Podcast: U.S. Air Force Poised For Modernization Revamp

Autonomous fighters, adaptive engines, powerful surveillance satellites and a new generation of airlifters and tankers are among the next wave of modernization priorities set to be unveiled in the next U.S. Air Force budget request.

Aviation Week editors Steve Trimble and Brian Everstine discussed all of the possible options with J.J. Gertler, who co-hosts the Defense & Aerospace Report Air Power Podcast.

Don't miss a single episode of Check 6. Subscribe in Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Amazon, Audible and Spotify.

Discover all of Aviation Week Network's podcasts on our Apple Podcasts channel or aviationweek.com/podcasts.

Rush Transcript

Steve Trimble: 

It is now February in Washington, DC and that means that we're going to be talking about the defense budget. Now, we're several weeks away from the administration rolling out the fiscal year 2024 defense budget. But we're starting to get some new information, including a very important new fact that was revealed in a podcast interview with a fellow podcaster, which we're going to get to in just a minute. But first of all, welcome to the Check 6 Podcast by Aviation Week. My name is Steve Trimble, I'm the defense editor for Aviation Week. I'm joined with a panel that includes Brian Everstine, our pentagon editor. Please say hi, Brian. 

Brian Everstine: 

Hello. 

Steve Trimble: 

And we have a special guest this week that is JJ Gertler. He is the former professional staff member on the House Armed Services Committee, a former military analyst at the Congressional Research Service, and now currently a defense consultant. And he has his own podcast, the Air Power Podcast with Vago Muradian and JJ Gertler. JJ, please say hello. 

JJ Gertler: 

Well, very good of you to have me. 

Steve Trimble: 

Thank you very much. And we have to have you because it was actually on your podcast that gave us the idea for doing this. Something that came out specifically on your podcast a week or two ago with Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall, who appeared on your podcast and talked about what's going to be coming ahead. We're going to get to that in just a few minutes. But I thought it'd be helpful to explain where the Air Force has been going strategically with its modernization portfolio. 

Now, I remember for several years when you asked the Air Force what their priorities were for modernization when you went to the hill, they always had the same answer, F-35, B-21, and KC-46. Those three programs. Those were their priorities. Well, Frank Kendall came in as Air Force secretary a year or two ago and really changed that with a much broader portfolio that wasn't tied to any specific procurement or R&D program. But really a portfolio and several different topics with each representing a portfolio of programs, and technologies, and capabilities. So let's start there. So Brian, what are these, as Frank Kendall calls them, operational imperatives, or OIs? And break them down for us. 

Brian Everstine: 

Yeah, so it was actually at the Air Force Association Conference last March in Orlando that this term OI, operational imperative, entered our lexicon. And unfortunately, we have to repeat it constantly, it's kind of become a regular drum beat for the Air Force. So during his keynotes address at this conference, he laid out these seven priorities. And bear with me, I'll just read through them right now. They are, defining resilient and effective space order of battle, achieving operationally optimized ABMS, the Advanced Battle Management System, defining the Next Generation Air Dominance system of systems, achieving air moving target engagement at scale, defining optimized resilient basing, defining the B-21 long-range family systems, and the readiness of the Air Force to transition to a wartime posture. 

So those seven operational imperatives, he repeats that these are in a specific order, but you hear officials say, "We're going to work on number five, we're going to work on number three." Et cetera. And so he outlined these as his top priorities for modernization, and doing it you would touch on a different approach, where the Air Force went out with a series of RFIs to industry to get ideas of what is possible in each of these areas, and use that to shape future acquisition programs, as opposed to just going to companies and saying, "These are our requirements, you need to meet these." So he tried to do this as a new way to put together the Air Force's top modernization programs, all with the focus of the 2024 budget, which we're going to start see rollout here in several weeks. 

Steve Trimble: 

And as they do that, they're going to have to start some new programs, while at the same time they're trying to keep their existing modernization portfolio going, whether it's recapitalizing the fighter fleet, or modernizing the nuclear triad, expanding their space or their portfolio space capabilities. All of those are still going, but they want to do a lot of new things too. And that's where we bring JJ into the conversation because he had this interview in the last week or two, like I said, with Frank Kendall. And what did he tell you about what they want to do new or different in the fiscal year 2024 budget? 

JJ Gertler: 

Well, Steve, Secretary Kendall covered a lot of ground in our conversation, but it got particularly interesting when we got onto the '24 budget because he said, very explicitly a couple of times, that he can't talk about the '24 budget. But when we asked him about the effects of a yearlong continuing resolution on the Air Force, he made clear that that would be a problem because they intended in the '24 budget to introduce 12 new start programs. And of course, under the terms of a continuing resolution, you can't have any new starts. So this was seen as causing difficulty for the Air Force in whatever it is they're going to submit in '24. And he said it not once, but twice, 12 new start programs were expected in that budget in support of the operational imperatives. I will say for those who play the operational imperative drinking game, he did mention that twice, but did not go through the list of seven as he so often does, so that's a partial score for those following along at home. 

Steve Trimble: 

Yeah, so it makes it slightly easier to listen to without having to go through all seven of those. Well, so there's 12 new starts then in the fiscal year 2024 budget just for the Air Force. And when we're talking about new starts, we mean new programs of record, or perhaps even OTAs, or rapid prototyping programs that they want to get started up to deliver new capabilities for this future for us. 

JJ Gertler: 

And there are a couple of caveats on that actually, because a new start program is when a new line item enters the budget. So if, for example, there's a program that's already in development, but you start a procurement line for it, that's technically a new start. Secretary Kendall didn't say whether any of these new starts might be in the classified arena, which would make them harder to keep track of. And third, remember, he's the secretary of the Air Force and the Space Force, and he did not make any delineation on these 12 new start programs about which of those two services they fell under. 

Steve Trimble: 

Yeah. So Brian, can you just break down what they've talked about already as programs that they're thinking about starting up in fiscal year 2024? 

Brian Everstine: 

Yeah, so throughout this OI work, Secretary Kendall has hinted that some of these are a lot more ready than others. Specifically, he said the NGAD systems, which now he's calling the Collaborative Combat Aircraft, the technology's pretty far along and that can be ready to make an entrance into the upcoming budget. And in my last conversation with him a little over a month ago in California at the Reagan Defense Forum, he specifically brought up a lot of progress on air-based defense. And that has become a big priority for him, especially as you look into the Pacific. And in our conversation, he had talked about bringing on things like more base hardening, use of even decoys, things like that to complicate the enemies targeting of US bases. So there are some priorities that are further along than others. He had mentioned that the B-21 long-range family of systems is not as far along as the NGADs, and that will probably fall off as that moves forward. And some other- 

Steve Trimble: 

Well, and that would be the autonomous adjunct when they talk about the NGAD family of systems, or CCA, or something similar to that for the Long Range Strike family of systems, those would be autonomous wingman of sorts. But yeah, they've talked about the NGAD being much further along at this point than the bomber version of that, whatever that might be. But sorry, go ahead. 

Brian Everstine: 

Yeah, and I also wanted to touch on, he had mentioned that this will be really interesting to see play out, the moving target engagement at scale. Secretary Kendall said we'll start to see how that comes together, it'll be kind of a combination of space, air, bringing in some work from the NRO to patch together a new way of moving target engagement. And one big thing for industry that we'll be looking at is he has said that 2024 will be, the upcoming budget will be when a decision needs to be made on reengineering the F-35. Can't keep kicking that can down the road. If we're going to see ATP, if we're going to see an upgrade to the F135, that decision will come up soon too. 

Steve Trimble: 

Right. And ATP is this very ambitious program to introduce a third stream adaptive cycle propulsion engine, the first of its kind, into an operational system. They can either go with that if that's what they decide to do, or upgrade the existing F135 to get more fuel efficiency, more thrust, and most importantly, perhaps, more thermal management in terms of how much cooling they can provide and how much heat the engine can process that's created by the aircraft's avionics. So JJ, do you have any other ideas for what could be coming in that fiscal year of 2024 with all those new starts? 

JJ Gertler: 

Well, as we look at the secretary's imperatives, and I have to say it's fascinating to see an Air Force budget put together this way. It's been a long time since they've started with certain principles and built a budget from it. We saw them come close back when Secretary Heather Wilson proposed 386 squadrons as a planning factor for the Air Force, but that initiative didn't last very long. We've seen chiefs of staff in the past put out vision documents that say, "By this year, this is what the Air Force should look like." But those also never turned into budgets. Particularly interesting though in this case that the initiative is coming from the civilian secretary and not from the chief of staff in setting forward what the Air Force needs to do in the future. There's a few capability gaps that are evident and that they may want to address, but let's start with NGAD. 

You had talked about the Next Generation Air Dominance program, which was a technology program to develop five specific technologies. We know that one of those is propulsion, and you've already addressed the question of moving into a new generation of engines. But it could be that one of those other NGAD technologies, or possibly even the system itself, is ready to move from early stage development money into something that looks more like a procurement line. Remember that the Air Force has said that they anticipate NGAD to have an operational capability by 2030. You'd have to start procurement money right about now in order to get a meaningful capability into the forest force by that time. So watch that space. 

Steve Trimble: 

Well, so not just the CCA, but the sixth-generation fighter, whatever that is, manned or unmanned, that system, that's what you're talking about. 

JJ Gertler: 

That's right. It could be the beginning of procurement money to take that system, which is rumored to have already flown in some form, and turn it into hardware on the ramp. 

Steve Trimble: 

And I should note that over the summer, Frank Kendall said that they had effectively achieved milestone B, which would be the start of engineering and manufacturing development. We still don't know what that means to effectively achieve it versus actually achieving it. And I think the inspector general said that they were going to investigate exactly what that meant as well, but we don't know the results of that. But anyway, sorry, go ahead. 

JJ Gertler: 

There has been a lot of dancing around that particular declaration, and whether it is actually still in effect is unclear. Second, you'd mentioned the Long Range Strike family of systems. Remember that the B-21 is LRS-B, the Long Range Strike Bomber, but there are a family of other systems that are LRS-?. We don't know what those are yet. Yes, the CCA is one of them, or some form of CCA is one of them, but there are other supporting systems to make the Long Range Strike complex work. We could see one or more of those coming out in the '24 budget. Obviously, there will have already been development on them in the classified world. 

Steve Trimble: 

Well, and just to drill down on that, in 2010 when, I think it was General Stud Stutt or STAT Stott came out with the original vision for the Long Range Strike family of systems, he included the bomber, but also penetrating ISR, or penetrating Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Aircraft, which we have long suspected would be the aircraft that Aviation Week calls the RQ-180, even though we don't actually know what it’s callsed. As well as a penetrating airborne electronic attack aircraft. Those were all introduced in that original public and unclassified presentation on the Long Range Strike family of systems 12 years ago, 13 years ago now. Anyway, sorry, go ahead. I keep in interrupting you, but go ahead. 

JJ Gertler: 

Well, no, because we're here to talk about these different systems, and yes, that's a very good observation about where they came from because that was one of the big jumps from the previous Next-Generation Bomber program, in which the bomber was expected to provide all these capabilities itself. To move from that to a family of federated systems was part of what made the Long Range Strike Bomber possible and acceptable, frankly, to the Department of Defense at the time. The other system that comes to mind, and this is pure speculation, but Secretary Kendall has recently talked about how the Air Force is modernizing fighters, modernizing bombers, modernizing tankers. 

They've got three mobility platforms that are either very old in design, or have been ridden hard the last few years. And about how there needed to be some modernization of the transport fleet. Combine that with the Air Force's agile combat employment concept, in which you have far-flung fields that are not well-developed that need to be supplied. And you have a requirement for a transport aircraft that has good short field capability, but Pacific ranges, you start to get into some new transport. And perhaps coincidentally, we have L3Harris teaming with Embraer on the KC-390 as a smaller tanker aircraft that they hope to propose to the US Air Force. Some variation of that as a cargo aircraft would be an interesting new start in helping support the agile combat employment concept. 

Steve Trimble: 

Yeah, no, and I'm sure they'll get plenty of competition with the Lockheed Martin C-130, but yeah, Brian, what do you think about that, the mobility side? 

Brian Everstine: 

Yeah. Well, just to add to that, the Air Force kind of ruined my New Year's a few weeks back, on New Year's Eve they released... We talked about the OIs, now there's this new phrase that's coming out called cross-cutting operational enablers. So they are kind of a subset of the operational imperative work. And there is a series of RFIs that went out on New Year's Eve, of course, and they were looking at mobility, electromagnetic spectrum of operations and munitions. And I've only seen the mobility one public, but it was released with a deadline of January 11th or so to give a recommendation to Secretary Kendall by March 2023 to be included in the upcoming PALM POM. So we've heard Kendall, we've heard Air Mobility Command, General Minihan, talk about really wanting to accelerate some next-generation airlift work for KC-X, KC-Z, and we'll see if that will make a way to a new start or some further PALM POM work. 

JJ Gertler: 

You just sparked another idea in my mind, Brian, and it is the observation that DARPA has just announced that they have completed testing of two basic hypersonic designs of basically chassis for future hypersonic weapons. And could this be a follow-on effort from that DARPA experiment, in which the Air Force is developing some new hypersonic weapon, picking up that research where it left off? 

Steve Trimble: 

Well, we do know the Air Force is starting with the Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile program and getting it out. They plan to get the operational prototype of that fielded in 2027, leveraging this southern cross integrated flight research experiment with Australia, which is going to have a first flight in 2024, or at least that was the original plan. But yeah, there is that hypersonic push going on as well. Just in the mobility area, also, just on that next-generation mobility side, there's some really interesting stuff going on in the R&D community. DIU has this commercial solutions opening, I think it is, for a blended wing body demonstrator that would be 767 or A330 size. They want to get it flying by 2028. I have no idea how they get that done. DARPA's got this ekranoplan wing and ground effect type aircraft that they want to... It would be C-17 size that could lift just a huge amount of equipment, and it just fly over the tops of the waves all the way across the Pacific. So there's some really interesting ideas out there. 

JJ Gertler: 

And in late January, Boeing unveiled a blended wing body design for a tanker or transport based on some of the work they've already been doing in the X program with NASA. And let's not forget, Lockheed Martin had the speed agile, some years ago, concept of a stealthy transport in this category. 

Steve Trimble: 

Right. And HX as well, their proposed C-5 replacement with a hybrid wing body type design, that goes back several years as well. Yeah, it's going to be really interesting going on, all the different options, and capabilities, and needs in the mobility area. They've looked at fighters, we've got Next Generation Air Dominance already going, B-21 is in production, so maybe now is the time to go back and see what they can do about the C-130, and KC-135, and C-5, maybe all at the same time. So we're talking about all this and there's a lot going on, but the big question still is what Congress is going to do this year. And it's an interesting year, we're back into the era of divided government with the house controlled by the Republicans, Senate controlled by the Democrats, and the Democrats in the White House. And this sets up a very dynamic situation with any types of legislation. So JJ, what do you think is going to happen with the appropriations bills this year? 

JJ Gertler: 

Does the phrase utter chaos mean anything? Look, this is one of those years that happens from time to time, where the defense budget is not really debated by itself. The size of the defense budget, the top line that's given to the appropriations and authorization committees, depends on a deal about the whole budget and the domestic spending as well, the taxes as well. It gets rolled into an entire debate. What's unusual this year is it's the earliest I can recall the defense budget coming up as being a matter of controversy. Usually, you get into the year, the committees have started to mark up, they've had at least the posture hearings, we have a budget in from the president, and then there's a discussion. How big should the defense budget be, relative to these other things? Here we are, it's barely the new year, it's even more early in the new Congress, and there's a big question about, how big should the defense budget be? What are the trade-offs going to look like? 

And for the first time in a long time, you have a resuscitated budget hawk caucus in the Congress. For the last decade or so, defense has sailed through relatively untouched or even plused up. But there weren't a lot of members who were pushing for deficit reduction and reigning in spending. Now you have, on the conservative side, people saying, "We're spending too much on defense." You have on the liberal side, people saying, "We're spending too much on defense." And when the margin in each house is just a few votes, those voices wind up mattering a whole lot more than they do in a typical year. 

Steve Trimble: 

It makes me remember Budget Control Act sequestration and that whole process from 2011, 2012, the Tea Party and that sort of thing. Yeah, it's kind of a whole different paradigm than we've known for the last seven, eight years. 

JJ Gertler: 

Well, it just makes it very hard to predict, but when you look at all of what we've been talking about already, it's like someone came along and said, "Your birthday is coming and you're going to get 12 really good presents, but we're not going to tell you what any of them is. And you can't see the packages to shake them or see how big they are." 

Steve Trimble: 

And we have to go to Congress to see whether you actually get them. 

JJ Gertler: 

That's right. Yes. You might have to wait until five years from now. 

Steve Trimble: 

Well, we're going to keep tracking this and see how this evolves and shapes itself over the course of the year. It's going to be very interesting on a lot of different levels once we get to the budget rollout, and then when that goes into the legislative process and see what comes out of it. So keep track of us here, and I want to thank JJ for joining us, and Brian for participating. And I think that'll wrap us up. And thank you very much for listening.