Integrating to Win: Finding the Jets to Fly, Fix and Fight

Watch the Video

---

Read the Transcript

---

Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula, USAF (Ret.):

Well, good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I’m Dave Deptula, Dean of the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies. And welcome to our panel today. Now, for too many years budget pressures drove the Air Force to fund modernization by cutting capacity. The global security environment simply can no longer tolerate that approach. Combatant commanders are calling for more power, airpower in every single mission area.

So the Air Force needs to build its way out of this capacity crunch: more planes, munitions, mission systems, and trained professionals to operate them. And to do that, we need to optimize our teamwork between the Active Duty, Air National Guard and the Air Reserve to yield the most capacity possible. So that’s what we’re here to talk about today, to better understand how and why this collaboration is so crucial.

And joining me to discuss this imperative is General Spain, Commander of Air Combat Command, General Healy, Chief Air Force Reserve. You can clap. That’s good. But now we have to go back to Elmo because he’ll feel … Lieutenant General Hurry, a new Commander of Air Material Command. And Major General Terrell, Special Assistant to the Director of Air National Guard. Thank you all for being here today.

And let’s jump right into the questions. And for that, I am going to give the opportunity to General Healy to answer the first question. Air Force Reserve is on a path to sunset nearly 50% of its fighter capacity. And this comes at a time where demand for fighters is surging, but budgets haven’t been sufficient to buy enough new aircraft. So could you share with us why that needs to change?

Lt. Gen. John P. Healy:

Well, thanks very much. And first, to AFA, thanks, as always, for the opportunity to participate in these panels. It’s a great opportunity to team up with other members like this and get our messaging across. Sir, when you talk about the path that we’re on, it’s my job to change that path, quite honestly. I’m almost at the end of my four years, and I’ve been working day in and day out to try to affect that. And that specific question actually got me in quite a bit of heat about three years ago, but now we’ll talk about it.

We’ve typically, in the Air Force Reserve, looked at 2014 as a baseline. They had the National Commission on the structure of the Reserve. And when they came out from that, they decided that the Guard, Reserve, and Active Duty should all be provisioned proportionally and concurrently. And what we’ve seen in that time, looking at a 15-year time span through 2030 is exactly the opposite. So we’ve taken a 48% cut in our CAF portfolio, while the Active Duty has taken a 2% cut, and the Guard has taken a 15% cut.

So in my time alone, we’ve lost Davis-Monthan without recapitalization. We lost Nellis F-16 aggressors without recapitalization. We’re on the books to lose Whiteman without recapitalization, associated with them is Moody A10s without recap and Homestead has got no program or record. But I say that now, in my opinion, my optimism has significantly changed now than it was a year ago. Right now with the prospect of budget increases like we’re seeing, I think there’s real opportunity and a sense of optimism that we can get after a realistic replacement mission for some of these upcoming planned divestments.

I literally cornered General Spain on a bus two days ago. I got at least 10 pounds on him, so he couldn’t really get out, plus I had a bag in front of him as well. So we talk about these things constantly. I constantly bring this up to the Chief and to the Secretary as well. What we’re trying to provide and what we’re trying to ensure we stop the flow of is the loss of talent. When we look at our ability to have a CAF portfolio, I always go back to the 477th Fighter Group up in Alaska. I mean, these F-22 pilots, 70% of our unit are Weapons School graduates.

We do 67% of all the grade sheets for the Active Duty, 50% of all the evaluations. We can’t let these type of units, this type of experience go out the door. And that’s what we lose, and that’s what we have to stop the path of when we talk about what’s next and how do we proceed forward. That experience that we provide to the fight, I think is irreplaceable. And that’s why I’ve been, like I said, working for almost the entirety of these four years to try to stem that.

Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula, USAF (Ret.):

Well, thanks for that. As a bit of a follow-up, Major General Terrell, the Guard’s also experiencing pressure an example is what happened to Martin State with the retirement of the A10, and now Maryland’s the only state in the nation without an air guard flying mission. So your thoughts on this and the associated challenges that General Healy talked about?

Maj. Gen. Bryony Terrell:

Thank you for the question, and thanks for putting this together. It’s been a great week. I feel like starting, I need to say that I’ve been a longtime listener, first time caller. For me, you brought up Maryland, and in fact, I think we all would’ve preferred for a procurement profile to cover down on the loss of the A10, but Maryland represents two realities simultaneously. One, that the Guard can evolve, and Maryland has proven that with stepping into their premier cyber mission, which has already proven to be invaluable to the joint force.

But second, the reality that without a long-term funded recapitalization plan for the Air National Guard and really the Total Force, other states are going to have to face that same reality and possible loss of talent and capacity for the Total Force. And so as you mentioned, General Healy, we have a number of units, over a dozen, that are either facing uncovered missions where there is no recapitalization plan, or that plan entails cascading legacy platforms to the Air National Guard. And so for us, we see some risk there in capacity. We believe that recapitalization is about readiness, not about redistribution of legacy platforms.

Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula, USAF (Ret.):

Very good. Now, General Spain, if anyone understands the demands for combat air power in the Air Force, it’s you because you live it every day. Could you talk a bit and give us your perspectives on the current state of play when it comes to the appetite for Air Force combat systems?

Gen. Adrian L. Spain:

You bet. And like my colleagues here, I appreciate being on the stage with you. Once again, thanks to AFA and really a pleasure being with each of you who I’ve known for a very long time and appreciate working with. I do have to start with, I could take John anytime. It’s not a question. You did corner me, but I was on the inside seat so I couldn’t … it was a great conversation. I wasn’t ambushed at all. But the demand question is a good one, right? The demand has not gone down, it’s gone up, it continues to go up. And as I mentioned in the panel yesterday, there’s a reason for that. It’s because the value of what the Air Force brings, the Total Force, Air Force brings to the fight and to the joint force I, in my heart, truly believe that the Air Force is the indispensable force.

The Department of the Air Force certainly partnered with Space Force, is an indispensable capability for the joint force and it unlocks the rest of our joint partners when we go into any theater. And that’s why we’re in such high demand. There’s a reason why when crisis kicks off, the first thing that happens is you bring air power in a bigger way into the area in question because: one, we can respond quickly, and two, we can be decisive very quickly in a much smaller footprint than many of our partners. And it doesn’t mean we don’t need them. We need the joint force to be powerful together, but we get there first generally and we can create effects very quickly without huge footprints, which is pretty powerful to our senior leaders. But the reason we can do that is because we have capacity and the Total Force is what brings us capacity.

And I know we’re going to get to that in a couple of following questions, but John referenced this and Brian referenced this as well, it’s about the right balance. Do we have the right balance and place from a Guard, a Reserves and an Active Duty force to enable us to continue to respond in the way that we do and to be ready? The way that we’re meeting the demand now is really impressive. And our airmen are responding and contributing in really valued ways every single day. And every time we are called we deliver. And you can’t really tell what kind of patch the airman is wearing in the unit when they go forward.

And there are Reserve patches and there are Guard patches, but when you’re in the unit you can’t tell the difference between them, and that’s the way that it should be. We have to continue to be able to adjust to the current reality of demand increasing and surge demand increasing because that has an implication for readiness. How do I build readiness to prepare for the surge? And then how do I regain readiness on the backside to quickly reset so that when the next surge occurs we continue to deliver for the nation when called?

Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula, USAF (Ret.):

Very good. General Hurry, first congratulations on your recent posting as a AFMC Commander. That’s awesome. And so with that in mind, here’s an easy question for you. Air Force mission capable rates are at all time lows. So what’s AFMC’s part in helping reverse the declines in mission capable rates across the Air Force?

Lt. Gen. Linda Hurry:

Sir, thanks so much for having the panel, and thanks for the great AFA forum that we’ve had. You’ve been in a lot of great discussions and I’m just happy to be a part of it and being honored to be able to continue to serve and lead airmen. So we are at a challenge right now. And the Chief, when I got into the seat, the Chief’s like, he goes, “You got one focus. I need you to help fix readiness. I need you to help turn the crank. And how do you drive operational readiness so that if we’re asked to go do something, we’re ready to go do so?” I mean, if you look at the age of our fleet right now, the average age is sitting at about 31 years. If you look at the tankers, tankers are sitting at about 52 years, the average age, the bombers at 49.

I know we have a challenge. And then if you add that with the MC rates, as was highlighted, our MC rates have dropped 21% in the last five years. And so we have the work cut out for us, but we’ve got an amazing team that we’re really trying to get after it. So specifically, what are we trying to do? Number one, we’ve got to get after spares. We’ve put in requests for APOs. We were somewhat successful last year. We only got about $260 million, but that is definitely starting to lay the foundation. We had the reconciliation that promises about another $2 billion. But just to put this in perspective, the requirement for spares right now that we are in the hole is $14.6 billion. We have got a whole to dig out of, and we can’t do it by ourselves. This is going to be done in partnership with the industry.

There’s a lot of diminishing manufacturing. We have a lot of no bids. We’ve got to figure a way out of that. And so we’re working on it. The other thing we’re trying to do is incorporate AI. What can we do so that AI can help produce those parts in a much faster manner? What can we use AI for to get better forecast accuracy? Right now our forecast accuracy is sitting it at about 60%. It is up from years in the past, but … Okay, we’ve got the Research Lab under Air Force Material Command, let’s use that AI brain power that delivered NIPRGPT and now GenAI. How do we use that for the collective supply chain and how to optimize how we do maintenance, sustainment, supply chain, writ large? And so we’re really getting after all of that. The other thing we’re really focused on right now is bringing in the workforce.

Everybody in this room knows our airmen are our most precious asset. Well, last year we took a fairly significant cut. We took a lot of airmen that we lost to DRP. So our big focus this year is bringing in the folks that can help better manage our programs, bring in engineers, bring in the talent that we need, the contracting professionals, the supply chain professionals, you name it across the board, and make sure we can build resilience in our collective supply chain. We are not quite there yet, but we’re working really, really hard in that space.

Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula, USAF (Ret.):

Very good. A bit of a follow-up with some good news in it, hopefully. And that’s we are all aware that the President’s going to submit a $1.5 trillion budget for the Department of War/Defense for 27. So is it time now to advocate forcefully for an increase in weapon system sustainment accounts?

Lt. Gen. Linda Hurry:

Yes. A hundred times, yes. So in fact, we’ve actually been fairly successful in advocating for that. In fact, there’s a primary focus on the foundational accounts. What can we do to drive up? So weapon system sustainment in the past couple of years have been sitting in the mid 80s percent, we need to get that in the upper 80s to the 90s. We also have another APO that we’re requesting in terms of additional supply spares to put more things on the shelf.

Because what we really need to do, not only do we need to fix the scenario that we have right now and build up the collective shelves, we have got to get out of just in-time logistics, which is where we’ve been over the past couple years. We have got to build resilience. We’ve got to put things on the shelves and we’ve got to be prepared to go forward, and that is the primary focus. But yes, the entire administration is hyper-focused right now on weapon system sustainment because without it, we don’t have the readiness our force needs.

Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula, USAF (Ret.):

Yeah. I’ll just add that under Secretary Lohmeier yesterday highlighted 2027 is a year of readiness. So I think there’s some hope there. John Spain, one of the things that you mentioned in your earlier remarks was the importance of Total Force participation. We had a recent, recent time flies, but Midnight Hammer really evidenced that cooperation. Could you elaborate a little bit on that?

Gen. Adrian L. Spain:

You bet that… It’s always been a collaboration between the Guard, the Reserves, and the Active Force. There’s not really in any sense of the word … And the Air Force in general is a tribe of tribes, right? So that’s okay. We embrace the tribes, but we all come together when the time comes, and this is no different. I think part of what we saw in Midnight Hammer is what we see every time there’s a huge demand spike on Air Force forces is that it is a collaborative effort between the Guard, Reserves, and Active. That’s why we call it the Total Force. There is very little distance between us. But there are … One of the things that we’ve seen is a willingness in, I call it the last 10 months to mobilize in different ways than we have in the past, which is really powerful.

It unlocks a huge capability for the Air Force that has in the past been a bit of a struggle to unlock because of an unwillingness to use some of those mobilization authorities. And so kind of careful what we wish for, right? I mean, we’ve been talking about probably the last four years, “Hey, these authorities exist. You can access the Reserves and the Guard in this way.” Well, they’re doing it now and there’s some challenges with that and we have to prepare for it, but it really is a powerful tool for us, anytime the nation calls to be able to access those forces in that capacity and the experience levels that both John and Bryony referenced.

Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula, USAF (Ret.):

Well, very good. A bit of a follow on. Could you talk a little bit about just what are the advantages of Active Duty forces?

Gen. Adrian L. Spain:

Yeah, I can actually. But I want to start with, because this typically leads to, I say how great the Active Duty is and then John will say, “Yeah, but this is how great the Reserves are.” And then Bryony, he will say-

Lt. Gen. John P. Healy:

No, no, no. I’m going to say, I want to take your Active Duty members to the Reserves.

Gen. Adrian L. Spain:

That’s right. So I don’t want this to be the start of that conversation because going back to my earlier comment it’s about the balance between the three and achieving the right balance so that we can respond when the nation calls. But the Active Force is the core and the foundation for the Guard and for the Reserves. There’s no doubt about that. We’re the ones that set the command structures that enable Guard and Reserve forces to fall in and create the Total Force integration powerhouse that we’re able to deliver for the nation. And frankly, we also are the seed corn for the Reserves and the Guard.

And that unit in Alaska is a really powerful example. Most of them came from Active Duty to go to the Reserves. And so we have to continue to have a powerful base on Active Duty that enables the Reserve component or the Reserves and the Guard to catch the talent as they leave us. Now, I need to be on the record saying, I want people to stay on Active Duty. I want us to retain the talent first. That’s my first priority. John’s heard me say this. But if you can’t stay or you’re not going to stay, I need you to go to the Reserves, I need you to go to the Guard so we can keep the talent in the pool and have access to it.

And I’m thinking from a war fighting perspective, if the war happen, if the next fight happens where we’re in a high end conflict against a peer, I need people that can quickly get on the step. If I’ve lost you, we don’t get you back. If you’re in the Guard or Reserves part-time or full-time, I can get you back and I can get you back quickly, and you’re going to be on the step, and you’re going to be ready to go. And when I need to either send you first or send you next, you’ll be ready and we’ll have that capacity. If we don’t have that, starting with the core of Active Duty, feeding the Reserves and feeding the Guard and enabling the power that they bring to the fight, then we’re going to be in a worse position than we’re in today.

Lt. Gen. John P. Healy:

And I’ll chime in real quick too. When General Spain was the A3, it was a fundamental shift in terms of that philosophy and that understanding of a Total Force in duration. So if those people that are not going to continue with the bonus, not looked upon as, “Hey, you’re going to go to the Guard, you’re dead to us, you go to the Reserves, you’re dead to us.” It’s a long-term investment in individuals and high skill levels, and it’s all about making sure that they stay working for the Air Force in some fashion. We get that long-term return on investment. We made some great progress to start with and General Cunningham and I are continuing that as well right now, to make sure that there’s a tie always.

Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula, USAF (Ret.):

Okay. Yeah. I think it means all of you here on this panel understand all this. Unfortunately, a lot of times the public doesn’t. So I think there’s value in having this discussion. And I do want to give you, General Healy and General Terrell an opportunity to talk about the advantages of the Reserve and Guard. Now you already spoke a bit, but you’re nickel.

Lt. Gen. John P. Healy:

Yeah, I appreciate that. We consider what the Reserve advantage is, and I’ve been saying this in these forums for four years now, we’re efficient. We run our units 28 days a month on only 25% of our population. So that allows cost savings. We’re a efficient force in terms … If we were to put an EX force into a base, we can run at $24 million cheaper a year than the Active component can. If we were to do just a strike it would equal $28 million cheaper a year, so we have efficiencies. We’ve got the experience. We’ve talked about that already. The average F-16 pilot has three times the flying hours that the Active Duty does. So we get that because they come from the Active Duty with that experience and we just keep them that much longer. We’re accessible. When I came into the job, the narrative was we go to some of these events and we say, “Yeah, but we can’t access the Reserve, we can’t access the Guard.” That’s crap.

We’ve proven over and over again, today, last month, six months ago, two years ago, that access is an understanding in the authorities. And to General Spain’s point, we have an understanding that we’ve … you’ve heard me say that now enough times in Coronas. Every single time I talk about authorities and the understanding of how to program Reserve participation so it’s assured access to a unit, to a fighter unit, to a tanker unit, for an exercise three years down the road, as opposed to assume to access, which is the expectation that there’s going to be volunteers.

Lastly, in every single one of these things we do, we’re lethal. It’s not by chance, it’s not cherry-picking, for instance, a tanker crew that might be used during Midnight Hammer. It’s not cherry-picking that crew and putting in the position. It’s just going out and do an in system select and knowing that the experience is there and you’re going to be a lot rock solid in terms of they’re going to get the gas to the needed force.

Perfect example of all of these combined is Cyber, 960th Cyber Wing right now. Think of the synergy that’s created when we have members that are Guardians of the Grid and they’re able to work in their civilian sector and gain the experience, the real time updates to threats and mitigation of threats, and then bring that to bear when they come in on a weekend or for two weeks of orders and the acceleration that they provide to the Total Force. So that I think in a nutshell is an example of what the Reserve advantage is.

Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula, USAF (Ret.):

Very good.

Lt. Gen. Linda Hurry:

Yeah. Let me piggyback on that a little bit and I’ll give you an operational logistics perspective. About 70% of the Air Transportation Specialists are in the Guard and the Reserves. And we literally can’t deploy around the world without our teammates in that space. And then from a maintenance perspective, you talked a little bit about the depth of experience. From an Active Duty side, first, not only are we short about almost 7,000 maintainers, but they’re younger, and younger, and younger maintainers. We routinely lead our Guard and Reserve expertise because they have depth on a platform. And we can understand and they can help teach the rest of the Active Duty force on how to best maintain and what are almost the tricks of the trade. But it’s absolutely invaluable, we cannot do things without our Guard and Reserve teammates.

Maj. Gen. Bryony Terrell:

So I’ll just add to that. Of course, our model requires the largest of the Active Duty. A large, healthy Active Duty is how we get our talent and how we retain capacity for the Total Force. But 66% of the Air National Guard is serving part-time, and that is not a vulnerability, that is a value proposition and for us that’s our competitive advantage. We have members that are operating in professions, who are in industry, who are business owners, who bring back that experience to the Guard, and we can leverage that experience across the Total Force, just as General Healy has mentioned.

We talked a lot about the experience. That experience exists, that depth of experience, and we can bring that to the Total Force as well. But our full-time force is also very small and very lean. It means that we probably have one deep in each position, and so we’re natural innovators, and we’re used to integrating across different disciplines to make sure that we have the most lean and efficient model to preserve readiness to train and equip our troops.

And so those are some of the talents that we have. But most of all, we have optionality for members who want to continue to serve, but want to stay in their hometown, who want to leverage the support system of staying in one place, and who see value in, not just contributing at the Federal mission, but also at the State mission. And so some of those are unique value propositions.

Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula, USAF (Ret.):

Thanks very much. General Hurry, you already alluded to the fact that the Air Force has a panoply of older aircraft. What’s AFMC doing to address supply chain issues to overcome and sustain many issues for legacy systems?

Lt. Gen. Linda Hurry:

Yeah. So just to throw another stat at you, over the last five years, the tenemics rate or is it the supply rate? Has jumped about 90%. And so we have a fundamental challenge. Yes, we’re going to get after parts, but there’s other ways to mitigate that. So as an example, okay, we have fighters and we have weapon systems all over the globe. Well, what if we moved maintenance capability closer to the point of need? So we have an initiative called GENUS, the Global Enterprise Network for Universal Sustainment. What if we would actually take our depot level artisans and embed them into one of your squadrons, such that if something breaks, we don’t have to pull the part and send it all the way back to Tinker, Robins or Hill. We can actually help fix it and train the airmen that are there on the ground to turn the jet faster.

What if we can do a repair network initiative to fix things with the airmen that are on the ground there for an intermediate level maintenance capability? So we’re pushing maintenance forward. What about if we could break down how we actually analyze what is going on or not going well in a weapon system? So we’ve got a new metric and a new system called the aircraft readiness machine where we’re literally looking at the holistic of the platform, not just parts, but what could be done better from a maintenance’s perspective? What could be done from a propulsion’s perspective? What about throughput of the depot? Let’s look at things from a holistic perspective and then put a North Star out there. So an example, B-52, we know our B-52 readiness rates were not where they needed to be. But as an enterprise, we got our arms around that platform and basically put a North Star metric of, “We need 55 jets ready to meet COCOM requirements.”

How does each part of that sustainment enterprise work together to make sure we can generate those aircraft? That is done in partnership with our Program Office. Program Office owns the life cycle of a weapon system. Where can we make trade-offs in modernization for the B-52 versus trade-offs in test? One of the other things the Chief has asked us to do, how do we deliver capability faster? Yes, we naturally think in terms of acquisition, absolutely, we’re totally getting after that, but what can we do in test? How do we accelerate test faster? And we’re trying to do all of that to turn the dial so that we can put capability in our war fighters hands in a much faster way.

So we’ve also done more in predictive analytics. So a lot of our aging platforms, they don’t have the sensors that our newer airframes are on. So what can we do with AI and use tools like Panda, such that we anticipate when the next part is going to break? So if I know I’ve got to open up this panel because something broke, what else is in and around the area so such that the panel’s open, I can go ahead and take care of that right off the bat.

Predictive maintenance, now that takes a culture change. Maintainers generally don’t want to try to fix what isn’t broke, but if we know darn well that it’s going to break based on pure data, and the panel’s open, let’s take care of it now. In other words, what can we use in terms of technology to make better use of our airmen’s time that are out there on the flight line? And that’s really what we’re trying to do holistically on top of parts, parts, and more parts.

Gen. Adrian L. Spain:

In addition to what Linda just mentioned, it’s really important that we don’t lose sight of the fact that if we just get the parts, if we got all of the parts right, so one, I hope you’re right on the budgeting and the resourcing, and I hope that comes and I’m cheering for that to happen. But if we got all of the parts right, a hundred percent, if we don’t have the manpower in the right place, if I don’t have that training infrastructure in the right place, if I don’t have the air crew trained sufficiently or available to be trained sufficiently, we will waste the resource.

And so we’re also, and I know at the enterprise level of the Air Force, we’re working really hard to generate a picture so that we understand all of the levers of readiness that have to come together to create a capability so that when I get the parts I have the people there to maintain the airplanes at the level that the parts would allow. And I have the air crew and the infrastructure to execute and implement with those parts and those maintainers. And so without all of them, I don’t actually have the capability. So we have to be constantly mindful, and deliberate, and disciplined about making sure that every lever is invested in appropriately to take advantage of the supply chain when it does get healthier for us.

Lt. Gen. Linda Hurry:

So let me piggyback on that a little bit more. So in terms of some of the supply chain and building resiliency, the visualization tools that General Spain highlighted, what can we do to share that with the industry so that we know that if these are requirements and I know I’ve got no bids, what can we do from an additive or an advanced manufacturing capability and trying to bring those tools into our mindset? Maybe we’ve had old ways of producing a part, but there’s been years and years of technology of advancements in some of these aircraft that are probably older than half of us. What can we use to use that new technology to produce things faster?

Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula, USAF (Ret.):

Older than you guys.

Lt. Gen. Linda Hurry:

Bottom line, how can we use technology and put them in the hands of the airmen so that the airmen can only do the things that airmen can do? We have plenty of technology, we have additive, we have 3D printing. I mean, I’ve talked to a number of teammates and industry partners here that have been able to produce things through various types of 3D printing. And we can take that to the next level and produce parts in the hands of our airmen to generate the readiness that we need.

Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula, USAF (Ret.):

General Spain, we’ve been talking a lot about Total Force here and if Total Force is going to fly and fight together as they are, what are the implications for training to make sure that all the training standards are the same and that we’re operating as a unified force? Comments?

Gen. Adrian L. Spain:

Yeah. Well, we work really hard to make sure that the training standards are the same. There’s no difference between an Active unit and a Guard unit and a Reserve unit in terms of the standard that we hold ourselves to. But we have to make sure and be … We talked about being disciplined and deliberate, that the training methods, there’s equal access to training methods across the components. And so whether that’s the high end SIM, The Joint Simulation Environment, Red Flag, JPARC, the access to those training venues and methods has to be equivalent across each of the components.

But some of the reality is because we generally have a younger force, we probably need to go to some of these places more often than some of the Reserve component does. But they still need to go. We still need to send the Reserve component to WSEP, for example, to shoot live weapons so that they have that experience from an air-to-air perspective.

We need to have good ranges nearby all components units so that if you’re dropping live ordinance, you have the opportunity to do so to keep those skills up or you’re a seed platform. You have to have both the tools on the airplane and the range to stress the aircraft and the air crew so that you get valid training on those ends. So it’s really not so much about focus, it’s about access to the different methods for us to generate that readiness across all of the components.

Lt. Gen. John P. Healy:

Yeah. And that’s an accurate representation of how it’s working right now. The challenge as we’re developing into AEW 2.0 is when we look at certifying different parts of our force, there’s a lot of requirements out there. We’ve gone to … There’s an inclusion that we have, but my personal perspective has been that there’s probably not yet enough to manage a Total Force type of continuous exercises at all the levels that we need. What we’ve started to do in the Reserve is mimic some of the third tier exercises and start creating those ourselves so that within the Air Force Reserve Command, we can certify one of our wings before … whether they’re doing C2 or they’re an MGFE, we can go out and we can certify them ourselves. To it, we’ve included in my command staff down in Georgia, we’ve started an A7 and they are specifically responsible for tying into the Active Duty, the other MAJCOMs with a universal patch chart, so to speak, but also looking two, three, five years out to ensure that we’re not only planning on it, but we’re executing it at real time.

Lt. Gen. Linda Hurry:

If I can piggyback on that also. So one of the things we’re also focusing on is building up the combat support training ranges to enable the certification for all the units. That’s an area that we’ve really been focused on. We believe we’re going to get some additional money, but it has been very successful over the last two years. And the feedback that we’ve received on folks going through those ranges, to make sure they’re ready to go down range has been absolutely critical.

The other thing I will say, in terms of training and the ability to speed learning, we’ve once again used some of the AFRL AI technologies in partnership with AETC so that our airmen learn faster and so that when we put them in a classroom, there are digital tools at their handset, because that’s how they’ve learned, that’s how they’ve grown up. I want my cell phone to work, I hand it to my kids. So the new kids coming in and the new folks that are joining our forces right now have a digital mindset. Let’s put those type of tools in their hands that let them learn the professions that we need from them.

Maj. Gen. Bryony Terrell:

So I’ll add that although access to JSE and simulators is also, as we talked about, a challenge, the one tool that we do have is our flying hours. And the Air National Guard has maximized our Flying Hour Program year-over-year for the last five years. And there is no substitute for flying hours. But the unpredictability of the Flying Hour Program and the underfunding, the continual underfunding for the Air National Guard has been a challenge because that will lead to lower AA rates and in the future long-term capacity issues.

Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula, USAF (Ret.):

Okay, very good. We’ve got three minutes and 30 seconds left, so kind of a firing round thing on the last question. And I think one of the biggest values of the Total Force is the number of communities that the various units touch. So how can we best harness this connectivity to ensure that the public and decision makers out there understand the value of air power?

Gen. Adrian L. Spain:

I’ll just quickly jump in. I mean, the power in the Reserve component is that they’re in the communities and they’re there persistently, right? And so the kind of conversations that they can have are different than the kinds of conversations that we can have as an Active Force. And they’re not only living, working, going to school for decades with those folks in the community they’re on boards, they’re on councils, they’re in city government, they’re in the industries and those local areas. And so creating that connection, which is something that we’re all striving to do more and more, is really powerful in the Reserve component. And it’s powerful on the Active side as well. You can just do it in a much more robust way than we can because you’re there much longer than we are.

Lt. Gen. John P. Healy:

Yeah. And it gets down to what General Spain just said, “We’re entrenched in those. We are the community.” So while my job in the Pentagon is to go to Congress and testify for money for both my O&M and my Reserve personnel accounts every year, it’s those constituents that double that effort. They double down and they make the real difference. Knowing that if a base closes or if a mission’s not going to continue on, that not only affects their family, but it affects the entire ecosystem of that base. They’re very acutely aware of that. So my positions when I go to Congress are very much in line with the Air Force priorities, but that added firepower, so to speak, that communities can bring at the local level, you just can’t turn away from that.

Maj. Gen. Bryony Terrell:

So I’ll just add for the Air National Guard, we have the dual role with the State mission. And so we’re very much embedded in the communities, both in a State Active Duty role, as well as a Title 32 capacity under the Governor. And so we are the first responders when there are crises in our own backyards. And so that’s how we continue to contribute to the Air Force mission and understanding that the community and the US on a greater level sees and understands about the talent that we provide.

Lt. Gen. Linda Hurry:

So as everyone knows, last year we had a very significant challenge with the shutdown. So AFMC’s got about 90,000 folks, 82% of them are civilian teammates. And so it had an outsized impact on our collective workforce. And quite frankly, the surrounding communities surrounding our bases were unbelievably critical to the health and wellbeing of our collective force. And so I can’t thank them enough from that perspective on really just trying to build the resiliency and the care for the workforce. And now that we’ve opened up the hiring aperture writ large across our command, they are really leaning in and the Civic Leader Program and reaching out to all the communities out there for bringing folks on. I’m not kidding I have to hire about 5,000 folks this year. We cannot do that without our civilian counterparts. And so I just want to say thank you to each and every one of them.

Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula, USAF (Ret.):

Well, great job, folks. 10 seconds left. So I think all of you who have listened to the crowd up here will agree with me that as a Total Force we have the best leaders and the best place that we possibly clunk can. So please join me on behalf of the Mitchell Institute and AFA for everything that you do and all the best in the future.