Air, Space and Cyber Conference 2025 - Modernizing the Triad: The Imperative for B-21 and Sentinel

[Announcer] Ladies and gentlemen, airmen and guardians, please welcome the moderator of our next session, Major General Larry Stutzriem, executive vice president of the Air and Space Forces Association.

[Retired Maj. Gen. Larry Stutzriem] Thank you, Mom and Dad. Well, good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to this, our first panel discussion.

And I don't think it's a coincidence that we begin this conference with a focus on the backstop of our national security, that is our nuclear deterrent enterprise. In particular, we're gonna take a fresh look at America's land and air-based strategic deterrent. Those are two legs of the nuclear triad, and this scope includes the Minuteman III ICBM, the B-52, the B-2, associated nuclear weapons, nuclear command and control and communications, inextricably linked space capabilities, and the talented and trained, dedicated airmen and guardian who serve in this enterprise 24-7.

Now, we are also looking forward to the next systems, the modernization piece, the Sentinel ICBM, the B-21, NC3, nuclear command, control and communications, upgrades. They all stand as essential next steps to ensure this capability remains viable for future decades. So today, we're honored to have an impressive and distinguished panel.

First, we're pleased to welcome Lieutenant General Michael Lutton, who's deputy commander, Air Force Global Strike Command. Next to him, we're glad to be joined by Major General Brandon Parker, director of global operations, Headquarters U.S. Strategic Command. Next to him, we're glad to be joined by Brigadier General William Buck Rogers, Air Force program executive officer for Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles, and director of the ICBM Systems Directorate. And finally, we round out the panel with a perspective from industry, our industry partner, Ben Davies, who is corporate vice president and president of Defense Systems, Northrop Grumman Corporation. So, gentlemen, thank you all for being here today.

Well, I want to begin this by setting some context, and it's a question for all the panelists. And General Lutton, we're going to begin with you, and we'll go down the line. You know, during the Cold War, we had one threat. It was the Soviet Union. But today, that threat is much more complicated. We have China, Russia, and China is building its enterprise very quickly. And we have North Korea we can't forget about.

So, I want to ask the panel, how does this new multi-threat affect your calculations in terms of this need to modernize and to have a strong nuclear deterrent? And what are those implications for force sizing and composition, I guess I would say? General Lutton?

[Lt. Gen. Michael Lutton] Sure, thanks, sir. I think for our command as a part of the joint force, we're required to be laser-focused. That's our contribution to deterrence, to defend the nation, as well as integrate and dominate with the joint force.

How do we do that? We do that by following through on our commitment. Our commitment is to always be ready for the nation, and our commitment is to conduct global strike on behalf of the nation.

We've been unbelievably busy, but it's a good busy. The airmen and their total force airmen, along with our mobility team, has conducted 267 days of bomber task force operations around the globe. And those are 33 bomber task force operations while we've made 24-7 nuclear alert for the nation. So, it's an unbelievable honor to serve them and their families. That's how we contribute to it, sir.

[Stutzriem] Very good, General Parker.

[Maj. Gen. Brandon Parker] Thanks, Stutz, first of all, for having this panel and having us on it. Certainly, on behalf of General Cotton, the way we think about your question is really about the changing global security landscape, and what I would term really is the evolving character of war, right? And we all see this every single day as we observe the conflicts that are ongoing right now. And some of the key features that have drawn our attention, I'll just highlight a couple for you, right? Gray zone activity, right? Where you blur the lines between competition, crisis, and conflict.

We see our adversaries leveraging advanced technologies, especially when it comes to cyber, counter space, novel missile systems and delivery platforms, right? Then we see increased collaboration amongst aligned adversaries. And then you don't even mention the economic entanglement between these nation states.

And so, to us, you mentioned the Cold War, to us, contextually what we're facing now is vastly different. And so, our thinking in Omaha, General Cotton has put us to task, right? And so, we're thinking about how we approach modern era deterrence differently.

We need to adapt our approach. And so that's where we're going now. And so, you mentioned modernization, a key aspect of how we're thinking about nuclear forces is this necessity to modernize, right?

And I love what Secretary Meink and General Allvin said, it's not just about the technology. A lot of it is the mindset, but certainly it sets the stage so that you can maintain strategic advantage. And so, we see a lot of promise both in the programs of record, but also in the legacy systems that we have existing today.

And so, we understand that the amount of time it'll take to develop and field these more advanced systems. And so, while we go through that modernization process, we would say it's equally important that we sustain the capabilities that we have today so that we can continue to deter, assure, and if necessary, respond.

[Stutzriem] Yeah, it's complex. It really is. General?

[Brig. Gen. William Rogers] Stutz, first, thank you for including me on the panel and also thank you to AFA.

So as the program executive officer for ICBMs and representing the acquisition and sustainment communities, we really work very closely with our operational community. So, it's really about that teamwork, that teamwork to get after modernization. So, in this multipolar world, it's about speed and really having the credibility, delivering on our commitments to our operational community.

So, working closely to understand what we need to do, what the requirements are in this as a quickly change, and then how do we get after delivering the capability as quick as we can in that, in following through on those commitments.

[Stutzriem] Ben?

[Mr. Ben Davies] Again, thank you for the opportunity to join you today.

I'd say given our role on B-21 and Sentinel, we in the industry team think a lot about what the characteristics of 21st century deterrence look like. And it's been mentioned a couple of times, both by the secretary and the chief and others on the panel, but a piece of that is technology. And the systems that we're developing today are generational leaps in technology.

And what that means is when we field these systems, they will not be one-for-one replacements for the systems we have in operation today. They are intentionally developed to provide effective and survivable deterrence in the face of a modern threat. I would say second is we understand that the threat environment is changing rapidly.

So by its very nature, 21st century deterrence needs to be modular network systems. These systems need to evolve and adapt to stay ahead of the pacing threat and continue to provide resilient, responsive options to our senior leaders. And last, I would just touch again on something that others have said is just urgency.

We understand the urgency of the pacing threat. So, we are actively investing, partnering with the Air Force to find ways to accelerate delivery of both the B-21 and the Sentinel capability. You probably saw recently, we've incorporated some process changes in the manufacturing on B-21, specifically to get after our ability to accelerate the production rate.

And we're actively working right now on ways to accelerate delivery of not just the Sentinel missile, but the ground infrastructure to support it.

[Stutzriem] Yeah. And Ben, I hope we can get to more of this discussion as we go through this.

I wanna set a baseline in this next question because it comes up decade after decade in the last two or three decades. And that's about this thing called the nuclear triad. Of course, for the audience who are not familiar, our ICBMs, our nuclear submarine force, and of course our nuclear-equipped bombers.

And there's been thoughts that that triad is not going to serve us in the future, that we could do away with one of the legs of the triad. I'm just curious, and I'm gonna ask you, General Parker, from your perspective at STRATCOM, and maybe General Lutton might wanna jump in. Is the triad still relevant?

And, or I could ask it the other way. What happens if you lose one of the legs of the triad?

[Parker] Well, thanks for that question. You're right, we get this question a lot at STRATCOM. But I would state it simply like this. The triad, the nuclear triad, is the bedrock of our national defense.

There's no element of U.S. military power that can replace the unique deterrence characteristics of nuclear forces. And so, to me, you know, your first question about, you know, deterrence in the modern age is directly linked to this question about the triad. Right, and so what we've seen is successive administrations, right, so across the political spectrum, including the 2022 Nuclear Posture Review, reaffirmed our nation's commitment to a safe, secure, effective nuclear force posture, which includes all three legs of the triad.

And so, when we think about, at least at the Command Headquarters, when we think about the triad, we think of the separate legs as complementary. So, we really view them from a holistic perspective. And so, when you take it that way and you look to the future, if we can have a modern triad that maintains responsiveness, survivability, flexibility, visibility, we feel it will serve us well.

And so, the land leg, you know, because we hear about that most often, to be frank with you, it remains our most responsive leg of the triad, on alert 24-7, 365. It presents the ultimate dilemma for our adversary leaders because they can't be confident that they can destroy them all before our opportunity to launch. Sentinel will improve on the capabilities that we currently field today.

The sea-based leg of the triad, right? It's the most survivable. Okay, and as we transition from Ohio-class to Columbia-class, we'll be guaranteed that advantage well for decades to come.

And then you have the air leg. And so, this is your most flexible and your most visible. And so, we know that, you know, the capabilities that the B-21 will bring into the mix, especially as we talk about the more advanced defensive systems that we're seeing, we're really looking forward to this capability.

And so, at the end of the day for General Cotton, you know, he has to provide a range of options to the president in order to preserve the decision space for the president. And so, the triad, in our view, remains the most effective, the best way to do that.

[Lutton] Sir, I'd just add to that, as a very young second lieutenant in strategic air command, there's an importance to acknowledge that the triad has evolved over time.

And the triad has responded to what the nation needs. When I was a second lieutenant, you had bombers that were on alert, submarines continue to be on alert, and we had almost 1,000 intercontinental ballistic missiles that were on alert. And that triad has evolved for what our nation needs to defend the homeland and assure allies.

And I think that's critical to remain laser focused on that mission set for the triad and what it means to the nation. Right now, our bombers are not on nuclear alert, given the conditions. That doesn't mean they couldn't be generated back to nuclear alert or some element of nuclear alert.

But our triad is what our nation needs to assure allies and deter potential aggressors that would threaten our homeland. And it's proven. It's proven over five decades that it works. Now we need to modernize it.

[Stutzriem] Yeah. No, that flexibility discussion also is that it's all about escalation control also, having that triad that we have some options before the button's pushed, right?

Yeah. Well, General, let me pick up on that a bit. And right now, the Air Force operates the free world's only strategic bomber force. And we talked about the concurrent threats we face. Just curious, share your thoughts on the sizing of this bomber force because it will have both a conventional and a nuclear role in the future. Thoughts there?

[Lutton] I think the thought that comes to mind is how that bomber force will be employed, right? Through our combatant commander, United States Strategic Command, as well as integrating with other combatant commanders and allies around the world. There was a gentleman at the beginning of the summer that I met at the Capitol Hill Club when I was talking to a group of individuals.

And he showed me a picture of the B-52s on Guam during Vietnam. And there were almost 300 B-52s on Guam. We don't have 300 bombers in the United States Air Force. So, force structure matters. Because as General Parker mentioned, and Ben and Buck had mentioned, it provides options. Now it's just what is that right mix?

That right mix to deter potential allies, or excuse me, deter potential adversaries and assure allies. And then deliver combat capability if required. And so, we'll continue to work with our headquarters Air Force and the Joint Force on what that mix is that the nation needs.

[Stutzriem] Thank you. Yeah, more and faster is what the nation needs. Let me ask get Buck Rogers to jump into this. And we talk about the Sentinel Program, and that's your job description right now. And folks are talking a bit about cost overruns. And they may not be as clearly educated on the cost to keeping 60-year-old ICBMs. So, can you talk a little bit about the Sentinel and why it's important, how it enhances our deterrence?

[Rogers] Yes, sir. And I'll actually approach it from both systems' perspectives. So let me start with Minuteman III. It is a credible, secure, and safe system today, and will be for the foreseeable future. That is one of the roles I perform as a PEO for ICBMs. I have a skilled team working very hard every single day to make sure that that system remains available and remains credible. So, working with industry and our operational community and the sustainment community to keep that system, Minuteman III, online.

However, to your point earlier, the adversary gets a vote. With this world changing, the requirements for an ICBM fleet may look different in the future, and do look different. And that's where Sentinel comes in, right? We have to be more responsive to the threats when it comes to the land leg. So, we need, and that doesn't include just head-on kinetic type threats. That includes things like cyber.

So Sentinel, a core part of Sentinel is actually making sure that we are cyber secure, making sure that we bake cyber into that system, and that we can defend it from not just, like I said, the traditional kinetic type of attack, but also cyber and non-kinetic attacks.

It also brings that ability to be modular and open, and actually adjust to the threats quicker. So today, Minuteman, the team works very hard to figure out the engineering, the sustainment, and work through the problems as they come up, and the requirements change to implement those solutions into the system.

In the future, having more control of our standards and our interfaces, we'll be able to better adjust and get after those new capabilities, especially when it comes to things like software and some of the other capabilities that may ride on top of the missile.

[Stutzriem] And by the way, AFA, the magazine, the AFA magazine, has some really good archived articles on the scope of the program, which is awesome. I mean, it's huge.

[Rogers] It is, and it makes the job very fun every single day. There's something different to work on, right? The Sentinel program, as is, same with Minuteman, it's far more than simply a missile. I mentioned the software, but the ground infrastructure, the command and control, everything from the launch silos, to the launch centers, to the wing command centers, it all has to work together, all the system, the infrastructure aspect, as well as the people and our airmen.

[Stutzriem] Well, General, you're all over this. Keep taking your vitamins, okay? Stick with it.

[Rogers] Will do.

[Stutzriem] I'd like to bring in Ben Davies in this discussion. Northrop Grumman is a key industrial partner in the B-21 and the Sentinel programs, and I'm sure the scope of these, you encounter challenges no one ever expected. Curious if you can talk to some of that, how your team dealt with some of those.

[Davies] Yeah, absolutely, and maybe just to tag on to some of what's just been said. It's been a while since we as a nation developed a new ICBM and developed a new bomber, but I would argue even beyond that, programs like B-21 and Sentinel are not just generational leaps in technology, they're generational leaps in scale and complexity. If you think about B-21, our nation's first sixth generation bomber, it's a deep strike penetrating stealth bomber, it's a flexible platform, it performs both conventional and nuclear missions, it replaces not just the B-2 Spirit, but the B-1 Lancer, the platforms that we've been flying for 35 and 50 years respectively, and as was just mentioned, you think about Sentinel, Sentinel is arguably one of the largest, most complex programs we as a nation have ever taken on. As General Rogers mentioned, it's not just replacing the 400 on alert missiles we have today in Minuteman, but it's really a replacement for all of the ground infrastructure, which includes nearly 500 sites across 30,000 square miles across five states.

So, we in the industry team are up to the challenge, and the way we're doing this is facing this head on, and first I'll just say, we've invested, we've made significant investments, we in the industry team, to be able to produce these systems at the scale and the rate needed to provide that deterrence. We as a company have invested 13 and a half billion dollars just over the last five years, we've grown to 30 million square feet of manufacturing, and much of that is the investment in the advanced aircraft manufacturing necessary to produce B-21, it's the solid rocket motor manufacturing capability to produce the Sentinel missile, it's the advanced composites manufacturing, it's the subsystems necessary. We've also invested in the workforce, if you look at between the Northrop Grumman and our major teammates, we have nearly 20,000 skilled men and women across the country in locations like Florida, and Mississippi, and Alabama, Colorado, California, Utah, that are working hard every single day to deliver these capabilities.

We have a supply base that we've invested and grown of nearly a thousand suppliers across 40 states to support these programs, many of whom are probably in the room with us today that have invested. I'd say second is while we haven't done some of these program types in a while, we have leveraged technology and learning across multiple programs, some of that clearly is the learning we had on Minuteman and on B-2 in terms of what it takes to produce, operate, and sustain those systems, but that's not the only place that we've drawn lessons in technology, if you look at from space launch to other missile programs to other advanced aircraft, we're applying those technologies in automation and advanced manufacturing, and I would say, last but not least, we're all in on digital. We as an organization have invested $2 billion in the digital ecosystem, and programs like B-21 and Sentinel at that scale are born digital, and they need to be born digital. Before we deliver the first B-21 or before we deliver the first Sentinel, you better believe we've taken the mission analysis all the way through the requirements and design so we know how those systems are gonna operate.

We’ve taken that design through our suppliers and through the factory so we know how we're gonna produce them, and we've developed a common digital environment so industry with our government partners know exactly how we're gonna certify and maintain those systems. Yeah.

[Lutton] If I could, I'd... Yeah, I just wanted to follow up on the concept of the scope and scale, because I know that's often talked about, but I see it as a positive. I mean, that scope and scale equals consequence for the nation, and if you're an airman, you wanna deliver for the nation, and so what better time now, right?

I mean, to be in an arena where you're gonna execute a mission of consequence for the nation and our allies. So, the scope and scale, we should embrace that. I mean, we embrace that throughout our history as an Air Force, so I just see it as a positive. Oftentimes, it's, I think, sometimes has a negative connotation, so I just wanted to footnote that. I see it as a positive.

[Stutzriem] That’s excellent. No, that's excellent. It's a challenge that airmen and guardians have stood up to before, yeah.

[Rogers] Yes, sir, yeah, and along those lines, to get after that scope and scale, the secretary mentioned the teamwork aspect earlier. It's absolutely critical. You'll hear we work very closely in a team dynamic with industry, with our support contractors, with our government, civilians, military members, but it's also about great teams have great accountability, so that is really an area that we focus on is not just one-way accountability with industry, but they have hold us accountable as well, so we need to deliver on our commitments and work together. That's how we overcome the scale of these programs, working through each problem as we encounter them as a team.

[Stutzriem] Well said. Hey, Ben, I just also want to note, you know, a lot of folks don't quite get that the workforce, you know, we've gone a long time without modernization, and the workforce of the Cold War era are gone. They're retired, so that is another amazing thing that we've been able to find the people technically competent to, you know, work these programs.

Hey, Buck, I want to ask you, so dazzle the missileers and the maintenance crews. What is Sentinel going to do that's going to amaze them? Besides the detonation, we don't want to talk about that.

[Rogers] Right, yeah, well, that'll hopefully not dazzle us on our end, but the points I'll hit here, and I'll hit some at a higher level just because that's where we have to keep it, but in terms of the range, Sentinel will better enable our operational community to hold more targets at risk. In terms of our national defense, the accuracy will be greatly improved as well. So those are two key core components in terms of the Sentinel program.

One other aspect when I talk about our operational community, I don't want to forget our maintainers and defenders. So, in terms of the maintenance, the maintainability of the Sentinel system, we're doing the engineering to make sure that there's better access, there's the system's more reliable, that we are actually focusing on how are we going to maintain this weapon system for the next 40, 50 years so that we learn from what we've experienced with Minuteman III. For our defenders, aspects such as the security, helping them secure the missile field better in terms of what we'll call the communication systems, the battle space awareness, more knowledge of what's happening out in the missile field to make sure that the system is safe and secure.

And then finally, as Ben mentioned, the open modular. It means we can, if we implement this right, it means we can actually evolve to the threats, get after encountering those threats quicker, which obviously benefits the nation, but it's really a cool thing for operators when they can see how fast we can in the future implement fixes to the operational threats that they encounter.

[Stutzriem] Yeah, awesome.

[Davies] And maybe if I could just reinforce that last point. Our missile crews who recently had the opportunity to retire the floppy disk in Minuteman, we hope to impress them with how we will keep systems like Sentinel at the leading edge of deterrence through the architecture that we're implementing.

[Stutzriem] Very good, very good. Hey, we have to move to, I want to move to what's sometimes called the fourth leg of the triad, if that makes sense, but it's the nuclear command and control and communications.

And that's undergoing a significant look. And as we talked about in the opening here, our adversaries are developing space capabilities, cyber capabilities. So, what's important about that? I'm gonna ask General Lutton and General Parker to talk to this a bit, but what are we looking at to make sure that commanders can stay connected to the nuclear forces?

[Lutton] Yeah, I think when I look at that, I fall back on my experience. I had about 17 years in space operations. So, we have to be absolutely welded to the Space Force on integration when we deliver those nuclear command control communications capabilities.

It's not a challenge, it's an imperative that we stay highly coupled to the Space Force as they are developing space-based capabilities, if that's a route we choose for nuclear command, control communications. And then I really think the innovation of our airmen to develop new solutions to deliver even more improved command, control and communications throughout all scenarios will be critical. Yeah, yeah.

[Parker] I'll pile on to that. At STRATCOM, you know, when it comes to the modernization of NC3, we have a pretty simple framework for how we're thinking about what we're doing there. And it's, you know, really revolves around the key functions of this family of systems, which is to detect, decide, and then direct.

And so, I need to be able to detect enemy threat action and force status, which will inform national level decision, which then drives how we direct the force. And so USSTRATCOM is leading a congressionally directed cyber instrumentation pilot, and the intent here is to develop and field a rapid, advanced, standards-based construct for NC3 cyber security, just to the point that you are making.

And so, we, you know, the way we see it, you know, it's gonna be designed so that it's system agnostic, meaning from the enterprise level to the war fighting edge, I can integrate it with existing systems and those that are to come. And so, if we're doing this right, we'll have, you know, a capability that allows us to, you know, from a network perspective, we can sense, we can monitor, right? And we can respond to the types of threats that we may see in the future.

And so, you know, to put a finer point on this, you know, when we view NC3, it really is the effector that expands presidential decision space. It is that important, right? Without it, you don't get it. And so, we're really excited about where we're going in this area.

[Rogers] And if I could quick, because I don't want to be remiss in the support for the NC3 team I provide with another role I currently play, which is the acting commander of the Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center. So, the NC3 program office team is doing a lot of work, working as an integrating PEO type function to really help build out that architecture, bring more logic, right?

NC3 has evolved over many years and decades to get where we are today, but how do we make it better, right? Really focus on what are the improvements in terms of the logic engineering systems architecture that we can make to that system to better support the other parts of the nuclear triad and obviously our presidential decision making.

[Parker] I would add just one other key point and it hits on what you just said is, so, you know, General Cotton has us taking a hard look as we lead this effort to look at those data analytic tools that we think could be available within the processes that we have in order to optimize or improve the human performance that's in the loop. And so, we're always gonna have a human in the loop when it comes to informing and understanding presidential decision in our processes. But can we leverage these tools in order to improve that process, enhance that process? That's what we're looking at now.

[Stutzriem] Yeah, and I really appreciate what you just said. When I was at NORTHCOM, we were involved in some of this and it was not chaotic, but it involved a lot of touch points and a lot of manual handoffs. So that's good to hear that we can use technology to help improve the decision process.

[Parker] There's definitely room for automation, machine learning, AI within this space.

[Stutzriem] Right, right, very good. Well, let me move from there back to some of the industrial issues, Ben. And you're using, you've mentioned a lot of things, digital engineering, advanced manufacturing, rapid prototyping. So, when we talk about lifecycle of the program over a period of time, can we talk specifically about digital engineering, what that is and how it fits in?

[Davies] Absolutely, and actually ties into some of the topics that were just mentioned. So first, let me say both systems like B-21 and Sentinel born digital and necessarily so, given the scale and complexity of those systems. So, what does that mean?

That means for systems like this, very complex, we're able to very accurately model, analyze, optimize, evaluate every aspect of those systems, thousands or tens of thousands of times before we bend metal. And then when we do, we can use advanced manufacturing techniques to prototype, test and evaluate key aspects of the system to validate the models and demonstrate that they perform the way we expect them to. That's a path that we've been on for B-21. And when you look at really, so what are the benefits? Once you go to produce and then test the platform, significantly higher maturity. And we can see that today in the B-21 program.

In fact, it was mentioned in some of the keynote addresses where we now not just have one, but two aircraft in the test program. And if you think about it, very advanced aircraft, very complicated aircraft built to production processes, performing exactly how we expected them to, which is really a testament to all the great work that was done in the model environment before we actually built those aircraft. I would say Sentinel is on that same path a little bit earlier in its lifecycle, but we're at that same point in Sentinel where we're now starting to see the models come to life.

We've now had the opportunity to prototype and test every stage of the missile, and they very much performed as we expect them to, which gives us confidence as we push forward on the path to get that program into flight test. A unique aspect of Sentinel is our infrastructure is very much a part of our weapons system. And so, we are actively expanding the digital thread on Sentinel to include our infrastructure.

And that means not just analyzing and optimizing how that infrastructure will perform, and it's very important it does perform because it provides critical aspects of the performance of the weapons system. But we need to understand when we talk about nearly 500 sites across 30,000 square miles, we need to understand how are we gonna construct and how are we gonna deploy inclusive of all the logistics. And that's very much an area that we're leveraging the digital environment to make sure that we're making smart choices.

And I'm excited we're getting very close to where we're gonna start prototyping and demonstrating some aspects of that infrastructure design in the near future as well.

[Stutzriem] That's pretty exciting. Go ahead.

[Rogers] Yeah, and just quick, one part I also wanna hit to build on Ben's point is doing it together in the same environments, working through the models, the tools, but really is focused on the systems engineering processes and other business processes to eventually, obviously, deliver the capability for our operators. So that's the one area that we've really doubled down on is bringing our teams together with these tools, doing the digital engineering, digital, I'll say, material management together.

[Stutzriem] And Ben, I would say it's not just about more effect, but there's actually a lot of savings along the way. For example, test. Can you do less live tests, more digital testing before you get there?

[Davies] Absolutely. I would say it's a mindset shift from explicitly having to verify every requirement on a physical article to essentially, you can perform thousands and thousands, millions of verification cases against these high-fidelity models, and then you're essentially just validating data points when you get into the test program, which is amazingly more comprehensive and more efficient.

[Lutton] Sir, just to add to that, we've studied with Northrop the lessons learned on the Minuteman III fielding, and one of the concepts that comes up there is concurrency, and that was actually a negative impact to Minuteman III fielding, Minuteman I, actually. With Sentinel, we can be much more informed about how we can currently deploy, especially some of the on-installation projects that we do that are low-risk to no-risk that will allow us to accelerate, because often, one will hear this sentiment about early to need. You don't wanna be on the other side of that coin with a deterrent capability where you're late to need. That's not good for the nation. That's not good for the Joint Force. It's not good for the Air Force.

[Stutzriem] Yeah, well said. Well, we just got a couple minutes left, and I do wanna recognize that I'm particularly proud of the missileers that are out there. I've got somebody close to me who's in that workforce, and I'm curious how you see that. Are these bomber crews and missileers and maintenance crews and the defenders, where are they at today? Are they ready to go for this? We know it's gonna be an incredible transition from, for example, the ICBM from Minuteman to Sentinel. We know the same thing happens with aircraft-bomber transitions, so where are they at, General Lutton? Are they in good shape?

[Lutton] I would say, and I thought this way when I was a numbered Air Force commander and a wing commander, one, you need to ask them. From where I sit when I talk to them, we can't get to modernization fast enough. But it also comes down to critical issues that support them as professionals.

So, it's working with JJ and his team to deliver world-class medical care for them and their families. Also, when you look at our bomber crews, it's acknowledging the fact that they will take off out of Barksdale Air Force Base and fly into the East China Sea and South China Sea and fly back home. So, 29, 32-hour sortie.

So physiologically, what are the things that we can do to improve their quality of service as well as get them new gear? So, it's really that whole aspect of addressing quality of service for them and their families that I think is critical to remain laser-focused on while we modernize the force.

[Stutzriem] One last thing with this. You are so deeply involved in both operations and training. When the Air Force chief talked a little bit about readiness and he especially called out training, how are we doing with training with respect to ranges, concurrent development of simulators, and that sort of thing with our bombers?

[Lutton] For the bomber force not satisfied with the simulators, and this is just me going as a weapons officer, I think we can always look at how we push higher-end integrated joint allied training. So, to that extent, partnering with General Spain and Air Combat Command and other joint ranges for our bomber crews, in particular, and our helo crews to allow them to do higher-end training is something we're always gonna prefer. We understand it takes a building block approach to get the crews to that level.

[Stutzriem] Yeah, very good. Well, ladies and gentlemen, we've run out of time, but I'll tell you, this is a cross-section in this panel of folks who are there doing the business of nuclear deterrence, and if necessary, they will employ. They're producing the systems, and of course, they're the industry reps that are producing those systems. So, I'd really appreciate a nice warm round of applause for our panel today.