air force end of tour award

Sharing my journey through Air Force Officer Training School (OTS) and beyond.

• Application
• Career Fields

Air Force Decorations Part 2 of 2

Read Next →

Air Force Decorations Part 1 of 2

For part 1 of this series I focused on my experience with how the Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM), Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM), and Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) are practically awarded. For part 2 my goal is to focus on some administrative tips for completing each level of decoration. As you progress from the AFAM to the MSM the quality of achievement should improve, and this is evident by the progressive level of the approval authority. The only way to achieve a consistent quality across all levels across the Air Force is to adhere to the guidance outlined in the AFI.

Achievement Decorations

For “achievement” types of decorations we should lean heavily on our NCOs and SNCOs. We need to ensure they are tracking and familiar with the unit precedent for each level of award, both in-house and with similar units across the Air Force. As I said in part 1, some examples of “achievements” recognized at the AFAM level are one year of base honor guard volunteer service or support for a contingency operation. For example, if you are at an overseas base and a Combatant Command called the wing you are assigned to into action, it may be appropriate to fight for your NCO to be awarded an AFAM if his duties supported the contingency mission.

Service Decorations

For “service” decorations it is generally accepted that a 3-4 year of duty warrants a decoration. The inclusive date for “service” decorations cannot overlap and the AFI provides very clear guidance for what the dates should be.

1.15.12. Inclusive Dates: The dates to be used for inclusive dates are as follows: 1.15.12.1. PCS: Start date is the date the member arrived to the station/unit; stop date is the date of final outprocessing. 1.15.12.2. PCA: Start date is the date the member arrived to the unit; stop date is the day prior to the effective date of the unit change. 1.15.12.3. Separation/Retirement: Start date is the date the member arrived to the station/unit; stop date is the day prior to the separation/retirement effective date. 1.15.12.5. Achievement: Start date is the date member inprocessed (TDY) or the date the special project or duty started; stop date is the final outprocessing day (TDY) or the date of when the special project or duty ended. 1.15.12.6. Extended Tour: Start date is the date the member arrived to the station/unit; stop date is the day prior to the 3- or 4-year point (see paragraph 1.16.1.6) AFI 36-2803, The Air Force Military Awards and Decorations Program

The “3-4 year” rule is not a hard rule, and the quality of performance during that period is important. Maybe a SrA truly deserves an AFCM after four years of service. Maybe a TSgt who failed two fitness assessments doesn’t deserve a decoration at all. Bottom line, it needs to make sense. Decorations have to be earned and are not a given.

Extended Tour Decorations

My second point for this post is the award of extended tour decorations. Typically an enlisted Airman serves a 3-4 year tour, but it is possible for someone to serve 6-8 years at the same base. Awarding an Airman with one decoration for eight years of service may send a negative message when the Airman is competing for a SNCO promotion board later down the road. Due to this, the AFI authorizes what are called “extended tour” (also known as “mid-tour”) decorations. With these you just have to be careful about what you fight for. For example, a SNCO who served five years at the same assignment may end up leaving with one extended tour AFCMs and one end of tour AFCM, versus 1 MSM for the five-year period. That may matter to the individual.

Opening and Closing Sentences

My final point for this post is about how the opening and closing statements for decorations are determined. The level of award coupled by the decoration reason determine the exact wording of the opening and closing statements. Luckily, this is populated automatically by the system we use to process decorations called vPC. It is just important for us to be mindful of what it is supposed to say so we can make sure it is correct.

The below examples are just the common examples outlined in the AFI 36-2803, The Air Force Military Awards and Decorations Program . Dig into the actual AFI for more details for your specific situation.

AFAM Opening Sentence

3.5.13.1. Opening Sentence: Captain Michelle Canmore distinguished herself by (meritorious service) OR (outstanding achievement), as (duty assignment, and office location) OR while assigned to (office location).

AFAM Closing Sentence

3.5.13.3. Closing Sentence. Confine the closing to one sentence which will personalize the summation.

AFCM Opening Sentence

3.5.12.1. Opening Sentence: Technical Sergeant Ami Ponde distinguished herself by (meritorious service) OR (outstanding achievement) OR (an act of courage) as (duty assignment and office) OR (while assigned to (office) from _____to ).

AFCM Closing Sentence

3.5.12.4. Closing Sentence: The distinctive accomplishments of Sergeant Ponde reflect credit upon herself and the United States Air Force.

3.5.12.4.2. Retirement Award: The distinctive accomplishments of Sergeant Ponde culminate a (long and) distinguished career in the service of her country and reflect credit upon herself and the United States Air Force.

3.5.12.4.3. Separation Award: The distinctive accomplishments of Sergeant Ponde while serving her country reflect credit upon herself and the United States Air Force.

MSM Opening Statement

3.5.9.1. Opening Sentence: Senior Master Sergeant Mickey Smith distinguished himself in the performance of outstanding service to the United States as (duty title) OR (while assigned to the (office) from _____to ).

MSM Closing Statement

3.5.9.3. Closing Sentence: The singularly distinctive accomplishments of Sergeant Smith reflect great credit upon himself and the United States Air Force:

3.5.9.3.1. Retirement Award: The singularly distinctive accomplishments of Sergeant Smith culminate a (long and) distinguished career in the service of his country and reflect great credit upon himself and the United States Air Force.

3.5.9.3.2. Separation Award: The singularly distinctive accomplishments of Sergeant Smith while serving his country reflect great credit upon himself and the United States Air Force.

Administrative Instructions

Here are a few helpful tips from the AFI I have learned along the way. Reference paragraph 3.4.

• The use of the dollar sign ($) is typically not recommended, however, will be accepted if used in the proper format ($10 million).
• Numeric designators of units should read 3d Aerospace Wing, 4th Mission Support Group, etc.
• Use Times New Roman (TMS RMN) 10- to 12-point size or comparable font.
• Length of citation should not exceed:
• 3.4.8.1. MSM, AM, AAM, and AFCM citations: 14 lines maximum
• 3.4.8.2. AFAM citations: 11 or 12 lines maximum

The actual writing of a decoration is something that takes practice. In general you review all of the EPRs or OPRs for the time period, pick out the best bullets, then write them in narrative form. If there is a demand I will likely do a part 3 to this post at a later date.

Share this:

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)

airforceotsguy

Add Comment →

Former Enlisted

I have sort of an odd question when it comes to decorations. Is it possible for the flight commander to mail the actual physical award/certificate (example: AF achievement medal award) to the airman after they have separated? I ask because many of us who served at Beale AFB, CA never got our awards once we separated. They were held up at the base’s MPF. The approval process is very long. So, by the time the award is approved by the Group Commander, the airman is no longer active duty. Btw, everyone should try to stay away from Beale AFB, CA. Bad morale on base. Go to Travis AFB instead.

The short answer is yes. Currently I can only speak to those who use the vPC site process. Once MPS approves it a CSS member, either in MPF or at the squadron level, can pull the approved PDF of the decoration from vPC and print it on the decoration paper blank. My commander wet signs the decoration and gets it back to the CSS member to mail to the member. The CSS ideally has a valid/current mailing address on file… Ideally you get the decoration before you depart but yeah, some people suck.

The unit can even use government funds to mail it so it is just a matter of if the staff had the bandwidth. I’d reach out to the group exec and see if they can help you out, that isn’t right.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

Currently you have JavaScript disabled. In order to post comments, please make sure JavaScript and Cookies are enabled, and reload the page. Click here for instructions on how to enable JavaScript in your browser.

Upcoming Boards

• 24OTS02 (Rated) Estimated Release May 3, 2024
• 24OTS03 (Non-Rated) AFRS App Cut-Off May 13, 2024
• 24OTS03 (Non-Rated) Board Dates June 10, 2024 – June 14, 2024

OTS Schedule

No upcoming events

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Email Address

Air Force Protocol

• ORDER MEDALS
• GO - Air Force
• Protocol Home
• Introduction
• Table of Contents
• Protocol Officer
• 2.0 Funding Events
• 2.1 Official Funds (ORF)
• 2.1 Non-Appropriated Funds
• 3.0 Mementos
• 3.1 Presentation
• 3.2 Memento Source
• 3.3 Stocking Mementos
• 3.4 Outside Sources
• 3.5 Gift Limitations
• 3.6 Foreign Gifts
• 3.7 Honoraria
• 3.8 Fundraising
• 3.9 Membership Drives
• 3.10 Endorsements
• 4.0 Transportation
• 5.0 Entertaining
• 5.1 Formal Dinners
• 5.2 Receptions
• 5.3 Preceremony Coffee
• 5.4 Comm. Leader Receptions
• 5.5 Informal Dinners
• 5.6 Remembering Names
• 5.7 Religious Dietary Laws
• 5.8 Other Factors
• 6.0 Invitations
• 6.1 Start to Finish
• 7.1 Foreign Officer
• 7.2 U.S. Officers
• 7.3 Abbreviations
• 8.0 Precedence
• 8.1 VIP Codes
• 8.2 DoD Precedence
• 8.3 State Order
• 8.4 Equivalent Ranks
• 9.0 Types of Dress
• 9.1 Uniforms
• 10.0 Seating Assignments
• 11.0 Receiving Line
• 11.1 Positioning
• 11.2 Placement
• 12.0 Toasts
• 12.1 Countries A - C
• 12.2 Countries D - F
• 12.3 Countries G - I
• 12.4 Countries J - M
• 12.5 Countries N - Q
• 12.6 Countries R - T
• 12.7 Countries U - Z
• 13.0 Conferences
• 13.1 Checklist
• 14.0 Flag Etiquette
• 14.1 Retirement Flag
• 14.2 Etiquette Detail
• 15.0 Change of Command
• 16.0 Ceremonies
• 16.1 Retirement
• 16.2 Award Decoration
• 16.3 Promotion
• 16.4 Activation
• 16.5 Reveille Retreat
• 17.0 Military Funeral
• 18.0 Customs
• 19.0 Dist. Visitors
• 19.2 Table of Honors
• 19.3 Who is a DV?
• 19.3.1 Responsibility
• 19.3.2 Hotels
• 19.3.3 Itinerary
• 19.3.4 Welcome Package
• 19.4 Transportation
• 19.5 Flight Line
• 19.6 Vehicle Seating
• 19.7 DV Considerations
• 19.8 DV Entertainment
• 19.9 Communications
• 19.10 Contingencies
• 19.11 Greet Farewell
• 19.12 Honor Guard
• 20.0 Dinings-In / Out
• 20.1 Expanded History
• 20.2 President Duties
• 20.3 Vice President Duties
• 20.4 Arrangements Officer
• 20.5 Protocol Officer
• 20.6 Escort Officer
• 20.7 Seating
• 20.8 Programs
• 20.9 Finances for
• 20.10 Head Table
• 20.11 Wine Ceremony
• 20.12 Ceremonies
• 20.13 Toasting
• 20.14 POW-MIA Script
• 20.15 The Grog Bowl
• 20.16 Mess Rules
• A1 Appendices
• A2 Individual Recognition
• A3 Civic Affairs
• A4 Memorial Observances
• A5 Welcoming
• A7 Environment
• A8 Conferences
• A9 Change Of Command
• A10 Org Membership
• Service Specific
• Common to ALL Services
• Email Contact Us
• OUR STORE Order Medals
• You are here:  

Award/Decoration Ceremonies

Award/Decoration ceremonies are somewhat similar to portions of retirement, promotion, or other ceremonies. The commander's timely presentation of the appropriate decoration at a "public" ceremony greatly enhances the value of the award to the recipient and is a plus for the entire unit. Award/Decoration ceremonies range from formal reviews to presentation at commander's call to much smaller informal office ceremonies, depending largely on the recipient's desires. The "host" or presiding officer should be senior in rank or position to the highest ranking individual being decorated. While generally simpler than larger reviews or parades, award/decoration ceremonies still require advance planning along the same lines as other events.

• Award/Decoration Ceremony Script  (pdf file)
• Award/Decoration Ceremony Sequence of Events  (pdf file)
• Award/Decoration Ceremony Stage Diagram
• Award/Decoration Ceremony Task Reminder  (pdf file)
• Award/Decoration Ceremony Checklist  (pdf file)

The Marine Corps has a ‘participation award’ problem

It's the season of participation trophies, although the preferred nomenclature is the “end of tour” award.

By Brent Kreckman | Published Dec 10, 2021 11:59 AM EST

• Military Life

It’s that time of year again for the devil dogs across the country. For the past few months, tailor shop lines were out the door, inspections of uniforms only worn a handful of times popped up repeatedly on the training schedule, and the inevitable comparison, perhaps judgment for some, of “chest candy” began in earnest. For the newest Marines, it’s as simple as putting a National Service Defense medal next to a Global War on Terrorism medal in the proper order. But for those having recently changed duty stations or units, there is the scramble to update their awards “stack” with all the new participation trophies the Marine Corps doled out. Although I think the preferred term is the “end of tour” award.

In fact, the Pentagon is so aware that the majority of awards are given at the end of a tour with a unit that they issue an administrative message to warn us all. This year it came out in February, titled “ MILITARY AWARDS GUIDANCE FOR THE 2021 PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION SEASON .” This is how commonplace, for what was long considered the most stringent service branch regarding awards, it has become to give Marines the ol’ “atta boy” or a “thanks for coming out” or even the occasional, “good job not getting fired” award. Come moving season each year, company-grade officers, noncommissioned officers, and Staff Sergeants alike will get their Navy Achievement Medals. Field grade officers, gunnery sergeants, and “Tops” will get their Navy Commendations. Commanders and Sergeants Major will get their Meritorious Service Medals standing in front of their whole unit on the way out the door. And of course, those with eagles or stars on their collars will receive Legions of Merit or Distinguished Service Medals. You can almost picture the Birthday Balls and Marines squeezed into their Dress Blues with their fresh new medals, double-fisting Coors Lights, walking into a ballroom, taking a look at each other’s “stack,” and saying… “Meh.”

It may be a colorful and generic description, but there’s a vein of truth that Marines all tacitly know. The truth is that many awards don’t mean much anymore to the average Marine. 

Do any awards matter?

Not all awards are meaningless, of course. That same “stack” at a birthday ball could reasonably be dissected into four categories, two of which still hold strong value to Marines or serve a useful purpose. 

Second to none amongst Marines are the combat and valor awards. Medals of Honor, Navy Crosses, Silver Stars, Distinguished Flying Crosses, and any award with a “V” device automatically garner attention and deference from Marines. This is due to strict and tightly controlled requirements to earn such rare and combat-oriented awards. The Combat Action Ribbon has a similar effect, although there has been a diluting of its value in some circles due to a perceived loosening of awarding requirements during Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. This feeling that the CAR was watered down comes from whole units being blanket issued the ribbon in theater or stories of an IED hitting one vehicle in a convoy and the entire convoy receiving it, rather than it being issued specifically to individuals involved in direct action against the enemy.

The next useful category could best be described as a visual resume. Campaign awards give other service members a condensed overview of where you have been and, to some degree, how long you have served. Our senior-most staff can still be seen with Operation Desert Shield medals, while many career-level Marines have OEF and OIF medals. A limited number of Marines continue to receive the Operation Inherent Resolve medal, while those Marines serving on MEUs may receive a Humanitarian Service Medal for conducting disaster relief. Additionally, you can tally the number of deployments someone has been on by the number of stars on their Sea Service Deployment ribbon or tell if they spent time in Korea by the Korean Defense Service Medal. Ultimately, these awards can give a Marine a sense of someone’s experience level or at least provide common ground when striking up a conversation.

The third category is an odd set of awards that are seemingly neutral in value: unit citations. These can be Presidential, Navy, and Meritorious Unit Citations or various joint awards. Assuming the award isn’t one of the dozens given to a Headquarters or Joint Staff that is patting themselves on the back, these awards can actually take years to approve and requires vigilant monitoring of MARADMIN “Awards Updates” for notification. Some MEUs find themselves receiving awards two or more years after disbanding. For example, according to MARADMIN 114/21 released on March 4, 2021, HMLA-269 is finally receiving a Meritorious Unit Commendation… from 2012 . This absurd awarding timeline coupled with a general desire to avoid awkwardly asking about someone’s ribbons relegates these awards to overall neutrality, possibly obsolescence.

Finally, we have the fluff awards. These awards are generally disregarded unless they have a special device, such as the “V” for valor, “R” for remote, or “C” device for effect in a combat area, indicating something out of the ordinary occurred to receive them. These include the NAMs, Navy Comm’s, MSMs, and every brand of medal using the words “Distinguished” or “Superior” in their title. These are the awards that have been so over-issued and watered-down that command photos of our highest officers could be mistaken for old Soviet generals . These are the participation trophies of the military and everyone knows it. But how did they become so diluted that they feel irrelevant?

Is it really a problem?

What would you think if you saw a staff noncommissioned officer or a field grade officer without a personal award? At first, it may seem odd. “How did that happen?” you might ask. Perhaps you may be more direct: “They must have pissed someone off” or “They must not be very good.” Those thoughts don’t come up because the person is actually bad at their job or has an off-putting personality, those thoughts arise because of a learned expectation. We expect that if you stay active duty long enough, you’re bound to eventually get an award. It’s not a question of if they performed well, it’s really just a matter of time and rank. I’d argue this expectation is so developed that matching specific awards with certain ranks is as predictable as following an MOS road map. 

This creates a perception that personal awards are less about doing specific noteworthy actions and more about crossing a career threshold without upsetting your superiors along the way. For instance, it has become all too common that if someone does their job adequately over a single tour, just summarize the highlights of their Fitness Reports, add some flourish to the wording, and submit it up the chain. Those individuals may have legitimate “Impact” award-worthy material in that same write-up, but their noteworthy actions get diluted among the rest of the material for their “End of Tour” award. Even more offensive, an individual could deserve a higher level award, but their unit’s awards board imposes its own restrictions on who can earn what. Most commonly, units restrict the maximum level of award an individual can receive based solely on their rank and not their merit. 

Perhaps some of this is unintentional. S-1 administrative shops across the fleet are perpetually swamped with policies, programs, pay issues, and other administrivia that are, quite frankly, more important than someone’s personal award. So it stands to reason, the most convenient method with the simplest deadline for ensuring people get awarded is to catch them as they are out-processing. Plus, adding multiple years to the window of the award ensures there is plenty of material to meet the minimum justification. An added kicker of convenience, particularly amongst officers, is that while an individual is writing the form containing a list of responsibilities and accomplishments for their final FITREP, they are perfectly poised, and sometimes asked, to write their own Summary of Action for an award. Now, the Reporting Seniors can more conveniently submit for awards without having to think too critically about what their Marines have done to actually deserve one. They don’t even have to consider the type of award if the unit policy limits awards based on rank. It’s just easier this way. The end result, the “Impact” awards for truly meaningful accomplishment become the drastic minority when compared to the “End of Tour” awards, at least by perception, and the value of personal awards overall continues to tank.

What do we do about it?

Some might say we can fix this by tightening the reins or modifying the awards themselves. For example, in 2017 with MARADMIN 665/17 , the Marine Corps added the “C” and “R” devices to better recognize combat-related activities but also chose to clarify Bronze Star criteria . Specifically, it stated that the Bronze Star is to be awarded to those who were “either personally exposed to hostile action, or [were] at significant risk of exposure to hostile action.” This clarification was largely thanks to the excessive issuing of the Bronze Star during OEF and OIF as an end of tour award across all branches, even if the individuals were not actually exposed to or at significant risk of enemy action. 

Specifically, between 2002 and 2004, the Marine Corps awarded 701 Bronze Stars, the Air Force awarded 2,425 in total, and the Army issued a ridiculous 17,498 Bronze Stars between the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. For perspective, the Army is habitually more than double the size of the Corps; at its peak in 2009 the Corps had 203,000 Marines compared to the Army’s 549,000 soldiers. Yet the Army awarded 25 times more Bronze Stars than the Marines. By 2007 the Army would award more than 50,000 non-valor Bronze Stars and almost 1,700 Bronze Stars with a “V.”  While the Marine Corps is generally regarded as “stingy” with its combat awards when seeing those numbers, it’s obvious why the Marine Corps would attempt to modify and clarify its combat awards to prevent similar inflation.

However, that example falters as a method of how to fix personal awards since the Bronze Star maintains its original conditions-based restrictions. By simply enforcing and clarifying a very specific set of criteria, the Bronze Star’s clout can be restored and maintained. Non-valor personal awards, on the other hand, have had no such conditions-based requirement and as such are open to expansion and abuse, hence their propensity to be used for End of Tour, “feel good” purposes. If these awards are systemically problematic and prone to inflation, perhaps we shouldn’t be afraid to downsize or outright eliminate our excess and broken programs.

This year we saw the rollout of the Junior Enlisted Performance Evaluation System (JEPES) system for evaluating junior Marines in a far more objective manner than ever before. Implementing JEPES was a decisive step in eliminating the notorious issue of proficiency and conduct score inflation. Historically, whether scores were inflated was entirely up to individual commands and trusting that other commands were holding to the standard as well. Regardless of how well commands across the Corps maintained scoring standards, the concern for and stigma of inflation stuck until the system was eliminated. Like Pros and Cons, it’s time we scrap participation trophies from our culture and focus on awarding Marines truly deserving of recognition, not just because it’s PCS season.

If we are unable to police ourselves and award only to those truly outstanding individuals or for events that deserve accolades, then perhaps we should scrap them altogether. Eliminating excessive awards would alleviate unnecessary paperwork and time spent on awards boards, let alone the amount of time people spend actually writing and screening Summaries of Action and Citations for submission. In addition to lifting the burden on lower command administration, promotion and career boards would no longer be distracted evaluating individuals by how many personal awards they do or don’t have and instead focus on the actual performance of their duties. We, as an organization, are wasting valuable time on meaningless awards that could be better spent elsewhere.

If elimination of awards is too extreme or, more realistically, not feasible as they are governed by a higher Navy authority, then perhaps the next option is to restrict availability. Currently, NAMs are awarded by O-5 level commanders with no limits on quantity. By restricting commanders to a set number in a given fiscal year, it would force not only higher scrutiny by the awarding authority but an increase in the quality of submissions. For higher awards that already have limits on quantity, those restrictions could be tightened further. For instance, should every battalion or squadron commander receive a Meritorious Service Medal for successfully finishing a tour as a commanding officer? What would happen if Regiments or Groups had to recommend top commanders within a set timeframe? Regardless of the specifics, increasing restrictions on how many awards of a given type can be issued within a designated time frame would logically result in commands recognizing the true top performers and begin to return value to personal awards.

Ultimately, we need to honestly evaluate if the current processes of recognizing our Marines are truly value-added. But if the likes of Chesty Puller and Smedley Butler could excel through their careers with less than three non-valor personal awards from the U.S. Military, perhaps going through a career without three NAMs, a Navy Commendation, an MSM, and DSM isn’t too tall of an order. 

Capt. Brent “Wheeler” Kreckman is currently the Air Officer for 3rd Battalion, 3rd Marine Regiment with multiple deployments in Central Command and Pacific Command over his 12 years of active service. The opinions expressed are his and do not reflect or represent any official position of his commands, the US Marine Corps, or the Department of Defense.

More great stories on Task & Purpose

• Marine Corps plan calls for some future Marines to skip boot camp
• Mission failure: West Point cadets reportedly abduct the wrong goat in attempt to steal Navy’s mascot
• Soldier risks career to donate kidney to retired buddy
• The Marine Corps wants junior Marines to have a say in who their leaders are
• Videos reveal moldy, disgusting Camp Lejeune barracks where Marines are forced to live
• ‘They saved our marriage’ — This is what happens when Army leaders actually put people first
• This airman’s common sense idea made life easier for the most overworked job in the Air Force

Want to write for Task & Purpose? Learn more here and be sure to check out more great stories on our homepage.

Subscribe to Task & Purpose Today

Get the latest in military news, entertainment and gear in your inbox daily.

TrendyDigests

Lockheed Martin and Boeing Compete for Air Force's Next-Generation Contract in 2024 Fighter Jet Showdown

Posted: April 23, 2024 | Last updated: April 23, 2024

Lockheed Martin and Boeing are poised for a head-to-head competition as the service prepares to award the contract for the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) platform. The NGAD is envisioned as a family of systems comprising a crewed sixth-generation fighter aircraft, drone wingmen also referred to as Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA), advanced sensor capabilities, and superior network connectivity to satellites and other assets.

The classified solicitation for NGAD’s engineering and manufacturing development contract was initiated in May 2023, signaling the formal commencement of the selection process. As a futuristic endeavor intended to replace the venerable F-22 Raptor, the Air Force aims for the NGAD to be operational by the decade's end. Emphasizing on open-architecture standards, the NGAD is designed to exploit competitive dynamics over its life cycle and curtail maintenance and support expenditures.

The NGAD program’s intricate details have been tightly guarded due to security concerns. Notably, in a significant industry shift, Northrop Grumman withdrew from the NGAD competition in 2023, focusing instead on the Navy’s variant, dubbed the F/A-XX. Northrop's CEO, Kathy Warden, indicated the company's strategy in a July earnings call. Consequently, the Air Force's procurement path is projected to see Lockheed Martin and Boeing as the main contenders.

The NGAD's propulsion technology, referred to as Next Generation Adaptive Propulsion (NGAP), is another focal area with the Air Force planning a substantial budgetary injection in 2024. NGAP, with its adaptive capabilities, is positioned to transition rapidly to the optimal engine configuration for varied flight conditions. Featuring advanced composites capable of enduring high temperatures, NGAP draws on research initially considered for the F-35. The substantial investment increase in NGAP, to the tune of $595 million requested for the fiscal year 2024, underscores its centrality to NGAD’s performance.

In parallel, Pratt & Whitney, an RTX subsidiary, has achieved a milestone with the Air Force's critical design review for its NGAD engine. The prototypical XA103 engine is on track for ground testing in the late 2020s, showcasing Pratt & Whitney's commitment to advancing sixth-generation propulsion. The propulsion innovation entailed in NGAD reflects a broader trend toward maintaining air superiority and ensuring the U.S. maintains its competitive edge in aerospace and defense technology.

related images you might be interested.

More for You

Why You Should Think Twice Before Pouring Boiling Water Over Ant Hills In Your Yard

We Ordered 7 Fast-Food Breakfast Sandwiches to Find the Best One

Top physicist publishes 'evidence' that we're living in a computer simulation

Iran Unveils New Weapon Capable of Taking Out America's Stealth Jets

This Photo Allegedly Shows What a Beach in Palestine Looked Like Before Israel Was Founded. We Delved into Its History

Tesla’s Cybertruck dreams just crashed into reality

Baking Soda Makes a Great DIY Weed Killer—Here's How to Use It

Latest On Bryan Danielson After Injury Scare At AEW Dynasty 2024

Falcons, Eagles tampering penalties coming, and it could cost major NFL Draft picks

UAE Floods Shown in Incredible Before-and-After Satellite Photos

Taylor Swift just dropped her newest video, ‘Fortnight,’ with Post Malone

The Only Ingredients Bobby Flay Uses To Season His Burgers

How To Remove Weeds From The Cracks In Your Driveway To Prevent Their Return

Capri Pants Are Trending Again For Spring

3 Reasons Not to Open a CD Right Now, Even With Rates at 5.30%

Tech trick: How to tell who’s calling when you don’t recognize the phone number

Workers Stunned as California Minimum Wage Increase Results in Immediate Restaurant Closure

13 Things You Need to Order from the McDonald’s Secret Menu

This is one of the most advanced humanoid robots in the world

Unplug These 29 Items That Hike Up Your Electricity Bill