the F-15EX. The F-15EX ``Eagle II'' will provide superior
sensor, range, and payload for Critical Infrastructure Protection.
The Eagle II additionally brings outsized long range weapons (i.e.,
air-to-surface and air-to-air) into a peer fight. The Fiscal Year 2023
President's Budget request procures 24 F-15EX aircraft at a cost of
$2.7 billion. Notably, the Air Force remains fully committed to
advanced 5th and next generation capabilities and the F-35. The
decision to refresh the 4th generation fighter force with the F-15EX is
a complementary step to both F-35 procurement and NGAD development, and
helps mitigate capacity risk while balancing near-term readiness
concerns.
The existing F-15E Strike Eagle fleet provides all-weather, long
range global precision attack in all but the highest threat
environments. The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget requests $772
million in fiscal year 2023 to continue modernization efforts to ensure
the aircraft remains viable to the 2030s. Modernizing the F-15E with
Early Passive Active Warning Survivability System (EPAWSS), also used
on the F-15EX, demonstrates our commitment to building a more lethal
Air Force. EPAWSS will allow the F-15E/EX to survive to attack targets
in high threat environments.
F-16
The F-16 is the Air Force's primary multi-role fighter and
Suppression of Enemy Air Defense (SEAD) aircraft. Our more than 600
late block F-16s will provide affordable capacity for the next 15 or
more years, in both competition and more permissive combat
environments. We are beginning to transition away from our oldest,
early block F-16s, with a reduction of 76 planned through fiscal year
2024. We will continue to modernize the late block F-16s we keep as our
``affordable capacity'' fighter into the 2040s. The F-16 investment
strategy funds modifications for the most capable, late block aircraft
to ensure they can operate and survive in today's threat environment.
The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget requests $970.7 million in
fiscal year 2023 to continue these modernization efforts. This includes
continuing the Service Life Extension Program comprising 12 structural
modifications, affecting 450 aircraft, as well as several avionics
capability upgrades including the Active Electronically Scanned Array
(AESA) Radar upgrade. The new radar replaces the current mechanically
scanned radar, with greater ability to detect, track, and identify low-
observable, low-flying, and slow-flying targets. This joint emerging
operational need of 72 radar systems is complete and fielded. The
underway Phase 3 will install an additional 444 radar systems across
the Combat Air Force (CAF), Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC), and Air
National Guard (ANG), bringing critical capabilities to the F-16
platform to meet aerospace control alert mission requirements to
properly defend the Homeland against modern threats. These radars
continue fielding in fiscal year 2023.
A-10
The A-10 remains an effective close air support platform for the
current Counter Violent Extremist Organization fight. With very limited
utility in a contested fight, we are right-sizing our A-10 fleet for
the current and anticipated future demand and then structurally
extending and modernizing the aircraft we keep. We have installed 172
new wings on our A-10 fleet and an additional order of 50 wings has
been placed and is set to be received from May 2022 through 3rd quarter
fiscal year 2025. Once all wing replacements have been installed, the
Air Force will have a complete A-10 fleet of 218 aircraft. As we will
continue to modernize 218 A-10s, we will reduce the fleet by 21 in
fiscal year 2023. The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget requests
$156.4 million (Procurement; and Research, Development, Test, and
Evaluation funds) in fiscal year 2023 for modernization.
Trainers
T-1, T-6, and T-38
The Air Force is continuing investment efforts in its trainer
platforms, including critical modernization programs for the T-6 and T-
38 fleets. The T-1A fleet is scheduled for divestment between fiscal
year 2023 and fiscal year 2025. Training of future Mobility pilots,
currently being conducted in the T-1A Aircraft, will be accomplished in
the T-1A simulators using procedures developed from the Pilot Training
Next Innovation Cell at Air Education and Training Command (AETC). The
T-6 continues mitigation efforts for the aircraft with the On-Board
Oxygen Generation System (OBOGS) to improve the safety of pilot
training and address Unexplained Physiological Events (UPEs). To date,
mitigation efforts have resulted in an 82 percent reduction in UPEs.
Expected completion of Enhanced OBOGS mitigation efforts is mid-fiscal
year 2024. In fiscal year 2023, the T-6 will start a major Avionics
Replacement Program (ARP) to address Diminishing Manufacturing Sources
and Materiel Shortages (DMSMS) for critical avionics issues. For the T-
38, modifications are also required to sustain and upgrade the fleet
until the T-7A delivers, including avionics, Pacer Classic III, Talon
repair, inspections, maintenance, and front canopy replacement
programs. The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget requests $6.3
million, $13.8 million, and $121.3 million for the T-1, T-6, and T-38
fleets, respectively.
T-7A
The T-7A Advanced Pilot Trainer replaces AETC's existing fleet of
427 T-38C aircraft with 351 aircraft and associated simulators, ground
equipment, spares, and support equipment. The T-7A will provide student
pilots with the skills and competencies required to be better prepared
to transition into 4th and 5th generation fighter and bomber aircraft.
The T-7A program uses a digital engineering approach, which offers
significant benefits particularly during the design and build phases.
Digital engineering reduces development times, lowers production costs,
and allows greater collaboration between the Air Force and Boeing.
Modern digital engineering practices are more efficient and yield
tangible results by reducing design costs, reducing production support
manpower, improving first time quality by 75 percent, and reducing
assembly hours by 80 percent through task reduction. Additionally, the
use of these digital engineering practices and early prototyping
enabled the Air Force and Boeing team to identify aerodynamic
instability issues at least 22 months earlier in the testing phase than
possible using traditional development processes.
The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget request continues the
program's Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) and early
aircraft flight test efforts, and procures long lead support equipment,
ensuring we meet the 2026 Initial Operational Capability and 2034 Full
Operational Capability milestones. Rollout of the first EMD T-7A is
scheduled to occur April 28, 2022. The Air Force remains committed to
working with Boeing to enable the T-7A program to achieve Milestone C
in 1st quarter fiscal year 2024.
Munitions
To meet the priorities outlined in the NDS, the Air Force must
maintain a suite of affordable air-to-air and air-to-ground kinetic and
non-kinetic weapons delivering capability and capacity to defeat
rapidly evolving competitors. As such, we continue to procure preferred
munitions, but are tapering production as programs approach warfighter
inventory objectives, while simultaneously investing in new technology
to counter future peer threats in highly contested environments. The
fiscal year 2023 President's budget request continues to modernize the
munitions inventory to enable the future USAF construct. A fiscally
constrained environment requires difficult risk-based decisions to
offset development and procurement of new weapons. We must accept some
near-term risk to build the munitions inventory needed for the future.
The Air Force has shaped its investment based on the correct mix of
munitions, aligned with current OSD and Joint Staff planning guidance.
This includes balancing stand-off and stand-in munitions. Advanced
stand-in weapons bring great capability to penetrating platforms, while
stand-off weapons provide adequate range to keep 4th generation
aircraft relevant in high-end conflicts. Combined, they provide the
volume of fires required to prevail in conflict when necessary.
Weapons that advance USAF capability include advanced air-to-air
weapons, the Stand-in Attack Weapon (SiAW), Joint Air-to-Surface
Standoff Missile-Extended Range (JASSM-ER), Air-launched Rapid Response
Weapon (ARRW), and Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile (HACM). The USAF
will continue to collaborate with the U.S. Navy to share cost and
technology. This partnership is critical in countering naval air
defense threats.
Joint Direct Attack Munition and Small Diameter Bomb
The Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) inventory levels are
approaching objective quantities after several years at high levels of
production funding. Current procurement is being held to minimal
levels, pending fielding of guidance kit with GPS Military Code (M-
Code) receivers and antennas. After increasing tailkit production to
45,000 tailkits per year in fiscal year 2018 to meet the needs of the
Services and Foreign Military Sales (FMS) partners, the Air Force has
adjusted to demand and now plans to procure 4,200 tailkits in fiscal
year 2023 with a request of $251.9 million, with U.S. Navy and FMS
partners procuring the remaining production capacity.
Small Diameter Bomb I (SDB I) and II (SBD II) provide reduced
collateral damage effects and increased load-out per sortie. Due to its
high operational utility, the Air Force ramped the line for SDB I from
3,000 weapons per year in fiscal year 2015 to 8,000 weapons in fiscal
year 2017. With demand dropping and advanced standoff weapons in higher
demand, the Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget requests $46.5 million
and plans to order 356 weapons, leaving residual production capacity
available to FMS partners. For SDB II, the Fiscal Year 2023 President's
Budget requests $279.0 million to procure 761 weapons.
Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile and Advanced Medium Range Air-
to-Air Missile
As the Air Force responds to current operational demands, we are
also looking to the future to ensure we are prepared to defend against
more advanced threats as directed in the NDS. Doing so requires
advanced weapons capabilities and the Fiscal Year 2023 President's
Budget request reflects the Air Force's plan to continue investing in
those areas, specifically with the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff
Missile (JASSM), the Long-Range Anti-Ship Munition (LRASM), and the
Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM). These weapons
provide unique and necessary capabilities for the highly contested
environment.
JASSM is the premier air-to-ground, low observable missile for
defeating threats in highly contested environments and is the weapon of
choice for a future fight against peer adversaries. The program is
focused on increasing inventory by implementing a strategy to ramp up
production rates and monitor subsystems for obsolescence. To achieve
this, we have partnered with industry to expand production capacity to
satisfy a 47 percent increase in our inventory objective. The Fiscal
Year 2023 President's Budget requests $785 million, which uses the full
capacity of the second Lockheed Martin production line with 550
missiles.
LRASM, produced in the same facility as JASSM, is a purpose-built
anti-ship missile particularly critical for the future fight in a
maritime environment. The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget requests
$114 million to procure 28 missiles.
The Air Force continues to invest in the next generation medium and
long-range air-to-air missiles. AMRAAM is still in production and meets
today's requirements, but we will also need to invest to maintain our
long history as the world's best Air Superiority Air Force. The Air
Force is requesting $320 million for 271 missiles, as industry partners
begin to cut-in a solution to obsolescence issues through the Form Fit
Function Refresh (F3R) effort.
Stand-In Attack Weapon (SiAW)
To defend the nation in an increasingly competitive global
environment, we must look beyond currently fielded weapons systems and
invest in future advanced munitions capabilities. To that end, the Air
Force continues to invest in development of the Stand-in Attack Weapon
(SiAW) to deliver a strike capability to defeat rapidly relocatable
targets, a hallmark of the highly contested environment. SiAW is the
munition that gives the F-35 unique air-to-surface capabilities in the
high end fight for the Joint Force. The Fiscal Year 2023 President's
Budget requests $283 million for SiAW development and prototyping,
along with $78 million in procurement funding to field Advanced Anti-
Radiation Guided Missile Extended Range (AARGM-ER) on the F-35 as an
interim capability.
Hypersonics
The USAF is developing and fielding long-range, hypersonic strike
weapons. The Hypersonic Air Launched Cruise Missile (HACM) and the Air-
Launched Rapid Response Weapon (ARRW) will enhance our Global Strike
capability in future contested environments. The AGM-183A ARRW requests
$114.9 million in fiscal year 2023 to complete its flight test program.
The Air Force has prioritized completion of the ARRW flight test
program and will revisit a production decision in the fiscal year 2024
planning process. The HACM is a planned system for fighter integration
and increased load-out for bombers. HACM addresses urgent national
defense needs and provides a credible deterrent to adversaries. The
Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget request of $462 million for HACM
development is designed to result in production article procurement by
fiscal year 2027.
Tanker Fleet
Tanker Fleet
The Air Force tanker fleet is a critical capability to all Joint
operations. It is crucial that we prioritize modernization over legacy
capacity. We are modernizing the tanker fleet through four separate
efforts. First, the Air Force is investing $574 million across the
fiscal year 2023 Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) to modernize a
smaller legacy tanker fleet. Second, we are continuing to deliver new
KC-46s with $13.1 billion invested in new aircraft procurement across
the FYDP. Third, the Air Force is initiating the KC-Y program in fiscal
year 2023 with $423 million for RDT&E across the FYDP and $1.3 billion
for procurement in fiscal year 2027 for an initial aircraft delivery in
approximately fiscal year 2029. Finally, the Air Force is continuing
divestment of legacy KC-10s and recapitalization of KC-135s that will
result in a tanker fleet comprised of 362 KC-135s, 26 KC-10s, and 95
KC-46s by the end of fiscal year 2023. As of April 2022, we have
accepted 57 KC-46 Pegasus aircraft out of a planned total of 179 KC-
46s. As we transition away from the aging KC-10 and right-size the KC-
135 fleet, we continue to look towards the next generation for tanker
recapitalization options.
KC-46
While we continue to sustain the current tanker capability,
building the future tanker fleet remains one of the Air Force's top
acquisition priorities. The KC-46 will deliver greater operational
readiness, flexibility, and survivability to the Global Reach mission.
Ninety-four production aircraft are on contract, and the Air Force is
in negotiations with Boeing for 15 aircraft in fiscal year 2022.
The first KC-46 aircraft delivered to Main Operating Base 1,
McConnell AFB, Kansas, on 25 January 2019. The Formal Training Unit at
Altus AFB, Oklahoma, received its first KC-46 on 8 February 2019. The
Air Force established Main Operating Base 2 at Pease Air National Guard
Base, New Hampshire, on 8 August 2019, and Main Operating Base 3 at
Seymour Johnson AFB, North Carolina, on 12 June 2020. Main Operating
Base 4a at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey received its
first two KC-46 aircraft on 9 November 2021. The Air Force will
continue taking delivery of KC-46s at a rate of approximately 1.25 per
month.
The Air Force remains committed to ensuring Boeing corrects
deficiencies identified in both developmental and operational test and
evaluation. Partnered with Air Mobility Command, we have worked hard to
accept the KC-46 while ensuring its major deficiencies--the Remote
Vision System (RVS) and stiff air refueling boom--are properly
addressed without undue burden on taxpayers or warfighters.
On 2 April 2020, we reached agreement with Boeing to fix the RVS
deficiencies through significant upgrades, known as RVS 2.0, at no
additional cost to the government. On 11 April 2022, the Air Force and
Boeing officially closed the Remote Vision System (RVS) 2.0 Preliminary
Design Review (PDR)..The RVS 2.0 design provides marked improvements
over the current system. The overall RVS 2.0 program is still on
schedule, with design solution and start of fleet retrofit expected in
fiscal year 2024. The air refueling boom engineering change proposal,
initially awarded in August 2019, was definitized on 30 September 2020,
and the design solution is expected to complete in fiscal year 2024,
with retrofit starting in fiscal year 2025.
The Director, Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) has stated
Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E) will conclude after the
RVS and boom deficiencies are resolved; IOT&E is expected to complete
in fiscal year 2024. The full-rate production decision is planned after
IOT&E is complete and we are in receipt of the statutorily-required
Beyond Low Rate Initial Production report from DOT&E.
Despite its current deficiencies, the KC-46 is safe to operate
(adhering to flight manual cautions provided to our operators) and will
be the Air Force's best tanker for contested environments due to
enhanced situational awareness, battle management, and threat
countermeasures. By accepting the KC-46 with known deficiencies, the
Air Force has enabled familiarization and operational test activities
while working with Boeing on long-term efforts to correct deficiencies.
Accepting the KC-46, and fixing deficiencies in parallel with
operational test and evaluation, is the fastest way to achieve full
operational capability to meet warfighter requirements.
At this time last year, only the Navy's F/A-18 was fully certified
for unrestricted refueling with the KC-46. Additionally, at this time
last year, no KC-46s were or had been presented to USTRANSCOM for
tasking.
Beginning last July, the Interim Capability Release Program (ICR)
allowed USTRANSCOM to ``task'' KC-46s to support approved receivers
under the plan. Since then, continued approval of additional receivers
has led to the KC-46 being cleared for 85 percent of missions tasked by
USTRANSCOM. These additional approvals include bombers, tankers,
airlift, ISR and fighters (F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22 and F-35). The KC-46
is now also capable of being tasked to conduct passenger and
aeromedical evacuation missions.
KC-46 aircraft have conducted nearly 9000 missions since January
2019 with U.S. and coalition receivers delivering nearly 80 million
pounds of fuel through over 37,000 safe and effective aerial refueling
contacts. Within the next few months, additional receivers will likely
be approved via the ICR process, allowing nearly all boom-compatible
receivers to be refueled by the KC-46 except the A-10 and some Air
Force Special Operations Command C-130 aircraft. This alleviates
pressure on legacy tanker fleets and allows some continued legacy
divestiture.
The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget requests $186.2 million in
RDT&E funding for the ongoing KC-46 Engineering and Manufacturing
Development and post production modification efforts, to include the
boom telescope actuator redesign that resolves the stiff boom
deficiency, on-going test and receiver aircraft certifications, and
increased effort on the KC-46 Block 1 program. Additionally, the budget
requests $2.83 billion not only to procure 15 aircraft in Production
Lot 9 along with associated engines, spares, and support equipment, but
also to support increased depot standup and organic sustainment.
KC-10 and KC-135
The average age of our KC-135 and KC-10 tankers is 59 and 35 years
old, respectively. Both fleets are challenged by aircraft parts
obsolescence and diminishing manufacturing source issues. With the help
of organic Air Force depots and industry, we are able to maintain these
platforms as effective and safe weapon systems for the warfighter. We
are executing several key modernization, safety, and compliance
initiatives to ensure our KC-135 fleet remains viable beyond 2040.
The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget request will continue KC-
135 modernization efforts, including the Block 45 program, the Aero-I
Satellite Communications (SATCOM) program, Mobile User Objective
System, Real Time in Cockpit, and the Rudder Position Indicator
program. The Air Force is also funding three new modernization efforts
in fiscal year 2023, including two radio upgrades and Center Console
Refresh.
Additionally, the budget requests funding to keep our KC-10 fleet
operational through its planned retirement at the end of fiscal year
2024, and includes funding for service bulletins and low cost
modifications to ensure Federal Aviation Administration certification.
The Air Force fiscal year 2023 budget request proposes decreasing
its tanker fleet from 479 Total Active Inventory to 455 by the end of
fiscal year 2027. In fiscal year 2023, the Air Force is retiring 14 KC-
10s and 18 KC-135s from the Active Duty fleets. These retirements are
critical in providing the flexibility to free up resources and manpower
to modernize and fund the Air Force's future tanker fleet.
Executive Airlift
VC-25B
The VC-25B program will replace the U.S. Air Force Presidential VC-
25A fleet, which faces capability gaps, rising maintenance costs, and
parts obsolescence as it ages beyond 30 years. The VC-25B program will
deliver two new aircraft to meet the requirements for the President to
execute the roles of Head of State, Chief Executive, and Commander-in-
Chief. Two Boeing 747-8 aircraft are being uniquely modified to provide
the President, staff, and guests with safe and reliable air
transportation and a level of communications capability and security
equivalent to that which is available in the White House. Modifications
to the 747-8 aircraft began in February 2020 in San Antonio, Texas, and
include an electrical power upgrade, dual auxiliary power units that
are usable in flight, a mission communication systems, an executive
interior, military avionics, a self-defense system, autonomous
enplaning and deplaning, and autonomous baggage loading.
The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget requests $493 million to
continue Engineering and Manufacturing Development, aircraft
modifications, and other product support activities.
C-40
The C-40 is a modified 737-700 Boeing Business Jet used to provide
safe and reliable global air transportation for U.S. officials,
including members of the Executive and Legislative branches of
government, as well as other Defense officials. The fleet has been
undergoing communications upgrades to ensure secure and robust
communications that meet Executive-level requirements. The Fiscal Year
2023 President's Budget reflects $2.2 million in procurement funding to
address low cost modifications and service bulletins in order to
provide secure and reliable government air transportation to these
passengers.
Strategic and Tactical Airlift
C-5
The C-5 Super Galaxy provides all-weather worldwide strategic
airlift for combat forces, equipment, and supplies, exemplifying Rapid
Global Mobility as outlined in the NDS. Current investment programs
focus on fleet obsolescence, maintainability, and safety of flight.
The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget requests $46.0 million in
procurement funding, predominantly for communications, navigation,
surveillance/air traffic management (CNS/ATM) and core mission
computer/weather radar (CMC/WxR) system equipment. CNS/ATM upgrades
include Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) Out
modifications required for global airspace compliance. The CMC/WxR
effort replaces an antiquated radar system and upgrades the core
mission computer processor to meet the demands of future software
modifications. Production funding also includes procurement of training
systems.
Additionally, the Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget requests
RDT&E funding to support replacement of the Multifunctional Controls
and Displays (RMCD). This comprehensive sustainment modification
mitigates the obsolescence of the current control and display units and
increases capacity for future technology integration into the cockpit.
C-17
The C-17 is the only aircraft in the Air Force inventory that
combines tactical capability with strategic range to operate from
austere airfields. The fleet of 222 aircraft provides our Nation with
unmatched flexibility to conduct theater and inter-theater direct
delivery, airdrop, aeromedical, and special operations airlift
missions. Agile and efficient software and hardware updates ensure
timely readiness, safety, and capability improvements as this premier
airlift platform contributes to our national security objectives.
The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget requests $152.0 million in
procurement funding to continue critical modifications to the C-17
fleet. This includes a filter fire mitigation for the On-Board Inert
Gas Generating System, Large Aircraft Infrared Countermeasures
defensive systems, and training system upgrades. The modification
effort of a replacement heads-up display will address obsolescence of
the current C-17 heads-up display and improve the system's
availability, reliability, and maintainability. Production funding also
includes procurement of training systems.
Additionally, fiscal year 2023 RDT&E funding will address
obsolescence and flight safety issues. The Beyond-Line-of-Sight
communication system effort modernizes multi-channel voice and data
communication subsystems to ensure the C-17 keeps pace with changes in
Department of Defense communication infrastructure, and begins
production in fiscal year 2023.
C-130H/J Fleet
The C-130 fleet consists of C-130H and newer C-130J aircraft, as
well as special mission aircraft (AC/LC/EC/MC/HC/WC-130s). C-130Hs and
C-130Js are medium-size transport aircraft capable of completing a
variety of tactical airlift operations across a broad range of
missions. The fleet delivers air logistics support for all theater
forces, including those involved in combat operations.
C-130H
The Air Force continues to modernize the C-130H fleet through a
four-pronged approach emphasizing aircraft safety, airspace compliance,
modernization, and partial recapitalization. Our C-130H Center Wing Box
replacement program breathes new life into some of our hardest flown
aircraft, enabling them to continue to safely operate well into the
future. The C-130H Avionics Modernization Program (AMP) Increment 1
ensures the C-130H fleet is outfitted with modern communication
equipment and complies with U.S. and international airspace transponder
mandates. We completed the AMP Increment 1 installations for the C-130H
fleet in May 2021. The AMP Increment 2 program improves the C-130H
fleet maintainability and reliability by providing a new digital
avionics suite and mitigating obsolescence and diminishing
manufacturing source challenges. The Fiscal Year 2023 President's
Budget requests $0.4 million in RDT&E and $115.4 million in procurement
funding to support the C-130H fleet.
As with other weapon systems, the Air Force is taking measured risk
in the C-130 portfolio as it focuses resources toward the future force.
Specifically, in fiscal year 2023 we plan to reduce the total C-130
fleet from 279 aircraft to 271 aircraft (110 C-130Hs and 161 C-130J
aircraft).
C-130J
The Air Force has partially recapitalized the C-130H fleet with C-
130Js, which also supports our Special Operations missions by providing
Special Forces with extra weight carrying capacity, longer range, and
better fuel efficiency. These special mission variants of the C-130J
conduct airborne psychological operations and offensive electronic
warfare (EC-130J), weather reconnaissance (WC-130J), search and rescue
(HC-130J), and special operations (MC-130J and AC-130J). The Air Force
has multiple modification efforts for the C-130J, including Center Wing
Box replacement, Large Aircraft Infrared Countermeasures, Block 8.1,
and communications upgrades. The C-130J Block 8.1 modernization
program, currently in production, delivers new communication and data
link capabilities, a modern flight management system, and other key
capabilities to the field. In addition, the Air Force plans to upgrade
both our C-130H and C-130J fleets with a Mobile User Objective System
and a Second Generation Anti-Jam Tactical Ultra High Frequency Radio
satellite communication system to ensure we maintain key communication
links anywhere in the world.
The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget requests $11.1 million for
C-130J RDT&E and $187.6 million for C-130J procurement and modification
efforts. The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget also requests funding
for HC/MC-130J RDT&E and HC/MC-130J procurement and modification
efforts.
Rotorcraft
The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget continues investment in the
Air Force's critical rotorcraft modernization programs, including the
CV-22 Osprey, HH-60G, HH-60W, and MH-139A programs.
CV-22
The CV-22 is the Air Force variant of the joint V-22 tilt-rotor
aircraft. It allows for long-distance, terrain following, vertical lift
operations with increased survivability and is the only high-speed
vertical lift platform in the Air Force inventory. The CV-22 conducts
infiltration, exfiltration, and resupply of Special Operations Forces
(SOF) in politically sensitive and hostile or denied areas. The Fiscal
Year 2023 President's Budget requests $165.4 million to continue
modifications to increase CV-22 fleet reliability, capability, and
survivability. Investments in these areas will ensure the CV-22 fleet
remains ready, reliable, and relevant in the future.
HH-60G and HH-60W (Combat Rescue Helicopter)
The Air Force is the only Service with a dedicated force organized,
trained, and equipped to execute theater-wide Personnel Recovery. The
HH-60G fleet currently accomplishes this mission by conducting day,
night, and marginal weather Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) operations
to recover isolated personnel in hostile or permissive environments.
Due to the advancing age and current attrition rates of the HH-60G, the
Air Force must continue to sustain existing HH-60G helicopters and use
aircraft procured under Operational Loss Replacement program to meet
Combatant Command requirements until we can fully recapitalize with the
HH-60W (Combat Rescue Helicopter (CRH)) program. The HH-60W will be
specifically equipped to conduct CSAR across the entire spectrum of
military operations. The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget request
reduces the total fleet to 75 air vehicles from the program of record
of 113. The Air Force has fully funded the CRH program to meet National
Military Strategy objectives through Personnel Recovery missions. The
Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget requests $10.8 million and $928.8
million for the HH-60G and HH-60W programs, respectively.
MH-139A
The MH-139A program is an element of the Air Force nuclear
enterprise reform initiative and also supports operational airlift
within the National Capital Region. This program will deliver up to 80
replacement helicopters, training devices, and associated support
equipment to replace the legacy UH-1Ns. The Fiscal Year 2023
President's Budget requests $185.4 million for the MH-139 program,
which will fund Low Rate Initial Production, training devices, and
support equipment. It also funds the MH-139A Performance Enhancements
and Product Improvements Program, which is the development of solutions
to solve capability gaps found during the development and test of the
MH-139A. This includes solving communication and weapon systems
deficiencies, improving mission planning compatibility, resolving
usability concerns, and other critical capabilities. The first six
aircraft continue to be used to finalize test and development.
Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance
The Air Force is focusing Intelligence, Surveillance, and
Reconnaissance (ISR) resources on efforts that provide high quality
tracking and target coordinates, establish meaningful data nodes to
give tactical direction, and optimize weapon systems with information
that matters in the most useful formats, at speed and scale. To meet
the challenges of a highly contested environment, the future ISR
portfolio will consist of a multi-domain, multi-intelligence,
collaborative sensing grid that uses advanced technology. The end goal
is a ready Next Generation ISR Enterprise possessing a decisive
advantage for the warfighter while remaining competent across the
entire spectrum of conflict.
The ability to win future high-end conflicts requires accelerating
investment to transition our ISR force structure into a connected,
persistent, and survivable force. To achieve this, we must move away
from expensive legacy systems that offer limited capability against
future competitors. The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget request
takes further steps towards repurposing, retooling, automating, and
stabilizing the force to ensure the ISR Enterprise can achieve this
vision within the next decade.
MQ-9
The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget request of $208.2 million
will continue MQ-9 fleet modernization efforts aimed at providing
needed capabilities to the Combatant Commands. To date the MQ-9 fleet
has flown over 2.75 million hours, with approximately 91 percent of
those hours supporting combat operations. This level of warfighter
support is facilitated by a unique program architecture in which MQ-9
sustainment and modernization efforts are managed as separate, yet
fully integrated and complementary, programs of record. This allows the
Air Force to focus on operating and sustaining fielded MQ-9s while
development and testing of planned modernizations are conducted in
parallel. By structuring this way, mature and proven upgrades for the
program at large are delivered when and where they are needed.
MQ-9 modernization efforts include the continued development of MQ-
9 Multi-Domain Operations (M2DO) capability upgrades that will keep the
fleet relevant. The upgrades in the M2DO configuration include Anti-jam
GPS, Command and Control Resiliency, Enhanced Power, Link-16, and an
effective and reliable open systems architecture.
The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget request removes 250
aircraft from the inventory over the FYDP. The Air Force will first
remove all Block 1 aircraft between fiscal year 2023 and fiscal year
2024, and then will remove high time Block 5 aircraft between fiscal
year 2026 and fiscal year 2027. The remaining fleet of 140 Block 5
aircraft will continue to meet Combatant Command requirements.
RC-135
The Air Force is committed to sustaining and upgrading the RC-135
fleet as it continues to be our most capable, relevant, and viable
signals intelligence platform. Continued modernization using rapid
acquisition and fielding processes is critical as we address emerging
peer threats and great power competition. The RC-135 is critical to our
decision advantage as it provides vital intelligence data at unrivaled
speeds to both the national-level intelligence community and the
tactical-level warfighter today and in any future highly contested
conflict.
The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget request facilitates mission
system improvements for the RC-135 variant fleet. Efforts include the
automation of additional search and detection capabilities, improved
near-real-time data distribution and collaborative processing, and
exploitation and dissemination supported by enhanced artificial
intelligence algorithms. Also, the second and third KC-135 to WC-135
conversions will be accomplished and delivered in fiscal year 2023.
Finally, the recent extension of the standard-setting RC-135
cooperative agreement with the United Kingdom's Royal Air Force (RAF)
to 2035, as well as the integration of RC-135 derived sensor
technologies on the Australian Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) MC-55
Peregrine, continue to strengthen alliances globally while increasing
partner interoperability.
RQ-4
The RQ-4 Global Hawk remotely piloted aircraft system provides high
altitude, long endurance, all weather, wide area reconnaissance and
surveillance. The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget request of $116
million will maximize Block 40 utility through the remainder of the
Global Hawk service life, to include fielding the modernized ground
segment and addressing diminishing manufacturing sources issues.
The Ground Segment Modernization Program is on track to complete
installation of upgraded cockpits at Grand Forks Air Force Base and
Beale Air Force Base in fiscal year 2023. Finally, the Air Force plans
to divest Block 40 by fiscal year 2027, at which time space-based
Ground Moving Target Indicator is expected to meet combatant
commander's needs in accordance with the NDS. The reduced investment in
the RQ-4 also enables the Department to better align resources with the
NDS.
EC-37B COMPASS CALL
COMPASS CALL is the Air Force's only wide-area, standoff, Airborne
Electromagnetic Attack (AEA) Command and Control Warfare/Information
Operations weapon system. The COMPASS CALL program is currently
undergoing a re-host effort to transition the capability from the EC-
130H to the EC-37B in order to maintain U.S. Electromagnetic Spectrum
(EMS) Superiority in future conflicts. To date, six EC-37B aircraft
have been procured and are undergoing modification, with limited
fielding for training only in fiscal year 2024, and initial operational
fielding in fiscal year 2026.
The Air Force has included procurement of the last four planned EC-
37Bs as part of the fiscal year 2023 Unfunded Priority List (UPL).
Additionally, the Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget accelerates
development of the mission system upgrade for the fielding of System
Wide Open Reconfigurable Dynamic Architecture (SWORD-A) capabilities.
The open and agile architecture of SWORD-A will enable a more rapid
response capability against emerging threats and will be included on
aircraft number six initially and then to the first five aircraft as an
upgrade modification.
E-8C JSTARS
The E-8C JSTARS provides wide-area Ground Moving Target Indicator
(GMTI) capability and dynamic Battle Management Command and Control
(BMC2). JSTARS aircraft will have survivability challenges in future
scenarios, as airborne GMTI platforms have to operate closely (from
within contested areas) to adequately sense ground moving targets. The
future of the GMTI is a pivot to space. Additionally, this pivot is
imperative due to the increasingly prohibitive cost to sustain the
platform and maintain a relevant capability across the spectrum of
operations. As such, the Department is transitioning from legacy
airborne GMTI platforms to space-based capabilities, where sensing will
be possible in anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) scenarios. As part of
this transition, the Air Force began divestiture of the JSTARS fleet in
fiscal year 2022 and will divest eight aircraft in the Fiscal Year 2023
President's Budget request, leaving three aircraft in the Active fleet.
E-3 AWACS
The E-3 AWACS provides wide-area Airborne Moving Target Indicator
(AMTI) capability and dynamic Battle Management Command and Control
(BMC2) to build an accurate battlespace picture. Despite modernization
efforts, the aging E-3 AWACS offers limited operational utility in
contested conflicts, creating an operational imperative to replace it.
The AMTI capability of the E-3 AWACS presents a significant capability
gap with no present long term Air Force capability to compete in the
high end fight. The E-3 Replacement program will close the capability
gap by enabling the long range kill chain, enhancing reliability and
availability, and reducing operating costs by integrating a modern
Electronically Scanned Array sensor on a crewed platform. An
electronically scanned array will be capable of radar beam steering,
sector staring, and much faster target revisit rates that translate
into better target detection and tracking of modern threats, as well as
more robust Electronic Protection not possible with the mechanically
scanned radar on the E-3 AWACS. The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget
request begins the transition to the more capable E-7A platform by
divesting the first 15 E-3 aircraft in fiscal year 2023. This fleet
reduction will allow the Air Force to concentrate resources and improve
E-3 aircraft availability rates, while efforts to procure the E-7A are
underway. Full fleet divestment is currently scheduled to occur by
fiscal year 2029; therefore, most E-3 modernization programs are being
terminated except mandated requirements for crypto and communication
systems as well as safety of flight efforts. The Fiscal Year 2023
President's Budget request of $67 million funds these efforts to
maintain existing AWACS BMC2 capabilities. For the E-3 Replacement
program, which will be the E-7A, the Fiscal Year 2023 President's
Budget request funds the development and delivery of two production
representative prototype aircraft to support test and evaluation, and
associated ground support and training systems.
Connecting the Joint Force
One effort that will stress how fast and smart our requirements,
acquisition, and operations process can move is Joint All-Domain
Command and Control (JADC2) powered by the Advanced Battle Management
System (ABMS). Charged by the Secretary of Defense with leading the
concept development for JADC2, the Department of the Air Force is
building ABMS to create decision superiority by delivering relevant
information and capabilities to warfighters and operators at all
echelons. ABMS will integrate today's and tomorrow's sensors; develop
applications embedded with artificial intelligence, sophisticated
algorithms, and multi-layered protections to make sense of massive
amounts of trusted data; link space capabilities with weapons systems
and personnel across all domains; and design pods, platforms, pathways,
procedures, and policies that connect and integrate the warfighter
better and faster than in any time in our history.
Operationally optimized ABMS/JADC2 is one of the Secretary of the
Air Force's Operational Imperatives (OIs) and is a foundational
capability in many other OIs. The ABMS acquisition effort will pursue
two interconnected investment paths: enduring digital infrastructure
investments and Capability Release packages, which leverage those
enduring investments but focus on closing kill-chains and delivering
immediate operational capability. The Department of the Air Force (DAF)
Rapid Capabilities Office (RCO) is working in conjunction with the
wider acquisition community to ensure Air Force and Space Force systems
have seamless interoperability and compatibility to meet the JADC2
operational requirements. The six ABMS capabilities required to connect
the warfighter are secure processing, connectivity, data management,
applications, sensor integration, and effects integration.
Driven by requirements approved by the Chief of Staff of the United
States Air Force and the Chief of Space Operations, Capability Release
#1 (CR #1) (Airborne Edge Node) connects select tactical assets and C2
functions to the transport layer and the ABMS digital infrastructure at
the tactical edge, enhancing situational awareness and decision making
at the tactical, operational, and strategic levels.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify. We look forward to
working with this Subcommittee to ensure the Department of the Air
Force maintains sufficient military advantage to secure our vital
national interests and support our allies and partners in fiscal year
2023 and beyond.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you. At this time, I would like to
recognize the Ranking Member for his opening statement.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR TOM COTTON
Senator Cotton. Thank you. Pardon my tardiness. Gentlemen,
welcome back. Thank you for being here this afternoon and for
your many years of distinguished service. First, I want to
commend you for taking bold steps to modernize the Air Force as
best as you can with what I think is an inadequate budget.
I want to add my voice to the many voices saying that the
Administration is still underfunding our military in a
dangerous global environment. I also appreciate that you are
focusing on China as the most serious threat we face in the
long term. There are a lot of big moving pieces in this budget.
As I have said before, I want to give you the opportunity,
as a force to divest the old and outdated aircraft and invest
and procure what we need in terms of new and modern aircraft
and weapon systems. But I also want to make sure your plan
ensures that we have the necessary ability to maintain air
superiority in the short term, the next 5 to 7 years. We can't
trade security now, in the future either.
Also, I would like to hear you address your concerns from
critics that these big divestments and procurement moves the
Air Force wants to make, that there is not enough
interoperability between new capabilities and old technology
that the joint force still needs. I hope these critics are
wrong, and I think you have good answers to them, and I look
forward to hearing what you have to say on this topic and other
topics. Thank you.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you, Senator Cotton. I now
recognize myself for opening round of questions for five
minutes. The fiscal year 2023 budget request would retire
roughly half of the E-3 airborne warning control systems, AWACS
aircraft, or 15 of 31 aircraft in the fleet.
The Air Force just announced its intent to award a sole
source contract to Boeing to buy an aircraft called the E-7
Wedgetail to replace some of the E-3 fleet. Air Force
officials, including Secretary Kendall, indicate that we could
get the first aircraft for testing by 2027.
If that is the case, it would be several years before there
would be any substantial number of Wedgetail aircraft available
to support the combatant commanders.
My first question is for each of you. Why do you believe we
can afford to cut the AWACS force structure and wait on a
replacement for the E-3 aircraft for more than 5 years?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Senator Duckworth, thank you for
the question. I will start out and then I certainly want to let
General Richardson talk about the E-7 development as well. When
you look at the E-3 fleet right now, and you talk about taking
15 to 31 airplanes away, and we are concerned with the gap.
Unfortunately, right now with the condition of the E-3
fleet, ;we have a gap right now. The E-3 has got
maintainability issues as well as capability issues, and the
capability, we can talk a little more in a classified session,
certainly, but there are things that the E-3 cannot do that we
need it to do right now when you look at peer threats, peer
competition.
On the maintainability side, we struggle to keep roughly
half that fleet airborne. The airplane was delivered in the
1970s. It is a 707 with aging engines on it. Significant
maintainability challenges with that airframe.
By divesting the 15 airplanes, we took the entirety of the
savings and reinvested it into the E-7 program so we can get
the E-7 as quickly as possible. We recognize that this is a
gap, but unfortunately the gap exists right now with the
current condition of that fleet.
Lieutenant General Richardson. Madam Chair, what I would
add on to that without repeating it is, on the acquisition
side, what we are trying to do is move out very swiftly to
address this effectively emergency situation that we have got.
We moved very quickly to do the market research to see
which is part of our standard process. We are now working
towards the strategy build process with Honorable Hunter, the
acquisition executive.
We are really pushing hard to make sure that we get on
contract just the first part of the year. We want to make sure
that we do that smartly. We don't want to just quickly rush too
fast there, so we will go through a series of two or three
solicitations with Boeing to make sure we get the requirement
correct.
We are going to try to make sure that we minimize, only to
things that are mandated, any changes to the actual E-7 that
has already been developed. We are hoping that we can go as
fast as we can to try to close that gap.
Right now, the only things that we are doing would be
mandating things like M-Code GPS, adding that on for example--
as one example, and a couple other things like cybersecurity
cleanup.
For the most part, this is a, just a nondevelopmental
effort on top of a obviously a commercial derivative aircraft
over.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you. So are you saying that the
cost savings that General Nahom mentioned--by decreasing the
number of E-3s, you are going to take that cost savings and put
it towards expediting the acquisition of the replacement
aircraft, in this case probably the E-7? Is that going to
accelerate that timeline so that we get it before 2027? Or are
you saying that doing this will only get us to 2027--we are
going to have that gap regardless.
Lieutenant General Richardson. Doing this gets us to 2027,
Senator. There is a couple of year lead time on the green
aircraft side and there is a couple year lead time on the
mission equipment, specifically the radar that is part of the
system.
Then we will go into a test period. The 2023 budget request
asks for two prototype aircraft, and the first one of those
would be the one that would be delivered in 2027. They will
start flowing after that.
Senator Duckworth. That is a separate line from--you are
saying that if you cut the E-3, so the cost savings from that,
you are going to put towards expediting the E-7s?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Well, ma'am, I would say when we
worked this program for our budget request. The divestment of
the E3s went into getting this program started. We are going as
quickly as we can. That money was in confined resources, we
needed that money to get this E-7 program started, and that was
part of the resources required for the E-7 itself.
Senator Duckworth. Is there any other potential for
shortening the timeline mentioned by Secretary Kendall, the
2027 timeline, in a responsible fashion?
Lieutenant General Richardson. I think there is really two
ways to do that, Senator. We have looked at options of maybe
instead of starting out with two prototype aircraft for test,
if we had a third, it would speed things along.
We don't think it is smart to rush to get on contracts, so
we are not going to swiftly move to get on contract. We want to
make sure that with our Boeing partner that we get that
contract, the terms of that contract correct so that we don't
get off on the wrong foot.
Once we get started, there is an option there, there is an
opportunity to maybe have a third aircraft at the beginning of
the effort. But the real way that I think we can quickly
replace the E-3 capability is by procuring more--once we are
done with that certification work, is procuring at a faster
rate in the backside of it, over.
Lieutenant General Nahom. Ma'am, if I could add too. Once
we get the aircraft, going operational as quickly as possible.
That we can actually work some ahead of time because our
Australian partners fly this aircraft and they have already
offered to help us.
We can get crews trained ahead of time, both maintainers
and pilots and air battle managers, so when the airplanes are
delivered, we can go operationally very quickly, and we have
not been able to do that before.
Senator Duckworth. So that gap is going to stay there,
though, is what you are seeing, from the E-3 to the E-7s? I am
just deeply concerned that we have got a gap there that we have
not figure out how to mitigate yet.
Lieutenant General Nahom. Yes, ma'am.
Lieutenant General Guastella. Yes, ma'am. Just to
reiterate, General Nahom's point, the aircraft is exhausted. It
has been deployed continuously which much of the Air Force's
fleet is in that condition. It is not maintainable out there in
the field, and it has a significant capability gaps, so those
two together have put us in the situation.
The one thing that reducing the fleet size will allow us to
do will be to invest in the remaining fleet, get that fleet as
healthy as we can, and then employ things such as dynamic force
deployments, which essentially deploy the AWACS in healthy
packages to locations that need it just long enough to get
missions done and the return them back and restore their
health, so that episodic shorter duration employment, dynamic
force employment is our new construct. That is one of the ways
to global force management that we will try to mitigate through
this gap.
Senator Duckworth. Okay. Thank you. Senator Cotton.
Senator Cotton. Thank you. I didn't mind you going a few
minutes over because I share those concerns as well. I will
cross that question off my question list, but just know that I
share the Chairwoman's concerns as well. General Nahom, I go to
another question on my list here.
The Navy has requested to divest 25 of its Growlers, which
I think highlights a capability gap in the Air Force that has
existed since the retirement of the EF-111s in the mid 1990s.
What is the Air Force plan for stand in electronic attack?
Lieutenant General Nahom. [Unaudible.]
Senator Cotton. Sure.
Lieutenant General Guastella. Sir, if I could and obviously
respectful of the room that we are in here, all the services
absolutely support each other. This is a case where the Growler
is a critical element of the joint force, and it supports all
the other services.
Electronic attack, electronic warfare, electronic ESM
[Enterprise Security Management] mission is something that is
critical to the joint force, and it is a global force managed
asset, as are many of the aircraft in the Air Force's
inventory. From our perspective, it is a critical aspect of the
force.
Senator Cotton. Has the Air Force considered developing its
own organic platforms for stand in electronic attacks?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Sir, we have not.
Senator Cotton. Okay.
Lieutenant General Nahom. We rely on our joint partners for
that capability, sir.
Senator Cotton. I mean, so it is a key enabler for our low
observable aircraft, right?
Lieutenant General Guastella. Sir, it is a key enabler for
the success of the joint air campaign because it is a full team
effort, whether it is fourth generation or fifth generation
team together with electronic attack, to create a strike
capability or air superiority. All of it weaves together and it
is a critical piece of that----
Senator Cotton. Do you do you have concerns about the Navy
divesting these aircraft and what it means for the Air Force?
Lieutenant General Guastella. Sir, I would say it is a
critical capability for the joint force that the joint force
has to have.
Senator Cotton. Let me go to another question that I may
not get answers in this setting for.
[Laughter.]
Senator Cotton. The B-21. I just want--at a very high
level, I know that we can have a classified briefing at another
time. General Nahom, can you give us an update on the status of
the B-21? Is it on schedule and on budget?
Lieutenant General Nahom. It is on schedule, on budget,
sir. This is the second time I am passing, but I got my
acquisition professional right here to my left. Probably give
you much better, better details on that.
Senator Cotton. Okay. General Richardson.
Lieutenant General Richardson. Senator, it is on schedule
and on budget and has been. So we are--not a lot we can say
about it here other than there are six articles on build, as
you have probably seen, but yes, sir, it is on schedule and
budget.
Senator Cotton. Okay. What, if anything, do you need from
Congress to make sure you maintain that on schedule, on budget
status with this aircraft?
Lieutenant General Nahom. From the programmer side, just
the steady investment. I think we have had that. I think that
is one of the Pentagon successes, this program, because we have
had steady investor in this program. We have been well
resourced, which has kept it on track.
Lieutenant General Richardson. What I would add to that is
just keep doing what you are doing. I think we are a great team
on this and so there is a lot of interest in it in Congress.
The only warning that I would give is we got to just know
that it is a development program and we have got a lot of work
ahead of us. The program is going really, really well. There is
a lot of work to go.
I don't know what bumps might come, but there will be bumps
along the road, as we finish out the program and we just have
to work through them.
Just the patience there to continue working with us as we
work through whatever bumps are there. To be clear, I don't
know of any, through all my years of experience, most programs
worth doing have bumps along the road.
Senator Cotton. Okay. I guess I have been here long enough
now that I can say I have followed this program since its
infancy. While the department, both yours and the big
department, take sometimes justified criticism about programs
that are overbudget and overdue, I think this program has been
fairly exquisitely managed for a very key capability for many
decades to come.
Gentlemen, I hope I can ask you another question. If you
kick it to another one of these Generals this time, I am going
to say you should be a Senator at a press conference in the
middle of the controversy who looks to his other Senators to
answer hard questions. I have heard some rumors that a leading
contributor to the F-35's lagging mission capable rate is a
shortage of spare engines. Is that correct?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Sir, we are working through some
engine challenges. We have made some strides in the past few
months, but it is a challenge based on the nature of that motor
and the way we operate it, and we have seen some challenges.
Senator Cotton. So let me ask--an implication of that
answer is that if Congress were to increase the number of F-35s
procured in fiscal year 2023 beyond the number on your unfunded
party list, would it cause a similar problem or exacerbate the
problem we already have?
Lieutenant General Nahom. I don't necessarily think it
would exacerbate the problem, sir, but you will notice that
last year we did in 2022, we did put in for extra motors and
extra parts for motors because of this phenomenon. We are
starting to see some improvements based on that.
I think we will continue to work it. But more F-35s are not
necessarily going to exasperate that right now, especially as
the newer F-35s come off the line with the motor.
Senator Cotton. Whether it is off of your unfunded priority
list or even above the number on your unfunded priority list?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Sir, it wouldn't exacerbate the
problem. Yes, sir.
Senator Cotton. Okay. Thank you.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you. Senator Tillis.
Senator Tillis. Thank you, Madam Chair. Gentlemen, thank
you for being here and for your service. Maybe I will start on
the F-35. Can you talk a little bit about the importance of the
adaptive engine transition program and why do you think it is
important for the increasing demands put on this platform?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Sir, and I will be careful here
about talking about F-35 modernization, it is unclassified
environment, but it is very critical that we modernize the F-35
in the Block 4, because when we first got in this game with the
F-35, 20 something years ago, the threat was different.
The current airplane with the motor and the power demand on
that motor was just different. Now, as we improve the
capabilities, there is going to be increased power needed from
the motor. So, looking at the future of advanced power on the
F-35 is critical.
Senator Tillis. How is the Air Force with respect to
compliance on the F-35 for the requirement modernization,
requirements on the F-35? Are you tracking towards compliance
on the requirements?
Lieutenant General Nahom. We are tracking towards
compliance--and do you have anything specific on that, but----
Lieutenant General Richardson. Senator, can you be more
specific? When you say compliance, what are you referring to,
sir?
Senator Tillis. Just the specific requirements that have
been set forth by Congress? Are all your programs tracking to
achieving those requirements?
Lieutenant General Richardson. As far as I know, Senator, I
think the F-35 reports that are mandated, we are working
towards those, whether that is, well, the two reports that are
outstanding right now. The warfighter requirements, we are
certainly working towards--very hard towards those. We are
behind where we should be. As far as I know, Senator, we are.
Senator Tillis. Okay. I want to get to the KC-10 and the
KC-46. I am looking forward to the KC-46 being able to achieve
all of its mission requirements. Seymour Johnson is going to be
a main base for KC-46s, so I want its health and hygiene to be
great as quickly as possible.
When you are talking about our refueling requirements now
and the retirement strategy for the KC-10, do we have any
current requirements, refueling capacity that is in the yellow
or red? Are we able to achieve our mission requirements?
Lieutenant General Guastella. Sir, our tanker fleet is in
constant global demand, and we manage that demand much as we do
with the AWACS, with dynamically allocating resources where
they need to be. I think the Air Force has a good plan to
manage the demand as we recapitalize to the much needed KC-46.
Senator Tillis. Okay. But in your opinion, the current
retirement schedule for the KC-10 is not in any way impeding
your ability to meet minimum requirements?
Lieutenant General Nahom. No, sir. I think the KC-10
retirement has to continue on. One of the most important things
we do in the coming years is we have to have a continuous recap
of our tanker fleet, and keeping the KC-46 on track is
important. The KC-10, as incredible as that platform is, is
expensive to maintain.
Getting to that, the modern KC-46 capability as quickly as
possible and keeping it on track and then continuing--after the
first contract, when we get into KC-Y, continuing tanker
recapitalization because unfortunately our KC-135, as amazing
as they are, the newest one is a 1962 model, and we have to
continue to recap that fleet.
Senator Tillis. The reduction in the F-35s in favor of the
Block 4, the decision to do that, was it at all influenced by
the fact that you ran out of money, or would you have done it
even if you had money on account?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Well, sir, I would say in our
fighter fleet--if you look at our investment in fiscal year
2023, in our fighter fleet, we increased our investment,
overall in the fighter portfolio by over $1 billion. There
certainly was a balance, and no company, no organization has
unlimited resources. The Air Force is no different in that.
When you look at where we put our money in the fighter
portfolio, whether it was a next generation or dominant
systems, the F-22 upgrades F-35 Block 4, the F-15EX, the fourth
generation modifications to the F-16s, and the F-15Es that are
in North Carolina, these are very critical things to make sure
that we fund it as well.
In a perfect world, would we get to 72 fighters a year?
Absolutely. But we have to, in given resources, we have to
strike a balance because we need that capability for that high
end threat, as well as we need that capacity for what the
combat commanders are demanding today.
Senator Tillis. Last question I had in response to the
update on the bomber program was that, keep doing what you are
doing, General Richardson, I think that is what you said. Would
that include a CR [continuing resolution], is there any
disruption in terms of future funding or anticipated future
funding if we fail to get through regular order appropriations
and just put forth the CR?
Lieutenant General Richardson. Senator, I think the answer
depends on how long the CR proceeds. For the development
program itself, we could go a pretty good distance without a CR
concern so as long as it is not--it turns into a full year, I
think we would be able to work through most of it.
If it drags out, we would obviously work with you to let
you know the hard dates for production kinds of awards that
would potentially be more impacted than the development effort.
Senator Tillis. Well, just in closing, Madam Chair, one
thing that, I mentioned this in a hearing last week, one thing
that I would urge you to do, if it is a short term CR, I get
it. If it is a series of CRs, it is going to have some impact.
So that if that did occur, take note, so the next time we
come in here and flog you for having a program behind, you can
respectfully submit that some of that was a disruption in
future funding streams and make no apology for that.
We need to understand the consequences when we fail to
actually provide the resources that, in your opinion, are
required to keep it on budget and on track. Thank you, Madam
Chair.
Senator Duckworth. Senator Hawley.
Senator Hawley. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thanks to all of
you for being here. General Nahom, General Guastella, would you
agree with me that PACAF [Pacific Air Forces] is critical to
project air power in our facing theater in INDOPACOM?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Yes, sir.
Senator Hawley. I would think so as well. When I asked
Secretary Kendall recently whether the fiscal year 2023 budget
meets all of PACAF's posture requirements, he said he didn't
know. So maybe you can tell me. Can you confirm that all of the
posture requirements identified either by PACAF or for PACAF in
the 2023 budget cycle are funded in this year's request?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Sir, I guess there is a--there is
certainly, there is always posture concerns and certainly with
some of the aircraft we are replacing, if you look at what we
are doing at again with the F-15Cs. Certainly with the E-3, we
just mentioned, there is certainly concern as we recapitalize
airplanes.
I am not aware of any budgeting concerns with the posture
requirements other than replacing aging airplanes, is my number
one concern because we do have a lot of aging airplanes in the
Pacific, not just F-15Cs, the Kadena, but the A-10s sitting in
Korea, as well as some F-16s in the Western Pacific as well.
They will be a significant concern in the coming years as we
recapitalize our fleets.
Senator Hawley. So, are you telling me that you think that
meeting those challenges, that that is not sufficiently funded
in this budget of the fiscal year 2023?
Lieutenant General Nahom. What I would say is, we have
talked for many years about getting 72 fighters a year. That
number, as we looked at our fleets and we looked at airplanes
that are retiring, and over the next about 10 years, all the
legacy airplanes will be out of the Air Force, and that is your
F-15Cs, your older F-15Es, your pre-Block, your older F-16s,
your older F-22s, certainly your A-10s.
That is a significant number of airplanes, and if we don't
purchase airplanes to replace those, then we either get smaller
as a fighter force or we will have some locations that will
have not as many airplanes as we would need.
That is a concern because that is why our Chief has said
continuously and we have been very consistent over the last
several cycles that the 72 fighters a year allows us to
recapitalize the fighter fleet and keep the capacity where we
have it now.
Senator Hawley. So what do we need to do in the fiscal year
2023 budget to address these concerns?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Sir, I could say with the
fighters, we have paid a lot of attention to the fighter
fleets. We have increased the funding, but we did, in given
resources, have to maintain a balance between the capacity that
we would like and ascertain the capabilities that we need for a
China threat.
Senator Hawley. Do you have anything to do add to that,
General Guastella?
Lieutenant General Guastella. Sir, I and General Nahom,
correct me if I'm wrong, in our plan, there is a net increase
to PACAF's posture over time. One thing we are doing real
time--because the National Defense Strategy has us clearly
focused on the threats in that region and our services is
definitely moving in that direction.
We are using some outstanding techniques and some different
applications of air power, such as dynamic force deployment, to
episodically appear and operate air power out of significantly
different locations across the region. That has a deterrent
value, and we are also asking for support and agile combat
employment.
That is a logistical element to that for prepositioning and
robusting locations across the theater to make air power
usable, even though if it is retained in the United States, it
can rapidly deploy anywhere in the world. We think those
factors together actually respond very well to PACAF's posture
needs.
Senator Hawley. Okay. Okay. Fair enough. While I have you,
General Guastella, let me ask you about the Guam cluster. That
is going to play an important role, obviously, in future air
operations in the Pacific. Can you talk about how the request
supports development of operational locations or other
activities in the Guam cluster?
Lieutenant General Guastella. Sir, I don't know if I can
answer that specifically. Given the room, I will say that
obviously Guam and the cluster there is a critical capability
for us. It is also a main operating area that we will always
want to robust and ensure it is viable in various threat
levels.
In addition to that, we need other operating locations, and
that is something I have talked about with Agile combat
employment. It is a combination of robusting the Guam cluster
as well as investments in locations across some of the Pacific
area.
Senator Hawley. Would you feel more comfortable responding
in a different environment? I mean, would that be preferable?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Yes, sir. We will probably get
some specifics----
Senator Hawley. We will follow up with you on it.
Lieutenant General Nahom. Yes, sir.
Senator Hawley. I will follow up with you on that. Let me
ask you here just in the few seconds I have remaining, General
Nahom back to you. QUICKSINK, can you talk about how that will
contribute to the Air Force's ability to deny a Chinese
invasion of Taiwan, or is it intended for other scenarios?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Sir, was that term----
Senator Hawley. QUICKSINK. Sir, this is the new joint
direct attack munition that the Air Force recently
demonstrated.
Lieutenant General Nahom. Sir, I would have to take it off
the record and get back to you.
Senator Cotton. Okay, that is fine. I see my time has
expired. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you. Senator Rosen.
Senator Rosen. Well, thank you, Chair Duckworth, Ranking
Member Cotton. Today's hearing is so important because Nevada
is the proud home to Creech, Nellis, and Nevada Air National
Guard, so we got a lot of questions for you today about Air
Force modernization. I just really want to thank you for your
service.
I do want to talk about C-130J recapitalization, as I
highlighted to Secretary Kendall and General Brown when they
testified before this Committee earlier this month, the Nevada
Air National Guard's 152nd Airlift Wing in Reno, it flies its
legacy C-130s in some of the hottest temperatures, highest
elevations, and most challenging mountainous environments of
any C-130 unit in the Nation.
Integral to their mission is flying the maps, a modular
airborne firefighting system. Of course, we know what is
happening in the West with wildfires. So upgrading the Nevada
Air National Guard C-130H fleet with C-130Js would have a
substantial impact on their readiness and on their firefighting
capabilities in Nevada and the Western United States, where
every year the wildfires keep getting worse and worse, more
devastating.
With this in mind and at my urging, Air Force leadership at
the past 2 years posture hearing has committed to considering
making the maps mission part of the Air Force basing criteria
for the C-130J.
General Nahom, can you update the committee as to where you
are in that process? Can I get a commitment that the 152nd
Airlift Wing in Reno will be seriously considered for an
upgrade given its need, mission, and readiness to host the C-
130J?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Well, thank you, Senator, for the
question. We do have 20 C-130s that were part of the 2022
appropriation, 16 to the Guard, 4 to the Reserves, and over the
next year we will be working through our basing process to
place this aircraft. The spray and maps will be part of that
process, those specific requirements, and that will certainly
be addressed as part of the process, ma'am.
Senator Rosen. Thank you. I also want to follow up with
you, General, that about adversary air training. Of course, I
was just at Nellis Air Force Base last week and the contractor
providing adversary air training at Nellis was recently
notified by Air Combatant Command that ACC does not intend to
continue the contract, which expires next month.
ACC intends to operate adversary air support completely
organically. In written responses to my staff, the Air Force
states that it will use Nellis' F-16s, and I am going to quote
you here, ``while ACC built an F-35 aggressor capability, but
timing of this capability and growth is yet to be determined.''
I am really concerned by these responses and the capability
gap that is going to exist until the Air Force can completely
compensate for the adversary air training currently being
performed today at some future unspecified date.
General Nahom, given the Air Force does not currently have
the capability to carry out sole adversary air missions without
reducing training capacity, why has ACC taken this past path
without the aircraft or even the pilots, particularly when the
Air Force has warned for years of a growing pilot shortage?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Senator, thanks again for the
question. On the adversary air piece, with the contract at air,
and these companies do wonderful work for the Air Force,
especially at our formal training units or FTUs, where we train
basic fighter pilots how to fly, the contracts are very, very
effective. What we are finding now, though, is these contracts
aren't very effective at Nellis in that high end training
environment at the Nellis----
Senator Rosen. How are you going to bridge the gap,
General?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Well, what they provide is not
giving us what we need. What we are using is not only the--our
adversary, our RADR professionals there in the 64th Aggressor
Squadron there at Nellis. We also augment that regularly with
F-35s, other aircraft that regularly play RADR.
We have ways to augment the RADR. Adversary air is
something we have to be attuned to, especially as we get to
fifth generation. The interesting thing is 5, 6 years ago, we
wouldn't be talking about F-35s being adversary air because our
adversaries didn't fly fifth generation airplanes.
Well, the Chinese do now. So that way, as the China threat
has stepped up, we have to step up our replication. What the
contractor is providing there at Nellis for that high end piece
that we get at the NTTR [Nellis Test and Training Range], and
only--the only place, the NTTR and the JPARC [Joint Pacific and
Alaska Range Complex] in Alaska, the only two places you get
that high end training anywhere in the world, that contract,
what they are providing is not meeting what we need.
Senator Rosen. Well, I am still going to be concerned.
Sixty-three percent of aggressor flying hours, their
contractors are responsible for, that is a very large gap. I
know I only have 9 seconds left so if somebody wants to add or
we will just take it from the record.
Lieutenant General Guastella. I could just add one thing,
Senator, and that is, while the Nellis training range is a
national treasure, it is very important that we maintain that
high end capability, there is also a transition that our
service is making to more and more virtual training.
It is critical because a lot of the things that cannot be
replicated in real--flying hours are critical, real flying is
critical, adversary air is critical, but investment, which our
program has done, to invest in the virtual and the simulation
environment is also something that we do to ensure our aircrews
maintain that edge.
Senator Rosen. I appreciate it. All these are years away,
however, and the threats are now. Thank you, gentlemen. Thank
you, Madam Chair.
Senator Duckworth. Senator Peters.
Senator Peters. Thank you, Madam Chair. General Nahom, when
speaking with Air Force magazine on April 13th of this year,
you stated that the Air Force needs to buy 72 new fighters a
year in order to recapitalize a fighter force that can win and
fight against peer threats such as China.
Yet the fiscal year 2023 Air Force budget only calls for
33, F-35s and 24, F-15EXs to be purchased. The question for you
is, do you stand by your comment and your assertion that we
need 62 fighter squadrons and a procurement rate of 72 advanced
fighters per year to meet that goal? If so, why is that not in
the request?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Sir, I certainly stand by 72
fighters here, and as I said previously, we have increased our
investment in the fighter portfolio this year, over $1 billion
from last year. But we certainly have to strike a balance
because we do need the capacity because of what the combatant
commanders are asking our airmen to do worldwide every day.
But at the same time, we have to make sure we are investing
in the capabilities that are needed for an ever increasing peer
threat, so that that balance was important as we prepared our
budget request.
Certainly, I do stand by the 72 fighters a year because we
have an aging fighter force. Right now, the Air Force fighter
force is in excess of 29 years fleet average. There is no other
relevant Air Force in the world that has that old of a fleet.
We have got to refresh these aircraft.
Senator Peters. We are sort of falling short in that goal
that you set this year. That means next year we are in the hole
and that could continue to get deeper and deeper. Are you
concerned about that? How should we be thinking about this?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Sir, absolutely. We are
absolutely concerned by--we do have some aging platforms. You
are watching us divest the F-15Cs now. The airplanes, many of
them, majority of them are flying past their intended service
life.
That is why you are seeing us try to get to the F-15EXs and
so we can get these aircraft to these locations as quickly as
possible, so we can offer what the combatant commanders need
today.
But at the same time, sir, we have to maintain these
investments for the future, whether it is the JADM missile,
next generation air dominance system, F-22 upgrades, F-35 Block
4. We have to balance these investments.
Senator Peters. General Richardson, certainly we always
want to be focused on ensuring that our aircraft maintain both
the tactical and technical edge. But clearly we can't just be
investing in the most expensive platforms.
Perhaps related to the reason we have a smaller number of
some of these fighter aircraft is because of their expense and
it makes it difficult to balance all of the various objectives
that you have to achieve, and so we just can't be investing in
them.
Secretary Kendall has mentioned the potential of
complementary uncrewed aircraft as a solution to increase both
the quantity and the capability at a lower cost than the crewed
aircraft.
So my question to you, General Richardson, do you envision
this concept exclusively with fighters or are uncrewed
platforms also envisioned for a variety of other functions that
the Air Force needs?
Lieutenant General Richardson. Thank you, Senator, for the
question. When Secretary Kendall describes this as part of his
operational imperatives, he is really looking at sort of two
different concepts. One would be as part of a fighter team and
then also with the actual B-21, and so it kind of plays both
ways.
We are looking at both of those constructs now, and I
should also add, when he is talking about fighters, he is not
just talking about the NGAD family systems, he is also talking
about F-35.
Senator Peters. Okay. General Nahom, every combat commander
I have spoken with praises the State partnership program
because of the relationships and the interoperability that it
builds with partners around the globe.
A few weeks ago, NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization]
highlighted the nearly 30 year partnership between the Michigan
Air National Guard and the Latvian military, specifically the
vital joint terminal attack control training that Latvian
troops received at Camp Grayling in my home State of Michigan.
Clearly, this type of training builds competence, capacity, and
at a moment that is really needed given Latvia's close
proximity to Russia.
My question for you is, how can the Air Force ensure that
the National Guard bases are outfitted with relevant platforms
and capabilities to support our warfighting functions that
actually maximize the partner force integration that we are
trying to achieve?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Thank you, Senator, for the
question. I absolutely agree. The place that I have been in the
Pacific, in the Middle East, I watched these State
partnerships, unbelievable force multiplier. I couldn't agree
more.
As we look at the future of our fleet and the future of the
Air Force and as we bring our new capabilities, we are
certainly going to continue to balance the Guard, Reserve and
Active, because we get benefits from both sides. The Reserve
component, and the Active component.
It is important that we strike the right balance moving
forward. Our Air Force may be a different size, maybe a
different form in the coming years, but we must maintain the
right balance between Active Reserve component and continue to
take advantage of these State partnerships.
Senator Peters. Right. Thank you, General. Thank you, Madam
Chair.
Senator Duckworth. Senator Kelly. After that, if no other
Senators arrive, we will do a second round of questions.
Senator Kelly.
Senator Kelly. Thank you, Madam Chair. General Nahom, as
the military continues to invest in new and more sophisticated
tactical airplanes, I am thinking continued investment in the
F-35 and NGAD beyond that, investments in infrastructure
necessary to support proper training will have to grow as well.
In Arizona, the military and community leaders that I have
spoken to are actively trying to come up with workable
solutions to the issue of limited training airspace. What I am
getting at is as we have increased speeds of airplanes and
range of air to air missile systems, we need bigger ranges.
Would you agree that the range space is critical to the Air
Force's modernization goals and efforts?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Yes, Senator. Absolutely. What
Arizona offers, the Barry Goldwater Range complex, the weather
we have down there, the bases is absolutely critical to our
training as an Air Force.
Senator Kelly. Thinking ahead with the--as the stick gets
bigger here and it will, so because of that, last year I
authored report language in the Fiscal Year 2022 NDAA that
urged the Secretary of Defense to consult with the Secretary of
State and Mexico on the possibility of negotiating with Mexico
to establish some shared use agreements for airspace near the
United States-Mexico border.
This is intended to help meet the increasing demand for
airspace, as I mentioned, and as you mentioned, at the Barry
Goldwater Range. The analysis required by the NDAA was due to
Congress in March.
Have you been involved in providing input to Secretary
Austin, and do you have an update on when this report will be
delivered to the Committee?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Senator, I don't have an update
and we have not been involved in that. We did hear about the
process moving forward, but we have not any updates or been
involved along the way, sir.
Senator Kelly. Could you get me an update?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Yes, sir.
Senator Kelly. All right. Thank you. General Richardson, so
a couple of weeks ago, I asked Secretary Kendall about the
value of our electronic warfare capability, specifically
jamming capability, and our ability to suppress enemy air
defenses with electronic warfare capabilities of our systems.
As you know, this is one way that helps us achieve and maintain
air superiority.
Specifically what I was referring to is the Compass Call
program, which was on pace to replace 14 EC-130s with 10
Compass Call EC-37B aircraft. It was on pace until fiscal year,
the 2023 budget request was submitted to Congress, and I am
concerned with the Air Force's decision to delay the EC-37B
purchases and place the remaining four airplanes on the
unfunded priorities list rather than requesting funding for
them.
General, what would be the operational impact, and maybe
this question is for anybody, but particularly given the
sophisticated integrated air defense systems that is being
fielded by China, if we don't have the additional funding for
these EC-37Bs.
Lieutenant General Richardson. Senator, I will just give
you a very short update and then I will pivot to General Nahom
and General Guastella. The good news, we have got six of them
on contract. The first two have actually completed their
supplemental type cert work and are now at L3 under mod.
We are looking pretty good to start--to deliver the first
one in the first quarter of fiscal year 2023 to start the
testing. That is really going well. The other thing I would
mention about the capability, before I ask General Nahom to
answer the second, the question you asked about the four, the
other four aircraft is, that is also a, I would say a marquee
program for us for this new digital acquisition method.
We are making sure that we build them so that they are very
rapidly reprogrammable. Once we do get those aircraft, that we
can quickly software change them out, so to speak, without
years of time, and so I will ask General Nahom to answer your
direct question.
Lieutenant General Nahom. Yes, sir. We do want to get to a
fleet of ten, and six is too small. If you take a couple away
for training, maybe one or two away for maintenance, you are
not left with a lot for operational use. There is a lot of use
for those airplanes right now, the EC-130 certainly.
We know the EC-37 will be in high demand as well. So we,
when you look at the balances we made on this year's POM
[Program Objective Memorandum] in this year's budget
submission, we had limited resources, and this is one of those
places we just could not get to the whole 10 aircraft.
That is why the Chief did put it on his unfunded priorities
list. But we do see the need for a fleet of 10 so we can train,
we can fix, and we can employ all at the same time. I would be
concerned with a fleet of only six airplanes, sir.
Senator Kelly. Okay. Well, thank you. Thank you, General.
Lieutenant General Richardson. I would just add on and just
say, for the balance of the four, we are keeping a sharp eye on
the used Gulfstream 550. There are some available, and we are
also looking at when the Rolls Royce engine line shuts down for
new orders in December. So all that stuff is part of this mix.
We are watching it closely.
Senator Kelly. The EC-37B uses these Rolls Royce engines?
Lieutenant General Richardson. Yes, sir. So we are keeping
an eye on that. That particular engine stops taking new orders,
new engine orders in December. Gulfstream already stopped
taking new Gulfstream 550 orders. Thankfully, there is a pretty
healthy use market, so we can get some very lower aircraft to
finish those last four. We will do the same thing with the
engines if we need to.
Senator Kelly. Do you plan on getting some spares?
Lieutenant General Richardson. Yes, sir.
Senator Kelly. For the 10 aircraft?
Lieutenant General Richardson. Yes, sir. Absolutely.
Senator Kelly. All right. Well, I am willing to work with
you to make sure we get the additional four airplanes. Thank
you.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you. We will now begin a second
round of questions. I recognize myself for five minutes. I
mentioned in my opening statement concerns about the Air Force
plan to truncate the HH-60 Whiskey program after fiscal year
2023.
That would leave the Air Force roughly 40 percent short of
its original plan to modernize the combat search and rescue
fleet of aircraft. General Nahom or General Guastella, why do
you believe that truncating the HH-60 Whiskey helicopter
program will be an acceptable risk, and how will a much smaller
combat search and rescue force structure affect the Air Force's
ability to conduct these operations in future conflicts?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Ma'am, I will start out and I
will pass the second half off to General Guastella. When you
look at the fleet, these were decisions we made in given
resources. First of all, with the 75 helicopters, we intend to
ensure that we get those to the Guard and Reserve in full
complement.
They do a lot of things in the Reserve. Our Reserves, for
example, do the--on the Space Coast, do the recoveries for
manned spaceflight as well as many of our guardsmen do a lot of
the decommissions around the country. As we look at rescue in
the future, that we have to take a look at what rescue is going
to look like in a contested environment, it is likely not to be
in a Black Hawk type helicopter.
As we outfit this fleet, we also have to make sure that we
don't spend too much resource on this capability, and then not
have the resources to invest in what rescue is going to look
like in a contested environment, and we are still doing the
wargaming and the analysis to determine what that is.
Lieutenant General Guastella. Ma'am, not too much else to
ask--I mean, the personal recovery and combat search and rescue
absolutely is an American mission that we have to do, and we
are maintaining investment in our Guardian Angels, part of the
team, as well as our HC-130s. But like General Nahom said, the
survivability of the asset has to be, and the threat that it is
going to enter into, has to be there.
I think it is important that we maintain the right size
fleet as we look for other technologies and other ways to
ensure we can still provide PR [purchase request] in face of
the NDS level threats.
Senator Duckworth. Okay. I just feel like we are, again,
with this decision creating a gap, but we don't have anything
to fill in the gap. Have you looked at the V-22 Osprey? I mean,
it is already in the inventory.
Is that something that could have longer range but also
perform this mission? You are not sort of addressing the
mitigating of the risk of losing--taking some of these
aircraft--this asset offline.
Lieutenant General Nahom. Ma'am, we obviously do fly the
Osprey with our Air Force Special Ops and actually with--when
we set up a personal recovery task force, the PR task force,
they take on a whole shape of a number of aircraft.
Very often we put our Guardian Angels in Army Chinooks or
AFSOC, CV-22s, or Army Guard Black Hawks. A number of platforms
that our rescue professionals fly out of, so we do have
personnel recovery forces moving forward, not just the HH-60
Whiskeys, but our, certainly are CV-22s, and then our
supporting, our HC-130 refuelers, and then the Guardian Angels.
We do have to take a look at what this is going to look
like in contested environments, while we maintain some
resemblance of a fleet moving forward, and that work is ongoing
right now, ma'am.
Senator Duckworth. Okay. Thank you. I would like to return
to discussion of the F-35, but in particular, I would like to
talk about the lifecycle costs of the F-35. As you know, 60 to
80 percent of lifecycle costs for the average aircraft is
sustainment.
At various times, there have been press reports that the
Air Force leadership is wondering whether you can afford to buy
all 1,763 F-35 aircraft you plan to buy while you pay for the
lifecycle costs of these aircraft.
General Richardson, could you tell us what avenues the Air
Force is investigating for reducing the lifecycle costs of the
F-35 so that you can afford to operate the aircraft in the
numbers that you want? I mean, where we are sitting right now
at $39,000 per hour, that is still unaffordable.
Can you sort of address how you are going to address this
issue to bringing down the cost, especially under sustainment?
Lieutenant General Richardson. Yes, Senator, that is a
great question. That is something that concerns us as well. We
have actually made a lot of good measure over the last couple
of years. The latest contract that we just signed with Lockheed
for the fiscal year 2021 to 2023 sustainment contract actually
brought it down about 6 percent, at least as it affects the Air
Force, for the F-35A.
So, by the year 2023, we expect the cost per flying hour
for the F-35 to go down to about $30,000 a flight hour. So that
is good news. We did that through a pretty creative contract
structure to where they are actually incentivized to meet cost
goals, but also not just cost goals, but mission capability
rates.
That is the first thing that I would tell you. I think we
are looking past that contract, though, already, and so we are
looking at other performance based contracts to see if we can
bring down the cost even lower.
Even past that effort, we are also looking at some pilot
programs to maybe do some of the supply support work ourselves
to go, to contract directly with some of the suppliers of the
parts that fail. We talked about the engine work earlier. We
are very much looking very heavily at the engine right now. We
have got a number of holes because of that.
That actually drives a lot of extra maintenance and cost.
The engine work, we are not exactly sure where that is going to
end up right now. We are studying it pretty heavily through the
summer, but that is another huge area. The Congress has been
really great on helping us out.
So we have had a number of Congressional adds over, in
fiscal year 2022, specifically to address that, and we are
applying most of those adds towards cost reduction initiatives
for lifecycle cost. But thank you for the question, Senator.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you. It is something that we will
certainly be monitoring. Senator Sullivan.
Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Madam Chair. Gentlemen, thank
you for your testimony. General Nahom, you might remember last
year in this hearing room, about a little less than a year ago,
I had questions and kind of the surprise that we had heard
about the delay in the timeline to get JPARC to the threat
level force standard and that General Brown had indicated that
there would be a 6 year delay due to difficulty developing the
feeling of the ARTS version 3, Advanced Radar Threat System,
which I think everybody agreed was something that we didn't
want to be doing.
Can you explain whether the budget request for the Air
Force is to get the JPARC threat level force standard back on
track by fiscal year 2026 and not have that 6 year delay that I
think everybody, including you, when you testified here last
year, thought that that was not good for the Air Force 5th
generation training and the overall readiness of the Air Force.
Lieutenant General Nahom. Yes, sir, and absolute commitment
to get the JPARC and the NTTR to level four as quickly as
possible. I am going to take it for the record. Fiscal year
2026, I don't have the exact date when we get to what we would
declare a level four, but the two ranges that we are getting to
a level four plus is going to be the JPARC and the NTTR.
I tell you, sir, as the threat changes, the technology
changes, and the emitters change because the Chinese are
accelerating, so what we need to emulate those threats is
changing constantly. You know, 4, 5 or 6 years ago, I mentioned
it earlier, we never would imagine we would need an F-22 or an
F-35 to emulate a Chinese threat, but we do now, and so how we
actually portray the threat for red flag Alaska, the Northern
edge, and the other--the highest end exercises we do up in the
JPARC is going to continually change. We are working some
things. I would like to get with you in a classified session
and talk about some of the things that are working.
Because it is not just ARTS, there are other things that
are working and we think we can get to quicker, and we are
working those and those--and we do have our investment there.
Senator Sullivan. Okay. In the classified--in unclassified
setting, the Secretary of the Air Force was very bullish on the
need for JPARC. Can you explain again to this Committee why it
is so important? I think a lot of people, even to be honest in
the Air Force, unless they have trained up there, don't have a
recognition of the size and scope and the fact that it us over
land airspace as big as Florida.
The standoff ranges that we are going to need with fifth
generation training and fighting needs to be much bigger than
it is. To be honest, and Nellis and other places where--they
are constrained. As you know, at JPARC, we can expand quite a
lot. We have a lot more room to grow, and you can't say that of
other high end rangers.
Lieutenant General Nahom. Yes, sir. In sheer size, and I
would say I would almost add restrictions, but it is more lack
of restrictions and what we can do at the JPARC is unparalleled
to anywhere in the world. The NTTR, the Nellis range offers a
lot of advantages because of some of the integration we can do
down there with a lot of the systems.
But you don't get that sheer magnitude of size and the
dynamic way in which you can train up at the JPARC. Between
those two ranges that--if you look at any Air Force that we
work with anywhere in the world, they want to get to either the
JPARC and NTTR to train with us.
Those are the two places, are the destination places. Now
turn it over to General Guastella to follow on that.
Lieutenant General Guastella. No, sir. Just to add, it is a
national treasure, without a doubt. It is also geographically,
in addition to its size, it is geographically located in PACAF.
Which affords the both the United States plus our allies the
opportunity to train in theater and that is critical
capability.
Senator Sullivan. No, I know a lot of our allies, I have
talked to allied forces, obviously Japan, Korea, but even the
Indians, Singapore, they like to get up there and train, and I
think we need to take advantage of that.
Speaking of INDOPACOM, my next question is kind of a
general one for all three of you gentlemen, and it goes through
the issue of the big challenges we have with the tyranny of
distance in the INDOPACOM theater, whether it is a potential
Taiwan scenario. I know that the Air Force has been working on
the modernization of the B-52 Stratofortress with regard to
range extension for that platform, pretty dramatic range
extension.
But what else are we doing in terms of combat
effectiveness, efficiency, tanker ops, and basing that--again,
that can help us get to that issue of giant distances that we
need to travel in the INDOPACOM theater.
Lieutenant General Nahom. Yes, sir. I will start. I will
let Gus and Duke pile in after. Certainly the B-52, you are
right with the re-engining efficiency offers us increased
range. It is not just on the bomber side, you can also add the
B-21 in that as well.
Certainly, the platforms, what we are working, the
modifications to the F-22. The F-35 and some of the Block 4 and
some of the other modernization there. But I will tell you----
Senator Sullivan. Does the Block 4 come with----
Lieutenant General Nahom. It does not come with it added.
No, sir, that is not part of it. But I will tell you the other
piece is some of our advanced weapons, because you have to look
at the range of weapons. It is not just the hypersonics. It is
some of the, I don't want to say less exquisite because they
are still pretty exquisite like JASSM-ER.
If you look at our budget right now, we are maximizing our
production of JASSM-ER because it is such a good weapon for the
Pacific for its range and capability. But at the same time, you
are also seeing, as you saw this week with our successful test,
with the ARRW hypersonic, as well as what we are doing with the
other hypersonic effort, the air breathing hypersonic effort.
I think we are very committed to the ranges in the Pacific
and making sure that we not only have the assets, but they are
in the right place. You see us placing up tankers in Alaska.
That is because we are setting up another fifth generation wing
up at Eielson and those airplanes are going to need tankers to
get where they need to be.
Having extra tankers up there at Eielson with those F-35 is
critical to have them to be able to respond not just in the
South China Sea, but into the Arctic, the defense of the
Northern reaches of the United States. I think we are pretty
committed to those distances in the Pacific, sir.
Senator Sullivan. Anyone else on that, gentlemen?
Lieutenant General Richardson. I would just add, if you
just look at it, Senator, if you just look at our modernization
programs, HACM, ARRW, JASSM on the weapons side. It is all
based on the exact point that you are making.
Then even on the aircraft side, you know, continuation of
some of the ones that we are doing, like B-21, some of our neat
fighter programs, and even E-7 are all really geared towards
that directly, that direct distance that you are talking about.
Senator Sullivan. Great. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Duckworth. Senator Cotton.
Senator Cotton. All right. I can't believe the Senator from
Alaska didn't asking the Arctic questions. Would you like some
extra time to do so?
Senator Sullivan. Well, you know, it is Arctic and
INDOPACOM, they are all really----
[Laughter.]
Senator Cotton. No, I am----
Senator Duckworth. He is a Pacific State, so. Senator
Hawley.
Senator Hawley. Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. Generally
Nahom, on the B-21, I saw press reports a couple of weeks ago
now that the Air Force is accelerating the production timeline
by overlapping development and production.
I am just wondering if there is any possibility of
accelerating the timeline, pulling to the left the
capabilities, the capability estimates, both in terms of
initial operational and full operational capability.
Lieutenant General Nahom. I will start that, but I
definitely get General Richardson in this conversation. The
accelerating B-21--right now, we are concentrating on getting
through the development piece. If there is any acceleration, it
will be after we develop and field.
There may be some acceleration in the numbers we buy after
we have a fielded aircraft. But right now, unless Duke you know
something, right now there is no acceleration, we are just--we
are moving at a good pace, but we don't see an acceleration in
the near term.
Lieutenant General Richardson. No, sir, I would not
recommend that. I think the program is progressing well. We
want to make sure we stay--you know, speed with discipline is
our mantra on that program, move as quickly as we can, but do
it in a safe, so to speak, at least from a process, from a
systems engineering standpoint.
That is what you are seeing, is we are moving as swiftly as
we as we feel is prudent to do, and as General Nahom mentioned,
I think once we get further along in the system verification or
review process, we should then look at doing that.
Senator Hawley. Got it. Okay. Got it. That is helpful.
General Guastella, you mentioned, I think, agile combat
deployment earlier. Can I just ask you to come back to that?
Give us a sense of what progress you have made on
operationalizing that and where have you met delays, if you
have? What are your priorities for the coming year?
Lieutenant General Guastella. Sir, agile combat deployment
is absolutely critical to the future as we see air power,
especially against a peer competitor. Americans are used to air
power or Air Force winning in the air. We also have to win on
the ground. It means we have to be survivable.
We have to use, and to do so--that is why we are employing
actual combat employment, is to ensure that not only we operate
out of main operating hubs, but we have the agility to go out
of austere and varied landing services and fields from
anywhere. It creates a very complex situation for an adversary.
It is a very high deterrent value.
We are doing that in every PACAF--doing as a common
employment for a couple of years now. Same in CENTCOM, same in
EUCOM. Every major command has been doing their version of--as
a combat deployment, and what we are figuring out is best
practices.
It will take investment because there is a logistical
element to the agile combat employment to include investments
in airfields as well as pre-positioning long logistical kit,
aircraft maintenance kit, things of that nature, and we are
starting to hone in on what those requirements are to ensure
that we can generate air power not only from main bases, but
from austere and varied locations.
Senator Cotton. What is the next step here, then, in the
progress of this?
Lieutenant General Guastella. Sir, we have already a draft
CONOPS [contingency operations], it was quite long actually,
that shows some of the best practices. We are working on
identifying ways to get the most out of the airmen that we have
in terms of multi capable airmen. In other words, get airmen to
do more than one additional primary job.
How can they help each other to generate more with fewer
individuals? We are also looking at how we can improve our
logistics to get our logistics enterprise enabled to provide
support even in austere locations.
There is a lot of work there, a lot of experimentation
going on, and we are happy to come and talk to you more in
other settings, if we could.
Senator Cotton. Great. That is great. That is helpful. Last
thing for me, General Nahom, pallets, munitions. I understand
that this concept offers a promising way to expand our strike
capacity and deliver long range weapons at lower cost. I
understand it has also been maybe controversial to some. Can
you talk a little bit about this, why you think the concept is
promising?
Lieutenant General Nahom. It just gives you another means
to deliver a long range ordinance. There are times in any
campaign where certain airplanes have availability. That is why
if you look at the Palisades munitions, it is fairly platform
agnostic.
You could do on a C-17 and C-130, and certainly a special
ops C-130 as well, and it is going to give the combatant
commanders some options to deliver ordnance in ways that he or
she never thought about.
Senator Hawley. Great. Very good. That is all I have got.
Thanks, Madam Chair.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you. Gentlemen, thank you so much
for coming here today and answering our questions. As you see,
there is a pretty bipartisan concern with some of the decisions
that are being made to make sure that we are not leaving gaps
in our capabilities, but that we also maintain taxpayer
interest as well and bringing down costs and the like.
I think we are going to have to have some more discussion
in a secure environment for some further questions. So with
that, this hearing--we are now closed.
[Whereupon, at 3:40 p.m., the Committee adjourned.]
[Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Dan Sullivan
jparc
1. Senator Sullivan. General Nahom, modernizing the Joint Pacific
Alaska Range Complex (JPARC) to the Threat Level 4 standard is an Air
Force priority and it requires significant infrastructure investment,
including threat emitters that can be rapidly updated with new software
to emulate the latest adversary threat capabilities. Last year at this
hearing I asked you some questions about why the Air Force was delaying
the timeline to get JPARC to the Threat Level 4 standard from fiscal
year 2026 to fiscal year 2032. In a response to questions for the
record (QFR) I submitted to Chief of Staff General CQ Brown, USAF after
the Air Force posture hearing last year, he indicated that the 6 year
delay was due to difficulty developing and fielding the Advanced Radar
Threats Systems (ARTS) v3. The fiscal year 2023 Budget has $134.21
million to buy five Australian CEA [common electronic attack] Digital
Array threat emitter systems, $43.57 million in operations and
maintenance funding for installation support, and up to $91 million for
range infrastructure modernization. Does this budget request get the
Air Force back on track to bring JPARC to the Threat Level 4 standard
by fiscal year 2026?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Yes, the funding referenced in the FY23
Budget is critical to Air Force efforts to get back on track to
resource and modernize JPARC and NTTR to a Threat Matrix Level 4 (peer/
near-peer adversary) training capability. While we will not achieve
full Threat Matrix Level 4 capability by 2026 we will recognize a
significant improvement over existing capabilities at JPARC and the Air
Force has plans and funding to field additional threat systems annually
through FY30. As our adversaries' capabilities advance, it is likely
that additional investments--to include the potential for additional
investments at JPARC--will be required to keep pace.
2. Senator Sullivan. General Nahom, if this year's budget doesn't
get us back on track to bring JPARC to the Threat Level 4 standard by
fiscal year 2026, why not?
Lieutenant General Nahom. The Air Force is upgrading JPARC to
Threat Matrix Framework Level 4 environment with plans and funding to
field additional threat systems annually through FY30. We have an
aggressive plan to field two Advanced Radar Threat Systems (ARTS) and
ten CEA digital arrays at JPARC between now and fiscal year 2026 with
an additional four systems arriving between fiscal year 2027 and fiscal
year 2030. These improvements will bring JPARC close to Level 4 status
in fiscal year 2026, as we continue to fill gaps until fiscal year
2030.
awacs modernization
3. Senator Sullivan. General Nahom, the Air Force finally decided
to replace the aging E-3 Sentry Airborne Warning and Control System
(AWACS) with the E-7 Wedgetail. The service's proposed fiscal year 2023
budget calls for the retiring of 15 E-3s, or almost half of the
service's inventory, yet estimated delivery of the first E-7 platform
isn't expected until 2027. Will this divestment and new capability
fielding timeline create risk?
Lieutenant General Nahom. There is a capability gap that exists in
this mission area today, and it can never be filled by the E-3. We must
move to a modern platform to close this capability gap. As for
capacity, the E-3's availability rate has declined to an average of 40
percent and we routinely see lower rates on a day-to-day basis.
Divesting the E-3 is crucial to the AF's intent to invest in the E-7A,
a modern, more capable, and reliable AEW platform.
(Previous CSAF response to Senator Sullivan DAF Posture QFR.)
4. Senator Sullivan. General Nahom, how will the Air Force mitigate
the risk in the AWACS gap created by retiring almost half of our
current fleet?
Lieutenant General Nahom. There is a capability gap that exists in
this mission area today, and it can never be filled by the E-3. We must
move to a modern platform to close this capability gap. Retaining any
number of E-3's will not help with the capability we need to fight
China. During the transition to the E-7, the AF will leverage other
assets including, but not limited to, Control and Reporting Centers and
Over-the-Horizon radars.
(Previous CSAF response to Senator Sullivan DAF Posture QFR.)
combat radius of aircraft
5. Senator Sullivan. General Richardson and General Nahom, as you
are aware, the B-52 Stratofortress is currently undergoing several
modernization efforts, to include the Commercial Engine Replacement
Program (CERP), expected to extend the range of the platform from 7,100
miles to 9,400 miles, an incredible increase of 32 percent. This is the
only fixed wing aircraft that I'm aware of that is significantly
extending its range through its modernization process. Given the
vastness of the Indo-Pacific and the tyranny of distance in a potential
Taiwan scenario, what is the Air Force doing to increase the combat
radius of its aircraft?
Lieutenant General Richardson and Lieutenant General Nahom.
Currently, the F-35 is being evaluated to receive new advanced engines
that will have the benefit of an increased combat radius of 25 percent.
While aircraft range is one aspect of a conflict in the Indo-Pacific,
the ``tyranny of distance'' problem can be addressed with increasing
the range and effectiveness of our weapons. The USAF is developing
weapons that can be employed at significantly greater ranges than
legacy weapons, negating the need, and the expense, of increasing the
range of every delivery platform
6. Senator Sullivan. General Richardson and General Nahom, how will
increasing the combat radius of aircraft and weapons systems increase
the combat effectiveness of our Air Force in the Indo-Pacific?
Lieutenant General Richardson and Lieutenant General Nahom.
Increasing the combat radius of aircraft and weapons systems is one
facet of increasing combat effectiveness for our Air Force in the Indo-
Pacific. Increased combat radius multiplies our basing options and
lowers overall fuel needed to support operations. However, increased
aircraft range must be balanced with other important aircraft
characteristics such as thrust, speed, cooling power, and engine life
which also impact combat effectiveness of individual weapons systems.
While optimizing aircraft performance is critical, increasing long
range air-to-air and air-to-surface weapons performance can help
increase overall combat effectiveness by allowing the Air Force to
engage targets from outside potential highly contested threat
environments.
7. Senator Sullivan. General Richardson and General Nahom, how will
increasing the combat radius of our aircraft increase the efficiency of
our tanker fleet?
Lieutenant General Richardson and Lieutenant General Nahom.
Increasing the combat radius of our aircraft give the joint force
commander greater operational flexibility in the employment of the
tanker fleet. A recent study showed a 25 percent increase in fighter
range could yield a 67-75 percent decrease in tanker sorties required
to support fighter operations. This provides our tanker fleet greater
flexibility and them to support a broader spectrum of combat missions.
The Air Force is currently examining methods to increase fuel at range
capabilities for the KC-46, KC-Y and KC-Z. Coupling increased fighter
fuel efficiency with greater tanker fuel efficiency/capability could
further increase our overall operational effectiveness across a broader
spectrum of operations.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Josh Hawley
indo-pacific region
8. Senator Hawley. General Guastella, the Guam cluster will play an
important role in future air operations in the Pacific. With this in
mind, can you explain how the Air Force's budget request supports
development of operational locations and other activities in the Guam
cluster? Please provide a classified response if necessary.
Lieutenant General Guastella. [Deleted.]
9. Senator Hawley. General Nahom, how does QUICKSINK, the modified
JDAM [joint direct attack munition] that the Air Force recently
demonstrated, contribute to the Air Force's ability to deny a Chinese
invasion of Taiwan, or is it intended primarily for other scenarios?
Lieutenant General Nahom. QUICKSINK is intended to bring an
affordable, ship-sinking capability against large amphibious assault
ships today. QUICKSINK gives us the ability to cause catastrophic
damage to large materiel-delivering ships that bring the land-based
invasion force to the beach. By attacking from below, QUICKSINK puts
the necessary lethality at the point of maximum vulnerability, yielding
catastrophic damage to large amphibious ships.
10. Senator Hawley. General Nahom, are you confident that an F-15
can reliably close-in on PLA [People's Liberation Army] warships to
release QUICKSINK munitions, given Chinese ship defenses and other
countermeasures?
Lieutenant General Nahom. QUICKSINK would certainly have to be
deployed, like many other of our munitions, in combined force packages
to yield the most effective results. The specific details for how we
would envision employing QUICKSINK is best left to a CLASSIFIED
discussion.
11. Senator Hawley. General Guastella, what are some of the high-
demand, low-density capabilities that the Air Force provides in both
U.S. European Command (EUCOM) and U.S. Indo-Pacific Command
(INDOPACOM)?
Lieutenant General Guastella. [Deleted.]
12. Senator Hawley. General Guastella, would the Air Force be able
to support operational requirements in both EUCOM and INDOPACOM in the
event of simultaneous conflicts with Russia and China? Please provide a
classified response if necessary.
Lieutenant General Guastella. [Deleted.]
13. Senator Hawley. General Nahom and General Guastella, in your
assessments, what are some of the capabilities the Air Force currently
provides in Europe that our NATO allies could provide on their own if
they invest more in their own defense?
Lieutenant General Nahom. NATO allies have made clear commitments
and taken action to increase defense spending in the wake of Russia's
invasion of Ukraine. The Air Force provides assigned and rotational
capabilities in Europe. With continued investment, NATO allies could
provide enhanced capabilities and capacities that are currently
provided by the Air Force in 4th and 5th-gen fighter aircraft, manned
and unmanned ISR, airborne C2, inter and intra-theater lift.
Additionally, NATO ally investment in enabling capabilities such as
missile defense, airbase infrastructure (i.e.--fuel and munitions
storage, aircraft shelters, etc.) will enhance employment of Air Force
and other NATO airpower capabilities in both peacetime and conflict.
Lieutenant General Guastella. NATO allies have made clear
commitments and taken action to increase defense spending in the wake
of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The Air Force provides assigned and
rotational capabilities in Europe. With continued investment, NATO
allies could provide enhanced capabilities and capacities that are
currently provided by the Air Force in 4th and 5th-gen fighter
aircraft, manned and unmanned ISR, airborne C2, inter and intra-theater
lift. Additionally, NATO ally investment in enabling capabilities such
as missile defense, airbase infrastructure (i.e.--fuel and munitions
storage, aircraft shelters, etc.) will enhance employment of Air Force
and other NATO airpower capabilities in both peacetime and conflict.
14. Senator Hawley. General Nahom, how will ``advanced
collaborative platforms'' improve the Air Force's ability to counter
Chinese air forces?
Lieutenant General Nahom. Artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled
technologies and autonomous collaborative weapons are critical enablers
that will transform the future joint force and fulfill a crucial role
across the Air Force and joint force. In order to maintain a
competitive edge and build enduring advantages, the Air Force will rely
on crewed, uncrewed, and cooperative teaming platforms. The Air Force
is investing to accelerate the development of advanced collaborative
weapons systems to leverage AI and increase lethality in highly
contested environments. Human-machine teaming will enable Airmen to
process massive amounts of data and arrive at sound operational
decisions more rapidly and with confidence.
15. Senator Hawley. General Nahom, when do you expect advanced
collaborative platforms to reach initial operational capability and
full operational capability?
Lieutenant General Nahom. The Department of the Air Force
Operational Imperatives recognize that Collaborative Combat Aircraft
(CCA) capabilities are needed as soon as possible to counter the
rapidly evolving threats, especially in the anti-access/area denial
(A2/AD) environment. The Air Force is currently exploring operational
concepts and working with industry partners to evaluate technical
maturity. Once these activities are complete we will be able to share
more information in a classified response.
16. Senator Hawley. General Nahom, has the Air Force considered
using C-130Hs as delivery vehicles for palletized munitions?
Lieutenant General Nahom. ``Yes, the Air Force has considered this,
and we have not precluded integration on the C-130H in the future. For
now, we have prioritized the C-130J and C-17 due to their increased
performance, including a larger combat radius, which we will need in
Pacific scenarios.''
(Previous CSAF response to Senator Hawley DAF Posture QFR.)
[all]