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.
2015-05-02 According to a story published on 4/9/15 on the Norwegian Ministry of Defense website, Norway will take over the role of policing Baltic airspace this month.
The Baltic nations Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia have all been members of the NATO alliance since 2004, but because of limited own capacities the alliance handles the air policing in the Baltics.
This means that the other NATO partners alternate on maintaining the Quick Reaction Alert (QRA) in the Baltics.
On 1 May, Italy hands over the QRA responsibility at Šiauliai Air Base in Lithuania to Norway.
Even though Norway has the main responsibility, Italy will continue to support the allied operation.
Norwegian F-16. Credit: Norwegian MoD
In addition, United Kingdom will contribute from its established base, Ämari Air Base in Estonia.
The mission lasts through August and involves four F-16 fighter jets, of which two are constantly ready to act. Also, RNoAF is sending three liaison officers to the Control and Reporting Center in Karmelava, Lithuania.
“About 70 people are involved in the mission. However, due to personnel rotations, closer to 300 people will contribute in Lithuania during the course of the mission,” Stene explains.
Norway has previously contributed to air policing in the Baltics, both in 2005 and 2007.
132 Air Wing at Bodø Main Air Station has been given responsibility for planning and preparation, while the Norwegian Joint Headquarters will retain operational command.
Personnel from a wide range of professional fields are involved. Among others, personnel from Bodø and Ørland, the two air stations housing F-16, other air wings, in addition to the Norwegian Defense Logistics Organisation, Norwegian Cyber Force, and Norwegian Defense Medical Service.
Some conscripted soldiers will also be given the opportunity to serve part of their compulsory military service in Lithuania.
“We are proud to contribute to the Baltic Air Policing mission and the beneficial NATO collaboration, an ever-more important collaboration, given the current political situation in Europe. Both our fighter jets and control and reporting system are ready to perform,” says Major General Per Egil Rygg, Chief of Staff of the RNoAF.
In the video below, released on April 10. 2015, the Netherlands armed forces highlight their contributions to Dutch defense and security, both nationally and internationally.
2015-05-01 Ed Timperlake, editor of the Second Line of Defense Forum, was the last speaker of the day prior to the wrap up of the Danish airpower symposium.
The title of his briefing was “Early 21st Century Warfighting Trends: Technology, Training and Tactics,” and focused on the intersection of the coming of the F-35 with the evolving warfighting environment for the US and its allies.
In effect, he provided a look at the synergy of what John Blackburn discussed through Plan Jericho between the F-35 as a trigger for change, and the evolving approach of the RAAF or what Lt. Col. Berke referred as the disruptive change associated with the F-35 and the evolving eco system associated with fifth generation warfare.
As a Marine Corps pilot engaged in both close air support and air-to-air missions, Timperlake completed his flying career as Commanding Officer of VMFA-321 with over 3000 hours of tactical flying.
Timperlake was looking forward from the perspective of the way ahead for performing the mixture of missions pilots would need to deliver in the coming decade.
A core element of working the evolving future is understanding that even with a disruptive change platform like the F-35, it is intersection of the training and tactics for the platform with the overall capabilities of the force which will drive change, And it is the squadrons and the squadron pilots who are the heart of shaping innovation.
As Lt Col. Berke had highlighted, change was a significant part of what the F-35 was all about for the pilots and their roles.
Timperlake underscored that in visits to the core warfighting centers in the United States associated with airpower – Nellis, Fallon and MAWS-1 – the warfighters had embraced change and were working across the services and with the allies in shaping new combat approaches.
As one who had met John Boyd and sat through his lectures a couple of times, Timperlake focused on how the famous OODA loop was being re-shaped with the coming of the F-35 fleet whereby the “Decide-Act” part of the OODA loop was increasingly important.
F-22 Raptors from the 94th Fighter Squadron, Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Virginia, and F-35A Lightning IIs from the 58th Fighter Squadron, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, fly in formation after completing an integration training mission over the Eglin Training Range, Florida, Nov. 5, 2014. The purpose of the training was to improve integrated employment of fifth-generation assets and tactics. The F-35s and F-22s flew offensive counter air, defensive counter air and interdiction missions, maximizing effects by employing fifth-generation capabilities together. (U.S. Air Force photo/Master Sgt. Shane A. Cuomo)
The ability of the pilots to share situational awareness across the fleet, and to support one another’s operations over significant distance in compressed time meant that the force would have significant capability to deliver kinetic strike either by itself or from other platforms.
And the passive sensing capabilities of the F-35 would introduce innovations in kinetic and non-kinetic strike as well.
One way to understand the evolving eco system associated with fifth generation warfare is the S-cubed revolution.
Stealth, speed and sensors are an interactive dynamic and underlay the emergence of fifth generation warfare.
The sensor-shooter revolution sees as well the emergence of the offensive-defensive enterprise.
Sensors, stealth and speed enable the air combat enterprise to find, kill and respond effectively to the numerous adversarial threats that global powers and pop up forces can present to the US and its allies.
The strategic thrust of integrating modern systems is to create a honeycomb that can operate in an area as a seamless whole, able to strike or defend simultaneously.
This is enabled by the evolution of C5ISR (Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Combat Systems, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance), and it is why Secretary Wynne has underscored for more than a decade that fifth generation aircraft are not merely replacements for existing tactical systems but a whole new approach to integrating defense and offense.
By shaping a C5ISR system inextricably intertwined with platforms and assets that can honeycomb an area of operation, an attack and defense enterprise can operate to deter aggressors and adversaries or to conduct successful military operations.
The F-35 global fleet will help shape the new ecosystem and live off it. Synergy in shaping evolving capabilities to deal with the reactive enemy will be an essential part of the innovations associated with the offensive-defensive enterprise.
Ed Timperlake addresses the Copenhagen Airpower Symposium, April 17, 2015. Credit: SLD
Timperlake argued that the warfighting centers were interactively working together and with allies to shape the way ahead.
Each center has an evolving special focus that will carry forth innovation across the entire warfighting enterprise.
MCAS Yuma, MAWTS-1, VMX-22 and the F-35 squadron, were working together to shape an innovative approach to 21st century close air support within which the cockpit display gave the pilot a constant read of the AA and GA threats and in which electronic warfare was part of the CAS capabilities of the aircraft. And with the integration with the Osprey and with the MAGTF, the Marines were shaping a whole new approach to assault forces.
Visiting the Warfare Center at Nellis, Timperlake learned of the central importance of shaping a fleet wide mission data set correlated with the F-35 sensors in shaping wide ranging SA and engagement force decision making. With Red Flag exercises the USAF was leading the way in shaping the intersection of the F-35 with other combat assets to shape an air combat revolution that will help reshape an ecosystem that would evolve with the F-35 fleet.
At Fallon, the Navy is looking to lead the way on shaping a live virtual constructive range which will allow the complexities of a modern battlefield to be both inclusive and wide-ranging.
He saw the new carrier air wing evolving under the influence of the F-35 extending its reach and expanding the capabilities of the maritime force to deliver distributed lethality.
This is an open-ended learning process, but to use Lt. Col. Berke’s language, one which needs to be accelerated and to get on with it.
The systems making up the F-35 cockpit provide convergent capabilities but are driven by separate R and D paths to shape new 21st century capabilities. In other words, the F-35 and its evolving ecosystem are both inherent to change within the aircraft and synergistic with change in the entire air combat force.
The future is in the hands of the squadron pilots across the services, and the allies and change driven by any one service or F-35 nation will be part of the overall dynamic of re-shaping the eco-system.
This is a key advantage that the US and its allies can leverage to shape a more effective combat future and to position themselves effectively against adversaries like Russia, North Korea and China.
He concluded that “countless evolutionary and revolutionary aspects of 21st century combat will be in the hands of the squadron pilots – as it should be!”
2015-04-30 Dr. Robbin Laird was part of the last panel for the Copenhagen Airpower Symposium hosted by the Centre for Military Studies and the Williams Foundation on April 17, 2015.
In his summary presentation, he looked at a number of changes affecting the evolution of airpower.
One challenge facing airpower is that the decade ahead is that the context that it will face is neither repeat of the past decade nor of earlier ones.
The probing threats from Russia, China, and others, the establishment of new rules of the road for the second nuclear age, and the need to respond to pop-up states and threats requires the agility and lethality which airpower can deliver.
At the same time, naval, sea, and land-insertion power are being recrafted along modular, scalable lines to allow for even greater agility, flexibility, and lethality against growing capabilities from adversaries who are building larger numbers of air and naval platforms.
The democracies face a fundamental challenge: how to shape a concept of operations to protect the interests of the democracies in an uncertain and unsafe world.
It is not just a question of innovation by the military; the strategic and political elites need to recognize that they need to have decision making systems that are adapted to the new modular, scalable forces.
Having detailed Rules of Engagement for distributed military forces will make little sense.
Reworking what political leadership and accountability with the emergence of fifth-generation enabled warfare is a key challenge facing the democracies.
This is fifth time I have had the opportunity to visit the first or early squadron of a new generation air system.
I started with the Osprey more than eight years ago, have had multiple visits to various bases involved in the standup of the F-35, and visited the Wedgetail the KC-30A squadrons in Australia. I have watched the A400M emerge from briefing charts to test aircraft, to production aircraft, and now have had a chance to visit the first operational squadron at Bricy Air Base in France.
There is a common theme among the early adopters – real competence and enthusiasm and a clear sense of a way ahead.
If the many critics of all of these aircraft had carried the day, Western airpower would have died a slow death.
Instead, these hard working and forward leaning young men and women of the first squadrons shape the way ahead, learn the strengths and weaknesses of the early entry into service aircraft and are part of the innovation process in bringing a new series launch of aircraft into their successful use in combat.
During my visit to Bricy, I had a chance to talk at great length and visit the base with Lt. Col. Benoît Paillard, the Commander of the Transport Squadron, 1/61, Touraine and then to tour the training facility and talk with the Commander Transport Crew Training Center, Lt. Col. Christophe Piubeni.
Lt. Col. Paillard has been in the French Air Force since 1997 and flew the C-130H for nine years and then flew with the RAF and gained C-130J experience as a prelude to the coming of the A400M.
He had five tours with both the FAF and the RAF in Afghanistan and six tours in Africa.
He was qualified for personnel, equipment and supply drops was well as NVG ops during his time in Afghanistan.
Lt Col. Paillard seen in an A400M cockpit at Bricy. Credit: Second Line of Defense
Lt. Col. Piubeni has graduated from the FAF Academy in 1998, and flew as a tactical transport pilot at the 1/64 “Bearn” squadron from 2002-2006 on the C-160 NG.
He then became an instructor at the Training Air Transport Academy from 2006-2008.
He then was the Chief Pilot at the 2/64 “Anjou” Squadron from 2008-2010.
He then became head of the training on A400M from 2012-2014 (with his qualification on the A400M in July 2013).
He is currently 2IC of the Transport Crew Training Center at the Bricy base.
As Lt. Col. Paillard described his experience in Afghanistan: “We practiced how to support moving troops in Afghanistan and to supply forward operating bases when they were isolated by weather or other factors. We operated as a key element for insertion of forces.”
When asked how similar the FAF and the RAF are, he noted “We achieve common results but do it by completely different approaches.
As anything with the French and British people, we have completely different ways to do things.
And this will happen as well as the Brits will operate C-17s and A400Ms and we will operate A400Ms in both roles they envisage for two different aircraft.”
He then added the following important point: “The main lesson is that for any problem, there are lots of different but efficient solutions.
The key is then not to limit our imagination but to keep an open mind.”
There are six A400Ms at the base with a seventh coming this Fall.
The base currently operates C-130Hs as well as A400Ms but eventually will only operate A400Ms and will probably be the largest base of A400Ms in the world by the time the French Air Force (FAF) ends up with its full compliment of aircraft.
Although the plane has been in operation only for a short period of time, and is undergoing further development, it has already had an important impact. The plane is directly connecting France to operations in Africa and the Middle East without the need for refueling during the mission.
And the plane can carry not only supplies and troops but helicopters as well.
Paillard noted:
One of the key advantages of the A400M will be that we can fly helicopters directly from France to the troops which we can not do right now.
We cannot ship the helos directly back to France, currently with our own assets.
With the A400M we will be able to do so.
A test and evaluation team is working the processes of how best to put helos into the plane and how to take them out.
We will save significant amounts of time, and time is a key element of combat success.
The impact will be strategic for France, whereby interventions can occur directly from France without having to preposition forces in the area of interest.
The plane is in the process of development, and is a software upgradeable plane, which is evident from looking at the fly by wire cockpit and the loadmaster systems.
A look at the old and the new certainly highlights the coming of the digital age. The first photo is the A400M cockpit; the second that of the C-130H based at Bricy.
76789fade1.05.0
A three-person crew operates the plane, with significant automation built in to the loading, unloading and ejection of loads in flight process.
The plane does not yet do night insertion operations or operate in higher risk areas.
According to Paillard, the squadron will start night insertion operational training this Fall and will receive defensive aides early next year.
And as the software evolves, the capability of the plane will evolve with it as well.
Similar to the discussion with Air Commodore Gary Martin, the transition from the C-130 to the A400M has been a jumpstart in rethinking operations.
Rather than taking several aircraft and operating over several days, the FAF can take a smaller fleet of A400Ms and operate in several hours to support the forces operating in the objective area.
Air Commodore Martin spoke of both the Australian Army having to adjust to these new operational realities as well as the politicians as well, now thinking in terms of rapid effect, rather than slow motion operational forces. The same is clearly under way in France as well with the A400M entering the FAF and the C-130Hs moving toward African centered operations.
There have been a number of adjustments necessary to deal with the new aircraft, most noticeably with regard to the role of the loadmaster.
Lt. Col. Paillard becomes squadron commander in a ceremony presided over by General Mercier, Chief of Staff of the French Air Force, summer 2012. Credit: FAF
As Lt. Col. Paillard noted, the loadmaster is operating a single console and working the load with the pilot and the co-pilot, which is more technical loadmaster operation-centered than the traditional flight engineer aircraft-centered loadmaster in the FAF.
This requires a change in the requirements for those operating as loadmasters aboard the A400M.
He spoke of the stability of the aircraft in flight and the core flexibility and strength of the wings to support a variety of operational situations, and felt that over time, the plane could take on a variety of new missions as C2, ISR and weaponization evolve over time.
Clearly, the squadron is feeding its experience to the software development team as they are evolving the tactics. The basic procedures for operating the aircraft are provided by Airbus and are common to the multi-national fleet.
The plane is software enabled and as such will evolve over time.
Lt. Col. Paillard said that “at the end of the day the C-130J is an upgraded C-130 built on the C-130 platform.
The A400M is a whole new platform built from the bottom up on a digital software foundation and will grow from that foundation over time.”
Commonality is important, but the objective is to have familiarity with each A400M users aircraft so that a common controller can operate a fleet of aircraft to support missions.
It is not about mix and match crews; it is about common understanding and dovetailing of capabilities for the A400M users.
Lt. Col. Paillard thought that challenge would be met in part by common learning within the European Air Transport Command, of which France is a key member.
“We operate the A400M through the EATC and not the FAF.
We have an A400M user group at EATC, which will play an important role going forward as well.
We need to train as we go to war and the EATC plays a key role as well.”
Paillard also highlighted the centrality of common maintenance techniques, procedures and training as a key part of the way ahead as well.
And parts sharing is a goal of the effort as well, and the RAF and the FAF have an agreement with Airbus for common support and as Paillard put it, “as we work through the approach we will open it to other nations as well.”
He clearly felt that the interoperability provided by a common aircraft was something to be reinforced by training and operations and would be a key target goal to be preserved over time.
“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.”
The training center at Bricy looks and feels like Seville, but is focused on training for tactics as well. According to Piubeni: “We add an operational layer to our training here at Bricy compared to learning the basic flying and related skills which are learned at Seville.”
Simulators can help in shaping a risk management approach to flying the aircraft, and that works best with the linking several simulators together and operating as a de facto missionized air group.
Although not yet achieved, the plan is that by 2018 cross-linked simulators can assist with mission training and planning.
This will be an important step ahead, and is another difference from how past introduction of systems is different from a 21st century approach.
As Piubeni highlighted, “We need to link to the NATO network for training as well.” The entire effort with the FAF is to shape a more effective national force and one very much coalition enabled.
Lt. Col. Paillard then added: “We need to link the training with how we operate together to get the greatest effect we can from our coalition assets.”
Piubeni highlighted that the partners were working to leverage each other’s investments to shape common training, and noted that pilots and maintainers for the FAF and the German Air Force would be trained at each other’s training facilities, to leverage different investments in the simulators to maximize cost effectiveness as well.
Paillard noted that “the German Air Force will train French maintainers and crews for basic training and we will train the German Air Force in tactics and operations.”
In short, as planes get added to the FAF, the planes will see their capability grow not only in terms of experience but with software upgrading of systems as well.
The A400M will be the workhorse for the FAF with the retirement of the Transall and the key reliance on the assets to deliver capabilities to the forward edge of operations.
And the FAF is looking as well to expand its capabilities through the coalition enablement of a common operational fleet of A400Ms with other users of the aircraft.
As Lt. Col. Paillard put it: “Our pilots have on average 200-300 hours of flying time with the plane; that is just the beginning. As we gain experience, and the planes grow with us we will be able to provide a significant capability for the French forces and our allies.”
For earlier pieces on standing up the French A400M squadron see the following:
An Update on the A400M Training Facility in Seville: A Building Block in Allied Coalition Capabilities
04/20/2015–In this interview conducted at the Seville, Spain A400M training center, two leaders in shaping the multinational training process describe the effort and its advantages.
With the standing up of national training centers, there is the challenge of keeping the training common and learning how to shape the future evolution of the training, combat tactics and of the evolution of the airplane itself.
2015-04-30 The current Chief of Staff of the French Air Force (FAF), General Mercier, is on a visit to the United States prior to taking up his new command, as the head of the Allied Command Transformation (ACT) NATO, based in Norfolk, VA.
In the roundtable in which he participated on April 29, 2015, he dealt with a wide range of issues, involving the operation of the FAF and its modernization program.
In responses to questions, he underscored the high operational tempo of the FAF and the significant demands on the force.
Indeed, one challenge which airpower forces face is their high demand level due to how rapidly and flexibly these forces are able to support politically mandated operations.
The FAF is innovating in many ways, and one of these is by organizing a unified air force capability in Africa and deploying them to the threat. This allows force to be tailored to threats but at the same time consolidating capabilities as well.
The new A400M force also provides the FAF with enhanced flexibility as the forward deployed forces can be supplied directly from France.
And one of the missing “credits” which a modernization like the A400M is the impact of the new plane on operations.
There is much focus on the cost of the plane; there is virtually no mention of the forward operating bases which do not need to be built to support forward operations; or the security threats obviated by the same as well.
General Mercier meeting with RAF leadership, 2013. Credit: RAF
General Mercier also talked about the nuclear modernization of the air component of the FAF.
He was asked about the importance of President Hollande highlighting the air component of the nuclear forces last January (in a speech made on an air base by the way).
In his response, he focused on the importance of shaping high speed nuclear tipped missiles for this mission, up to and including hypersonic missiles.
He provided a very clear vision of the way ahead for the FAF which focused on interoperability, and participating in coalition capable “air combat clouds.”
And he highlighted the coming new tanker as a key element in providing an airborne platform, which could provide important contributions to air battle management, and not just function as a tanker.
Here his thinking is very close to the Royal Australian Air Force, which under its Plan Jericho transformation plan, is looking at the tanker as a key air battle management and combat cloud asset as well.
General Mercier comes to ACT at an interesting time as air combat transformation accelerates under the influence of new platforms such as the F-35, the tanker, the A400M, the Osprey, etc.
It is clear that his background and approach will provide an important opportunity for him to be a spokesman and architect for change.
For a comprehensive look at the themes at the press conference, see the following (in French):
At the Copenhagen Airpower Symposium hosted by the Centre for Military Studies and the Williams Foundation on April 17, 2015, Col. Bernard “Jeep” Willi, Combat Air Branch Head of the NATO Joint Air Power Competency Centre (JAPCC), provided an overview of the role and current work of the JAPCC.
The JAPCC is a NATO center of excellence for the study of airpower with the aim of enhancing the capability of the coalition to work together effectively.
The Joint Air Power Competence Centre (JAPCC) was formed on 1 January 2005 to provide a 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.
The Director of the Centre is General Frank Gorenc, Commander, U.S. Air Forces in Europe; Commander, U.S. Air Forces Africa; and Commander Allied Air Command.
Col. Willi highlighted the various activities of the JPAC and focus research areas.
Among current studies are examining the challenges for remotely piloted aircraft systems for operating in contested environments and how the shift from operating in Afghanistan to a more robust combat environment will affect their viability and usability.
The center is also looking at challenges such as disinformation campaigns against the use of NATO airpower, a study that recognizes the information war aspect of 21st century operations.
The impact of new systems, like the A400M, the F-35 and the tanker will also have their impact on coalition capabilities and operations are will be undoubtedly a key focus of attention for evolving studies by the JAPCC.
The project examined the “paradox” that political leaders in NATO have been increasingly willing to call upon airpower to achieve their objectives but have been unwilling to invest in replacing old and increasingly obsolete airpower platforms and systems, and, indeed, have seen reducing the size, scope, and sophistication of their air forces as a means to pay the bills for operations in Afghanistan within their defense budgets and to soften the impact of the 2008 financial crisis on their social welfare systems in general.
Highlighting these sorts of problems and giving them the imprimatur of NATO is among the JAPCC’s unstated functions.
In short, the JAPCC is a resource that smaller and larger air forces can use to help sort out ways to enhance the congruence of operational capabilities.
2015-04-30 Lt. Col. “Chip” Berke first met John Blackburn as a guest at the Williams Foundation Seminar in March 2014 on airpower.
When Blackburn was putting together a follow-on event with the Centre for Military Studies in Denmark, he requested early on that Berke provide his insights into what the fifth generation experience is really all about.
There is virtually no one better qualified to do so — which the audience attending the Copenhagen airpower symposium soon learned.
His background is unique in that he has moved from more than 2,000 hours in the Hornet to the F-22 and then the F-35. He then became the first F-35 squadron commander in the USMC. He also had time as a ground air controller with both the Marines and the US Army as well.
For Berke, the F-35 represents a rupture in airpower, not a steady state evolution.
It is not a replacement aircraft, and is no more a chronological replacement for the Hornet or the Super Hornet than is the Osprey a replacement for the CH-46.
It is very different type of airplane and rooted in doing things very differently, and that difference is crucial to mission success dealing with 21st century strategic challenges.
Lt. Col. Berke focuses on why fifth generation is not a chronological transition at the Copenhagen Airpower Symposium. Credit Photo: Second Line of Defense
It is more about rupture than continuity and is a key part of the air combat revolution underway.
Berke described the challenge he faced going from being a very successful pilot in 4th generation aircraft to confronting the disruptive change associated with fifth generation.
He faced a situation where pilots with much, much, much less experience than he had were able to excel against him as he brought fourth generation mindsets to the F-22.
I showed up with guys about half my experience, who were just annihilating me in the airplane.
They just understood things way better than I did.
It was a very difficult transition for me.
So much of what you knew as a pilot didn’t apply.
It was very frustrating to make fourth generation decisions – my Hornet brain – inside an F-22.
A lot of those times, if not most of the times, those decisions proved to be wrong.
One might note, given the high cost of pilot training and the key role of the combat pilots in the air combat force that learning to fly yesterday’s airplanes creates a mind set that actually can undercut the capabilities to use 5th generation aircraft such as the F-35 effectively.
It is not just about wasting time, effort and resources; it is about undercutting the speed with which the F-35 can have an impact upon the combat force.
When he was able to grasp how to think differently as a combat pilot in the F-22, he recovered his ability to perform combat dominance.
You have so much more to offer the three-dimensional world than you did prior to really figuring it out.
When you realize that your contribution to air warfare is about that, and you’re doing it much better than you can in any other platform, you start torecognize your contribution on war fighting as a Fifth Gen aviator.
And what made the F-22 different suggests how the F-35 is different.
The F-22 is a very fast and maneuverable aircraft, but that is not where it excels.
It is an information dominant aircraft, a characteristic that the F-35 takes to another level.
“The F-22 is the fastest, the most powerful fighter ever built.
The least impressive thing about the Raptor is how fast it is, and it is really fast.
The least impressive thing about the Raptor is its speed and maneuverability.
It is its ability to master the battlespace is where it is most impressive.”
Rather than focus on speed is life and more is better, the Raptor has started the rupture in air combat whereby information dominance in the battlespace is the key discriminator.
Berke believes that the replacement mentality really gets in the way of understanding the air combat revolution that fifth generation capabilities have introduced and that will accelerate with the F-35 global fleet.
He argues for the need really to accelerate the leap into fifth generation-enabled combat forces for the US and its allies.
“When you look back a decade from now, what will the F-16 be in 2025? Or the F-18 in 2025?
Lt. Col. Berke responds to a question from the audience at the Copenhagen Airpower Symposium. Berke is flanked by Group Captain Paul, Godfrey, RAF, and John Blackburn, Williams Foundation. Credit Photo: Second Line of Defense
The disparity which is already significant now will be even greater a decade out with comparison to the F-35.”
It is about the plane in an important sense.
We don’t want to find ourselves freaking out in 10 years that we wasted the last 10 years wondering, “Should we?” We should have spent all that time asking ourselves, “How do we?”
The “should we” question is yesterday’s news.
If you’re asking if we should fly Fifth Generation airplanes – if you’re asking if a Fifth Gen fleet is necessary, you are old.
You are behind.
You are late.
And you’re going to lose.
In another sense it is really about the synergy between the plane and the emerging fleet and the fifth-generation enabled combat ecosystem.
Berke used the iPhone analogy to describe the dynamics of change.
When Steve Jobs introduced the iPhone he said it was revolutionary for it combined a computer, with a music player with a phone.
And he repeated this several times in the roll out presentation.
I doubt that anyone in the audience today would describe their iPhone that way.
The ecosystem, which grew up around the phone and with which the phone itself has matured, is what is revolutionary, not simply the phone.
The same is true of the F-35; it is revolutionary; but the ecosystem which will change and which will inform the further development of the aircraft is even more so.
When we fast forward to 2025, what will be the threats with which we will be dealing?
Berke underscored that we could debate that point from the perspective of 2015 but it would be a debate.
Come 2025, and the threats will be much clearer and need to be dealt with.
We need a platform which can be responsive to those threats and evolve over time.
That is precisely what the F-35 is all about.
The F-35 is designed to evolve…..
Plasticity is about the idea that is inherent in the design, inherent in the DNA of the equipment you buy, is the ability to substitute for other elements as needed.
I understand that the F-35 is built as a tactical aircraft; I get that. The fact that it’s designed as well to be flexible to other mission sets and live in other regimes that you’d never ask a tactical platform to do is what give is it that inherent flexibility, that inherent plasticity.
Do we have a platform that’s flexible enough to adapt to that changing environment? Fourth generation airplanes simply can’t do that.
And in a theme that he introduced in the Canberra conference last year, Berke underscored that the notion of a tactical fighter was undergoing change as the pilot’s ability to operate in the battlespace with information capabilities, expands as well.
The burden that the F-35 places on a pilot is much greater, and I understand the information processing is better.
I understand that the pilot interface with the aircraft is a lot better, but the skill set is much broader now because that pilot and that aircraft interact on a much broader capability, and it’s much more operational, much more strategic, than any tactical platform that’s ever been built because it’s resident in the design of the airplane because of the things that it can do.
I can provide information to a general officer sitting in a CAOC.
At the exact same time, I can send information to an aircraft flying ten miles away from me.
That information is relevant to both at the same exact time in two totally different ways.
No other airplane has ever been asked to do that before, let alone have it be natural in its DNA or expect to be able to do that by design.
And to highlight the significant difference between the 4th and 5th generation, one simply can compare what was asked of each when they were launched into operation.
What makes a sensor-collaborator-shooter platform relevant?
That is not the question we asked about a fighter 10 years ago, 25 years ago.
That was not the question we asked in 1975 when we wanted to buy the F-16.
That’s not the question that was asked 10 years ago with the Typhoon.
Information development, access sharing, and the ability to integrate security – that’s how you measure the F-35.
That’s how you measure the fifth generation fleet.
How well does it do that?
You can build and design an airplane, and we have a designed and built airplane, to be able to answer those questions, to be relevant as a shooter, to be relevant as a collaborator.
You have this information.
I have this information.
Let’s view that information together, provide each other a much more enhanced picture to make a more intelligent decision while, at the same time, funnel information to other users that can parse out the data that’s valuable and relevant to them.
And it is the ability to operate throughout the combat spectrum that is essential as well, and is a core competence of the F-35.
Air warfare is about spectrum dominance.
It’s not just enough to say, “My radar is better than your radar,” or “My sensor is better than your sensor,” or “My capability in this spectrum is better than yours.”
I have to be able to move back and forth between spectrums.
I need to figure out where within the spectrum the fight’s going to take place, and then layer on top of it as much depth.
That’s what Sensor Fusion is by the way….
It isn’t just enough for that one airplane to get that information, it’s the data link and the multi-functioning capability that all these different airplanes are fusing information together behind the scenes, and handing it to you, so you can now make decisions based on information that another airplane 10 miles or 100 miles away have given you, that you didn’t even realize because you don’t even have to ask him for information because it’s just there.
And then Berke addressed the question of stealth and focused on its important contribution to the plane and its ability to operate and not providing a mystical capability.
Stealth facilitates access.
It doesn’t make you invisible; you don’t fly around with impunity.
It just allows you to operate in an environment that you could be restricted from or excluded from without it.
You take that with all the other capabilities of the platform, aggregate them together, and you now have a survivable platform that can operate in certain environments that no other platform can.
And clearly, the F-35 is designed to work with core assets throughout the battlespace.
With regard to other aircraft, the F-35 makes other aircraft more lethal and more survivable–and legacy airplanes provide ordinance and battlespace presence which complements the F-35 as well.
“Don’t just think that the presence of a fifth gen platform is good to the legacy airplanes.
It’s a two-way street, and it’s very functional for everybody.”
And he warned that if you do not make the jump into the F-35 world, you will have a core challenge of working with everyone else who has.
If you’re on the outside saying, “I have this asset that I’d like to contribute to your fight,” you put the onus on the recipient and go, “Well, we can use that on this side. Maybe it will fit here.
Can we communicate?
Can we make this work?
Can we make this relevant?
Let me see how you fit in.
For the USMC, the F-35 delivers essential capabilities to enhance the survivability and lethality of the MAGTF.
At the same time, it also allows the Marine Corps to link up more effectively with other forces as well.
Be brilliant for the Marines on the ground, keep Marines alive, support Marines in contact, and support Marine Corp objectives. We can operate any time, any place, anywhere, for any reason, with any other user.
Now you have a force that is relevant well beyond what its mission statement looks like on paper.
That’s what the F-35 provides for everybody.
It’s a great question to ask, what is it like to be part of that larger ecosystem?
In the Q and A, one audience member asked about the A-10 discussion in the US and Berke had a straightforward response:
As a JTAC the key requirement is that the airplane show up.
The A-10 pilots are amazing; the plane will not always able to show up in the environment in which we operate; the F-35 will.
That is the difference for a Marine on the ground.
In a meeting September 4, 2013 at Eglin AFB, Lt. Col. Berke—then the F-35B squadron commander at Eglin—and Secretary Wynne discussed fifth generation aircraft.
Wynne saw getting the services to understand the nature of 5th gen as crucial to the effort to change the culture.
He therefore worked with COS Mosley to create a billet in the USAF for a USMC F-22 pilot.
That pilot was Lt. Col. Berke. Berke.
Until this meeting at Eglin AFB on September 4, 2013, they had never met
