logo
USAF Generals Downplay Calls For More Hardened Aircraft Shelters In Pacific Theater

USAF Generals Downplay Calls For More Hardened Aircraft Shelters In Pacific Theater

Yahoo05-03-2025

U.S. Air Force officials remain focused on the ability to disperse forces to far-flung operating locations as the primary means of reducing vulnerability to enemy attacks. They also continue to downplay any talk of doing more to physically harden existing bases. This is despite acknowledgments that large established facilities are still expected to play key roles in any future conflict and can no longer be considered sanctuaries. All of this comes amid an increasingly heated debate about whether the entire U.S. military should be investing in new hardened aircraft shelters and other similar infrastructure improvements, which TWZ has been following closely.
Air Force Gen. Kevin Schneider, head of Pacific Air Forces (PACAF), the service's top command in the Indo-Pacific region, spoke yesterday about current 'resilient' basing priorities during a panel discussion at the Air & Space Forces Association's (AFA) 2025 Warfare Symposium, at which TWZ was in attendance. The panel's main topic was Agile Combat Employment (ACE), a term that currently refers to a set of concepts for distributed and disaggregated operations centered heavily on short notice and otherwise irregular deployments, often to remote, austere, or otherwise non-traditional locales. The other branches of the U.S. military, especially the U.S. Marine Corps, have been developing similar new concepts of operations.
'So the Air Force wants to populate the Indo-Pacific with dispersed operating locations to support ACE. However, the Air Force also needs to invest heavily in resilient infrastructure at its main operating bases,' Heather 'Lucky' Penney, the panel's moderator, said as a lead in to a question. 'So, General Schneider, could you speak to what the Air Force is doing to balance the demand for resilient infrastructure while also building out ACE operating locations across the Indo-Pacific?'
Penney is currently a senior fellow at AFA's Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies and also an Air Force veteran who flew F-16s.
'It's different in the Indo-Pacific than it is in Europe. [We] do not have NATO. You have a couple of – five bilateral treaty partners. Two of them are Korea and Japan where we share basing,' Schneider said in response. 'We also have the joint force demands on our bases. And their are benefits to that, as well. I like having the Army on our bases, especially when they have Patriots [surface-to-air missile systems] and other capability that helps us defend.'
It's worth noting here that currently the U.S. Army is the lead service for providing air and missile defense for Air Force bases at home and abroad. There has been talk recently about the Air Force potentially taking a greater role in this regard. The Army has been facing its own struggles in meeting growing demand for ground-based air and missile defenses.
'So, we will have the need for bases, the main operating bases from which we operate,' the PACAF commander continued. 'The challenge becomes, at some point, we will need to move to austere locations. We will need to disaggregate the force. We will need to operate out of other locations, again, one for survivability, and two, again, to provide response options.'
Ensuring the continued viability of main operating bases and work related to ACE both 'cost money,' he said. The Air Force is then faced with the need to 'make internal trades' funding-wise, such as 'do we put that dollar towards, you know, fixing the infrastructure at Kadena [Air Base in Japan] or do we put that dollar towards restoring an airfield at Tinian,' according to Schneider.
What Gen. Schneider was referring to at the end here is the massive amount of work that has been done to reclaim North Field on the island of Tinian, a U.S. territory in the Western Pacific, since the end of 2023. North Field was originally built as a huge B-29 bomber base during World War II. It was the biggest active airbase anywhere in the world before being largely abandoned after the war ended. There has also been additional expansion of the available facilities at Tinian International Airport in recent years, ostensibly to improve its ability to serve as a divert location for U.S. military aircraft in the event that the critically strategic Andersen Air Force Base on nearby Guam is rendered unusable for any reason.
North Field is a prime example of the Air Force's current focus on ACE as the centerpiece of how it expects to fight in the future, especially in a high-end fight in the Pacific. The airfield's grid-like layout inherently presents additional targeting challenges for a potential adversary like China, as you can read about in more detail in TWZ's recent story on what has been happening over the past year or so on Tinian.
Guam has also seen significant military construction work in recent years, including to refurbish more of the World War II-era Northwest Field on the island to support ACE operations. Guam is now set to get a huge new air and missile defense architecture full of new surface-to-air missile launchers, radars, and other supporting facilities, as you can read more about here.
'These are the things that we need in our main operating bases. These are the things that we need to project power,' Gen. Schneider added, but did not explicitly mention hardened infrastructure. He also emphasized a desire to work more with regional allies and partners to 'gain greater access to those fields that are already in operating condition.'
Air Force Gen. James Hecker, another member of yesterday's ACE panel at the AFA Warfare Symposium, also stressed the continued importance of existing main operating bases. Hecker, who is head of U.S. Air Forces in Europe and Air Forces Africa (USAFE-AFAFRICA), as well as NATO's Allied Air Command, highlighted significant challenges his service faces in successfully executing large-scale dispersed operations in the future, as well.
'I have the opportunity to talk to the Ukrainian air chief once every two weeks, or so. And they've been very successful not getting their aircraft hit on the ground,' Hecker said. 'And I ask him, I said, 'How is that? What do you do?' And he goes, 'Well, we never take off and land at the same airfield. I'm like, okay, you know, that's pretty good. Keeps the Russians on their toes.'
'I got tons of airfields from tons of allies, and we have access to all of them. The problem is, I can only protect a few of them,' he continued. 'We can't have that layered [defensive] effect for thousands of airbases. There's just no way it's going to happen.'
However, Gen. Hecker warned that just dispersing forces to more bases will not be a solution in of itself, either.
'So, to go think you're going to land at another airfield and hang out there for a week with no defense, you're going to get schwacked. It's going to happen,' he said. 'You can only stay there for a little bit, and then you've got to get back to your main operating bases.'
'It's going to be much shorter operations. You know, we're not talking weeks anymore,' Hecker explained. 'We're talking days, and sometimes we're talking hours, if you want to be survivable. And then back at your main operating base, you've got the layered defense.'
Hecker called attention to how shrinking adversary kill chains are a key driving factor here, specifically highlighting Russia's efforts to reduce the total time it takes to complete a targeting cycle in operations in Ukraine. China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) has been doing the same, particularly with the help of a growing array of space-based surveillance assets. The time it takes from certain munitions like ballistic and hypersonic missiles to actually get to their targets after launch can also be very short.
'So it's really evolving the ACE concept,' the Air Force's top officer in Europe noted.
Realities like the ones Hecker outlined are exactly what has been driving increasing criticism of the Air Force's current focus on ACE, as well as the service's general approach to basing and base defense, including from members of Congress and outside experts.
Just in January, the Hudson Institute think tank in Washington, D.C., published a report warning that a lack of hardened and unhardened aircraft shelters, as well as other exposed infrastructure, at bases across the Pacific and elsewhere globally has left the U.S. military worryingly vulnerable. The report's authors assessed that just 10 missiles with warheads capable of scattering cluster munitions across areas 450 feet in diameter could be sufficient to neutralize all aircraft parked in the open and critical fuel storage facilities at key airbases like Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni in Japan, Naval Support Facility Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, or Langley Air Force Base in Virginia.
Another report that the Henry L. Stimson Center think tank published last December highlighted how Chinese missile strikes aimed just at cratering runways at bases in the Pacific could upend the U.S. military's ability to project airpower.
'While 'active defenses' such as air and missile defense systems are an important part of base and force protection, their high cost and limited numbers mean the U.S. will not be able to deploy enough of them to fully protect our bases,' a group of 13 Republican members of Congress wrote in an open letter to the Air Force back in May 2024. 'In order to complement active defenses and strengthen our bases, we must invest in 'passive defenses,' like hardened aircraft shelters… Robust passive defenses can help minimize the damage of missile attacks by increasing our forces' ability to withstand strikes, recover quickly, and effectively continue operations.'
'While hardened aircraft shelters do not provide complete protection from missile attacks, they do offer significantly more protection against submunitions than expedient shelters (relocatable steel shelters),' the letter's authors added. More shelters 'would also force China to use more force to destroy each aircraft, thereby increasing the resources required to attack our forces and, in turn, the survivability of our valuable air assets.'
Outside of the United States, especially in China, but also in Russia, North Korea, and many other countries, there has been a growing trend in the expansion of hardened and otherwise more robust airbase infrastructure.
Air Force officials have also pushed back more actively on the idea of investing in additional physical hardening in recent years.
'I'm not a big fan of hardening infrastructure,' Gen. Kenneth Wilsbach said at a roundtable at the Air and Space Forces Association's main annual symposium in 2023. 'The reason is because of the advent of precision-guided weapons… you saw what we did to the Iraqi Air Force and their hardened aircraft shelters. They're not so hard when you put a 2,000-pound bomb right through the roof.'
Wilsbach was commander of PACAF at the time and has since become head of Air Combat Command (ACC), which oversees the vast majority of the Air Force's tactical combat jets and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) aircraft.
The comments yesterday from the Air Force's current top officers in the Indo-Pacific region and Europe highlighting the continued focus on ACE and the challenges with that strategy are only likely to further fuel the ongoing debate about building more hardened infrastructure to help ensure American forces can continue to project air power in future fights.
Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Ukraine's drone strike on Russia spurs global military rethink, raises U.S. preparedness concerns
Ukraine's drone strike on Russia spurs global military rethink, raises U.S. preparedness concerns

Yahoo

time31 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Ukraine's drone strike on Russia spurs global military rethink, raises U.S. preparedness concerns

Ukraine's drone attack on Russia last weekend was a technological and intelligence game changer. It will reshape not only how the United States bolsters its military, but how the entire world does — allies and adversaries alike. While defense specialists examined the feat in the days since the attack and Ukraine celebrated its success, the question remains: How prepared is the U.S. to use and fend off this emerging tech in warfare? Not well enough, former Utah Rep. Chris Stewart told the Deseret News. Stewart spent 14 years as a pilot in the Air Force and served on the permanent Select Committee on Intelligence while he was in the House of Representatives. He argued that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's attack, which took more than a year and a half to plan, was 'brilliantly planned' and 'brilliantly executed.' It was a 'dramatic event' that will reshape military thinking globally, Stewart said. On June 1, more than 100 Ukrainian drones targeted military airfields and warplanes in Russia that held equipment used in the more than three-year war. Zelenskyy shared a thread online celebrating his military's success in the mission, nicknamed 'Spider Web.' The attack was unique because it demonstrated Ukraine's ability to conduct a successful mission without intelligence assistance, it struck deep into Russian territory, destroyed billions of dollars of Russian equipment and came at a very low cost to Ukraine. The attack consisted of 117 unmanned drones, each with a drone operator. Drones were smuggled into Russia and placed in wooden containers that had remote-controlled lids. The drones then 'took off to strike their targets,' which were at four different Russian airfields, Ukraine's Security Service said. Ukraine said 41 Russian aircraft were hit by their drones, dealing Russia a blow of an estimated $7 billion. Zelenskyy touted that one of the targeted locations was directly next to one of the FSB Russian security service offices and Russia had 'suffered significant losses.' Zelenskyy said Ukraine will continue to propose a 'full and unconditional ceasefire' and work toward peace with Russia, but its June 1 attack may have pushed Russia further away from the negotiating table. Stewart argued that the attack, while largely successful in its goal of targeting some of Russia's prized possessions, is also a 'destabilizing event.' 'It was an attack, direct attack on an asset that Vladimir Putin considers his highest priority and I worry a little bit about the implications of that,' he said, later adding, 'I'm not saying Zelenskyy shouldn't have done it, I'm just saying … one of the outcomes for that is it's going to make … the peace negotiations that are taking place much harder.' President Donald Trump — who was apparently not aware of Ukraine's attack ahead of time — spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday. According to Trump, Putin said he would respond to the drone attack. It was a 'good conversation,' but not one that would lead to immediate peace, Trump said. Hours later, Russia struck the Ukrainian city of Pryluky, killing at least five people, including a 1-year-old child. On Friday, Russia launched one of its largest aerial attacks of the war, bombing six Ukrainian regions. The attack included 407 drones and 33 missiles. It killed four people, Ukraine said. As Ukraine balances protecting its front lines and cities, continuing its counteroffensive against Russia and seeking to strike a peace deal, the escalation raises questions about what the recent attack means for the United States and its adversaries. Stewart noted that the conflict between Russia and Ukraine has been interesting to watch because, in some ways, they are fighting a World War I-style war through trench warfare, but the use of unmanned drones in the battlefield has escalated fighting to World War III-level combat. The drones used by Ukraine aren't 'sophisticated weapons' by any means, Stewart pointed out. They aren't much different than drones seen flying in the park on weekends. However, if they're deployed strategically, they can cause 'enormous damage,' as seen by Russia. 'Last Friday, could you have imagined what happened in Russia over the weekend? And the truth is is no one did. And that's just one example of, we don't know really how this is going to change and be implemented and we're probably not nearly as prepared as we should be,' Stewart said. He also highlighted how Russia and Ukraine have 'leapfrogged' one another throughout the war. If Russia develops a drone with a new capability, Ukraine will develop a superior one weeks later, and so on. The technology itself is rapidly evolving in the war, Stewart said. 'Going back three years, if you had talked about how will drones affect the war in Ukraine, everyone would have shrugged their shoulders and said, 'Well, I'm not sure,' or they would have said, 'Well, probably not a lot,'' he said. 'And the answer to that question is, it impacted it greatly.' During a briefing on Tuesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Ukraine's drone attack 'absolutely does' raise questions about the United States' security. She pointed to Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' and the expansion of defense funding to bolster the U.S. military as it examines how to respond to the emergence of drone usage. 'The president has a full understanding, I can tell you because I've spoken to him about it, about the future of warfare and how drones are a big part of that, and I will not get ahead of our policy team, but I think you can expect to see some executive action on that front in the very near future,' she said. Evelyn Farkas, a former U.S. deputy assistant secretary of defense, said she believes the United States doesn't have the capability to protect against swarms of drones, should an adversary launch an attack. It's something the Department of Defense would need to look at, both domestically and at its overseas bases, she said. But bolstering U.S. military operations would need to start with production. Most drones are being produced overseas, including by U.S. adversaries like China. 'Now that they've used them to strategic effect, it will be even more urgent for the United States to improve its drone capability and to invest in drones,' Farkas, who is the executive director of the McCain Institute, said. The attack over the weekend proved that while drone warfare is not entirely a new operational tactic, the strategy behind using them changed the game. Stewart argued the attack also proved there are two major issues facing the U.S. as it stands on the sidelines of the current war: drone defense and implementation plans need to be drafted, and the supply chain needs to be less dependent on China. China, Stewart noted, has also been successful in purchasing land near U.S. military installations globally. Commanders have likely spent the last several days reviewing how to protect assets after seeing Ukraine launch drones into Russian bases at a very close range, he said. 'They weren't really particularly worried about the aircraft sitting out on their tarmac, and it turned out they should have been, right?' he said of the Russian military, later adding, 'I think people are looking at that differently now than they were.' The U.S. military has said it must invest in drones, commonly called unmanned aircraft systems or UAS. Secretary of the Army Dan Driscoll said in a post online that modernization is critical to U.S. national security. 'Investing in UAS isn't optional — it's essential for battlefield dominance, enhancing precision and protecting Soldiers,' he said. Air Force Gen. David Allvin highlighted the need for technological advancement and investment, pointing to Ukraine's attack. 'In today's environment not every asset must be exquisite/expensive. Look what Ukraine just did,' he said in a post online. 'We can't afford to walk by assets like this that generate lethal effects.' Hoover Institution fellow Jacquelyn Schneider has long argued that the U.S. needs to invest in low-cost technology to advance its military. In a 2023 op-ed, she expanded on her research and argued that the U.S. military has ended up in a paradox. It chased emerging technology that made weapons so expensive that upgrading them would be difficult. It left the Pentagon with a stockpile that was 'neither good enough nor large enough' for its plans, Schneider argued. 'The United States also underprioritized technology that would rein in the cost of logistics, maintenance, and replenishment, opting instead for high-tech weaponry patched together with fragile and outdated software,' she wrote. Schneider said the U.S. needs to 'urgently' prioritize technology that would cut warfare costs and admit it cannot replace all of its systems. High-cost technology should be complemented with cheaper options, she said. 'If the United States hopes to persevere against Russia in the short term and China in the long term, it must consider the economic impact of technology even as it pursues technological advantage,' Schneider wrote. Farkas agreed. The United States has an undeniable issue by having 'very expensive systems that are now vulnerable to foreign drones,' she said. War is a 'great accelerator,' Stewart said of technological advancements. It just depends on if the U.S. military will use it properly, he argued. 'The problem on the defense spending side is, we're just not spending the money we should. The bigger problem is, are we spending it right?' he questioned. 'It doesn't do us much good to buy $50 million Predator drones when we know now that a $500 plastic drone can do nearly the same thing.' Stewart said one of his largest concerns after Ukraine's attack is how the U.S. will respond. It's a pressing issue for the industry and the Pentagon as it grapples with rapidly evolving technology and the price tag of modern warfare. 'Will we spend it in the right way and are we keeping up with technology?' he asked, saying he hopes the administration is prompted to ask those questions after Ukraine's attack.

Captivision receives staff determination letter from Nasdaq
Captivision receives staff determination letter from Nasdaq

Business Insider

time2 hours ago

  • Business Insider

Captivision receives staff determination letter from Nasdaq

Captivision (CAPT) announced that on June 4, 2025, it received a staff determination letter from the Listing Qualifications Department of The Nasdaq Stock Market notifying the company that it had not regained compliance with the Market Value of Listed Securities Requirement by June 2, 2025. The Determination Letter has no immediate effect and will not immediately result in the suspension of trading or delisting of the company's securities. Additionally, on May 22, 2025, Staff notified the company that since it had not yet filed its Form 20-F for the period ended December 31, 2024, it no longer complied with Nasdaq Listing Rule 5250(c)(1). However, pursuant to Listing Rule 5810(c)(2), this deficiency serves as a separate and additional basis for delisting, and the company should also address this concern before a Hearings Panel if it appeals Staff's determination. Confident Investing Starts Here:

Is Ford's Model e Business Dragging Down its Overall Results?
Is Ford's Model e Business Dragging Down its Overall Results?

Yahoo

time3 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Is Ford's Model e Business Dragging Down its Overall Results?

US Legacy automaker Ford Motor Company F operates a dedicated electric vehicle (EV) segment, Model e, to focus and strategize its efforts toward EVs. The company's Mustang Mach-E and F-150 Lightning EVs have been received well by customers. The segment, however, has failed to generate profits for the company despite continued improvements. After having incurred losses of $4.7 billion in its EV business in 2023, Ford's loss from Model e widened to $5.07 billion in 2024, exacerbated by ongoing pricing pressure and increased investments in next-generation EVs. The segment incurred losses of $849 million in the first quarter of 2025, owing to stiff competition, pricing pressure and significant costs associated with new-generation EV development. The company is expected to incur huge losses in its EV business this year as well. The persisting pricing pressures caused by stiff competition in the industry are significantly ailing margins. China's markets, led by BYD, have been slashing prices, forcing others to follow. The industry also remains prone to supply-chain disruptions. To keep up with the contemporary developments in the industry, Ford has to consistently invest ample amounts. Although the investments are weighing down cash flows, these remain indispensable. Ford is working to improve charging infrastructure throughthe Ford Power Promise campaign, the success of which has already provided customers with a home charger in standard installation. Further plans to drive volumes in the upcoming quarters with recent launches are in place. Toyota Motor Corporation TM, a Japanese auto giant, also remains cautious in its approach toward fully electric vehicles. Toyota's EVs did not constitute more than 1% of its sales globally in fiscal 2025. This has led Toyota to plan on cutting down its EV production target by 20%, reducing from 1.5 million to 1 million units by 2026. However, the company has started to unveil several new EVs. In China, Toyota launched its most affordable EV, the bZ3X, in March, starting at just over $15,000, to regain the market. Honda HMC, TM's closest peer, is also cutting down its EV production as global demand remains stunted. Honda rather seems to shift its focus toward hybrid cars, aiming to launch 13 new hybrid models globally between 2027 and 2030. With rising pressure in China and loosened emission targets in the United States, Honda is expecting a rise in hybrids' popularity, leading to a 30% lowered investment target in EVs. Shares of Ford have lost around 10% year to date against the industry's growth of 11%. Image Source: Zacks Investment Research From a valuation standpoint, F trades at a forward price-to-sales ratio of 0.25, below the industry average. It carries a Value Score of A. Image Source: Zacks Investment Research Take a look at how Ford's EPS estimates have been revised over the past 30 days. Image Source: Zacks Investment Research Ford stock currently carries a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). You can see the complete list of today's Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here. Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report Ford Motor Company (F) : Free Stock Analysis Report Toyota Motor Corporation (TM) : Free Stock Analysis Report Honda Motor Co., Ltd. (HMC) : Free Stock Analysis Report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research ( Zacks Investment Research Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store