In an effort to be in compliance with GDPR we are providing you with the latest documentation about how we collect, use, share and secure your information, we want to make you aware of our updated privacy policy here
Enter your name and email address below to receive our newsletter.
The first day of our visit to the USAF Warfare Center was defined by the arrival of the first F-35 specifically for the Weapons School.
The arrival of the Block 3 aircraft is the first of several which allow the Weapons School to stand up its F-35 Weapons Instructor Course (WIC) by 2018.
Because the head of the weapons school was part of the process of introducing the F-22 into the fleet, we were able to look back at the integration of the F-22 and to look forward to the coming integration of the F-35 into the combat air force.
We were fortunate to have a roundtable with the Colonel in charge of the weapons school and two key players in shaping the standup of the F-35 WIC.
The Weapons School plays a very special role within the USAF Warfare Center.
According to the USAF fact sheet with regard to the Weapons School, the institution is central to shaping the advanced tactics for shaping the complicated and evolving choreography for USAF operations over time.
The USAF Weapons School trains tactical experts and leaders of Airmen skilled in the art of integrated battle-space dominance across the land, air, maritime, space and cyber domains.
Every five months, the school graduates approximately 100 Weapons Officers and enlisted specialists who are tactical system experts, weapons instructors and leaders of Airmen.
Weapons Officers serve as advisors to military leaders at all levels, both those in uniform or civilian government positions. Weapons Officers are the instructors of the Air Force’s instructors and the service’s institutional reservoir of tactical and operational knowledge. Taking the mantra, “humble, approachable and credible” as their creed, they form a fraternity of trusted advisors and problem-solvers that leads the force and enables it to integrate its combat power seamlessly alongside those of other military services.
In addition, the Weapons School provides academic and advisory support to numerous units, enhancing air combat training for thousands of Airmen from the Air Force, DOD and U.S. allied services each year.
The Weapons School cadre also authors tactical doctrine, and conducts tactics validation. Actively collecting tactical knowledge and lessons learned from deployed units, evaluating solutions in exercises, and formally preparing them for application across the force, the Weapons School provides a controlled learning environment and knowledge trust for best practices in air, space and cyber combat techniques.
Members of the Weapons School cadre have served as advisors to the other U.S. and allied military services around the world. The school also authors the Weapons Review, the Air Force’s premier professional tactics publication.
Colonel Adrian “Elmo” Spain, Commandant of the U.S. Air Force Weapons School, was the main discussant in the round table held during our visit to Nellis AFB.
According to Col. Spain’s official USAF biography, he is eminently qualified to head the Weapons School.
Colonel Adrian L. Spain is the Commandant of the USAF Weapons School, Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada.
As Commandant, he commands 18 squadrons with over 250 assigned instructors to provide “graduate-level” advanced flying, tactics and cross-domain integration training for hand selected officers across a variety of career fields, including fighter (F-22A, F-15C, F-15E, F-16CM, A-10C), bomber (B-1, B-2, B-52), command and control (utilizing E-3, E-8, RC-135, CRC, and EC-130H), space, cyber, ICBM, intelligence (utilizing U-2, RC-135 and RQ-4), air mobility (C-17, C-130, KC-135), special operations (MC-130, U-28, AC-130), combat search and rescue (HH-60) and remotely piloted aircraft (MQ-1, MQ-9).
Col. Span, Commander of the Weapons School during the Second Line of Defense interview. Credit: SLD
Colonel Spain entered the Air Force after graduating from Villanova University and receiving his commission through the ROTC program in 1994. He attended Joint Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training at Reese AFB TX, and F-15C initial training at Tyndall AFB FL.
Colonel Spain’s operational assignments include the 44th Fighter Squadron at Kadena AB, Japan, multiple squadrons at Langley AFB VA, the 58th Fighter Squadron at Eglin AFB FL, and the 433d Weapons Squadron, United States Air Force Weapons School, Nellis AFB NV.
He was Chief of Weapons and Tactics for the 58th Fighter Squadron when they deployed to Southwest Asia for the opening phase of Operation IRAQI FREEDOM in 2003, leading the first escort missions under wartime ROE.
Colonel Spain transitioned to the F-22A in 2007 as the Wing Weapons Officer, 1st Fighter Wing, Langley AFB VA, garnering an “Outstanding” as Mission Planning Cell lead in the first F-15C/F-22A Operational Readiness Inspection.
From there he served as both the Director of Operations and Commander of the 94th Fighter Squadron, also at Langley AFB. During his tenure, the “Spads” were the 1 FW Raytheon Trophy Nominee in 2008 and he led the first 94 FS AEF deployment of F-22s t Kadena AB JA, taking the F-22 to Tokyo, JA and the Korean peninsula for the first time.
Prior to his position as Commandant, Colonel Spain was Chief of the Joint Exercise Division, Alaskan Command and Joint Task Force-Alaska, Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska.
Colonel Spain is a Command Pilot with over 1,800 fighter hours in the F-15 and F-22A, including 129 combat hours in the F15.
There were two other members of the round table, namely Captain “Sword” Golden whom we interviewed the day after his flight in with the Block 3 F-35A and Lt. Col. David Epperson.
“Sword” Golden at the Weapons School Round Table During the Second Line of Defense visit to Nellis. Credit: SLD
Captain Golden is one of the two pilots spearheading the effort to standup the first F-35 WIC at Nellis by 2018.
He is currently an instructor in the 16th Weapons Squadron.
Lt. Col. Epperson is the head of the 16th Weapons Squadron where the F-35 will “belong” until its own Weapons Squadron is established in 2019.
According to his official USAF biography:
Colonel Epperson is Commander of the 16th Weapons Squadron. Colonel Epperson took command of the 16th Weapons Squadron in June 2013.
He leads 26 Instructor Pilots in the execution of the F-16 Weapons Instructor Course Syllabus and is currently building the F-35 Weapons Instructor Course.
We had a chance to discuss the integration of the F-22 into the combat air force and the standup of the weapons instruction course of the F-22 in 2009, which presages the standup of the weapons instruction course for the F-35 by 2018 with Col. Spain who has been deeply involved in both processes.
Col. Spain provided several insights with regard to his past experience with the F-22 and highlighted the process of standing up the F-35 looking forward.
Col. Spain: My background is originally in F-15Cs, I went through the weapons school as an F-15C student.
I came back to teach at the weapons school as an F-15C instructor in the 433rd weapons squadron.
And then transitioned to the F-22 in 2007.
I was a wing weapons officer when we brought the F-22 into the operational fleet.
General Corley was then the ACC Commander at Langley, when I was there involved in the process of introducing the F-22 to the force.
I was here in the weapons school as an instructor when they started the operational tests of the F-22.
I saw firsthand some of the great things about the F-22 when it started, I also saw some of the growing pains it went through.
The F-22 system represented a total paradigm shift in how you build the systems, not just the avionic systems, but also things like the fuel, the oil, the hydraulic systems.
We were shifting from an analog to a digital maintenance structure to make it easier to do maintenance.
But eventually, like everything that’s on the drawing board and becomes your first prototype, it doesn’t work exactly as you had designed, and anticipated, so that’s what the test process is for.
You work on all those things you can fix before we field them, so that at least the initial generation of fielded aircraft are stable enough to execute your missions.
We were also dealing with a small quantity of Raptors, which affects the cost of upgrading the airplane, because cost is driven in large part by numbers.
As you shift from developmental testing – designed to make sure that the basic airplane works – it transitions to operational testing which is focused on how we will use the aircraft and integrate it with the force.
The transition is not a science; it is a decision to move forward as well as the shift from operational testing to declaring initial operational capability or IOC for an aircraft.
These are judgments made on the experience in the process, one which the Warfare Center is deeply involved with.
Question: What is the role of the Weapons School in this process?
Col. Spain: Operational F-22s were out in the field for several years before we had a WIC, which was stood up in 2009.
The WIC comes along at a time when the Air Force is ready to now test to the highest level of the TTPs that are established.
For example, with regard to the F-35, the arrival of the F-35 into the 57th wing in the weapons school, this begins our ability to prepare for the first classes that are going to build your innovative expert instructors in the F-35.
The 53rd wing is going to build the initial TTPs for the F-35 with our pilots until the point that they get a baseline, and then they’re going to export those tactics to the first operational units at Hill, and the process will be highly interactive between the evolving TTPs and the operational squadrons
In the spring of 2018, we’ll have our first F-35 WIC.
That is nine years after having stood up the first WIC for the F-22.
And that’ll be about two years after the planned IOC decision at Hill, and then the F-35 capability will continue to grow, as we have weapons officers with F-35 experience.
Hill will help establish a standard based on the tactics that the 53rd wing, the test organization is going to build.
The three participants in the Weapons School Roundtable during the Second Line of Defense visit to Nellis AFB. Col. Spain, head of the Weapons School, Lt. Col. Epperson, F-16 Weapons School, and Captain Golden, F-35 pilot and working to standup of the F-35 weapons school. Credit: SLD
Question: What is your perspective, Lt. Col. Epperson, on the process and what is your role in that process?
Lt. Col. “Fuge” Epperson: I am the Commander of the 16th weapons squadron.
I’ve been helping with the standup of the F-35 here at the weapons school similar to how we’ve done the Raptor.
We’re initially bringing F-35 under the 16th umbrella to help stand it up.
As we add F-35 in numbers, we will split it off into its own squadron at the weapons school.
Question: When we visited MAWTS, the Marines were drawing on your F-16 TTPs in shaping their initial F-35 manuals. What has been your working relationship with the Marines?
Lt. Col. Epperson: We are working effectively with them.
In the past year, MAWTS came to us for advice on shaping their air-to-air tactics with the F-18 as a lead-in into making common F-35 tactics.
And the Commander of MAWTS when he was here said that he wanted the Marines to be on the same path as the USAF with regard to those tactics.
Question: What is your perspective, Captain Golden, on the process and what is your role in that process?
Captain Golden: As we stand up the WIC for the F-35, we are going to be focused on wringing out the aircraft and what it can do.
We are going to focus on determining what the single, two, four, eight aircraft formations can do and as it gets introduced into the Weapons School before Red and Green Flags, the focus will be upon leveraging what the aircraft can deliver and how to make the rest of the fleet more survivable and lethal.
Clearly, a major focus of attention will be upon the aircraft and its operational capability to hold a wide variety of targets at risk. In terms of what kind of actual specific shape that takes, I think it’s very difficult to predict that right now.
Question: There was a challenge for folks understanding what an F-22 has brought to the force. What was your experience with regard to the challenge of Raptor? as the F-22 came into operation?
Col. Spain: There is a culture shift with the F-22. From the outset the operational test community understood that the F-22 is not simply a super F-15.
The pilots and maintainers who worked the aircraft understood that.
The leadership understood that.
But to your point, there were a lot of folks in between that did not.
Capt. Brent Golden, 16th Weapons Squadron instructor, is greeted by Maj. Gen. Jay Silveria, U.S. Air Force Warfare Center commander, after arriving in the Weapons School’s first F-35A Lightning II at Nellis, January 15, 2015. Credit: USAF
Notably, the planners did not get it at first and did not rewrite their ops plans based on how the F-22 transformed the combat air force.
Question: How would you describe the shift from the F-15 to the F-22 in your experience?
Col. Spain: There was a huge shift in how we employed the airplane in terms of what you were able to do by yourself in a Raptor, as opposed to a two-ship formation in an F-15C seat.
One way to describe the shift from the Eagle to the Raptor is that many of the things I had to work hard to do in the Eagle, were simple in the Raptor.
I did not fuse the information; the plane did so. And oh, by the way, I’m not getting shot at while I am working my tactics.
With the Raptor, you were relieved from the burden of building your situational awareness, it was built for you.
The situational awareness was there.
Now it’s just a matter of what do I do with the information?
How do I prioritize it, and where do I place the formation to optimize effects?
And this experience is evident as well with regard to the F-35.
There is so much information organized for you in the cockpit, you can focus on prioritizing your tactics to achieve effects, determining what you will target and what other assets you might communicate with for them to target as well.
The F-22 has evolved over time, we have opened the aperture on air to ground missions as well with the addition of weapons and other capabilities for the airplane.
From an air-to-ground perspective, we’ve increased the capability on the Raptor over the last seven years pretty significantly.
We’re going to continue to find ways to improve air-to-ground capability in the Raptor without sacrificing the critical role it was built for in the first place, which is Air Superiority.
Question: A difference between the Raptor and the F-35 is clearly going to be numbers, not just in terms of aircraft but in terms of who is flying the aircraft. How will that affect the way ahead?
Col. Spain: The weapons school plays a forcing function for change.
We bring a small number of really good instructors here to teach and then they go back out to the force to make them better, and essentially, to standardize the force.
The F-22 really is a relatively small community.
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)
With the F-35, it will be crucial to shape effective standardization early because the community will be so much larger.
We need to focus on an effective F-35 schoolhouse, because when the cats leave the house, they are not coming back.
And what gets proliferated gets proliferated.
That is why establishing a solid foundation from common TTPs for the F-35 community from the start is so important.
Question: The USAF is the only force with more than 30 years of OPERATIONAL experience with stealth.
And with the F-22 and F-35, is the only force flying TWO stealth aircraft with fusion cockpits.
This means that you can focus on how the two operate together but also on the F-35 global fleet flying against F-22 in future Red Flags.
This provides the USAF and its joint and coalition partners with a huge training and operational advantage doesn’t it?
Col. Spain: We are already working on the F-22 and F-35 working together piece, but you have raised an interesting prospect with regard to the aggressor role.
Clearly, the introduction of the F-35 builds upon the F-22 foundation laid down by the Raptor nation, lead by warriors like Col. Spain.
And the leveraging of what these aircraft bring to the evolution of the combat air force is a key task facing the WIC and the USAF Warfare Center more generally.
As the Commanding General for the USAF Warfare Center, Major General Silveria, put it in our interview, the purpose of all of this is a more lethal and survivable air combat force.
Integration is what we do here at the Warfare Center.
We are the only place you will find F-16s, F-15Es, B-1s, B-2s, RPAs, AWACS, and F-22s working together in common tactics and training being tested in real world Red Flag or Green Flag exercises.
But the term integration can be confusing because it really is about the evolving capabilities of the combat air force going forward and to shape the combat choreography of many moving parts to shape the effects you want to achieve with airpower.
And with the F-22 to date and with the F-35 entering the combat air force, it is about how legacy aircraft can adjust to the new capabilities and the combat team learn how to use both the legacy and the new aircraft more effectively together.
For example, with regard to the F-22, which is by now an aircraft well integrated into our combat choreography, we have learned that the situational awareness and information dominance, which it brings to combat, has made the legacy aircraft more lethal and survivable.
And we have seen with the F-22, that with its information dominance capabilities, there is a clear advantage of these aircraft providing information to enable legacy aircraft to fire their weapons much more effectively at core targets.
For example, the F15Cs now have learned what they get from the F22s.
And so now they are certain things they won’t try to do because they know they’re going to get that in from the F22.
We have to teach the fourth gen at the same time we’re learning about the capabilities from the fifth generation aircraft.
The F-35 will enter directly into that world; we will learn what the F-35 provides and how legacy aircraft can become more lethal and survivable.
For our other articles highlighting our visit to Nellis AFB in January 2015, see the following:
During our visit to the USAF Warfare Center we had a chance to sit down with Lt. Col. Benjamin “Bach” Bishop, the 422nd Test and Evaluation Squadron director of operations, to discuss his experience with the Operational Testing of the F-35, and the way ahead.
Lt. Col. Bishop is an experienced F-15 pilot with a very strong engineering background. His squadron is assigned to the 53d Test and Evaluation Group, stationed at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada. The squadron performs operational testing of all fighter aircraft and munitions entering and in operational use by Air Combat Command (ACC).
The USAF Fact Sheet highlights the important role with the 53rd Test and Evaluation Group plays in evolving the tactics for the evolving combat air force.
The 53d Test and Evaluation Group is responsible for the overall execution of the 53d Wing’s flying activities at Barksdale, Beale, Creech, Davis Monthan, Edwards, Eglin, Dyess, Nellis, and Whiteman Air Force Bases.
Members of the group execute operational test and evaluation (OT&E), and tactics development projects assigned by Air Combat Command (ACC) for A-10, B-1, B-2, B-52, F-15C/E, F-16, F-22A, Guardian Angel, HH-60G, HC-130J, MQ-1, MQ-9, RQ-4, and U-2 combat aircraft.
The 53 TEG also supports current Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation Center efforts with the F-35A Lightning II. The unit performs functional management for acquisition, modification, testing and certification for fighter, bomber and combat support aircrew training systems.
The group also conducts foreign military exploitation and special access projects. Beginning July 15, 2012, the group has OT&E responsibility for space control and space range assets.
Lt. Col. Bishop, Commander of the 422nd Test and Evaluation Squadron. Credit: Second LIne of Defense
The 53 TEG is composed of highly trained aircrew and a diverse range of support personnel to execute ACC-directed operational tests as well as Combatant Commander-directed Urgent Operational Needs.
The mission of the TEG is to provide the warfighter with the latest in software, hardware, weapons and tactics techniques and procedures to win America’s wars.
Additionally, the TEG carries out the USAF Nuclear Weapons System Evaluation Program. The group plans, executes and analyzes ACC’s $50 million annual air-delivered reliability data for nuclear capable aircraft and weapons and reports weapon system reliability to USSTRATCOM for inclusion in their annual strategic war plan update.
The results of these tests directly benefit aircrews in Air Combat Command, Air Force Central Command, Pacific Air Forces and United States Air Forces in Europe by providing them with operationally proven hardware and software systems.
Lt. Col. Bishop came to the 422nd in 2012 in anticipation of a focused effort on the F-35 and support for the USAF preparation for their initial operation capability or IOC anticipated in 2016. In early 2013, he became a certified F-35 pilot and based on those experiences and the testing done with the 4 F-35s in their inventory is now preparing to work with the Weapons School with the arrival of their aircraft.
According to Bishop: “We work very closely with the Weapons School and will do so in support of the IOC process. We are part of the 53rd Wing and work and from the git go have worked with the Weapons Schools with the 4 F-35s we have been flying for operational test purposes when those planes first arrived in March 2013. This has been a 53rd and 57th Wing joint working effort. ”
Question: Are there precursor schools to prepare for coming to the 422nd?
Lt. Col. Bishop: No. We have precursor qualifications. To be a member of this division you have to have been an instructor pilot. And we have a number of graduates from the weapons schools as well.
Question: The plane that arrived yesterday is basically an IOC aircraft?
Lt. Col. Bishop: It is a Block 3 aircraft and that is the configuration, which will become the IOC aircraft.
Throughout our interview, Bishop emphasized that as an operational test squadron their role was to look throughout at the performance of the aircraft from the standpoint of its impact on tactics and integration within the combat air force.
And he highlighted that with the F-35, there is a close working relationship with the other services and partners working through the process of introducing the aircraft into service.
Lt. Col. Benjamin Bishop completes preflight checks before his first sortie in an F-35A Lightning II at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. Bishop, the 422nd Test and Evaluation Squadron director of operations, was among the first pilots to begin the official training that began in January 2013. (U.S. Air Force photo/Samuel King Jr.)
“I think it’s important to have tactics development that supports all the entities that the ACC is asked to develop tactics for.
The fact that we’re all executing the same playbook is very important. We know integration is the key to effective airpower.”
And working the joint and coalition integration piece is crucial as well, notably with the coming of a common aircraft, the F-35.
“We are involved in regular and ongoing cross talk with Marines and the Navy and with the coalition partners. I will receive a Marine Corps officer in the 422nd this summer and have a Navy pilot flying the F-22 as well. I also have UK and an Aussie officers as well in the 422nd.”
He emphasized as well the close working relationship with Edwards AFB with regard to operational testing.
And this engagement reinforced the multi-service, and multi-partner working relationship as well.
“The USAF pilots at Edwards are flying with Marines, Brits and Dutch pilots as well.”
Question: How do you approach the tactics development piece?
Lt. Col. Bishop: We do a series of tactics investigations, which means that we evaluate how this platform will conduct a particular mission set.
We have done a search and rescue testing investigations, and close air support tactics investigation as well as a defensive counter air attack investigation.
Looking forward, we have an air-surface tactics investigation coming up and this summer will do a counter-air tactics investigation.
In other words we are working through the mission sets the aircraft will perform when the USAF declares IOC.”
He expressed several times during the interview that from his experience with the aircraft and with the 422nd evaluations, that the F-35 represented the future of airpower.
What did he mean by this?
Lt. Col. Benjamin Bishop, the 422nd Test and Evaluation Squadron director of operations, walks toward an F-35A Lightning II at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., March 6 for his first sortie in the new aircraft. Bishop is among the first pilots to begin the official training that began in January. Bishop and other 422nd TES pilots will begin operational testing of the joint strike fighter later this year at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev. (U.S. Air Force photo/Samuel King Jr.)
“The way the system is designed and the way information is fused together, it’s the future of air power.
It’s phenomenal.
With the F-15, I have three different scopes and I have to fuse the information.
In the F-35, the data is fused for me, allowing me to focus on the tactics of the mission.
Data fusion is the fundamental distinguisher of the fifth generation aircraft from legacy aircraft.
And as a pilot, I shift from focusing upon sensor management and more on battle management.
The fusion-centered aircraft is the future, and the F-35 represents that future.
And it is here now.”
Bishop described the next phase of introducing the F-35 into service working with the weapons school as working through the integration of the aircraft with the legacy fleet.
The key was to work through the appropriate tactics in shaping air operations going forward as the F-35 joined the F-22 within the combat air force, and the warfare center pushed the envelope on understanding how integration can best proceed.
Last Fall we had the chance to interview the head of the Air Combat Command, General Hostage.
This was his last interview prior to retirement, and he highlighted a key aspect of the way ahead for the combat air force.
Question: How important is the ready room and the pilot learning culture to the evolution of airpower, notably with the new airplanes coming on line?
General Hostage: Any time you put your magic piece of hardware in the hands of a young lieutenant, they’re going to figure out something new that you never thought of.
And they’ll use it in ways that you never considered. And ultimately, we’ll rewrite the tactical manuals.But that’s expected.
You want it to be a disciplined process, which is why we look for them out there at the squadron level to come up with ideas, but we do a very disciplined weapons and tactics review every year where we have the weapons officers from every tactical squadron show up at Nellis for two weeks, we have them hammer out every new thing that the people thought of, but all the experts feed on it, and pull it six ways to Sunday.
If it survives that test, then we document it, and we write it down, and we start training everybody how to do these things.
That’s how we propagate these great ideas across the force.
Because you’re right, the engine is out there in the mind of the lieutenant who has just figured out something new to do with their fancy piece of machinery drives change.
Clearly, General Hostage had the Warfare Center in mind, and key players like Lt. Col. Bishop to bring the “Right Stuff” to the force.
In a story written by Master Sgt. Kelley Stewart at the time of the arrival of the first F-35As at Nellis in March 2013, the expectations of Major General Lofgren, then the Warfare Center Commander were highlighted:
NELLIS AIR FORCE BASE, Nev. – In the Thunderbird Hangar filled to capacity, Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Lofgren, U.S. Air Force Warfare Center commander, formally accepted delivery of three F-35A Lightning IIs March 19.
The aircraft will be assigned to the 422nd Test and Evaluation Squadron where they will undergo operational testing.
During the ceremony, the general focused on the importance of the F-35 program to the Air Force and the USAF Warfare Center by tying the aircrafts’ arrival to the center’s three priorities.
The first priority of the warfare center is developing capabilities and leaders who can fight in a contested environment. One of the focus areas for the 422nd TES will be operational testing to develop tactics for the aircraft and pilots.
U.S. Air Force Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Lofgren, U.S. Air Force Warfare Center commander, and Orlando Carvalho Lockheed Martin Aeronautics executive vice president and general manager of the F-35 program, answers questions from media during the F-35A Lightning II arrival ceremony March 19, 2013, in the Thunderbird Hangar at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev. The F-35A Lightning II is assigned to the 422nd Test and Evaluation Squadron and its modern engine delivers more than 60 percent more thrust than other aircraft of the same weight.
“What lies ahead for the 422nd TES and the 53rd Test and Evaluation Group is no small task,” said Orlando Carvalho, executive vice president Lockheed Martin Aeronautics. “You will forge the F-35 into the fighter of the future and test it to the limits.”
Carvalho went on to say the group’s and squadron’s pilots and maintainers “would take the F-35’s performance to new heights and define the very tactics the F-35 will one day use to defend freedom around the world.”
Lofgren expects to see the same dramatic new tactics development with the F-35A as was seen with the F-22.
“The aircraft has so much more capability than our current aircraft,” he said. “It will be exciting to see our experts develop innovative new ways to use the F-35 that have not been thought of yet.”
The second priority of the warfare center is integrating the capabilities of air, space and cyberspace to achieve greater warfighting effect in the battlespace.
“Integration of the F-35’s incredible sensors, and its ability to operate anywhere in the battlespace, will make the whole of all our forces more survivable and lethal,” Lofgren said.
Using the F-35A in tandem with the F-22 Raptor increases this lethality.
According to Gen. Mike Hostage III, Air Combat Command commander, the Air Force needs the fifth generation of capability it’s leveraging with the F-35A and F-22.
“No amount of fourth-generation capability is going to be able to survive in the environment that will be presented by our adversaries in the next decade without a fifth-generation capability to open up the way, to basically beat down the threat,” he said.
“Having the F-35s at Nellis brings the test and evaluation of the aircraft closer to operational conditions.
I can’t think of a better place to take the F-35 through the steps needed to reach initial operating capability for our Air Force.”
The final warfare center’s priority is to use the triad of live flying, virtual or simulator flying, and the constructive or synthetic threats and battlespace to test and develop tactics and conduct advanced training of future leaders using the F-35A.
This final priority is driven by the fact the aircraft’s capabilities are so advanced that “we cannot develop our warfighting edge with live flying alone,” Lofgren said.
A simulator complex to test and develop tactics and to conduct advanced training is being built at Nellis AFB and will provide F-35A pilots with realistic threat scenarios they could face in real-world combat.
Lt. Col. Bishop, Ed Timperlake and Major Sullivan and Master Sgt. Miller (the two PAOs who organized our very productive visit). Credit: Second Line of Defense
The F-35A will be doing its live-flying training over the Nevada Test and Training Range.
“The F-35, with its advanced electronic warfare and integrated avionics, is able to locate and identify real and fake targets and jam with unmatched precision which will present a challenge for the NTTR to replicate the threat,” Lofgren said.
Combining virtual and live training will allow the Air Force to “link and integrate current and future combat systems,” the general said.
The F-35A Lightning II blends the capabilities of seven legacy aircraft into one. As a stealth aircraft, it can enter areas without being seen by radar and this capability will also allow the pilot to see other aircraft first. The F-35 can also penetrate deeper into enemy territory allowing it to find and destroy ground targets while evading hostile surface-to-air weapons.
“Not only is it deadly in the air, it is easy to work on and sustain,” he said.
“Great improvements have been made in sustaining this aircraft so our world-class maintainers can fix and ready the F-35 faster.”
Nellis is scheduled to receive 36 F-35A Lightning IIs by 2020.
2015-02-06 Secretary Hagel participated in the recent NATO ministerial at NATO headquarters, and spoke about how he saw the challenges facing the Alliance.
He highlighted the cross-cutting impact of three threats: Russian seizure of Crimea and threats to the North; terrorism at home in the NATO territories; and combating ISIL in the Middle East.
He sees the challenge of dealing with the convergence of such threats as leading to the “third transformation” of NATO.
The alliance has transformed in the past, and Hagel traced the evolution of NATO in his lifetime. Through the end of the Cold War, he said, NATO focused on the imperative of territorial defense and deterring Soviet aggression.
The fall of the Soviet Union and dissolution of the Warsaw Pact led to a second stage, he continued, with the alliance responding to conflict in the Balkans and conducting major out-of-area military operations in Afghanistan and Libya.
“Now, in its third phase, the alliance and its members must be prepared to address all of these challenges at once — territorial defense and hybrid warfare on its eastern frontier, stability operations on its southern periphery, and out-of-area operations such as our training mission in Afghanistan and coalition counter-ISIL operations in Iraq,” he said.
Hagel said he is concerned with suggestions that NATO can handle only one threat, and that he is worried about a division between northern and southern allies. “This is a time for unity, shared purpose, and wise, long-term investments across the spectrum of military capability,” he said.
“We must address all the challenges to this alliance, all together and all at once.”
U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel conducts a news conference at NATO headquarters in Brussels, Feb. 5, 2015. Hagel addressed a range of topics including security across the Continent and Russian aggression in Ukraine. Credit: NATO
Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea and its continued efforts to destabilize Ukraine have been met with resolve, the secretary said. NATO forces have confronted Russian military aircraft over the Baltic republics and Poland, he noted, and have conducted exercises in all countries of the east to demonstrate the resolve of collective security.
“We have established a new high-readiness task force that will be poised for deployment within days — not just to its eastern frontier, but wherever it is needed,” Hagel said during a news conference at NATO headquarters.
The alliance is facing threats from terrorist groups, especially from the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. NATO is strengthening alliance member Turkey, and allies have been flying missions against ISIL in Iraq and Syria.
“Allies are on the front lines combating violent extremism — extremism that has brought tragic violence to Paris and Ottawa,” Hagel said.
“NATO allies and partners also make up the backbone of the coalition against ISIL. They have provided critical support for operations in North Africa, and NATO continues to help build peace and security in the Balkans.”
In Afghanistan, NATO has shifted from a combat role to a train-and-assist mission for Afghan security forces, the secretary said. “We transitioned security responsibility to a unity government emerging from the first peaceful, democratic transition in Afghan history,” he added.
“Our coalition has trained more than 370,000 members of the Afghan national security forces, helping the Afghan economy to expand more than six-fold since the fall of the Taliban, helping create unprecedented opportunity — and hope — for the people of Afghanistan.”
It is a complicated security environment, and the alliance must face all these security challenges, Hagel said.
“This means being prepared for the full spectrum of missions, and building NATO’s military capability and readiness, which has been the focus of our discussions today,” he said.
Last year, Hagel warned that the return of the direct defense of Europe posed some significant challenges.
“In recent years, one of the biggest obstacles to Alliance investment has been a sense that the end of the Cold War ushered in the ‘end of history,’ an end to insecurity — at least in Europe — and the end from aggression by nation-states. Russia’s actions in Ukraine shatter that myth, and usher in bracing new realities,” Hagel said.
“We must see renewed financial commitments from all NATO members [because] Russia’s actions in Ukraine have made NATO’s value abundantly clear.”
Hagel called for the inclusion of finance ministers and senior budget officials at a NATO ministerial meeting, while arguing that “talking amongst [defense ministers] is no longer good enough.”
He said the alliance must beef up its military capabilities, exercises, and joint planning. But he said nonmilitary measures are also needed in the face of Russian aggression.
Hagel emphasized the need to wean Europe off its dependence on Russian energy supplies, noting that the U.S. Department of Energy has conditionally approved export permits for liquefied natural gas that would add up to more than half of Europe’s gas imports from Russia.
“Future generations will note whether, at this moment — at this moment of challenge, we summoned the will to invest in our alliance. We must not squander this opportunity or shrink from this challenge. We will be judged harshly by history and by future generations if we do,” he said.
Credit Video: The NATO Channel
And decisions and visits made in his final period as Secretary of Defense have clearly highlighted the kind of forces which he sees the need to strengthen.
Enhance Insertion Force Capabilities
First, there is his recent visit to the new large deck amphibious ship, the USS America and his comments on the role of the USN-USMC amphibious assault force in the period ahead.
I thought I’d make a couple of comments about you, about your ship, about the future, at least from my perspective, and then we’ll talk about whatever you want to talk about.
First, we were talking with the admiral and captain, and some of us say we came on to the ship here a few minutes ago about three essential priorities that I have focused on since I have been secretary of defense, that I think capture the future of our country, the future of our military.
And the future in every respect of opportunities of our security, and it is first people, second, capability, and third, partnerships. And you probably represent and this ship represents those three foundational elements of our future as well as any one group of people.
And I say that because this is a very select crew, as you all know, for the reasons you know why you were selected for this crew.
This is a particularly important skillset that’s required. You are on-board and you run, maintain, and sail one of the most sophisticated Navy platforms we have with more capabilities than almost anything else. That’s first.
Second, capabilities, as I’ve just — capabilities represented on this ship and the amphibious possibilities that our Marines are getting back to after 13 years of long war: two long wars.
What you’re doing here, represent that in every way.
And third, partnerships. The reference I made to your tour around South America.
Those partnerships that we are building, partnerships to assist our partners in their capacity and their capability, and their ability to not just defend themselves, but partner with us in a world that is now completely interconnected, as we all know.
And so the threats are global. Opportunities are global. Relationships are all now more global than ever before. And that won’t decrease. That will only increase.
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel on Tuesday vigorously endorsed an Air Force plan to build a next-generation strategic bomber, arguing that it would help deter nuclear war and preserve America’s global pre-eminence.
“I think the long-range strike bomber is absolutely essential to keep our deterrent edge as we go into the next 25 years,” Hagel told reporters after addressing a group of several hundred airmen at this B-2 stealth bomber base in western Missouri.
He called the future bomber, estimated to cost $55 billion to $80 billion for as many as 100 planes, “a critical element” of U.S. global power.
Use Military Force, Notably Ground Power, Judiciously
Third, he underscored the importance of effective civilian leadership to use the military instrument wisely.
There is a clear need for any Administration to think through clearly where, how and when to use force.
On his visit back to the Army base where his military service started (Fort Bliss), he hammered home some key points.
Hagel said the terrorism and fighting roiling the Middle East are being driven by deep tribal, religious and ethnic tensions.
“We can’t fix that,” he said during a troop talk at Fort Bliss.
“The United States of America can’t fix that problem. No country outside that region can fix that problem.”
He argued that some people are too quick to look for a military solution.
“Sometimes there are not immediate answers,” he said. “
We Americans can test that. We can fight for that [and say], ‘Of course there’s an answer to the problem.
We’ll fix it. Let’s go to war.
Let’s commit troops …
[But] we have blundered when we have tried to force issues and tried to force answers on other people.”
During our visit to Nellis AFB we had the chance to sit down with Col. Ted “Vader” Dempsey, the Commander of the Nevada Test and Training Range.
According to a local Georgia paper (in a piece published in March 2014) which highlighted Dempsey’s promotion to Colonel (it is good to see we still have local communities proud of what our warriors do!):
A 1988 graduate of Coosa High School, Dempsey attended the United States Air Force Academy, graduating in 1992 with a Bachelor’s of Science degree in Aeronautical Engineering.
He entered flight training in 1998, becoming a certified pilot for the Air Force’s F-15C Eagle.
He has flown missions in Operations Southern Watch (Iraq) and Noble Eagle (Homeland Defense) and has deployed to Saudi Arabia and Iceland.
The Nevada Test and Training Range is a unique national asset managed and run by the USAF.
The Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR), formerly the 98th Range Wing, provides the warfighter a flexible, realistic and multidimensional battle-space to conduct testing tactics development, and advanced training in support of U.S. national interests.
The NTTR also provides instrumentation and target maintenance support for Green Flag-West at the National Training Center and Leach Lake Tactics Range (LLTR).
As a Major Range Test Facility Base (MRTFB) activity, the NTTR supports the Department of Defense advanced composite force training, tactics development, and electronic combat testing as well as DOD and Department of Energy testing, research, and development.
The NTTR hosts numerous Red Flag and U.S. Air Force Weapons School exercises each year, as well as various test and tactics development missions.
The NTTR coordinates operational and support matters with major commands, other services, DOE and Department of Interior, as well as other federal, state, and local government agencies. The NTTR acts as the single point of contact for range customers.
Even though the range is very large indeed, with the evolving threat environments of the 21st century, training is not confined simply within the confines of even this large training area.
Similar to what we discovered at Fallon, the USAF and the USN are focused on how to operate in the expanded battlespace of 21st century operations.
The size and role of the test range was identified in the Fact Sheet as follows:
The NTTR is the largest contiguous air and ground space available for peacetime military operations in the free world.
The range occupies 2.9 million acres of land, 5,000 square miles of airspace which is restricted from civilian air traffic over-flight and another 7,000 square miles of Military Operating Area, or MOA, which is shared with civilian aircraft.
The 12,000-square-nautical mile range provides a realistic arena for operational testing and training aircrews to improve combat readiness.
A wide variety of live munitions can be employed on targets on the range.
In our discussion with Col. Dempsey, he provided an overview on the nature of the range, its training role, the challenges in preparing for the next decade of 21st century combat, and ways to work towards more effective training for the 21st century battlespace.
The Role of the Range
The range is obviously designed to train airpower to operate in the various mission settings which today’s Air Force needs to operate in.
But it is not just about the mechanics of flying; it is about “multi-domain mission readiness,” according to Dempsey.
“Warfare is the synergistic combination of desired effects.”
This means that the air component of warfare is a key element but only part of a synergistic whole, and the training environment needs to reflect this.
We raised the question of the important role, which the US Army is playing with missile defense and Col. Dempsey noted that in coming training exercise, US Army air defense units are part of Red Flag 2015.
A Training Gap
Col. Dempsey discussed the historical role of the NTTR, when training done on the range was for preparing for Desert Storm.
The air-land battle approach was tested and trained on the NTTR.
With the post 9/11 focus on what would become the Iraq and Afghan conflicts, resources and focus of attention shifted to operations on the ground.
This meant an atrophy of technical capabilities for the type of higher end conflict required post Desert Storm.
As the land wars draw down, and conflicts, which are either hybrid or near competitors, need to be anticipated and trained for.
The training environment must be calibrated for the next decade of operations, the NTTR must be properly configured to deal with evolving threats, and prepared for the introduction of new capabilities such as the F-35.
In fact, the F-35 coming to Nellis at a time when the USAF was relooking at the threat environment and the appropriate tactics to deal with that environment provides an interesting historical convergence.
The convergence is productive two ways, both in terms of evolving the F-35 approach to combat operations and shaping overall tactics for the combat air force.
“We are opening up our aperture with regard to training for 21st century operations precisely as the F-35 enters the Air Force fleet.”
Synchronization to Deal with 21st Century Threats
The synchronization of air, space, and cyber elements and with the joint and coalition force is the core task of training to operate within the 21st century battlespace.
The F-35 will be a key element within which synchronization approaches evolve.
The Nevada Test and Training Range is responsible for the largest contiguous air and ground space available for military operations in the free world. With 1,200 possible targets, realistic threat systems and the support of an opposing enemy force that cannot be replicated anywhere else in the world, the NTTR is home to America’s most advanced aerial test and training environment, providing Airmen with a peacetime battlefield to hone their combat skills. (U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Michael R. Holzworth)
As at Fallon, Col. Dempsey underscored the importance of Live Virtual Constructive Training as a key part of the range’s future.
“The live part is operators that are affecting things are actually doing it in the environment that they are likely to do in combat.
A person is operating their platform or combat space by actually doing their task in real time.
Virtual means that I’m sitting still in a building in a mock up of my plane and getting some training.
The constructive piece of that is that an environment is generated by computer models in which the training takes place.
But here’s the confusing part.
If you’re a space operator going to war and you’re sitting at your space console to generate and train the effect, we’d say that’s live, right?
It’s as live as we know it because that’s where they’d go to war.
When they simulate that activity they’re sitting at the same console they were sitting at when they’re live, and so when you try to delineate virtual and constructive, it depends on the context.
A robust environment presents relevant training, and an appropriate combination of live, virtual, and constructive inputs provides the best environment for current and future needs.
Going forward what that means is our flight crews operating on the Nevada Test and Training Range will need to be tied into a Live Virtual Constructive Environment, they have a realistic sense of the threat and the challenge of leveraging joint and coalition assets in shaping the effects needed to defeat that threat.”
The Challenge: Crafting and Evolving Realistic Training
Given the nature of the expanded battlespace for 21st century operations and the complexity of joint and coalition operations two difficult challenges need to be met.
First, the threat needs to be as realistic as possible and to be simulated as rapidly as possible.
“We do not have years to craft a threat scenario; we need to find ways to develop realistic threats into a combat training environment, that prepare us for real world operations and optimizing the synergy of our tools to deliver real combat capability.
Second, there is the challenge of working the synergy among the assets to be used in operations.
It is challenging to orchestrate only USAF assets, let alone joint and coalition ones.
But this is the challenge, which must be mastered in the real world.
“Our long-term goal here is to present a realistic environment which is agnostic of country. And it must be a realistic environment which is complicated enough to train the crews to maximize the performance of their systems. And to do that we need to be able to master the process of Live Virtual Constructive Training. ”
During my trip to Australia last year, I had a chance to visit two new squadrons within the Royal Australian Air Force: the Wedgetail and KC-30A squadrons.
Both are part of the transformation of the RAAF into a powerful, integrated medium weight air force capable of significant global reach.
In a recent interview with the head of the Air Mobility Group, Air Commodore McDonald, that process of change associated with the transition for Air Lift to Air Mobility was described as part of understanding where the AMG is now and where it is headed moving forward.
One of the busiest organisations in the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) has undergone a change of command during a formal parade at RAAF Base Richmond, with Air Lift Group now under the command of Air Commodore Warren McDonald, CSC. Outgoing commander, Air Commodore Gary Martin, AM, CSC, has completed his three-year posting to the role and will now serve as the Air Attaché at the Australian Embassy in Washington DC.
Prior to the current modernization program, the RAAF would need several months warning time before they could assemble a strike force. And they did not have the logistic capability to support that force at long distance from Australia.
For example, the RAAF had C-130s and a small amount of B 707 tanking support which was in reality only a training capability.
Contrast that to today where in the current Middle East deployment, in a matter of weeks, the forces were able to respond rapidly and to deploy against the threat.
And they have an ability to provide the complete logistical support as well to the force. The C-17 and the KC-30As have been crucial to this effort, and is why the government is seeking to acquire additional C-17s and KC-30As as well.
It is a mindset as well as capability change as well. In today’s world you are not going to have six months warning with that amount of time to respond. You need forces that can be gathered together rapidly and deployed as a package.
Our government wants to insert forces rapidly to deal with crises; not to have to wait for a long period to deploy. We don’t want to respond to the PM’s request to deploy with: “Call us in six months, and we will let you know when we are on our way. Governments want real options; not a recorded message .”
In this interview with Air Commodore Gary Martin, currently the Air Attache in the United States, but previously the Air Lift Commander just prior to McDonald taking Command the process of transition is the focus of attention.
Martin was extensively involved in the process of introducing the C-17s into the RAAF and was the Commander in charge of the Air Lift Command as the KC-30A came into the fleet.
He looks at the very significant cultural shift represented by the introduction and operation of the C-17 fleet and the challenges of bringing the KC-30A to operational reality and the powerful synergy which operating both platforms brings to the Australian forces.
Especially noteworthy is the emphasis which Martin placed on the process of cultural change, not just for the RAAF, but for the government, the Australian Army and the emergency aid agencies in Australia.
Question: You took command of the Air Lift Group in late 2011. The ALG prior to the C-17 was basically defined by the operational span of the C-130 and the Caribou. And you were involved with the C-17 transition.
How would you describe the shift?
Air Commodore Martin: I took over in late 2010 and was confronted with a set of demanding humanitarian support situations ranging from support to Tsunami relief in Japan to the earthquake in New Zealand and a fairly serious moment at Christmas Island.
We were in the process of shifting from a C-130 centric mind set to a C-17 mind set by which I mean shifting from thinking in terms of days to support an operation to hours.
The initial cultural change was on the part of the Australian Government.
Royal Australian Air Force Air Load Team members offload humanitarian aid from the Australian C-17 Globemaster aircraft that landed at Honiara airport on 09 April 2014. The Defence Assessment Team is part of the Australian Government’s rapid response to a request for assistance from the Government of the Solomon Islands following devastating flash flooding on the 3rd and 4th of April. The DFAT led relief efforts are providing humanitarian support to thousands of effected residents of the capital Honiara, and throughout Guadalcanal Island. Credit: RAAF
Government suddenly realized that they had the speed and capacity to make an Australian flag appear anywhere in the South Pacific region within 12 hours. And then have a revisit capability within the next 24 hours or less if you’re utilizing two or more aircraft. This was a shift from a three to four day process to one of 12 hours.
The Prime Minister realized that the Government could have an immediate effect, and they could make a decision the night before, by 3:00 pm the following day an aircraft will be on the ground, with a load of whatever was required. And then can present to the Australian public the initial results on the 6 PM news.
This was a fundamental change to National power for Australia.
This changed us at ALG from being a tactical airlift Group to strategic airlift Group. With the C130, it always took a day to get offshore and then another day to get to the first point after that.
With the C-17, we could now conducted an operation from anywhere in Australia, pick up a load in Australia, get offshore, and come back home the next day.
This was a quantum leap for the RAAF and for the Government.
Next up was the cultural impact on the Army.
Rather than thinking of a relatively slow rollout of a support mission in terms of days, they now had to prepare for a response in hours. The Army had to realize their mobility now didn’t have that luxury of having 24 hours or 48 hours notice to move.
Because the aircraft that was going to carry them was going to be there within four to five hours, and then offshore and delivered within the next eight hours so they needed to be capable of such rapid insertion.
The Army then had to go through a complete redistribution process with its battalions and infantries for those who were on the ready lift notice because we were bringing down reaction times into the 12-hour picture, which is a working day. Food stores, ammunition, and water bottles, simple things like that now had to be on higher levels of readiness.
Emergency services for state governments of Victoria and Queensland had to adjust as well.
These two agencies were highly utilized for the rescue teams that were deployed to assist with the earthquake in Christchurch, and the tsunami in Japan. With the development of the reaction times that the RAAF now had with its C-17 fleet, in less than a day from the period of notification they had to call their people in, or volunteers, put them into their readiness vehicles, drive out to the base, load the equipment, and be deployed within a day, such as we did in Tsunami support to Japan.
The Army and the Emergency Services needed to adjust to the speed and load capacity of the C-17 and to shift from the C-130 centric mindset.
Everyone now realized that they had four times the C-130 capacity and that they could make a huge affect when they first touched down on the ground, rather than going through a series of flights to get that effect.
This led to the two State emergency services investing 3-4 million dollars in improving their ability to leverage a C-17 insertion capability to enable their ability to operate anywhere in the world.
It was certainly a game changer in the top most strategic thought processes of the National Security Council.
They could make a decision at a nighttime meeting and the C-17 force could be executing the mission the next day.
Mr Javier Matallanos-Martin, Senior Vice President and Head of Program Airbus Military (second from left) hands over the keys for the Royal Australian Air Forces new KC-30A Multi Role Tanker Transport aircraft to Commanding Officer No. 33 Squadron Wing Commander Guy Wilson (second from right). Also in attendance are Commander Air Lift Group Air Commodore Gary Martin AM, CSC (left) and Air Vice-Marshal Colin Thorne AM Head Aerospace Systems Division from Defence Material Organisation (right). June 1, 2011. Credit: RAAF
Question: Both the C-17 and KC-30A are multi-mission aircraft and how do you train to operate a diversity of missions?
Air Commodore Martin: Multi-mission is challenging.
For example, right after we flew missions to support Japan in the tsunami crisis we came back to Australia to conduct fire support activity and then earthquake support.
We received our training with the USAF and because the USAF had honed mult-mission skills with regard to their C-17s this was a relatively easy transition.
Yet the human stress factor was significant.
Rather than the tactical operational envelope, we were now flying great distances with the C-17. We worked closely with our RAAF aviation medicine experts to understand how we could best operate 15 hour missions covering 5-10 time zones.
We were tripling the extent of what our air mobility crews could do as compare to operating the C-130.
This led us to redesigning the entire focus of how to use the aircraft and the crews to execute a variety of missions over great distance and with significant speed.
Question: As you built up deployment experience with the C-17, obviously a major challenge or opportunity was to sort out how to coordinate your air lift operations with the USAF and others in the region to maximize the effect on the ground.
How did you approach this challenge or opportunity?
Air Commodore Martin: We needed to think through two problems.
First, we needed to work through cargo management from the Chinook through the C-17 for the RAAF.
Second, we need to work through how to marry up our cargos with USAF or other regional Air Forces to maximize effectiveness.
We have experienced a very successfully integrated with Scott Air Force base and TRANSCOM.
We are utilizing links between computer stations on different networks to be able to see each other’s tasking processes and be able to offer the ability to do airlift on behalf of the two Air Forces.
Now we can actually use a force, not just the Australian Force or the United States Air Force, but a force of air mobility assets, the right size, the right shape to actually affect the load that’s on the ground.
For years we’ve been flying over the same territories and bypassing each other’s airports and loads that are waiting for distribution because we were on our tasks. It was all viewed as being on sovereign tasks.
The get to this point meant that we had to think through how to shape a common approach.
We had to have a payment process again which is worked on common hours valuation process. And this accounting system had to work on an annual basis so the averaging process occurs – so you’re not having to get tied up into who’s charging for what on a monthly basis as per a commercial Fed Ex type of contract.
Question: Clearly, another aspect is the question of the shared sustainment approach of the C-17 as well.
When I was a PACAF last year, I was informed that the RAAF and the USAF have a common approach to managing spares and doing repairs.
Air Commodore Martin: You are talking about what has become the Boeing managed Global Sustainment Program.
It is a C-17 support mechanism that was designed for the United States Air Force, so it can maneuver anywhere around the world. And so, people who have received common training in different units could look after that aircraft as it deployed globally.
As international sales started with Britain and then with Australia with the C-17 in completely different hemispheres of the world, we felt that this agreement still was USAF centric. So if a British C-17 was visiting Australia and had an engine malfunction or something go wrong with it, and needed technical support with more than a couple of technicians it was carrying, Australia could not do anything to it without Britain asking America’s permission to do that work.
That worked for about the first six weeks.
Then we realized that this was obviously a shortfall in our ability to conduct worldwide operations and support.
We now have a totally different approach.
In the GSP we do not own the common spares; our common spares are part of a global C-17 inventory. Any of our air crew or technicians can walk up to any C-17 support area in the world, and actually submit an order form through which looks like a United States document.
And because the partner technicians have gone through the same training processes, they can help fix that malfunction that’s occurred.
This is the gold standard for working a multinational fleet and we see a similar process being established for the F-35 and we would certainly like to see that for the KC-30A as well.
With aircraft that operate globally, you do not want to be limited by the logistics simply being supported by national parts, which may well not be located at the point of attack or in the area of interest. This makes no sense with the multi-national and multi-mission aircraft becoming the norm for 21st century air forces.
Question: Let us now discuss the coming of the KC-30A to the RAAF and the process of transition.
You were at the heart of this effort, and could you take us back in time to provide some history on the initial efforts?
Air Commodore Martin: During my time at the Air Lift Group we took ownership of the KC-30A and worked with Airbus Military and Qantas Defence to craft an operational capability for the fleet.
The Chief of Air Force of the RAAF was impatient to add the tanking capability to the fleet as we had ceased our original B-707 tanking back in 2008. We were thin on personnel with tanking experience and knew that we would need to ramp up this capability as soon as possible.
(Kneeling left) Air Commodore Gary Martin AM, CSC, Commander Air Lift Group, (kneeling right) Wing Commander Geoff Fox, Commanding Officer No. 33 Squadron (33SQN) along with representatives from every section in 33SQN, all standing in front of one of the newly acquired KC-30As at RAAF Base Amberley. Credit: RAAF
And the new tanker was much larger than our legacy aircraft, so we realised that there would be challenges associated with our first of series aircraft fleet.
We were a demanding customer because of the pressures to get the KC-30A into operation.
Overall, our Chief was looking for the ability of the RAAF to deploy a sustainable insertion package with the C-17s and KC-30As moving out together to bring significant capability to an area of interest.
Because the KC-30A holds the fuel for its AAR in its wings, we can carry personnel and their baggage onboard the aircraft. This means that the C-17 can carry the heavy equipment; the KC-30A the fuel for AAR and the personnel to operate the capabilities when landing in an area of operation.
This combined capability is an essential force package for operating at a distance for the Australian forces.
But to get to that point has taken time.
The aircraft is a software-enabled aircraft and we had challenges to deal with to get the entire package to work operationally.
So all of our processes in the first year were aimed at getting the aircraft safely airborne, conducting our operational training and evaluation of the squadron members. We weren’t using the boom at this stage, just the pods and bringing them into operational service.
And as you know, we started with the process of getting the hose and drogue system to work with our Hornets, and then have moved onto the boom.
We clearly see both for our own use and working with coalition partners. Having a tanker that can do both and can refuel from such a large tanker reserve of fuel is a huge operational advantage for us.
Another priority was to get the whole logistical system to kick in.
Initially, we had just taken delivery of a limited spares package and were the first nation to use the aircraft. So there was no experience with mean failure rates of parts and other data important to establishing a functioning logistics system.
But the working relationship we had with Qantas Defence and Airbus Military allowed us to work through the challenges to get where we are today.
After we established a good workflow to deal with any problems evident as we starting using the aircraft, the 24-hour work flow between Spain and Australia worked to our advantage.
We had Airbus Military, and RAAF personnel in both Australia and Spain. We would identify problems and craft partial solutions and then send those by electronic means to Spain where the team would then work on them while we slept; We would then be able the next day to take their solution set and continue to work on it, and then we could send at the end of our work day our work on the solution set, etc.
It was a lot of coordination.
It took us two-and-a-half years to have a stabilized tanking process with the RAAF and fighter force and for them to integrate with our tanker aircraft.
Question: Now that the KC-30A is deployed to Iraq and certainly demonstrating its operational value, what is next for the aircraft?
Air Commodore Martin: We see the C-17 and KC-30A pairing as a powerful one; that is why the Government is seeking to add additional C-17 aircraft.
When we bought the KC-30A we were the first Air Force to move to operational use of the aircraft.
There are always challenges to doing that but we learned a lot and believe we have much to share with other users.
Now there is a global fleet of Airbus tankers flying.
We would like to see both the user group plus-ed up in working with Airbus to shape the evolution of the aircraft, but also see put in place a system similar to Boeing’s Global Sustainment Partnership or the F-35 global sustainment approach.
We think the KC-30A will clearly operate globally and become an even more important aircraft over time for the RAAF and allied forces, as we add capabilities to the aircraft to operate in the battlespace.
Indeed, because of the configuration of the KC-30A, we can use significant space onboard the aircraft to handle C2 and various types of digital data.
The tanker is at the far end of the battlespace and is well positioned to push and pull data. We would like to see the global users of the aircraft shape some common standards and common role equipment acquisitions as well.
That is the advantage of the multi-mission, multi-national programs which are so important to the allied air forces of the 21st century.
I think what you’re going to see now is not only air mobility aircraft provide fuel and equipment, but also be a key asset in terms of data transfer.
That’s now the power of this fleet.
Royal Australian Air Force KC-30A Multi Role Tanker Transport crews prep the jet on Anderson Air Force Base, Guam, before flying a refuel mission in support of Cope North 13, Feb. 13, 2013. (U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Matthew Bruch/Released). 2/13/13.
It gives you an aircraft that can sit back in a supply position to go back into the main bases with operational data being transferred to and from those aircraft in the area for free.
It doesn’t cost the aircraft one cent, it’s just the hardware and software fitted to the aircraft itself.
This capacity doesn’t have to bother the KC-30A aircrew as they conduct their respective missions, but it can be utilized for command and control system to actually network the whole process for our Navy deployed on the ocean, our Army personnel on the ground, or another Air Force asset of a coalition Air Force along with that of our own Royal Australian Air Force weapons systems.
Again because we have common aircraft loads and C2 systems as our partners in the world, we can enhance coalition building and their capabilities.
For a PDF version of this article to download see the following:
For the interview with Air Commodore Warren McDonald, the successor to Air Commodore Martin (note Marin was Air Lift Commander, but McDonald has become the Air Mobility Commander, a change which reflects the transformation as well) see the following:
Editor’s Note: The video above shows the KC-30A operating in the Iraq operation.
12/09/2014: Australia’s Air Task Group (ATG) consisting of six RAAF F/A-18F Super Hornets, an E-7A Wedgetail Airborne Early Warning and Control aircraft and a KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport aircraft continue to support Operation OKRA with missions in Iraq.
The ATG comprises around 400 RAAF personnel who have deployed to the Middle East.
Australia’s efforts are in response to a request for assistance by the Iraqi Government in combating ISIL terrorists. Operation OKRA is the Australian Defence Force’s contribution to the international effort to combat the ISIL terrorist threat in Iraq. Australia’s contribution is being closely coordinated with the Iraqi government, Gulf nations and a broad coalition of international partners.
“We are entering an era where American dominance in key warfighting domains is eroding, and we must find new and creative ways to sustain, and in some areas expand, our advantages,” Hagel said in a memo to Pentagon leaders announcing his innovation initiative.
Hagel noted that while the United States has been engaged in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, powers such as Russia and China have invested heavily in military modernization, fielding advanced aircraft, submarines, and both longer-range and more accurate missiles.
What can be easily missed is what he was talking about was not just innovation in briefing slides; but innovation embodied in deployed systems.
Because everyone but industrial workers populates Washington, what can be forgotten is that innovation is what is built by the hands and minds of American defense industrial worker. In fact, few have actually visited the defense industrial plants, to see the challenge of translating new platform concepts into new deployed capabilities.
In the Carter Administration, Mr. Andrew Marshall Director Net Assessment/OSD sponsored research that was directed at defining and if possible measuring military “modernization.” The effort was called TASCFORM –technique for measuring force modernization project. It was a worthy effort that had its time and place. One of the lasting legacies is not in the math model, which is a multi-attribute utility function, but in the opening definition, which were all acted on when Ronald Reagan became President.
The question of defining “modernization” has historically proven to be surprisingly difficult.
Modernization of a military force can always be carried out for various reasons. To gain some new capabilities not previously available: to add new components which then provide for enhanced or more reliable operation of existing equipment; or simply to replace worn out equipment with newly manufactured ones.
The future amphibious assault ship USS America (LHA 6) is saluted as it departs Huntington Ingalls Shipbuilding in Pascagoula, Miss. (U.S. Navy photo courtesy of Huntington Ingalls Shipbuilding by Shane Scara/Released) 7/11/14
Modernization has to also take into account capital investment in facilities for production and modification of existing weapons or support systems. (The TASCFORM Air model, 1 February 1980, Timperlake et al).
There is much criticism of new platforms as they come off of the assembly line, ranging from the Osprey to the F-35 to the USS Ford to the USS America.
What is missed in all of the criticism is the denigration of the efforts of the American workers who create the combat capabilities for the American warrior.
When visiting factories, it is hard not to miss the generations of workers stretching back to World War II which have built the “arsenal of democracy.” When I attended the christening of the USS Arlington, I met many workers who represented three generations of shipyard workers who were proud to see their ship go to see and to represent America abroad.
Modernization is built on the foundation of the American and Western defense industrial workforce. Disrupting the rhythm of production for the regular “debates” in Washington misses the whole point of the need to keep the work force in place to shape new capabilities. Shifting from the old to the new is fine; as long as the workforce is trained and engaged in building these new systems.
Only deployed systems in the hands of skilled warfighters deter; not claims in “innovators” briefing charts.
As the never-ending U.S. political revolution continues with the make-up of Congress having changed, the opportunity arises for both the House and Senate to answer Secretary Hagel’s parting challenge.
There are three examples that can give notice to Russia and China and others that America is building our real capabilities and not just enjoying a procurement holiday.
The first example is the most simple to describe. Gaining new capabilities by increasing the production of the F-35 to an efficient industrial number in order to drive down unit costs and more rapidly build up inventory numbers. Once the F-35 is proliferated to US and allied partners the aircraft will have the ability to not only be a catalyst for warfighting changes it will be its own follow-on.
The Lightning II is the first tactical air-to-air, air-to-ground, electronic warfare software upgradeable aircraft ever built. And to understand who the workers are who build this plane, you need to visit Cameri, Tokyo, Denmark, Norway, Australia and meet with computer scientists and engineers as well as those working on the final assembly line in Fort Worth. Many of today’s aviation workers read Wired Magazine.
“The learning curve to improve sensors, system capability and weapons carried quickly compared to building another airframe may be a new American way of industrial surging. The American arsenal of democracy may be shifting from an industrial production line to a clean room and a computer lab as key shapers of competitive advantage.”
Workers can be seen on the moving line and forward fuselage assembly areas for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter at Lockheed Martin Corp’s factory located in Fort Worth, Texas, Oct. 13, 2011. Randy A. Crites/Lockheed Martin/Reuters
The second military modernization initiative that is underway is the addressing the procurement holiday with regard to the Triad. A new bomber strike aircraft, and new sub and increased attention to the Minuteman Missile system is all underway.
Again Secretary Hagel a Vietnam Veteran infantry Sargent who was wounded in combat lead the way:
“I think the Long-Range Strike Bomber is absolutely essential for keeping our deterrent edge. … We need to do it. We need to make the investments. We’ll have it in the budget. It’s something I have particularly put a priority on.”
With the USN modernization of their contribution to the triad an Ohio Class replacement it is both good news and other story. Yes “Rosie the riveter” is reading Wired, but has also been on an extended vacation:
The number one priority of the US Military is to deter a major nuclear strike on America. Consequently, it is essential that Chuck Hagel’s support for a new bomber and the navy getting on with an Ohio class sub replacement is fully supported by both the Houses and Senate. A nuke strike on US is the only thing that has the distinct possibility of ending the United States and a nation, it is that serious.
The final example of proving today that the US is back with a truly state-of-the-art military modernization initiative is seen in the construction in Newport News Virginia of the CVN-78 class of Aircraft Carriers; the Gerald Ford class. The next in line of the CVN-78 Class is the Kennedy followed by one of the most historic ship names in the US Navy: The Enterprise.
It is time to immediately put a marker down by the Legislative Branch and put US shipyard carrier construction on an aggressive signal to the world by laying a keel every three years.
The debate over the cost and effectiveness of a modern carrier is over and is now nothing more than a rear guard action designed to continue to create paralysis by analysis. It can be looked at as for the most part as the constant intellectual empowerment of many who do not even know what is an “OK-3 Wire.”
The USS Gerald Ford unders construction. Credit: USN
And what is missed is that the US is the only nation that can construct a “super-carrier” which is the most difficult design-build engineering endeavor in the history of the world, very large building and monuments do not race from the arctic to the equator and points in between while launching soon to be the most modern aircraft ever designed.
So let’s just get on with it.
Russia and China are not slowing down. In fact the Peoples Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) wishes it had the skill and ability to build and operate a Ford class, but they cannot.
The Ford class are being built using a Nimitz Class hull so to all they may look like classic “super carriers” but do not let the “look” fool you.
The CVN-78 carriers absolutely personify the second definition of modernization mentioned above by adding significant new 21st Century design components especially increased internal power generation, for enhanced command and control, C&C, and the coming directed energy evolution.
The Ford Class design incorporates the ability to reconfigure rapidly 17 interior spaces based on the need to focus its combat role to being more than just a strike carrier.
The new carrier essentially provides at sea computer labs and centers for additional C&C state-of-the-art information centers as the combat mission requires.
However, there is also some good news in that the US Navy and their industry partners are focused on the most immediate future.
U.S. Combat commanders at any moment have to fight the force they have. Our current carriers are still being modernized from within and are also awaiting the arrival of new or upgraded Carrier Air Group (CAG) aircraft, such as F-35, V-22, the E-2 D Hawkeye (another software upgradeable aircraft) and more powerful 4th Gen Growlers to protect 4th Gen F/A-18s.
Sailors and family at the christening of the USS Arlington on March 26, 2011. The workers interviewed during our visit were proud of their new ship and the progress they had made in building this important new class of ships, the San Antonio Class. And generations of sailors rely on such dedication and performance from the defense industrial work force to survive and prevail in a dangerous world.. Photo: Second Line of Defense
So laying a keel every three years while modernizing the Nimitz class will be seen as a very prudent measure in light of declining numbers of U.S. air and ship assets, and the growth of Chinese, North Korean, Russian and other powers in the world.
It is not just about us versus them; we have allies our adversaries have clients.
But to bolster our global allied relationships we need to have modern combat platforms at the disposition of the national command authority.
Even to lead from behind requires capability beyond which we are currently building now.
It is important to be visionary on military technology, but getting on with matching our determined adversaries modernization efforts in quantity and quality with U.S. and allied capabilities that are already a generation ahead and currently on the factory floor or in a ship yard is essential.
But to do this, the U.S. needs political leadership on Capitol Hill to furnish appropriate resources and support for the way ahead.
Ed Timperlake was the Principal Director for Mobilization Planning and Requirements/OSD in the Reagan Administration.
The mission was to build accurate dynamic iterative models and studies to understand the consequences of warfighting from the Nuclear Triad and Continuity of Government programs, to the numbers and quality of performance of US tactical units of ships planes and ground units.
The most important question was combat losses and the industrial base surge capability, while concurrently acquiring replacement combat warriors properly trained and equipped to fight and win as long as necessary.
The Office no longer exists with the ending of the Cold War.
The outcome of the 25 January Greek elections has been the emergence of a government led by Syriza, a new party which has committed itself to reopen all previous debt and fiscal policy commitments made by Greece to the European Union and the IMF since Greek debt crises began in 2010.
Syriza’s campaign promises to Greek voters included debt write-off and abandonment of the fiscal austerity pledges the government had to make during recent years to meet EU and IMF conditions for extension of debt obligations and new loans.
Greece’s debt management misfortunes began in 2010 but continued at frequent intervals. In 2011, the EU governments and the IMF reached an accord to provide new assistance under the guidance of a Troika, comprised of the European Commission (EC), European Central Bank (ECB), and the IMF.
In 2012 Greek’s finances appeared to be near collapse once again, and to prevent default and potential exit from the EU and the Eurozone, the Troika put together a second bailout intended to put Greece back on track to orderly return to solvency and economic growth.
More recently Greece relapsed yet again into a crisis of unserviceable debt and public unrest no longer tolerant of the fiscal austerity measures imposed by the Troika.
The new Greek elections thus have brought the debt problems of Greece back into crisis mode, only this time the crisis is not solely financial.
This time the political structure of Greece is directly at stake.
During the 2012 crisis, German officials did consider some form of Greece exit (Grexit) from the Eurozone (and possibly from the EU). Chancellor Merkel personally considered the Grexit option, but decided against that extreme outcome on the grounds no convincing analysis was available on whether the potential financial market consequences might generate a broader crisis in European and global financial markets.
At that time, the US (under Treasury Secretary Geithner) supported a special workout for Greece, and strongly encouraged the IMF to join with the EZ leadership in provision of a new rescue package.
In 2015, the circumstances may be different.
After the 2012 bailout, German officials and politicians decided the Greek problems might well recur, and that additional plans should be made for the next crisis if one should occur.
Since that time, a handful of German officials, assisted by one IMF aide and unknown but closely associated others, considered in great secrecy various mechanisms for the possibility of a “managed Grexit” that would contain or moderate the negative financial effects of a Greek default and exit from the Euro.
In Germany, the political mood has also become far more hostile to yet another Greek bailout or any debt writedown. At this juncture, the possibility of forcing a Greek exit from the Eurozone is no longer “unthinkable” in Berlin, and various scenarios for orderly withdrawal have been given much thought.
Markets and media continue to assume a Grexit would ultimately not be permitted by German or other EZ leaders, but that assumption may no longer be valid.
Key questions now may be whether a Grexit would encourage other Eurozone nations (or regions within other Eurozone nations) to seek exit as a means of debt default and escape from the dreaded fiscal austerity imposed by Germany and the EU Commission.
Alternatively, there is worry that a new relief package designed for Greece would result in new demands for fiscal and financial help from big countries like France, Italy and Spain, as well as from the weaker debt-ridden “Peripherals.”
A new wrinkle has just been added to the EZ-IMF confrontation with the Greeks, as the new leadership in Athens has taken a visible pro-Putin stance in EU talks on further sanctions on Russia.
Syriza Party Leader Tsipras has already surprised Europeans with abrupt and provocative statements and diplomatic initiatives regarding EU relations with Russia.
For example, he declared “We should not accept or recognize the government of neo-Nazis in Ukraine”, and his Foreign Minister expressed objection to a joint EU declaration of intention to intensify sanctions on Russia regarding Russia’s action in Ukraine. Initial Syriza contacts with the Russian Ambassador elicited an offer from Moscow to assist Greece should the need arise.
The Syriza Party has also adopted a 40-point manifesto, in which the 40th point is shocking for those concerned with strategic balance: “40. Closure of all foreign bases in Greece and withdrawal from NATO.”
Tsipras has already surprised Europeans with abrupt and provocative statements and diplomatic initiatives regarding EU relations with Russia.
For example, he declared “We should not accept or recognize the government of neo-Nazis in Ukraine”, and his Foreign Minister expressed objection to a joint EU declaration of intention to intensify sanctions on Russia regarding Russia’s action in Ukraine.
Initial contacts with the Russian Ambassador elicited an offer from Moscow to assist Greece should the need arise. It is, of course, possible that these are tactical moves to enhance his bargaining position with the EU members of NATO, in hopes that drawing in strategic and security interests of Europe, NATO, and even the U.S. might tilt the scales in favor of the Greek demands.
Markets and Western economic and financial officials are still probably overlooking potential Chinese and Russian interest in acquiring a larger financial and strategic positions in Greece.
The Chinese are already deeply involved in an effort to take control of the Port of Piraeus, and would no doubt be eager to seek a larger foothold as a hub for expansion of Chinese business in Europe and Eurasia.
Russia has already become deeply involved with wealthy Greek-Cypriot families in its very large scale financial interactions with Cyprus.
Many of these same families are major players in the mainland Greek economy. Russia’s interests in that region spanning Greece and Cyprus are both strategic and financial (including much interest in the oil and gas reserves known to be located from that area all the way to Israel).
We wrote earlier in a Defense News op ed published on September 2, 2012, that the evolving Greek crisis would be part of shaping a new European map. This article focused on the strategic impact of the Euro crisis at that time.
Now, with the Ukrainian crisis and Russian assertiveness compounded with an economic crisis, the prospects for further redrawing of the map of European security, including NATO, are clearly on the rise.
The Greek dynamic could reopen concerns on NATO’s southern flank.
The weakening of Greece, and the high probability that Athens will go its own way on currency and other economic issues, is occurring in the midst of the growing Chinese global economic reach and Russian activism in the Middle East. China and Russia will be eager to engage Greece with its geographic position on the Mediterranean Sea.
The Euro crisis is a key element in reshaping European defense and security challenges and in reshaping alliances within Europe itself.
2015-01-29 The Wedgetail Command and Control platform and the KC-30A MRTT aircraft are the two new Australian systems operating in Iraq which have been part of the RAAF transformation.
And the Wedgetail squadron is leveraging the operational experience to expand its operational envelope.
Royal Australian Air Force E-7A Wedgetail Airborne Early Warning and Control aircraft recently made history for the longest Australian command and control mission in a war zone during a combat mission over Iraq.
At 16 hours and 18 minutes, the E-7A Wedgetail’s mission entailed the command and control of large numbers of Coalition aircraft operating in Iraqi airspace as part of the multi-national air campaign confronting ISIL.
Commander of Australia’s Air Task Group, Air Commodore Steve Roberton commented on what the endurance mission meant for Australia’s air power capability.
“After already being ‘on station’ for a number of hours, the Australian Wedgetail crew was advised the Coalition aircraft due to relieve them was delayed,” Air Commodore Roberton said.
In response, the Wedgetail crew quickly assessed their ability to coordinate additional air-to-air refueling and agreed to substantially extend their mission.
“Try to imagine coordinating a short-notice, mid-air refuel for a Boeing 737 in the middle of a combat zone. It is no small task,” he said.
Air Commodore Roberton noted Australia’s ability to ‘go above and beyond’ is a clear demonstration of the nation’s important contribution to the Coalition air campaign.
A Royal Australian Air Force E-7A Wedgetail Airborne Early Warning and Control aircraft in the skies of the Middle East. Australias Air Task Group (ATG) consisting of six RAAF F/A-18F Super Hornets, an E-7A Wedgetail Airborne Early Warning and Control aircraft and a KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport aircraft continue to support Operation OKRA with missions in Iraq. Credit: RAAF
The E-7A Wedgetail crew completed two air-to-air refuels during this mission, allowing it to stay airborne and make the historic time.
The crew first deployed to the Middle East in September 2014 and were regularly undertaking lengthy missions of approximately 13 hours. Including planning and debriefing, the extension to over 16 hours airborne resulted in the aircrew working toward their duty limits.
“The Australian crew’s responsiveness and flexibility made up for a shortfall that night” Air Commodore Roberton said.
Commander of the E-7A Wedgetail Task Element Wing Commander Christian Martin echoed this praise but acknowledged there were also many in Australia who shared in this achievement.
“The performance and reliability of the aircraft are a direct result of the dedication of a joint ‘Wedgetail team’ comprising our Wing Headquarters back home, the Airborne Early Warning and Control Special Projects Office and Boeing Defence Australia,” Wing Commander Martin said.
Wing Commander Martin believes the E-7A Wedgetail has developed into a world-class command and control platform and is the envy of many nations.
The video above shows the Wedgetail operating in the Iraq AOR.
2015-01-12 For the first time, the new Australian airborne early warning and C2 aircraft is operating in combat.
Australia’s Air Task Group (ATG) consisting of six RAAF F/A-18F Super Hornets, an E-7A Wedgetail Airborne Early Warning and Control aircraft and a KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport aircraft continue to support Operation OKRA with missions in Iraq.
The ATG comprises nearly 400 RAAF personnel who have deployed to the Middle East. Australia’s efforts are in response to a request for assistance by the Iraqi Government in combating ISIL terrorists.
Operation OKRA is the Australian Defence Force’s contribution to the international effort to combat the ISIL terrorist threat in Iraq. Australia’s contribution is being closely coordinated with the Iraqi government, Gulf nations and a broad coalition of international partners.
