america. yesterday, a panel of active-duty and retired u.s. air force officials discussed the importance of maintaining air superiority on the global stage. posted by the mitchell institute for aerospace studies, this is about an hour. >> our fellow on panel, which we are fortunate to have with us. deputy chief of staff for the airports for operations nolan and his partner, lieutenant mison.l -- -- dash ja a cat bit of introduction for you all. i think most of the people in this room understand that air superiority is a tenet of national security operation. we can't succeed unless we have it. however, in terms of quantity of aircraft, the united states air force has been on a down slide for over 25 years now. the air force has 59% fewer fighter squadrons than it had during operation desert storm in 1991, but we had 130 four squadrons at the time. got 33% fewer people and fewer total aircraft. at the same time, the air force is operating a geriatric force that is becoming more so every day. bombers and tankers over 50 trainers over 40 and fighters and helicopters over 30. our air support your geforce a decline in quantity, it is taking a hit in quality, as well. the air force has been at war not just since 9/11, but since 1991. of continuous combat operations, coupled with budget instability and lower than planned budgets have put the air force in a position where it simply cannot produce the quantity and quality required of this threat demand around the world. it is one thing to get smaller with a more ready force, but today, the air force is both smaller and the least ready force it has ever been. and a half,t decade the united states is at risk of losing its ability to control the air domain in combat. budget pressures have forced delays in key investments. our adversaries continue to advance. historicalline is a u.s. claim to air superiority is increasingly in jeopardy and the video you are about to see provides the fact and the context to illustrate the precarious situation in our military air forces now find themselves. so let's see and hear more about this. if you would please roll the video. engines] >> our ground forces have not come under attack from enemy aircraft since the korean war 65 years ago. it is because the united states has been able to maintain air providing the freedom of action required by our war fighters to emerge victorious in the battle space. however, our claim to air supremacy is increasingly in jeopardy. decades,past several our potential adversaries have closely followed the technological advances and employment doctrine that have attributed to our dominance in the air domain. realizing this potential -- realizing this, they have taken concerted efforts to counter our air power advantage. the challenges we face today are growing income plex the and sophistication as our opponents deploy and use new technologies. as a result, we face increasing challenges in every domain relevant to air security. air, space and cyberspace. pervasive --st modern ground based air defenses has under -- reached unprecedented lethality. since the first practical sam's in the 1950's, our potential adversaries have pursued their development as a means to counter american air power, which for more than 70 years has been the foundation of our military might. over time, nearly air power advancement we have fielded has been matched by sam's, which have become increasingly effective against a broader array of airborne targets at longer ranges. both russia and china are producing state-of-the-art sam's . shown are several currently fielded systems that directly challenge our bid for air supremacy. these modern systems can engage as many as three dozen targets simultaneously at ranges in excess of 200 miles. furthermore, they are not tied to a prepared site. they are highly mobile, allowing them to relocate in minutes, rather than hours or days. -- thestrate the ellis changing dynamics of the sam challenge, threats posed by the vietnam era sam. it has a short range coverage reaching out nearly to baltimore from washington. 10 and 20, the same systems operated by iran and china. the russian sam sold to china, india and most vietnam.- recently, finally, russia's next generation sam, the s 500, which will be able to cape -- engage targets as far as charlotte and buffalo. these systems are being deployed worldwide and the trend will only continue as additional nations seek to neutralize our air power advantage. naval areas extend the potential threat to anywhere on the globe where our air forces operate. threats, to air base the proliferation of advanced fighters pose and other escalating challenge to our legacy fighter force. even our newest fifth-generation aircraft. at trendsas to look in aircraft development over the past several decades to see where our legacy today are most numerous fighters are outmatched by the latest russian and chinese designs. every stage of modern fighter development our emphasis never failed to meet the challenges we present them with. today there's basically no distinct fourth-generation advantage we hold. rushes at the forefront of advanced fighter technology development but chide is also rapidly moving forward with significant developments based on improvements to existing foreign technologies. both countries continue to push the envelope fifth-generation technologies. both russia and hina are willing to export these fighters to anyone able to pay for them so they probably will only continue to worsen. russia's recently fielded its latest to the su 35, a very advanced fighter that will help reach the gap between the current fourth-generation fighters and future fifth-generation aircraft. the su-35 incorporates numerous fifth-generation fighter attributes such as advanced digital flight controls, , centrifuging, high-powered jammers and ultra-long-range air to air missiles. in the meantime a potential adversaries have produced and tested their own inaugural fifth-generation fighters. russia's contender has been an active flight for several years. china is developing fifth-generation aircraft, the g20 and the j31. both aircraft are also an advanced flight testing and are expected to enter service by 2020. russian and chinese fifth-generation fighters are specifically designed to counter the f-22 and f-35 as well as to neutralize our airport command-and-control and isr advantage by targeting high-value airborne acid such as awacs, rivet joint and jstars or standoff ranges. some adversary fighters are also equipped with their advanced russian engines that incorporate thrust vectoring technology. this technology provide significant dynamic maneuverability and turning capability. and resulting edge of the permits rapid reorientation towards unanticipated threats and it just tactical dominance at close in as well standoff ranges. the heart and soul of an air superiority fighter is it centers especially its radar. in the past decade russia has unveiled several active electronically standard radars. also known as -- these powerful sensors for poorly can simultaneously perform multiple tasks, track up to 30 targets while engaging out to 100 miles. china has developed its own radar for its buyers including the j10 nj 11. in the air to air missile field we have traditionally held the advantage of beyond visual range combat with our in 120 mrap. that is also change. russia and china have both yielded missiles of their own. one can see the parity have achieved in comparison to our current baseline. while the beat will restore its superiority in terms of missile range, both china and russia are also developing follow one missiles with significantly increased range performance. future adversary missile esigns specifically intended to far outpace our reach in the air to arena director challenging our superiority and holy are most critical assets at risk from greater and greater distances, thereby taking them out of the fight. looking at other risks we face, one of the most challenging is is the cyber threat. our air and space are increasingly rely on cyber connectivity and cyber enabled capabilities. russia, china and others recognize the potential vulnerabilities of our cyber dependencies, and are our cyber dependencies, and are fielding dedicated and highly specific programs to exploit and attack our military computer networks and platform resident mission systems. last but certainly not least is the issue of space superiority. the united states once enjoyed uncontested master of the space domain but lost that luxury a decade ago when china shocked the world by destroying a target satellite with an interceptor missile. that event dramatically illustrated that space is a no longer a sanctuary for us. since 2007 but certainly not least is the china has conducted at least for additional test the different anti-space anti-space weapons while russia has repeatedly tested its anti-settler missile, the pl 19. bringing it all together with a significant challenges across the board. we can no longer operate with impunity against modern surface-based defenses. current and developmental adversary aircraft for even our latest and best while challenges in space and cyberspace negative impact every air force mission area. if we do not make a concerted effort to revitalize air supremacy enterprise, these challenges the only grow as our qualitative edge continues to ab. this not a question of dollars but lies. beginning with those of our servicemen nd women. this kind of contest there is no prize for second best. i know we don't have the production budget steven spielberg has, but i hope some there is no prize for second f the points came across. if ou would join the upfront. what we will do next is run the panel today in a discussion format. i'm going to plenty of time for audience participation. for answering the first question i've asked our panel members to make a couple of introductory remarks. we will start with general jamison addressing the significance droit threat capabilities that you saw highlighted in the video. then we will turn over to general noland to hear his thoughts on how we're going to meet those threat capabilities and these challenges that are growing around the world and present us some pretty difficult situation. so with that, over to you. thanks so much, general. appreciate it, mitchell institute, for organizing all of this sunny day. fantastic opportunity to have a dialogue. and i really appreciate the fact that you invited both -- for an integrated picture of what we see for the future. let me just give you a few comments. intel, we don't have against you, but i will start with saying that. about how we see, how i see the threat picture. i thought the film did a a great job of setting the scene. so i'm going to dig into some of those aspects. if you didn't conclude i'm sure you all have concluded, we are really not as far ahead of our adversaries as we are used to being. and no longer is russia like it so the counterpart where brute force was one of its tactics and in the older eneration of time, chinese look at overwhelming capability with numbers and that really is not how they are going in the future. we are rapidly approaching a world where the united states will no longer be assured of an uncontested air superiority situation. i would also submit that development by our peer adversaries, russia and china, are closing the advantages some traditional areas that we've enjoyed and it only takes a quick review of what's happened, what are some significant things that's happened really and alas, i could even say 12 months but i will go back about 24. and i give you a couple specifics. in syria we have seen russia starting to use a lot more precision guided munitions. we ave seen them with a long-range aviation stories, 18-24 hours long. from china we have seen with their bombers going out six to 8+ hours whether used to only fly in their little world. and we've seen both air forces take a look at not just using their fighters or bombers but ntegrating in airborne command and control isr and refueling capability. so it really has hanged. and to shape because her adversaries are watching us. they are learning from us and the skies over iraq and specifically syria have really just been a treasure trove for them to see how we operate. we also know where watchmaker and -- we are watched, and today over the korean peninsula. ashington has gained invaluable insights and information with, operating in a contested airspace alongside of us in syria. and they are incorporating lessons learned of actually doing a first away fight from the homeland. china has established its first four and based in djibouti last year in 2017, and it's going to provide them a unique opportunity to actually be able to monitor our operations in the region. china and russia are not just concentrated on defeating our air superiority, fighters and individual combat. they're taking a broader multi-domain approach. let's take a look at space-based systems that feed our air security elements are increasingly at risk from russia and china's system. as he saw in the film. they are looking at error, grant and space launched systems. they have cyber attack capability and their advancing those apabilities, and we assess today that they clearly have integrated cyber attack integrated cyber attack capabilities into their come what i would say, plans for engagements in the future. our adversaries are much more smarter, much more flexible and they are focused on countering our strengths across a broad multi-domain spectrum. what are he implications since i am the director of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance? i'm going to also share with you, what are some of the challenges we face from it isr perspective? and i as a really we look at just an director of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance? i'm going to unrelenting operations tempo with our many lines of effort across multiple different areas of responsibility, and we've got to look to new ways to maximize our efficiencies. the days of using single aircraft for single aircraft category such as cast, , fighters, attack, bombers are really old and better transition to new think with multirole capabilities that we have brought up, but went to look at that at our current inventory are we moving out with that with our operations. we also and isr enterprise have to posture our software effectively and i would offer to went to look at data as a weapon. the air force isr enterprise will be data centric and will allow in this war fighters the ability to fuse information from multiple sources. and when i talk about the i'm not just talking about exquisite dod capabilities. on talking about integrating and publicly available information to our portfolio in support of commanders object is at speed and skill of current operation and future operations. data rich environment comes with challenges though, including the volume velocity and veracity of unstructured data. but our use of and integration with machine learning and artificial intelligence and to current communications, current capabilities, is allowing us to develop additional tpp to fight t the speed of computing. when we look at the isr enterprise and where we are going for solution, we will continue to plan and program based on defensive military priorities e look at the isr enterprise to ensure that are isr to ensure that are isr enterprise is equipped to support war fighters across the broad spectrum, specifically to balance our capabilities, space come cyber, not just simply focus on air. and as we do this, data sharing between our sr enterprise and intelligence community is paramount for that effort. so i'd like to shift and can close my opening comments with we've got to anufacture time and space back for our analysts to actually get at identify and predicting actionable intelligence, affording our decision-makers the ability to have decision advantage you all have heard many mitchell forums talk about closing down -- their slightest atchison u.s. but we've also seen that from both china and russia, that the decision cycle has got to be spent up, and who gets the past is going to dominate in tomorrow's environment. so we're going to learn and we are going to continue to lean on human machine teaming, human machine learning algorithmic warfare, and pathways artificial intelligence to allow computers to do what computer to best, and human analytic, and of us adversary is doing from an and human analytic, and of us come to do what they do best which is predicted trends and actually forecast with the intent wide stamper, not just on history, on what they have accomplished. so with that i'd like to turn it over to my compadre here to talk labette about what is the air force from an operational, looking at dealing with things. okay, thank you very much, dash. is this on? now it is. thank you very much. jenna, thank you for the invitation, for the press corps, the staffers, the officers, the attaches, the friends, the industry partners and all standing in the back looking on. thank you for being out here on a great day. it's great to talk about the united states air force. in that video you just watched was very nstructive. now, if you look at the video and think about that video, what you saw is a at the video and think about progression of time. and what ucsf the enemy, not the enemy, our part in a, part of then competitors have been watching us. dash can , hit it. they had been watching us. as you move along, you may question today that video demonstrate we had overmatch in every one of those competitions, those wars that we thought. and i'm here to tell you with overmatch today here united states air force can and will maintain air supremacy today. the question is the future. the question is the rate of change, and what can we do to affect the future. so i was at a seminar, we have blue horizons. blue horizons is a study group. i love its captains and mages, its young office if they get together on a year and a study, people about and put them on the study and they said, hey, what can we do? how do we affect change? and the number one answer was this. we have to quit thinking like the champion and start thinking like the contender. we have become complacent. imitation is the ultimate form of flattery, and our competitors arnoldo imitating us, they are improving upon what we have done and how we re getting after it. so there, was, you've got to start thinking like a contender. you have to be hungry. you have to do things differently. but we've been here before. this is not new. we have a tendency to forget our heritage. we had been accused of a palos chariot, the acquisition, the accusation of the air force only concerned about the newest, greatest passes, shines a point. it's not true. but we forget our heritage. no. what forget our heritage. no. what we start world war ii, we didn't have much of an air force. think of what we did when the b-17, b24, p 51, p 38, think of how we gain air supremacy. we fought for that. the video highlighted korea. the video highlighted korea. there was a fight for air supremacy in korea that many of our veterans remember. vietnam, we forget that the air force bled in vietnam. we all bled as a nation but air force bled in vietnam which resulted in guys greeting things called red flag. creating what we now have as our weapons program were to go out and shoot and drop bombs. and think about the anges that we did and created. but we have developed those but we have not really kept the momentum going. because we have been at fighting america's wars. i just want to remind you that last year isis at territory, isis has no territory today. that's the joint fight but that was also enabled by a lot of airmen. when i say amen i'm not talking u.s. air force. i'm talking rmy airmen, marine airmen, air force airman, navy, joint fight that controls the third dimension as we went forward there. so we have to invest, but we can't invest in new old. force airman, navy, joint fight what i mean is we can't just keep doing the same thing and approving it went to think new new. so now for something totally different. there's a book by gs quinn called pass the perfect pass. he's a writer out of texas and there is no, i have no kickbacks coming from this but i highly recommend this book if you want to think about change and how you change hings. many of us sat around this weekend on new year's day and watched the bowl games and this weekend on new year's day and watched the bowl games and watched football. you compare football in 2018 compared to 1973. 1973 is the is the team, the miami dolphins that have the perfect season, right? bob griese was a quarterback, considered one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time. how many times did he throw the 1973. 1973 is the is the team, ball? may be speeded i don't know. maybe 15 a game. how many times do they throw the ball this weekend in the game that we just watched in the rose bowl? football has changed in front of our eyes and we don't even recognize it. how did it change? it didn't change from a big institution top-down. it change from a group, small group who had a better idea and then instituted that across high school, college, and eventually into the pros. so if we think that we're going to change by come in with a big institutional change that's going to change things, i don't think so. i think the best way we're going to change to get new new resides in those young officers that i saw at new horizon, or those young weapons officers are going to be graduated, such as graduated last week from weapons school, or those new tax that are just penny on a think about how we do it differently. but the bottom line is it's just not in the military. i did industry to hange, too. because industry has got to be a partner with us because our strength of our nation is in our industrial military ability to come together and capitalize on our diversity of thought. and not stifle the new thought, but do things differently. that's how we're going to ensure that we control the third dimension. i went to school called the school of dance and our studies and the made in the rights of this. they didn't really make me but i but i memorize it anyway. the quote is an superiority is the critical synergistic enabler for all forms of military power. it is absolutely true, but it's not air superiority. it's air and space superiority. it is control of the third dimension. t is not our birthright as americans. we have to fight for it and we've got to start acting like the contender. thank you. okay. i think after hearing americans. we have to fight for these two you will agree with me that the air force has quite the intel ops team, and we very much appreciate your perspectives. now, as promised i want to leave plenty of time for audience participation. so with that i will open the floor to questions. go ahead. please do wait for the mic, introduce yourself and away you o. sidney friedberg, breaking defense. on the subject of getting multiple missions on every platform, jenna, you particularly mentioned this from your step standpoint it referred a lot about f-35 being a multi, not just after our. how about the b21 as we evolve how about the b21 as we evolve that? what extent is that going o be a penetrating platform? talked o what general bout us being the contender. .. we actually have to set up our young officers and our maintenance enlisted folks and our intel folks to understand how we actually employ today. when we break out of our paradigm of only f-15 can do air superiority and so on, we have to condition and look at not just how are we employing, but how are we scheduling, communicating to the joint force and how are we breaking down paradigms that have existed for decades. we are working on that. the easiest example is with the m2 nine and you all have seen this so that's what i'm going to use that as my template. we have seen it conduct isr for years. we've seen it shoot fires for years, but we have not institutionalized that when we put it on an air tasking order it can do multi mission. we schedule it to do tasks. we schedule another group to do isr. we are saying that's old think. let's break that down and say let's put on the ato, there are more spirals, and ensure that when there are troops in contact, let's just say in syria, that it operates in an attack task role and when it is and it's scheduled for isr. gives the crew the capability to respond in kind so we look at our family of systems capabilities we will have conditioned our force, our joint force, our process and procedures, and our doctrine to employ the way we want to employ which is not in a single form, but in multi- role capabilities, and then we've got everything honed so that when the be 21 comes out or any other operating generation platform, that it is given the mission and a multirole environment using mission type orders versus a specific set to attack and that's it. does that address your question? in general mullen, do you have any comments. i think you've got it. we are on a journey. we're thinking about it differently. we can talk about the requirements of the be 21 in this form, but i think that's the way the approach, and it's key to industry to hear this, the approach of howard thinking about things and how our j fax work at the joint force to enable that within our testing cycle. you've heard a lot about ulti- domain command-and-control. multi- domain battle is another term starting to use and think about. it's the same concept. think you. i will take the prerogative of sand appear to just elaborate a bit on what these two folks said. they are spot on. if you heard earlier, general nolan's comment with respect to changing the way we think about the employment of force, reinforced by what -- also command-and-control. multi- domain battle is another term starting to use and think about. it's the same concept. said, we are still encumbered by something as simple as semantics. we call the next generation long-range sensor shooter a bomber. we still talk bout the f35 and the f-22 as if they were just fighters. they are not. we need to start thinking in that context and we will value them more for their ability to penetrate contested airspace, share information with the rest of force, oftentimes more than we will their ability to shoot missiles or drop bombs. all right, next question. my gifts are. hi, my name is david. realizing that we are looking missiles or drop bombs. all at a system of systems rather than specific airframes, yet our air superiority aircraft, f-22, f-15, f-16 are not getting younger everyday. do you believe the air force needs to invest in keeping these operationally viable and general jamison, i would add to that question the block 45 awacs which is a key part of our superiority capability. i will take the awacs question with command-and-control. the answer is absolutely the future f the air force's new and old. it's penetrating, it's penetrating, nonpenetrating credits manned and unmanned. we have a modernization wave as we look out there and as the secretary of defense has said in our secretary has said, stable budgets from year-to-year allow us to program so that we get continuous improvement as we move along in our modernization. we've got space, we've got a lot of things we have to modernize, and congress, i've got give them credit. they supported us and they've increased our budget. allowed to grow and we just have to get the budgets on time and move forward. the answer is you have to continue to modernize and back to what the eneral said, how do we connect it all? back to dashes weapon, information is a weapon, and many people lifelong with that will we start applying air superiority missions, particularly way back, it was 10 miles power hud and we killed somebody, we shot at eight, killed them at six and we thought we were king kong. that there showed that were oing a lot farther distance, but it's just not the weapon system. go to that diagram where they showed you where the s500, did you see the size of that ring? do you know how big a range we need to replicate that threat, but at the same time, do we realize, you realize it because i really got here over the holidays and flew in an airplane, aviation is good for america and we have put airplanes everywhere which is constricted our cheering training ranges. we have a ying and yang going on. we have to modernize our airplanes and operational training infrastructure while at the same time conform to what america needs to do which is to get mobile store airspace and ranges are national treasures. my long answer is, you can't just squeeze one thing. you've got to do it all which is tough. yes, ma'am. thank you. this question is for you general jamison, recently the air force awarded a $40 million contract to aurora for continued development of o ryan, your predecessor didn't see a role for orion in the isr field in the air force for this long endurance air force. separately there is a $40 million request in the fy 18 defense budget so i'm wondering, have you changed the position from general auto as far as ultra long endurance aircraft go and where does the air force see this aircraft going? what's the future of t? that is a great question. does anyone want to answer that. i think it's still on. how i might approach it is this way. when i came in, the chief and i ad a very frank conversation and the conversation really was, how are we going to continue with the next generation isr capability. as you look at where we've come, and the conversation really e've done things very manually adding airmen to tackle issues and we can't continue to do that. so, i have a team working on an isr flight plan for the next generation isr and it will be completed in early spring. i am holding an industry day on the second of february that is cosponsored and we will start to bring out some of the lements of the isr framework about form. it will be a little premature for me to give you a specific specific answer so i will tease you with please come to industry day. it's on our website, anyone can sign up, it will be held at the ts eye level and we will have a frank conversation on where we anticipate we are going and how we will partner with industry and others to get there. can you give me a little better idea. where is the money coming from? thank you. eneral jamison, you're talking bout what russia is learning from observing the airspace over syria. what things have from observing the airspace over syria. what things have been taken away from matt what challenge has not presented if it's restricted our ability to do anything and how we push back against that. thank you. this is one of the questions i was hoping we would get. so you see, i do have a few notes in front of me because he wanted to bring to all some of the things we have learned on what russia has accomplished and what they have learned flying in syria. i would tell you, let me amplify a little bit about they have employed precision guided munition for the first time in a combat role in their history. wild is -- while it is not the same as the u.s. and i would not mere image, they do not use the same mindset nor do they have the same employment concept but they are using pm at a much greater rate. by their own account, russia has cycled nearly 85% of all line unit aircrew from across the air force into combat operation. one of the things they learned was it's one thing to be in an exercise and train, it's a whole another thing to be in combat and face an adversary and a threat. they wanted to test the mettle. not just of a specific few, but of the majority of their line aircraft and pilots. they have used syria as a testing ground for not just aircraft, but also their munitions as well. i would highlight, they have fired off cruise missiles, air to air missiles, they have used long-range aviation, they have conducted what i would characterize as their first away game operation in a complete and continuous deployment arena. mr. wales, if you would, we did a little resource research. the mod put out and we have an english translation and i brought enough for people to take a look at this, but from publicly available information on what russia is saying that they've done their year in review, it goes every single thing they think they have learned which is pretty incredible for us to actually get the scan of information from their military and defense. we have seen them integrate in some of what we would call their advanced fourth-generation fighters but we do not assess them to be fifth-generation fighters. imus it that way because well we are saying how much the threat has advanced, i don't want to make the threat 10 feet tall. we are ompetitors and russia views, by their own account, as a. , by their own account, as a. , competitor in air and air defense. china was a different philosophy and has said they assess they are about a decade behind us and that they are the underdog but they are trying in he next ten or so years they want to be a. competitor in the want to be a. competitor in the air and air defense arena. i think that does sum up a good example of how the two different countries view themselves and view themselves versus the united states. but, some other things i think are worth mentioning, one of the things russia learned in china is watching, what is russia learning. one of the things we've seen is russia employees in a joint environment. while it was not as integrated as we operate, it is a change for them. china took that. china exercises are truly of a joint nature where they exercise all of their components together because they see the value of joint interoperability. lastly, i would offer you this, specifically from an air capability we have seen both russia and china use a little more flexibility based on the technology and the advances in their newer fighter aircraft to where there is a little more fusion of data in the aircraft so they're able to be a little more flexible in their tp p. not such a strict reliance on gci. i think that's an mportant distinction they have learned and gain confidence in a combat setting. learned and gain confidence in combat setting. yes, ma'am, in the middle. you too can flip a coin. hi. something that i didn't see in that video was any discussion of the self-defense is that the air force is looking at for aircraft, in particularly big wing isr, and a lot of times when you talk to people about this they point lasers and other systems that aren't mature or fielded yet. i wonder if if you are looking at any readily available or shorter-term things that could help protect these systems or if they're just going to keep lying. when we are evaluating the threats we are always looking at how we balance things. where we make the investments and where we modernize, and as we said, new and old, non- penetrating, penetrating, we will make those trades as we can but self-defense of our airplanes, absolutely we have to protect where we can make sense. all of these airplanes. even what we used to think of as an m2 one we thought there inexpensive, the m2 nine is an expensive piece of machinery. and our 24 is expensive. all of these are expensive so we look to defend them. the other part of self-defense we've got to get over and start thinking about is how do we forward rotect and take new technology and get it in the hands of our defenders to defend our bases. how do we defend against small unmanned aerial systems. you all know in industry we've been working out very hard to think about that. not only that but how do we turn it to an advantage for us so that our defenders can use it to make their lives better to get better situation awareness and how do we get that technology turned into the hands of our defense of our bases. there's always a balance between them, trying to find that but obviously budgets play into it and get it in the hands of our as we look into what we can fford. i would just add to that, it's not just in the air domain. we ll no space is now a contested environment. so how do you also protect and defend in space and cyberspace. how are we able to evaluate what we are protecting and defending and when are we doing offense of versus defensive trade. environment. so how do you also all that is in play. we have to make some assessments on what other priorities and where we most vulnerable and get after it because the adversary is not going to wait. let me do just a bit of a follow-up. general nolan, you mentioned cost. there are some folks out there that made a big deal out of the supposed high cost to operate fifth-generation aircraft with the thought that we can afford the capability. could you talk a bit about the cost-effectiveness of fifth-generation aircraft. absolutely. fifth-generation, what we've learned is that it makes fourth generation better. it makes it more survivable. we've gone out, we put them together, we experiment and we have the 422 out of developmental testing and perational testing, the 53rd wing, the weapon school, now hill has f35's, we put them together and we find that fifth-generation makes fourth generation better, more survivable, more lethal. so yes, you can look at cost and e are looking at cost within the f35, sustainment cost trying to drive that cost down, absolutely and i know that's a priority for industry as well as the air force, but in the end, you're fifth-generation, that mix allows you to get more out of your fourth-generation fleet in a contested area. it's a hard thing to quantify but from an operational perspective is invaluable, particularly if you're in that fourth-generation asset that gets deployed in urine a threat ring and need to maneuver to defend yourself. i just want to follow-up very quickly about the isr flight plan that you mentioned. can you talk a little bit about the scope of that. are you going to layout how the air force might be modernizing things like our pas in the future or are you concentrating more on the backend on a init that will be plan that you mentioned. can you talk a little bit about the scope of that. are you going to layout how the air force might you talked about. secondly, i was hoping you could talk about, general homes talked about a light isr to permit with inexpensive platform that is modularly complete different eeded to perform the functions payloads on it. is that something you see that could be beneficial in terms of what analyst needs in terms of getting more data for having better eyes on the ground? for the first party or question the answer is yes. it's pretty comprehensive. it is all things in all domains to include architecture and human resources. it's not just how i modernize your words, it's how i transform and where does our next generation really need to be. the second question, can you help me out again. oh yes. i would tell you we are actually working today using the mq9 as a platform for an open mission system pod where you can plug and play differences sensors already on that. we actually can take advantage of multiple nterconnected very different capabilities. we are trying to look at how we actually do that because it is and just how i get my analyst for data because we've gone through a lot of iterations, and i think the eneral coin the phrase would grounding in data. it's not getting more data, it's how i use an action on the data that is required to meet the objective and create the effect in the time and space of my own choosing. how do we do that. we are working towards doing that nd we are partnering on how we actually get multiple capabilities to do that. as we look to open mission architectures on various platforms because we don't want to be platform centric, we want to start with the data. what is required and work backwards versus start with a platform and say well here's the data you're going to get. thank you. patrick tucker. you mentioned how ai is helping you develop tpp at the speed of computing. some of us are familiar with project maven. to those new ones extend beyond that or how do you see that evolving over the next five years or so. the question for both of you, not very much references made to north korea oday, but understanding we are in a public forum and you're limited on what you can say, but for the american people and policymakers what is the most important thing to understand, for the public about the air defense system over north korea and the ability of the united states air force to carry out a targeted strike if calgon to do so. is there anything else you'd like to that's it right now. so i'll take the first one. hank you for bringing up project maven. that is also referred to as a i would tell you no, that is not the only thing we are doing. we have another program called data to decision where we are combining our data scientist with our isr operators. only speak isr because that's my field. we are actually connecting and creating apps off of machine learning and we've got the ongoing right now. on your second question regarding north korea, i just talked with general bergeson yesterday and his boss, general brooks, part of the coalition, working with the republic of korea, the answer is if you're asking us if were ready to fight tonight, the answer is yes. as i started, the united states air force, if required when we are called to do our job we will gain and maintain our sis primacy. i will also add that right now defense department is in support of secretary of state tillerson who has a campaign to be lead with north korea and a diplomatic endeavor. i was also asking if you could characterize, for the public, the air defense situation over north korea. as in right now. what is the biggest challenge that you can describe to the public. back tour point, our biggest thing is we are going to support the secretary of state campaign in coordination with our coalition allies. we've been at arms with this for a long time. we will be ready and we will support secretary tillerson campaign. he american public should feel safe and secure that both of secretary of state and defense department are on this point issue they should be able to sleep well. thank you. that said, the north koreans have a much more significant integrated air defense system that exists in some of the places that we've done battle in the middle east in the past 5 years. that reinforces the need to advance our systems and capabilities, not just in terms of their ability to defeat an enemy but also to do it in more than one place around the world simultaneously. that's what were hurting. we simply don't ave the quantities, as i mentioned in the beginning to be able to conduct more than one regional contingency at a time. you can't have or be a global superpower with only one major regional contingency strategy. you have to have the ability to conduct more than one operation at a time or else we leave our role as the world's sole superpower and move into the realm of regional power. laura. thank you. i was just wondering if we could go back to syria for a second, can you just characterize the threat that the pilots there are facing in terms of the russian aircraft. i know we've heard about several incidents recently where the russian aircraft are crossing into u.s. territory, i guess, it's not actually u.s. territory, but you know what i mean. they are having some difficulties with getting them back into their airspace. can you talk about what characterize that threaten say what can be done about it. great question. thank you. so lieutenant general and his team are in constant dialogue and the conflicting. that's the ight word. the conflicting ctivities in syria. as you know we use the river valley, the euphrates river valley. that area has had some uncomfortable situations, but handled professionally so that's been an important thing to realize. as the demonstrator, the russians are a professional air force per know we use the river valley, the chinese are professional, were professional. in the dialogue back and forth we did conflicted so they continue to work and they are on a hotline alking to each other as they work it. communications can be a problem in syria for somebody their plan involved. in the end, it's professionalism of ur pilots that has been able to manage the situation very, very well as you have seen from the reports we released over the past year about how we've been the conflicting with the russians. it is a two-way street. the professional relationship that goes all the way up to the joint staff talking to the russians and doing our best to make sure we keep that decompression. the problem is the space get smaller and smaller than gets harder and harder. as of today, recently, communication has been good so i think we will continue to work it. let me back wrap up with one final question. i know general jamison has to go. general nolan may be able to figure out a little bit but this is for you, if you would talk about the future, we can handle what we have today, but given the advanced threat quality and quantity growth that was seen in the video, doesn't it make sense for the air force to accelerate from something in the 100, 110 range. isn't that possibly the quickest way to meet our air superiority bathtub that will be facing in the next ten years. general, thank you for the question. >> i would say, it depends. how do you think about it? do we do new new? we do new old? how expand the field from a field that was 15 yards wide by 10 yards deep which was what they played in 1973 to what hey play today which is a huge expanse so i think you've got very innovative minds in the air force that are thinking about how we change the playing field. if we can't change from a 15 by ten, then we may have to do something different or not we get there. if things differently, and remember it's controlling the third dimension is controlling the dimension. we are the only air force in he world that can successfully play an away game. i just want to remind you we passed 3 million pounds of gas a day in the middle east by area area refueling. we have got a unmatched ability to inject power and we want to keep that ay but time and distance problems are something we have play an away game. i just want to solve as we think differently. i think in the nd, i think general harrison our 518 was doing a magnificent job balancing all the different modernization requirement that we have, and so, that approach of how we think differently and go after will be the real answer to your question. if we can't come up with a solution we may have to go there. if we do come up and think differently, maybe not. thank you very much for an excellent answer. ladies and gentlemen, please join me in thanking our palace for their time and effort today. [applause]