A Freed Hostage: ACC Commander’s Parting Shots

By on September 17, 2014 at 4:00 AM
Gen. Mike Hostage at Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan in 2013.

Gen. Mike Hostage at Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan in 2013.

“Our industrial base has eroded and we’re reducing our military down to a skeletal size at a time when the world is looking crazier by the day,” Gen. Mike Hostage told reporters Tuesday at the Air Force Association’s annual conference.

“[But] there is nothing happening right now that is going to make sequestration go away, so we’re going to live with the sequestered federal budget.” With his retirement just seven weeks away, the Air Combat Command chief admitted that he’s finding it easier to speak his mind about what budget politics is doing to the future of Air Force he’s served for 37 years. He’s not happy about it. “I believe in civilian leadership of the military,” he said.

“My job is to provide the best military advice. If somebody doesn’t want to take it, wants to make a less than perfect military decision, I accept that. That is our system. I’m okay with that. But what I can’t abide by is being told, ‘No, don’t say that, you can’t say that.’” One decision Hostage particularly lamented was the move to retire the venerable, high-flying U-2 spyplane and replace it with RQ-4 Global Hawk drones – even though there aren’t enough Global Hawks yet to provide the same coverage. Keeping the U-2s actually was the Air Force plan until last March, when Secretary Deborah Lee James said that a drop in Global Hawk Block 30 sustainment costs justified the change in plan. It also happens that the Northrop-built Global Hawk has some passionate supporters in Congress, while the last new U-2 was built in 1989.

“The politics of it say, ‘Nope, you’re going to buy the Global Hawk and we’re not going to give you any more money to do ISR,” said Hostage. “That leaves me with ‘how do I pay for the remainder of Global Hawk?’” The answer: retire the U-2 — even though it will take eight years for the Global Hawk fleet to provide 90 percent of the capability of manned aircraft, Hostage said. “The combatant commanders are going to suffer for eight years and the best they’re going to get is 90 percent.“ Hostage was far more sanguine about the comparable decision to cancel the equally venerable A-10 Warthog ground attack aircraft.

In Afghanistan, he said, 70 percent of close air support was provided by other aircraft. The loss of the U-2, though, bothers him deeply. “You give the best military advice, then all the realities of politics and economics and all the other constraints” impose a different path, which the military then has to make work. “I’ll go to my grave making that happen,” Hostage said. “But don’t ask me to tell…everybody that that’s the best decision made.“

Among “other constraints” leaving Hostage frustrated as he ends his Air Force career is the fact that the service’s 4th and 5th generation fighter planes use different data links and thus “don’t talk to each other” – a particular problem when tight budgets will require flying those 4th generation fighters decades longer. He’s also “appalled” that the 5th generation F-35 and F-22 can’t communicate with each other via data link, either. Solving that problem is a top ACC priority, he said. The strategic shift toward Asia and the Pacific declared by President Obama adds other constraints.

The Air Force needs a new Combat Rescue Helicopter (CRH) to retrieve downed aircrew, Hostage said, but in a conflict with a peer competitor in Asia (code for “China”), vast distances and sophisticated air defenses might require the speed and countermeasures of Air Force Special Operations Command CV-22 Osprey tiltrotors. “Neither the A-10 nor the rescue helicopter are going to survive in a close-in IADS [Integrated Air Defense System] fight,” he said. In the near term, though, the danger to all these aircraft is the budget wars.

Comments

  • Sand Man

    “He’s also ‘appalled’ that the 5th generation F-35 and F-22 can’t communicate with each other via data link…”

    How is it possible that the F-22 and the F-35 can’t communicate?!

    “The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”
    George Bernard Shaw

    • CLacroix

      Great quote!

      • Sand Man

        Thanks, that guy was pretty good…

    • Nobody-

      They can actually communicate with each other, just not stealthily. The F-35’s AN/ASQ-242 CNI suite has both the old Link 16 data link and the new stealthy Mutifunction Advanced Data Link. The F-22’s CNI has Link 16 (in receive-only mode) and a much more primitive stealthy data link called the intra-flight data link (which has shorter range and lower bandwidth). The F-22 was supposed to be upgraded to MADL, but that was defunded in 2010.

      • dagny

        Nobody – I know it’s a year later, but I just found this page. Actually, right now, the 5ths and 4ths CANNOT communicate – yet. And if you’re a real CAS jet-driver, you’ll know that information can’t be exchanged on these links unless those pesky data-link network designers and JICO’s did their job properly and everything was accurately communicated to both you and your “brick.” In the past 30 years of working in the field, I’ve encountered less than 25 pilots who really had a clue about how JTIDS/L-16 actually works, in-the-weeds, and is implemented across Joint/Coalition IADS/IFS architectures. And this guy is correct: “The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”
        George Bernard Shaw

  • originalone

    Isn’t it the members of the who dictate what the planes will do? Don’t they come up with the different sets of performance specs? They get a model approved, then change/add the what works and what doesn’t, and viola, the F-35. Obsolete before it’s built. Oh well, it’s only taxpayers money, along with the future earnings of the generations to come, but don’t ask the industrialists to pay their fair share, as was done in the last century. One might conclude that the present situation[s] around the world, benefit only the Cabal, but that might seem anti-what ever you want to label it.

    • holoh

      The members of the who? I’m not sure that’s relevant. Also, do you mean the original members or the current members?

      • originalone

        to holoh, left out the Air Force name, so the confussion, but yes, you’re right, it’s both the original & current members.

  • Carter Lee

    ““Our industrial base has eroded and we’re reducing our military down to a skeletal size at a time when the world is looking crazier by the day,””

    This statement is an outright fabrication that is not surprising since it is coming from Gen. Hostage. In fact, the US spends more money on our armed forces than the combined military spending of the the next 18 largest industrialized nations in the world most of whom are our alliance allies.

    • Thaumaturgist

      I don’t have the statistics, but why do we call “The Rust Belt” the “Rust Belt?” Is that something the socialist president made up? Where do we get our steel? Who believes we today can produce bombers faster than the Germans can shoot them down, Victory ships faster than the Germans can sink them, or tanks, trucks and,for that matter, food, faster than the Chinese can destroy it?

    • Jim Nanban

      Considering we provide a massive share of the defence capability for those allies, I would expect us to spend more on our armed forces.

    • 10579

      while what you say is true that we spend a lot of money on the armed forces,BUT they have given us TWO(2) aircraft that it seems like they are afraid to fly theseLook pretty but can’t fly at least to far.What is the matter with puting a Rolls Royce engine or GE engine.It’s not like it hasn’t been done before, may iI remind those who don’t remember the Mustang.They call it the plane that won the war.It had an inferior engine made in the usa that lacked horse power.They then put the British Merlin engine and the mustang came alive.It was a dragster vs a Yugo.They have to think outside the box(skunk works ).I some times wonder if these guys know which way is up.Also in fighting ISIS how about we let saudi arabia pay for the weapons that will be given to the kurds and the syrian good guys HA.

  • Joseph White

    I agree that sequestration should never effect military readiness, but when our socialist president has the say so on what gets cut and what gets funded, he’ll go for illegal immigrants and muslims every time, instead of supporting the Military.
    We passed a balanced budget act and made it the law of the land. every year that we don’t balance the budget, we break the law. On that alone, congress should be arrested and put in prison, and new people should be elected that will balance the budget.
    I agree with the General that when your aircraft can’t even talk to each other, it’s a stupid thing. Who the hell thinks of these things?

    • James Freeborn

      Stealth aircraft have different datalinks than conventional aircraft, otherewise it compromises their stealth. So, yes, it is an issue that needs to be fixed, but there is a reason for it, not sheer stupidity on the part of the military.

      I used to know why the F22 and F35 have different datalinks, but can’t remember right now and don’t feel like looking it up.

      • CharleyA

        Not sheer stupidity, but a generous lack of forethought.

      • Nobody-

        Except that’s not accurate. The F-22 uses the same Link-16 radio that everything else uses. It’s MADL upgrade was cancelled. The F-35 has the stealthy MADL datalink *in addition* to Link-16. It can communicate stealthy within its flight or use Link 16 to communicate with other forces.

    • Aero-Engineer

      You’re not very bright. I wish Obama was a socialist President. You obviously don’t know what the word means, because if you did you would know the U.S. Military is one of the largest socialist organizations in the world. The people who didn’t think about the planes talking to each other was our socialist Air Force.

      BTW, it was John Boehner, who when the Sequester was passed, said that the GOP got 90% of what they wanted. So if you have a problem with it, take it up with him.

  • Don Bacon

    If “the world is looking crazier by the day” it’s largely because of US military aggression, and support for military violence, which has destabilized Asia between India and the Med, as well as North Africa. Meanwhile a general complaining that he doesn’t have enough kit is like a poker player complaining he doesn’t have enough aces.

    • Jim Nanban

      Except that you can create legitimate aces, and losing a hand means losing lives.

      • Don Bacon

        Similes are always tough. Normally I avoid them.

        • Gary Church

          I burned out on simile on space forums. I have read about a thousand analogies about space and very few of them were anything but absurd. But of course the author understood it perfectly as self-consistent and logical. We are only human.

  • CharleyA

    CV-22s are not particularly survivable, wit the two that got shot up (with light arms at that) recently, so the jab at the A-10 and CSAR helo not being survivable, while implying that the CV-22 is seems out of place.

    • Gary Church

      Advertising. I picked up on that instantly also. Maybe he will be sucking up some consulting fees for promoting that junk in his retirement.

    • shaark92

      70% of the CAS was other than A-10s? Clearly they chose to use less than the best platform, then … that, or like Inigo Montoya, I don’t think he knows what that word (CAS) means. 😉

      • Jerry

        CAS, like when a B-1 bombed and killed five of our soldiers last June.

        • An actual AF pilot

          you’re an idiot. All other CAS platforms have had this happen to them, the A-10s more than most — this was the FIRST time ever for a frat off of a Bone. read the report… it was the ground JTACs fault for calling what he saw in the B-1s targeting pod as enemy. It is a sad cost of war and all involved feel like shit and are redoubling their training to do prevent it next time

          • An actual CAS Pilot

            BOC is not CAS.

          • Coach

            Its incredible that an MR B-1 crew didn’t know what kind of friendly markers it can see.

          • Been doing this a while.

            I think JP 3-09.3 begs to differ. BOC can be CAS so long as there is detailed integration of forces.

          • Gary Church

            Yapping like a secretary. What a hero.

          • Beltway Bandit

            Then what pray tell is it? Every single laser guided PGM hosted by a JTAC’s laser is BOC.

          • Nobody-

            Hey, just a quick question that you should be able to answer if you’re “an actual CAS pilot”

            -How did you get the brass to let you not fly any other type of mission? That’s quite an accomplishment.

            -What plane do you fly?

            -What’s its standard CAS loadout

            -If you fly the A-10, how is its CAS loadout sometimes modified for Afghanistan?

            -What’re the fusing, guidance, and warhead options on the munitions you use?

          • Gary Church

            Friendly fire is a part of war and the over-the-top sensitivity to it is kind of….I don’t know the right word to use without offending someone or other.

            This whole half-hour drama series conception of CAS is being abused by people concerned with their job security instead of military effectiveness.

            Incredible as it may sound, you do not need CAS to win a war. The idea of roaring down from heaven on the enemy with a pair of human eyeballs aiming a cannon from a few thousand yards away and getting away with it completely ignores the modern threat environment and MANPADS proliferation.

            If the military is in the business of massacring illiterate mountain tribesmen who can’t shoot back then they are in for a surprise when they go up against Ivan the duck hunter.

          • Been doing this a while

            Gary, you’ve never been on the receiving end of enemy fire have you? Your comments are full of bravado from someone who doesn’t know shit.

          • church

            And you have never told someone they don’t know shit to their face because you know you know they would spank you.

        • Nobody-

          A-10’s have killed 12 American soldiers, 10 British soldiers, and one Canadian solider in friendly fire incidents. They’ve also wounded 17 more Americans and 5 more Brits. B-1B’s have had one friendly fire incident in which 5 people were killed.

          TL;DR: You’re 4.3 times more likely to be killed by an A-10 than a B-1B if you’re a coalition soldier.

      • Nobody-

        The A-10 provides basically no advantage over the F-16C or F-15E. PGMs dominate the role, not guns. Hell, even the A-10 was upgraded so that it could use Mavericks, Paveways, JDAMs, WCMDs, targeting pods, and ROVER.

        • Lee

          The A-10 has better loiter time. Also, they can get into the Afghan mountain passes that a fast mover cannot.

          • Nobody-

            The A-10 does not have better loiter time. It has a two-hour loiter at a range of 250 nmi.

            The F-15E has a combat radius of 1000nmi at a 0.75 mach cruise. That means that if it stayed at cruise during its entire loiter, it would *still* match the A-10’s loiter. That’s before we point out that it can fly at a lower speed (Stall speed is approximately mach 0.42). The same can be said about the F-16C. More powerful engines allow both to carry more fuel, and more ordnance. The far greater range of fast movers more than compensates for their, shall we say more stringent runway requirements.

            Numbers back me up too. The F-16C provided more CAS in Afghanistan than the A-10 did, flying more sorties (22% to 19%) than the A-10 did.

          • D

            This is not correct. I’d be glad to chat with you about this. I’m an A-10 pilot and Weapons Officer.

          • PlayLoud

            Please share with the class :-)

    • John

      Given that the aircraft flew 100+ miles to get the injured crew members safely to medical care… And everyone survived, it sounds pretty survivable to me.

      • Pilot

        I don’t discount that the thing held together and the crews made it back but the airframes were complete losses. Take the H-60s or the 53s before them and that kind of damage would have been and has been just patched up before and the aircraft are back in service within a month if not a week.

        • Gary Church

          That was a several hundred million dollar mission!

  • daniel

    Would love to see an upgraded f-22, starting with f35 data link. Some conformal fuel tanks and more powerful engines. A laser turet, and …….just dreaming. …….

    • Gary Church

      If you are dreaming about something really fast and heavily armed then space is the final frontier. Want to do some asteroid target practice with hydrogen bomb pumped x-ray lasers? What happens in the asteroid belt stays in the asteroid belt:)

  • 10579

    Why has Jeffery Emmelt been selling USA technology to china since 2011 for Wink,Wink, commercial jet engines?So he wants to give the chinese a foot up on development of jet engines This turn coat and his bud in the WH are complisit in selling out this country and our air military.Incase you dont know Emmelt is an advisor to Obama and CEO of Genera Electric,who make jet engines.

  • Jerry

    What a nutcase. “skeletal size” with one of the largest military budgets in our history!

    • bobbymike34

      Actually as a share of the federal budget and GDP it is one of the smallest since the end of WWII.

      • Gary Church

        Double-talk. Clarify, I dare you.

        • bobbymike34

          You need clarity for such an obvious statement? Wow do the math yourself genius.

          • Gary Church

            I understand you are just getting more and more insulting.

        • Lee

          I believe the Defense budget makes up about 16 or 18% of the 2015 federal budget if I’m not mistaken.

      • ShootMe/ShootYou

        Yeah, right. The US military strictly operates out of a peanut-doling shoestring purse bag. According to many noted researchers the final cost of the US 21st century’s Iraq-Afghan military adventure could climb above the figure of $6 TRILLION. Small change really.

      • Don Bacon

        Why is it relevant to compare the military budget to the overall budget and to GDP? Shouldn’t the military budget be needs-based, like every other aspect of the budget? Does anyone claim that any other budget ingredient ought to be a certain percent of the overall budget?

        • bobbymike34

          Don I agree with you on needs based budgeting my comment has more to do when someone points out the ‘dollar’ amount of defense spending and then classifies it with some modifier as ‘huge,’ ‘enormous,’ etc.

          It has to be compared to something and because it is generally very difficult to account for inflation and its impact on a complex budget like defense spending using percentage of GDP or the federal budget, I feel, gives perspective.

          If someone made $100,000/year and purchased a car for $50,000 and someone else makes $1,000,000/year and bought a car for $200,000. One response could be Oh my gosh that car is four times as expensive. Or another might be ya but it is actually a smaller percentage of that person’s income than the guy who bought the $50,000/car and arguably more affordable to them than the less expensive car to the other guy.

          Your argument changes the whole dynamic. Using the above example, if the second guy needed an F-350 instead of the Ferrari he bought then yes he spent way to much on the wrong car.

          You point is absolutely valid but it begs the question, “Who is going to be trusted with making a budget with what the military ‘needs’ and therefore what it will spend?” My guess would be that Democrats and Republicans would be at least $100 billion apart.

          I personally would like 600 ships and 15 carrier battle groups again and with the rise of Russia and China might be justified in thinking that. While someone could easily say 10 carriers would suffice, etc. etc.

        • http://www.mrcapco.com maximurandb

          Yes, as you say Don, and Bobbymike34 supports, the budget should be needs-based; other considerations are ancillary at best. The budget should be sufficient to the national security missions it is supposed to accomplish. We can’t have a situation where the budget dictates how much national security we’re going to have…that’s backwards.

  • Don Bacon

    “But what I can’t abide by is being told, ‘No, don’t say that, you can’t say that.’”

    As a civilian you can say whatever you want, buddy. Til then your mouth, as well as other parts, belong to the government.

    • Gary Church

      Actually, I cannot talk about most of the stuff I did when I was in intelligence.

      • Don Bacon

        Hostage was not and is not in intelligence. He’s talking about stuff way above his pay grade, which isn’t unusual for generals overly impressed with their own importance.

        • Gary Church

          Roger that.

          • holoh

            You sound like a moron. Roger means “acknowledge”. Affirmative means “yes”.

          • Gary Church

            Then just about everyone who talks on a radio is a moron because it is a common sign off. Whose a moron?

          • holoh

            This is a discussion board, not a radio. No one cares if you acknowledged the message – they want to know if you agree or disagree with the message.

          • Gary Church

            This is a discussion board where people can say what they want you foul mouth insulter. That includes insults so I guess that is why you are here.

          • holoh

            No, I am here to let you know that you sound like a moron saying “Roger that” on a discussion board.

          • Gary Church

            No, you are here to insult people. A punk.

          • holoh

            I didn’t insult you. Were you insulted by my statement of fact: “You sound like a moron. Roger means ‘acknowledge’. Affirmative means ‘yes’ “?

          • Gary Church

            Then yes, you are a punk.

          • holoh

            Gotta love someone who accuses another of insulting and then insults. Nice work, hypocrite.

          • Gary Church

            Thanks, silly-ass-insulter.

        • holoh

          Hostage is a 4-star. He’s certainly “in intelligence” as well as pretty much every other duty in the Air Force.

    • holoh

      He won’t ever be a civilian – he’ll be retired Air Force and by definition will be a permanent member of the Retired Reserve force.

  • 2IDSGT

    Soooooo… has this guy been vetted by a party for office yet? Just askin.

    • holoh

      LOL. Like most retired Generals, he’s no heading for office – he’s heading for the cushy corporate jobs he set him self up with over the last 3-4 years by helping out those companies by using his influence as a 4-star.

      • 2IDSGT

        Soooooo… did you speak with him on the matter, or are you just some lame-a$$ troll attempting to sound smart?

        • holoh

          Yes, no.

          • 2IDSGT

            Pretty sure it’s actually “no, yes.”

          • holoh

            no, no. He was my boss’s boss in 2011-2012.

          • 2IDSGT

            Unless you’re a flag-officer yourself, no. I’m guessing some SSG was actually your boss.

          • holoh

            There are no SSG’s in the Air Force. We have SSgt’s though. There are no flag officers that work for people that work for Hostage. That would be a general working for a general working for a general. I actually can’t think of anywhere that that happens, even in the case of Combatant Commanders and the CSAF. Lots of Col’s working for Generals working for Hostage though. 😉

          • 2IDSGT

            E6 whatevs… crybaby.

          • holoh

            No, an E-6 in the Air Force is a TSgt. A SSgt is an E-5.

          • 2IDSGT

            Like I said… whatevs.

          • holoh

            Are you a 12 year old girl?

          • Gary Church

            Are you a jackass Holoh- everyone says yes.

          • holoh

            Your delusional view that your opinion equals “everyone” is both comical and sad. I am so, so sorry for you.

          • Gary Church

            Thank you.

          • 2IDSGT

            Are you? ‘Cause you troll like one. Wanna complain about the General’s choice of civilian shoes?

          • holoh

            Thank you for admitting that I successfully trolled you and the rest of the idiots on this board.

          • 2IDSGT

            You need to get more than a two-line post out of someone before your troll can be called successful.

          • holoh

            You’ve replied to my posts 5 times now, moron. What other idiotic comments do you have, you dirty enlisted mouth-breather?

          • 2IDSGT

            Keeping it short each time… you cost me a mere 5 seconds per-day.

  • Gimme a break

    No mention of him wanting to fist AWACS up the bung hole? Interesting…

    • holoh

      Apparently no one knows what you are talking about. Enlighten us (as long as it’s not just a veiled request for someone to fist your bunghole).

  • Derek Sage

    another military hypocrite…hate the govt, don’t want to pay taxes but expect a blank check for their poor leadership, decision making and budgets.

    • Texasdav

      Military leaders are not in charge, the President and Congress are (2/3’s of that equation is Democrat.)

  • Landsnark

    Ground support is a bad thing, but a manned recon system is a must? What a hack. I hope he enjoys his future contracting job.

    • Texasdav

      If the Global Hawk cannot meet the requirement–despite the billions wasted on endless cost overruns and re-engineering–then the U-2 should remain active until it can.

  • Texasdav

    What was the sequestration cut to the DoD–something like 20%?