Air Force officials testify on 2027 budget request in Senate hearing

[0:00] and plays a critical role in producing and sustaining the F-135 engine. [0:07] This impressive facility has made substantial investments in workforce [0:14] capacity to support the long-term success of the F-35. So here's my concern. The [0:24] administration is proposing that a significant portion of funding for both [0:31] of these modernization programs be done through a third reconciliation bill, a [0:39] bill that may never happen. For example, of the $154 million requests for the [0:49] power thermal management upgrade for the engine, only $10 million is requested [0:57] in the base budget. What is the impact on these programs if they are not fully [1:05] funded in fiscal year 2027, and what would be the implications for the defense [1:13] industrial base? Thank you, Chairwoman, and I agree it's a phenomenal engine that [1:21] Pratt builds for the F-35, and we continue to modernize that engine going forward to [1:26] make sure it can keep up with the rest of the aircraft. Yes, you know, the FY27 [1:33] budget request is a combination of base and reconciliation. We did not prioritize to [1:40] execute the mission that we are asked to do. The total request is required. If we do [1:47] not get the total request, then prioritization will have to be done within the [1:51] budget we do get, and that'll be a continual dialogue with the Congress going forward. [1:55] Thank you. I would just suggest that it is taking a terrible risk and creates [2:03] instability when you're counting on a third reconciliation bill for the bulk of [2:11] the money rather than doing base funding through the defense appropriations bill. I just add one thing. I think it's safe to conclude, [2:21] it's safe to conclude there will not be another reconciliation bill, so it's really not an option. [2:29] I agree with that assessment. Let me switch to a different issue. Mr. Secretary, the conflict with Iran has once again underscored the importance of the aerial refueling to U.S. military operations. [2:47] Tankers are essential to power projection, global mobility, fighter operations, and the sustainment of U.S. of forces across multiple theaters. [2:59] The air refueling wing in Bangor, Maine has long played a critical role in that mission. Since 2021, and particularly during recent operations, we've seen increased activity in the [3:17] in Bangor reinforcing the importance of the Air National Guard tanker units to real-world operational requirements. At the same time, the Air Force has validated a requirement for up to 75 additional KC-46 aircraft and plans to continue tanker production well into the next decade. [3:44] Given the strategic importance of tanker aircraft and the continued operational contributions of the Air National Guard units, such as the impressive one in Bangor, when should Congress expect the Air Force to provide a clearer roadmap for replacing the aging KC-135 aircraft across the Guard tanker enterprise? [4:14] Thanks, Congresswoman. [4:16] Thanks, Congresswoman. The tanker fleet air refueling is critical to operations anywhere in the world, as well as airlift in general is critical. And this is why in the FY27 and the FIDAP budget submission, we are essentially maxing out Boeing's ability to produce, really at the max rate that Boeing's capable of producing tankers. And our intent, our strategy is to replace all the 135s in the fleet, [4:42] going forward. Some of those aircraft are actually older than I am. Still flying the same ones that we flew when I was a young second lieutenant. So we do know we need to replace them. And our strategy is to replace all of them. [4:57] With respect to Maine, exactly phenomenal unit there. They've done great work. And they are part of the next strategic basing decision that we hope to get out, narrowing of that field by September, October timeframe. And I'm sure we'll have more conversations. [5:15] Thank you. The location is also very strategic, as you're well aware. [5:22] Yes. Yes, Mr. Chairman. [5:24] Just let me in ending say that I associate myself with the comments on Ukraine and the support for Ukraine and giving Ukraine the help it needs. Thank you. [5:38] Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Secretary, I want to begin where the chairwoman of the full committee just left off, which is on the KC 46s. [5:51] So thank you all for being here today and for your service. My question regarding the Air Force's refueling tanker fleet starts with the fact that this war in Iran has shown how important these tankers are to successful U.S. and allied operations. [6:15] Over the last several years, the Air Force has been procuring KC 46 tankers to replace the aging KC 135s currently flown by units like the Wisconsin Air National Guard's 128th Air Refueling Wing. [6:30] Seven KC 135s have also been destroyed or damaged in the fighting against Iran, including one which tragically crashed in Iraq, losing all six crew members on board. [6:46] For fiscal year 27, the Air Force is requesting $3.9 billion to procure 15 KC 46s. [6:56] Is this request sufficient to cover the lost KC 135s and the necessary upgrades to the tanker fleet? [7:08] Thank you, Senator. It was a tragic loss. No question about it. [7:16] Yes, it is the appropriate amount of money to build the KC 46s. Essentially, Senator, it's the max rate that Boeing is able to produce the aircraft. [7:28] So basically, we are producing them as fast as we can with the intent of replacing, again, all the KC 135s in the fleet as we build out over the coming years. [7:41] With respect to the losses, there was one aircraft that was a total loss. [7:44] The other six aircraft, we believe, are in the process of being refurbished and will be back in inventory. [7:50] But nonetheless, these are old airplanes. We're replacing them as quickly as a contractor can build them. [7:56] So you believe the six damaged or destroyed aircraft will be returned to service? [8:02] Yes. The one has been lost. The other six, we believe, will be returned to service. Is that correct? [8:07] Okay. Do you anticipate that gap as they are returned to service and the loss of the other one will impact? [8:23] Actually, how will it impact which units the Air Force will select for upgrades to the KC 46s? [8:32] I can ask General Wilsbach to ask the impact to operations. It won't, again, it won't necessarily impact the basing decisions, [8:46] although it could potentially be a factor as we go through the strategic basing process. [8:50] So I guess it could potentially, depending on how long they take to repair, but that will be considered as part of the strategic basing process. [8:57] General Wilsbach would respect the operational impact. [8:59] And can you add how long you think it will take to refurbish the six aircraft? [9:06] So some of them are already flying. In fact, most of them are already flying. [9:10] Some of them had a one-time flight to have further repair, but some of them are already back in service, [9:17] and then the ones that had the more significant damage will take a year or two to get fixed. [9:23] But I anticipate that they'll be back eventually. And as far as the operational impact, certainly after they were initially damaged, [9:32] we had a very short-term impact to the ability to generate tankers. [9:36] But we surged forward other tankers to fill those gaps, and that's what we're doing now as well. [9:41] So there's very little impact to the tanker loss. [9:45] Okay. Next, I want to ask you, General Wilsbach, about the readiness of the Air Force's F-35 fleet. [9:54] By all accounts, the F-35 has performed well in the war with Iran. [9:59] Unfortunately, only about 50% of the fleet was available for operations when the war began. [10:06] What is the status of Air Force efforts to improve the combat readiness of our F-35s? [10:12] Thank you, Senator. Yes, the F-35 has performed marvelously in epic fury. [10:19] And you're right, the aircraft availability averages out over the course of time at about 50%. [10:26] But of the jets that we actually had forward performed much, much greater than that. [10:34] I don't want to say the number because it's classified, but it was meeting standards for sure forward. [10:40] What that tells us is that when you prioritize the funding for the parts and the weapons system sustainment, [10:47] the jet flies really well. [10:49] And that's why in this budget we have $24 billion for weapons system sustainment [10:55] and $10 billion for flying hours and $4.5 billion for the Working Capital Fund, [11:01] which funds the necessary parts and weapons system sustainment. [11:06] A large portion of that is for F-35, but it's for all of our fleet so that we have the parts for the aircraft. [11:12] So when they come back and they need repair, our airmen can put the parts in and the jet can get back in the air. [11:18] And in closing, Mr. Chairman and Madam Chairwoman, I want to associate myself with your comments and concerns [11:25] about the fact that a large part of this request is in the partisan reconciliation measure, [11:31] not in the base budget that we are putting together. [11:34] So I'm very concerned about that. [11:38] Yield back. [11:39] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [11:45] Mr. Secretary, General, General, thank you for your service. [11:49] Mr. Secretary, I want to start with you. [11:53] Is not the Air Force Global Strike Command at Barksdale Air Force Base the most spectacular thing you've ever seen in your life? [12:08] Yes, Senator. [12:09] I was actually, when I was active duty, I was part of the Forerunner, which was Strategic Air Command. [12:14] So it's… [12:15] When are we going to address the staffing shortfalls there? [12:19] So I'll look to the general for a little bit, but we are having… [12:23] Briefly. [12:24] We are increasing to the tune of about $10,000 in the military strength within the department to try to address some of those funding or staffing shortfalls. [12:37] Briefly, sir. [12:38] The 27 budget has dollars in there to increase the end strength for the Air Force, as the Secretary noted, [12:44] and that will allow us to get after a lot of the shortages that we have. [12:50] The staff at Global Strike Command is certainly one of them. [12:53] Other shortages that we have with maintainers, et cetera, those are all… [12:58] The budget requests will allow us to take care of those. [13:01] Okay. [13:03] General, before I ask this question, I don't like to do it this way, but this will be an exception. [13:09] I'm going to give you a point of view about what's going on around here. [13:14] I know you hear all the happy talk, but I'm going to try to explain what's really going on in my opinion. [13:20] I could be wrong, but I doubt it. [13:23] The President has pointed out that we have a crisis in defense, and we need to spend a lot more money. [13:32] I mean, look around. [13:33] He is, of course, correct. [13:35] He's asked for 42 percent. [13:38] It's going to be tough in regular order to do that amount. [13:42] But Republicans want to spend, we haven't come to a final conclusion on the number, anywhere from 20 to 25, 27 percent more in the budget on defense. [13:57] My Democratic friends in the Senate, and they are my friends, have said privately, that's swell. [14:06] We want to spend an additional amount of money on welfare. [14:13] They're smart people. [14:17] They know that we can't do that, and we're not going to do that. [14:21] If nothing else, it would explode the deficit. [14:25] And besides that, as they know, we don't have a crisis in welfare like we have a crisis in defense. [14:33] It's not like we're not spending a lot of money on welfare. [14:37] If we would properly define the poverty rate, it wouldn't be 10 percent. [14:42] And it would be 1 percent. [14:45] I'm not against helping people less fortunate than I am. [14:49] I am for standing up to China and Russia and North Korea and, you know, the other countries I'm talking about. [14:59] Now, what does that tell me? [15:01] That tells me that the Democrats have no intention of helping us pass a budget. [15:06] And I also predict, if I'm wrong, I will apologize, that my friend Senator Schumer is going to shut down government tight as Dick's hatband, first chance he gets before the midterms. [15:19] We'll be shut down. Eventually we won't stay shut down. We will come out of it at some point. [15:27] But we'll have to come out of it with a CR. [15:30] How's that going to impact the Air Force's ability to protect this country? [15:36] Because my Democratic friends, and they are my friends, want to play politics before the midterm elections. [15:43] Without a reconciliation and a year-long CR that keeps us at the 890-ish total, that would have significant impacts on our readiness. [15:58] A lot of the investments we've just been talking about to meet the threats from the unmanned vehicles as well as, you know, the increased readiness for weapons systems to increase the F-35 readiness as well as the munitions procurement. [16:18] All that is substantially impacted if we stayed at 890 without a reconciliation or other mechanism. [16:23] Well, I think you should prepare for it. Again, I hope I'm wrong, but I doubt it. [16:27] You're going to hear a lot of happy talk from senators about how we need to spend more money on defense. [16:34] But I think a lot of my colleagues have no intention of voting for a budget under any circumstances. [16:42] They want government to be shut down, and I think Senator Schumer is going to accommodate them. [16:47] So I would prepare for a shutdown and a CR. [16:51] Last question quickly. Since we're shooting down $25,000 drones with million-dollar missiles, why aren't we bear-hugging Ukraine, which is the world's expert on drone technology, to combat drones with drones? [17:10] Senator, I'd say in many ways we are. We are. We are looking to utilize our expertise. We are looking to utilize similar or same manufacturing supply. [17:23] But there's a hesitancy. [17:25] Not on our part, Senator. [17:28] I know, but the administration does not seem fully committed to partnering up with Ukraine. [17:33] I don't understand why. They know more about drones than anybody. I'm out of time. I'm sorry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [17:44] Senator Bozeman, followed by Senator Hovind, Senator Capito. [18:01] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And, Mr. Secretary, we had a good Air Force Caucus briefing last week, which I think everyone really enjoyed. [18:11] One of the things that we discussed was the additional authorities provided by Congress to counter drone incursions over installations within the United States. [18:20] Can you tell us the impacts that these drone incursions have made on the mission? [18:27] And also, what additional authorities would be helpful, would be needed to protect our infrastructure, airmen and guardians? [18:39] I would say the impact of operations to this point has been minimal. [18:44] I'm more concerned about the potential impact of operations if the drone operators, regardless of who they are, got more aggressive. [18:54] So with respect to authorities, I think we're in pretty good shape. If I could, let's let General Wolfsbach touch on it. [19:01] The Secretary is right. Minimal impact at this point, but we are giving up intelligence to people that are flying drones on our facilities. [19:10] If we ever run into one with an aircraft, it's going to significantly damage it. It could cause it to crash. [19:16] And so that's my greatest concern. And of course, we all saw what happened to the Russians with a drone attack. [19:22] And so it's very cheap to fly a drone and attack a very expensive platform. [19:27] So we need to be able to defend every one of our bases. And we are in this budget. [19:32] We're asking for additional funds to increase eventually to get every single base covered with a defensive system that can detect and defeat any drone that would come come to our base. [19:43] We have the current authorities to do that. Good. Very good. [19:47] I've heard from each of you on the need of more flexibility with the multi-year procurement efforts that have been provided to the department. [19:59] I understand that you all have made progress with using the authorities for things like munitions, procurement. [20:07] General Wilsbach, can you speak to the progress being made on these authorities for multi-year procurement? [20:15] And are they allowing the Air Force to succeed in munitions procurement? [20:21] Yes. Thank you, Senator. So we have authorities right now for JASM and LORASM. [20:27] We'd like to expand that to other weapons systems like the AMRAAM and the JADAM. [20:33] There's a number of others that we would like to expand to. [20:36] We believe that it creates a stability for the industrial base, the defense industrial base, that creates what I say is good behavior by them that benefits us. [20:47] So they can hire the right number of people, they can facilitate, they can line up the supply chain because they have that stable environment. [20:54] And what that means to us is we get the equipment that we've ordered on time, on contract, and at the rate and the volume that we need. [21:05] Right. General Salzman, are you experiencing the same thing? [21:09] Yes, Senator. The multi-year procurement is vital because it creates stability for the vendors, which allows them to invest their own money in facilitization, which improves our ability at speed and scale to deliver capabilities. [21:24] So the stability is just essential to success. [21:27] Very good. Last week, we discussed the E-7 Wedge Tail and how it would complement the efforts of the Golden Dome. [21:35] General Salzman, can you explain how the E-7 Wedge Tail would be beneficial to integrate into the space-based airborne moving target indicator as we build out the Golden Dome? [21:48] I think my experience in combat tells me that when you have a tough situation, the more capability you have, the better. [21:55] And I think these are complementary systems that will only make more options available for air battle management and moving target indications. [22:04] Very good. Again, General Salzman, what capabilities, missions, and operational demands are driving the growth that you have in the budget? [22:22] And can you speak to why this level of expansion is necessary at this time? [22:26] Well, I'll start with why it's important, and that's because the threat's important. [22:31] I mean, the threat is growing and the missions are important. [22:34] The space control alone, to be able to secure the space domain so we can use it the way we want, requires us to invest in new capabilities for new mission sets. [22:44] Those are going to be delivered in the next four to five years, but they're going to require new mission ops centers, new personnel to fly the satellites, as well as 10 new program offices just to do the acquisition work. [22:56] So we have an increase in manpower, increase in facilities when we get these new missions to perform these vital critical functions for the nation. [23:04] Good. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [23:06] Thank you, Mr. Chair. Secretary Mick, I want to follow up on Senator Kennedy's concerns, because I very much share them. [23:19] If we're not able to do a reconciliation and we continue to work to get the regular funding through in terms of the budgetary process, [23:35] isn't it vital that we have a supplemental right now to make sure that we have provided funding for our global military operations? [23:48] Thanks, Senator. It's vital that we get the full budget request. [23:54] Again, all the things we've talked about here are because of the increase to the Department of the Air Force's budget. [24:00] With respect to supplemental, right now that will come out of the OMB in the White House and the DOW is working with OMB on options, but I can't speak to supplemental. [24:12] Right. But it is vital that we get funding to our military for all of these purposes. [24:19] And the longer we go at a lower level of funding locked into a CR, the bigger problems we're going to have. Is that a fact? [24:26] It is vital that we get the resource we're requesting. Absolutely. [24:29] So anybody talking about this and not recognizing that fact is not stepping up and supporting the needs our military has at a very dangerous time in the world. Isn't that true? [24:39] I agree, Senator. It is vital. We get the resources we've requested. [24:44] Thank you, Secretary. General Wilsbach, as far as the Gulf, talk to me about the blockade. [24:50] And I'm going to just put forward a thought and I want you to analyze and tell me what you think. [24:56] It seems to me if we get better and better at the blockade, which we are, and we bottle up Iran and we open up the strait for everyone else and we continue to put pressure on our allies to work with us, including NATO, doesn't that long term put the kind of pressure on Iran that we need to get to the kind of make sure they don't have nuclear weapons and to get to the place that we need to, not just for the good of the United States, but really for the world? [25:25] That's getting a little bit out of my lane, but I'm tracking what you're saying. [25:32] It seems to that is the objective and the approach that the blockade is causing inside of Iran. [25:39] But what I want to understand specifically is your thoughts in terms of our ability militarily to get to the point where we can block Iran with the blockade and open up the strait. [25:49] What are your thoughts in terms of getting there? How soon and how effectively? [25:54] Well, I think you're seeing that we are Admiral Cooper with CENTCOM is executing that every single day and he's doing that with the joint force and the Air Force is providing strike capability overhead as well as intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance. [26:12] So that's that's the Air Force part of that mission. [26:15] Yeah. And in fact, this committee is going to meet with him in the skiff today and talk about that and other things. [26:21] So but I do want to highlight what you're doing over there, how incredible it is and that this is a strategy. [26:28] I mean, people have to have some patience, but this is a strategy that can work, can solve an existential crisis and over time energy prices will be lower. [26:37] And if we're not out there talking about it, how can we expect people to say, hey, yeah, we do have to hang in there and get it accomplished. [26:43] So we can't just have those conversations in the skiff. [26:46] And that's why I do want to bring up to you as well as technology, incredible work that our men and women are doing over there. [26:51] And I'm sure glad our two Apache pilots are safe. [26:56] We're losing a lot of MQ-9s over there or I better be careful. [26:59] We've lost some MQ-9s over there. [27:02] That production line is closed down back to the funding issue. [27:05] What are your thoughts on how we cover that base? [27:07] Well, first of all, the MQ-9 has been a tremendous capability that we've used very well inside of Epic Fury. [27:15] And they've conducted a lot of extremely high risk missions that we would choose not to put a manned platform in. [27:21] And they've been very effective. [27:23] So from that standpoint, we've gotten a lot out of our MQ-9s. [27:26] And as you said, we've lost some of them. [27:28] And the approach that we're taking now is to refurbish and get ready the remaining block five MQ-9s that we have. [27:38] We still have a lot of them. [27:39] I don't want to say the number because it's classified, but we still have a lot of them. [27:42] And so we're not in a crisis with the MQ-9 at the moment. [27:46] And then we're also looking at a more affordable option that provides a lot more staying power even than the MQ-9 with respect to on station time, [27:57] which we believe will be a lot more economical and will provide essentially the same capability that an MQ-9 does for less money and for a longer period of time. [28:07] In addition to newer technologies and satellite, correct? [28:11] That's a combination. [28:12] I mean, we are putting a lot more in space, which General Saltzman can talk to. [28:16] General Saltzman, at Grand Forks, we're working on funding and standing up a Space Force operational facility. [28:22] Talk to me about the mission that you expect to operate out of that. [28:26] And I know there'll be a number of others, but specifically Grand Forks. [28:30] Thanks, Senator. [28:33] We're focusing on the proliferated constellations up there. [28:36] So that'll be the space-based sensing and targeting, missile warning, missile defense, and the space data network. [28:41] All take advantage of that ops center that we're putting at Grand Forks. [28:45] Thanks to all of you for the incredible work you're doing. [28:48] Shane and then Murkowski. [29:00] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [29:03] Mr. Secretary, we had a chance to talk a little bit about the KC-46, and I understand it's come up from a number of people at this hearing. [29:12] But I did want to reiterate what I understood you to say when we had a chance to talk about this at the Air Force Caucus. [29:23] Because New Hampshire is the home to the 157th Air Refueling Wing. [29:28] It's the only KC-46 wing in the country to reach an initial operating capacity. [29:33] We're very proud of it, as you can tell. [29:36] And I know that you talked about the KC-46 in your written testimony and the investment of over a billion dollars in the program. [29:47] But as we know, the remote vision system has continued to have issues. [29:51] I understand that they're getting very close to a resolution, and that will be incorporated in the new planes. [29:58] But my concern is how you prioritize those planes that are already operating in terms of retrofitting with the new remote vision system. [30:10] So can you speak to how you see those planes being addressed in terms of the retrofits? [30:17] I think we're proud of the unit as well, Senator. [30:23] I think the good news is that we believe we've fixed and have tested the new 2.0 vision system. [30:31] And that we should start rolling that into the production line in 28. [30:35] I think your concern goes further than that, is how do we get to the planes that are already out there? [30:39] And we are working through the strategy for that. [30:42] But it is essentially going to take a significant amount to the airplane to do that. [30:48] Whether or not we can do that in the field or we do that as part of the depot, we're just working our way through that. [30:52] General Wilsbach, anything else on that? [30:54] Can I just ask you two to address, as part of your comments, how you'll view those planes that are already out there? [31:01] Are you looking at the first ones who were fielded, or what's your priority? [31:07] We haven't set the priority for which actual aircraft gets the upgrade. [31:13] But what I'll tell you, Senator, is the KC-46 is performing magnificently. [31:19] Even with, we know the current vision system isn't what we ordered, and that's why we're getting the 2.0 version of it. [31:26] But even so, it's flying fantastically. [31:29] It's been doing a great job in Epic Fury and really all over the world. [31:33] I actually just had a chance to fly the aircraft myself, and I can tell you it's a phenomenal aircraft. [31:38] And when we get the deficiency solved, it will be even better. [31:41] Well, I certainly agree with that, and I hope that as you're thinking about how you're going to retrofit those planes that are already operating, [31:48] that you will think about which ones have been on the ground longest and may be therefore more capable of and may be more important to address that RVS system. [32:05] General Saltzman, we will miss you as you retire. [32:13] As I was saying briefly, last month, a group of senators traveled to the Arctic. [32:19] We visited Bidific in Greenland, and it was very impressive to see the operation there, to see the work with NASA to identify black holes. [32:30] I was very impressed with that, to see the cooperation with our Danish and Canadian and Greenlandic partners. [32:39] It was nice to hear that that is going so smoothly, despite some of the challenges. [32:46] So can you, and for us in New Hampshire, to see the station, to know the connection to New Boston, New Hampshire, [32:55] because there is a hub for the Space Force in New Boston, as you know. [32:59] But can you talk about how important it is for that radar and space surveillance mission to our homeland missile warning in both the U.S. and Canada, [33:09] and how we're cooperating with Canada on that? [33:11] Thank you, Senator. [33:13] And I know the guardians and airmen up there loved having you there. [33:16] So it was important for them as much as it is for us. [33:19] Greenland is an important strategic area for us. [33:22] Missile warning, missile defense, as you mentioned, space domain awareness. [33:26] And satellite control network. [33:28] We have all those kinds of antennas and radars up there to do vital missions. [33:32] And that posture, where they are, gives them a different vantage point to collect things, [33:37] and to see things that you wouldn't otherwise get an opportunity if we didn't have that strategic piece of land. [33:44] So it's vital. [33:46] And that's why we're investing in it. [33:47] Almost $130 million in this budget request for upgrades to the radar system. [33:52] We're upgrading the dorms. [33:55] We're upgrading the power generation. [33:57] As you know, that's vital there as well. [33:59] So I feel like we're investing heavily because of the strategic importance to those missions. [34:03] Thank you. [34:04] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [34:05] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [34:08] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [34:09] Mr. Secretary, Generals, thank you for being here. [34:11] Thank you for your leadership. [34:12] I want to follow on Senator Sheehan's comments about our Arctic visit, and particularly to Pitavik. [34:20] I've been there on multiple occasions, as you know, General. [34:24] And with each visit, I am impressed by what we have, but also how old what we have is there. [34:33] And we have seen, obviously, increasing interest in the high north and better understanding the gaps that we have in our surveillance is what is going to have to be a priority for us. [34:50] Now, I appreciate what you have shared in terms of underscoring the importance of the Arctic, but do you believe that the budget that we have in front of us is going to be appropriate when it comes to not only ensuring the ongoing mission role of Pitavik space base, [35:20] but the role of the space force in the Arctic. [35:26] I'm looking at the budget, and it's pretty significant in terms of its growth, but I am concerned that we don't specifically call out the strategic investment in the Arctic. [35:45] So I'd like to ask you that question, and General Wilsbach, you know it's coming to you, too. [35:50] So I'd like to just hear from the two of you whether you think that this budget adequately reflects the ongoing priority of the Arctic at this time. [36:02] Yes, Senator, I believe it is. I believe there are substantial investments. [36:06] We may not call out specifically the investments that are in support of the Arctic, but the posture that we have in the Arctic, in Alaska, as you all know, in Greenland in particular, and even in our northern tier bases, [36:18] accomplishing missile warning, missile defense, space domain awareness, vital. [36:23] And we are upgrading the systems to make sure we get rid of some obsolescence. These are older systems, our legacy ground-based radars. [36:30] We want to digitize them and make them relevant to the future fight. And this budget does invest along those lines. [36:37] General Wilsbach? [36:40] Probably the biggest example I can give you is the fighter town recapitalization at Elmendorf of almost $7 billion to recapitalize the fighter side of that base. [36:53] And that is a significant amount of money to create a very strategic spot for the fighter aircraft that we have stationed at Elmendorf. [37:03] And then the other is the weapon system sustainment for the F-35s, which should improve the readiness of the F-35s. [37:09] So between Elmendorf with the F-22s and Nielsen with the F-35s and the strategic location that Alaska is where you can get those jets anywhere in the northern hemisphere in about nine hours of flying time, [37:24] that's a strategic point. And to invest in those two bases is increasing our capability to make those moves happen at the time and place of our choosing. [37:34] Well, I thank you for reinforcing the priority of that and an emphasis that this is a national priority. [37:42] It's not necessarily this is an Alaska specific or a JBEAR specific, but what that allows us to do from the perspective of true strategic positioning. [37:54] It was, I think, important for colleagues, many of whom had never been to the Arctic, [38:01] to understand how this North American connect between Alaska, Canada, and then Greenland, [38:12] how working together we are able to have a position of not only leverage but also a domain awareness that doesn't come with just increased assets on the ground in Alaska. [38:30] It's got to be linked together. And so we saw some pretty impressive things, not only in Greenland, but also understanding what our Canadian neighbors are doing, [38:42] what they need to do more of, but how we integrate across the far north is going to be, has to be a priority moving forward. [38:50] To the point that you made about domain awareness, the funding for the E7 as well as the space-based AMTI will help us with both, you know, with domain awareness. [39:00] Thank you for raising the E7. You and I have had multiple conversations about how this must remain a priority for us. [39:08] And I think we have seen that play out. My time has expired. General, you and I have also talked about the HC-130 and the importance to us in Alaska from a search and rescue perspective. [39:21] But we've seen that play out in real time in the, in the Iran conflict with the, with the need for combat search and rescue. [39:29] So I would just hope that you are able to confirm the HC-130J Combat King II fleet, that that's going to be sustained nationwide to, to continue these important missions. [39:41] Yes, Senator. Thank you. I'm glad you brought that up. Actually, one of the early measures I took when I took the CSAF seat was to keep the HC-130s together with the HA-60s across the country. [39:54] Though they're, they're, they go together. And to separate them really decreases our capability. [40:00] And so there's no plans in Alaska or, or anywhere else to separate those at, at this time. [40:05] Very good. Thank you. Gentlemen, thank you all. Appreciate it. [40:08] Well, I want to thank all our witnesses. Thank you for your service and your testimony today. [40:18] Members of the subcommittee will have a week to submit additional questions for the record. [40:24] Senators may submit additional written questions and we ask that you respond to them within 30 days of receiving them. [40:33] The subcommittee now stands in recess. Somebody to call the chair. [40:37] Instead of following. [40:39] Money. [40:40] Let's go. [40:41] Let's go. [40:42] All right. [40:43] We're going to share the mic. [40:44] Let's go. [40:45] Let's go. [40:46] Let's go. [40:47] Let's go. [40:48] Let's go. [40:49] Let's go. [40:51] Okay. [40:52] Let's go. [40:53] Let's go. [40:55] Let's go. [40:57] Let's go. [40:58] Let's go. [40:59] Let's go.