Nouvelles

Mark Pomerleau WASHINGTON — The Pentagon's virtual cyber-training platform has been successfully integrated with operational tools that will be used during missions, according to Col. Tanya Trout, the outgoing director of the Joint Cyber Training Enterprise. The Persistent Cyber Training Environment, or PCTE, is an online client that allows U.S. Cyber Command's warriors to log on from anywhere in the world to conduct individual or collective cyber training as well as mission rehearsal on par with the National Training Center, which did not previously exist for cyber warriors. The Army runs the program on behalf of the joint cyber force and Cyber Command. Given the inherent need for such a platform, U.S. Cyber Command and the subordinate service cyber components have actively sought the technology. The program office in charge of the effort delivered the first version in February. Prior to that, the office was creating prototypes to incrementally test the system. After the platform was first used in a large-scale, tier-one exercise in June, it joined an integration pilot program in July with the program offices of the Unified Platform system and the Joint Cyber Command and Control system, according to Trout, who spoke during a virtual industry day for PCTE on Aug. 19. Trout's Joint Cyber Training Enterprise is the nonmaterial component to PCTE at Cyber Command. It coordinates training of personnel through the platform. The Unified Platform system will consolidate and standardize the variety of big-data tools used by Cyber Command and its subordinate commands to allow forces to more easily share information, build common tools, and conduct mission planning and analysis. Joint Cyber Command and Control, or JCC2, currently in its nascent and amorphous stages, will help command cyber forces and plan their missions. Both programs are managed by the Air Force on behalf of Cyber Command and the joint cyber force. Unified Platform and JCC2, as well as PCTE, are components of the Joint Cyber Warfighting Architecture. JCWA includes five capability categories and guides their development priorities. “This integration allowed for execution of small team tactics while performing active hunt of advanced persistent threat within a post-compromised range environment,” she said. Trout added that the pilot demonstrated PCTE's ability to integrate existing operational tools into training scenarios. “PCTE will integrate and be interoperable with these other five elements [of the JCWA] to enable teams to train and rehearse using available JCWA operational tools and capabilities, [which] gives us really the ability to train as we fight,” she said. Due to the ongoing pandemic and the need to practice social distancing while maintaining readiness, Trout said, there has been increased demand for PCTE. From March to May, the number of new accounts for PCTE doubled. Trout also explained that PCTE — which, since its delivery to Cyber Command, is used daily by the cyber mission force — participated in another pilot focused on mission rehearsal. Members of the Cyber National Mission Force, one of Cyber Command's elite units aligned against specific threat actors and charged with defending the nation in cyberspace, were able to expand their mission rehearsal scope, scale and fidelity in a virtualized adversarial network, which will help determine future requirements, she said. Lt. Gen. Stephen Fogarty, commander of Army Cyber Command, told the industry day audience that the advantage the virtual cyber-training environment has over the National Training Center is its ability to replicate an actual opponent. The mission rehearsal capability allows users to input prior operations, such as those used against the Islamic State group, or to train against or upload malware discovered in operations. https://www.c4isrnet.com/cyber/2020/08/20/us-cyber-commands-training-platform-can-now-use-operational-cyber-tools/

By: Charles V. Peña The first COVID-19 clusters appeared in Italy in late February, and by early March the Italian authorities issued a decree to install strict public health measures, including social distancing first in the affected regions and then nationwide. Soon afterward, Spain, France and many other European countries instituted similar public health measures. Without debating the efficacy of those measures, the important takeaway is that when faced with what was viewed as a clear and present danger, European countries acted in their own self-interest without having to depend on the U.S. to counter the threat posed by COVID-19. They need to take that same approach for their own security and responsibilities under NATO. It is not a question of resources or capabilities — it is largely a matter of political will. The low hanging fruit for our European NATO allies is to meet their pledge of spending 2 percent of their gross domestic product on defense. Currently nine countries meet that threshold: the United States (3.42 percent), Bulgaria (3.25 percent), Greece (2.28 percent), the United Kingdom (2.14 percent), Estonia (2.14 percent), Romania (2.04 percent), Lithuania (2.03 percent), Latvia (2.01 percent) and Poland (2 percent). Noticeably absent are Germany (1.38 percent), France (1.84 percent) and Italy (1.22 percent) — the fourth, seventh and eighth largest economies in the world. These are wealthy countries that can afford to make the necessary investment. Indeed, the combined GDP of NATO Europe is nearly on par with the U.S. — about $17.5 trillion versus about $20 trillion. Yet, the U.S. spends more than double on defense than our European NATO allies. Other than political will, there is no real reason that European NATO countries cannot spend 2 percent of their GDP for their own defense. Yet, even though Germany previously pledged to meet its 2 percent obligation, Berlin is proposing a new metric based on a country's defense needs — perhaps because U.S. President Donald Trump has stated that he wants European allies to spend 4 percent of their GDP on defense (a metric even the U.S. does not meet). Beyond spending, there is the question of what threat NATO should counter. Originally created in 1949, NATO was intended to counter the Soviet military threat and communist expansion. At the height of the Cold War, the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies had some 4 million troops and 60,000 main battle tanks deployed against Western Europe — and threatened invasion via the North German Plain, Hof Corridor and Fulda Gap. But today's Russian Federation is not the Soviet Union. Nonetheless, NATO's European countries have the resources to counter a Russian military threat (although it's worth noting that NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg recently said: “We don't see any imminent threat against any NATO ally.”) NATO Europe's combined GDP is 10 times larger than Russia's — more than $17 trillion versus $1.7 trillion. And current defense spending is also in Europe's favor by more than 4-to-1 ($287 billion versus $65 billion). Again, there is no practical reason why NATO Europe cannot make the necessary investments to provide for its security. It is more a question of political will. Moreover, if NATO is concerned about Russia as a potential threat, it should think twice about continuing to expand the alliance eastward onto Russia's doorstep. Rather than providing increased security, it may do more to provoke the Russian bear. Part of the problem is that NATO has largely strayed from its original purpose of collective defense against the Soviet Union (and now Russia). According to the NATO website, the organization is “an active and leading contributor to peace and security on the international stage” that “promotes democratic values and is committed to the peaceful resolution of disputes” with “approximately 20,000 military personnel ... engaged in NATO operations and missions around the world.” If Russia is deemed a threat to Europe and NATO, then the European members of NATO need to take primary responsibility for defending themselves against that threat — and they should view that threat widely to include Russian cyberthreats as well as misinformation and disinformation campaigns meant to undermine elections. That doesn't mean a U.S. withdrawal from NATO. But it is long past the post-World War II era when European countries were struggling to regain their footing and needed America to be the bulwark of its defense. Europe as a whole is today an economic powerhouse — second only to the United States. NATO Europe can and should do more to provide for its own security rather than depending on the U.S. to act as the front line of its defense. All that needs to happen is for those countries to be as serious as they were with COVID-19 and take the same approach to national security as they did when the pandemic began. Charles V. Peña is a senior fellow with Defense Priorities. He has experience supporting the U.S. departments of Defense and Homeland Security. He previously served as the director of defense for policy studies at the Cato Institute, and he is author of “Winning the Un—War: A New Strategy for the War on Terrorism.” https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/08/20/money-and-missions-nato-should-learn-from-europes-pandemic-response/

Nathan Strout WASHINGTON — Beginning in September, entities across the U.S. Department of Defense will be able to buy small, American-manufactured drones from five select companies, allowing users in the field to quickly and easily gain a bird's eye view of their environment. A spin-off of U.S. Army efforts to develop a rucksack-packable quadcopter with the Short Range Reconnaissance (SRR) program of record, the Defense Innovation Unit's Blue sUAS effort let's U.S. government customers purchase trusted small Unmanned Aerial Systems (sUAS) that can take off and land vertically. The new drones were developed to comply with Section 848 of the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act, which prohibits the procurement of UAS built in China. Drone configurations will be available from five manufacturers: Altavian, Parrot, Skydio, Teal, and Vantage Robotics. “I think the fact that we started a program with a single requirement around an Army effort and were able to scale it across not only all of the services in DoD to include (U.S. Special Operations Command) and the combatant commands as well as the inter-agency federal government partners ― at least to me ― is super exciting,” Chris Bonzagni, a program manager within DIU's autonomy portfolio and an sUAS subject matter expert, told C4ISRNET. “As a former infantryman, having this capability when I was deployed to Iraq would have been a dream come true.” While Blue sUAS uses the same aerial vehicles as SRR, it offers a vendor-provided ground control system and radio configurations that can be used by customers across DoD and the federal government more broadly. Blue sUAS drones will be available on the GSA schedule starting in September 2020, though DoD entities can also pursue a production contract via Other Transaction Authority, DIU noted in their announcement. “Blue sUAS represents a tremendous first step toward building a robust and trusted UAS domestic industrial base that ensures sustained delivery of highly-capable, secure UAS to the warfighters that depend on it,” said Michael Kratsios, Acting Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering. “Blue sUAS showcases how we can both work with small, nontraditional companies and our allies and partners to quickly pilot cutting-edge technologies that support our mutual defense.” The path to Blue sUAS started about two years ago, according to Bonzagni. The Army approached DIU for help adopting commercial quadcopters for use by every platoon. DIU staff walked the Army through their Commercial Solutions Opening process, distilling about 60 pages of requirements to just a page and a half, making them more accessible to commercial companies looking to work with DoD. Those specifications were posted in November 2018, drawing 34 responses from industry. DIU accepted pitches from half of those companies, and ultimately downselected to just six companies five months later in April 2019. Of those six companies, four had never even worked with DoD before. “Blue sUAS is a great example of DoD acquisition reform by lowering the barrier to entry for non-traditional companies to rapidly iterate shoulder to shoulder with warfighters to deliver highly capable sUAS tailored to mission needs,” said Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Ellen Lord in a statement. Under those contracts, DIU worked with those six companies to modify their mature commercial products for broader DoD needs. Among other things, the companies had to incorporate a thermal camera, add a DoD data link, cyber test the drones and ruggedize them for field use. Midway through development, Congress passed a new requirement in the annual defense policy legislation, prohibiting the operation or procurement of UAS manufactured in China. That effort grounded significant numbers of government drones, said Bonzagni, and there were no suitable U.S.-manufactured alternatives available. While the Army continued to focus on developing a solution specifically for its soldiers through SRR, the new requirement opened up a much broader need across the federal government for U.S.-manufactured sUAS. DIU was able to leverage the Army's investment in SRR and make the technology available for all federal government customers — including organizations that use drones every day like the Bureau of Land Management or the U.S. Geological Survey — as Blue sUAS. Drones available through Blue sUAS can be assembled in two minutes or less and will have an operational range of over 3 kilometers, flight endurance greater than 30 minutes, and can fly through dust and rain. All products are three pounds or greater. According to Bonzagni, DIU is looking for a pricing range between $7,000 and $15,000 per unit, although the end price point will vary based on configuration. “While all these offerings were derived from essentially consumer-based [products] ― in some cases toys and some cases fun cameras in the sky — these are sUAS built for work,” explained Matthew Borowski, program manager within DIU's sUAS portfolio and an sUAS subject matter expert. “There really is no consumer offering that has the type of payload package that these drones have on them, including higher resolution thermal cameras [and cameras with seamless zoom].” https://www.c4isrnet.com/unmanned/2020/08/20/department-of-defense-can-now-buy-us-manufactured-small-drones-from-these-five-companies/

Mark Pomerleau WASHINGTON — As the U.S. Defense Department matures its cyber force and training, it wants greater visibility over the readiness of its teams and a more realistic training environment that replicates the entirety of the internet, including social media. These two areas were the focus of the latest industry day for the Persistent Cyber Training Environment, or PCTE, which is U.S. Cyber Command's online client that allows worldwide cyber mission force teams to connect and conduct individual and team training as well as mission rehearsal. The Army is running the program on behalf of Cyber Command and the joint cyber force. The Aug. 19 industry day specifically focused on what the PCTE program office is calling Cyber Innovation Challenge 4. Officials have said that Cyber Innovation Challenge 4 differs from its predecessors, partly because how the program office has matured and better integrated with the operational force at Cyber Command and the service cyber components. The challenges are ways to deliver incremental capability to the training platform. They also serve as competitions to award contracts and layer new technologies onto the platform, oftentimes involving smaller, nontraditional defense companies. There were 78 companies registered to the industry day — 25 percent of which were new to PCTE competitions and cyber innovation challenges. “What do I need from you? The two major areas we're focused on today are cyber mission force assessment, which is improving our ability to assess our training of the force, and two, traffic generation. Increasing the realism of operating [in] the internet,” Lt. Gen. Stephen Fogarty, commander of Army Cyber Command, told the industry audience during the remote event. These two focus areas emerged from multiple discussions with Cyber Command and the service cyber components, officials said. Part of what is driving the greater need to assess the force and understand its readiness is new reporting requirements from Congress. “The assessment functionally must be able to incorporate defined training standards which will enable USCYBERCOM to accurately measure and maintain team and mission readiness, which has become even more critical with the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act directing quarterly reviews of the cyber mission force's readiness,” said Col. Tanya Trout, the outgoing director of the Joint Cyber Training Enterprise, which is the nonmaterial component to PCTE at Cyber Command. “Being able to demonstrate how we're impacting readiness is the gamechanger.” A staffer for the House Armed Services Committee said the quarterly assessment is set to be delivered along with the quarterly briefing on cyber operations, as mandated in a previous NDAA. However, due to the ongoing pandemic, the committee has been unable to schedule the briefing. The staffer added that despite not having the report in hand, the committee is encouraged to see the Pentagon has made progress in creating metrics to evaluate the cyber mission force. Commanders also want a better way to see how their forces perform during training so they can review scenarios and modify it as needed. Specific requests to industry include planning tools, a scoring engine, an assessment repository and data collection, analytics dashboards and aggregation, and external reporting. “These capabilities will give commanders better tools to assess their force. Commanders will be able to look at data and assess individual ... and unit readiness. These capabilities will also give training managers planning tools to meet commander's goals,” Fogarty said. Regarding traffic generation, Fogarty said there's a need for forces to be able to operate across the continuum of the information environment, not just within a certain set of networks. These include friendly space, gray space — which refers to the neutral area of the broader internet — and adversarial networks (known as red space). “The environment that PCTE replicates has to actually replicate the real-world environment,” he said. “We need a way to define, shape and record realistic traffic emulation capabilities that mirror real-world activities and terrain across the cyber domain. But also, very importantly, in the information environment, that includes social media because it would be very simple for us if all we had to do was worry about just the network. What we have to worry about is the entire information environment.” The program office is now looking for host/user-based traffic activities, cyber traffic terrain, network traffic layers, information operations and social media layers, and traffic command-and-control dashboards. https://www.c4isrnet.com/cyber/2020/08/20/heres-what-us-cyber-command-wants-next-for-its-training-platform/

Toyko has put the breaks on its Aegis Ashore program, and there are reports its support for the Global Hawk buy may be soft. By PAUL MCLEARYon August 20, 2020 at 4:29 PM WASHINGTON: As Japan undergoes the deepest rethink of its defense posture since the end of the Second World War, some big-ticket acquisition programs appear to be on shaky ground as the country retools to counter a rapidly modernizing Chinese military. Tokyo put the brakes on two planned Aegis Ashore missile defense systems set to be built on the mainland, a surprise June move that came after local communities protested about the powerful radars and possibility that rocket debris could fall on local communities. That reversal on a major $2.1 billion program led to questions over what other changes the government of Shinzo Abe might consider as it retools its defense strategy and considers funneling more money into offensive strike weapons, as opposed to purely defensive systems. Earlier this week, fresh reports emerged from Tokyo that the government might also be reconsidering its purchase of three Global Hawk UAVs, which would provide long-endurance surveillance capabilities. One source with knowledge of the program said, despite the reports, the Japanese government has indicated it supports the Global Hawk program, even in the face of possible divestiture by the US Air Force of its block 30 variants, the same version Northrop Grumman is making for Japan. Despite the moves in Washington, South Korea is still in the process of buying four block 30 Global Hawks, the first of which was delivered in April. Further south, Australia purchased six MQ-4C Tritons — the maritime version of the Global Hawk — with the first three to be delivered between 2023 and 2025. With those allies remaining in the program, and the US flying the drone from Guam on a seasonal basis, the allies have started to build a powerful, long-endurance sensor layer, along with its attendant supply chain. That sort of capability would fit within plans the Indo-Pacific Command pitched to the Trump administration earlier this year to invest billions in joint infrastructure across the region. The proposal has found bipartisan support on Capitol Hill, with the Republican-controlled Senate's version of the annual defense policy bill including $1.4 billion for an Indo-Pacific Deterrence Initiative, while the Democratic-controlled House had $3.6 billion for an Indo-Pacific Reassurance Initiative focused on shoring up allies and partners. A conference committee will have to thrash out the differences and fill in almost all the details this fall. The Japanese Ministry of Defense did not respond to questions on the issue by publication. “Unmanned systems are going to be vital — in particular underwater unmanned systems and also aerial unmanned systems — given that Japan is an archipelago,” Ryo Hinata-Yamaguchi, professor at Pusan National University, said during a virtual event sponsored by the Atlantic Council on Wednesday. “Those are the domains that are most vital to Japan's security. It's really about Japan thinking about what we can afford to do, what we need to do.” https://breakingdefense.com/2020/08/japans-reset-raises-questions-over-big-programs

by Andrew White Northrop Grumman Armament Systems is moving to verify the design and upgrade its Mobile Acquisition Cueing and Effector (M-ACE) system following a test event completed in July. Conducted at the company's private proving grounds, northwest of Armament Systems' headquarters near Minneapolis, the event was aimed at demonstrating advanced predictive cueing integration between the M-ACE vehicle – which is equipped with radar, electro-optical/infrared (EO/IR), radio frequency (RF) sensors, and a command and control (C2) suite – and several Scorpion air defence (AD) vehicles fitted with 30 mm M230LF Bushmaster cannons. M-ACE comprises a multi-mission ground and air security which can be tasked with counter-unmanned aircraft system (C-UAS) operations, company officials told Janes . Northrop Grumman's Business Development Director, Armament Systems C-UAS, Robert Menti, said the event successfully proved a fully “networked, integrated, full kill chain” capable of detecting ground and UAS threats at extended ranges. “The advanced predictive cueing capability enables shortening the kill chain decision cycle (target identification, classification, and prioritisation) at near machine speed,” Menti explained. “This is accomplished through the fusion of sensors and autonomous/artificial intelligence capabilities of the system.” The next test event is scheduled to be conducted at Big Sandy Range in Arizona in October which will see the Scorpion AD vehicles firing proximity fused ammunition from the M230LF to destroy UASs that are initially identified, tracked, and targeted by M-ACE. https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/northrop-grumman-armament-systems-advances-m-ace-development

Lee Ann Shay August 21, 2020 Changes in military sustainment--including the push for agile development and the use of cloud-based software—could hint at broader shifts in the overall aftermarket. Listen as Aviation Week speaks to Accenture's aerospace team talks about these developments. https://aviationweek.com/mro/podcast-could-military-sustainment-shifts-impact-broader-aftermarket

By: Andrew Chuter LONDON — Britain is stepping up its military support in Ukraine with an announcement that the U.K. will lead a multinational maritime initiative to train the Ukrainian navy. During a visit to Ukraine on Aug. 17 British Defense Secretary Ben Wallace confirmed the Royal Navy is coordinating a training initiative which also involves Canada, Denmark and Sweden. The training initiative will be complemented by U.S. security assistance support, said the British Ministry of Defence in a statement. Other nations are expected to join the naval training effort, said the MoD. The British-led training will focus on areas such as navigation, operational planning, military diving, sea surveillance, firefighting and damage control. The Royal Navy also plans to deploy warships to the region later in the year, Wallace said. Last year the Royal Navy Type 45 destroyer HMS Duncan visited Ukraine as part of the NATO's Sea Breeze exercise. That followed a visit by the survey ship HMS Echo. The U.K. has been conducting maritime training with the Ukraine for a while. Last year the British announced they were enlarging the scope of a wider military training effort, known as Operation Orbital, by deploying training teams from the Royal Navy and Royal Marines to boost a Ukrainian Navy facing increasing threats from Russia in the Sea of Azov. The Ukrainians are trying to rebuild a maritime presence following Moscow's annexation of Crimea in 2014. Ukraine lost most of its navy, including 75 percent of personnel, 70 percent of ships and key infrastructure. It faces a rising number of threats from the Russians in the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea, and its armed forces continue to counter Moscow-backed separatists in the Donbass region of the country. Last year the Ukrainian navy unveiled a 15-year, three-stage strategy to rebuild naval capabilities starting with the aim of developing capabilities to establish control over territorial waters and beyond by 2025. Britain announced late last year it was extending Operation Orbital by three years to March 2023, and despite a COVID-19 enforced suspension, now lifted, the U.K. armed forces have trained over 18,000 Ukrainian military personnel. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/08/19/britain-moves-to-boost-ukraines-naval-chops/

Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — In 2022, the U.S. Air Force will take delivery of the F-15EX, a new and improved version of the nearly 40-year-old F-15E Strike Eagle. But for all of the modern advances of the new jet, only 9 percent of women in the Air Force currently meet the body-size standards for piloting the legacy F-15 and possibly also the new EX variant, potentially blocking highly qualified pilots from flying a platform that will be in operation for decades to come. Like the vast majority of the Air Force's aircraft and aircrew equipment, the F-15 was designed to meet the anthropometric specifications of a male pilot in 1967. But in an Aug. 4 memo, the Air Force mandated that future weapons programs use current body size data that reflects the central 95 percent of the U.S. recruitment population — a move meant to make pilot and aircrew jobs more accessible to women and people of color. Air Force acquisition executive Will Roper, who signed off on the changes, said there is a strategic imperative for opening the door to a more diverse pool of pilots and aircrew. During a war with a near-peer, technologically advanced nation like China, the U.S. military will have to contend with a well-trained, highly educated force that might outnumber its own, he said. By fielding weapon systems that can only be used by a smaller portion of the U.S. population, the Air Force could be shutting out some of its most promising potential pilots or aircrew. “The human factor is a delineator and it likely will be against an adversary like China, where I believe we will have a greater propensity to trust the operator in the seat, to delegate more, to empower more and take greater risk in that delegation,” Roper told Defense News in an exclusive Aug. 6 interview. “All well and good when you're a country that's going to face a country with a population that's four times your own by the end of this decade,” he said. “But if we begin with a recruitment population that we've artificially halved because of how we design our cockpits and workstations, we've just doubled our work, and now we make every operator in the seat have to be eight times better than the counterpart they will face in a nation like China.” The new guidance directs the Air Force Lifecycle Management Center to conduct a study that will solidify a more inclusive anthropometric standard that would include 95 percent of the U.S. population eligible for recruitment in the U.S. Air Force. But until that wraps up, all new-start Air Force programs must be designed with cockpits, aircrew operating stations and aircrew equipment that accommodates eight anthropometric data sets. These eight cases use measurement data from the Centers for Disease Control and represent a range of body types including individuals who are short in stature, have short limbs or have a long torso. AFLCMC's Airman's Accommodations Laboratory will also run a three-year study that will develop separate anthropometric standards for career enlisted aviators, who perform specialized jobs onboard military aircraft including flight engineers, flight attendants and loadmasters. Currently, career enlisted aviators also must meet the 1967 anthropometric standards. ‘A hidden barrier' The legacy design parameters — which stem from a 1967 survey of male pilots and measure everything from a pilot's standing height, eye height while sitting, and reach — have effectively barred 44 percent of women from being able to fly aircraft unless they receive a waiver, with women of color disproportionately affected, the Air Force stated. Even after a waiver is granted, the pilot will remain disqualified from certain platforms regardless of his or her aptitude. Then, when future requirements are defined for new platforms or equipment, the systems are usually designed to meet the existing pool of pilots, creating a self-perpetuating problem. “It is a hidden barrier with multiple layers,” said Lt. Col. Jessica Ruttenber, an Air Force mobility planner and a leader of the Women's Initiative Team that advocated for the change in anthropometric standards. “People are trying to do the right thing, but the barriers are baked into legacy policy. And without even knowing it, they're kind of cut and pasting the same standard.” Ruttenber said the new guidance addresses the root of the problem by establishing new design specifications — ensuring platforms are engineered to accommodate a wide range of body sizes from the start of the development process, rather than papering over the problem with waivers after the fact. “[For] the next inter-theater airlift that is going to replace the C-130 or C-17, we can't get the anthropometric data wrong or women are still going to be eliminated 30 years from now. The C-130 and C-17 still eliminate one out of three women from flying it,” she said. For more than a year, the Women's Initiative Group worked with Chief Master Sgt. Chris Dawson, the career field manager for the Air National Guard's career enlisted aviators, on trying to garner funding for an anthropometric study for CEAs. “There were so many communities we had to coordinate with that we realized really quickly that this has to come from the top down or we're not going to be as successful,” Ruttenber said. After meeting with Roper, the Women's Initiative group was granted $4 million for the study. Ruttenber, a KC-135 pilot, remembers being pulled out of her first pilot training class in 2005 because her physical examination indicated that she didn't meet the standing height requirement of 5-foot-4 by a fraction of an inch. She then sought a waiver that would allow her to fly. “The process was different back then. I had to drive from base to base and get measured in each cockpit in an attempt to get an exception to policy. I went to Charleston and I got measured in a C-17, and then I went to Little Rock and got measured in a C-130,” she said. “I got measured in the KC-135 and so on and so on and so on.” Since then, the Air Force has made the process to obtain a waiver less arduous, and it recently removed the initial height requirement — although some platforms still require pilots to meet the 5-foot-4 standard. Newer aircraft such as the F-35 joint strike fighter and the T-7 trainer currently under development will also accommodate a wider height and weight range. However, Ruttenber pointed out that the specifications for legacy aircraft will remain a hurdle for the progression of female pilots. “Even if the F-35 is 97 percent accommodating for women, I still can't get there because the T-38,” which is used for fighter pilot training, “has a 41 percent accommodation envelope for women,” she said. Roper said he is working with defense contractors to see whether there can be modifications made to legacy platforms — or upgraded versions like the F-15EX — that will accommodate operators with a wider range of body sizes. But whether those changes are ultimately made will depend on if they are technically feasible and funding is available for design changes. At the time of the Aug. 6 interview, Roper had already spoken to some defense industry executives — including those from Lockheed Martin — about the new guidance and planned similar phone calls with Boeing and Northrop Grumman officials over the coming days. The reaction from industry so far has been “very positive” but “very surprised” that such bias still exists, he said. However, Roper acknowledged that more work has yet to be done. “Changing the policy is one thing. Changing the platforms is another. And that's going to require cost to do. My next job, aside from designing future systems differently — which we'll do — is to find options to bring systems into greater compliance with the new policy and then to advocate tooth and nail for the funding needed to do it,” he said. “The litmus test for the Air Force long term has got to be balancing accommodation with the technology for future platforms.” https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2020/08/19/to-get-more-female-pilots-the-air-force-is-changing-the-way-it-designs-weapons/