Bring the hearing to order uh for my
colleagues awareness . We intend to
conclude today's hearing by 12 o'clock
noon due to possible four proceedings
and also the possibility that any one
of our colleagues may object to uh
preceding past 12 o'clock noon . Uh So
this will require us ending the open
session at by 11 a.m. and then moving
immediately to a closed session at SCC
217 . I ask uh that
members strictly adhere to the five
minute timeline and I will uh tap
my my gavel to remind people . Um
I in that spirit , I will uh submit my
opening statement for the record . Uh
Senator Fisher . Thank you , Mr
Chairman . I would submit my uh
statement for the record as well .
Thank you very much , Senator Fisher .
Let me recognize Secretary Kendall Mr
Secretary . Thank you , Mr Chairman uh
Chairman Reed uh Senator Fisher ,
members of the committee , General
Saltzman General Alvin . And I thank
you for the opportunity to testify
today on the Department of the Air
Force's fy 25 budget submission . The
Department of the Air Force uh budget
request supports the national defense
strategy . We appreciate the
committee's support for the recently
enacted fy 24 budget and your efforts
to secure timely passage . As you are
aware , the six month delay has had a
real impact . That time cannot be
recovered , but at least we can now
move forward with our urgent
modernization priorities . As I have
testified before this committee
repeatedly , time is my greatest
concern . We are in a race for military
technological superiority with a
capable pacing challenge . Our cushion
is gone . We are out of time as we have
briefed the committee in the classified
level , the pacing threat moves
steadily forward . We appreciate the
opportunity to have a classified
session today . Mr Chairman as well .
Continued fear to provide on time ,
authorities and appropriations will
leave the Air Force and Space force
inaccurately prepared . We know the
committee recognizes this and we
appreciate your strong bipartisan
support . Our fy 25 budget request
complies with the Physical
Responsibility Act . We are requesting
217.5 billion for the Department of the
Air Force which includes 100 and 88
billion for the Air Force and 29.4
billion for the Space Force . The fy 25
budget reflects an increase of about
1.5% or with the enacted fy 24 budget
and does not keep pace with inflation
or with the 7% publicly acknowledged
growth of China's military budget to
stay within the levels of the fr a the
Department of the Air force had to
adjust our previous plans . The 25
budget request seeks to preserve the
momentum behind our modernization
efforts , particularly the work on
operational imperatives that we
initiated that this committee supported
in fy 24 . In order to preserve
modernization , we have marginally
reduced procurement and we have
sustained our foundational accounts at
levels we deemed acceptable but no more
because the space force budget is
dominated by research and development
uh accounts , we have had to marginally
reduce the pace and scope of our space
force modernization programs . Our
first priority in the national defense
strategy remains defense of the
homeland , which is a Department of the
Air Force primarily supports through
investments in domain awareness , air
and space defense , early warning and
cyberspace defense programs . Our
second national defense strategy
priority is to deter strategic attack
against the United States , our allies
and our partners , the Department of
the Air Force 25 budget request
prioritizes nuclear modernization to
maintain a safe , secure and effective
nuclear deterrent . Notably , the
Sentinel ICBM program has experienced
unacceptable costs and schedule
increases and is currently undergoing a
none mccurdy review . The Department of
the Air Force will work closely with
the committee as that review reaches
its conclusions . The third national
defense strategy priority is to deter
aggression and be prepared to prevail
in conflict when necessary . The
Department of the Air Force needs
immediate and significant capability
modernization to keep pace with their
growing military capabilities of the PR
C , the Department of the Air Force ,
operational imperatives and the closely
related cross cutting operational
enablers continue to guide our
modernization program . The fy 25 D
budget request includes 6.1 billion for
these efforts . Finally , the fourth
national defense strategy priority is
to build a resilient joint force and
enduring advantages . This budget
request invest to ensure that we can
recruit and retain the force we need so
that our airmen and guardians and their
families have the quality of life they
deserve and can serve to their full
potential . As we have briefed the
committee , the Department of the Air
Force is also currently undertaking a
department wide effort to re optimize
to meet the needs of great power
competition . The intent is to minimize
both cost impacts and personnel or unit
movement . We will work closely with
the committee as we develop detailed
plans . We do not anticipate any
significant impact on the fy 25 budget
and we have not requested funds for
this purpose . The da also appreciates
the committee's support for the dod
quick start initiative that was enacted
last year . Department of the Air Force
has obtained approval from the
Secretary of Defense for two programs
that will be initiated under this new
authority . They are a more resilient
national GPS uh position , navigation
and timing capability and C three
battle management for moving target
indication ,
time matters , but so do resources .
The United States is facing a
competitor with national purchasing
power that exceeds our own . A
challenge we have never faced in modern
times , China is actively developing
and expanding capabilities to challenge
strategic stability , attack our
critical space systems and defeat our
ability to project power , especially
air power conflict is not inevitable ,
but it could happen at any time .
General Alvin and I just returned from
a trip to some of our key bases in the
Indo Pacific . We should all be very
proud of our men and women serving in
harm's way and doing everything they
can to deter and to be ready for a
conflict . Unlike any we've seen before ,
the Department of the Air Force . Fy 25
budget request is focused on addressing
these realities . We commit to working
with the committee to secure timely
enactment of this budget request .
Thank you . We look forward to your
questions . Thank you very much , Mr
Secretary General Alvan , please . Good
morning , Chairman Reed , Senator
Fisher and distinguished members of
this committee . Today . I'm proud to
represent the 677,000 total force
airmen serving our nation . I want to
thank you for your unyielding support ,
not only for those airmen but for their
families as well . I'd like to open by
stating my immense pride in the
exemplary performance of our i in this
past weekend as part of a joint and
coalition effort . They successfully
thwarted a massive air attack by Iran
on Israel's home soil . Their
professionalism and skill turned a
potentially catastrophic event for
Israel into a strategic defeat for Iran
and its proxies . As we look across the
strategic landscape , we find ourselves
in a time of significant consequence .
The simultaneous demands of strategic
competition with an aggressive and
increasingly capable pr C and
persistent acute threats from around
the globe require the air force to
maximize the readiness of today's
forces while adapting our structures
and processes to offer the best
opportunity to prevail in an
environment of enduring competition
time is not on our side . The fy 25 air
force budget request reflects difficult
choices . We've made tradeoffs to keep
the air force's operational readiness
today at the minimum , acceptable to
meet the nation's demands while seeking
to preserve the previous year's
advances in modernization . The air
force budget request also invests in
the Air force most precious asset .
It's airman to ensure they remain the
decisive advantage upon which the
nation depends . Strategic deterrence
is a key priority in our national
defense strategy and the United States
Air Force remains committed to the
recapitalization of our nuclear force .
We're actively supporting the process
triggered by the nun mccurdy breach of
the Sentinel program and will continue
to pursue the path of a safe , secure ,
reliable and effective ground leg of
the nuclear triad . Well into the
future , our ability to support the
national defense strategy . Priority of
deterring aggression and prevailing in
conflict demands . A modern air force
that is connected to the joint force
and can close multiple kill chains in
minimal time to control the tempo of a
complex fight with a peer competitor .
To that end , the Fy 25 budget proposes
continued investments in the F-35 and
F-15 ex , albeit with fewer than
preferred quantities dictated by the
constraints of the Fiscal
Responsibility Act . We remain
committed to the advanced battle
management system . C three battle
management and to the NGA D family of
systems , particularly collaborative
combat aircraft which will allow the
air force to deliver the affordable
mass required to be effective against a
very capable PR C . We're also
committed to building forward based
resiliency enough to enable continued
so degeneration even while under attack
to arrest the decline in our readiness ,
we have proposed modest increased
investment in flying hours and the
weapons system sustainment funding to
support them while prioritizing
investments in critical physical and
cyber infrastructure . Our airmen are
and will always be the deciding factor
in any conflict our air force faces and
we are committed to their health
development and quality of life . We
have made significant progress . Thanks
to Congress's support to increase basic
pay , adjust the basic allowance for
housing and subsistence to account for
macroeconomic factors . There's still
work to be done during our recent trip
to the Indo Pacific Secretary Kendall
and I saw dedicated airmen eager to
accomplish the mission despite
infrastructure degradation caused by
natural disaster and persistent
environmental challenges as well as
limited access to the health care
enjoyed by many Ka Spaces . The Jabir
Air Force has not changed since its
inception , support and defend this
nation through credible deterrence and
unmatched combat prowess to preserve
that level of deterrence . We must
maintain our readiness today ,
modernize our forces for tomorrow and
provide the absolute best support for
our airmen . Success on any battlefield
is a team effort . I want to thank the
members of Congress and this committee
for your past and continued support .
Thank you . And I look forward to your
question . Thank you , General uh
General Saltman . Please . Chairman
Reed , Senator Fisher , distinguished
members of the committee . Thank you
for your continued support and for the
opportunity to testify on the Space
Forces Posture for fiscal year 25 . As
the Space force prepares to celebrate
its fifth birthday , we are wholly
dedicated to the work of forging a
service purpose built for great power
competition . Space has never been more
critical to the security of our nation
and the success or failure of the joint
force depends heavily upon the
capabilities we present . It is our
responsibility to contest and control
the domain , to defend us space
capabilities and to protect the joint
force from space enabled attack .
Gaining and maintaining space
superiority is the purpose for which
the space force was established . With
about 3% of the department of Defense
budget . The Space Force offers a
tremendous value proposition to the
nation . Every dollar invested in space
brings asymmetric returns . But that
means every dollar cut creates
asymmetric risk against a near peer .
Adversary . Space superiority is the
linchpin . Without it , we cannot deter
conflict without it . We cannot provide
vital effects without it . We cannot
protect the joint force until we have
built the infrastructure to achieve
space superiority . The space force is
a work in progress . The space force's
theory of success includes three parts
avoiding operational surprise , denying
the benefits of attack in space and
conducting responsible counter space
activities . The space force budget
request is designed to support the
national defense strategy by building
training and equipping the forces . The
nation needs to perform each activity ,
preserving freedom of action in space
while deterring and denying adversarial
objectives . Avoiding operational
surprise requires us to maintain an
accurate understanding of the space
domain at all times . 8.3% of our
budget is dedicated to this aim
operating across disaggregated sensor
frameworks . The space force provides
the maximum information possible to
decision makers from the tactical to
the strategic level . Denying the
benefits of attack in space demands
that we make any attack against us .
Space capabilities , impractical and
self defeating . 43.4% of our budget is
devoted to this objective , investing
in resiliency for missile warning and
tracking satellite communications and
precision navigation and timing ,
hybrid architectures and proliferated
constellations impose a heavy cost on
aggression . Finally , responsible
counter space activities describes the
mechanism by which the Space Force
contests and controls the space domain .
The fy 25 budget dedicates 24.7%
of the space force budget to space
superiority within the constraints of
the fr a fiscal year 25 space Force
budget reflects hard choices to
maintain legacy space services and
preserve current readiness . But it
also slows the fielding of a modernized
force . Addressing these challenges
depends on guardians that are trained
and ready to meet the high tech demands
of space operations . For that reason ,
I would like to personally thank the
committee for its support for the Space
Force Personnel Management Act . This
will be a major force multiplier in the
space force's efforts to modernize the
way we recruit , build and retain
talent . Thank you for the opportunity
to discuss the Space Force's fy 25
budget and posture . Even in the face
of accelerating threats , the Space
Force remains the pre eminent military
space organization in the world . With
the support of this committee , our
guardians will preserve and expand our
strategic advantage and we will step up
to meet the challenge of our pacing
threat . So as long as you continue to
trust and invest in your space service ,
the space force will respond with
unparalleled value for the nation . I
look forward to your questions . Thank
you very much , General Saltman Mr
Secretary . Uh We have been endeavoring
for the last several years to replace
the E three A wax uh aircraft which
uh has certainly served well , but uh
it is reaching its limits . Uh Could
you fill us in on the progress towards
getting the seven in the air to
replace the E three ? And we're still
moving ahead with the E seven . It's
funded in 25 budget . Uh We had to slip
uh production of 11 aircraft uh a , a
year to the right . Uh The price that
we got from the prime came in much
higher than we had anticipated . We've
been involved in negotiations , try to
get it down . We have come much closer ,
but we're not really at closure yet .
So we have some additional work to do
there . Uh So I I'm anticipating and
maybe being optimistic here , but
hopefully that we'll get to uh an
agreement very shortly and then be able
to move on with the program . We're
still committed to the program , but
we've got to have an affordable
aircraft . Uh uh The Australians among
others have the E seven . Our version
would be more sophisticated or quite
different . It , it would be uh it
would have to include all of our
communication systems and so on . So
there are a number of modifications
from the original E seven which is
several years old that had to be made
to meet our requirements . That's part
of the problem with the cost . Thank
you . Uh G Alvin , uh a
significant part of the life cycle cost
of an aircraft is sustainment costs .
And I think around here we uh our first
reaction is the sticker shock . You
mean it cost X ? But we don't realize
how much it really costs to keep flying .
For example , the F-35 is uh I think
about $39,000 per hour of flying .
Uh Can you tell us what progress the
air force has made in reducing the life
cycle cost of the F-35 system , in
particular ? Uh Thank you , Chairman
and of course , the F-35 will be the
backbone of our force into the future .
So having it sustainable is , is
certainly uh required for us to be able
to afford it . And all the other things ,
the joint program office has been
undertaking this uh what they're
referring to as a war and readiness ,
trying to understand each of the
individual elements and segments that
are driving the cost down . Uh And I
think uh that that program is is
underway , we expect to see some
results from that in the very near
future . The other thing is that when
you , when you purchase the new weapon
systems , you also have to pur purchase
the uh contract uh contract logistics
supply system as well , which adds a
bit of a additional cost to it . So ,
digging into that and understanding how
we might be able to transition to this
performance based logistics is another
way into the future . As you know ,
we've been working back and forth uh
with prime on how to do that . We
couldn't come to a conclusion that was
satisfactory for both sides to be able
to have all of the things that we
needed . So we are going to re enter
that as well to ensure that in the
future , we can have a performance
based logistics system that will drive
down the cost of sustainment as well .
And there's been a determination , I ,
I presume over time that uh contractor
based uh sustainment is more efficient
than uniformed sustainment by military
personnel . That was certainly the uh
the premise when they put into the CLS .
And so now we're looking at adjusting
that uh to the current environment ,
how we may be able to adapt to ensure
that we can get some of the efficiency
and affordability , but also the
operational responsiveness that we need .
Thank you , uh General Salman , your
chief task is to provide the uh
trained and equipped space force
guardians . And can you sort of give us
a sense of what are the obstacles
you're facing in that ? Yeah , thank
you , Senator . The um the conditions
have changed radically in space over
the last 10 years or so . One of the
analogies , Secretary Kendall and I use
is it's akin to going from a merchant
marine and transforming into a US navy
that requires different equipment that
requires different training . And so
what we're working on currently is
advancing the training of our guardians .
Uh We've invested in fiscal year 25
about $438 million to enhance the
training infrastructure . This includes
new simulators , new ranges , uh
aggressive forces to simulate the
threat all to give them realistic
training for the competitive
environment they're gonna face . But
maybe more importantly and certainly
more in terms of investments is giving
them the equipment they need resilient
architectures that are gonna be more uh
capable , more effective in the
contested environment and looking for
the counter space capabilities to deny
an adversary the ability to use space
enabled targeting against our joint
force . Oh , thank you very much . Uh
And gentlemen , thank you for your
testimony , Senator Fisher , please .
Thank you , Mr Chairman . Welcome ,
gentlemen . I share with many of my
colleagues a deep concern regarding the
future of the United States Air Force
spiders , bombers , tankers and cargo
aircraft are in constant rotation
around the world ready to combat any
threat . I understand that we must
modernize our forces and divest when it
makes sense to do so . However many of
the aircraft that the air force has
requested to divest in this year's
budget such as the
F-15s are among the most combat
capable with expensive upgrades and
thousands of flight hours remaining on
the aircraft in the event of conflict .
We need not only capability but also
capacity . Not every place in which the
air force is expected to operate is a
high end threat environment . I'm
especially concerned about the impact
of these budget caps on the Space Force
whose programs form the backbone of
every other services , combat
capability , communications , command
and control and guidance for weapon
systems , all rely on space and more
vital mission sets are expected to move
to space in the near term , though not
fast enough to justify such rapid
divestment of airborne programs . Yet
this budget request does not include
the resources necessary for the space
force to grow its capability at scale
and at the speed of relevance . Indeed ,
your request for Space Force is $600
million less than what the department
requested last year . General Salzman .
In your opening statement , you stated
quote , the space force lacks similar
trade-off options , forcing delays in
needed systems , especially counter
space systems . End quote , I'm
concerned about the level of risk we're
accepting by delay in development of
these systems . If Congress were to
provide additional funding for
development of these counter space
systems , would you be able to execute
that funding ? Yes , ma'am . We have a
series of programs that are still in R
and D . Uh But there is a good solid
program that with additional resources ,
we would be able to accelerate and
deliver capability uh in this fight up .
We've also heard a lot about what the
Air Force is doing related to re
optimizing the great power competition .
General Saltzman , what does that look
for ? Look like for the space force ,
please ? Thank you for that . We're
very excited about the re optimization .
Uh And , and like I started in , in the
previous question to Senator Reed , uh
It's about recognizing that the
environment has shifted and that we
have to train differently . So we have
reestablished new advanced training
standards for our guardians to be able
to respond in this contested
environment . We've also created a new
force presentation model which creates
both the time and the tools uh for our
guardians to be able to train against
this adversary . Um Most importantly ,
probably most recognizable , you'll see
the establishment of a space futures
command . This is in recognition that
there is a great many efforts that were
going on in science and technology uh
in operational concepts , new missions
and we wanted to make sure we could get
our arms around that as quickly as
possible and really focus delivery of
the right kind of systems with the
right prioritization in time so that we
can continue to have an enduring
advantage over our threats as we go
into the future . Thank you , sir . Uh
General Alvin or Secretary Kendall . Um
What are , what are additional updates
that you can share in this setting on
uh new developments in the B 21 program ?
Uh The B 21 is moving forward . Uh I'm
always very careful about saying
positive things about programs and
development , they all have risk . But
at this stage , uh the B 21 has been
performing uh close to original
scheduling and , and , and costs and
delivering capability is in testing .
We just had the milestone sea approval
to enter low rate production . So the
program is moving forward at this point
in time . At least we're pretty happy
with the progress . Great . Thank you ,
General Alvin . It's my understanding
that one of the changes at the Air
Force Nuclear Weapons Center is
establishing that two star General as
pe O for international ballistic
missiles . What benefits will this
bring to the Air Force's capability in
to help them execute that Sentinel
program ? Thank you , Senator . And
this is really part and parcel to what
uh things we're looking at with the re
optimization understanding , keeping
the main thing , the main thing nuclear
deterrence is a cornerstone of our
national defense . And so the ability
to oversee at the right level with the
right authorities to do integration uh
of the ICBM leg of the triad is is very
important . So elevating that to the
two star level gives uh more seniority
and more authority to be able to
integrate the nuclear material
management and all of the systems that
will be uh able to support the ICBM leg .
We think that's going to be regardless
of what comes out of the of the nun
mccurdy review going forward that uh
ground leg of the triad that
recapitalization is going to take uh
years upon years . And so we want to
ensure we have the right level of
leadership and oversight to see this
massive program , correct . We need to
make sure we have what we need and
continue to move forward on that
program . Thank you . Thank you ,
Senator Fisher , Senator Haruno .
Please . Thank you , Mr Chairman .
Thank you all for testifying today . Uh
This is for General Alvin . The agile
combat employment strategy requires the
appropriate posture and supporting
infrastructure at locations throughout
the Pacific . For example , just last
week , the air force awarded a $409
million contract to rebuild an
airfield used during World War two on
the island of Tinian . General Alvin ,
does the air force have the appropriate
for air basing ? It needs to execute
agile combat employment ? And are there
plans for more reclamation efforts at
Pacific Airfield similar to Tin and the
runway upgrade base Air uh air Base
Basa Airbase in the island of Luzon .
Well , Senator , thank you for that
question . And uh Secretary Kendall and
I were there for about two weeks ago .
We're on the island of Tinian and we
certainly it holds a not only a , a
historic place but it also is going to
be part of the future as far as our
combat employment scheme of maneuver .
So direct answer to your question ,
Senator is we're on the path . We have
uh the wing commanders and the
commander of Pacific Air Force with a ,
a very strong understanding of what it
takes to do a combat employment and
they continue through their wing level
exercises to , to to sort of to build
that out at least uh intellectually and
conceptually . And as we continue to ,
to fight for the resources to do that ,
we do have designs on several of these
clusters . Uh These spoke bases to
include uh Tinian that the secretary
and I were on , you mentioned a couple
of the other ones but building out not
only the runway but the the necessary ,
not overly necessary , just what we
need to operate those hub and spoke
locations . Uh We have uh a ways to go
in the funding , but we are , we are
designing in the requirements ,
prioritizing them and we do intend to
exercise to ensure we have everything
we need to execute that that scheme of
maneuver that's going to be required .
It's part of the or maybe the major
part of the reason that we need to have
these um um facilities in the in the
Indo Pacific is because of recognizing
that China is definitely um having
they're reaching out to a number of
these island nations to influence them
is that one of the reasons that's
correct . We want to ensure that we
have the agility and be able to , to
complicate their targeting calculus to
ensure survivability and success in
that theater . Thank you . I support
your effort . Secretary Kendall , last
year's NDA A included a provision
directing the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a feasibility study regarding
the advisability of transfer ,
transferring all covered space
functions of the National Guard to the
Space Force . The results of the study
have not been released , but I am
concerned that uh you are already
pursuing . Apparently , our dod is um a
provision in this year's NDA A that
would move all space missions out of
the National Guard . So uh how does
this , how does this change , by the
way ? I think it's important for us to
actually have the results of this
analysis . And I would hope that the
analysis is al also including outreach
and the in input of these National
Guard units that are performing some of
the space functions that I'm sure , you
know , Mr Secretary , there are about
1000 national Guardsmen in states ,
not just Hawaii , there are about 100
but in California , Colorado , Florida ,
New York , Ohio , Alaska .
Uh so while that study has not even
been completed , I hope that you have
out , have gotten um reached out to
these National Guard units . Have you
in conducting this study that we do not
have the results of yet ? Uh The , the
study is in the final draft . First of
all , let me just say that we deeply
value uh the units that are , that are
part of essentially our space
capabilities . Um We're looking at
which ones will be covered under the
Act consultant with General Saltzman .
And we've looked at the functions of
those units to see if they fit into the
Air Force or Space Force architecture .
More more , more appropriately . Most
of them do fit within the space force
or a couple that I think uh may be more
appropriate in the Air Force , but
they're all valued and they're all
important . We want to have them
continue to serve . We are looking at
how to best make that happen . Uh
General Saltzman and I are both very
strongly of the opinion that the right
way to do that uh from the point of
view of national capability and for the
ability to manage the Space Force is to
bring those units into the Space Force .
Uh Ultimately , under the Space Force
Personnel Management Act , that was
just passed by the Congress last year .
The the Space Force is incredibly small
and it was designed to be lean and mean ,
I guess is a way to put it is to be
very efficient in how it operated and
to have his minimal amount of
bureaucracy associated with it . And
we're very grateful that this committee
and uh and your colleagues on the other
side of the hill supported the Space
Force um Personnel Management Act . It
allows the Space Force to have full
time and part time people in it and to
be very flexible in how it manages
people . So we want to bring these
guard units into that same structure
and that's , that's clearly from the
point of view of the Space Force , the
best solution . Mr Secretary , I'm glad
to hear that . Although transferring
these units into the space force might
mean transfer the transferring these
part time people who are located in all
the states that I mentioned away from
their , their states and other
functions . So I have a concern about
that and um you know , the , the
General Salzman just testified today
that it is very important in terms of
the recruiting and retention of the
people who are gonna be uh doing these
functions . So um I , I have concerns
that uh of , of the movement . I do
have other questions , Mr Chairman that
I will submit for the record . Thank
you . Thank you very much , Senator
Senator Mr Chairman , I could have one
minute to , to respond to Senator Rod .
Uh Yes , the only one minute you'll get .
Thank you . Thank you , Mr Chairman .
Um There's no intention to move anyone .
They uh so there's some concerns out
there that I think are overblown . Um
People will basically have stability if
they transition . Uh We're doing this
now with some of the Reserves , there
are about 1000 people in the Reserves
essentially that are gonna be moving
under the Space Force Personnel
Management Act . We're gonna handle the ,
the , the Space Guard people the same
way basically . So they would have
stability . Um uh and they would be
able to continue to serve in the way
generally that they , they currently
would serve . So there should not be a
lot of concern about dramatic changes
as far as any of them are concerned .
So general . Also , we wanna add a
quick word on it . Thank you very much ,
Mr Secretary that helps clarify the
issue very much . Uh Senator round ,
please . Thank you , Mr Chairman uh
Secretary Kel General Alvin , uh
General Saltzman . Thank you for your
service . Um And thank you for being
with us today to share your testimony .
I'd also like to take this opportunity
to acknowledge the actions of the
pilots and air crews of the 494th and
the 335th fighter squadrons who
performed so magnificently over the
weekend , we are all proud and humbled
by their clear excellence and uh to
the entire joint force for the job they
did uh in responding very , very
quickly , Secretary Kennel , given the
events over this past weekend , it
seems clear to me that there is no
substitute for military hardware . Uh
and that divesting platforms in the
short term to pay for future
capabilities is not necessarily uh the
most desirable option or choice .
Congress must fund the department at
levels commensurate to the global
threat environment . Broadly speaking ,
in this open setting , where does your
fy 25 budget assume the most risk ?
Um If I look over at the Department of
the Air Force's budget , um I'm most
concerned about the pace at which we're
moving forward in space , particularly
counter space . Uh I'm not
uncomfortable with where the Air Force
is in terms of force structural
capabilities globally . Uh We have a
large air force and it's very capable .
It's not as large as it once was , but
we have a lot of units and the two you
mentioned , I think did a fantastic job ,
but we have a lot of other units could
do very similar things if called upon
to do that . Our average aircraft is
about 30 years old . Uh and we need to
move forward with the next generation
of capabilities as quickly as we can on
the space force side . Though , as
general Saltzman mentioned , we're
going from a country that had uh space
capabilities designed to operate in
space with impunity and very little in
the way of counter space capabilities .
So we are moving from a merchant marine
like arrangement to a military Navy
force arrangement , which means we've
got to have resilient assets in space
that will survive an attack and provide
the services that are so important to
the joint force . And we've got to
protect the joint force uh from the s
similar systems that the other side has
that would threaten us and target us .
So we need to do both of those things
and those are transformational
capabilities compared to what we
currently have in the space force for
the most part . So my my greatest
concern again is time and moving
forward as quickly as possible with the
kind of space capabilities we need
particularly counter space . And I
guess just to follow up on that . And
uh once again , I , I suspect this is
one that all of you would probably
participate in responding to but ISR is
critical and right now we've got
platforms that do a great job , but
they're not necessarily space based ,
space based is critical long term . But
it would appear that right now we're
still building those ISR capabilities
for the combatant commander to have in
order to , to finish that , that kill
web . Uh General Alvin , would it be
cleared ? Would , would you , at least
in your professional military opinion ,
would you share with this committee
where we are right now with regard to
our , our ISR platforms that the
combatant commanders are requesting at
this time ? Uh Absolutely , Senator ,
of course , you know , uh intelligence ,
surveillance reconnaissance ,
absolutely critical to be able to , to
close those kill chains and , and have
the situational awareness that
combatant commanders need . Uh I would
say that where we are is we are in a
transition . I think there's a ,
there's a comfort with uh the level of ,
of the capacity that the airborne ISR
has been able to provide and during our
transition to to space air mix , I
think it is from General Alvin . I'm
gonna , I'm gonna cut right to the
chase on this fair to say we are
assuming risk in this transition .
Senator , I would say we assume risk in
any of the transitions . We are trying
to manage that risk through the
platforms , we have , retaining the
platforms that we have through the RQ
four through 2029 and , and those that
we have in the airborne layer until we
get more resilience uh through the
space born layer because that is where
the future is . Thank you , General
Alvin . Also with regards to the family ,
the B 21 family , uh right now , the
actual platform itself we've ordered or
were prepared to purchase 100 . Would
you say that that is the minimum number
needed of the base platform ? It , it
certainly is uh the future of our
bomber force . Uh Before 100 is the
program of record . I think uh we're
not going to reach that number until
probably the mid 20 thirties and beyond .
And before we commit to that as being
the platform beyond that , I think
there are other technological
advancements uh that we would see to be
able to augment that and have a better
mix because as you know , they're ,
they're also uh there's a price to pay
for them . They are going to be very
capable . But the 101 100 sir is the
minimum . That is a program of record .
Thank you . Thank you , Mr Chairman .
Thank you , Senator Rounds . Let me
recognize Senator King , please . Thank
you , Mr Chairman , Mr Secretary . You
began your testimony talking about the
nun mccurdy process and , and Sentinel
um very expensive program designed
years ago , make the case for the
ground based leg of the triad . Um
I should mention that I'm recused on
Sentinel itself , but I can definitely
answer your question about your arm
based leg . Um For as long as I've been
in this business , about 50 years , the ,
um the , the country has relied upon
the triad for nuclear strategic
deterrence . It presents an adversary
with a very difficult problem . Uh If
it's contemplating an attack against
the United States , the , the IC B
laying leg in particular , which is our
largest and most responsive leg of the
triad uh presents a dilemma because if
it's attacked , it , it basically um
can be very responsive and respond
immediately with a large scale
counterattack . The submarine part of
the fleet provides a , a more secure
reserve if you will . Uh that is a lot
smaller in size uh but more survivable .
And then of course , the bomber leg
provides additional flexibility and the
ability to present an adversary with uh
another way in which they can be
attacked , that triumvirate that , that
triad has been enormously effective at
preventing a nuclear war for more than
half a century . Uh almost approaching
a century . Now . Um At one point , I
think you could have had a debate when
the only nuclear powers were Russia in
the United States and our arsenals were
declining that we could have gone to
some other arrangement . But the thing
that's happened in the last few years
that really reinforces the need for the
ICBM leg is China's breakout and their ,
their , their expansion of their
nuclear nuclear force , which is still
in progress . China is making huge
investments in a land based China is
making a large investment and they're
going to an inventory within the next
few years that is comparable to that of
the United States and Russia . So for
the first time in our history , we're
gonna live in a world in which there
are three large scale nuclear powers .
Uh That's a very dangerous world . And
I think reducing our capability ,
reducing our options in the face of
that would be a serious mistake . And
of course , the fundamental of our
entire defense policy is deterrence .
Exactly . In order to maintain
deterrence , the , the , the ground leg
is , is an important factor . Thank you .
Um When we buy a major weapon
systems B 21 F-35 , do we acquire the
IP ? And what I'm leading to here is
the ability of our military to 3d print
parts so that we're not subject to a
long supply chain uh delays and also
potentially a additional cost . Do we
have the uh I believe that every ,
every hangar should have a 3d printer
and every navy ship should have a 3D
printer so that we're not tied to that
uh long tail of , of parts . What's the ,
what's the status of our a acquisition
of the IP ? So that , that can be
effectuated . Our history is mixed on
IP acquisition Um The , the F-35 is a
good example of a program where we
didn't do that . It was acquired
initially under a philosophy of Total
system PPP Procurement , which
essentially left in the hands of the
prime contractor . A lot of control of
the program makes it very hard to
upgrade , it makes very hard to make
changes and do them in a cost effective
way and to take advantage of
competition . Our more modern programs
generally are , are built where we
acquire the uner property , we need to
control uh both upgrades and
maintenance so that we have a lot more
flexibility on how we manage . Uh The B
21 is being done that way . The NGA
program is being done that way . Um It ,
it , it , it's one of the lessons we've
learned very painfully over our history
and acquisition . Um I'm not sure that
we always get it right today , but my ,
I'm not doing acquisition anymore . I'm
a different role now . But my guidance
uh when I was doing that was that when ,
when we still have the benefits of
competition , we need to get the
intellectual property rights we're
going to need for the life of the
program and we can get reasonable
prices for those rights at that time .
Uh And then be in a position to manage
the program effectively going forward
that that's the way we should be doing
this . Uh I can't say that we do it in
every case . Thank you uh General
Saltzman . We may need to talk about
this in a classified setting , but you
use the term denying the benefits of
attacks in space . Secretary Kendall
used counter space . Clearly , we're
we're playing catch up in this
situation and is there anything you can
say in the open setting to provide some
reassurance that we're not totally
vulnerable in space right now ? Uh Yes ,
Senator , thank you for that . The ,
the fy 25 budget I think continues to
advance us on a pretty uh uh solid time
line for adding resilient architectures
to the the critical missions like
missile warning , satellite
communications data transport . So I'm
I'm pretty comfortable with where we're
headed in terms of denying the benefits
of an attack on our systems uh to some
degree . Uh The problem again , as the
secretary mentioned was the fact that
the PR C in particular has built a very
robust space enabled targeting system
and continue to do so at a very rapid
rate . And so scaling up to develop not
just the type of counter space
capabilities that we need , but the
quantity of those capabilities to hold
those targets at risk is where we're
falling behind in the timeline . And
we're not just moving as , as quickly
as I think we should . Thank you ,
General Alvin . I'm gonna submit this
question for the record , but I would
like some thoughts from you about the
Transition Assistance program and how
it's being implemented in the Air Force .
I worry about the transition process
from active duty to veteran status .
Very dangerous moment . And uh so you
don't need to respond now , but I look
forward to your response on that
question . Thank you . Thank you .
Thank you , Senator King . Senator ,
please . Good morning , gentlemen ,
General Saltzman . Uh Fy President's fy
25 budget contains a new program for
space , a access , mobility and
logistics . It's only $20 million .
What's your plan for this ? So that
that type of money is used to study to
figure out if there's military utility .
And so for example , if we , we are
looking at a concept called dynamic
maneuvering , if we can have unlimited
fuel in our spacecraft , because we
have the ability to service them on
orbit , then we can have more dynamic
orbits which are harder to target .
That's the concept . That's the idea .
But we really need to evaluate that to
figure out if there's serious military
utility there before we invest heavily
in a program and the $20 million gets
us along that line . Yeah , $20 million
for five years . That's not a lot of
money . I mean , is that gonna get the
job done ? I , I believe we'll have the
answers to our basic questions on
military utility with that . And then
we can make a determination as whether
we need more funding . How's your
recruiting and retention ? We're doing
great . Uh We still get thousands of
applicants for hundreds of positions .
Uh And uh we're , we're above 90% in
terms of the , the people that we want
to retain . So I , I'm not , you know ,
convinced that that's gonna last
forever . And so we're working hard to
make sure we provide our guardians with
high levels of challenges and
opportunities to uh enhance their own
competencies to make sure we can retain
that workforce . Thank you , Secretary
Kendall . Uh recently , uh I guess , uh
you decided to cut in half the mh 130
nines and we've got one or two . I
think we've got eight total eventually
coming to Montgomery in Macksville .
What's your plan on this ? I think
Maxwell has one already and another uh ,
later this year and then the full eight ,
about a year after that , uh we did cut
the buy back . We cut up from about 80
to about 40 . And the reason for that
was that the threat change and the
areas in which we expect to operate
have changed . Uh So it's a fairly
expensive special purpose helicopter
that , uh isn't , isn't , doesn't have
that much , um , utility in some of the
theaters where we'd have to operate ,
given the threats that are there and
there are a number of other assets and
in many cases can be used for personnel
recovery . So we , we basically
downsized it to have what we think is a
reasonable for us to our needs . Uh ,
given the changes in the threat that's
been the fundamental driver . Yeah , I
was at the Tyndall Air Force Base
recently . How's that coming ? That was
a disaster . What happened to Tyndall ?
But we're rebuilding it back . Is it
coming along pretty good ? Um I'd have
to get your detailed answer for the
record , but yes , is , is basically
answer your question . A lot has been
put into the Tindal to restore it .
Thank you . Uh General Al uh F-35s .
We're putting a lot of eggs in the
basket on this . Uh Are we getting
enough flying time knowing the cost uh ,
of F-35s of operating and maintaining ?
Well , Senator , we're certainly , uh
trying to manage that to get as many as
we can . You know , we , uh as the ,
the weapon system sustainment accounts
and the flying hour program accounts
are very much interrelated . And so as
we try and drive down the cost of what
it costs to sustain that we can put
more of that into flying hours . No
pilot thinks he or she ever has enough
flying hours . Well , we certainly are
augmented that with our synthetic
training . Uh , our joint synthetic
environment is also helping us
understand the things that we don't
necessarily want to do in open air
because of security . Uh I would say
though that every pilot wants to fly
more , but we're trying to manage that
well , to keep that proficiency up , to
keep up with the pacing threat , we
want to make sure our pilots are safe
obviously , um uh in the uh
confrontations we've been having lately
is F-35 been used that , you know , of
the F-35 has been a part of some of the ,
the recent ones like o over the weekend ,
it was not , it was not uh required for
that capability . It actually wasn't in
the theater but the assets that we had
in the theater , uh they , they come
through requests from um the combatant
commander and we provide the assets for
which uh they request and those were
satisfactory uh in that permissive
environment in the highly contested
environment , the contested environment .
That is really where this fifth
generation capability at the F-35
provides today . But even more so into
tomorrow with the tech refresh three
and , and uh block four capability
upgrade capabilities . General , how is
our recruiting in the air force
recruiting air force is , is doing
quite well . Uh It's , it's really
improving on the active duty side . We
actually just uh recently increased our
goal and we think we're going to make
that increased goal on the reserve side ,
they're going to be within 1% . I think
they may actually make it as well . The
National Guard had a deeper deficit to
recover from , I think last year , they
were well below . They're gonna be
within 5% . So we're , we're gaining on
all fronts . We're certainly not
resting on our laurels in the 25 budget .
We asked for another uh 50 million to
be able to distribute , uh , out to ,
uh , to more recruiting centers to have
more , uh , digitization of records and
things . So we can , uh , also have the
recruiters do more recruiting rather
than just admin work . So , we're not
giving up that . We've got it all
licked right now , but we certainly are
on the right path . We increase in
numbers . That what you said , what
percentage do you know ? Well , I would
say right now we are uh math and public .
The , the what percent of the goal ?
The air , the activity Air Force is not
right now . Reading , reaching 100% of
its goal . 100 and 1% quite frankly ,
which allows us to bank a few the
reserves 99% and the National Guard
about 95% . Thank you . Thank you ,
Senator to Senator Pet , please . Thank
you , Mr Chairman . Uh gentlemen ,
welcome . It's good to see all of you
uh here , uh today , uh Secretary
Kendall and uh general uh Alvin , um as
you know , this uh past January , the
uh Air Force uh announced that
Selfridge Air National Guard Base will
be receiving 12 new KC 46 refueling
tankers in uh 2029 . Uh And uh I
just want to say , I don't think I can
emphasize enough how grateful I am to
the Air Force for making uh this
announcement . Uh Certainly a very big
deal for our area and the community is
uh , is very excited . To receive uh
these uh critical refueling tankers
that will continue to play uh uh really
a tremendous strategic role for us uh
for , for decades to come at the same
time . And I've talked to both of uh
General Elvin and Secretary Kendall . I
also remain committed to securing a
future fighter replacement for the
retiring A tens that are currently
flying at Selfridge . The Air Force
basing announcement clearly stated at
the time that the KC 46 decision does
not preclude Selfridge from quote ,
being considered for a future fighter
aircraft mission or other potential
missions in the future . Uh and a quote
and I'd just like both of you if you
would uh kind of reaffirm and uh commit
uh on the record that Selfridge uh is
still in consideration for a future
fighter basing decision at some point ,
Secretary Kendall . Um he beers thank
you . Uh Selfridge would be in
consideration for future fighter uh
basing decision potentially . But at
the current time , we don't have uh uh
an option to do that . And the reason
we made the programmatic decision to
put the KC 46 there was in part at
least because of the divestiture of the
A 10 . So those , those , those two are
linked together . Our general policy is
to replace a flying mission that is
divested with a like flying mission
where we can , if we can't do that , we
try to apply it with another flying
mission and then if we can't do that ,
we try to replace it with an enduring
mission . In the case of Selfridge ,
the uh the KC 40 sixes are basically to
replace uh the combination of the KC
135 and the eight tens . And in the
future , we may be at a different place .
General Alvin mentioned in his opening
statement , the ccas that we're
acquiring , uh we don't know the final
inventory number there , but we expect
it to be large . So there's a
possibility there and we're , we're
looking as we build our 26 budget at
our overall fighter modernization plan
overall . So there is a possibility in
the future but none that we can point
to right at this time . General Alvin ,
do you want to add any to that comment ?
I just to answer your specific question ,
it , it does not preclude but the
secretary has really laid out with
respect to the basing uh decision and
criteria , but it doesn't preclude
future as we continue to work . And
General Alvin um uh and I appreciate
the time that we took yesterday or last
week rather to uh to meet . And as part
of that conversation , we discussed the
critical importance of the
collaborative combat aircraft which
Secretary Kendall uh just referred to .
Uh we also talked about a potential
pilot program to study drone operations
in medium and high intensity airspace
which right now is uh problematic uh
with uh unmanned aircraft . Uh This
pilot program would allow the
Department of Defense to experiment
with existing unmanned systems like the
uh MQ nine Reaper uh to pave the way
for the employment of future platforms
like CC A . So my question for you ,
sir is what benefits and lessons
learned uh would uh the air , would the
air force gain from this kind of pilot
program ? And would you support a pilot
program of that nature ? Uh Thank you ,
Senator . I certainly would . I think
as we look forward to the arc of where
the uh the contested environment in
which we're gonna need to fight that ,
that arc is , is one that requires us
to , to really investigate all the
options for how we maintain
survivability at the right risk to be
able to penetrate , to be able to
survive and to be able to close these
kill chains . And it's increasingly
become apparent to me that there's ,
there's um ripe for study how we do it
in the un crude area . We're , we're
developing the autonomy as well . We
have a , a current program in parallel
that we're looking at the length of the ,
the the portfolio to which you can put
autonomy in these collaborative combat
aircraft as well as how we utilize them
and base them . So we're trying to go
as fast as we can into the human
machine , teaming play . Yeah , if I
could build on that , we , we discussed
uh uh last week uh the importance of
the KC 46 refueling tanker uh as well
as the need for some out of the box
thinking when it comes to collaborative
combat aircraft employment . Uh As part
of that discussion , you mentioned the
possibility , the possibility of
employing KC 46 as a command and
control node for future CC A uh
aircraft . Uh You know , I understand
those decisions are in the very early
stages . But what steps would the air
force need to explore this KC 46 and CC
A command and control concept ? Senator ,
I think the first step that we need to
do is to , to get better situational
awareness on the KC 40 sixes . And
that's something that we're , we're uh
looking into very strongly . Uh General
Minahan has done some experiments out
in the Indo Pacific showing that if you
just have ac two note the ability to
communicate in ways that the tanker
right now can't that starts your
ability to have a more resilient
command and control network . Now ,
whether that next step is to go from
just being a com uh communications node
relay to actually doing airborne battle
management is is something that can be
investigated . But the first start is
to ensure that you have the
connectivity of your platforms in the
way that you didn't before that opens
up the opportunity to do more than just
being coms really , but maybe doing
more command and control . Thank you .
Appreciate it . Thank you , Senator
Peter . Senator Schmidt , please .
Thank you , Mr Chairman , uh ,
Secretary Kall , a sort of follow up on
Senator Peter's question . Um ,
Missouri is home to Whiteman Air Force
Base , um , and the 4 42nd fighter wing ,
um , is there and the A 10 , um , you
know , the Air Force is moving on from
the A 10 , uh , and that'll be really
come to fruition in four years . Um ,
you know , it has some really
experienced um , pilots and maintainers
and um we're already starting to see
the retention issues because there
hasn't been a , a follow on mission .
Um What can you tell me today about how
you're approaching that because there
are some options , but there's really
just not been a lot of movement . I
don't think we have an option yet for
the agent replacement . Can I make a
suggestion ? G F-15 EX would be a great
option . We , we'll take that into
consideration . Ok . Um
Secondly , um Rosecrans
which is in Saint Joseph Missouri , uh
I is home to the aging fleet of , of C
130 Hs . Um Interestingly ,
um and you know , some have said that
the last round was pretty political or
where they went and I just want to make
the point . Um Rosecrans
trains people from all around the world ,
for example , the Indian Air Force
comes in with their C 130 Js to be
trained by the folks at Rosecrans who
have HS from the 19 eighties . There
have been eight you know , appropriated
in this next round . So , I guess just
for , for either one of you , where do
you see this headed , uh , senator ,
the , uh , those eight that were
appropriated ? Certainly they go
through the , the basing process and ,
uh , the candidate bases . I understand
that the Ros Cranz is going to be
considered as one of , I believe four
candidate bases . Uh , for those . It
obviously , it meets the criteria .
That's the first part of the strategic
basing process . And it does meet the
criteria obviously , because they're
flying one through each other . But uh
the expectation is it will be under
consideration . Uh The director of our
NA Air National Guard Bureau works uh
closely uh with the secretary and on
making those decisions , but it should
be into consideration . Let me just add
that I delegated the last C 130 trade
basing decision to the head of the ,
the Air National Guard and I will
probably do the same with this one . Ok .
Um Secretary Kendall , I do wanna ask
you , I sent a letter um to Secretary
Austin , uh you know , asking for some
accountability with these , with these
DE I positions that have found their
way throughout um the Pentagon in our ,
in our armed services . Um
Secretary kind . Do you know how many
DE I positions exist in the Air Force
full time positions ? Um It , it is a
relatively small number , Senator .
We're , we're in the process of
complying with the law and we'll comply
with it . Uh , I think the due date to
have this done is about the middle of
June if I remember . Right . So we'll
get to the exact , the answer is 70 70 .
Um , the Navy has 18 , the army has
19 , those are 18 and 19 . Too many as
far as I'm concerned . But 70 what do
these people do all day long ? Like ,
I'm , I'm asking a question , what do
these de I coordinators do all day long ?
70 of them in the Air Force .
Um I think I thought the number was
higher than that actually . Well ,
that's full time position . So maybe I ,
I am actually very curious now what
you're gonna , what your report might
show but 70 full time positions , what
do they do ? Um They oversee programs
that are in that area . They oversee
our training in that area . They are
responsible for some of our data
collection that are related to that .
We did two disparity reports in the
department that were started before I
came in and published shortly
afterwards . They're responsible for
that . Those reports showed pretty
significant disparities and results of
things like the criminal justice system
uh in promotions and command selection
rates and then senior school selection
and those pointed us at uh actions we
could take to try to address some of
those concerns . Well , I look , they ,
they , they did , they have done , I
think valuable work for them . Well , I
look forward to your , your full report
and I could make a suggestion how you
could be a real leader for the country .
You should fire them all , every single
one of them . It's so divisive . And
Senator Tub Tuberville has talked about
recruiting the elephant in the room is
the truth is that this is dividing our
folks in the military by race . It is
taking us backwards . It's Cultural
Marxism and somehow you're , you know ,
you're here today defending this . So ,
you know , I've got legislation to give
her them all . You could take a real
leadership position by firing everybody
tomorrow . That'd be great . I do have
time for one quick question . I know
that we're moving a lot of ISR
capability to space . Um And I'm
generally supportive of that . Um But
are you guys concerned at all that
we're um maybe moving too quickly away
from some more traditional capabilities ?
Uh Just as a quick comment on , I think
we have a fundamental difference of
opinion about D we do . We certainly do .
Um with regard to ISR , we are moving ,
we are transitioning the space because
of the vulnerability of some of our
airborne platforms . A wax and jars are
great examples of that . The same is
true with some of our UAVS on , on a
man aerial vehicles that operate uh can
operate in a contested environment . We
will always have a balance between
airborne capabilities and space based
capabilities . We want to confront our
adversaries with a more difficult
problem than just having to deal with
one of those . But because of the range
at which uh and the sophistication at
which our adversaries are reaching out
to engage some of those platforms ,
they're pushed back so far that they
can't be effective in many cases , or
they have to operate in a way which
limits their effectiveness in order to
be survival survivable . So we're
moving a lot of that capability in the
space and we're doing it with the
resilient architectures that General
Saltzman talked about earlier . Thank
you , Senator Warren , please . Thank
you , Mr Chairman . Our military is the
best and the strongest in the world .
So it's no surprise that foreign
governments have been recruiting both
active duty and retired officers . The
Washington Post found that hundreds of
foreign governments have hired hundreds
of retired officers from Saudi Arabia
to Libya to the United Arab Emirates .
General Alvin . Is there a national
security risk when our trained military
personnel work for foreign governments ?
Uh Senator , there certainly is so
retired officers working for foreign
governments could endanger our military
competitiveness . That's why we require
retired officers who want to work for
foreign governments to receive approval
from their military service and from
the Secretary of State now we tightened
up that process last year in the
National Defense Authorization Act .
But there are still some loopholes in
this space . For example , active duty
service members are allowed to start
negotiating employment with foreign
governments before they leave the
military . General Alvin could allowing
active duty airmen to negotiate work on
behalf of another government while
still wearing their US uniform pose
risks to our national security .
Well , well , Senator , there's , while
they're still in uniform , they are
still subject to the policies , the
restrictions and the UCMJ . I
understand that , but they are also
permitted to negotiate with foreign
governments for their future employment .
And what I'm asking is , does that
potentially pose a conflict of interest
that threatens our security ? At least
potentially , I would say potentially
it could . Yes . All right , I agree .
You know , we need to strengthen our
rules so that active duty personnel
aren't selling their services to
foreign governments while they're still
in uniform . There's another loophole
that we need to close last year , the
Air Force issued a memo raising
concerns about China's recruitment of
both current and recently retired air
force personnel like pilots ,
maintainers and other technical experts
that have a lot of insight into us air
tactics . Now , in many cases , these
individuals are hired by private
entities and actually may not know that
they are signing up to work for a
foreign government . And our laws
required uh requiring retired personnel
to get approval before working for a
foreign government are much less clear
if the officers are hired by a private
company that's doing work for that
foreign government . General Alvin ,
from your perspective , are we in a
better position to protect classified
information in us national security .
When we know if a retired officer is
working for a contractor that works for
a foreign government senator , we are .
And I think as you know , my
predecessor , uh now Chairman Brown put
out that note um really to , to raise
awareness and also to serve as a
deterrent . So both of those , uh both
of those I think are having good effect .
The uh our A fo si uh is getting good
reports back . But it's not only about
educating um those within the force but
also the mandatory . Now as you
transition out also that we're making
sure we do that as well . And I
appreciate that treat this as awareness
is raised on this . You know , these
arrangements can pose serious conflicts
of interest . And in fact , the Air
Force rejected two retired generals
requests to work for an Azerbaijani
cargo carrier because it would raise
concerns about potential conflicts .
Given previous contact contracts , the
air force had awarded to the airline .
So last year I secured a position , a
provision in the Senate version of the
National Defense Authorization Act to
require work on behalf of foreign
governments even indirectly through a
private company to be approved by the
US government . I think it is foolish
not to use our national security
expertise to help retired service
members identify if their potential
employer is asking them potentially
to break the law here . So I look
forward to working with my colleagues
and the Air force to close any
additional loopholes that allow foreign
governments to target and exploit our
service members . Thank you all and
thank you in particular General Alvin
for your work in this area . Thank you ,
Senator Warren , Senator Ernst , please .
Thank you , Mr Chair and thank you
gentlemen very much for your service to
our nation and to your teams as well .
We appreciate you being here today and
first Secretary Kendall , um we know
the Iowa National Guard is really
important to me . And so I'm going to
address to you some of the questions um
coming from our great Iowa Air Guard .
Um Secretary Kendall , when the
National Guards 1 85th air refueling
wing in Sioux City , Iowa converted
from its F-16 fighters to the KC
135 tankers . Way back in 2003 .
The United States Air Force said that
they would upgrade the airfield at the
Iowa National Guard facility . Now ,
the 1 85th air refueling wing might
nothing confirmed but might lose its
mission because the runway which has
not yet been upgraded here . We are 20
plus years later , is insufficient for
the KC 40 sixes which will eventually
replace the 130 fives . Um So Secretary
Kendall , uh why do you feel it has
taken so long to begin the airfield
expansion ? And do I have your
commitment to work with the National
Guard to assess the runway upgrade
situation at the Iowa National Guard
facility in Sioux City . Uh Thank you ,
Senator . We have started the uh
architecture and engineering uh
activities associated with three
projects at the airfield and I think
the Congress has been notified of that .
So we're moving forward with , with
those upgrades , there's a runway
repair project at 45 million runway
extension of 47 million and an air
parking apron at 45 million . They're
not all the way through the process yet .
This is the earlier phases , but the
process has begun and we will work with
you on that . Ok . Can you outline
maybe the time frame that we might see
some of that work done ? Walk me
through that assessment and when we
could actually see work begin , I'll
get you the details for the record ,
but essentially we have to get to a 35
design percent design maturity before
we put a milk on project in . So we're
in the earlier stages of that process
and I'll get you the dates as to when
different phases of it might be
completed . Ok . Thank you so much
secretary and um I do understand the
importance of of transitioning to a
more capable aircraft like the 46 . Um
Do we also have your commitment that
any change uh to the 1 85th air
refueling wings mission set will be on
pause until a full and proper milk on
assessment is completed . I'm not aware
of any changes that would be , would
would occur in the interim . I'll
double check that and get back to you
on that , but I'm not aware of it .
Thank you , Secretary . It's just
important that I get that on the record .
So , um again , uh we've got such a
great unit . The 1 85th has been uh so
engaged around the globe . Um We wanna
make sure that they are taken care of .
Um So Secretary Kendall , as we're now
in an era of great power competition ,
the urgency of modernizing and
recapitalizing our air refueling and
strategic airlift capabilities is
absolutely paramount . And if you could
walk us through how you are ensuring
our transition from the older KC 130
fives to the newer 40 sixes is
conducted without compromising mission
readiness . Essentially as we retire
135 we're replacing them with , with
446 is on a one for one basis .
Generally speaking , it's not always
exactly the case . We're trying to make
sure we have a smooth transition so
that we don't have a gap in in
capability uh for the tanker fleet and
we're required to maintain the tanker
feet at a certain level . So we have to
stay within those statutory constraints .
Ok . Thank you . And General Alvin , um
soft continues to play a vital role in
strategic competition uh particularly
in a regular warfare . So what is your
view on the role of the Air Force ,
special warfare and a FSOC and great
power competition and future conflicts .
Uh Thank you for that Senator . I , I
think they're doing a tremendous job in
really adapting . That's one of the
things special operations has always
done . They've really adapted to the
missions that have been laid out in
front of them . But in their transition
really also to great power competition ,
they have adjusted some of their A FSC
to be more relevant . And so the uh
what was the uh Special operations
weather team now , they're more special
reconnaissance and there they are part
of this newly formed uh special tactics
team , which includes the , the uh
combat control teams , the para rescue ,
the uh tar control party and now the
strategic reconnaissance , they're
really forming uh sort of the way that
they did when , when they used to be in
the old uh great power competition ,
understanding how to operate ahead of
main force elements . In in this case ,
in a more electromagnetic spectrum ,
contested environment , they are really
doing some path finding work in helping
to find those , take their niche
capabilities and do things at speed and
agility that maybe the standard
conventional forces couldn't do . I
think I'm really impressed with how
they're moving along . Yeah . Thank you ,
General . And I was excited to learn
from you about the air force special
reconnaissance , airmen and air women
and , and we appreciate their service .
It's a great opportunity for them and
for us . Thank you , Mr chair . Uh
Thank you , Senator Senator Kelly ,
please . Thank you , Mr Chairman and
Secretary Kendall General Alvin ,
General Saltzman . Thank you for being
here today . Secretary Kendall and
General Alvin . I wanna thank you for
your continued collaboration uh as we
secure a long term future for Davis
Monton Air Force Base in Tucson .
During last year's hearing , I asked
you about the stand up of the new power
projection wing at DM and I'd like to
follow up on that today and also follow
up on uh uh Senator Ernst's um
discussion with you , General Alvin .
In the last year , we brought new
search and rescue and advanced
electronic platforms to DM and I'd like
to hear any updates on the power
projection wing that you can provide .
So General Alvin uh starting with you ,
you've just embarked on this ambitious
plan to re optimize the Air Force for
great power competition . A key
component of this is the creation of
deployable combat wings . The power
projection wings provides just such a
force for Air Force uh special ops
command . Can you talk about the wings
overall import importance in the Air
Force's strategy ? Yeah . Thank you for
that senator in , in some ways . Some
of the things that the Special
operations community have been doing
have been a bit of pathfinders with our
deployable combat wings , reorienting
to where you have the ability to train
with support teams in garrison in the
way you expect to deploy with that unit
together , training together doing uh
individual training , then consolidated
training , certification training , all
those things are are paving the with ,
with this power projection wing at uh
Davis Mon , then it is oriented towards
the Indo Pacific . So not only in its
structure , is it designed to be able
to address the pacing challenge but in
its orientation as well . And I think
uh there will be lessons that we learn
in the the structure and the makeup of
those sort of wings that will apply to
the larger air force . All right .
Thank you and Secretary Kendall , your
new stra strategy here is uh ambitious
and I support your efforts , but there
are a lot of moving parts here and
still a lot to be done to get all the
units in place at Davis Moth . And uh
can you provide assurances that you
will still be able to manage all of
these movements and stick with the
timeline to stand up the power
projection wing . Uh So we're gonna do
everything we can to make that happen .
Uh Right now we're on track , the site
activation task force was out there in
February , as I think , you know , and
the EIS is on track for completion uh
uh in 25 through quarter , 25 those are
kind of the governing uh events . So I
think we're moving forward on on
schedule , but we'll , we'll continue
to monitor that and make sure that we
do . So you're not anticipating any new
delays , not at this time . And , and
do I have your continued commitment
here to ensure full transparency on
this process ? Absolutely . We'll work
closely with your honor . And if any
issues come up , would you please bring
them to my attention as soon as you
possibly can ? I will . Thank you . And
on , um ,
electronic warfare Secretary Kendall .
Um , it's a , ew , is a cornerstone
of any modern conflict and only gonna
increase in importance as we prepare
for great power competition , the Air
Force and dod need to continue to focus
on electronic warfare because achieving
ew superiority is gonna be the key to
getting air superiority . Um I'm
encouraged by systems like uh the new
compass call airplane that's being
deployed at Davis Moth in uh but also
the new F-15 EW systems . But
I'm also concerned that our training
ranges aren't able to replicate the
threat sufficiently . And if we want to
succeed in the Indo Pacific , we need
to ensure that our military is prepared
for operations that are um
realistic because of the training being
realistic . Uh The emitters available
for training . Uh and our ranges aren't
quite realistic enough to fool 1/5
generation aircraft . This is so it's
no way to train for pacing challenges .
Um In my view , the exercises and the
training we do should be the hardest
thing we do here . Uh So what then it ,
when it's time to fight , uh we're more
than ready to go . And it's imperative
that dod expand its training ranges to
provide more realistic training .
Achieving that level of readiness is
gonna require coordinate across the
branches . That's why I've advocated
for dod to assess the capacity for
testing and training of VW operations
and identify areas where multiple
ranges can be used to simulate the
Pacific deterrence initiative . For
example , at the Fort Wachuka
Electronic Proving ground with its
restricted airspace , favorable terrain ,
access to frequencies and spectrum and
bands of spectrum and the authorities
required to conduct ew training . It
offers great potential for advanced and
dynamic electronic warfare testing ,
experimentation and training . So ,
Secretary Kendall , how important is it
to find opportunities for realistic ew
training and how can the Air force
benefit from ew testing and training
and in an environment like Fort
Huachuca ? It's critical Senator , I
haven't looked at Fort Wachuka
specifically , uh General Alden may
have some information on that but for
Ellis and for Jay Park in Alaska , uh
and for the exercises , I think you're
aware of that . We really see , we see
down in the Pacific uh having ability
to emulate both the threat and the
space and time constraints that are
applicable against the basing challenge
are really important to us . So if Wu
offers some additional opportunities
here , we'd be happy to pursue those .
I'm not familiar exactly what we're
doing , what it , what it offers is .
It's got geography . Uh it's , it's a
ball you can emit at orders of
magnitude . I think a couple of orders
of magnitude uh power compared to what
you can emit on , on the Barry
Goldwater Range . So it offers uh you
know F-35s can detect the sensor at a
much greater range , more realistic
training . Thank you understood . We'll
take a look at it . Uh Let me recognize
now , Senator Budd . Thank you , Mr
Chairman and good morning gentlemen .
Uh Secretary Kendall , we've spoken at
length regarding the Air Force budget .
My concerns with the air Force plan ,
divestment of fighter aircraft ,
including the F-15 E , Strike Eagles
from Seymour Johnson , the State of
North Carolina . So I'm deeply
concerned about what a growing fighter
capacity gap could mean for the fight
in the Indo Pacific . But also as was
made clear over this past weekend , our
fighter aircraft are also playing major
roles in other regions including us ,
Central command every single day . So
I'd like to turn to you , General Alvin
for just a moment again . Thank you for
being here . Uh The committee heard
from the Commander of Indo Paycom this
year and just recently , in fact that
there is a role for Strike Eagles in
scenarios in the Indo Pacific . And the
head of North Com also told this
committee the F-15 E is in many ways
unmatched air to ground and in many
ways , um it's unmatched air to air .
It also has a phenomenal radar that can
pick out low and slow moving and it's
got a great radar cross section , uh ,
which is useful for drones and other
threats like cruise missiles . It was
the 3 35th squadron at North Carolina's
Seymour Johnson Air Force Base that
proved that out on Sunday when they
helped shoot down dozens of drones
fired at Israel from Iran . The supreme
allied commander of Europe told the
House Armed Services Committee last
week that strike Eagles and I quote ,
figure he heavily in his plans at uconn .
He also said it would be very important
not to have a gap between the
retirement of one aircraft and the
arrival of the next . Most recently ,
the chairman of the joint chiefs agreed
with these assessments of the FT F-15 E
and asserted that it is indeed a very
capable aircraft . General van . Do you
agree uh with these officers
assessments of the capability
importance of the Strike Eagles and
scenarios across the combatant commands ?
Yes or no , sir . I , I absolutely do
agree with those assessments . I would
offer that those assessments are part
of , first of all , II , I want to echo
uh what you said about what happened
over the weekend , brilliant crew , uh
skill and courage , that skill and
courage in those . Those aircraft also
had a connection with a command and
control system , brilliant stuff done
in the A OC and air battle management
system and all of those systems are
what made it successful . And so the
platform is very capable , but it has
to have the systems around it in order
to be effective and combat effective .
And so going into the future , we , we
would imagine that that platform is
gonna have to fire weapons , longer
range , that range has to have target
custody for that munition to be able to
track the target all the way it needs
to be able to be to defend itself in
that theater . It needs to be able to
have basing from which it can move
around . All those things are , what is
gonna make it successful against the
pacing challenge . So that capability
in and of itself is , is very
impressive . But when , when you're in
a fiscally constrained environment , we
try and manage how many of those and
those with respect to other platforms .
What is the mix of the entire system
beyond just the the weapon and the
aircraft to make it effective against
uh in the highly contested environment
against the PR C ? But it's a highly
capable aircraft . Thank you general
and I'll just note that many of those
including those at Seymour Johnson have
been upgraded or soon to be upgraded or
can be upgraded to be useful into the
20 thirties or 20 forties . Uh
Secretary Kendall turning to you , sir .
Uh where is the fighter road map
required by the NDA A ? We've heard
secretary that's sitting with you . Uh
It's in final review . She'll be over
here shortly , sir . We look forward to
receiving that report . Uh When should
we expect the congressionally required
report on divestment of F-15 aircraft ?
And uh will it be compliant with
section 131 of last year's NDA A
right now , our plans are to take out
additional F-15 DS in the outliers ,
but of course , we will be complying
with the current law . And our 25
budget is , is consistent with that
compliance with 131 of last year's nd A .
Thank you , Mr Chairman . I hope the
committee takes note of the testimony
it's received this year and seriously
considers prohibiting divestment of the
F-15 Strike Eagles , particularly 26
F-15 Strike Eagles next year . Thank
you , sir . Thank you very much ,
Senator , but uh Senator Rosenbluth ,
uh thank you , Chairman Reed for
holding this important hearing . I'd
also like to thank Secretary Kendall
General Alvin and General Saltzman uh
for testifying today and of course for
your service to our country . So ,
Secretary Kendall , I really , I know
we've had so many meetings , but I
really appreciated our phone call um
last week . And I just want to take a
moment to emphasize the importance of
the Nevada Air National Guard and their
mission , which they do so well . Not
only does 100 and 52nd airlift Wing and
Reno provide rapid global mobility and
are currently preparing for deployment ,
but they're also , they also protect
the homeland by fighting those horrific
wildland fires in Nevada and throughout
the West with Legacy CC 130 HS . This
mission is extremely dangerous as they
fly heavy , low and slow over these
fires and challenging mountainous
terrain . Upgrading to the C 130 Js
would provide increased power and cargo
capacity for fire retardant which would
result in increased flight safety and
of course firefighting capability . So ,
Se Mr Secretary , now that the Fy 24
Defense Appropriations Act has provided
funding to procure eight additional C
130 Js funding that I fought to secure .
Can I have your commitment to seriously
consider Reno when making a basing
decision due to their obvious
operational need ? Um Yes , honor . I
think we're proceeding with that uh
basin selection and I believe Reno is
one of the uh one of the units being
considered . Thank you . And can I have
your commitment that the Air Force will
strongly consider location and the
mission served in particular regions of
the country when making their basing
deci decisions to ensure that the Air
National Guard is best equipped to
respond to these emergencies ? I think
we have a list of basic considerations
that are um will be consistent with
what we've done in the past . Thank you .
I want to move on now to um housing and
our dorm shortages because uh now it's
increased . We actually uh uh uh
Senator Kelly was talking a little bit
about knitter over there at Ellis , but
in Nevada , home to Nelli and Creech
Air Force bases . I've observed
firsthand the unique challenges that
each base faces , particularly when it
comes to affordable housing and dorm
availability for our airmen and our
guardians . Given the widespread and
distinct nature of these shortages
across the department in the Air Force .
A one size fits all solution . It's
really insufficient to address the
issues . So , Secretary Kendall , what
additional authorities if any could be
granted to service secretaries to um
address the current housing and
dormitory shortages , thereby improving
really the welfare and readiness of our
personnel across the force . Um We are
looking at some innovative ways to do
that through public , private
partnerships in various forms . The
Navy has a project in San Diego , I
think , which is an example of how to
do that . I'm not aware of additional
authorities we need at this time . But
if there are any , then I'll , I'll ,
I'll get back to you with that . Thank
you , appreciate that . I'm going to
stay on you and stay on Creech Air
Force Base a little bit . Uh We love
Creech and uh um with the experimental
operations uh unit considering Creech
Air Force Base as the eventual
deployment of the collaborative combat
aircraft . I'm gonna say CC A , that's
a little bit easier . We must address
the complexities of the new systems ,
basing decisions about where to house
these systems needs considerations
beyond again , conventional
requirements such as employment options ,
infrastructure adaptations , airspace
control and of course electromagnetic
spectrum availability . So given the
challenges posed by these new systems .
Could you elaborate on the variables
that the Air Force might , that you
might be considering in the CC A basing
decision and specifically what unique
characteristics and complications , uh ,
might we anticipate senator that work's
going on now to decide what , what the
considerations will be ? We're a little
bit early in the process . Uh ,
creatures , I think , uh , a very
reasonable candidate . Thank you .
Thank you . Well , I'm gonna move on .
We're gonna keep uh uh on Creech in
particular , but now this as well to
General Alvin , um you know , the
sacrifices , each one of you really
know the sacrifices and challenges that
airmen and their families uh make
during their permanent change of
station . And one of the difficulties
that is really challenging for us is a
finding and accessing childcare at each
new location . And so , you know ,
childcare remains one of the most
needed services for our military
members , but it's still in such short
supply . It's too expensive and
difficult . So currently , um general
in your role as chief of staff of the
Air Force , what can you do to , um ,
help increase access to affordable
childcare ? That's flexible .
Particularly cree , they go 24 . Well ,
all of them , they go 2473 , 65 . We
need some help out there . Well , thank
you , Senator and , and I couldn't
agree with you more . A lot of times we
put things into , into a bin that
called quality of life or the , it's ,
it's actually a readiness issue as well
to make sure that our , our airmen can
focus on the mission at hand ,
understanding that they , they know
that their families and Children are
well cared for . Specifically . I think
we , I what I can do as Chief of staff
is continue to advocate for the
programs that the Department of Air
Force is really are already undertaking
with respect to uh going above and
beyond uh staffing those child
development centers that we actually
have . We've increased the staffing
through the incentivization of 100% uh
of a reduction , 100 free for the first
child , 25% off for the other Children
for those who are working on staff that
has actually increased our staffing
from 61 uh 63% to 81% . So that's
helping staff the existing one but to
your point senator , um specifically in
some of these nontraditional areas
where you have not a normal business
hours as requirement , the increase in
uh family childcare centers though the
ones that the , the , so the ones that
can be done at home are those that are
actually certified to do such . We've
increased funding and incentives
survive up about 21% from where it was
in fy 23 . So we continue to do that
and in other areas for , for uh
facility restoration and modernization ,
we put a lot of money into that as well .
And on the milk on side , overall ,
some , sometimes we just need more
facilities on milk on side . We have
had uh 35 mil on projects under
consideration . Uh RD 11 of them are RD
in appropriation and , and uh and
design or , and in delivery the other
24 in design . Well , thank you . I
look forward to continuing to work with
you on all of that . Thank you . Thank
you , Senator Rosen , Senator Kman ,
please . Thank you , Mr Chairman .
Thank you , gentlemen for your service
and for being here . Um And I look
forward to the next session as well .
Uh The classified section . Um No ,
no hearing with the Air Force would be
complete without me . I sort of jumping
on board with some of my other friends
who've asked about ISR Secretary
Kendall . I'm gonna go in more at it
from the re optimization plans that
were released in February . And my
office sent an RF I asking about how
the new air force structure might
affect the 3/19 Reconnaissance Wing in
Grand Forks specifically . I mean ,
this is a very high demand air force
base with very few people and , and
assets . Um How do I guess to
put it pointedly , how do these low
density high demand units like like
global Hawk Wing and Grand Forks um or
other ISR units for that matter around
the Air Force fit into the plan for re
optimization ? I just and I just add ,
you know , I mean , I read all 12 pages
on the airplane this morning . There's
not a mention of ISR , there's lots of
mentions , you know , 16 China R PC
eight . Anyway , no ISR in 12 pages .
So how does , how does grant forks fit
into re optimization ? Um It doesn't
directly the the real , the re
optimization of Great Carre competition
is largely about focusing our readiness
units on readiness creating units that
are focused on the future and
sustaining advantage over time , uh
developing our people , some of the
things we're gonna do in terms of uh
their skill sets and so on their ,
their readiness for that kind of
conflict and also some changes in the
secretariat . So specific units are not
directly addressed as we form units of
action that are either deployable or
fight in place or supporting . There
may be some changes on the margin as a
result of that , that's work that's
gonna take place over some time . Um
There is no direct correlation between
what what we're doing under re
optimizing and specific units . So we
are we we do have plans , I mean , I
understand but but maybe not specific
units , but ISR at large is not not
even mentioned as a priority where it
used to be always mentioned as a
priority . ISR is a very high priority
under our , our um um operational
imperatives and under cross cutting
operational enablers , it's a very big
part of our modernization program which
is separate from the optimization . Um
As we talked about earlier , we're
moving a lot of our ISR capacity into
space because our airborne platforms ,
many of them are too vulnerable to
attack . They're not survivable enough .
We wanna keep a balance , we wanna keep
some airborne platforms and some space
based capabilities as well . We have ,
we have requirements to have ISR for
less contested environments , more
benign environments as well as highly
contested environments . So we're
trying to have a balanced mix of
capabilities uh and sustain that while
we move forward some of our legacy
capabilities , if you will are less
valuable to us against the pacing
challenge or just not effective against
the pa I get all I understand all that
modernization is important everywhere
and in every , in every mission and
space is obviously to it . Obviously ,
I'm , I'm I have a bias for space . Uh
But I also have talked to enough people
both in space and especially co coms
especially recently , especially very
recently , who are frightened to death
about the gap between um their ability
to find a target , identify a target ,
hit a target um today or over the
course of the next few years and the
day that space is not so vulnerable
that um that it can stand alone .
General o did you want to speak to that ?
And then I do have a question about uh
yeah , the other thing to add to what
the secretary said is specifically
within r for great power competition .
We are lining our wings in order to be
able to deploy how we expect to fight .
So there will be three different types
of wings . One will be deployable
combat wings , one will be in place
combat wings , think , think uh uh
missile wings , but the other are
combat generation wings . And these are
very , very important and this is where
the 3/19 falls in it . It needs to be
able to generate the combat power that
can fall into a wing because you're not
going to deploy the entire wing at once .
That wouldn't be it , that would be uh
uh for some of the other types of wings .
So while ISR may not be mentioned
specifically , there is neither is
probably air mobility or neither is
maybe air refueling . Those are the
parts of their , they're called the
combat generation wings because they
will feed into the larger deployable
construct . But we wouldn't expect the
entire 3/19 to take to be able to go
and deploy the entire wing because it's
such a HDLD asset , right ? It needs to
be able to be distributed all across .
So that's why it's part of these combat
generation wings . And I'm , I'm ready
to talk at length and I'm gonna go over
my time and yeah , and , and as am I so
real quickly then I , speaking of
modernization , I'll just cut to it . I
mean , we picked up some rumors in the
last couple of days that the commercial
engine replacement program might be in
some doubt . Um Of course , the , that
would be the reengineering of things
like the B 52 which has only been
around about 60 years and we expect it
to be around another 30 or so . Um Just ,
just confirm for me that that's just a
vicious lie that somebody is spreading ,
then they'll be happy . The commercial ,
the reengineer , the B 52 is proceeding .
If that's what you're asking about ,
that's what I'm asking . Thank you .
It's a proceeding . Thank you , Mr
Chairman . Thank you , Senator Grier
and Cotton . Please .
Secretary Kendall General Alden . Thank
you for appearance today . I want to
add my uh congratulations to the brave
men and women of the force who were
involved uh in the defense of Israel
over the weekend . Uh to include two
former Senator Cotton defense fellows ,
Bud and Rowdy . I'm to , I'm told I'm
not supposed to say anything more than
that , but I'm glad to see that their
skills not atrophy while they were
death molesters up here for me . Now ,
it's very important uh that we not just
have our own capabilities but that we
train our foreign partners and
capabilities . We can't be everywhere
all the time at once . So I wanna
respond to Senator Warren's questions ,
General Alden about retired flag
officers supporting foreign militaries .
Um I have a slightly different
perspective . I think it's a great
thing when America's retired generals
and admirals go overseas , take the
skills and the knowledge they've
learned and help train foreign military
partners to be more proficient , to be
more respectful of the laws of war , to
be more professional in their own
services . So far from taking steps to
restrain retired flag officers
serving under contractual relationships
with nations like Saudi Arabia , United
Arab Emirates or emerging nations in
Eastern Europe who are recent NATO uh
members . I think we should encourage
it . General Alvin , I don't know what
you plan to do in retirement . Maybe
you plan just to go fishing all the
time . But if you want to do that , I
think that'd be a great thing for you
to do . And , and this committee
carefully considered that matter last
year in our markup and those markups
aren't public . So you don't know what
happened . But this is AAA serious
debate then and Senator Warren called
one of these measures a loophole . It's
not a loophole . It's specifically how
we wrote it because we think it's a
good thing for our retired flag
officers to be advising partner nations
whose militaries may not yet be as
skillful or as professional as ours ,
but whose militaries we should want to
be a skill for professional , ours . So
General Alvin , can I get your
commitment that we will continue to
ensure retired flag officers can in
fact work with partner and allied
nations ? Yes , Senator I , I certainly
don't want to wade into the , how the
legislative process worked . But I
think that the , that those two
positions are not necessarily mutually
exclusive , which is why we have the uh
approval process . There are only
certain nations against which you are
disapproved and those we understand
which those are . But there's still
stop gap is requires the approval of
the sector and Secretary of State in
order to do that . So I believe that
stop GP it helps to mitigate uh your
position . As from Senator Warren ,
Secretary Kendall , you look like you
had something you wanted to add on this
case . I just want to say , I think
we're talking about apples and oranges
here . I think Senator Warren is
concerned about very understandably
pilots who were hired by China , for
example , indirectly through , let me
just stop , let me stop you there
because we're not talking about apples
and oranges . She raised two different
topics . I do want to say I am
concerned about the second topic she
raised , which is the practice of not
just American but Western trained
pilots , mechanics , maintainers and
others going to work often indirectly
through private military contractors
for say , China and South Africa ,
let's say , and that is something we
definitely need to crack down on and
something that , that we took steps
with Senator Kelly and I have worked on
this challenge as well . We need to
make sure that all those , those pilots
and those maintainers and mechanics
that we have trained are not using
their skills that the taxpayers paid
for to indirectly or directly help our
adversary . So I'm , I'm glad to hear
that you're counseling all those people
as they leave the service to be aware
of their obligations . I mean , I , I
frankly think it should be strictly
prohibited if not made a crime to work
for a foreign military , like China's
that contrast to her first point ,
which is again , military officers ,
usually flag officers , sometimes field
grades going to work for friendly
nations like Saudi Arabia or Jordan or
the United Arab Emirates , some fruits
of which we saw over the weekend . So I
just wanna say it's good when they go
to work for pro American countries .
It's bad when they go to work for
anti-american countries . It's pretty
simple . I , I don't see what the
complication is here . We don't have
any disagreement with that . Thank you .
Um One final point since we're talking
about making sure that foreign partners
have strong capabilities , so we don't
have to carry the load everywhere .
Secretary Kendall General Allen , you
know that a top priority for Senator
Bowsman for me is the for uh foreign
military military sales training
mission at uh Ebbing International
Guard Base in Fort Smith Arkansas . Um
We know that they're still working out
a few things in terms of the
construction , the airspace Secretary
Kindle you , you've committed me in the
past on several occasions that you're
gonna make sure that this stays on time
and that we have the sound of freedom .
Return to the River Valley later this
fall . Can I get your commitment again ?
Given whatever the latest developments
are on your end , that that is still
going to happen on time this fall ? Uh
Before I give you a commitment about on
time , let me go double check and see
exactly where we are . I , I know we're
moving forward on this and I , I
haven't had any reports that were there .
They were just flipping schedule , but
I haven't either . But you never know
when you're dealing with the real world
of , of building this thing or moving
that thing . I , I just don't want to
have not dealing with the real world
but the bureaucratic world of red tape .
So I just wanna make sure that you've
got a sword over the Gordian knot .
You're ready to cut if you have to , we
will do whatever we can to stay on
schedule . Thank you , Senator Cotton ,
Senator Mo , please . Thank you , Mr
Chairman and thank you General Suzman ,
Secretary Kendall and General Allen for
being here . Um And uh for everybody .
That's your support staff that we know
do does the heavy lifting behind you ?
Thank you for sitting through this
hearing . I uh obviously showed up late ,
so I'm back and clean up here .
Secretary Kendall . I , I just want to
tell you , thank you for your attention
uh to the cadet that you and I visited
about . Uh , it seems like it's working
out . II I know that seems like a small
thing for what you deal with , but it's
important . Uh , and I appreciate you
taking the time to visit with me about
it . It's good to hear , sir . Thank
you . I'm glad it's working out . I
hope , I hope one day you get a meeting ,
you'll understand why , uh why I want
to do everything . I can , a great ,
great young man . And uh like I said ,
you guys , your attention really pushed
things . He's been through quite an
ordeal and he's doing really well .
It's encouraging to see amazing story .
It , it really , it is . Um I uh
Secretary Secretary Ken , I want to
stay with you for just a second . Um Li
II , I know you you're up against a
budget and ideally uh everybody at the
table right now , you guys would like
to have as many air frames as you
possibly can in the air . Uh because of
budget overruns uh from with the E
sevens . You know , we're , we're
divesting to invest . I think that's
the term you guys are using . Is that
correct ? General Alvin , I would say
to modernize . Yeah , deves invest
modernized . But we're going from , I
mean , just what's on y'all's docket
right now . You're going from 250 air
frames to 91 air frames . We know
during time of war attrition plays a
huge role . Um We've got our new planes
that are coming out this , you know ,
double the cost at $2.5 billion per
plane that's gonna be in the air . Um ,
and we're talking about the maintenance
of the E threes , which is why we're
bringing them out of the sky . Uh I ,
if I understand correctly , the
chairman and I , we were at , um , uh ,
Tinker Air Force Base this last
Saturday and Friday both and they
brought up the concerns about being
able to continue their mission . They
say , you know , we'll do it was
handled to us , but just to keep their
mission capabilities right now , it
takes 16 , 16 planes in the sky
that's secure . The current mission .
There's gonna be a lack between the
delivery of the E threes and the E
sevens . Uh We're not even talking
about our fighting jets right now , but
just in that frame alone , what do we ,
is it just about the money ? Why we're
divesting ourselves of so many
airframes and going to so few and it
seems like we are and a pretty
interesting times right now and I , I'm
really concerned and I'm not trying to
just get on to you and tell you how to
do your car's jobs . I'm saying , what
do we , what do you need from us ? How
this mathematically looking at ? This
doesn't make any sense .
So , Senator , I think uh specifically
with the E three they're starting to
divest themselves . This is one of
those where just , just in order to
keep them flying is a challenge and we
also the , the capabilities that we're
anticipating gonna be in the future
that this is the constant that we have .
So Ryan to understand uh how we
maintain the readiness for today and
still not leave my successors or my
successor's successor in in this seat
saying , why don't you have an air
force that can compete with , you know ,
where China is right now ? And so we're
trying to skate to where the puck is
gonna be with China at the same time ,
preserve the readiness . And so this is
some of the challenge that we have and ,
and uh so that managing this readiness
is , is , is never , is never easy .
But I will tell you that um at some
point , the , the statement of , you
know , quantity has equality on its own .
It , it's only good if that quantity
can survive . It's only good if that
quantity can be effective . Now , we
saw over the weekend it can be
effective against one type of adversary
in one type of environment in one area .
But in order to meet what our national
defense strategy wants us do in the
highly contested environment against a
peer adversary . Um some of those
capabilities , it it really is just you
have more quantities that might be left
in the bottom of the Pacific Ocean . We
need to ensure that those crews can
survive , they can execute their
mission . So that's where this tension
between retaining enough for today and
preserving enough for the pacing threat .
And I , I totally understand that . Uh
and when , when you start talking about ,
you know , what's going down to E
threes , they , they refer to us as the
motors , um which I know frames ,
airframes can be upgraded with new
motor spin on the side of them
constantly . Uh Is it even a
possibility ? You don't have to answer
that . I'm just trying to think outside
the box . But still yet , when we start
talking about just sheer numbers , we
start looking at what our adversaries
are doing . They're coming out with
planes with a lot less technology on
them . Uh But just sheer numbers can
overwhelm what we have . And when we're
dropping this many airframes , we are
not going to have the numbers and I
don't care , it's like a drone swarm .
I don't care what you have in defense .
Eventually they're gonna start poking
through because ours do end in the
bottom of the Pacific and we cannot
replace a $2.5 billion plane fast
enough . Senator . The problem we have
is that these aircraft E three is a
really good example . Um I was on one
at Ellis a couple of years ago . It was
built in 1972 . Uh The radar on it is
an obsolete radar basically and our
crews are working very , very hard to
try to keep these airplanes operational .
Uh , and it's a really an uphill fight .
So , by retiring some of the threes ,
we're able to free up some parts at
least keep some of the remaining
aircraft more operational . Um , but ,
but they're not effective against the
basing threat and they're gonna die
very quickly . They just don't have the
resilience or the capability to survive .
So we've really got to get to the next
generation . So keeping airplanes
around that are gonna be ineffective
and essentially , um , very vulnerable
to attack in the early stages of the
conflict . This is not putting us in a
better position . But , and chairman ,
I'll , I'll wrap up right here , excuse
me . But the gap between the delivery
of the new plane and the old plane is
what has me certain . We're , we're
divesting faster than we're getting in
men and the cost runs continue to go
mind blowing over cost . I mean , aa at
some point , the math actually doesn't
add up either . But how are we going to
keep the mission capability there ? The ,
all the way through the transition ? I
mean , we haven't even got to the air
guard that we're gonna be losing and
not being able to control the , our ,
our homeland by divesting of them too .
But I , there's a real concern there
and I know that's a lot more to unpack
than we have time here . But II , I
don't want to be proud of the problem
and I don't want to try telling you how
to do your job . I wanna work with you
to make sure that we can stay mission
capable . So I look forward to working
with everybody here . Thank you again
for your time . I really appreciate the
work . Thank you . Thank you . Thank
you , Senator Mullen , Senator Sullivan .
Thank you , Mr Chairman , gentlemen .
Thank you for your testimony today . Uh
Mr Secretary , I want to compliment you .
Uh you , you've been one of the voices
that's uh put it pretty bluntly about
the challenges with China and we need
to be ready actually for a war with
China if they choose to do so . Um So I
appreciate your uh your directness on
that . Let me ask . So , um you know ,
this is a tough question for all of you
general . It's a tough question for you .
The president uh talks a big game on
the challenges and then four years in a
row , he puts forward a uh inflation
adjusted cuts to the Department of
Defense four years in a row . That's
the Biden legacy . Now , he always
expects us to boost it up . The left
wing of his party doesn't like defense
spending . So they , you know , double
digit increases in every other federal
agency . I think this year is 7.5
trillion . But once again , uh the
Biden administration , the commander in
chief says , nope , you guys get a cut
shrinking the army shrinking the Navy ,
shrinking the Marine Corps . This
budget right now does that ? I don't
think it shrinks the Air Force but do
you think inflation adjusted cuts to
the Department of Defense is what Xi
Jinping and Putin um should be
seeing , I mean , is that how you
prepare for war or enhance deterrence
by cutting you guys , uh Senator ,
we've been very pleased to have
significant increases in the Air Force
budget Department of the Air Force
budget uh 23 and 24 in particular , the ,
the uh the two year budget deal that we
have , you know , does limit us under
the Physical Responsibility Act in 25 .
And that's what I mean in general and ,
and look , these are hard questions for
you guys . I know because I know our
military leaders , you go in there ,
you fight for a bigger budget . Omb the
president , they tell you sorry , I'm
gonna increase Department of Interior
by 25% . You guys get a cut . But in
terms of our adversaries , China's
building out a huge military . They
keep saying 7% increases . We all know
that's not true . I was in a classified
hearing . I'm going to just mention it
because the um nd the uh DN I
and the uh dia head , the lieutenant
general won't get back to me . They
actually said in that hearing , it was
a class right here . I'm just gonna
publicly say there was about 700
billion that China puts towards its
military , uh all in . It's a pretty
big number . I think the American
people should know that , which is why
I'm saying it right now . But what do
you think in terms of our adversaries ?
Um when they see defense
cuts , what do you think that does for
deterrence ? Uh We're continuing to
move forward , Senator with our
modernization program , not quite at
the rate that we'd like to have this
year because of the physical responses
uh Responsibility Act , but we are
moving forward . Uh We are trying to
manage the risk across time with the
current forest , uh the more immediate
force and the future for . But I think
we are at acceptable risk with the
budget that we were to the Congress .
Let me uh turn to one of my favorite
topics , Billy Mitchell , the father of
the US Air Force called Alaska , the
most strategic place in the world . I
appreciate the air forces focus on
that um on our state and how important
it is . There's been a significant
build up in , in Alaska . We have over
105th gen fighters located in Alaska
now . Um The Air Force's fy
25 budget requests 250 million for the
joint integrated test and training
center at J Bear . This represents a
significant new training capability in
how it will enable the Air Force to
plug into live fire exercises at Jay
Park . Probably the most advanced
training range in the world um to give
pilots across the US , military and
unrivaled training venue . Can you just
talk a little bit about why that J I TT
C is so important ? But that's to you ,
general as well . Yeah , Senator I'll ,
I'll start by saying it's uh like like
many of , of our uh sort of fifth
generation capable test and training
centers . It's providing the
opportunity to , to test advancements
in a synthetic environment in ways you
couldn't actually do it in the physical
environment . But with this increase ,
uh we are able to look at the models
for how we believe that the , that the
threat is gonna act . We take these
models , we can validate them in the J
Park , which is like the integration of
these two between the live environment
and the synthetic environment . It
allows you to , to test some hypotheses
in , in maybe a place where you
wouldn't want to the adversary to see
you in open air . So that's a top
priority in our um
preparation for China conflict .
Absolutely . And , and you , when you
can replicate those through the J Park
modernization that we're doing with
those emitters , then you can have a
better chance of , of looking at those
models validating those and maybe
tweaking them back in and between the
two , the synthetic and the live you
get better than either of them
individually when you can connect them .
Let me ask one final question , my time
uh but Mr Chairman , if I may , um , uh
we've been back and forth this
committee , me , the Air Force on
tankers and the strategic importance of
having them located , not just in one
place in the lower 48 . I was a little
bit disappointed that after many years
ago , back and forth with air force
leadership , the , the final decision
was , well , we're going to put all our
tankers in the lower 48 at certain
bases . I can't remember which ones ,
but it seems to be more of a budget
driven idea than a strategic driven
idea . Uh M se you and I and the
previous um uh chief of staff of the
Air Force who's now the chairman of the
joint chiefs got to a resolution on
that where I say , well , we're going
to be bringing more KC 135 tankers to
Isle . And how are we doing on that ?
And I want to make sure in this hearing
you're still committed to that , it
seems like that timeline has kind of
moved to the right . And um it's really
important , not just for Alaska , but
for uh the strategic ability to move
aircraft anywhere in the world , but
particularly to the indo paycom theater
if there's a conflict . Uh So , you
know , the capability is important to
us . But as you're aware , and we've
discussed , we have an issue with
housing that I also that we're trying
to address and we , we , we were
concerned about the quality of life of
our people that we have to assign there .
So that's an issue that we're working
as we , as we try to move forward on
the tankers , I think . But you're
still committed to move those tankers
there as you and I , we have to address
the situation for our people as part of
that process . Are you walking this
commitment back to me ? M se um , I
don't think so . Senator . Ok , you've
committed to this to me like several
times . So this is a little concerning ,
we're gonna work on the housing issue .
But can I just get a commitment again ?
I got it from the heck . He's the
chairman of the Joint chiefs now to be
four KC 130 fives at Ason and we
haven't changed our plans as far as I
know . Do you have anything to add to
that ? II , I think we're still in the
same place , but we do need , we do
need to address this issue . J Center
that is still on our plan , Senator ,
but as we were just at Alison as well ,
we know we do need to ensure that we
don't have the air crew and the support
going up there as , as though it's an
austere location because we know uh the ,
the quality of life , we need to be
able to retain those families up there
as well . So the , the plan is as it's
written , hasn't changed , but the
determination of how and when we get
housing and quality of life is going to
be dispositive on , on how fast the
pacing can , can go up there . Ok .
Thank you . Thank you , Mr Chairman .
Uh Gentlemen , thank you for your
testimony . Uh At this point , we will
uh recess the open uh portion of the
hearing and reconvene in S DC 217 . Uh
Let's try to be there about between
1105 and 1110 which will allow for
a moment to re recollect and , and
refresh . Uh with that , I will adjourn
the open portion .