Pilot Stress, Aging Equipment Cause Angst at D.C. Air Guard

Sponsors

HOMELAND SECURITY

March 2008

By Grace V. Jean

ANDREWS AIR FORCE BASE, Md. — Defending the nation’s capital from an aerial attack might seem a good enough reason to give a wing commander whatever he needs. But it has not worked out that way for the aviators of the District of Columbia Air National Guard.

“Sometimes I feel like we’re fighting a Saks Fifth Avenue war on a Kmart budget,” says Col. Jeff Johnson, vice commander of the 113th Wing.

Since 9/11, the wing’s F-16 fighter jets have scrambled into the skies to intercept aircraft that have wandered into the region’s no-fly zones. They have deployed twice to Iraq. They voluntarily deployed to Louisiana in January, where the local squadron could not fly after the Air Force grounded most of its F-15 fleet because of structural defects.

“We’re doing a wider variety of missions with fewer ranges, less time, less flying hours, less aircraft availability, and even less money to pay my pilots,” says Johnson.

The F-16 Block 30 aircraft that the wing operates can conduct air-to-air and air-to-ground combat missions and provide close air support. By virtue of being an “air sovereignty alert” unit, the wing’s 121st Fighter Squadron has the widest mission set of any U.S. fighter unit, says Johnson.

The hectic pace of operations means the aging F-16s will not last much longer, say wing officials. Despite efforts to modernize the aircraft, they are slated to retire in 2015.

“The capability limits in an airplane that was built in 1986 are tangible,” says Johnson, who has flown the F-16 for 18 years.

Congressional limitations prohibit large-scale improvements to aircraft during the waning five years to retirement, an interval known as the sunset period.

“Once it goes into sunset, we can only put modifications on the airplane that cost less than $100,000 per airplane, which is chump change. We’re fast approaching that with these Block 30s,” says Johnson. “We need to start thinking now about how we’re going to replace these airplanes.”

Once a strategic reserve for the Cold War, the 113th Wing, known as the Capital Guardians, now flies two daily missions. The 121st Fighter Squadron provides air defense for the national capital region while the 201st Airlift Squadron transports congressional delegations around the globe.

Only a few months after 9/11, the wing constructed five temporary shelters to keep fighter jets ready for scrambling and brought in two double-wide trailers to house the alert detachment pilots and crews. When the alert klaxon goes off, crews are ready to run to the airplanes.

The aircraft have been updated. But some of the airframes and bulkheads have become weakened and are cracking.

“We’re holding them together with duct tape and bailing wire,” quips Johnson.

The airplanes received a software upgrade late last fall to improve combat capabilities, including more accurate launch zones for missiles. But there are many technologies on the unit’s wish list.

“As a fighter pilot, I want the new generation radar. I want the helmet-mounted cueing system. The active duty has it and we don’t,” says Lt. Col. George Degnon, deputy operations group commander.
The cueing system would allow the pilots to point their weapons in a certain direction by simply turning their heads that way.

With funds that Congress appropriated specifically for the Guard and Reserves, units have acquired several new technologies.

For example, the wing purchased a commercial communications system that its engineers further developed for the F-16. That system, the situational awareness data link, allows pilots to communicate and share data with ground forces.

Juggling how much to spend on patching up older aircraft versus investing in next-generation fighters is a constant battle being fought at higher levels in the Air Force.

The F-16 flies with old engines and outdated mechanically-scanned antennas. Its radar capabilities are limited by the plane’s computing power.

Sometimes, even improvements in technology can cause problems because pilots’ already packed schedules have to accommodate additional training on the new equipment.

“Every time I put a new technology in the airplane — a new targeting pod, for example — that drives the training,” says Johnson. The maintainers need to learn how to load and maintain that targeting pod.

The pilots need to learn how the pod works. Then they need to fly on actual missions to develop tactics and better ways of employing that technology.

“It’s a vicious cycle that we constantly fight,” says Johnson.

Rapidly changing tactics in combat also affect training, says Col. Mark Valentine, director of operations for the 121st Fighter Squadron.

“Every month you have something new, so what you were taught a month ago is now obsolete,” he says.

When they went to Iraq in 2003, the F-16 pilots were tasked with bombing missions. “We were very proficient at that,” says Degnon.

But the second time around, the pilots spent more time tracking vehicles and flying nighttime strafing missions.

“We hadn’t trained to do that for years,” says Degnon.

Another major concern for the pilots is the decreasing supply of military airspace in which to train.

“We’re in a constant battle with the Federal Aviation Administration because they want to take airspace from us for airline traffic,” explains Degnon.

The FAA in November and December temporarily made portions of restricted airspace available to passenger jetliners in the New York area.

To help alleviate the congested airways, the government wants to open some military airspace to commercial traffic.

“If we did not have the training areas that we have around here, it would be almost impossible to do the jobs that we do,” says Valentine.

“You start to worry more about where the borders of the airspace are,” he adds. That can be advantageous for pilots who are training for certain missions that require flying in tight airspace. Valentine experienced that in Bosnia, where there were political borders that U.S. fighters could not fly across.

Besides encroachment from the civilian sector, pilots face competition from other flying units for military air space.

The wing’s F-16 pilots, for example, train on a range in North Carolina, where they vie for time with Navy, Air Force reserve and active-duty units. The Air Force’s newest fighter, the F-22 Raptor, requires a larger airspace for training. As a result, F-16 pilots are finding it more difficult to get scheduled, Degnon says.

To help boost pilot training in emergency procedures, the wing has an F-16 simulator, although the technology is rudimentary, says Degnon.

Some of the wing’s pilots travel to Phoenix every year for virtual training in Air Force simulators. Because of travel budget restrictions, the wing only sends four pilots annually. The Air National Guard has plans to construct a virtual training facility in Vermont.

Aviators agree that no simulator can fully replicate flying in the F-16 cockpit.

“There’s nothing that can replace the tactile feel of physically flying the airplane, having to look through weather and not being able to see your target,” says Valentine.

Challenges that are experienced in combat, such as radio interference, air traffic issues and wingman performance, are difficult to simulate in a virtual cockpit.

“A lot of times in simulators, you’re looking at the radar screen, and it’s pristine. You’re seeing stuff in the simulator that you wouldn’t realistically see in the airplane,” says Degnon.
Many of the airmen came into the unit on the basis of the Guard’s weekend warrior ethos: one weekend a month and two weeks of active duty a year.

“That is not the current environment that we operate on,” says Johnson.

For fighter pilots, especially, the adage rings false. “Even if they’re part-time, they still have to maintain the active duty currencies. That absolutely, positively cannot be done in one weekend a month, two weeks a year,” says Valentine.

Many of the part-time pilots spend 10 days a month at the base flying sorties. That busy tempo extends to crew chiefs, weapons loaders and maintainers in the 1,000-person wing.
As a result of the stress, Guardsmen are retiring at the 20-year mark, officials say.

“We’ve lost some experience on the maintenance side, and that hurts us in maintaining these 21-year old airplanes,” says Johnson.

Not having enough experienced mechanics is problematic because the airplanes are redlined more often, pilots say. In November, one of the airplanes was having its wing replaced for the second time because of cracks.

The D.C. Air Guard currently runs its own jet engine shop. But the Air Force is planning to regionalize repair shops in an effort to have more centralized locations for fixing airplanes. The consolidation will cut costs, but potentially could lead to delays in obtaining parts, Guard officials say.

In October, the inspector general’s office will test the wing’s capabilities during a week-long simulated deployment to a major war theater scenario.

“It’s a big deal for us to do well on it. You don’t want to do poorly on inspection and be singled out in some future BRAC,” says Lt. Col. Kirk Pierce, commander of the 121st Fighter Squadron.

Crews will have to respond to air, chemical and terrorist attacks, among other scenarios.

In its last inspection in 1997, the wing earned an outstanding rating.

Last fall, the wing broke ground to construct a new facility to house the F-16s, crews and command post for the alert mission. The building will be located near the end of the runway to reduce the time it now takes to scramble jets. The facility, expected to be completed in December, is designed to accommodate next-generation aircraft, including the F-22 and the F-35.

“Would I like to see an F-22 on the ramp here guarding the nation’s capital sometime in the near future? Absolutely,” says Johnson.

Please email your comments to GJean@ndia.org