In an effort to be in compliance with GDPR we are providing you with the latest documentation about how we collect, use, share and secure your information, we want to make you aware of our updated privacy policy here
Enter your name and email address below to receive our newsletter.
The latest Chinese-U.S. military meeting was refreshingly frank—the two sides made clear their areas of disagreement, which will place Sino-U.S. defense relations on a much firmer footing.
This past week, Marine Corps Gen. Joe Dunford undertook his first visit to China as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
According to Dunford, “The visit underscores U.S. interest in further developing military-to-military relationships between the United States and China.”
Gen. Fang Fenghui, chief of the Joint Staff Department of the PLA Central Military Commission (CMC), hosted the visit.
Gen. Dunford also met with Fan Changlong, CMC vice chairman, and PRC State Councilor Yang Jiechi. Dunford also observed a PLA infantry unit carry out maneuvers at the Northern Theater Command, the PLA unified command closest to North Korea.
The discussions focused on Korea, Taiwan, and the South China Sea.
Dunford pointedly told the Chinese that the Pentagon, while hoping for a peaceful solution to the Korean crisis, was “developing military options in the event that the diplomatic and economic pressure failed.”
Therefore, both defense communities “needed to seriously have a conversation about what might happen if there was military action.”
The Pentagon clearly hopes that the fear of military action will induce Beijing to place more pressure on Pyongyang to curtail its missile and nuclear weapons testing.
Chinese complaints focused on U.S. defense ties with Taiwan, the recently deployed Terminal High Altitude Area Defence (THAAD) missile defense system in South Korea, and the continuing U.S. Freedom of Navigation Operations (FONOPS) in the South China Sea.
99683random1.05.0
Fan said that the “wrong actions on the Taiwan issue, the United States deploying the THAAD system around China, U.S. ships and aircraft’s activities in the South China Sea, the United States close-in surveillance in the sea and air near China have had a large, negative influence on bilateral military ties and mutual trust.”
Still, he added that, “China was willing to work with the United States to find more potential for cooperation, handle disputes and sensitive issues appropriately and ensure military cooperation becomes a positive force in relations.”
Building on the Trump-Xi presidential summit earlier this year, the two defense communities agreed during Dunford’s visit to establish a joint operational communications mechanism between their joint staffs, at the three-star level, to prevent any Korean conflict from leading to an inadvertent Sino-U.S. military clash.
Dunford explained that, “It would also be helpful for us to have effective communications mechanisms in place, so in the event of a crisis, we can immediately speak to each other and avoid miscalculation and a deepening crisis.”
Upon meeting Dunford, PRC President Xi Jinping said that Sino-U.S. defense relations have become a major stabilizing force in bilateral ties. His session with Dunford at the Great Hall of the People represented Xi’s first meeting with a senior U.S. military official since Trump became president.
According to the Chinese media, Xi “applauded the new progress made in relations between the two armed forces, such as enhanced dialogue at all levels and improved military confidence-building mechanisms as well as deepened cooperation.”
He said that, “President Trump and I have attached great importance to Sino-U.S. relations and are willing to actively promote the continuous development of bilateral ties.”
“As major influential countries in the region and the world as well as world’s top two economies,” Xi added, “China and the United States shoulder important responsibility to safeguard world peace and stability and to promote global development and prosperity.”
Further, Xi expressed hope “that the two sides could show sincerity and good-will to each other, maintain close communications, properly handle disputes, and work together on building a better future.”
In addition to inviting President Trump to visit China this year, Xi poetically concluded by observing that, “Despite some ups and downs in the development of bilateral relations, a rainbow comes after wind and rain.”
Still, Dunford acknowledged that, “having the framework for dealing with these difficult issues is different than making progress on them… I think our collective challenge is to sincerely and with candor attack these issues that we have to address.”
He explained that, while decreasing miscalculation is “the minimum standard” for defense contacts, “We should also try to see areas to cooperate.”
Even so, what is most interesting is that, unlike in the past, the Chinese government has not responded to these Sino-American differences by suspending defense cooperation between the militaries.
In the 1990s and the 2000s, little sustained progress was achieved in this area due to such suspensions.
The two militaries and defense departments negotiated several security and confidence-building measures designed to moderate tensions. Though these mechanisms may promoted understanding of their opposing security concerns, they proved highly vulnerable to external shocks.
For Beijing, curtailing Sino-American defense dialogues have been a favored way of signaling displeasure with some development in the overall PRC-U.S. relationship. Whenever a U.S. policy decision seriously angered t political leadership, Beijing ordered the PLA to suspend defense ties with the Pentagon.
The various incidents between the PLA and U.S. military units operating in the international waters and airspace near China repeatedly upended relations. China also regularly suspended defense collaboration following announcements of U.S. arms sales to Taiwan and other disputes.
The suspensions made evident how little China valued the relationship between the PLA and the Pentagon, reflecting deep Sino-American strategic suspicion, their competition for influence in East Asia, and other major differences.
The conflicts and mutual suspicions have provided an unfavorable environment for flourishing defense relations.
Meanwhile, PLA leaders feared that excessive defense transparency could give the United States deep insights into Chinese military vulnerabilities.
Influenced by a strategic tradition that emphasizes deception, moreover, many PLA strategists believe that opaqueness assists in deterring potential adversaries by complicating their defense planning.
As a rising military power, moreover, Beijing did not want to codify the disparities in Sino-American force capacities or military operating patterns that favored the Pentagon.
Furthermore, PRC policymakers strived to obscure the extent of their military buildup.
A more robust relationship between the Chinese and U.S. militaries is useful since the PLA has expanded its forward deployments considerably in recent years.
As a result, Chinese and U.S. forces are operating more in close proximity.
There is a need to avoid and manage PLA-Pentagon accidents, miscalculations, or other incidents, such as the April 2001 collision between a U.S. Navy EP-3 reconnaissance aircraft and a Chinese warplane near China’s Hainan Island.
The desert skies of southern New Mexico currently host the USAF Light Attack Experiment (OA-X).
During the experiment the three turboprops (Sierra Nevada Corp./Embraer A-29 Super Tucano, Air Tractor Inc./L3 Platform Integration AT-802L Longsword, Textron Aviation’s AT-6 Wolverine) and single jet (Textron Scorpion) are piloted by Air Force personnel and measured on several performance parameters.
The Air Force indicated that each aircraft would be evaluated on the following missions;
Basic Surface Attack
Close Air Support
Daytime Ground Assault Force
Rescue Escort
Night Basic Surface Attack
Might Close Air Support
Lt. Col Robert Odom, Deputy Commander of the 704th Test Group noted that through the mission exercises the participating aircraft will be assessed by criteria such as; pilot workload to find and track a target, range scores, assessments of displays, capability in austere environments, cockpit visibility, loiter capability, communications, target tracking, lines of sight, sensor tracking, takeoff distance, acoustic signatures and more.
General Mike Holmes, Commander of Air Combat Command (COMACC) commented on the experiment and associated aircraft requirements, “If you want to invest in things that are already available, if you want to go with commercially off the shelf capabilities then you have to live with commercially off the shelf capabilities for the most part.
So what we want to do is let our [Air Force] personnel go fly, let our personnel participate in the maintenance and get data.
Part of this that is really important that we talked about briefly was the signature measurements because I want to send our young Americans out in a platform they can survive in doing this job.”
99421random1.05.0
Holmes continued, “…after the experiment is complete, we’ll take all that data, we’ll come together and bring to the Chief of Staff and the SecAF the option to go with a combat demo next year.
If they say yes, Air Combat Command (ACC) will take the lead from Air Force Material Command (AFMC) who ran this experiment and [ACC will] run the combat demo.”
However, it was made very clear that the experiment was not a fly-off or competitive evaluation and there is no certainty that procurement of one of the aircraft will follow.
As Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson explained, “This is an experiment, we are gathering data on these four different airplanes.
The data is intended to inform strategic decisions and tell us whether we take this to the next stage to what we call a combat experiment, whether any of these airframes are ready for that.”
Invaluable insight was provided by Col. Michael “Starbaby” Pietrucha, pilot and ACC staff lead for light attack.
Pietrucha served as an instructorelectronic warfare officer in the F-4G Wild Weasel and the F-15E Strike Eagle completing 156 combat missions.
Pietrucha took part in 2.5 SAM kills over 10 combat deployments.
Pietrucha stated, “Over the past few years our readiness is hurting.
We are flying the wings off our aircraft to do things that those aircraft are vastly overqualified to do.
If we have a light attack aircraft we can take some of that burden [off our 4th and 5th Gen fighter].
We can take our 4th and 5th Gen force and go back to training for major [high intensity] combat operations.
If we deploy our 4th and 5th Gen aircraft less we can restore our readiness to acceptable levels.”
Pietrucha continued, “Right now today, we have more missions than we have Air Force.
The Chief of Staff has been pretty clear that if we do not have additional money and personnel we cannot pursue the light attack program.
The best we can do is move a hole from one place to another, and we already have too many holes.”
Aside from the lower cost of the aircraft, one of the clear operational savings would be the reduced fuel consumption.
Pietrucha noted, “the amount of fuel it takes to keep a turboprop in the air for an hour with weapons aboard is the amount the F-15E Strike Eagle uses taxiing down the runway in 6-9 minutes.”
Pietrucha referenced an article he had authored that the logistics of moving all that fuel to an operational area amounted to ‘logistical fratricide’.
Fuel consumption vs fuel conservation clearly demonstrates a variety of exponential costs vs savings in the combat environment.
The introduction of a light attack aircraft will offer low procurement costs, efficient operations (in the appropriate threat environment) and an improvement in readiness of the 4th & 5th Gen fleet.
The introduction of an appropriate number of light attack aircraft would also assist in addressing the pilot shortage in the USAF. A variety of sources indicate the USAF is currently 750 – 1000 pilots short.
The Air Force is executing an aggressive program of pilot retention and the addition of a light attack aircraft would make a positive impact.
Pietrucha explains, “People say, ‘you don’t have enough pilots, why do you need more aircraft?’ Good question. We need to absorb pilots. The Air Force takes a pilot out of pilot training and then to make him or her an experienced aviator that individual goes into a fighter squadron to get 500 flight hours, and then they are an experienced fighter pilot. The Air Force does not have enough airplanes to achieve that. It does not matter how many pilots the Air Force produces, they cannot absorb them.”
General Holmes commented on the same dynamic, “Part of the benefit of this airplane is that I can season and produce fighter pilots fast. I can fly a lot of hours on it pretty cheap so I can make an experienced fighter pilot (which is what I am short) fast. So as ACC Commander I would season pilots in this aircraft fast then bring them back for a short course to move them into a 4th or 5th Gen fighter.”
“[Considering the light attack aircraft], I can use them in combat (I think, we’ll find out). I can use them to season young fighter pilots fast. When they are in the US, I can use them to train tactical air control parties at a much lower cost per flying hour. I can use them to support my maneuver unit training with the Army at a much lower cost per flying hour and still work through all the close air support procedures. It is a capability we think (we’re going to do these experiments and see) that would let us continue to do another multi-year approach to fighting violent extremist organizations at a cheaper cost in a fiscal environment where every dollar counts. When preparing for the higher end fight – the 5th gen fight, every dollar counts.”
It was noted that the Super Tucano and Wolverine were the two aircraft that met the Air Force’s defined requirements for the light attack platform. The Scorpion and Longsword were also embraced in the experiment to see what could be learned by the Air Force and the industry partners. No specifics were provided as to how the Longsword and Scorpion did not currently meet the requirements. However, they are technically both experimental platforms (and the Longsword lacks ejection seats) while the Wolverine and Super Tucano are in production.
The Scorpion while perhaps a little more aircraft than the Air Force had in mind, looks to be a very interesting option. The platform demonstrated excellent maturity and reliability this past summer when the small fleet of 4 Scorpions was successfully deployed to four locations worldwide (Paris Air Show, Royal International Air Tattoo [RIAT], NAS Patuxent River, MD and its home base, Wichita, KS).
99393random1.05.0
The Scorpion realized a 100% mission completion rate during weapons testing at NAS Pax River this summer. The Testing utilized the GBU-12, LAU-131, and HMP-400 weapons in 5 different configurations over 5 consecutive days. The weapons testing went so smoothly it wrapped up 4 days early. The aircrafts economy, capability in austere environments, design for modular payloads and advanced ISR capabilities make it a compelling option.
Regardless of the apparent value of introducing a low cost and capable light attack aircraft, it will require budget. Pietrucha summarized the current situation, “Bottom line – right now today, we have more missions than we have Air Force. The Chief of Staff has been pretty clear that if we do not have additional money and personnel we cannot pursue the light attack program. The best we can do is move a hole from one place to another, and we already have too many holes.”
The rationale of the light attack experiment and potential adoption of such aircraft within the USAF appears sound.
It will be up to the Air Force to identify the platform that offers the greatest value to address the identified needs, as well as pair with the fleet wide capabilities that the Air Force is introducing.
The Second Line of Defense extends thanks and appreciation to Arlan Ponder and the entire Public Affairs team and personnel of 49th Wing Holloman AFB, as well as all the leaders of the USAF that granted time, availability and expertise to our group.
During our visit to NAWDC, we had a chance to talk with Captain Enfield, an experienced naval aviator with several tours of duty in Japan and Pete Milham, the NAWDC Technical Director.
We discussed with them the evolution of NAWDC to build out capabilities to work within an expanded battlespace and to drive the process of enhanced integration of the air enabled naval force.
The senior leadership has suggested that the strategic goal of a distributed but integrated force is to be able to operate as a kill web.
The kill chain is a linear concept which is about connecting assets to deliver fire power; the kill web is about distributed operations and the ability of force packages or task forces to deliver force dominance in an area of interest.
It is about building in integration from the ground up so that forces can work seamlessly together through multiple networks, rather than relying on a single point of failure large network.
But the kill web remains a concept if the technology and training do not translate into operational realities.
Most often, the technology is discussed in this context; but the training is crucial to shape a way for naval aviators to operate as animators of an integrated kill web.
“Doogie” is a very experienced combat aviator put his focus squarely on the need for vigilance and diligence to refocus the current acquisition process to always make sure “state-of-the art” technology is rapidly fielded and in the hands of warriors when it really matters.
“We have a very slow acquisition process.
“Other countries do not.
“Other countries are beginning to rival us with their intellectual capability.
“We must leverage ever more effective training for integrated operations and to develop the TPPs that allow us to prevail in combat.”
There are a number of tools being put in place to provide for the evolution of more effective integrated operations from the ground up or put another way, to train for operating as a kill web requires a new tool set.
This is a key task facing NAWDC.
Fallon is known as the Carrier in the Desert; but as the carrier and its role within the fleet evolve and encompass distributed lethality and the kill web, so must the Carrier in the Desert evolve.
It starts with the addition of two new buildings, which embrace the shift.
One building is to house the integrated air enabled force; the second houses the simulators that drive the process of their integration.
The first building, building P420, will house the integrated training effort.
“The entire building is a SCIF (Sensitized Compartmented Information Facility) at 55,000 square feet.
“We will have offices in there.
‘We will have auditoriums.
‘We will have classrooms.
‘We will have mission-planning rooms.
‘And the building will also house the spaces from which we monitor and control missions on the Fallon Range.
“We will be able to do all of our operations at the appropriate classification level for the entire air wing.”
The additional new building will house the simulators.
“Building P440, which is 25,000 square feet, will host initially the simulator devices for the integrated training facility.
150903-N-SS390-266 FALLON, Nev. (Sept. 3, 2015) F-35C Lightning IIs, attached to the Grim Reapers of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 101, and an F/A-18E/F Super Hornets attached to the Naval Aviation Warfighter Development Center (NAWDC) fly over Naval Air Station Fallon’s (NASF) Range Training Complex. VFA 101, based out of Eglin Air Force Base, is conducting an F-35C cross-country visit to NASF. The purpose is to begin integration of F-35C with the Fallon Range Training Complex and work with NAWDC to refine tactics, techniques and procedures (TTP) of F-35C as it integrates into the carrier air wing. (U.S. Navy photo by Lt. Cmdr. Darin Russell/Released)
“These include F-35, E-2D, Super Hornet, Growler, and Aegis.”
But this is a work in progress, as all simulators do not seamlessly connect, although this is a clear requirement going forward.
For example, “there is no MH-60R simulator that connects easily to other simulators.”
The software side is important as well as the simulators will be upgraded to the state of the fleet software for each platform and the different software builds resident in the fleet as well can be leveraged for each platform.
The software enablement of the new platforms clearly puts a premium on collocating code writers with operators and TTP writers, but this is a work in progress.
But to get the kind of on the fly kind of integration, which will enhance combat success, this transition needs to be made, executed and then evolved.
The ability to shape the virtual training environment is a key focus of attention and needs to be integrated prior to doing the much more difficult part, namely folding in the live aspect of a training mission.
In short, at NAWDC the team is a key part of shaping the way ahead to forge a maritime force able to operate as a kill web.
Editor’s note: The Navy is looking to expand the size of the training range.
Integrated ops training extends the need for larger range space for certain.
According to a September 2, 2016 article by Steve Timko, the Navy is looking to quadruple land for Fallon naval Air Station training.
FALLON, Nev. (KOLO)– The Fallon Naval Air Station will increase public land used for training by about four times to about 1,262 square miles under a proposal released this week.
The U.S. Navy is asking for an additional 604,789 acres and to renew the use of 202,859 acres. It scheduled seven meetings in Nevada to discuss the proposal, including Oct. 3 in Fallon and Oct. 4 in Reno.
The Navy said it began reviewing its training ability at the Fallon Naval Air Station in 2014.
“The analysis showed that the size of the Fallon Ranges severely restricts the types of weapons that can be used, which limits training realism and effectiveness,” it wrote. “These limitations leave aircrews and special operations forces unable to fully train, compromising their safety and success in combat.”
Newer aircraft require more training space, the Navy said.
“The boundaries of the Fallon Ranges have not changed to accommodate for the capabilities of modern weapons,” the Navy wrote. “Modern weapons can reach targets at greater distances than ever before, but current range boundaries limit this type of training. Expanding the range boundaries would allow military personnel to train in a realistic, and in some instances 360-degree, combat scenario.”
So it is asking for additional land. Congress must sign off on expanding the land used by the base. It appears it will involve buying privately owned land, for which the Navy said it will offer fair-market price.
Churchill County Manager Eleanor Lockwood said the base, which has a good relationship with the county, first notified them of the proposal on Aug. 26. Churchill County commissioners are scheduled to formally review the proposal at its Sept. 21 meeting and they are expected to have it reviewed by Resource Concept Inc. of Carson City, which is under contract to the county to review these kinds of studies.
RCI is expected to help Churchill County understand impact the expansion has, Lockwood said. For example, what restrictions will be imposed on the land for recreation, ranching or mining.
She called it the first major expansion of the military range.
Churchill County Commissioner Harry “Bus” Scharmann is looking forward to getting more information about the proposed expansion.
“We want to look at this closely,” Scharmann said. “The Navy and Churchill County have been good partners and we always try to work closely with them.”
According to the information provided by the Navy, the base contributed $517 million in economic activity in a three-county area in 2015 and had a payroll of $84 million.
“The base is huge. That’s how I put it,” Scharmann said. “Our economy centers around the Navy base and agricultural.
“In my mind, in the last seven years when we have had a drought and a slowdown in the economy, the thing that has been a major stabilizing factor has been the Navy base,” Scharmann said.
2017-08-12 Mobility Guardian is the USAF’s premier global power projection or global reach exercise.
According to an article published by Force Tech. Sgt. Jodi Martinez375th Air Mobility Wing:
JOINT BASE LEWIS-MCCHORD, Wash., Aug. 1, 2017 — Nearly 30 partner nations are participating alongside U.S. counterparts during Air Mobility Command‘s Mobility Guardian exercise, which kicked off across Washington state yesterday and concludes Aug. 12.
The exercise aims to enhance the U.S. military’s global response force by integrating in complex, realistic mobility training with partner nations, AMC officials said.
Fully-integrated events during the exercise will allow for strategic interoperability in support of real-world operations, said Air Force Maj. Thomas Rich, joint task force director of operations for Mobility Guardian.
“We’re pushing the tactical edge,” Rich said. “We’re putting aircraft from different nations close together in a tight airspace in a dynamic threat environment. There’s a little bit of inherent risk in that, but that’s what we want to do here so that everybody is ready when we do it for real.”
More than 650 international military personnel and 3,000 U.S. military service members will focus on AMC’s four core competencies — airlift, air refueling, aeromedical evacuation and air mobility support — said Air Force Col. Clinton Zumbrunnen, the exercise’s international observer mission commander.
Zumbrunnen said he hopes Mobility Guardian, which is planned to be held biennially, will attract additional allies to attend and will encourage observers to return as participants in the future.
Col. Jose Antonio Morales, training commander for the Brazilian air force’s 5th Wing, echoed this hope for his own country. “We are trying to arrange a lot of new exercises and interchanges between our countries,” he said. “We are all so proud to represent our country and our air force and participate in this very important exercise.”
The Royal Air Force and the French Air Force brought their A400Ms for the first time to this core exercise.
According to a story by Air Force Airman 1st Class Erin McClellan, 22nd Air Refueling Wing Public Affairs and published August 05, 2017:
JOINT BASE LEWIS-MCCHORD, Wash.– Many Mobility airframes from 11 international countries are attending Mobility Guardian, including the Royal Air Force’s A400M Atlas as it makes its debut in a large-scale exercise.
The tactical airlifter is comparable to the C-130 Hercules and the C-17 Globemaster III.
Capable of all major components of airlift, including transport, airdrops and aeromedical evacuation, it will eventually replace the C-130 for the RAF, leaving only a small fleet of the older aircraft in service.
Although the A400 has operated in exercises previously, Mobility Guardian is the largest and most diverse, which gives the aircraft a chance to shine.
“Exercise Mobility Guardian 2017 is a real opportunity for us,” said Wing Commander Ed Horne, Number 70 Squadron commanding officer, RAF Brize Norton, U.K.
“It’s the first time we’ve deployed the aircraft on an exercise like this.
“The aircraft arrived in service with the Royal Air Force in 2014, so we’re still preparing the aircraft for operations overseas. This is really an excellent opportunity for us to operate with our coalition partners.
“[Mobility Guardian] will demonstrate to our partners that the A400M Atlas is a really capable platform,” he added. “It’s also of benefit to me and my guys to be meeting people from all over the world that we might well be operating with in a real-world scenario in the future.”
While the aircraft is at Mobility Guardian, the RAF’s international partners, including the United States, are able to work with the aircraft for the first time and learn how it can be used as an asset to the Mobility mission.
“With the aircraft being new to them, it’s also new to us,” said Maj. Andrew Rich, Mobility Guardian Joint Task Force director of operations. “We’d like to learn about it and how we can incorporate it into how we fight. We’re exploring the interoperability pieces of how our equipment fits on their aircraft and how their equipment fits on ours. Being interoperable gives us a chance to be more flexible when we go downrange.”
The A400 is slotted for nine missions during Mobility Guardian, providing the opportunity to learn more about the aircraft and to help partnerships flourish.
“Coalition partners are very important to us,” said Rich. “We rely on them, and they rely on us. We don’t go into any conflict without them. We trust them, and we love having them here. We can’t wait to bring them back next time.”
According to a story by Charlsy Panzio published on August 2, 2017 by Military Times:
The British Royal Air Force brought its new Airbus A400M plane, the first time it has participated in an exercise of this scale. A number of countries are using the four-engine, turboprop tactical airlifter to replace older aircraft, such as the somewhat smaller C-130 Hercules.
Operated by two pilots and a weapons systems operator, the aircraft has the ability to carry a 25-ton payload more than 2,300 miles to remote airfields, or by landing on short, semi-prepared strips.
“They wanted to integrate the A400 into a large exercise,” ZumBrunnen said. “They also brought an aeromedical evacuation team. From a U.S. perspective, we’re happy to see other countries work on their AE skills.”
The French air force also brought its A400M, which will participate in airdrop missions during the exercise.
“We were really interested in trying to be as integrated as possible in airdrops because that is a major capability,” said French Maj. Eric Brunet, who was in charge of preparing the French team for Mobility Guardian.
Brunet said he and his airmen want to compare the way they use their aircraft to how other countries use theirs to make sure their way is as efficient as possible.
“Being involved in a realistic situation is a great opportunity to do that,” he told Air Force Times the day before the training missions began.
Finally, according to a story published by the RAF on August 10, 2017, an RAF aeromedical evacuation team deployed with the A400M to the exercise.
A Royal Air Force Aeromedical Evacuation team has deployed on exercise with A400M Atlas for the first time.
The medics from Tactical Medical Wing (TMW) and three RAF Reserve squadrons are in the US to participate in Mobility Guardian, the largest exercise of its type involving over 50 transport and air-refuelling aircraft, paratroopers, Force Protection and Aeromed personnel.
Flight Lieutenant Scott Fitzgerald, a Flight Commander on TMW based at RAF Brize Norton, explained the aim of the exercise. He said: “The focus for the aeromedical part of this exercise is to simulate the evacuation of up to 300 hospital patients in a humanitarian effort from a displaced area in a war torn environment.
“We’re doing that by working closely with other aeromedical teams from other countries. We’re mixing those teams to understand what qualifications, capabilities and skill sets are required in order to function on various aircraft from other countries and that combination of doctor, nurse and medical teams.”
The scale of the exercise has enabled a medical evacuation process which replicates closely what the RAF personnel have experienced previously on coalition operations. Two separate patient preparation areas have been established over 350 miles apart. The RAF teams fly out to the humanitarian area to evacuate patients originating from a US Army Role 2 Hospital.
“We receive hand over of those casualties and evacuate them back” explained Flt Lt Fitzgerald. “We sometimes simulate an intra-theatre transfer which involves a 40 minute flight, or when we have a C-CAST on board, which is the critical care aspect of our aeromedical team, we simulate the 3-4 hour evacuation as if we were for example returning patients to Birmingham.”
The UK Aeromedical Team on the exercise have brought Flight Nurses who are emergency qualified, including four Reservists from three different squadrons.
The A400M, which can carry up to 66 stretcher patients, was recently used for the first time on a real aeromed mission for operational reasons. Mobility Guardian is however the first time it has been used on exercise in the role.
Flt Lt Fitzgerald: “All the personnel we have brought with us have never flown A400 previously so this is new for us. It’s a new capability, we can carry up to 66 stretchers on board the A400 which is our aircraft for the future.”
Editor’s Note: Last year, we published an update on the A400M in an interview with two senior leaders of Airbus Defence and Space during a visit to Madrid, Spain.
2016-11-22 By Robbin Laird
After my visit to the Albacete Air Base in Spain, I spent time in Madrid with Airbus Defence and Space.
During my time in Madrid, I was able to conduct two interviews, the first with the head of the tanker program, namely, Antonio Caramazana, and the second with Fernando Alonso, head of Military Aircraft and with the chief engineer of the A-400M, Lionel Rouby.
The A400M has been delivered to several air forces and will become a key part of their fleets for operations over the next 50 years.
99362random1.05.0
Currently, the program is working through engine modifications, which has fixed a known problem with the gear boxes.
During a visit to the Bricy air base, the squadron leadership provided insights with regard to the French approach to the A400M and the squadron leader highlighted the importance in his view of the inherent upgradeability of the aircraft associated with its software systems as well as the promise of digital maintenance for shaping a new approach to fleet management.
In that interview, Lt. Col. Paillard highlighted the importance of keeping the aircraft common among the A400M users to get the maximum impact from the aircraft operating as a fleet.
“We do not want to end up like the Transall which was a common French and German aircraft but at the end became completely different aircraft.”
A key potential for leveraging commonality is derived from the digital nature of the aircraft.
The sensors onboard the aircraft and the various software upgradeable systems provide an inherent potential for the A400M to provide for inherent upgradeability and serviceability across the fleet.
Lt Col. Paillard seen in an A400M cockpit at Bricy. Credit: Second Line of Defense
Put in other terms, the digital nature of the aircraft is part of every A400M which enters the combat fleet and can provide a significant advantage over legacy aircraft. In that sense, the A400M is part of the strategic transition associated with other software upgradeable aircraft like the Wedgetail, the P-8, the Triton and the F-35.
My discussion with Fernando Alonso and Lionel Rouby focused on the sensors and software upgradeability of the aircraft built in and the potential impact of leveraging this inherent or built-in capability.
As Alonso put it: “Every A400M may look the same outside, but as the software evolves, new capabilities are generated for the aircraft.”
Question: How would you describe the software upgradeable quality of the A400M and field upgradeable capabilities associated with that upgradeability?
Lionel Rouby: The systems architecture of the aircraft, there are about 5,000 equipment (gathered in more than 200 systems/subsystems) onboard the aircraft and their around 130 of them – key ones – which are software upgradeable and could be uploaded by customers themselves.
You can upload software changes in the field. This makes the system quite flexible for upgrades.
The system is called the DLCS or data load control system, which manages the 130 systems for software upgrades featuring field loadable systems.
Fernando Alonso: For example, with the flight control systems we have software capabilities, which can be modified.
We are upgrading the flight control system to manage load shifts onboard the aircraft is dropping loads.
The center of gravity obviously changes as you drop loads during an operation.
By upgrading the software, although the airplane is physically the same, it now has a new capability associated with the upgrade.
The A400M at the Farnbourgh Airshow 2016. Credit: Airbus Defence and Space
And this capability is field loadable.
Lionel Rouby: Key computers onboard the aircraft operate this way, such as the flight management system, the mission management system, the load master work station, the flight warning system, the flight control system or the flight display system.
Obviously, the upgrades is not done in a few minutes but you can do this in a few hours as you ensure that the upgrade to the system has been properly installed and operating.
Question: This is very different from legacy aircraft.
This gives you a 50-year growth cycle and as you build up operational experience, which can shape as well the software changes, desired by customers.
Keeping the aircraft common allows the software upgradeable quality to give customers significant growth in capabilities over time.
But also the digital quality of the aircraft provides significant change in how maintenance can be done as well.
Could you describe this advantage?
Fernando Alonso: Onboard the aircraft are sensors which can provide real time data on the performance of the aircraft and this data can clearly provide key information to shape both an understanding of its operation but provide data for more effective maintenance.
Lionel Rouby: The sensors are there, but the system to exploit the data generated by the sensors is a work in progress.
We can shape a lifetime maintenance system.
We can process on the ground by the maintenance system which can process this data which can shape a customized maintenance system.
You can maintain the aircraft based on real need rather than having predetermined maintenance points.
When a set of conditions has been met, then the maintenance can be performed.
In effect, demand side maintenance can be provided rather than milestone maintenance.
We need to develop the algorithms which can translate the sensor driven data to shape the new maintenance regime which the aircraft can clearly deliver to our customers.
Fernando Alonso: From the standpoint of the airplane the data is there; shaping the systems to exploit the data is a work in progress but is inherent in the technology onboard the aircraft.
Question: This provides you with the opportunity to provide services to the customer to support the digital management process.
Could you describe these possibilities?
Lionel Rouby: We are opening the door to two new kinds of services to support the A400M.
The first is software maintenance whereby we provide for software upgrades to our customers.
The second is a customized solution by national customers based on mission driven operations.
Fernando Alonso: With the data coming from the aircraft, you can drive down to specific aircraft tails.
This allows customers to shape fleet management options, such as used in the commercial sector.
You can determine the correlation between the actual state of a particular aircraft against missions to determine how best to use the aircraft with its current operational state.
You can target the particular aircraft in its current operational state against lift, tanking, or Special Forces missions for a particular case.
And with the generation of data in flight, it is possible to deliver the data of the aircraft in flight to the ground to prepare the maintenance team PRIOR to the aircraft landing what maintenance needs to be done to get that aircraft back in flight more rapidly.
You can then generate better sortie generation rates by managing the data effectively.
In short, the digital nature of the aircraft provides for inherent upgradeability of the aircraft and new approach to modernization.
And the data generated by the sensors provides the basis for big data management for more effective and realistic maintenance approaches.
For some earlier pieces on the A400M, see the following:
During our recent visit to Naval Aviation Warfighting Development Center or NAWDC, Captain Leif “Weed” Steinbaugh, Director of Training at NAWDC, provided our first briefing which oriented us to the changes at NAWDC since we last visited Fallon Naval Air Station in 2014.
Notably, the name had changed from Naval Strike and Air Warfare Center (NSAWC) to the Naval Aviation Warfighting Development Center (NAWADC).
This change of name is very significant and represents a culmination of the work of the Top Gun era and the laying the foundation for the integrated Warfighting approach for the distributed fleet, which the US Navy is shaping with the fleet it has and the fleet, which is on the way.
Captain Steinbaugh has a significant background in Electronic Warfare and strike operations as well.
He first flew A-6s, then went to Prowler and then to Growler.
This is his fourth tour at Fallon as well. His first tour was with the strike department, the second he set up the Growler department and the third was in the training department.
Captain Steinbaugh characterized NSAWC as follows:
“The focus was on proficiency with the platform, at the individual level with integration in the final week of Air Wing Fallon.
“TTPs were approached from this perspective.
“Then as now we train the training officers for the Carrier Air Group or CAG.”
The name change reflects a strategic shift in the US Navy towards integrated Warfighting and, by definition almost, because integration is crucial to success, to an enhanced focus on the high end fight.
NAWDC was the first of a series of Warfighting development centers which have been stood up and which the Navy is leveraging for the evolution of the integrated Warfighting approach.
There are several Warfighting development centers: for surface and mine warfare, underwater warfare, for information warfare, for expeditionary warfare.
Currently, the closest working relationship between NAWDC and the other Warfighting centers is with the surface Warfighting development center, and with the potential to cross link aviation with the weapons onboard surface ships this lays a solid foundation to go where the technology is evolving as well.
There is a monthly video teleconference among the Warfighting development centers.
Warfare tactics instructors (WTI), from left to right, Lt. Cmdr. Mike Dwan, Lt Doug Wilkins, Lt. Lisa Schmidt, Lt Joseph Lewis, Lt Scott Margolis, Lt. Andrew Blanco, Lt Weston Floyd, LT Justin Bolly, Lt. Serg Samardzic, Lt. Rebecca O’Brien, and Lt. Cmdr. Derek Rader pause for a group photo at Naval Air Station (NAS) Fallon, in Nevada. The 11 integrated air and missile defense (IAMD) WTIs participated in a pilot integrated air defense course (IADC) — a joint effort led by the Naval Surface and Mine Warfighting Development Center (SMWDC) and Naval Aviation Warfighting Development Center (NAWDC). IADC will activate in late 2016 and train carrier air wings, carrier strike groups, and air and missile defense commanders in a simulated training environment at NAS Fallon. Several IAMD WTIs will teach and train the inaugural course alongside their aviation counterparts from Navy Weapons Fighter School (TOPGUN).
“ We focus on TTP development and doctrine, on upcoming major exercises and any Commander interest items that the Commanders may have.
“The biggest change with the Warfighting Development Centers is our ability now to integrate with the other communities, and to gain a better understanding of the evolving mission areas.”
The culmination of the training process at NAWDC is Air Wing Fallon when the air wing about to go on deployment comes for its final training.
“Their training track, if you will, is to get ready for deployment.
“They will have completed the air wing, will have completed advanced readiness program, which is the program done by platform for each of their type of squadrons. We start where they should be, at what level they should be at, finishing ARP, and then we do a crawl, walk, run.
“The first week, week and a half, we give them the plan, we do everything for them.
“They don’t have to do any of the planning.
“They just have to execute.
“Once we see that they can execute, we’ll get to the next part where they get more involved in the planning, we tighten the timelines down a little bit on them so it provides some pressure.
“We up the game, if you will, on the threats side of things so things feel a bit more real, and finally the last week is ATP, the advanced training phase, where they are pretty much on a timeline.
“We may see out on deployment, whoever might be out there at the time and they then execute there.
“The threat is about as high as we can ramp it up to.”
Captain Steinbaugh highlighted what the training command is doing now but how the transition implied in the name change was laying the foundation for a way ahead towards more effective fleet integration.
With new buildings being added for simulation and training a new phase will be added.
We will focus on this shift in a later interview, but it is clear that the Navy is preparing for a more effective fleet operation with the fleet it has, but is taking the longer view of preparing for the potential for rapid innovation associated with the fleet operating in a kill web.
Captain Leif “Weed” Steinbaugh, Director of Training at NAWDC
Captain Steinbaugh is a native of Quantico, VA. He earned his commission in May 1990 from the United States Naval Academy, where he received a Bachelor of Science degree in Mechanical Engineering.
He was designated a Naval Flight Officer in April 1992 and was assigned to Attack Squadron (VA) 128 for training as an A-6E Bombardier/Navigator. After completing training in July 1993, he was assigned to the “Boomers” of VA 165. While assigned to VA 165 as schedules officer and line division officer, he completed one Western Pacific/Arabian Gulf deployment and decommissioned the squadron in August 1996. He then was assigned to Commander, Medium Attack Wing, Pacific as part of the A-6E “Shoretail” detachment until the retirement of the A-6E. Selected for transition to the EA-6B Prowler, he reported to Electronic Attack Squadron (VAQ) 129 in December 1996 for training as an EA-6B Electronic Countermeasures Officer.
After graduating from VAQ 129 in January 1998, Captain Steinbaugh was assigned to the “Gauntlets” of VAQ 136 in Atsugi, Japan for a “Super-JO” tour. While with VAQ 136 as the personnel officer and assistant maintenance officer, he completed two Arabian Gulf deployments and numerous Western Pacific deployments. Promoted to Lieutenant Commander in August 2000, he was extended in VAQ 136 in order to complete his department head tour, serving as the squadron’s operations officer.
From January 2002 until January 2004, Captain Steinbaugh was assigned to VAQ 129 as the maintenance officer and as a fleet replacement squadron instructor. In January 2004, he was assigned to the Naval Strike and Air Warfare Center Strike Department as the electronic warfare division officer, where he instructed carrier air wings in Suppression of Enemy Air Defense tactics. Captain Steinbaugh was then assigned to the staff of Commander, Naval Air Forces, as the EA-6B/EA-18G Class Desk Officer from July 2005 to January 2007. He then proceeded to VAQ 129 for refresher training and reported in November 2007 to VAQ 131 as the executive officer. He assumed command of VAQ 131 in February 2009. In May 2010, he reported back to VAQ 129 for transition to the EA-18G.
Captain Steinbaugh reported to Naval Strike and Air Warfare Center in October 2010 as the first Airborne Electronics Attack Weapons School (HAVOC) Department Head. As a HAVOC plank owner, he helped develop and establish the classroom and flight syllabus for the Growler Tactics Instructor course.
In June 2013, he became the Commanding Officer of Naval Air Station Fallon. Captain Steinbaugh now serves as Director of Training at Naval Aviation Warfighting Development Center, on Naval Air Station Fallon.
N2: The Information Warfare Directorate at NAWDC is responsible for ensuring command leadership and personnel are provided the full capabilities of the Information Warfare Community (IWC) to support combat readiness and training of Carrier Air Wings and Strike Groups. The Directorate is comprised of four areas of focus: Air Wing Intelligence Training, the Maritime ISR (MISR) Cell, Targeting, and Command Information Services (CIS).
The Air Wing Intelligence Training Division is responsible for training CVW Intelligence Officers and Enlisted Intelligence Specialists in strike support operations. The MISR Cell is tasked with providing ISR integration into Carrier Air Wing training as well as qualifying MISR Package Commanders and Coordinators. The Targeting Division trains and certifies all CVW Targeteer personnel and provides distributed reach-back support for deployed units worldwide regarding target development. CIS provides cyber security and computer network operations for the entire NAWDC enterprise.
N3: NAWDC Operations department (N3) is responsible for the coordination, planning, synchronization, and scheduling for the operations of the command, its assigned aircraft, and airspace and range systems within the Fallon Range Training Complex (FRTC).
N4: NAWDC’s Maintenance Department is the heart of training for all the NAWDC schoolhouses. Maintenance’s focus is providing mission-ready fleet and adversary aircraft configured with required weapons and systems for all training evolutions. We support day to day training missions with the F-16 Viper, F-18 Hornet and Super Hornet, EA-18G Growler, E-2C Hawkeye and the MH-60S Seahawk; conducting scheduled and un-scheduled maintenance on 39 individual aircraft. These aircraft and weapon systems are the foundation for all other NAWDC Department’s training syllabi.
N5: Responsible for training Naval aviation in advanced Tactics, Techniques and Procedures (TTP) across assigned combat mission areas at the individual, unit, integrated and joint levels, ensuring alignment of the training continuum; to set and enforce combat proficiency standards; to develop, validate, standarize, publish and revise TTPs.
Also provides subject matter expertise support to strike group commanders, numbered fleet commanders, Navy component commanders and combatant commanders; to lead training and warfighting effectiveness assessments and identify and mitigate gaps across all platforms and staffs for assigned mission areas as the supported WDC; and collaborates with other WDCs to ensure cross-platform intergration and alignment.
NAWDC’s Joint NAWDC’s Joint Close-Air Support (JCAS) Division continues to answer the needs of current theater operations with increased production of Joint Terminal Attack Controllers Course (JTACC).NAWDC’s Joint NAWDC’s Joint Close-Air Support (JCAS) Division continues to answer the needs of current theater operations with increased production of Joint Terminal Attack Controllers Course (JTACC). NAWDC JCAS primarily trains Naval Special Warfare and Riverine Group personnel, but has this year also trained U.S. Army Special Operations, U.S. Marine Corps Air and Naval Gunfire Liaison Officers, international personnel, as well as U.S. Navy Fixed and Rotary Wing Forward-Air Controller (Airborne) personnel.
NAWDC’s JCAS branch is the U.S. Navy’s designated representative to the Coalition JCAS Executive Steering Committee, and is a recognized authority on kinetic air support to information warfare (IW), tactical precision targeting, and digitally aided CAS.
N6: Carrier Airborne Early Warning Weapons School (CAEWWS), also referred to as TOP DOME, is the E-2 weapon school and responsible for Airborne Tactical Command and Control advanced individual training via the Hawkeye Weapons and Tactics Instructors (HEWTIs) class. CAEWWS is also responsible for development of community Tactics, Technique and Procedures and provides inputs to the acquisition process in the form of requirements and priorities for research and development (R&D), procurement, and training systems.
CAEWWS works closely to support other Warfare Development Centers and Weapons Schools; such as the Surface and Mine Warfighting Development Center’s Integrated Air Defense Course (IADC) and Integrated Air and Missile Defense WTI Integration Course (IWIC). Other functions include support to advanced integrated fleet training by way of WTI augmentation to the N5/STRIKE Department for CVW integrated training detachments; also known as Air Wing Fallon Detachment and support of squadron activities.
N7: In the early stages of the Vietnam War, the tactical performance of Navy fighter aircraft against seemingly technologically inferior adversaries, the North Vietnamese MiG-17, MiG-19, and MiG-21, fell far short of expectations and caused significant concern among national leadership.
Based on an unacceptable ratio of combat losses, in 1967, ADM Tom Moorer, Chief of Naval Operations, commissioned an in-depth examination of the process by which air-to-air missile systems were acquired and employed. Among the multitude of findings within this report was the critical need for an advanced fighter weapons school, designed to train aircrew in all aspects of aerial combat including the capabilities and limitations of Navy aircraft and weapon systems, along with those of the expected threat.
In 1969, the United States Navy Fighter Weapons School (TOPGUN) was established to develop and implement a course of graduate-level instruction in aerial combat. Today, TOPGUN continues to provide advanced tactics training for FA-18A-F aircrew in the Navy and Marine Corps through the execution of the Strike Fighter Tactics Instructor (SFTI) Course. TOPGUN is the most demanding air combat syllabus found anywhere in the world. The SFTI Course ultimately produces graduate-level strike fighter tacticians, adversary instructors, and Air Intercept Controllers (AIC) who go on to fill the critical assignment of Training Officer in fleet units.
N8: Navy’s Rotary Wing Weapons School is composed of a staff of 25 pilots and aircrewmen who instruct the Seahawk Weapons and Tactics Instructor program; provide tactics instructors to fleet squadrons; maintain and develop the Navy’s helicopter tactics doctrine via the SEAWOLF Manual; instruct the Navy’s Mountain Flying School; provide high-altitude, mountainous flight experience for sea-going squadrons; and provide academic, ground, flight, and opposing-forces instruction for visiting aircrew during Air Wing Fallon detachments.
N9: The NAWDC Safety Department (N9) serves as the principle advisor to the Commander on all matters pertaining to safe command operations and is responsible for administering the following safety programs: aviation, ground, ergonomics, motor vehicles (personal, commercial), recreation, and on- and off-duty. Our goal is to eliminate preventable mishaps while maximizing operational readiness. We accomplish this by preserving lives, preventing injury, and protecting equipment and material.
N10: The US Navy’s Airborne Electronic Attack Weapons School, call sign “HAVOC”, stood up in 2011 to execute the NAWDC mission as it pertains to Electronic Warfare and the EA-18G Growler. HAVOC is comprised of highly qualified Growler Tactics Instructors, or GTIs, that form the “tactical engine” of the EA-18G community, developing the tactics that get the most out of EA-18G sensors and weapons. HAVOC’s mission is also to train Growler Aircrew and Intelligence Officers on those tactics during the Growler Tactics Instructor Course.
The Growler Tactics Instructor Course is a rigorous 12 week syllabus of academic, simulator, and live fly events that earn graduates the Growler Tactics Instructor designation – the highest level of EA-18G tactical qualification that is recognized across Naval Aviation. The Growler brings the most advanced tactical Electronic Warfare capabilities to operational commanders creating a tactical advantage for friendly air, land, and maritime forces by delaying, degrading, denying, or deceiving enemy kill chains.
N20: The Tomahawk Landing Attack Missile (TLAM) Department provides direct support to U.S. Fleet Forces Command (USFFC) in the development and standardization of tactics, techniques and procedures for the employment of the Tomahawk weapon system. In addition, TLAM provides training to the CVW, fleet, and joint commands on TLAM capabilities and strike integration
The mine threat is a significant one affecting operations, notably in littoral areas.
The Australian Navy certainly recognizes the threat and is expanding the envelope of systems to deal with this threat.
Notably, they are preparing for a new role for unmanned underwater systems.
According to an article published August 11, 2017 by the Australian Department of Defnece, they are shaping a way ahead for deployable Mine Countermeasure Capabilities For Navy.
The Royal Australian Navy is forging ahead with new technologies to counter the threat of sea mines to military and commercial vessels.
The Head of Navy Capability, Rear Admiral Jonathan Mead, said the prevalence and increasing sophistication of sea mines means the Royal Australian Navy must continue to improve the way it finds and disposes of these mines.
“New autonomous and remote-controlled technologies deployed from within the maritime task force provides the opportunity to find and dispose of sea mines more safely and efficiently,” Rear Admiral Mead said.
“In the 2030s, Defence will seek to replace its specialised mine hunting and environmental survey vessels with a single fleet of multi-role vessels embarking advanced autonomous and uninhabited systems.”
Rear Admiral Mead said these newly introduced systems are the first step in realising a future capability which would allow the Royal Australian Navy to clear sea mines with minimal risk to its people and assets.
“Thales Australia Ltd will deliver and support the new equipment over the next 15 years,” Rear Admiral Mead said.
The new capability will primarily be based and sustained at HMAS Waterhen in Sydney, New South Wales.
Rear Admiral Mead also focused on upgrading the current counter mine vessels as well in his statement.
The Australian Government has granted First Pass approval to extend the service life for Navy’s Huon Class Minehunter Coastal vessels.
The Head of Navy Capability, Rear Admiral Jonathan Mead, said the project forecast in the Defence White Paper 2016 will ensure Defence is able to provide an effective maritime mine countermeasure capability out to the 2030s.
“Minehunters play a vital role in protecting Australia’s ships, harbours and infrastructure from the threat of sea mines,” Rear Admiral Mead said.
“First Pass approval is a major milestone for this project that will see the life of the Minehunters extended to ensure there is no gap in mine warfare capability as we determine the replacement vessels.
“The Huon Class have proven highly capable, supporting Defence’s international engagement strategy through participation in exercises and operations to secure our sea lanes and disposing of Second World War explosive remnants, and they will continue to serve Australia for years to come.
“In addition to its mine warfare role, the Huon Class vessels play a unique role in Defence assistance to the civil community and in 2011 provided support in response to severe flooding in Queensland, including the disposal of debris that posed a navigational hazard,” Rear Admiral Mead said.
The Australian Defence industry will be heavily involved in the future of the platforms. Negotiations are underway with Thales Australia to engage them as the Prime Systems Integrator to deliver the project. Under Thales’ lead there will be opportunities for other Australian companies to support the Minehunters through their service life.
The Huon class were built by Thales Australia, formerly ADI, and were introduced into service in the early 2000s.
2017-08-17 Mobility Guardian 2017 is a lift and tanking exercise designed to enhance the training of U.S. and allied crews in terms of operating in contested airspace.
As high tempo and high intensity operations return as a core activity, the Aussies at Tailsman Sabre 2017 and at Mobility Guardian 2017 are focused on shape capabilities and working with allies in the contested environment.
We have upcoming interviews conducted during the current visit to Australia which will further discuss both exercises and the enhanced training of the RAAF for operations in contested airspace.
According to an article published by the Australian Department of Defence on August 12, 2017, RAAF participation in Mobility Guardian 2017 is highlighted.
The Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) has dispatched its two largest aircraft—C-17A Globemaster III transport and KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport—to the United States for Exercise Mobility Guardian 17.
Held in Washington State from 30 July to 12 August 2017, Mobility Guardian 17 is conducted by the US Air Force (USAF) and involves the rehearsal of key air mobility roles.
This includes air-to-air refuelling from the KC-30A and aerial delivery of cargo to a drop zone by the C-17A.
RAAF Base Amberley in Queensland will provide most of the 120 deployed personnel who will join 1,700 USAF members along with 330 personnel from other nations.
Commanding Officer No. 36 Squadron, Wing Commander Peter Thompson, who is leading the Australian element, said RAAF has never practiced air mobility missions on the same scale as Mobility Guardian 17.
99452random1.05.0
“Mobility Guardian 17 will involve participants delivering a ‘first stage’ response to a contingency event that has taken place within a contested environment,” Wing Commander Thompson said.
“Our role is to work with international partners to deliver that first stage response, and then sustain those forces within that environment, responding to their needs as the scenario develops.
“Air mobility is a critical part of how modern defence forces maintain logistical links, whilst it is often used operationally; it is seldom exercised on a large scale.”
Working alongside RAAF’s KC-30A and C-17A are the USAF’s colossal C-5M Galaxy transport, its KC-135 and KC-10 tankers, and the Royal Air Force’s A400M Atlas turboprop.
Having introduced the C-17A and KC-30A to service during the last decade, RAAF will bring a wealth of experience to the Exercise.
“Coming to Mobility Guardian 17 allows us to leverage the training opportunities developed by the USAF’s Air Mobility Command, which are unmatched in their scale or complexity,” Wing Commander Thompson said.
“At the same time, we’re able to demonstrate what our crews are capable of delivering, so we can better work with international partners in future situations.”
“The RAAF contingent will be integrated into a group of 57 airlift and air-to-air refuelling aircraft during the exercise, the majority of which will fly two missions per day,”
USAF leadership, international representatives and media gathered at Holloman AFB August 9, 2017 to focus on the USAF’s OA-X Experiment.
The event was organized under the auspices of the USAF Light Attack Experiment (OA-X) featuring the Sierra Nevada Corp./Embraer A-29 Super Tucano, Air Tractor Inc./L3 Platform Integration AT-802L Longsword, Textron Aviation’s AT-6 Wolverine and Scorpion Jet.
The composition of the group including U.S. Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson, U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff General David Goldfein, Air Combat Command Commander General Mike Holmes, Lt. General Arnold Bunch Asst. Secretary of the Air Force – Acquisition and many more.
Obviously, the USAF was underscoring the importance of this effort.
The message from Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson and Air Force Leaders who spoke was clear – the OA-X experiment is part of what the USAF hopes is a shift in USAF platform procurement and capability development philosophies.
In many respects, this message of change was the event.
As SecAF Wilson noted:
“Our adversaries are modernizing faster than we are and it is up to the USAF to drive innovation so that our adversaries are surprised by just how powerful we are and how ready we are for any fight, anytime, anywhere.
That means we have to think about things in new ways and identify new capabilities faster than we have done in the past.”
“This drive to innovation to find rapid and affordable solutions to the challenges that we face on the battlefield is really about two things; It’s about what we are looking at, and it’s about how we are developing those capabilities.
Innovation is in the DNA of the USAF, and sometimes and perhaps at some points in our history we have lost that, that DNA of being the ‘bicycle mechanics’ who are constantly tinkering and finding new things and getting after it in new ways.
99393random1.05.0
We are trying to reinvigorate that in the Air Force in both what we are researching and how we are pursuing innovation.”
“With respect to the What, I expect over the next couple months we will begin a wide ranging review of USAF research priorities in basic and applied research [to identify] the big things we have to drive forward to create the Air Force of 2030.”
“It is also about How we are pursuing [innovation].
We are looking for new ways to do business.
New ways to get ideas from our lab bench to our flightline faster.
New ways to get capabilities that our Airman need today and can’t wait the 2-3 years for the normal acquisition process.
We’re breaking barriers, going outside the box.
We’re willing to try new things in new ways.”
Wilson provided the following examples, “We are moving forward with a National Space Defense Center so we can have real time situational awareness of the space battlefield. That system, like all Air Force systems going forward will be open architecture.”
To be unmistakably clear Wilson stated that [exquisite (exclusive) or stand alone systems] “…will not win a contract with the USAF. If it doesn’t integrate with the open architecture you might as well not bid. That is going to be the way we will do business.
We won’t have exquisite and exclusive systems.
We want to have plug and play systems so we can rapidly change out technologies to stay ahead of the adversary.”
SecAF Wilson noted a recent example of the Special Operations Command (SOC) doing things “outside the box” that yielded the desired results; “Our special operators often go into very difficult situations with dogs.
You can’t jump out of an airplane with a dog above 18,000 ft. because they don’t make oxygen masks for dogs.
So rather than go out with exact specifications and an RPA for an oxygen mask SOFWERX and SOC decided to hold a competition.
For a prize of $6,000 they got an oxygen mask for dogs!
And under the [relevant] Federal Act that qualifies as a competitive procurement.”
“We need to get after it in different ways.
The Light Attack Experiment that you will see today is one of those ‘outside the box’ ways of looking at things.
The $6,000,000 experiment was enabled by the US Congress in the 2016/2017 National Defense Authorization Acts and it gave rapid acquisition authority to the military to do things differently.
To his credit, Chief of Staff General Dave Goldfein decided to take advantage of this authority as it related to concepts for light attack.”
“In less than 5 months we have 4 aircraft on the ground for testing.
That is the kind of rapid evaluation that those provisions were intended to allow.
It is an experiment.
We are learning things.
We want to meet the demands of the permissive environments at lower costs.
We want to develop capabilities for contested environments and use this experiment to evaluate the military utility of these kinds of aircraft and the manufacturing feasibility of these aircraft.”
“The empirical data that we gather from this experiment will inform strategic decisions about where we need to go from here.
But I hope the broader message is clear to all.
It’s ok to experiment.
It’s okay to do things fast.
It’s okay to try stuff.
It’s okay to productively fail.
Because we learn things and then we move on very quickly to develop capabilities to defeat the enemy.”
Later in a follow-up interview SecAF Wilson unpacked the statement ‘productive failure;’ “One of the things we need to get back to as a service is “productive failure;” where we try something, learn from it, and it really was an experiment.
When we have the first experiment fail and learn from it – I am buying the cake.”
“We can’t just stand back, set out requirements do analyses of alternatives, spend five years figuring out exactly what we want, put out an RFP, throw it over the fence and take 10 years to develop the technology.
The adversary is innovating faster.
To prevail in 2020 and beyond we have to innovate, we have to engage industry and the private sector in helping us to maintain the edge.
It will be faster, it will be more dynamic.
We have some wonderful innovators in the USAF, we just need to liberate them.”
Quoting Lt. Gen Harris SecAF Wilson noted, ‘We are using the experiment to team with our industry partners with what is currently available to study the benefits to see if we can proceed to a combat demonstration.”
Wilson continued, “I hope this starts to change the way we do acquisition on projects and change the way in which we can understand capabilities and even think of new concepts and ways of bringing the fight to the enemy.”
As an future example of innovation and experimentation AFSec Wilson referenced Thunderdrone an upcoming competition involving “drone swarms” in conjunction with SOFWERX.
Later in the day, General Holmes noted the USAF sponsorship of the Drone Racing League as a related example of the Air Force commitment to embrace incoming technologies, people and capabilities.
Secretary Wilson concluded, “Let’s see what innovations Americans have and let’s start to adapt and bring them into the USAF to support our Airman.”
But to put this in perspective. I reflect on the early years of jet flight and the incredible activity that took place at Edwards AFB following WWII right through to the 1970s.
Granted the complexity of today’s weapons systems temper expectations that we will see anything like those decades again.
However, the leadership is clearly moving to renew and apply that spirit to the technology and capability opportunities available today.
Given success the US Air Force will remain the dynamic, powerful protectorate of the US and its global interests for the foreseen future.
Quotes have been edited for readability while maintaining integrity of meaning and intent.
The Second Line of Defense extends thanks and appreciation to Arlan Ponder and the entire Public Affairs team and personnel of 49th Wing Holloman AFB, as well as all the leaders of the USAF that granted time, availability and expertise to our group. You were all gracious and professional hosts.
150903-N-SS390-266 FALLON, Nev. (Sept. 3, 2015) F-35C Lightning IIs, attached to the Grim Reapers of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 101, and an F/A-18E/F Super Hornets attached to the Naval Aviation Warfighter Development Center (NAWDC) fly over Naval Air Station Fallon’s (NASF) Range Training Complex. VFA 101, based out of Eglin Air Force Base, is conducting an F-35C cross-country visit to NASF. The purpose is to begin integration of F-35C with the Fallon Range Training Complex and work with NAWDC to refine tactics, techniques and procedures (TTP) of F-35C as it integrates into the carrier air wing. (U.S. Navy photo by Lt. Cmdr. Darin Russell/Released)
Warfare tactics instructors (WTI), from left to right, Lt. Cmdr. Mike Dwan, Lt Doug Wilkins, Lt. Lisa Schmidt, Lt Joseph Lewis, Lt Scott Margolis, Lt. Andrew Blanco, Lt Weston Floyd, LT Justin Bolly, Lt. Serg Samardzic, Lt. Rebecca O’Brien, and Lt. Cmdr. Derek Rader pause for a group photo at Naval Air Station (NAS) Fallon, in Nevada. The 11 integrated air and missile defense (IAMD) WTIs participated in a pilot integrated air defense course (IADC) — a joint effort led by the Naval Surface and Mine Warfighting Development Center (SMWDC) and Naval Aviation Warfighting Development Center (NAWDC). IADC will activate in late 2016 and train carrier air wings, carrier strike groups, and air and missile defense commanders in a simulated training environment at NAS Fallon. Several IAMD WTIs will teach and train the inaugural course alongside their aviation counterparts from Navy Weapons Fighter School (TOPGUN).
