The Defense Subcommittee will come to order.
Today, the Subcommittee will receive testimony from the Honorable Frank Kendall, Secretary of the Air Force; General David Allvin, Chief of Staff of the Air Force; And General Chance Saltzman, Chief of Space Operations.
Thank you all for joining us today. General Allvin, I'll note that this is your first appearance before this Subcommittee. Welcome, and congratulations on your new role.
Increasingly volatile world events since this hearing last year have underscored the importance of maintaining a strong and ready Air Force and Space Force.
China is engaged in a historic military buildup and seeks to erode our military superiority. While China remains our pacing threat, it is not the only threat we face. Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, and earlier this month Iran launched its first ever direct attack on Israel.
I am pleased that we were able to get supplemental appropriations across the finish line to address emergent needs in these three regions.
Our Air and Space Forces must be ready and able to respond across the globe if needed. We need to be innovative and agile, with the goal of rapidly putting advanced capability in the hands of our Airmen and Guardians.
For the Air Force, the fiscal year 2025 budget request is $228.8 billion. This is 2% more than the enacted amount for fiscal year 2024, which I note does not keep up with inflation.
When budgets are constrained, tradeoffs must be made, and a certain level of risk is assumed. Today, we will discuss your proposed tradeoffs in a constrained topline. One area that gets a lot of attention is the divestment of aircraft – and this budget proposes significant divestments.
On one hand, older airframes are less suited for modern missions, expensive to maintain, and parts are at a premium. On the other, quantity has a quality unto itself – particularly in a perilous security environment.
I understand that you had to prioritize in your constrained topline, but we need to understand the capability gaps this will create and your mitigation plans.
We also need assurance that your bet on modernization over sustainment will yield success – and unfortunately, the track record is not encouraging so far. Just last week we were notified of a Nunn-McCurdy breach for the
MH-139 Grey Wolf. This follows the Sentinel’s Nunn-McCurdy breach. We need to understand the implications of both these breach reviews for fiscal year 2025 and beyond.
I also hope to hear how the Air Force plans to address acquisition delays and mitigation plans to ensure there are no capability gaps for the warfighter in the F-15EX, T-7, and E-7, to name a few of particular concern.
On the bright side, I am pleased to see the Air Force continue to prioritize investments in the B-21 and Next Generation Air Dominance aircraft, especially with the recent down-select of the Collaborative Combat Aircraft to two companies, one of which was founded a few years ago.
For the Space Force, the Fiscal Year 2025 budget request is $29.4 billion, which is effectively flat funding compared to last year. Factoring in inflation, this is a real dollar cut.
In fact, the projected budget for the Space Force remains flat at this amount over the next five years.
Budgets are obviously tight. However, given the increasing reliance on space capabilities and plans to pivot some missions from aircraft to space, I am skeptical that a flat-level budget is credible to deliver all the capabilities needed. I’d like to know where you chose to take risks in the space portfolio in this year’s budget.
This Committee expects programs to be well-managed. One of the key reasons for establishing the Space Force was to bring a focused discipline in delivering capabilities on schedule and within budget. The Space Force continues to be a work in progress in this regard, especially when it comes to delivering ground systems and user equipment.
For example, the Global Positioning System ground control system is more than $3 billion over budget, more than seven years late and still has not been delivered.
Further, your own assessment identifies the Space Command and Control program and the Family of Beyond Line-of-Sight Terminals as other challenging programs that failed to meet schedule milestones and will be delivered late.
The pattern is clear. The problem with space is on the ground. I hope to hear your plans to ensure ground systems keep pace with satellite developments.
On a positive note, I continue to be impressed with the progress of the Space Development Agency and their rapid development-to-acquisition process. This Committee is willing to give the Space Force resources to take risks and pursue new approaches when warranted, and SDA has lived up to its investment so far.
I think we can agree that there are challenges that need to be addressed, but I also know the devil is in the details and it matters how things are addressed.
I have been disappointed with the level of rigor in analysis behind some of the Department’s program decisions and organizational proposals. This Subcommittee is data-driven, and will not accept proposals that are presented simply as done-deals.
Another area of concern is in the innovation and rapid fielding accounts – which have been a focus of mine. The request for AFWERX is just $20.5 million, a substantial decrease from the last two years. AFWERX and SpaceWERX are crucial to the defense innovation ecosystem, essential to expanding opportunities to non-traditional defense companies and increasing use of commercial technologies. I will be interested to hear how you intend to get after barriers to innovation if not through AFWERX and SpaceWERX.
Finally, we are all aware of the challenges the entire Department is having with recruitment across all components. I want to hear about your strategy to recruit the Airmen and Guardians of today, and the service leaders of tomorrow.
We will work closely with you throughout this budget process to find ways we can accelerate the fielding of the platforms needed by our warfighters today.
