this week on defense news. general mark welsh on his tenor at the airforce. how hackers target india. welcome to defense news. here is a look at a couple of this week's top headlines. silicon valley company palen tere is taking to the courts. the company is filing a protest in the u.s. court of federal claims after losing a case last month with the government accountability office. they hope to be grant add preliminary injunction that would prevent the army from awarding a contract for the project that so far has taken more than a decade and cost $3 billion to develop. soldiers have repeatedly requested permission to use palen tear software instead of the army system that continues to experience problems. lockheed martin went on a public relations push recently.

decision not to buy the f-35 would jeopardize hundreds of millions of dollars of contracts to that filter to canadian firms. the ruling liberal party government is look at the acquisition of 20 to 30 super hornets from boeing as an interim measure to deal with what it says is a gap in canada's fighter aircraft capability. now an interview with general mark welsh, outgoing airforce chief of staff who set down with defense news associated ed for. first question. how effective has the global air campaign against isis then? >> you can debate the strategy but the air campaign has been conducted phenomenally well. it's in line with the objective and the lines of effort. the performance of the airmen, coalition, the precision of the works that been done, the volume, all that's been done according to plan and exceptionally well. >> one of the criticisms we've heard is there is maybe too much restriction on the

power. that is something you agree with? >> i think it completely depends on what you are trying to accomplish and within the objective of the strategy as adopted by the department of defense and 'commander in scheef we're following -- chief we're following the rules of engagement. >> one of things that happened when you first came in to office as sequestration hit. you have said there's been serious impacts to readiness to modernization. are we still feeling those affects now? >> absolutely. the budget control act essentially took ten to $12 billion a year out of the airforce budget. that's a lot of money. you have to make adjustments if you going to lose that much money on your planned and projected top likes. we've got to be able to adjust and shape the airforce to the future reality of funding compared to what we expected as recently as 2013. it's still having a major impact. >> readiness in particular is something you said is an issue. how do you come back from the readiness hole that was dug. >> reporter: we had-- >> to be fair we started digging the hole before

control act happened. we were in the middle of trying to recover from the hole when the budget control act hit which made it difficult to get out of that hole. there's a short-term readiness problem with people and units a longer term problem with infrastructure that produces combat capability over time. testing infrastructure, simulation, those kind of things. we've just got to keep chipping away because we have to fix it. >> i guess that raises a question about how confident you are going forward that the airforce can do the missions it's assigned giving the actions last few years. >> we can accomplish the missions. the problem might be how many missions you get assigned in the future. capacity is a problem. quantity does have a quality all it's own. doesn't matter how great the airplane is it can only be one place at one. >> quality is a good place to jump into the question of what you termed the big three modernization problems. the tanker, the if f 45 and the b 21 bomber. quickly running through those how confident are you with the

f-35 that that it's going happen on time. >> very confident. it will happen this fall. >> what does that mean for the airforce? you will have the f 35 ready to go. >> it will be the beginning of mod earnizing our fighter fleet. it will be a great complimentary capability to the f-22 and is going to have to do some missions the f-22 was designed and intended to do. but we don't have enough to do it now. the f-35 will fill in that a air-to-air arena which is note intent of the program. >> on the f-22 there's thauk with a restart. is that a good idea? >> we think it's cost prohibitive. i was asked if it was a wild idea from a crazy man. no it was worth thinking through but we believe it's cost prohibiti prohibitive. we don't think it is a solution to the problem of not enough capacity in the fighter world. >> speaks of costs, the kc-46. for years boeing has said if there are issuess that fine as n

have to have 18 planes on the ramp in 2017. they've said they're not going to hit that date. how concerned are you? >> i'm disappointed that we're not on track to meet that date. kc-46 is going be a great tanker for the united states airforce. the problems that we're having that are causing the delay in the delivery of aircraft are things that we'll fix. we know how to fix loads and booms and de rogue system. i'm just disappointed it will not be done in the timeline agreed. >> is that something you think there will be a contribute negotiation with boeing about? >> i think it's clearly something we have to talk to boeing about. >> the other is the b-21 bomber was awarded after years and years of questions. do you think that program is going to be able to maintain on track given the budget situation? >> i think it can. that's our intent. we haven't changed the requirements in four years. i've been happy with the way the program has progressed from that point through a request for most. we believe the team is have to a great start in

capability. our job is to make sure we provide the right kind of oversight, make the right kind of decisions and keep it on track, cost and schedule. >> there's been questions about secrecy as well. something congress has debated pubically. where do you come down on the question of how much secrecy is the right amount. >> everybody who needs to know to provide oversight for this program and the acquisition of the development process is fully informed of everything related to the program and they have been for years. there's no surprises to the people who provide oversight to the b 21 program and won't be in the future. the question has been how much does the public need to know and our position is there are things that would cause this program to be exposed to the level of scrutiny others who would design capabilities to defeat it. if we put too much out too early that remains our position. >> that sounds like some of the concerns dlifen by the concerns with china as well. >> or any other system that we have currently if our military. this is not a new problem. and we have to be very, very serious about how we protect new capabilities before we

>> congress has throughout your time there's been a couple of issues with congress. the r-180 come to mind. do you think relationships with the hill and the airforce have been damaged over the last few years? >> no i think it's the opposite. there are thousands of interaction between the hill and airforce on issues every year. and the great, great majority of those are actually very positive. i think the debate about issues like this is healthy. we don't have to agree. our job is to provide the best military advice we can give based on the reality at the time. if someone disagrees, if congress disagrees they make a decision on what they will authorize and appropriate and we move on to the next annual cycle. but i don't have any issue with debate and disagreement with congress. that's part of the system. >> the rd-180 in particular as russian made engine. something congress has had we don't want you to be using. the airforce says we can't get a new engine in the timeframe you are giving us. how does this play out? how does this end in the

>> i don't know. the bottom line is everybody wants two or more viable launch systems so we have competition and save money for the american people. everybody wants to get off the rd-180, the russian built engine, as soon as we can. everybody wants the same things. but there is disagreement by all parties on the best way to get from here to there. the people who were opposing our position don't agree on the right answer either. that's what's creating this tension and debate. we just want to move forward. >> when we return, more from our interview with general welsh. you are watching "defense news." me and the guys walked into this you woulda thought from the name it was gonna be packed with sailors. so i immediately picked out the biggest guy in there. and i walked straight up to him. now he looks me square in the eye, and, i swear he says, "welcome to navy federal credit union." whoa friendly alert! i got a great auto rate outta that guy.

[000:09:00;00] slate blue. crème interior. he was so nice! open to the armed forces, the dod and their families. navy federal credit union. news." now more of the interview with general mark welsh who spoke about the proper balance of personnel and mission requirements. >> the question i was asked because we've been talking about under manning in different career fields. we've been talking about adding new capability. we were talking about expanding space, cyber, rpa capability. and someone asked me, well how many airmen would it take to do all that. i said i don't 40 to 60,000 would be a guess. if you look at bedding down the f-35 over the next 15, 20 years it's going take 30,000 airmen. if we're not allowed to divest the airmen w are doing other

things today to putga f 35 fleet you start with 30,000 more required. if we want to expand rpa wings, it's going to take five to 10,000 people to expand that. if we want to take all the missionaries in the airforce that are currently manned at 85 percent and plus em up to 100 percent it's going be more airmen. i don't think the number is outrageous. are we going to get 40 or 60,000 more. no. but the question was how many would it take. we're trying get to 317,000 by the end of this year. 321,000 by '19 a we'd love to go to 324,000 because we think that's how many we need to do the job as we're doing it today. it will still be a highly stressed airforce and busy but we can get the job done. >> if you don't get the plus ups is it affecting the fight against isis. >> it will not affect the fight against isis because the airmen will just work harder and deploy more. it will affect retention and stress on the force. that's not healthy. the plus ups help us create a

liv rhythm over time. >> how do you prioritize getting the money for extra airmen? you said in the past we need to modernize. we're in the fight currently. how do you find that balance? >> this year it's been very clear i think in the budget cycle secretary and i have been clear our number one requirement is manpower. it is the biggest issue facing our airforce right now. we've not controlled all the variables that have led us to this point but we've got to make it clear you can't continue to cut the force and expect us to do everything we're doing today and add more no matter how much more money you give us we need more manpower. >> retention is something you have talked about passionately in the past. as you are getting ready to leave the airforce, what's the message that you want to give to the airmen in there and might be saying, i don't know if i want to stay in here or go and leave and get a private sector job? >> well typically tsz three kinds of people in this particular category. there's people who know they're not going to stay in. they never intended to stay in. or their family has other prioritys or they need stability for whatever reason.

or they and we should shake their hands and thank them four for serving and wish them the best. there's another group who will stay because they love it and this what's they feel is their chosen profession and they will continue to serve unless we do something to really aggravate them. then there's the group in the middle which may be on the fence. because they like what they're doing and enjoy the job but they're frustrate bid things. the targets that we have aimed at are the things that frustrate people. sometimes it 2450z do with career advancement. sometimes it has to do with assignment or money or bonuses or whatever. that's how we look at the retention problem and it's never going to go away. it's been the same forever and will be the same 50 years from now. we'll have the same groups of people they will just be different sizes. we have to make sure every airmen knows what they care about matters to the airforce. >> can the force of the future idea that secretary carter put forth do you think those will help with that issue. >> i think they'll help with certain people.

anything that is going to allow people in a way that's unique to that person's issues is a good thing. >> [ inaudible ] it is a big question discussed around the pentagon. a lot of ideas from the hill and this building. one good idea, one idea not so hot on. >> first do no harm. gold water nishgols has been a huge success story. we are joint. we weren't when gold water nichols came in to being. let's not change that. one good idea is make sure the chairman of the joint staff have the ability to prioritize and conduct planning across -- on cross regional issues. because there are a number of those these days that we have to worry about. each combat and commands foes uked on their oo ie focused on their particular issue. we i would not do anymore things that add limits to how the services use them. i would minimize that requirement. we get that we got to be joint. we are way past having to worry about convincing our people of

that. >> quickly on acquisition there's been a lot of talk about putting the chief more in power. is that something you back? >> i back making sure that we formalize that acknowledgement. i don't think i've ever been out of the acquisition loop. the airforce i'm involved in reviewing things quarterly and every acquisition decision. i've never had a problem with feeling removed. i think you have to be careful what you ask for if you are service chief and want to get more involved in the day-to-day details of acquisition. it's difficult, complicated business. >> you hate talking about your legacy but i'm going to ask you about your legacy. so as you are getting ready to leave, look back and give us what the greatest accomplishment of your time as chief of staff is to your mind. >> oh golly. i never quit trying. that's one thing. last week we were at a conference where all the senior leaders come together. as i was sitting at the head of the tale with the secretary listening to discussion and looking at the leaders around the table, i was really, really

impressed by the calir the room. i was inspired by their fashion for the job, by their willingness to engage. by the way they challenge ideas and discussion. and i think if anything, anything i did to help secretary james build that team as success story for me. >> under your leadership, and sorry if this was your call or other's call, but there was a number of female generals who rose in the ranks significantly. is that something you think is notable? >> it's notable for them. it's notable for the airforce i believe but not for me. these are tremendously talented officers. wilson, allen, and [ inaudible ] earned everything they got. nobody gave them everything. they grew up in a tough environment in a male dominated world. and they excelled because they are immensely capable. they're just great officers. the fact they're women is interesting but not the reason they are where they are today. >> greatest regret from your time?

>> no real regrets. one thing i would have and every family member. and had to chance to look them all in the eye and say thank you. >> as you get ready to leave, give us one or two pieces of advice for your successor. likely successor. >> be yourself. don't change a thing. he is remarkable. he will be absolutely fantastic. >> when we return, a close look at recent hacking attempts

against india. you're watching "defense news."

aaron boyd associate editor with federal times sat dow director of cyber egs pee nauj analysis -- espionage analysis to learn more about a recent hacking campaign against india. >> what we're looking at is a pakistani based threat actor group or cyber espionage group targeting the indian government. they used a method that's actually very typical among cyber espionage world wide and especially typical in south asia where they took a document, a beenal document that they probably downloaded off the internet. in this case it was a information on pay scales, military pay scales or government pay skals. they weaponized it or basically put code in it that would allow it to open up a vulnerability in a system. and attached it to an email. a spear fishing social engineering email and sent it to indian government users.

it's actually a very typical method. as, you know, a user would see something that aassociated with their pay scale that might find very interesting. it's a method we've seen -- for instance chinese operators used against the united states government. i've seen it used by just about every operator under the sun. >> this is a known exploit. this is a known tactic, spear fishing. what could the indian government have done to prevent this from being successful and what could individuals have done to protect themselves. >> the obvious answer is cyber hygiene. they could have patched against this exploit. it was known at the time. but in addition to that they could have worked with their workforce to recognize social engineering to prevent them from clicking on the malicious document when it actually came in. also, of course, there is a opportunity for them to detect

that activity as it comes in or on the netwo device. but all those methods could be really fueled by an intelligence approach where in they recognize or threat actors are focused on them for instance, in this case pakistani threat actors. and focus on solutions that are appropriate for that actor. so that specific exploit that we know they're using. we know they're using for instance pay scale information. could they have taught their workers to recognize pay scale information as potentially malicious. things of that nature. >> you mentioned this is a pakistani based group. a source within the indian defense tells our reporter they believe this is a pakistani government backed group. is there anything in your data to support that? >> well they were heavily focused on the indian military and you see most of their focus on the indian military.

in addition we saw them heavily focused on nato and coalition partners in afghanistan. they seem to have an interest on both sides of pakistan. additionally there's some intern pakistan targets and in those cases they look to be dissidents possibly associated with bellucci separatists. in all those cases that really suggest pakistani origins. >> whether this is a nation state act or independent group, what does this campaign tell us about the geopolitical landscape with regard to cyber attacks and cyber espionage? >>. >> often when we talk about cyber espionage we talk about the iranians, chinese, russians, north koreans. they are without a doubt the most prolific actors and in many cases the most advanced actors. and while south asian cyber espionage activity has been around for quite sometime, it's been very focused, very regionally. less and less we're seeing that regional focus.

we're seeing these actors hit we're seeing them hit, you know, i've seen them hit switzerland and europe. people associated with nato. and they're simply growing. it's a capability that is ase met rick capability. it allows somebody with fewer resources to carry out major wafks. we are also seeing guys develop more sophisticated capabilities. so before we've -- we often still see them use capabilitys that rerye on for instance exploits that are known, we're seeing them develop things like air gap tools. so usb tools. which might allow them to target computer networks that are separated from the internet. or mobile tools that let them target accounts on mobile phones. >> so what does this campaign mean for the u.s. government,

the u.s. military? >> well i think government and u.s. military is they are -- they're global. they have global reach right. the u.s. military operates globally. it operates in the backyard of pakistan. we know that they are targeting nato, you know, partners. multiple nato partners. though we don't have specific evidence of u.s. targeting in that case we do know that other countries are lock working along side the u.s. have been targeted . as a country that operates globally we can't allow ourselves to focus sole ji on our adversaries. the north koreas, irans, chinese, russians. we have to also worry about regional threats. even though these guys may be focused on south asia we have to worry about these things. >> on this week's montana personal finance expert jeanette

mack offers tips on how to maximize travel perks >> before you take off on summer leave you owe it to yourself to check for money saving credit card parts. while taking off your combat boots and packing your sandals look at your cards and see if you can upgrade for free. pay attention to the card's rewards problem. maybe you can upgrade to first class using points or trade up to the junior suite. if your points expire you might need to use them or lose them. if you are shopping for a travel rewards card look for one with a hefty sign up bonus or promotion like 60,000 points if you spend a reasonable amount of money in the first few months. some offer a statement credit. and make sure you know your card's fee structure. if you are traveling abroad often, choose a car that doesn't have a foreign transaction fee. this is a good tip for all service members on the go. your credit card can and should help you make the most of your summer vacation. you've aerned it. >> thanks jeanette. we'll see you next week. when we return a look at what the healthcare industry can learn from the military.

you are watching >> you guys in the army know how to do some pretty good things in being detected was not an option. if i was recognized the whole operation was blown. the element of surprise was imperative. wow. he won't even recognize you. seriously. i don't even recognize myself. and thanks to my cashrewards credit card from navy federal with never-expiring rewards it's gonna be a killer honeymoon. woo! maui!! boom open to the armed forces, the dod and their families.

navy federal credit union. >> army times editor tony lombardo sat down with lieutenant general mark herd ling who retired from the commanding general of u.s. army europe. he shared how the u.s. can advance the quality of healthcare. >> within a month of being there, the chief medical officer said you guys in the army know how to do some pretty good things in growing leaders. could you help our doctors become better leaders? they had been trying to do that for several years.

trying to find a way to do that. after about another 30 doing analysis and looking at some outside organizations that might help, we came to the conclusion that we could apply military techniques in learning leadership to a bunch of physicians. and it has taken off. started about three years ago. we've now graduated about 250 healthcare provide everys from this course. and it's making a world of difference within our organization. >> to be very clear, this is not an army doc talking to doctors. >> not at all. this is leadership advice. that's the key point. when we talk to the chief medical officer and said here's what we plan on doing, one of the first things he said what about finances and what about hr and what about healthcare strategy? i said hey the first thing we want to do is get basic leadership. because that's the principal that you build everything else on. that's the base. so what we're really doing with a bunch of doctors and nurses

and administrators is teaching them character presence intellect, how to build teams, how to develop one another and how to contribute to the organization. and truthfully for any military person, you would say well these are the basics. yeah. but what's interesting about this, doctors don't get the basics of leadership. they get unbelievably great education on the science of medicine. but nowhere in their schooling or training do they get anything on the art of leadership. the military is not just all about following orders. it's really getting people to serve a greater good, to serve selflessly, to have a sense of values and allow them to contribute to your decision making. and to know the tricks of building teams to accomplish missions. >> that's all this week. don't miss "defense news" next week when we'll have an interview with the vice prime minister of the ukraine about nato and euro integration. and be sure to check out the latest news and analysis

happening in the defense center at defense

discussion online. >> announcer: the following program is a paid advertisement for the nuwave brio digital air fryer brought to you by nuwave, the makers of the nuwave oven pro and the nuwave precision induction cooktop. we all love fried food -- french fries, wings, onion rings, fried chicken -- but who wants to deal with the mess and added calories? deep-fried food has been linked to high cholesterol, heartburn, acid reflux, kidney problems, and even cancer and alzheimer's. now you can have all the fried food you love without the added fats and oil. introducing the revolutionary nuwave brio digital air fryer. the nuwave brio uses superheated cyclonic air to cook all your foods up to 50% faster while cutting calories by up to 70%. it's faster cooking that's better for you. now make crispy air-fried french fries in just eight minutes, crunchy onion rings in