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.
With President Obama visiting Vietnam, it is now time for a celebration of a very successful bipartisan pro-bono effort to help build elementary schools in Vietnam.
The late Jack Wheeler upon hearing of Lew Puller Jr ‘s tragic suicide challenged us all to build enough schools to honor all the names on The Vietnam Veteran Memorial.
Now with the 50th School built that quest has been doubled.
And the year end letter for 2015 captures the sense of progress.
Dear Friends of the Vietnam Children’s Fund,
The close of the year always seems to be a time of reflection for me. The first thing I think of is the gratitude we feel for the support we have from those who care about our work – building clean modern schools for children who live in some of the most deprived regions of Vietnam.
We have finished the renovation of Lew’s school, thanks to the generosity of Mr. H.F. Lenfest of Pennsylvania.
Last spring President Truong Tan Sang conferred the Friendship Medal on Sam in recognition of the important contributions he has made for the past two decades in his work with VCF. This Medal is the highest honor accorded by the Government of Vietnam to non-citizens.
In June an elaborate new playground was installed at the award winning school in Thai Binh, a generous gift from Mr. Binh Tran of Washington, DC.
We are working now on the new school in Quang Nam, sponsored by FedEX which will be number 50! And a school in Ha Giang, sponsored by Mr. and Mrs. Pat Lomma, our 51st!
We remain deeply grateful to all those who have supported our work over the years. Your gifts, large and small, have made it possible to change the lives of more than 100,000 children. Many have gone on to secondary education and beyond. There are no words to express our appreciation. If you are moved to give VCF a gift our mailing address remains PO Box 150, Unionville, VA.
Wishing you and yours the very Best of the Holiday season and beyond.
The above letter written by the two distinguished co-chairs of the Vietnam Children’s Fund , Terry Anderson and Kieu Chinh and perfectly captures the success of a project that began two decades ago.
Since the letter the 50th School was dedicated thanks to the generosity of FedEx a company created by a decorated Vietnam veteran Fred Smith.
This is a picture of the famously talented actress Kieu Chinh and the VFC project manager Sam Russell who was awarded the Vietnam Friendship Medal, the highest award bestowed on non-citizens.
L-R Sam Russell, Lan Vien, Board members Kieu Chinh and Binh Nguyen.
With the 50th school having been built, it is time to reflect on all who made this worthy effort possible.
Two decades ago group of friends got together at the Freedom Forum in the old Arlington USA Today headquarters to launch an effort to build a school in Vietnam in honor of the late Lew Puller.
Today his legacy is very much alive with the children of Vietnam.
The Vietnam Children’s Fund was the dream of Lewis B. Puller, Jr. who lost both legs and most of both hands to a land mine during the Vietnam War.
Lew was awarded two Purple Hearts and a Silver Star while serving as a Marine Lieutenant.
His personal experience, expressed in his Pulitzer Prize-winning book, Fortunate Son, led him to believe that in war no one goes unscathed, and that children, the most vulnerable of all, suffer the greatest hardships.
In the year before his death, Lew Puller returned to Vietnam seeking ideas for the living memorialhe and several friends had decided to build to honor the Vietnamese men, women, and children who died in that country’s long wars.
He decided that the most appropriate monument to the past and greatest hope for the future would be schools for Vietnam’s children.
Lew died just before the ground-breaking of the first school, built in Quang Tri Province on the old demilitarized zone and dedicated in his name on the 20th anniversary of the end of the Vietnam War.
Since Lew’s death, his friends have remained determined to realize his dream.
(Left to Right) Ed Tumperlake, Lan Vien Jack Wheeler, Sam Russell, Kim Anh, Marcia Landau, Terry Anderson, Kieu Chin, and Tony Accamando Board members not seen in the photo are Joy Carroll and the Honorable Pat Derian.
During the journey to the 5th School many were very helpful especially the late Al Neuharth, and the late David Broder of The Washington Post.
Mr. Neuharth sponsored the original meeting space and David Broder’s column, very early in the effort, about honoring Lew was so very important.
“The project is an inspiring example of how people of goodwill can turn violence and tragedy into a cause for hope.”-David Broder, The Washington Post.
As the Vietnam War enters the history of America four people who made a difference are no longer with us:
Jack Wheeler was brutally murdered in 2011 and the crime remains unsolved.
Jim Kimsey who donated the seed money to build the first school.
Board Member Tom Kennedy who left us all to soon.
Tom was passionate about and dedicated to the Vietnamese children.
Over the years he raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for VCF.
His family and friends personally funded the construction of two schools: one in Phu Da and one in Que Son, the home village of his adopted son Khoa.
Thanks for everything, Tom.
We miss you.
The sounds of a distant battlefield are echoing into history but the sounds of Vietnamese children attending VCF schools will be with many generations yet to come.
For an opportunity to comment on this article, please go to the following:
During my visit to the United Kingdom in May 2016, I had a chance to meet with Air Commodore Harvey Smyth and members of the RAF Lightning Force team.
Air Commodore Smyth was the Tornado Force commander and has been involved with the F-35 program throughout its evolution from briefing charts to operational aircraft.
In his role as the Lightning Force Commander, Air Commodore Smyth is leading a team leveraging the force being trained and prepared in the United States and standing up the initial infrastructure at RAF Marham, a base which has been the key Tornado base for more than 30 years.
The British are on the ground floor of the standup, development and evolution of the F-35 as an air combat system, and visits to Pax River, Edwards, Eglin, Beaufort and Yuma have clearly demonstrated their key presence in the program and its long-term evolution.
Illustrative of the UK role was seen during an interview at Pax River, where a UK MoD engineer discussed the team Integrated Test Force at Pax River.
Question: How does the ITF work from a UK point of view?
Gordon Stewart: “Let me speak to my case.
I am employed by QinetiQ, but I am working here on behalf of the UK Ministry of Defence.
At the ITF, there around 900 people working here with the vast majority being U.S. Around 2/3s of the work force are contractors, and a third is government, and within that mix there are a number of UK nationals.
The UK is the only level one partner in the F-35 program, which means that we are more closely involved in the test phase of the program than other partners.
And, in my case, I work as a Flying Qualities (FQ) engineer on the 30-40 person FQ team as an integrated member.
As FQ engineers, we look at things like flight control laws and how the pilot interacts with those controls and what the aircraft feels like to fly in a wide range of conditions.
Where we do identify issues as we expand into new areas of the flight envelope, we work closely with the control law designers in Fort Worth to have those issues resolved.
We deal with the software that relates to flight controls, and those systems feeding data into the flight controls from the mission systems. Things like how the aircraft is going to get information from the ship as to where it is, what direction it is going, or how fast it is going.
As Stewart added:
This is the most integrated test team I have ever worked on.
As we work the way ahead, it might be a UK person, a Lockheed person, or a US government person who provides the best solution. It is a very well integrated team at the working level.
Computer Generated Image of the Maintenance and Finish Facility which is being built at RAF Marham, Norfolk, as part of a programme of works to prepare the station for the arrival of the F-35 Lightning II fleet in 2018.
It is a very different test process than in the past, although what is happening in the F-35 program is the way we are approaching the future as well. In the past, there was much more serial testing.
Twenty years ago when I first started, the contractor would do something and then throw it over the fence to the government, which would look at it, approve it and then pass it on to the operator.
Now with the pace of technology, and the role of software, we have a much more integrated process. We are shaping the evolution of the aircraft as it goes out the door as well.
At Pax, we are testing a software version ahead or a couple ahead of what the fleet is getting at the moment. In effect, we are testing the next iteration of the aircraft.
And the Edwards and Beaufort efforts provide important pieces to the evolution as well. We have an integrated RAF and Royal Navy team at Edwards. 17 (R) squadron at Edwards is a mix of RAF and RN.
At Beaufort, we have a UK team and one of our aircraft, and we are working closely with the USMC. That is another key element of the joint integrated effort, from our point of view.
It can be easily forgotten that the USAF and the RAF have not flown the same aircraft for a very long time indeed.
The RAF and the Marines have flown Harriers and along with the Spanish and Italians formed a three-decade Harrier community.
And Smyth as a Harrier pilot underscored the importance of this shared legacy moving forward.
“As an RAF pilot with significant maritime and carrier operational experience, we are shaping a collegiate and joint way ahead with the Royal Navy which brings the RAF domain knowledge of ways to operate in the extended battlespace with the coming of the F-35B to the new Queen Elizabeth class carrier.
Being radical, I think it would make sense to put a picture of the Queen Elizabeth class carrier on our RAF recruiting poster;the RAF and the RN are jointly delivering the UK’s future Carrier Strike capability, and a all RAF Lightning pilots will spend some of their time at sea, as I did throughout my 16-year career in Joint Force Harrier – we are forging an integrated approach together, which is incredibly exciting.”
When I was at Williamtown Air Base, the RAAF showed me the makeover of the base with the coming of the F-35, but made the point that the government was remaking the base for the next 50 years of the evolution of airpower, not just preparing for the F-35.
With the RAF it is different.
“The UK Government is investing heavily in an infrastructure redevelopment programme at RAF Marham for the 2018 arrival of our Lightning Force.
Specifically, this is centred purely on the F-35 Lightning, and doesn’t necessarily focus on other domestic infrastructure on the base, such as new accomodation. In the future, no doubt, the domestic site will also need an uplift – effectively, bringing Lightning to Marham secures the base for at least another 40-50 years.
In the near term, we are focussed on shaping the F-35 infrastructure with the long-term perspective in mind, with regard to security and support of the aircraft.
Much of the infrastructure redevelopment involves building from scratch, as opposed to redeveloping existing architecture.”
Smyth added: “There’s a cost benefit to starting from scratch, specifically because of the need to security accredit the buildings for Lightning.
If you take an old building and try to accredit it, you must basically strip it back to nothing and then rebuild it again anyway so that you know intimately what is in the make-up of that building. Building from new is a much easier, and more cost-effective, approach.
Alongside the Lightning specific buildings, we are also updating the operating surfaces – this work was needed to be done anyway, regardless of the fact that Lightning was coming to Marham.
The main runway is getting redone.
The secondary runway, which is currently disused due to disrepair, is being rebuilt completely, and will include a short strip specifically for F-35B STOL operations.
The current taxiways are being redone and we are building 3 new purpose-built vertical landing pads, and an ajoining taxiway structure.”
Air Commodore Smyth emphasized that the RAF was standing up a base where the goal was to have clear operational sovereignty over their aircraft.
“We are building what we call our Freedom of Action facilities that allow us to maintain operational sovereignty of the airplane, which give us an ability to use the aircraft, and maintain the aircraft, through life, at a time and place of our choosing.
That was always the absolute foundational bedrock of UK being a tier one partner in the F35 programme – it is extremely important for UK Defence that we achieve an ability to maintain operational sovereignty over our jets.
With this in mind, we’re building our own maintenance and final finish facility so that we can do our own upgrades to the airplane, including stealth repair.”
The UK is also building a number of the facilities which have been stood up in the United States, such as a version of the Eglin Academic Training Center.
And one key expectation of the RAF and UK government’s part is that the sustainment approach for the F-35 will build upon their successful Performance Based Logistics model used for both the Tornado and Typhoon.
One evidence of that expectation is that the UK is building a facility for the services and industry to work together, hand in hand, in maintaining and modernizing the aircraft.
Air Commodore Smyth spoke at some length and passion about his experience as the Tornado Force Commander, where a 40+-year-old aircraft was able to be maintained throughout the very high tempo ops facing an aging force.
He argued that simply put: “We could not have had the operational performance of the aircraft without our exceptional contractual and joined-up working relationships with BAE Systems and Rolls Royce.”
The contracts deliver a product – an aircraft able to go to combat, and he would like to see the focus shift from payments to industry based on simple aircraft availability, to ones based on dispatch rate and mission achievement for combat aircraft.
Air Commodore Smyth also discussed the ROCET contract with Rolls Royce as an example of how to do sustainment leveraging using the right kind of industrial-service partnership.
“In the ROCET contract, a few years ago we contracted Rolls Royce to do our FOD management for us.
We were probably trashing upwards of 2 or 3 engines a year through a FOD.
We were doing everything we could from an air force point of view to be good managers of foreign object damage.
Computer Generated Image of the outside of one of the facilities which is being built at RAF Marham, Norfolk, as part of a programme of works to prepare the station for the arrival of the F-35 Lightning II fleet in 2018.
We incentivized Rolls Royce to take that on, and as the subject matter experts, they were, and are, fantastic at it.
In fact last year, we had zero engines rejected due to FOD, and that’s down to them applying proper analysis and procedures and recommendations with regards to how to drive down a FOD-engine repair rate.
All of a sudden it’s a win-win for everybody.
As a Force Commander, I get better operational capability out of my airplanes.
I also have engineers that aren’t changing engines, and are able to concentrate on other work.
Rolls Royce makes more money due to the contract incentivization, and I get much better operational performance. Why wouldn’t this be a good thing?
More importantly, we do this effort together, as a Whole Force, so regardless of being Industry or Serviceman, we are all pulling together to deliver operational excellence.”
He clearly wishes to see the F-35 program build on this historical experience and not follow the USAF historic approach to sustainment with their F-15s at Lakenheath.
“With that approach. they are well over 10 years behind us with regard to our sustainment approach and experience.
I would hope that we could leverage this experience, and apply it to the sustainment of our inbound Lightning Force.”
He discussed the shift from a global solution to one, which could be shaped around regional hubs, and thought that the emergence of a viable regional hub support approach would make the most sense.
There are clear barriers to getting there, but for Air Commodore Smyth and others in the RAF, a forward leaning PBL was a necessary ingredient to ensuring the sortie generation rates which the aircraft is capable of doing.
How did he see the strategic opportunity of working with the USAF, as the USAF brings its two squadrons of F-35As to the UK?
“It is early days, but we are discussing ways to shape synergy.
We already have an excellent working relationship with our USAFE colleagues, and both sides are being very open to exploring ideas.
But the real opportunity will lie in joint training and some semblance of joint sustainment.
How do we do training in a more joined up way, both synthetically which is of immediate interest to me, and live with our F-35s because there’s got to be synergy in our approaches in British and European air space.
This could then no doubt grow beyond a UK-USAFE relationship, as our close European neighbors establish their F-35s in their countries.
The next question then is sustainment.
What is the appetite from the USAF to want to leverage off what will already be found at RAF Marham as we shape our infrastructure?
We fully understand that the JPO is still working hard to bottom out what the eventual Global Sustainment Solution will look like.
But at Marham we have left an ability to do modular builds and to grow it bigger if there is an appetite from USAF, or from someone in Europe, to want to bring their airplanes in as well.
This applies to training as well as sustainment.
The USAF has operated F-15s at RAF Lakenheath and have used a classic USAF model of flying in parts to sustain their F-15s with C-5s, C-17s and tankers.
It would make sense to shift to a new model whereby our F-35s shared sustainment and parts, transparently between our two bases, which after all are not very far apart.”
The ATTAC Contract
From the BAE Systems website:
Tornado ATTAC
We provide the Royal Air Force with a guarantee that their Tornado aircraft’s availability, capability and effectiveness will be maintained throughout its service life. This enables the RAF to perform their duties.
This is a contract with UK Ministry of Defence to maintain and support the RAF fleet of Tornado aircraft until their retirement in 2019.
We have a commitment to supporting and maintaining the fleet; with a responsibility of ensuring that enough aircraft are available for the squadrons to fly, making them easily deployable on operations.
We have a 250 strong team that works alongside the customer in order to deliver this service mainly from RAF Marham in Norfolk. To cut out any delays in the decision-making process there are communications links to the supply chain and project management teams at our Warton and Samlesbury sites also.
According to David Ward, Head of UK Fleet Operations, Tornado: “It is incredibly important that we perform for the RAF for the security of the nation, but it’s also important from a business point of view because around the world we have to deliver on our commitments here in the UK.”
The Benefits:
Guaranteed availability of the aircraft – UK Tornado fleet is able to rapidly deploy on operations. Recent deployments include Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan.
Capability upgrades and maintenance – capability upgrades are scheduled around servicing to cut down on lost time and increase aircraft availability.
Prompt joint decisions – through working side-by-side with the customer and using camera links to team members at other locations.
The Tornado aircraft has been involved in continued operations for almost 25 years, its capabilities have been extensively modified as a weapons platform and it sits strongly up there with the best. As Tornado’s planned out of service date of 2019 approaches, the team continues to develop its capability as it provides support on a day-to-day basis.
Rolls-Royce opens new Service Centre at RAF Marham
Friday, 11 January 2013
Rolls-Royce, the global power systems company, has opened its first Service Delivery Centre to support military engines at the Royal Air Force base at Marham in Norfolk, UK. The facility was officially opened today by the Chief of the Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal Sir Stephen Dalton, and Rolls-Royce Chief Executive Officer, John Rishton.
A team of around 15 specialist Rolls-Royce engineers will work alongside their RAF counterparts at the new centre to deliver tailored support services for the Tornado combat aircraft’s RB199 engines at the customer’s operating base. The Service Delivery Centre also features live video links to the Rolls-Royce Operations Centre in Bristol, which will enable real-time decision making on engine issues helping to further increase aircraft availability for missions.
Service Delivery Centres form part of a suite of innovative support solutions that Rolls-Royce is implementing across a global network of over 100 military customers. The centres are aimed at improving engine availability and reducing costs for customers.
The Chief of the Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal Sir Stephen Dalton, said: “I was privileged to be at Royal Air Force Marham today to open the newly refurbished Rolls-Royce Service Delivery Centre. This state of the art facility will provide critical support to the Royal Air Force’s Tornado fleet so that it can continue to deliver the first rate operational capability for which the Force is justifiably famous.
We are grateful for the essential support that our industry partners provide; their work, in true partnership with the Royal Air Force, has and will continue to deliver world class performance on operations and in training.”
John Rishton, Rolls-Royce Chief Executive, said: “This new Service Delivery Centre is an excellent example of Rolls-Royce and the Royal Air Force working in close partnership at the heart of our customer’s operations.
It will enable us to maximise engine time on-wing and improve response times on critical operational decisions.”
Rolls-Royce supports the Tornado’s RB199 engines under the ROCET (RB199 Operational Contract for Engine Transformation) contract which has effectively halved the cost of engine support for the RAF.
The contract was renewed and expanded in April 2010 to include the transfer of the RB199 repair and overhaul to Bristol from Marham.
This support model was significantly tested by the need to surge engine output in support of the UK’s Operation Ellamy activity in Libya in the summer of 2011 and delivered all customer requirements.
Work on the Service Delivery Centre started at Marham in April 2012 and was completed in September.
“Royal Navy and Royal Air Force Pilots are training to fly the new state-of-the-art stealth jet the F-35B Lightning II alongside their US counterparts at Marine Air Corps Station Beaufort, South Carolina.
The highly advanced 5th generation jet will come into UK service from 2018, but will make it’s first appearance over here at the Royal International Air Tattoo at RAF Fairford in July and the Farnborough Air Show too.”
Second Line of Defense has recently interviewed the Commander of the Lightning team and members of that team during a visit to the United Kingdom in May 2016, and the interview and related materials will appear laters this month.
Credit Video: UK Ministry of Defence, April 26, 2016
We have just published a book on the F-35 and 21st Century Defence: Shaping a Way Ahead.
The book is appearing initially on Amazon and will be available worldwide on Amazon stores in their digital format for reading on Kindle.
The book is about the arrival of the F-35 and its interactive role with other key innovations, which are reshaping the defence forces of the democracies.
As one analyst, put it: “If you did not have the F-35, you would have to invent it to be part of and to further the innovations we are pursuing to reshape defence, combat, and homeland security operations.”
The book draws on literally hundreds of visits with pilots, maintainers, testers, industrialists and visits in Asia, Europe and the Middle East discussing the F-35 and how it is viewed by key states as part of their defence transformation.
Here the continued focus is upon how the coming of the F-35 is part of the reshaping of European airpower and enabling 4th generation in the words of a Typhoon pilot to become “more lethal and survivable.”
But during my visit, I was able to talk with the Typhoon integration-working group.
The session was led by Brigadier General de Ponti, Deputy Director, of the European Air Group and joined by the “drivers” of the ETIP (Euro Typhoon Interoperability Project) as well as organizers of exercise efforts to shape a new approach, namely Lt. Col. Jacobo Lecube of the Spanish Air Force and Lt Col. Marco Schiattioni from the Italian Air Force and Chief of Staff Col. Stephane Pierre, of the Belgian Air Force.
The overall focus of the effort is upon shaping a more common fleet approach among Eurofighter nations.
Although four nations came together to build a common airplane, the planes have been used by four different air forces with limited overlap in standards and operating practices.
As the Euro-Typhoon is clearly a key element for the future of European airpower and with the coming of the F-35 to Europe, this makes little sense.
And what the European Air Group is focused upon are practical ways to shape more common fleet approaches among the air forces, which fly Euro-Typhoon.
Also, shaping a common template in doing Baltic air policing in which Eurofighter/Typhoons are becoming a frequent asset in executing the mission provides an obvious opportunity to find ways to shape common procedures and support approaches as well.
The problem was simply put by one of the participants:
“When an Italian Eurofighter lands on a German base, it can not use the ground support equipment or change a tire, because the standards are different.
These are procedural issues, which may make sense in terms of national norms but not in terms of common fleet operations.
Through this project we seek to end differences which get in the way of common operational support.”
According to BG de Ponti:
“The Eurofighter-Typhoon project is an important effort for our air forces.
It is about the co-evolution of Typhoon with the shaping of a 4th-5th generation integrated force.
It is two prongs of shaping more effective European airpower.
It is a building blocks approach to shaping evolving capabilities.”
The focus is upon achieving practical steps towards greater integration of the Eurofighter-Typhoon based on the working together of the crews to shape common approaches and capabilities.
The EAG is leveraging an exercise approach to shape a way ahead.
According to Lt Col. Schiattioni:
“We started as a normal forum, but quickly realized that we needed to shape an exercise approach.
From the beginning, the Tornado had a much more common operational approach than with Typhoons.
Although the jet was built together, each nation did its own training and TTPs.
Each nation operated the jet differently.
But now that we operate more together, we need clear common operating procedures, notably with regard to maintenance of the aircraft.
In turn, this drives a wedge in common modernization which needs to be done with the broader fleet.”
The approach is based on sharing information and to get the pilots and maintainers to together to share experiences and to shape common standards.
84506random1.05.0
Lt Col. Schiattioni underscored that “We managed to get the key people for each air force responsible for the standards for their national aircraft to shape a more global approach to standards.
And also important was bringing the maintainers together to share lessons learned and to shape more common maintenance procedures.”
Lt. Col. Lecube emphasized that the program has been very industry driven which meant that the operational commonality was not the center of attention.
“But at the squadron level there has been a growing interest ways to shape more operational commonality.
The Baltic patrolling was a key driver for this approach as well.
With the Spanish and the British e.g. operating together in the Baltic Air Patrol, it is crucial to operate a common SOP in such operations.”
A key achievement clearly is to shape a more common SOP for operations and maintenance which, of course, will become even more important as the Tranche 3 standard comes into play for the Eurofighter nations.
Underlying the new approach is a broad agreement reached many years ago where the seven Eurofighter nations agreed to broad ways to work together but the EAG as in other areas is focused on driving practical solutions.
Lt Col. Schiattioni added: “The sharing of information can provide a better way to underscore how each nation can pursue modernization but sort out which among the Eurofighter nations is interested in a solution generated by a particular nation.
This will allow national, bi-national approaches which can drive innovation for the larger Eurofighter enterprise.”
In the words of one speaker at the 4th-5th generation working group, there was a clear need to modernize the Eurofighter approach to modernization.
Clearly, the EAG is making a key contribution to this effort.
Eurofighter/Typhoon Interoperability Exercise – Albacete AB (Spain)
Four nations (Germany, Italy, Spain and UK) of the European Air Group (EAG) conducted a multinational exercise, VOLCANEX Eurofighter Typhoon Interoperability Project (ETIP) LIVEX 15, from 14 – 18 September at Albacete Air Base (Spain).
The aim was to strengthen Eurofighter/Typhoon interoperability and standardization between the EAG nations through the use of common Standard Operating Procedures (SOP), and to familiarize ground crews on other nations AGE (Aircraft Ground Equipment),“Turn around” and QRA procedures.
The key to success in multinational operations is a common understanding and efficient coordination and communications between nations of what to do and how to do it.
The EAG, consisting of the Air Forces of Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom, seeks to improve the operational capabilities of the Parties’ Air Forces to carry out operations in pursuit of shared interests.
One way of achieving this goal is by developing common doctrines and procedures. VOLCANEX is the European Air Group’s name for current and future multinational exercises on which it seeks to refine and validate its developed products and procedures.
87187random1.05.0
IM OF VOLCANEX ETIP LIVEX 15
VOLCANEX ETIP LIVEX 15 was a week-long exercise primarily focused on achieving a common EAG SOP for Air Operations and to improve familiarization through the exchange of best practices among aircrew and maintenance personnel of the Eurofighter/Typhoon community.
The live Air Operation Exercise was conducted under the ‘Eurofight Technical Agreement’ at the Spanish Air Force Base of Albacete, taking advantage of the concomitant deployment of nation’s aircrafts for the Tactical Leadership Programme Flying Course.
The exercise, hosted by the 14 ALA of the Spanish Air Force, was directed by EAG personnel, together with the senior national representatives.
The level of experience amongst the participants allowed to the exercise objectives to be achieved quickly and in particular to establish a usable and valid SOP for Eurofighter/Typhoon operations.
A ‘bottom-up’ / operator-led approach encouraged participants to explore the specific tools needed for further development of interoperability within the community.
A full week’s program focused on interoperability where daily aircrews compared, discussed, and validated in flight, common procedures throughout the missions spectrum.
Meanwhile ground crews had the opportunity to familiarize with launch and recovery (see off/in) and QRA procedures and to demonstrate their own national AGE.
A total of 8 very highly experienced pilots and more than 18 engineers/ground crew personnel took an active part in VOLCANEX ETIP LIVEX 15 and 28 total sorties were flown.
“The achievement of a Common SOP is a milestone in the development of future combined training and operations for the Eurofighter/Typhoon community.
`For instance, we are providing a useful tool for the operators to be employed in the Baltic air-policing mission where the four nations are currently involved.` said Lt Col Jacobo Lecube, member of the EAG permanent staff and Exercise Director.
It was also the first time that this Exercise was focused on 1st line maintenance interoperability issues, providing not only the opportunity to discuss and share best practices, but also to observe and practice together in order to identify possible tools and ways ahead for a better interoperability on future combined scenarios.
The EAG describes the project as follows on its website:
In September 2011, the Eurofighter operating community comprising 4 EAG Nations (Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom), two additional Eurofighter users (Austria and Saudi Arabia), NETMA and the Industry, signed the Typhoon User
Group (TUG) Agreement.
The Agreement aimed to provide an open forum for the exchange of operational, capability, sustainability and maintainability views and develop best practice within the Eurofighter-Typhoon operator community, industry and for other potential users.
The EAG Nations felt that they needed to coordinate and exchange information at the tactical/operational/operating level in order:
To improve the coordination of flight safety activity amoung the Typhoon Nations,
To organize an annual conference to share TTPs at Squadron level,
To organize an annual conference for Operational Conversion Units (OCU).
The Euro Typhoon Interoperability Project, created in September 2013, seeks to work on these issues at tactical level, in order to developed improved interoperability between the EAG Eurofighter and Typhoon nation’s aircrews and supporting staff.
The main objectives agreed by the nations and established in the ToRs are as follows:
Improve coordination between the different Eurofighter and Typhoon squadrons.
Improve flight safety at the user level.
Share crew certification criteria.
Improve mission planning knowledge and capability.
Share information at the tactical level (TTPs).
Improve the sharing of the day-to-day troubleshooting and basic maintenance issues.
Share instructional syllabus and improve the Initial Basic Instruction and coordination of training activities at the OCUs.
Coordinate as much as possible, deployments and exercises for mutual benefits.
The first slideshow shows various photos of the typhoons.
The first photo shows the Typhoons in the formation along with the F-35 crossing the Atlantic and is credited to the Italian Ministry of Defence.
The second and third show RAF Typhoons involved in Red Flag 2015.
The fourth shows the Typhoon with the Storm Shadow.
The fifth shows the Typhoon with a Meteor missile.
And the final photo shows the Typhoon with both Storm Shadow and Meteor.
The second slideshow shows Typhoons during the EAG Typhoon interoperability exercise in Spain and the photos are credited to the Spanish Air Force and the European Air Group.
The video below shows Typhoons from RAF 3rd Squadron (based at Coningsby) participating in Red Flag 16-1.
During a visit to the Joint Airpower Competence Center of NATO located in Dusseldorf, Germany, specifically in Kalkar, Germany, I had a chance to discuss their important study on the evolution of air warfare capabilities in a networked environment.
The Joint Air Power Competence Center or JAPCC was formed and focused on helping NATO member nations shape more effective airpower solutions for 21st century challenges.
According to its website:
The Joint Air Power Competence Centre (JAPCC) was formed on 1 January 2005 to provide the strategic level proponent for Joint Air and Space (A&S) Power that was missing in NATO. Soon thereafter, JAPCC was accredited as NATO’s first Centre of Excellence (COE) and, as such, is charged with the development of innovative concepts and solutions required for the transformation of A&S Power within the Alliance and the Nations.
A&S Power SMEs, drawn from the Land, Maritime and Air components of the 15 MoU nations, conduct collaborative research into areas in which JAPCC assistance is requested by leveraging their independent thought and a global network of experts that reach across the military, academic and industrial spheres. The resulting analysis and solutions are disseminated via studies, reports, journal articles, seminars, panels and conferences.
The co-leads of the study are Lt. Col. Carlos Presa of the Spanish Air Force who is the Combat Air Branch Manned Air lead, and Commander William Perkins of the US Navy the lead analyst for maritime air including carrier operations.
The two co-leads provided an overview of this important study, which is focused on the evolution of C2 in a networked environment.
Broadly speaking, there are two schools of thought among those looking at future generation-enabled air operations.
One school of thought looks at the evolution of networks within which airpower creates its effects and the coming of fifth generation is largely understood in terms of both its impact upon and role within the evolution of networks. This can be seen largely as an update on understanding of network centric warfare in the second decade of the 21st century.
The second school of thought focuses on the evolution of C2 within which fifth generation aircraft provide an impetus to an evolving trend towards decentralized C2.
The difference can be a subtle one but it is a significant one.
The first prioritizes the networks, their operations, and their security and assumes that the hub and spoke system largely continues within which hierarchical decision-making remains a norm.
The second focuses on a honeycomb approach within which force packages are shaped to work with one another but C2 evolves within the battlespace.
With a solid communications structure, the 5th generation aircraft can function as a honeycomb which allows them to follow a distributed air con-ops and allows the combat force to operate interactively in three-dimensional space. (Credit: Bigstock)
Tactical decisions are made at the key point of attack and defense; strategic decision making is really about the decision to deploy a force package, shaping ways for confluence of force to operate and evaluating the impacts of those force packages and calibrating next steps for the deployment of continuous evolving force engagement model.
Although the project is entitled air warfare in a networked environment, the study falls squarely in the second school of thought.
The co-evolution of platforms to shape C2 in self-adjusting networked operational environments is a key element of the approach.
In an interview, which we did with a former USAF officer who then joined Northrop Grumman the key impact of fifth generation on command and control, was highlighted in a key manner:
“You don’t want to have a fifth-generation Air Force, shackled by a third-generation system of command and control.”
He then added:
“The concept of dispersing aircraft on airfields is well understood. Rather than park them wingtip-to-wingtip, commanders might disperse them across broader geographies, so that at worst case, an adversary could take out one or two airplanes, not the entire fleet. And this idea of dispersing for survival is well accepted.
But the same kind of concept is not generally applied to command and control at the operational-level with the same level of effort.
Dispersing command and control for survival or distributing command and control in a way that one can pick up the slack is essential.
If the CAOC goes away and the Joint Force Air Component Commander is unable to C2 the forces, then, who are the subordinate commanders?
And, and what ability do they have to continue to fight in terms of operational-level command and control?
For the current fight, the tactical-level C2 elements, the air battle managers on board the AWACS for example, will continue to fight the current fight. But, what happens next?
And so, I think a wing commander in the future will have to have ability, in the same way a brigade commander does in land warfare, to exercise appropriate command and control over his forces absent the higher authority … centralized command, distributed control, decentralized execution … mission command for the air component.”
It is in this spirit that the JAPCC study is being conducted.
How will enhanced communication networks working with the co-evolution of new and legacy platforms reshape operations and mission effectiveness?
The study is based on a number of key propositions, which are guiding the research and analysis for the evolution of NATO C2.
“An advanced C2 network through unrestricted communication will permit new forms of information transfer among different platforms that display information from different sensors and employ different weapons
This will happen through:
self-synchronization
in pre-authorised sub-tasks
requiring a multi-functional supported-supporting toolbox
The different features or characteristics of these platforms may be combined in real-time to create more effective mission-tailored clusters.”
And this will likely result in an evolution in NATO Air C2 doctrine.
One of the elements for shaping the analyses is examining how European researchers are shaping understanding of swarm behavior or swarm intelligence.
How do swarms of bees balance and distribute their functions, configure their tasks and arrange the optimal motion policy for the swarm?
And what is the impact of swarming behavior among dissimilar species teaming when symbiotic behavior is a must in a competitive environment?
How does auto positioning and dynamic re-positioning happen with members of a swarm?
Data links have become important in shaping NATO coalition operations but with the introduction of the fifth generation multi-tasking aircraft, how will something more akin to self-adjusting cells of a honeycomb operate?
A number of key objectives have been identified for the project.
When considering the evolution of C2, a key dynamic of change is the evolving man-machine relationship and the enhanced role of machine-to-machine data transfers as well.
“Network-centric C2 and cyber warfare as a primary linking factor will dynamically reorganize the current functional distribution of Roles among aerial/joint platforms and expedite task accomplishment”.
F-35 is an example of a multi-functional platform that may act as an enabler for other legacy platforms.
Each platform has core functions. These functions are allocated for each tactical task, as well as the proper decision rights.
Task execution will become more dynamic and characterized by a flexible supported-supporting schema where the different systems contribute through data transfer to enable and augment everybody’s capabilities.
The ‘best available sensor’ and ‘best available weapon’ concepts will be allocated within the honeycomb for the different offensive and defensive stages of the fight.
Co-evolution of legacy platforms through LINK-16 is already a fact.
The JAPCC team, in close collaboration with the Tactical Leadership Programme, has analysed the pre and post LINK 16 efficiency trends within a 10-year span of TLP operations across different tactical scenarios.
But beyond LINK-16, and through gateways, like the Northrop-Grumman Freedom 550 Joint Enterprise Terminal, hyper-connectivity will create a new skeleton for decision making, force management and task execution based on data transfer while recognizing the future air forces will be comprised of aircraft with varying capabilities yet retain a requirement for robust network participation.”
The study draws upon the work of NATO researchers who have defined a maturity model for C2.
For future C2 model references, Alberts et al. proposed a Maturity Model for network-enabled operations. The scope of the SAS Panel study was to investigate how operational capability can be provided and enhanced through the exploitation of new technologies, new forms of organization or new concepts of operation.
Leveraging the Honeycomb and Swarming Capabilities Credit: Bigstock
The analogy used by the authors of this NATO NEC maturity Model is cartographic: ‘A maturity model is like a map, it helps you to determine where you are relative to where you want to go’.
As it is uncertain the impact that the incoming networked environments will cause in the existent C2 structures, the usage of a model will be the conceptual tool that helps to locate and understand the ‘intermediate destinations’ that these evolutionary trends will meet once the information’s age warfare changes the way to plan and conduct operations.
The Maturity Model defines 3 Axes:
1st Axis. Allocation of decision rights to the collective: The rules. The entities evolve from mistrust to a shared, robust and flexible decision-making process within the team by giving up their respective rights for the benefit of the endeavour as a whole. This feature is related to the strength and validity of the team’s contract and regulations.
2nd Axis. Patterns of interaction among the entities: The will and confidence. Axis where players with different communication capabilities, skills and communicative options can reduce uncertainty in support of the team’s leader decision making.
3rd Axis. Distribution of information among the players: Axis where the information needed to accomplish required tasks is available to each player. As the flow of relevant information within the C2 system is tangible, this axis can be considered as a direct measure of the team’s performance. A channel of communication must be available, a code compatible and messages understood without ambiguities.
Axis number 3 would cause a quicker effect as it would be possible to connect the team through universal sounds, icons and symbols, just as young teens play online videogames worldwide, sharing the rules and the functions, but neither the country nor the language or the culture.
Shaping an understanding of the way ahead for C2 in a coalition environment is built around what the authors call a dynamic airspace synchronization concept.
Because this is a NATO study, a key focus is upon understanding how the evolution of C2 maturity will impact on the evolution of NATO’s air C2 doctrine.
And the authors argue that although “hyper-connectivity has already changed the air (joint) battle, there is not a concept for integrated-distributed ops at coalition level.”
The Director of JAPCC is General Frank Gorenc, USAF. In previous interviews he addressed interoperability through machine-to-machine interaction as part of his future Air Power vision.
Recently, he has clearly identified the significant impact of the coming of the F-35 on NATO airpower.
In an interview with Defense News published on March 16, 2016, General Gorenc identified how he sees the impact of the coming of the F-35:
“The beauty of the F-35 is for the first time ever we have an airplane that literally can do four out of five core competencies. It can do air and space superiority, it can do strike, it can do intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) and it can do command and control”.
With the coming of the F-35 and the evolution of the networks within which coalition airpower operate and are changing, it makes sense to think through a broader approach to C2, notably one which can leverage the evolving man-machine relationship.
The longer-term objective is to have a more effective coalition force which can provide much more effective C2 in a fluid battlespace with maximum effect.
With the evolution of two way data-linked weapons, and of remotely piloted vehicles and the coming of the F-35, the need to both understand and shape a more effective approach to self-synchronization of platforms through a collaborative use of the joint battlespace is crucial.
And understanding how this can be done in accord with the evolution of Alliance or Coalition rules, caveats and missions is required as well.
In short, the JAPCC is taking a solid step forward in looking at the future of airpower and how that future is reshaping concepts of operations.
On Thursday May 12, 2016, the Brazilian senate voted by 55 to 22 to begin an impeachment trail of Dilma Rousseff.
This means she was suspended from office and vice president Michel Temer was installed as interim president of Brazil.
The trial of Rousseff in the senate could last up to 180 days.
This will bring it close to the opening of the Olympic Games.
Dilma is unlikely to step down voluntarily.
Rousseff is well known for her obstinacy.
But she is also known for her courage in adversity.
Then Brazil’s President Dilma Rousseff reacts during a meeting with leaders of the Social Democratic Party (PSD) at the Planalto Palace in Brasilia November 5, 2014. REUTERS/Ueslei Marcelino
Brazil’s first female president claimes that she has been the “victim of a great injustice.”
She is accused of breaking budget laws to disguise the scale of the fiscal deficit during her re-election campaign in 2014: “I have made mistakes, but I have not committed any crimes.”
She is unlikely to be acquitted.
The balance of the votes are against her. But she is not charged with personal corruption.
The case against her involves her alleged manipulation of the budget. But this been an endemic practice by previous presidents, governors, and municipal leaders for decades. In fact the accusations against her are political.
The decision to impeach her is a political act, which is the direct result of her abismal ratings of popularity. The action is conducted within legalistic and constitutional mechanisms.
So it is not a “coup” as she claims.
But it is without question a “constitutional” removal from office of an elected president by a partisan congress, where she has lost support, and where her political enemies, many of them accused of corruption, have been calling the tune.
Acting president Michel Temer has moved quickly to install a new government.
The key figures in Temer’s government are the new finance minister, Henrique Meirelles, and Jose Serra, the new minister of foreign affairs. Both men have presidential ambitions. Michel Temer, who is 75, will not run for office in the next presidential election which will take place in 2018.
Michel Temer is the interim President of Brazil. Credit Photo: Reuters
Jose Serra is a long term leader in the main oppostion party (the PSDB). Serra was twice the presidential candidate of the PSDB in 2002 and 2010, when he was defeated by Luis Inacio Lula da Silva, of the workers party (PT).
Dilma, who was Lula’s handpicked candidate to suceed him, was twice elected president, also in opposition to a PSDB candidate, most recently, when she ran for a second term against Aecio Neves, also a leader of the PSDB, a former governor on Minas Gerais, and now a senator from Minas Gerais, and a leader of the impreachment against Dilma Rousseff.
Serra is a long term political leader in Sao Paulo, Brazil’s industrial, commercial, and financial capital, where he has served a mayor, governor, and was elected as senator. He has a PhD from Cornell university. Serra has quickly asserted his leadership of the foreign ministry by criticising the so-called “Bolivarian” states of Latin America, principally Venezuela and Cuba, for their claims that Dilma was removed by a coup. He will undoubtedly go on to criticise the BRICS, another major component of the PT’s foreign policy agenda. As a senator Serra also introduced legislation (which passed) to privatise Brazil’s offshore petroleum assets.
Henrique Meirelles, the new minister of finance, is a former long term president of Brazil’s central bank. During Lula’s two terms in office, he was an essential figure in establishing and retaining Brazil’s financial credibility for Lula when he first became president. Lula was a left-wing union organiser and PT founder and his election had been opposed by Brazilian business leaders.
But Lula gave Meirelles de facto autonomy at the central bank, and he presided over a time when Brazil experienced great prosperity as a result of high commodity exports, low inflation, the discovery of vast off shore petroleum reserves, and substantial social progress.
Meirelles is a fiscal hawk.
He has a PhD in economics from MIT, and he was for 28 years with BankBoston, where he became president and chief operating officer. He has also said he will appoint Ilan Goldfajn, chief economist at itau Unibanco, as the new head of Brazil’s central bank. Goldfajn is also a PhD in economics from MIT. He also worked as chief economist and risk manager for Gavea Investments in Rio de Janeiro, the company established by Arminio Fraga, who was the Brazilian Central Bank president under Fernando Henrique Cardoso. Arminio Fraga had previously worked with George Soros in New York City. Temer had wanted Fraga to be his finance minister, but he declined.
These appointments in the financial area, however, will undoubtedly be very well received by the financial establishment in São Paulo, and more generally by the co-called “markets.” The “Financial Times” in fact called them the ideal “wishlist for investors.”
But who is Temer and what are the prospects for his administration?
Temer is a Brazilian career politician from São Paulo. He has twice been speaker of the chamber of deputies.
He is the son of Lebanese Christian immigrants, a lawyer, and constitutional law professor at the pontifical catholic university of São Paulo. He is also the author of a work of fiction “anonymous intimacy” and a collection of poems. But he is not well known by the public, nor is he popular. And there have been accusations against him for electoral improprieties and illicit funding of his campaigns.
He is best known for his marriage to Marcela Temer (32) who is 43 years younger than her husband, and is a statuesque former beauty queen who has “Michel” tattooed on her neck. The Brazilian weekly newsmagazine, Veja, a protagonist in the impeachment debate, called Marcela Temer (approvingly): “Beautiful, maiden like, and a housewife.”(Bela, recatada, e “do lar”). Which only reinforced the popular reaction to Temer’s new cabinet which is all white and all male. But then only 53 out of 513 Brazilian congressional representatives are women.
Michel Temer certainly has the insider skills of a long serving politician, but he also has all the faults of a long term “articulator” of the back room deals which characterize the “inside the beltway” mentality of Brazilian politics.
His choice of ministers reflects this pattern.
His first choice as minister of defence, for example, was representative Newton Cardoso Jr, the son of the former vice-governor of Minas Gerais. Newton Cardoso Jr had supported Dilma’s re-election, but he then voted for her impeachment. The army reacted with fury to this nomination. A general was quoted a saying that it was “incredible” that a “boy of 26 years old” would “command men of 60 at a critical moment of crisis on the eve of the Olympic Games.”
Temer retreated. Cardoso Jr was not appointed to be minister of defence.
But other ministers bring heavy baggage.
Temer’s first chose as minister of science was Marcos Pereira, an evangelical pastor, who is a “creationist.” Evangelical Christians form an important bloc in the congress. But again he was forced to retreat. But he did secure the agriculture ministry for senator Blairo Maggi of Matto Grosso, known as the “soya-king”. Maggi it is claimed was responsible for deforesting large tracts of the Amazon rain forest.
One thing is certain. Michel Temer’s honeymoon will be very short indeed.
His government faces formidable problems on many fronts:
Not least the worst recession in modern times.
Growing inflation.
Competing would-be presidential hopefuls in key positions in his administration.
Providing security for the rapidly approaching Olympic and para-Olympic games in Rio de Janeiro.
The continuing spread of Zika.
The on-going Petrobras investigations, plea bargaining and convictions (as well as other corruption scandals.)
And against this background the ongoing impeachment trail of Dilma Rousseff in the Brazilian senate, which for all her faults, omissions, misjudgments, and misgovernment, now risks becoming the trail of a wronged woman, pursued by middle aged, corrupt, and vengeful men.
But the new interim president of Brazil is the last man to realize the potency of this image.
Dilma defenestrated is much more powerful than Dilma in office.
While celebrating the formal inauguration last week of its new Aegis Ashore ballistic missile defense (BMD) site in Romania, NATO’s July heads-of-state summit in Warsaw will need to decide how to develop NATO’s BMD architecture after the fulfillment of the existing plans to establish one more Aegis Ashore site in Poland.
In September 2009, the new Obama administration announced major changes in plans for establishing missile defenses in Europe.
The administration cancelled the Bush administration’s planned deployment of a third U.S. national missile defense site in Europe—a BMD radar in the Czech Republic and ten Grand-Based Missile Interceptors in Poland—and instead decided to focus on first deploying shorter-range interceptors closer to Iran and then deploying more advanced capabilities in later phases to match the expected growth in Iranian missile capabilities.
The administration also more explicitly described this alternative BDM program for Europe, the so-called European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA), as a U.S. contribution to the defense of NATO’s European members.
At the 2010 Lisbon summit, NATO decided to make missile defense a priority mission and committed to protect European populations and territory from missile attacks as well as NATO”s deployed armed forces, which had been the previous focus of NATO’s collective BMD efforts.
The NATO decision did not highlight any particular country as a threat but cited general concerns about the proliferation of ballistic missiles around its periphery, especially to the southeast, where the alliance faced emerging missile threats from Iran and potentially other states
The first EPAA phase 1, which began in 2011, resulted in the deployment in Turkey of a forward-based AN/TPY-2 BMD radar, which shifted to NATO’s operational control in 2012; the establishment of a BMD command and control node in Germany; and the sustained deployment of a rotating fleet of Aegis BMD-capable ships, armed with the U.S. Navy’s Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) interceptor, in the eastern Mediterranean Sea.
The just completed EPAA Phase 2 consisted of deployment of four Aegis BMD-capable ships to Naval Station Rota in Spain and the construction of an Aegis Ashore BMD site in Romania.
Aegis Ashore employs a system nearly identical to the sea-based version, with the same vertical launch system, fire command and control system in an enclosed “deckhouse,” the SPY-1 radar, and SM-3 interceptors designed to intercept ballistic missiles in flight.
The US and NATO have just started EPAA Phase 3 with the beginning of the construction of another Aegis Ashore in Poland equipped with the new U.S. SM-3 Block IIB interceptor being co-developed with Japan. Upon its completion by the end of 2018, the BMD coverage will extend to all NATO European territory.
The Obama administration cancelled a planned EPAA Phase IV deployment due to problems developing the proposed interceptor—and never offered an alternative post-2018 vision for NATO BMD.
NATO allies have been working to develop and deploy their own national contributions to missile defense (the Netherlands, for example, is upgrading the radar on several air-defense frigates to an extended long-range missile defense early-warning system). But they have also not officially proposed how to develop the alliance’s collective missile defenses after 2018.
At the 2012 Chicago summit, NATO declared that its collective missile defense had achieved “Interim Capability;” current plans are to raise this status to “Initial Operational Capability” at the early July 2016 Warsaw summit, following the deployment of the Aegis Ashore system in Romania and further improvements in NATO’s collective BMD command and control capabilities. At present, missile defense in no longer a divisive issue in the alliance and allies see missile defense as a shared commitment of all NATO members.
At present, there are no public plans to develop the system further, beyond EPAA Phase 3.
The United States has been constantly changing its BMD plans regarding Europe. At times, these shifts have weakened European trust in U.S. security guarantees regarding missile defense. Yet, NATO must recognize and soberly evaluate current threats and upgrade its deployments and capabilities accordingly.
The threat environment has notably changed since the U.S. 209 and 2010 NATO BMD decisions. The Iran nuclear deal and Tehran’s decision to focus its missile program on developing short- and intermediate-range missiles have decreased the near-term threat potential nuclear missile threat to Europe from Iran.
Meanwhile, Russia has become more threatening, with the modernization of Russia’s missile capability, threats of Russian nuclear strikes against NATO members, and menacing aviation and ground exercises and deployments against NATO.
Until now, the United States and NATO have defined their missile defense programs as directed against exclusively non-Russian threats. In particular, the 2010 U.S. Ballistic Missile Defense Review (BMDR) states that U.S. missile defenses are focused on defending against limited missile threats from states of proliferation concern like North Korea and Iran to the U.S. homeland as well as regional missile threats to U.S. allies and partners and deployed U.S. forces throughout the world.
NATO’s secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, center; Prime Minister Dacian Ciolos of Romania, right; and Foreign Minister Lazar Comanescu at May 12, 2016 opening of an antimissile system.Credit Robert Ghement/European Pressphoto Agency
Despite growing tensions with Moscow, the Obama administration, in the BMDR and subsequently, has insisted that U.S. missile defense efforts are not directed against Russia (or China).
Indeed, until recently, the United States and other NATO countries tried to cooperate with Russia on missile defense within the NATO framework as well as bilaterally. These efforts proved unsuccessful since Moscow insisted on receiving binding legal guarantees from Western leaders limiting the capabilities and deployments of NATO missile defenses.
Although Russia’s aggression in Ukraine has resulted in the suspension of formal NATO-Russian dialogue and joint projects on European missile defense, and NATO has been strengthening its conventional capabilities for defending its members against Russian threats, NATO leaders continue to state that their missile defenses are not directed against Russia.
Some NATO experts are arguing the alliance should be allocating more time and resources to the missile threat posed by Russia in light of its new assertiveness, current missile deployments, and future modernization efforts.
But developing defenses against Russia’s strategic deterrent, as opposed to the current declared focus on Iran, is technically and financially impossible for the foreseeable future. Furthermore, there is no political consensus in Europe to launch a program due to divisions within NATO on how robustly to challenge Moscow and on how much to spend on defense.
The next U.S. administration will need to take the lead in deciding where to direct the NATO BMD program after 2018.
There would be value in having the capacity to defend against more limited Russian air, ballistic, and especially cruise missile strikes in Europe, such as those Russia has demonstrated in its Syrian campaign.
Having even limited capabilities against Russian strikes would force Moscow to contemplate larger missile strikes to overcome these defenses.
Recently, the European Air Group held a working group which continued their work on 4th and 5th generation integration which is viewed as crucial with 5th generation aircraft here now.
The 2016 two-day 4th 5th Generation Integration Information Forum was held at the home of the EAG, RAF High Wycombe, at the end of April 2016.
With national 5th Generation aircraft programs maturing and the need to integrate 4th and 5th generation aircraft into future coalitions acknowledged the forum is providing a vital conduit to keep information flowing between both EAG nations and external partners and increase the awareness of nations about the challenges to come.
The first day saw experts from academia and industry set the scene with their interpretation of the technological and political developments that are going to shape the future of air power and more specifically the challenges of integrating 4th and 5th generation multi-national air forces into that vision.
The second day opened the floor to a discussion between the individual EAG nations present, Tactical Leadership Program (TLP), Joint Air Power Competence Centre (JAPCC); European Union Military Staff (EUMS) and the USAF that was being represented for the first time at an EAG 4th 5th Generation Forum.
The debate focused on the specific challenges being experienced at a national program level whilst also providing an overview of the future Air Force compositions.
The identification of the common challenges being experienced with this cutting edge evolution of the approach to, and employment of, air power is key to the development of future collaborative solutions.
National representatives were able to take away key areas for further consideration and investigation that when resolved will be fundamental to enhancing interoperability between the nations.
The 4th 5th Generation Integration Information Forum will continue to provide a crucial communication channel between the EAG nations as the next generation of combat aircraft are brought into service in Europe.
The initial session was held in November 2014 at High Wycombe.
Honoring interoperability as our essence, the EAG Steering Group held in Breda, The Netherlands on 16 May 2014 tasked the Permanent Staff to analyze the challenges of operating 5th generation fighter aircraft alongside legacy 4th generation aircraft in a coalition environment.
In November 2014, the EAG hosted a two-day seminar with three clear objectives: (1) identify 4th/5th generation aircraft integration challenges at an unclassified level, (2) evaluate the need to harmonize a number of these challenges at a Multinational level and (3) determine a potential role for the EAG in resolving these challenges.
With the presence of representatives from the EAG nations and the Tactical Leadership Program (TLP), the seminar began with an opening address given by Dr. Robbin F. Laird, a long-time analyst of global defence issues currently focusing his work on analysing the evolution of fifth generation aircraft systems and the emergence of fifth generation warfare. Dr. Laird set up the appropriate strategic framework to allow further discussions.
This EAG initiative to establish practical steps to think through and shape the impact of the arrival of 5th gen aircraft on current 4th gen-based European airpower is considered a unique and worthwhile effort that will be further developed during 2015 with a second seminar.
The book is about the arrival of the F-35 and its interactive role with other key innovations, which are reshaping the defence forces of the democracies.
As one analyst, put it: “If you did not have the F-35, you would have to invent it to be part of and to further the innovations we are pursuing to reshape defence, combat, and homeland security operations.”
The book draws on literally hundreds of visits with pilots, maintainers, testers, industrialists and visits in Asia, Europe and the Middle East discussing the F-35 and how it is viewed by key states as part of their defence transformation.
The F-35 has arrived.
With more than 50,000 flight hours on the F-35 fleet and an operational squadron with the Marines, and second shortly, to be joined by the USAF this year and the Navy next year, the F-35 fleet has already taken off.
There are currently more than 250 F-35 pilots and 2,400 aircraft maintainers from six nations already trained and more than 110 jets are jointly under construction at the Fort Worth and Cameri production facilities with Japan starting its initial production as well.
The F-35 has become tactically operational in the USMC while the aircraft is undergoing developmental testing by the Pax River and Edwards AFB with an F-35 Integrated Test Force (ITF) for the USAF and USN. What is not widely understood is that the ITF is managing the ongoing developmental testing for the life of the program.
With the scope, complexity and concurrent global reach of the F-35 program, a new approach to testing was set in motion. The program is one of “spiral development” in which combat F-35 Type/Model/Series (T/M/S) airplanes emerge throughout the process to operate as effective combat assets, even while the developmental testing for all three types of F-35s continue.
Put bluntly, the F-35B in the hands of the Marines is a fully “up” combat aircraft (both airframe, sensors and weapon systems) addition to the USMC Air/Ground team.
All Squadron Pilots in Marines, USAF and Navy, will be backed up by the best test community in the world at Edwards and Pax. This partnership forged for decades will continue a dynamic synergistic combat way for the entire life of the F-35 Global Enterprise
For the Lightning II, the past decade of putting together a unique, and innovative approach to shaping the F-35 fleet has paid off and has built a solid foundation for the decade ahead.
As U.S. fighter pilots and their partners generate fleet and ultimately combat experience that will lead to never ending innovations and developmental testing.
Put bluntly, if you waiting for the end of developmental testing come back in 30-40 years. Meanwhile, the F-35 fleet will have reshaped air combat operations.
The global enterprise is a key part of what happens at Pax River.
The UK is an integral part of the team, and as Gordon Stewart, UK MoD flight engineer at Pax described this powerful and productive partnership:
This is the most integrated test team I have ever worked on. As we work the way ahead, it might be a UK person, a Lockheed person, or a US government person who provides the best solution. It is a very well integrated team at the working level.
It is a very different test process than in the past, although what is happening in the F-35 program is the way we are approaching the future as well. In the past, there was much more serial testing.
Twenty years ago when I first started, the contractor would do something and then throw it over the fence to the government, which would look at it, approve it and then pass it on to the operator.
Now with the pace of technology, and the role of software, we have a much more integrated process. We are shaping the evolution of the aircraft as it goes out the door as well.
At Pax, we are testing a software version ahead or a couple ahead of what the fleet is getting at the moment. In effect, we are testing the next iteration of the aircraft.
And the Edwards and Beaufort efforts provide important pieces to the evolution as well. We have an integrated RAF and Royal Navy team at Edwards. 17 (R) squadron at Edwards is a mix of RAF and RN.
At Beaufort, we have a UK team and one of our aircraft, and we are working closely with the USMC. That is another key element of the joint integrated effort, from our point of view.
In an historic first there was no clearer example of the global nature of the program when the first F-35 to fly across the Atlantic landed at Pax River.
At 1430 on February 5, 2016, the first Italian made F-35A flew into the pattern at Patuxent River Naval Air Station, Maryland and touched down.
The Italian AF pilot call-sign “Ninja” had only flown the jet for 50 hours previous to his seven hour trans-Atlantic dead of winter flight. And most amazing for reliability the airplane, which was the first built in Italy itself, had only 15 flight hours prior to the trans-Atlantic flight completed the entire mission “up and up” with no “gripes” or maintenance problems.
The landing of AF-01, which flew first in Italy in September, was by one of the Italian pilots trained at Luke AFB in the Fall 2015 with a first flight in November, highlighted the progress of the program.
Historically, allies and partners who operate U.S.-generated fighter aircraft would do so sequentially over time as the type/model/series progressed, with U.S. fighter pilots flying the newest jets first and then allies next as production was generated off of U.S. lines.
For example, the first flight by the U.S. of the F-16 was in 1977, however, it took until 2001 for the first USAF F-16s to be introduced into the Italian AF. Under the terms of a USAF and Italian Air Force agreement named the “Peace Caesar” program was the lease of F-16s to make up for shortfalls in Typhoons in the Italian Air Force fleet.
Put in blunt terms, the Italians are flying the most advanced U.S. combat jet in current production at the same time as the U.S. services.
This provides a unique moment in history and a clear opportunity for shaping new global capabilities.
A key aspect of the global nature of the program is the ability of the fighter pilots of different services and nations to share experiences. With regard to the transatlantic flight, Ninja commented:
I talked with the Marines about their flight – they went from Yuma to Pax – and their flight plan to come over in 2014. They were very helpful. Semper Fidelis is what I have to say about that.
Ninja also underscored that the advantage of learning to operate the aircraft from the ground up was an opportunity to shape new combat approaches as with all members of the first-ever concurrent state-of-the art international fighter program.
Training, Tactics and Procedures (TTPs) will be applied critiqued and modified over and over bay all Air warriors in the F-35 global consortium. Diversity of experiences can lead to unity of purpose to always have the best TTPs to fight and win in air combat.
Recently, in a presentation in Australia, Lt. General Davis, the Deputy Commandant of Aviation for the USMC told an international audience at a seminar Australia, how the F-35 was already a key part of the Marines shaping their way ahead.
“Now that it is in the hands of Marines, they are innovating in ways which the leadership really did not anticipate and much more rapidly than might be imagined.
He described an event where the Commandant was going witness a Yuma to Nellis scenario in which F-35s would be used to support Marines in the maneuver space.
He went to the Marines working the exercise and asked: “Was everything ready for the Commandant?”
The answer was: “Sir we are not going to do exactly what you asked for and are not ready to do it that way?”
Davis commented: “The Commandant is just about here, what are you talking about?”
The Marine answered: “Frankly, the scenario you suggested was not tough enough for we wanted to take our F-35s into a more advanced SAM belt to get through and then support the Marines on the ground.”
Davis was a bit taken aback, but the innovation already evident by the squadron pilots was rewarded with a demonstrated success on the Nellis ranges.
The Commandant was impressed, and although a ground combat Marine, he argued “we need to get that plane into the hands of Marines as fast as we can.”
No partner has been clearer about the central role of the F-35 in defence transformation than has been Australia.
The Aussies have stood up a newly enabled Air Force, and are working the Air, Naval and ground sides to provide for both the kind of homeland defence, and extended perimeter defence which they see as crucial to their national survival and security.
The Williams Foundation in Australia has led the effort to look at what they are calling fifth-generated enabled defence or combat operations, and throughout are looking at the interactive dynamics of change associated with rebuilding their force as the F-35 comes into the force.
As the Air Commander Australia, Air Vice-Marshal Turnbull put it in a recent interview:
“The F-35 clearly is about decision-making and ISR but we are not waiting for the plane to show up before we reshape our ability to use fused data and to push information to the right people at the right time in order to make the right decisions.
I’m thinking about decision making in the cockpit back to the strategic level, but teaching the JSF pilot how to operate in the decision space where he can be a decision-maker, that’s what we need to do as well to shape an ability to get better decisions at the point of attack or defence.
And we are focused throughout the force on how to work the shift forward to the operational level most capable of achieving the desired effect.”
And this is not simply the position of Air Force; it is the position of Army and Navy as well.
For example, Brigadier General Mills, Director General, Army Modernization made a recent presentation at the latest Williams Foundation conference, which highlighted how he saw the F-35 as part of the transformation necessary for the joint land force as the Aussies, call it.
During the briefing, Mills included a slide which would not appear in a typical Army briefing, for in this slide, the F-35 and naval fire support were prominently highlighted.
“Question: You put up a slide, which highlighted a very comprehensive look at joint fires and support to the ground maneuver forces.
How do you view the way ahead?
BG Mills: We need to move beyond the label of air land integration and look at joint integration or multi-domain integration.
We need to focus on the reality of what it looks like at the small team, combat team level, with regard to multi-domain integration with joint effects from JSF or from the Air Destroyer or from overhead surveillance systems.
I think the reality is that as we move beyond this decade, those type of joint effects need to empower the small team to achieve tactical success as the array of tactical successes transcend into an operational impact.
So a number of what would be seen as operational effects I think in the fullness of time will transcend all the way down to the small team, combat team level.
Hence, when a combat team commander who is about to attack a city block can potentially compartmentalize all the electronic emissions going out from that block to know exactly where the threat is.
Then he can look at a whole range of joint fires both lethal and non-lethal to support them in achieving their objectives.”
Mills then added:
“You now need the ability to coordinate direct air land integration fires and you need more F-35 support to deliver that effect.
The reality is that we potentially need to look at as we move beyond this decade of pushing support further down from division level and making it more readily available and more dynamically available to the small group level.
The time responsiveness of an Air Tasking Order that’s 72 hours old is really not going to make it.
I would suggest that time line needs to be radically truncated.
The Chief of Army made the point at the Airpower Conference that in many ways we are still using procedures and approaches that go back to World War II for air-ground operations; this makes no sense in terms of technological advances and operational shifts.
In the first section, we will look at the intersection between the arrival of the F-35 and innovation and transformation of defence capabilities and approaches.
In the second section, we will look at some of the key elements in the F-35 global enterprise which will see an unique arrival of an entire global interactive fleet of users, who can work with one another to meet homeland defence, extended perimeter defence, or expeditionary operations as needed by the leadership of that particular F-35 partner state.
The reach of the F-35 as a data sharing and decision making asset is unprecedented in combat history.
In the third section, we look briefly at some elements of the evolving strategic environment within which the F-35 can provide some solution sets, which can enhance the capability for national defence or embedded coalition capabilities which can empower a diversity of coalitions in the defence of the homeland or in extended perimeter defence.
In short, the F-35 is here now.
And key partners are already rethinking how they will use the plane based on direct engagement in the development, production, training, flying or maintaining the aircraft today.
A very clear look at the way ahead was articulated by the current Chief of Staff of the Royal Australian Air Force, Air Marshal Davies:
“It is like a jig saw puzzle.
You have these really nice pieces to the puzzle sitting in the container, but until you begin to look at the picture your trying to create through the overall puzzle, you do not know which bit goes where.”
With regard to F-35 as an example, Davies argued the following:
“I think Joint Strike Fighter on its own, a fifth generation air combat aircraft, could be regarded as just an air combat aircraft.
If you want to shoot the bad guy down, if you want to defend the battle space for a land maneuver or for a maritime strike, that’s fine.
But what we’re beginning to appreciate now is that it’s not just an air combat asset it is also an ISR node.
If you were to then put two more pieces of your puzzle down and go, “Well that’s starting to form a bit of a picture here,” in the center of your puzzle. ”
What else could I do if it was truly an ISR node?
How do I manage that asset differently than if it was just going to shoot down another fighter?”
Although the puzzle analogy suggested an overall approach what he really was focusing on the interaction between the evolving bigger picture, and relooking at what each piece of the puzzle might be able to do in fitting into a new puzzle big picture so to speak.
“How would you operate the air warfare destroyer differently as you add a Wedgetail, a P-8, a Triton or an F-35 to its operational environment?
And conversely, how could the changes in how the destroyer would operate as you evolve systems on it, affect how you operate or modernize the other pieces of the evolving puzzle?”
