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.
It is clear that the F-35 global enterprise is a unique enabler of the entire re-set of US and allied airpower.
Yet this crucial and even central reality is hardly recognized in the mounds or should one say piles of commentary on the F-35 program.
And indeed, notably in testimony of defense officials in front of Congress, is the absence of emphasis upon how central the allies are to the program, or that the F-35 has recently become the plane of choice for all of the core Pacific allies.
Allies are not simply “partners” in the program they are the enablers of 21st century air combat development and approaches.
Allies are not simply “following” the US lead; they are innovating on their own and will infuse the F-35 global enterprise with the spirit of innovation and invention, not mortgaged by the “sequestration” somnolent evident in Washington.
The F-35 as a global enterprise is clearly a foundational force or forcing function force for other developments.
It is not simply a means to an end (modernizing the tactical aircraft fleet) but a forcing function force for fundamental change.
There are several key aspects of the F-35 global enterprise, which are significant for allies as well as Americans.
The key to the F-35 is the reach of the fleet not the range of a single aircraft. Here the intersection of USMC F-35Bs operating off of an ARG-MEU are seen intersecting with Singapore’s F-35Bs. Credit Graphic: Second LIne of Defense
First, it will be in production for a long time, which means that allies can buy with confidence that the system will be there when they need it. There will be no repeat of the Aussie F-111 problem of buying and then the USAF retiring its aircraft leaving the Aussies to foot a significant maintenance bill
The US is up and down in buying numbers of aircraft but with the coming of three production lines (Fort Worth, Cameri, Japan) the allies will be able to buy as the US goes up and down.
Although Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor, the key designers of the combat systems are among the world’s best combat systems companies. As Ed Timperlake has highlighted, the combat systems have their own R and D vectors, which will drive capabilities up over time, which will be reflected in the aircraft.
The weapons, which will be fitted onto the F-35 or operated by the F-35 in a sensor shooter relationship, will be developed globally.
For example, the Kongsberg missile developed for Norway will be available immediately for any F-35A user. The new MBDA Meteor missile is also a case in point of allied investments also shaping a global market
This is historically unprecedented and allows global partners to build for themselves and for the global consortium.
For example, a country like Australia with unique ranges and key scientific capability (demonstrated in the hypersonics area) can become a major designer and producer of missiles for the F-35.
And as one Aussie engineer commented: “Clearly we see the opportunity inherent on adding longer range capabilities for strike associated with the F-35. And one needs to realize that the technology barriers that have hampered the development of a scramjet powered vehicle operating in the low hypersonic region have been broken.”
As a software upgradeable aircraft, users reflecting collaborative combat experience will do the code rewrite. This is already happening with the Wedgetail in Australia, which is a launch point for the use of new software upgradeable aircraft.
The Pacific F-35 Fleet can be sustained through a network of hubs and training ranges. Credit Graphic: Second Line of Defense
The program has built in a global sustainment capability from the ground up, which allows for the clear possibility of shaping a very different approach to global sustainment. Programs developed first for the US which then add global customers face a significant parts and support problem because there was never a thought of building in a global sustainment approach.
The Italians have already built a regional sustainment center in Italy for Europe and Med operations.
The manufacturing program is already mature and there will three FACOS: two already exist in the US and Italy and a third to be added in Japan.
And operationally, a global fleet will provide significant opportunities for innovation by the US and its partners in building out a new combat approach around distributed operations.
And the usual comparisons of stealth China and Russian aircraft versus the F-35 ignore three crucial points:
The US and several allies are investing in the program and will use the program. As a result, it is unlikely that Russia or China will win the fifth generation investment race.
The USAF has several decades of experience with stealth, which neither the Russians nor Chinese have.
The con-ops of F-35 facilities an aerospace combat cloud and distributed operations; neither is a strong suit for authoritarian controlled air combat forces such as those of the Russians and Chinese.
In short, the reality is the reality
The opportunities are there for the new generation of I-Pad generation pilots and the 21st century air combat innovators.
The “Right Stuff” is back.
But of course you actually have to talk to the new generation of pilots, maintainers, and manufacturers of the 21st century air combat force to feel the enthusiasm and see the rethinking going on daily.
It takes time, but the enthusiasm from the new generation is palpable.
And I would add that I am writing this piece from Canberra, Australia where this week The Williams Foundation is hosting a conference on the 5th generation opportunity.
I maybe physically down under but these folks are certainly not when it comes to sorting out the future.
I attended a seminar held by The Williams Foundation yesterday in Canberra, Australia.
The focus of the seminar was on Air Combat Operations: 2025 and Beyond.
The core emphasis was on the impact of the F-35 on reshaping the Australian combat approach appropriate to the challenges, which Australia faced in the region and beyond.
The emphasis was on how to leverage fifth generation technology to generate ongoing air combat development in the decades ahead.
AVM John Blackburn AO (Retd) laid on the intention of the conference in the slide seen below:
Williams Foundation Conference on Air Combat Operations 2025 and Beyond
In other words, the effort put in front of a large audience of attendees, many of them from the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF), was how to get on with it.
The RAAF started its current transformation with the coming of the C-17 which gave them a lift range, speed and capability injection. Then the introduction of the KC-30A which will be fully operational next year which introduced sustainability, reach and range, The most relevant transformational capability to the coming of the F-35 is the Wedgetail.
The Wedgetail is an air battle management aircraft, which is software upgradeable. This new aircraft will be able to manage the battlespace with 360 degree extended reach.
The Australian F-35 will enter into an environment of change and the question is how to accelerate the kind of change necessary to deal with the threats and challenges in the neighborhood and beyond in the years ahead. This was the central question addressed by the seminar.
I will be providing further inputs about presentations at the seminar in the weeks ahead, but would like to highlight a unique contribution of the seminar to furthering an informed discussion of the impact of the fifth generation aircraft on the evolution of airpower.
Lt. Col. “Chip” Berke discussing his F-22 and F-35 experiences with the Australian audience at the Williams Foundation Conference, March 11, 2014. Credit Photo: SLD
At the heart of the program were three speakers: SQNLDR Matthew Harper, No. 1 Squadron, Royal Australian Air Force, Lt. Col. Chip Berke and the VMX-22 Commander Mike Orr. These three operators addressed the question of what the fifth generation experience was all about and how that experience would affect the evolution of the force in the decade ahead.
The USMC is starting its rotational engagement in Australia at the end of the month and it is clear that there is a potential opportunity inherent in the RAAF and the Aussie evolution of combat approaches with that of the modernization of the USMC approach both in the Pacific and in the MAGTF itself.
In other words, the opportunity is not just for training but shaping relevant capabilities for 21st century operations. Both Harps and Chip had something in common: the former COS of the USAF “Buzz” Mosely and Secretary Mike Wynne crated the billets for the two non-USAF pilots to fly and work with the F-22.
The benefits of that decision were evident in the seminar as these two experienced pilots could relay to the rest of us what the impact is and can be. In Chip’s case, he is the only currently operational F-22 and F-35 pilot in the world.
Mike Orr’s task was different: it was to look at how the USMC is building out the combat capabilities of the MAGTF with the F-35 and how the USMC is preparing for the F-35, which is being IOCd next year. To give a sense of the sense of enthusiasm conveyed to the audience by the three speakers, I have included some video inserts from their presentations.
The video insert above is from the Australian F-22 pilot, SQNLDR Matthew Harper. The two below are of Lt. Col. Berke and Col. Orr. These inserts are not the highest quality video but will convey the sense of what these three speakers conveyed to the audience.
After the seminar, I sat down briefly with Chip and Mike to discuss what they thought about their experience of the day.
It was an unusual experience, in that they were being asked by their hosts to think through the future based on their experience in dealing with the new combat systems, something, frankly, I have never experienced in an Inside the Beltway setting.
According to Orr:
I was impressed that the RAAF is engaging in a process of examining the impact of the aircraft well before we are turning wrenches and flying the aircraft. As an air force they are thinking about the strategic impact of the F-35 on their operations, and how they are going to use it as a joint and coalition enabler. There is a clear recognition of what they are getting into. They are not buying it as a one for one enabler but as a tool to do things they simply cannot do today.
Berke underscored
What I enjoyed the most about the interaction was the enthusiasm and embracing the future. This was in distinct from my experience at home where skepticism and resistance to change is so constant. The RAAF clearly is embracing the future and are enthusiastic about the coming of the F-35 as a key enabler of the future.There is no question of should we: it is how do we.There is a full embracement of the necessity for the aircraft and how to get on with its transformational role and impact.
Editor’s Note: Berke’s and Orr’s Presentations Can Be Viewed Below:
During a visit to PACOM in late February 2014, I had the chance to interview the Commanding General of the 94th Army Air and Missile Defense Command located at Fort Shafter near Honolulu, Brig. Gen. Daniel Karbler.
Notably, if you look at his background you see that he learned his trade under fire in the Middle East, having deployed to Israel in 1991 as part of Task Force Patriot Defender in support of Desert Storm and deployed to Riyadh, Saudi Arabia in support of Operations Desert Thunder II and Desert Fox.
Talking with the General and his team was not simply a Washington-based seminar of possibilities but of combat realities and shaping the joint way ahead.
Participants in the roundtable on the role of the Army in missile defense in the Pacific and its contributions to the joint force. Credit: SLD. 2/24/14
The 94th has theater-wide responsibility for an ADA Brigade, 3 PATRIOT Battalions, 1 THAAD Battery on Guam, and currently one mobile radar detachment (the AN/TPY2 Radar) in Japan with an additional radar coming soon to Japan as well based on an announced agreement last Fall.
This function is the 21t century version of the old Air Defense Artillery role for the US Army, and unlike the significant questioning of the future of the Army after Iraq and Afghanistan, this part of the Army is in high demand from the joint forces and has no need to question its role and significance in the Pacific (or of their compatriots in the Middle East for that matter).
The first deployment of THAAD to the region last year marks an important turning point in the role of Army ADA in the Pacific and is a harbinger for things to come.
Early this year, I interviewed the THAAD commander on Guam about the deployment and the role of THAAD. Notably, he highlighted the central role of working the THAAD relationship with Aegis in crafting a more effective joint missile defense role for the PACCOM commander.
According to Task Force Talon Commander, Army Lt. Col. Cochrane, the THADD Task Force commander who is currently based on Guam:
We combine Aegis, with THAAD with short-range defense systems, etc.
For example, at Hickam Air Force Base in Hawaii, the 94th AAMDC and the 613 AOC coordinate air and missile defense for the Pacific Theater. The Navy and the Air Force all come together and conduct that coordination in terms of how we protect and coordinate our defense so that we are maximizing our capabilities.
It is not just a single system standing alone or operating independently.
It is the inter-dependence and the inter-operability of all these systems to all three of the branches that are actively engaged in missile and air defense.
In my unit, we are looking aggressively at how to cross link with Aegis, for example.
The interview held with the 94th Commanding General clearly reinforced the role of ADA in the joint mission.
The meeting was held in the HQ building which is an old school house which belies the significance of the command and its impact in the Pacific. Brig. Gen. Daniel Karbler commented that “my office is probably the former principal’s office.”
Underscoring the joint nature of the mission and its strategic trajectory to shape a combat grid which is increasingly designed to enable distributed operations, the interview with the General was a roundtable with key USN, and USAF present who discussed the cross synergy role of missile defense and its role in Pacific defense.
A key theme was simply that deploying THAAD on Guam had freed up the Aegis to be deployed more effectively in its multi-mission maritime role.
(From left) U.S. Air Force Major Gen. Paul McGillicuddy, Pacific Air Forces chief of staff, Japan Air Self-Defense Force Maj. Gen. Yutaka Masuko, Director of Defense Operations, Plans and Communications Directorate at the Air Defense Command Headquarters, Maj. Gen. Kevin Pottinger, Individual Mobility Augmentee to the Pacific Air Forces vice commander, and Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force Rear Adm. Ryo Sakai, Commander of Escort Flotilla 1 at Self-Defense Fleet, and U.S. Army Brig. Gen. Daniel Karbler, 94th Army Air Missile Defense commanding general, plan together during Integrated Air and Missile Defense Wargame V on Feb. 14, 2014, in the 613th Air Operations Center at Joint Base Pearl Harbor Hickam, Hawaii. The exercise provided opportunities to simulate integrated engagements between joint U.S. forces and Japan Self-Defense Forces, while aiming to promote missile defense interoperability. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Nathan Allen)
In a theme echoed throughout my visit to PACOM, Navy Commander Steve DeMoss, the deputy for PACOM’s Space and Integrated Air and Missile Defense Division, underscored that:
The deployment of THAAD to Guam provides a significant capability all by itself and has been a force multiplier in the region. It is defending U.S. territory, U.S. citizens, and strategic U.S. bases… it provides PACOM greater flexibility with Aegis ships and other PACOM forces that had previously served that mission. The work we are doing on cross-linking Aegis with THAAD will allow us to think creatively about combining the mobile defense capability of Aegis with the land-based deployed capabilities of THAAD and Patriot.
The impact of THAAD and PATRIOT to free up the Aegis is a significant contribution to Air-Sea battle.
DeMoss added:
Deploying persistent, purpose built IAMD capability into theater (like Patriot, THAAD, and TPY-2), has given us greater flexibility with multi-mission Aegis ships. It allows us to employ those ships as designed and not simply tying them to a single mission, like missile defense.
The General explained that the networking or cross linking of THAAD, Patriot and various radars under his control with NAVY assets was creating a crucial synergy central for evolving 21st century capabilities.
Currently, the ADA branch represents only 1.6% of the Army’s force structure. But the Army Chief of Staff has emphasized its significant and growing role in the future.
With the coming of a second BMD radar to Japan (as agreed last Fall), the mobile radar system used by THAAD will have more sensors available to empower the force.
And doing a better job of linking in Patriots to the system helps as well.
The General discussed the role of ADA within Pacific defense as part of the support to airpower and to strategic decision making.
He emphasized that the capabilities of ADA helped provide time to determine how to both generate more air power and how to use airpower and provided the national command authority time to determine how best to respond to a crisis.
There are three ways to deal with an incoming missile defense.
There is passive defense, but there is only so much hardening and dispersal one can do without degrading your combat capability, and their many soft targets which cannot be hardened.
You can use air strikes to take out the adversary’s missile strike force, but you may not wish to do that right away or have not fully mobilized your capability.
The role of having active defense or an interceptor force is to buy time for [Lieutenant] General [Jan-Marc] Jouas (7th USAF Commander in the Pacific) or General [Hawk] Carlisle (the PACAF Commander) to more effectively determine how to use their airpower.
It also allows the National Command Authority to determine the most effective way ahead with an adversary willing to strike US or allied forces and territory with missiles.
Air Force Col. Mark Harysch from PACAF Strategy and Plans sees the Army’s ADA role is a central part of the evolution of the joint force.
The way the Pacific Air Force strategist sees it is that the joint force is working hard on cross domain synergy and cross linking assets.
The objective is to have the relevant platform to a mission able to draw on deployed sensors within the grid to execute the most effective approach for mission execution. General Hostage (the ACC Commander) has spoken of the combat cloud. That is what we are building here in the Pacific. For example, the contribution of the F-22 may not be in the air-to-air domain but to provide the best sensor available to the relevant task in a mission. The F-35 will add significant new capabilities to the layered approach as well.
In other words, the sense around the table among the U.S. Army, Air Force and Navy personnel that the way ahead BEING built today is cross domain collaborative operations.
(For a look at the concept of evolving an aerospace combat cloud please see the following:
The THAAD system as well can support evolving Pacific defense in another sense.
As Col. Robert Lyons, the 94th AAMDC Chief of Staff noted,
The THAAD radar and interceptors can be deployed separately. We can put the radar in one location and deploy launchers to 3 launchers in another and 2 to 3 launchers in yet another and provide capability to operate over a geographic operational area. Given the geography of the Pacific thinking along these lines will give us options and enhance deterrence.
Lyons also underscored that the working relationship with allies over time is yielding enhanced combat capability.
We deployed Patriot on Okinawa in 2006 and it operated initially pretty much as a standalone system. Now we are working much more effectively with the Japanese Patriots to provide much greater potential integration. As Gen Karbler often says, you can’t [Request for Forces] Trust, and you can’t Surge Relationships.
Clearly, one key way ahead is to combine the evolving US approach to distributed operations with allied enhancement of their own capabilities to shape a new collaborative Pacific defense system.
The Army ADA evolution is clearly a central contributor to the kind of defense capability which the US needs in the Pacific and which enables credible and effective collaboration with US allies on the path to enhance their own capabilities.
One can learn a lot by visiting the principal’s office at the 94th AAMDC. I certainly did.
The 94th Army Air and Missile Defense Command is slated to move to Joint Base Pearl Harbor Hickam in FY2014.
Early 2013, the Pacific Air Force Commander laid out a vision for an Integrated Air and Missile Defense Center of Excellence, which will enhance cooperation between the 613th Air and Space Operations Center, Pacific Air Forces and the 94th AAMDC.
The key role of PACAF in leading the integrated air and missile defense effort is a focus of discussion in my next interview which is with the Commander PACAF, “Hawk” Carlisle.
In the video above was prepared by the 94th Army Air and Missile Defense Command located at Fort Shafter near Honolulu, the evolving role of ARMY missile defense is highlighted.
The video played during 94th AAMDC Brig. Gen. Daniel Karbler’s 2013 AUSA LANPAC Panel discussion that he hosted.
The photos below elements of the THAAD system now deployed on Guam.
[slidepress gallery=’the-thaad-system-to-guam’]
Credit Photos: DOD or Lockheed Martin
The first photo provides a sense of Guam in relationship to North Korea.
The second and third photos show the TEL for the THAAD.
The fourth photo shows the launcher at rest at sunset.
Photos 5 through 7 show the THAAD being launched.
The eighth photo shows U.S. Army Pacific commander Gen. Vincent Brooks takes a photo with the A4 THAAD during his visit to the unit at Andersen AFB, Guam on Sunday, Aug. 18, 2013. The A4 THAAD deployed to Guam in April as a part of the 94th AAMDC Task Force Talon Mission.
The ninth photo shows U.S. Army Pacific commander Gen. Vincent Brooks speaking with soldiers of the A4 THAAD about numerous personnel and operational issues during his visit to the unit at Andersen AFB, Guam, on Sunday, Aug. 18, 2013.
The final photo provides a graphic with regard to how THAAD works.
28 Squadron is widely recognized as one of the hardest working units in the SA Air Force (SAAF) with its more than 50-year-old C-130BZs routinely providing logistic support across the country and the continent.
One of its other missions is search and rescue and training in this aspect of operations with the National Sea Rescue Institute (NSRI) recently took place a long way from the squadron’s home base at AFB Waterkloof.
A pair of BZs made AFB Ysterplaat their temporary base for maritime flight operations training. NSRI crew members Robert Fine and Mahboob Ebrahim were invited to join the crew aboard one of the BZs.
The mission the NSRI crew joined started early at Ysterplaat and after a flight briefing the aircraft departed for a location just off Saldanha Bay/Langebaan lagoon.
Two specially deployed SANDF “casualty” vessels were on the sea in the area for the aircrew to spot and then deploy life rafts as near as possible.
“On arrival in the area, the C-130 started a search pattern and once the ‘casualties’ were located, the flight pattern was changed so that multiple smoke markers could be dropped in close proximity. The markers would assist with wind direction and enable the pilot to line up the aircraft on final approach. Once in position a life raft is pushed out of the back of the aircraft with a small parachute deploying to break its fall. It automatically inflates on hitting the water,” said Fine.
The C-130BZ has a range of about 2 700 nautical miles and an eight hour endurance.
The four-engine aircraft can run search operations up to 1 300 nautical miles offshore with an hour on station depending on weather conditions and other variables. Different size life rafts can be dropped depending on the number of people needing rescue. Additional life rafts are carried aboard in case the initial drop is unsuccessful.
28 Squadron, under the command of Colonel Jurgens Prinsloo, has nine C-130BZs on its inventory to fulfill tasks ranging from logistic support for SANDF continental peacekeeping and peace support operations, humanitarian operations, search and rescue, support to the SA Army and general airlift.
The squadron is the SAAF’s main medium heavy airlift squadron and last June it marked its 70th anniversary at the same time as the 50th in-service anniversary of the C-130BZ.
Picture Credit: Robert Fine, NSRI
Republished with permission of our partner defenceWeb:
The Crimea has seen international conflict before.
The Crimean War between 1853 and 1856 was a disaster for all the parties involved causing over 300.000 deaths, 80,000 killed, 40.000 wounded and over 100.000 who died of disease. The British army alone lost 2,755 men killed in action, 2,019 wounded, and over 16,000 to disease.
The Crimean War was a conflict that involved an alliance of the Ottoman Empire with France. Great Britain and Sardinia, against an expansionist Russia. It was the result of fatal blundering by inept leaders who were also responding to an aroused public opinion feed by news quickly accessible over the new telegraph cables, first laid to the Black Sea by the French 1854 and by the British in 1855. News reached London thereafter in a day.
Siege of Sevastopol by Franz Roubaud. Credit: Wikipedia
The Crimean War was the first conflict to be recorded by the new invention of photography.
But the war most notable for multiple logistical, tactical, and medical failures on all sides.
Russia wanted a warm water port on the Black Sea and was pushing south into the territory long ruled by the Ottoman Turks. Russia claimed to defend the Orthodox Christians under Muslim rule. But France also claimed the right to protect the Catholic Christians under Ottoman rule. But this was an excuse for conflicting geostrategic and financial objectives in the Back Sea and Eastern Mediterranean.
Russia lost in the medium term. So did the Ottomans.
The struggle produced memorable moments.
The Russians held out in the fortress of Sevastopol for over a year. The battle of Balaclava went down in history for the disastrous charge of the British light cavalry brigade into Russian artillery, memorialized in a famous poem by Alfred Lord Tennyson.
The French commander, General Pierre Bosquel, said of the charge of the light brigade, where 278 out of the 700 British cavalrymen were killed or wounded: “C’est manifique, mas n’est pas la guerre.”
The consequences of the war were manifold.
In the Baltic, Immanuel Nobel, father of Alfred Nobel, founder of the Nobel Prize, helped Russia by adapting industrial explosives, nitroglycerin and gunpowder, for use in naval mines. On the battlefields in the Crimea, Florence Nightingale, and the Jamaican nurse Mary Seacole, revolutionized the treatment of wounded solders .
Russia did expand eventually to incorporate the Crimean peninsula and established its Black Sea Fleet.
In 1954 Soviet leader Nikita Khushehev decided that the Crimea would be part of Ukraine, not anticipating of course the break up of the Soviet Union.
Putin certainly knows the history and it is clear his advisers do as well. As to Obama that is another story.
And the Russians not only remember the history but negotiated the naval treaty because of that history.
For Europe and the US to play one upski without a clear strategic end in sight will only play to Putin’s advantage.
Putin plays chess; and the Western leaders?
Editor’s Note: For a look at the dangers of one-upski in the current crisis in Crimea see the following:
2014-03-05 During a visit to Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii, at the end of February 2014, Second Line of Defense had a chance to talk with Col. Mickey Addison, Director of Installations and Mission Support and the PACAF command engineer (A7), and Mr. James T. Silva, Deputy Director, Logistics (A4D), about the evolving PACAF approach to logistics and sustainment in the vast area of operations.
SLD: How important is an ability to provide forward based logistics or traditional logistics, whatever you want to call it, as part of a credible force in the Pacific?
Col. Addison: It is crucial.
General Hap Arnold, in preparing the after action report for World War II, highlighted the centrality of logistics and combat support for Air Force operations. He wrote, “Modern war is a war for air bases, the bulldozer must accompany the plane,” and of course the fuel truck and warehouse and the ships and all the specifics that go with supporting a forward deployed air force.
The key terrain during and prior to World War II and the key terrain during the Vietnam and Korea conflicts and all the other conflicts we’ve had in the Pacific is still the same key terrain today. And we have the same allies, many of the same partners, the same friends, and the same places that are important to us.
The key areas are still important for different reasons, but they’re still key terrain to enable our strategy.
Logistics is the linchpin of sustained operations in the Pacific because of the distances involved, and the USAF is very good at logistics
There’s a lot more involved operationally than just showing up at an air base and starting to fly.
SLD: With shaping a distributed operational strategy for Pacific Defense, which is really the 21st century approach, the logistics challenge is even more important, for we have to work the basing issue quite differently for operational and political reasons.
Jim Silva: It is. And General Carlisle focuses on places not bases.
Our engagement strategy is based on our ability to exercise and work with our partners and allies, all the way down to the action officer level.
So if something does come up, be it a humanitarian crisis, like typhoon Haiyan that just hit the Philippines or an actual military contingency, we have relationships in place; we’ve been to these places and we can go and operate there much more effectively.
Royal Australian Air Force Leading Aircraftman Steve Bernat, No. 3 Squadron, RAAF Base Williamtown, Australia, marshals an F-15J Eagle from Naha Air Base, Japan during training with Japan Air Self Defense members on the Andersen Air Force Base, Guam flight line during Cope North 2013 Feb 13, 2013. Cope North is an annual air combat tactics, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief exercise designed to increase the readiness and interoperability of the U.S. Air Force, Japan Air Self-Defense Force and Royal Australian Air Force. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Alex Montes/RELEASED)
SLD: But how does the notion of an expeditionary Air Force implementing a distributed operational approach in the Pacific dovetail with shaping places not bases?
Col. Addison: A key factor is the engagement approach Jim was talking about.
For example, when we supported the Philippines in the recent typhoon Haiyan disaster, we went to Tacloban. We had familiarity with the country, and had an existing working relationship with the Philippine Armed Forces so we could rapidly and collaboratively support the Philippine Air Force (PAF)_to shape an infrastructure to bring in relief assets.
Our engineers had been to Tacloban so we knew the airfield; we had worked with the Philippine engineers so we knew what they needed and how they operate. We had worked with the Marines and who set up initially, and then transitioned when our operators showed up to help run the airlift operation in Manila that ended up being a hub for the operation.
The other part of it is, go back to World War II and look at B-24 operations out of Hickam. Squadrons were based out of Oahu in 1942 that hopscotched across the Pacific to their staging bases and launched out to strike enemy targets across the Pacific.
We don’t have to leapfrog around from atoll to atoll now because we have aerial refueling and long-range aircraft they didn’t have back in World War II, but the idea is the same.
There’s only so much land out in a big ocean, so our ability to rapidly begin to operate at an austere location and then sustain those operations is very important to our strategy in the Pacific.
The key terrain, that was key terrain in 1935, is still key terrain in 2014. Those were places that we’re going to need to go and set-up quickly and operate in almost any kind of operations you can imagine.
There is a clear need for flex bases in the Pacific. We also need continuous linkages to the forward places, back and forth to replenish.
SLD: The template is clear but to meet 21st century political and operational realities you are reshaping the approach to some extent?
U.S Air Force 36th Logistics Readiness Squadron fuels flight services Royal Australian Air Force F/A-18 Hornet after landing on the Andersen Air Force Base, Guam flight line during Cope North 2013 Feb 12. 2013. Cope North is an annual air combat tactics, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief exercise designed to increase the readiness and interoperability of the U.S. Air Force, Japan Air Self-Defense Force and Royal Australian Air Force. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Alex Montes/RELEASED)
Col. Addison: We are.
We are constantly working to build and maintain relationships in the Pacific to enable us to help maintain the peace, and work together to rapidly recover from natural disasters.
SLD: With the new IT systems and RFID tags it is possible to do a better job of knowing what is where so if you have an aggregated joint facility, one can better disaggregate what the USAF might want out of that facility?
Jim Silva: The system is not perfect. There is always the human factor, of the person who moves the part but does not record its movement.
Nevertheless, we are aggregating materiel and tracking it to specific locations.
For example, with regard to prepositioning ships, those ships may be carrying munitions for the USMC, for the USN, and for the USAF. All of this will be on the same ship and each of the services know exactly where it is.
In addition, the supply chains are linked together by DOD systems and policy. The inventory systems are all managed through the DOD. So we don’t have different tracking numbers for all our parts.
Once you reach one step beyond the DOD level, and jump into service-specific tracking, we still keep those same stock and part numbers that are resident in the DOD system, so we can draw linkages back to where the items are located.
SLD: So you have better tools to try to manage the diversity of logistics parts and key elements distributed over the Pacific?
Jim Silva We do.
This is why as well that our exercise and engagement approach is so important specifically in the sustainability arena. We go to the facilities; we exercise; we test the parts availability and usability and can gain greater confidence in the sustainment capabilities from the stocks distributed throughout the Pacific.
SLD: When one focuses on exercises, one usually looks at the forces operating together. But you are emphasizing that that is simply the tip of the iceberg. In reality, the sustainment enterprise is being built and exercised through your exercise and engagement approach?
Col. Addison: It is. Take Australia as an example. We have a great relationship with the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF). Like any relationship, the best way to deepen it is to spend time together.
And I think that all the things we do at our level, either with logistics or combat support or operations or whatever we’re doing, any time we operate with the Aussies anywhere in the world, we build trust; we build a relationship with each other.
We learn more about each other, how they operate and they learn how we operate.
And so when it comes time to do something for real and not as part of an exercise, the transition happens a lot more smoothly.
SLD: Another change which I have heard earlier discussions about is what one might call shaping a logistics enterprise approach so one can do a better job of leveraging commonality with new aircraft between allies and the US or in our ability to move major parts in the system up against the priority operation. Could you discuss this?
Col. Addison: Let me take the second case. The hard part is landing jets loaded with bombs, gas, food, fuel and keeping that force supplied so they can do something besides just being a static display. We work hard at truly building a linkage to the rest of the network.
Jim Silva: Let me take the first case and discuss from the standpoint of our relationship with the Aussies with regard to C-17s. If one of our C-17’s breaks in Australia, they have C-17 parts.
We don’t even have to negotiate anything because there is pre-set agreement that we just trade parts.
All of their parts are certified and can be used on any C-17 aircraft around the world.
So we can go take an Aussie part and put it on an Air Force airplane, and vice versa; they can even use a U.S. Air Force part if one of their jets lands here in Hickam. The system is managed across the enterprise.
SLD: Another aspect of a 21st century approach is building an enterprise network to support the expeditionary force, rather than stocking up inventory at fixed bases and defining maintenance as the organic capacity for the base to support “its” aircraft.
Could you discuss this evolving approach.
Jim Silva: There’s an Air Force-level initiative called Repair Network Integration, where we changed the way we manage many of our repair assets.
For example, taking our old engines, let me date myself, in the early 80’s, every unit had an engine shop, a full-blown engine shop.
We picked up a whole jet engine intermediate maintenance crew when we deployed, moved it forward and operated. We don’t do that anymore, we literally say an engine is just as much a repair part as any small widget you need to repair an aircraft.
So for example, during air operations in Operation Iraqi Freedom, we set up a European hub that did engine repairs. Well we found out there were some flaws in their maintenance practices and as a result we temporarily shut that engine hub down.
So we would presumably not be able to support air operations anymore. Now we have built an enterprise network so we can ship an engine from Misawa Air Base, Japan, that should be destined for the Pacific but we find there’s a higher priority somewhere else in the enterprise. We simply shift the engine destination to the highest need across the enterprise.
So if I take out a particular node anywhere, of my engine capability in the Pacific, West Coast comes up and says, I’ve got an engine, I’ll ship it to you, and it comes by another source.
As the preparation of the next NATO Summit in Wales early September heats up, French Air Force General Paloméros was in Washington during the last week of January for a Transatlantic Forum organized by Allied Command Transformation (ACT) with CSIS, which focus was on “Rebalancing and Reinforcing The Transatlantic Bond. “[ref]http://www.act.nato.int/nato-act-and-csis-host-transatlantic-forum; http://csis.org/event/transatlantic-forum[/ref]
In a round table following the event, he described his duties as SACT since he took office in September 2012 as concentrating on the following priorities [ref]Reporters’ round table, January 29th, 2014[/ref]:
Reinvest in training and exercise and education via the Connected Forces Initiatives (CFI).
Develop effective capabilities in NATO through NATO planning and Smart Defense.
Develop new partnerships which is crucial for the Alliance.
Reinforce and reinvigorate the transatlantic bound for the future and set common goals.
This [fourth priority] will be a key topic for the next NATO Summit, where Heads of State and Government of NATO Allies and Partners will meet early September in Wales, in the United Kingdom: it will be the door opener for the success of NATO in the future.
This Summit hence will be a true Transformation summit as it will touch the Alliance in a new phase and in a new area with the transition of the Afghan mission.
It represents a genuine opportunity to reinforce the cooperation, the interoperability and the readiness of our forces, and therefore better prepare the latter. “
General Palomeros making opening speech at last year’s Allied Reach conference in Norfolk, Va. Credit: ACT.
“The next NATO Summit] represents a genuine opportunity to reinforce the cooperation, the interoperability and the readiness of our forces, and therefore better prepare the latter.”
Given the constrained budget environment, SACT stresses that NATO must « optimize what it has and train the people to make sure they are able to use common C2 systems (…).
NATO can only encourage nations to increase their defense budgets, but we fully realize that crisis have effects.
However, we do hope for reinvestment in defense, as it needs long term investments and long term enduring will for investment. You cannot invest in systems without long term political commitment.
The level of investment is important, but the stability of the commitment is as much crucial.
We have to take care of legacy investments, but we also have to look into the future.
What I know is that we have to make the best out of any single dollar, so we have to find new solutions.
There are solutions which can help the Allies to mitigate defense budgets reduction.
In that sense it is a key role for NATO and SACT to aim at full interoperability.
We should train for that and that is why exercises are so important: optimizing the resources to train people at the standards of NATO. Technology is useless if you don’t train people to use them. »
According to former Vice Admiral Carol Pottenger, deputy chief of staff for capability and development (2010-13), 80% of NATO equipment for the next 20 years are legacy equipment, the task of ACT being to determine what should be the remaining 20%, whether connectivity or cyber.[ref]NATO ACT’s Chief of Transformation Conference, Norfolk, Virginia, December 2012[/ref]
“The question is to balance quality and quantity”, says General Paloméros.
“The NATO planning process is meant to keep the balance knowing our level of investment.
It is necessary to avoid overstating needs resulting in long term investment problems, while not overstretching our forces: balance is key.
Some nations for instance are very keen to keep CBRN capabilities, and we must encourage them.
Our rule is to organize the capabilities to make sure these national resources are available for NATO; we make sure we do not miss any capability in the inventory, as that would be irresponsible.
We must focus in particular on our logistics needs because we tend to reduce what is less visible at times of budget cuts, but one day or another you will pay for that.
Some nations for instance are very keen to keep CBRN capabilities and we must encourage them. We need to keep the balance between high end capabilities and avoid shortfalls in sustainment; otherwise the former will be useless as well. It is a difficult equation. The key is a clear dialogue between NATO and the future the nations envision for themselves.
We assess the nations’ capabilities and set a target and see if they can fulfill that target; if there are shortfalls, we make sure to identify them. It is the case as far as JISR is concerned, as there is a high demand on that: we need more platforms and more joint capabilities, such as the AGS system (Allied Ground Surveillance). The European have also decided to launch a joint drone project for the future that will be very helpful for future operations. (…) We need to support better JISR capabilities for NATO as [the need for them] has grown in many operations: efficiency needs to be improved for better strategic awareness and being able to make better decisions in the process of a crisis.
This is what we really must organize to make sure we are very interoperable with a joint ISR set of systems and people trained to use that.
We have to find a cost-effectiveness ratio to any kind of system depending on the flexibility and multi-roling of the platforms.
There is a new fighter generation able to provide good ISR and hover capabilities (…), but we have to make sure all new generation systems are combat proven and integrated. Joint ISR is key to that. (…)
We need to have an overall capacity prospective, i.e. to find the best balance between the resources and the best technologies that we have and how we mix all of that to have the best results.
We should focus on the effects, the results: whether the intelligence is provided by a man on the ground or a satellite, what we need is a persistent reliable and sharable information which would be available for the tactical unit, the men on the ground…
This is the ultimate objective. (…)
It is transforming intelligence to enable the commanders to apprehend and have a clear situational awareness.
This is not easy to achieve: we saw that in Libya; [ref]At the time of the Libyan operation, General Paloméros was Chief of staff of the French Air Force.[/ref]we worked it very much in Afghanistan, as well as in maritime operations.
This is why I see JISR as the key for the future: I would call that strategic awareness, because it is really about a strategic checklist ….”, SACT concludes.
At first glance, the Canadian and Italian navies may not appear to have a great deal in common, typically operating in vastly different areas of the world’s oceans.
In recent years, however, operations in the Arabian Gulf and Mediterranean Sea have brought both forces into closer operational contact, and strengthened the links already forged within NATO.
Today, the similarities may be heightened by the requirement for both the Marina Militare and the Royal Canadian Navy to rebuild their fleets in a time of constrained resources and strategic uncertainty.
FrontLine’s Richard Bray had the opportunity to discuss these and other questions with the commander of Italy’s navy, Admiral Giuseppe De Giorgi, in an email dialogue.
Admiral De Giorgi was the first Maritime Task Force Commander within the UN Mandate to control Lebanese territorial waters. For his achievements, in 2007 he was awarded the “Military Order of Italy” (Officer) by the President of the Italian Republic; the “Medal for Meritorious Service” from the Lebanese Republic; and the “Military of the Year” award at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum in Washington D.C.
From February 2012 to January 2013 he was Commander in Chief of the Italian Navy fleet, and has been Chief of the Italian Navy since January 2013.
The Changing Geopolitical Context
Q: Can you describe for FrontLine’s informed readership, the impact that today’s evolving geopolitical context is having on navies in general, and Italy’s in particular?
The prosperity of the world owes much to the maritime spaces having been, by and large, secure and safe for commerce. The maritime domain provides life sustainment and opportunities to the majority of the world’s population.
The global maritime commons have been (with a few exceptions of time and place) a “peaceful environment” and a highway to prosperity for all mankind for over six decades. Seaborne trade has more than quadrupled in volume over the last half-century and now stands at over 90% of world economic traffic.
Freedom of navigation is a principle embraced by the great majority of nations. This is an important legacy of the 20th century, which is too often taken for granted by the media, together with a large part of the public opinion. Some observers describe such a lack of perception of the vital importance of the maritime domain as “sea blindness”.
Italian frigates at sea. Credit: Italian Navy
Today, transit and transport on the global oceans face a growing number of trans-national threats, calling for a multi-national cooperative effort.
In this fast changing world there are few certainties, but the following three facts that are solid enough to drive our future developments:
The geopolitical situation will continue to be characterized by regional crises unfolding unexpectedly and suddenly;
The sea brings us a unique opportunity to access and influence a crisis area in an agile and unobstructed fashion; and
The maritime domain will be increasingly critical to economic development and world prosperity.
This is particularly true for Italy, which is traditionally dependent on the sea, due to its geography and economy. Thus, it is in our direct interest to contribute to Maritime Security with a well-balanced and efficient Navy.
One of my goals is to increase among the Italian public opinion an awareness of what the Navy represents for the country.
It is crucial that people understand that Maritime Security is a vital interest for Italy and that the Italian Navy is instrumental to secure such interest.
The Italian Navy and NATO
Q: How do you see the Italian Navy’s role in NATO today, including in command of NATO operations?
Italy participates in international organizations such as the UN, NATO, and the EU, which continue to play a key role in keeping peace and stability around the world. Among these, since 1949, NATO has been a military reference for most, thanks to its effectiveness, credibility and expertise on the full spectrum of military operations. NATO commitments have a high priority for Italy, and the Italian Navy is actively contributing to NATO’s structures and activities.
Italy has participated in all recent operations conducted and led by NATO, from Operation Active Endeavour (2001), to the counter piracy operations, Allied Provider (2008), Allied Protector (2009), and the current Ocean Shield (from 2009), through to the Operation Unified Protector (the Libyan crisis of 2011). We permanently provide naval assets to the NATO Standing Maritime Groups, of which we often take Command.
The Italian Navy provides one of the high readiness Force Headquarters at Maritime Component Commander level.
The Italian Command, named COMITMARFOR, is on the rotation list among the other Command structures offered to NATO and, in 2014, will take charge as Command of the NRF Maritime Component.
Q: We live in a resource-constrained world. What are your thoughts on how navies can leverage opportunities such as in fleet mix or as a result of alliances?
In this economically sensitive time, budget constraints are driving Navies’ future. Thus, it is imperative to optimize resources, seek new cooperation agreements and strengthen existing ones. This is particularly true for Europe. Indeed, European Navies shall keep pursuing the significant process of modernization and review, to respond effectively to the current challenges while maintaining the high operational output that only a truly balanced tool can provide.
Some initiatives have been already launched and are now in progress, like the NATO Smart Defence or the EU Pooling & Sharing. Others are already consolidated like EUROMARFOR, SIAF-SILF, European Amphibious Initiative (EAI), STOVL Carrier Training Initiative (SCTI) and European Carrier Group Interoperability Initiative (ECGII), where we work together to find a common ground.
Apart from that, Navies should also focus on achieving robust cooperation on critical operational enablers, such as surveillance (in all its dimensions), Intel gathering, C4ISTAR, etc..
Building a 21t Century Fleet
Q: What crewing challenges and opportunities does a more automated fleet present? In your opinion, does a smaller navy reduce readiness or flexibility for surge capacity, such as sudden humanitarian missions? How does the Italian Navy handle such unexpected manpower requirements when crew sizes are pared down to low levels?
There is no doubt that today, thanks to the improvement of technology and automation, all new ships will have a downsized crew. If necessary, the crew can be complemented by Specialist Augmentees to deal with the specific missions and adapt to operational situations, such as anti-piracy, Non-combatant Evacuation Operations (NEO), command and control of military operations, and humanitarian interventions.
With such an approach there is the strong need for more accommodations than crew members.
The new Italian Navy (ITN) vessels will have a reduced crew but a large availability of extra beds, along with the extensive implementation of many different operational payloads/capabilities.
I am talking about the multi-role ship that the Navy is presently studying, which will be highly sea worthy, roomy, less expensive and dual usable, with a deck capable to recover containers for humanitarian assistance purposes or to deploy large speed boats.
This new generation of vessels will also provide a floating hospital to be used in disaster zones by the Civil Protection Department, exploiting the extra accommodation availability.
Coming to the Cavour deck is the F-35B. Credit Photo: Italian Navy
She will be also able to provide electrical power and potable water for a small community ashore. The high speed will allow the ship to respond quickly to emergencies while maintaining a significant operational range.
We are continuously improving coordinated procedures between the Navy and the Civil Protection Department, to enhance interoperability. To this end, we regularly plan and conduct dedicated exercises, simulating disaster relief scenarios, where a command center of the civil protection is established on board a ship as, for example, the aircraft carrier Cavour.
Question: Canada’s navy appears to be looking for a ‘one for one’ ship replacement program, but Italy seems to be pursuing a different strategy, with fewer hulls. Can you explain that for us? What are the challenges of rebuilding a destroyer/frigate force and what opportunities does it present?
The on-going restructuring process within the ITN is of course involving the fleet, which is our main “raison d’être”.
The replacement of old ships is a “must” if we want to achieve a capable, efficient and interoperable Navy, avoiding capability gaps with other Navies.
We have recently completed the entering into service of the new aircraft carrier Cavour as well as the two Horizon units (Doria and Duilio). Currently we have undergone the replacement of older frigates by introducing the new FREMMs, conceived from an Italian-French joint venture. However, this will not be sufficient to compensate for the decline in the numbers of our ships.
So we need to invest more in our Navy while the economic crisis forces western countries to adopt spending review policies; building of new sophisticated ships has come at the cost of rapidly shrinking fleet sizes. The future scenario, however, requires a compromise between high technology ships and affordable but reliable platforms. Hence, for the next generation units, we will confer a lower priority to high-expensive requisites, such as noise, radar-signature extreme reduction and miniaturization, in favour of simplicity, resilience and sea-worthy qualities.
Future fleets need to be able to operate both in military operations and in support of civilian people during disaster relief missions.
This implies an evolution of the assigned tasks beyond their purely traditional military nature. Thus, the investment necessary to build new ships will generate positive outputs for the whole country. Therefore ITN is seeking to develop a new generation of low-cost vessels with dual-use capabilities that will be more multirole and affordable to sustain than the older vessels. This class of ships will be particularly suitable to accomplish Maritime Security tasks, providing presence and surveillance along sea lanes of communication: a role of relevance and exclusive responsibility of the Navies worldwide.
Similar considerations will be implemented also developing new amphibious, logistics, hydrographic and underwater research support ships.
Those classes of units will be innovative, realized to fulfill dual use tasks and to respect and protect the environment. We are actively participating in the development of bio-fuel. By the end of the year we will conduct a full scale test on board of an OPV, in view of the certification of the whole fleet. Simplicity will be the key element in terms of construction and maintenance solutions, also aimed at creating a product of interest for the foreign markets…..
Franco-Italian Cooperation
Q: FrontLine has featured many articles on the Franco-Italian cooperative initiative for FREMM (Frégate Multi-mission or Fregata multi-missione) and the companion fleet of Horizon Class air defense frigates, noting that each country has its own customizations. From your own perspective, how has the FREMM experience with France worked out? Will there be similar joint shipbuilding projects in future?
The interest in the development of a Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) is strongly felt throughout the European Union and is intended primarily to strengthen the EU’s ability to act in the external sphere through the development of its civilian capabilities and military instruments in the prevention of international conflicts and crisis management.
The cooperation between Italy and France in the armaments sector is quite relevant and spans almost the entire spectrum, involving the naval, missile and space industries. It must be noted that the Italian Navy is, by nature, open to cooperation in the shipbuilding industry…..
Final Thoughts About the Future
Q: Do you have any other thoughts or lessons to share with other navies facing similar challenges as the Italian Navy?
The words “flexibility,” “modularity,” “multi-purpose,” along with the concept “comprehensive,” must be at the foundation of our strategies and visions.
Navies should continue their innovative path, in terms of organization, structure, doctrines and assets, in order to accommodate new requirements and needs. In doing so, they should not forget that the real “smart” approach must set aside personal and demagogic attitudes aimed at sponsoring the interests of few.
In practical terms, the lessons learned that we have identified, lead us to focus on:
Sea worthiness and dimensions, tailored to allow the Navy to operate and interact in long lasting missions and particularly in severe weather conditions;
Speed, as a fundamental tactical factor to reduce time of intervention;
Simplicity and resilience versus extreme high-tech solutions, to reduce project and life-cycle costs: dimensions will compensate for minor recourse to miniaturization;
Modularity, to customize the ship’s features – tailored for the specific mission and easily reconfigurable – to reduce the overall costs (project, personnel, training, maintenance).
We shall never forget, however, that conventional warfare proficiencies remain fundamental capabilities that must not be lost.
The video above comes from Brilliant Mariner 13, where some 5,000 representatives from 14 nations trained together.
The video is one five on our website which feature rare aerial shots of a fleet of 23 NATO warships and Harrier jets taking off from the Italian aircraft carrier ITS Cavour which functioned as the flagship for the exercise.
