 Good evening ladies and gentlemen. My name is Wynne Bone. I am one of the two co-directors of the Freeman Air and Space Institute here at King's alongside my other co-director David Jordan over the other side of the stage here. So welcome to Bush House from Assault at King's and from the Freeman Institute. It's a great pleasure to be hosting once again our annual event with the Chief of the Air Staff and many thanks indeed to our Chief Marshal from Mike Winston for joining us again tonight. Very quickly on admins so the fire exits are clearly marked at the top and at the bottom. If you hear the alarm then head for the exits and there are also the fire marshals and follow a King's member of staff but it's pretty clear how to get out if we have to do that. I'm sure most of you know at least something about the Freeman Institute but let me say a quick few words. We're part of the School of Security Studies here at King's College London and we were established in 2020 thanks to a generous funding from the Royal Air Force through the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory. As a university organisation of course the Institute is independent of the RAF and our role is very much one of a critical friend. So we seek to inform policy, doctrinal and scholarly debates related to air and space issues and of course this is all happening at the moment in a rapidly changing strategic environment characterised in part by transformative technological change of course. So we place a priority in identifying, developing and cultivating air and space thinkers whether that's in academia, whether that's in government industry and of course within the armed forces themselves. As well as seeking to inform and equip air and space education provision both at King's and further afield. And as part of that we're also dedicated to diversity, inclusion and widening participation in the air and space field. Anyone who wants to talk about those issues come to me. We regularly hold events like the one this evening and we published the Freeman paper series. Recent examples of which include the challenges of the RAF's return to the Arctic written by Aaron Dawson. We've had something recently on drones in the Ukraine conflict by Julia Marovska and also Julia Baum from Freeman recently wrote about mediating space security. So turning to this evening, instead of a lecture format this year tonight is an in conversation event with Cass reflecting on his career and the experience of commanding the Royal Air Force during a very significant time marked by the pandemic and several Prime Ministers to say the least. Caroline White has joined us from the BBC. She's kindly agreed to conduct the conversation this evening with Cass. Caroline spent almost two decades as people probably know reporting on global affairs as a foreign correspondent based in various places Germany, France, Russia, and has covered a range of conflicts from Kosovo, Chechnya, Iraq, Afghanistan and so forth. She was the BBC defence correspondent from 2007 to 2014 and after a period covering global religious affairs, Caroline now works as the presenter of BBC Radio 4's Saturday PM news and current affairs programme. Recently, her most recent documentary was on radio for looking at Afghan war veterans back in April. So thanks for coming. It's going to be a great event. I'll hand over to Caroline. Thank you. Good evening to all of you. It's an immense pleasure to be here tonight. Can you hear me on this microphone? Good. It's a building that as we arrive tonight I remember as being far less glamorous than it is now because I arrived here as a terrified BBC trainee in the very dusty World Service newsroom that was based here at Bush House and it is a real pleasure to be speaking to the Chief of the Air Staff, our Chief Marshal, Sir Mike Wigston this evening. Not least because King's is where you studied for your MA. That was in defence studies. You'd already joined the RF by then you'd become a tornado pilot in 1992 and this was all before you went on to climb 12 squadron, a 903 expeditionary air wing in Basra and later becoming director of air operations at ISAF in Afghanistan. And I was curious, what made you join the RAF? I joined the RAF out of a passion for aviation and so there was no higher patriotic motivations. I'm almost ashamed to admit I think that came later. But as a small child absolutely fascinated by aviation things that fly and I spent my teenage years obsessing about being a fighter pilot and I was fortunate enough to pass the tests and be able to do it and had an incredibly rewarding career as a tornado pilot and squadron commander as you say and then one day I became more valuable to the Air Force as a bureaucrat than as a pilot and that has shaped the second half of my career. Did you have a role model as you progressed through all of those leadership roles, whether that was someone within the RAF or outside? With hindsight there was no single role model and I think it's probably the same experience for most people in the Air Force, the Army and the Navy but what we have is a succession of amazing leaders and you learn so much from the people around you but the people you work for and they're not always great leaders, sometimes people have shortcomings and you learn from those as well but I think a succession of people at varying ranks who have done things that I've looked at and said I would really like a chance to do that or that's really a fascinating role and that's something that I should aspire to so it's been inspiration step by step I think rather than one driving role model to follow. When alluded to the last few years I mean you took over as chief of the Air Staff in those gloriously calm days of 2019 so before the pandemic before Russia's invasion of Ukraine I think it was either three or even four Prime Ministers ago so just as the UK was heading into some real social and political turbulence what advice would you now have given yourself then? And in that mix I would throw in a strategic review, the integrated review and I'd throw the evacuation from Afghanistan from Kabul, some real unexpected moments and a recognition that above all an organisation, a defence organisation, a military organisation like the Royal Air Force needs to have a degree of resilience for those shocks and that resilience comes from a bit of planning and preparation and thinking through the contingency plans. It comes from having the right equipment in the right place and again thinking through what you need sometimes decades in advance but above all it requires talented people and people with the skills and the leaders in particular who are able to lead their teams at whatever level in the organisation through those shocks and I think of what was achieved in Kabul last summer so 18 months ago with only weeks of notice or less than that even we were mounting the largest airlift operation since Berlin in the post Second World War years. Over two very frantic weeks we extracted 15,000 people from Afghanistan far more than we were expecting to as part of a massive international effort. We helped just under 40 countries and flew dozens and dozens of missions in that time and that was all down to the crews, the British Army doing the cordon to get people through and that was just achieved by local leadership and it wasn't something we'd planned for at that scale we certainly hadn't planned for it at that kind of pace but it happened and it happened because the organisation had the resilience to cope with it and I think whether it's the pandemic, whether it's operational shocks like that, whether it's facing up to those signals from Russia, those signals that we've seen for over a decade now of an increasingly malevolent, brutal, aggressive regime that was determined to pursue political aims through the use of force through invading sovereign countries, that brutal invasion of Ukraine, all of those signals were there and it's a matter of how much you prepare for them and how much resilience you've got in your organisation to deal with them. Talking of resilience, as you say, one of the greatest challenges for democracy is now not just for us but it is how do we deal with what's happening in Ukraine. What for you have been the lessons of the war in Ukraine for air power? There have been some enduring lessons of air power, some of those qualities of air power that we talk about in academic institutions over the years, the importance of control of the air, but we've seen what happens when you have control of the air and we've also seen what happens when you don't have control of the air and in essence what you've got in Ukraine at the moment is a bit of a stalemate in terms of control of the air. The Russians haven't got the freedom to employ air power nor do the Ukrainians and what that results in is intense artillery barrages, some of the hideous conditions that we've seen on the ground that the Ukrainian civilian population has suffered, but it's also meant that Russia hasn't been able to bring to bear its large armoured forces, its army in a way that you would think the numbers would tell you would be able to. So control of the air matters. Now we don't need control of the air, sort of ubiquitous control of the air like we've enjoyed for the last 30 years in Afghanistan and Iraq. That's probably asking too much in the current context with very sophisticated surface-to-air missiles and air-to-air missiles as well. So the important thing is to be able to get control of the air at the time and place of your choosing because then you have the freedom of manoeuvre on the ground or at sea. I think the other significant lesson and it's a reminder for us is that almost as important as control of the air is control of the electromagnetic spectrum. And it's something that a lot of us are looking at now in the way that we do. And I think it's important to be able to get control of the air at the time and place of your choosing because a lot of us are looking at now in the way that both sides in Ukraine are using it to their advantage. Everything from information operations all the way through to some sort of energy weapons. And then the other thing which is increasingly playing a part in the Ukrainian conflict is space and the role of the space domain. Through space Ukraine has been able to stay in touch with the world. We've given us the insight into what's going on on the ground to dispel some of the Russian propaganda. It's given us, it's given the Ukrainians intelligence and a large part of that has been achieved by linking up with commercial space service providers in a very agile way and there's something in that for all of us to take note of and to recognise the advantages it brings but also to an extent the limitations as well if you are dealing with a capricious commercial provider if I can put it in those terms. Have you seen improved dialogue, collaboration across Europe and within NATO? From an air perspective I think the way that NATO air forces came together under the command of the NATO headquarters in Rammstein was exemplary. We started as chiefs, so all of the NATO air chiefs came together on a weekly basis from the beginning of the year as we started to read what was likely to happen and our planning staff put together a plan for us to be able to protect NATO airspace and NATO territory because whilst we were pretty clear in our mind what Russia's intentions for that unprovoked illegal invasion of Ukraine were we didn't know to what extent it would expand or escalate beyond those initial aims and there was the prospect of Russia rolling right through Ukraine in a brutal, brutally overwhelming fashion and be at the borders of NATO with an armoured force with momentum. So, on night one and in the immediate aftermath of the invasion on February 24th we had NATO combat air patrols all the way from the north of Norway all the way down to the Black Sea all coordinated by the air operation centres and by air command in Rammstein and airborne for 24 hours. A huge effort, largely unseen by our populations with all of the command and control that goes with that the air to air refueling, all of the supporting infrastructure that goes with that but it was a very, very clear message to Putin that there would be a high price to pay for any escalation or expansion of what he was going to do in Ukraine and that message was very evident and I think it contributed to that strategic signaling without question of a doubt about the sanctity of NATO territory and NATO airspace and I would go so far as to say in those early weeks it was an air power that was NATO's maneuver force and we were the force that was flexing and being able to modulate our response to what was going on in Afghanistan, in Ukraine without raising the risk of escalation in any way. On top of that it was reconnaissance platforms that were gathering a lot of really important intelligence right up to and on the day before the invasion of Ukraine we had Royal Air Force Rivet Joint Aircraft flying in Ukrainian airspace and they have subsequently been on the borders of Ukraine ever since on a weekly basis and then the Air Mobility Force has night after night supplied the vital equipment weapons and ammunition and food and medical aid to keep Ukraine in the fight and we've been flying it into Eastern Europe to be handed over to the Ukrainians and sustaining them in the fight and the Royal Air Force alone has delivered some 10,000 anti-tank rounds 3 million small arms 100,000 artillery shells armoured vehicles tens of thousands of body armour kits and night after night that's continuing and those are donations coming in from the UK from all around the world and again it's air lift that is sustaining and keeping the Ukrainian armed forces in that heroic fight Do you worry about the risks of escalation? Yes, yes we do and I think we have to think through every step in a very careful way I applaud our government for being the first government to declare that we were going to help arm the Ukrainians with defensive anti-tank weapons and we spoke about it and we delivered it and that was at the time that was a very bold leadership political leadership position by our government but other governments followed and here we are six, nine months down the road and we are and the continued support for the Ukrainians through the resupply and giving them ground-to-air missiles more anti-tank rounds, armoured fighting vehicles so whilst there was a risk of a response and escalation there again very carefully thought through there is of course always the risk of miscalculation, inadvertent acts, reckless acts and again this is something that we have to be prepared for but there is a conscious risk of or a conscious recognition that escalation is a risk and so we need to be very careful and that's why we've taken the position we have on some aspects of resupply of the Ukrainians and you'll remember in the early days back in February or March talk about no-fly zones and supplying Ukraine with combat aircraft and again that would have been and probably still is to escalatory One thread running through everything you've talked about so far is that being prepared for the unexpected and some argue that the RAF of 2018 would have been perfectly recognisable to achieve for the air staff of 1918 I think the uniform is about the same isn't it How much harder is it for you now and the leaders within the RAF to imagine and envisage what on Earth the RAF will need to be like in another hundred It's a fabulous question and I hope there are some academics who are sort of thinking through that because that taking the last hundred years and then flipping it a hundred years ahead to my mind that's where the real value of holding the mirror upon our past comes in there were some things that our founding fathers got absolutely right and Lord Trenshard and the senior team around him that when you think and I've described it and some people will have heard me describe it like this before that the Royal Air Force was the 20th century's original tech startup it was a group of people working for the Navy and the Army at the time who came across this amazing new technology understood its unlimited, near unlimited potential but were frustrated by the way the organisation they were part of was responding to it so they rebelled and they had to set up a whole new organisation that was born of the Army and the Navy but that was distinctly different and the work that Trenshard put into consciously put into creating a culture creating a different culture creating a distinctly Royal Air Force culture has stood the test of time and so there are threads of what he put in place that we can still see today there are some things that haven't stood the test of time either but there are many many things that you would recognise and I think have a high likelihood of enduring for another 100 years what of course has changed beyond imagination and I think when I look at what those tiny fragile machines that they were flying in 1918 and then you look only 20 years later as the first of the iconic Second World War fighters started emerging the hurricane spitfire and then you roll on to where we are today and it's those leaps of technology just go beyond human comprehension and I think that is where we will struggle to pitch what we will be like in 2021-18 I think we have a pretty good we can have a pretty good stab at where we'll be in 20 years time and how things will change but even that there will be things that we'll be doing in 2040 that probably some people in this audience have started to think about but that we are that are beyond comprehension for the majority of us and it's those leaps of technology when you look at the advent of the jet age the advent of radar and some of the electronic technologies the introduction now of digital design digitally flown platforms the skills for our people from aircrew all the way through to our technicians the skills that are required are changing as well I joined the Air Force in a day when you needed those hand-eye foot coordination skills because you still had to fly things like the tornado when you look at the F-35 lightning now you're a systems operator still in a very arduous complex demanding environment but you're operating a system and you're interfacing with an incredibly sophisticated intelligent machine which is quite capable of flying itself what you're doing is operating it as a weapon system and it's the human brain which is the key part of that It's interesting looking ahead to the air force of the future if most of the work will be done by on-man every little bit how do you persuade people to join the RAF if they're not going to fly? We recruit now for people to fly Reaper and in future that will be the protector and it's a rich source of recruiting people want to because it is exciting technology and for some people who might not have the might not pass the physical standards to get into a cockpit the legs might be too long or other aspects actually flying up as as close as it gets I have when you look at what our Reaper Force does day in day out tackling violent extremists in the Middle East and what they have done for over a decade now again it's a key part of keeping the UK safe and the righteousness of that for the people involved in those missions is a motivation in itself before you even think about whether it's an airborne cockpit or a cockpit in a trailer in Lincolnshire so I think we will continue to attract people who see the fascination of technology that are seized by what these amazing machines we operate can do the other rich source of recruiting for us at the moment is space now we're not going to be launching astronauts anytime soon but we are bringing in people whose job it will be to protect and defend the United Kingdom in space and that is bringing that again is a fascinating area that the Air Force is expanding into and will continue to grow and it will be something we're doing in 2118 I'm absolutely certain to come back to the here and now you'll hand over next year do you worry at all about the size the numbers of aircraft that you have in the last few squadrons the number of pilots that you have is that a concern? So you're asking the chief of the Air Staff if I'd like more aeroplanes Caroline I can't think what the answer will be I would I would dearly love a larger Air Force I think and if it was the first sea lord sitting here you know what he'd say and if it was the chief of the general staff sitting here but I but we recognize that we exist in a resource constrained environment and so it's really important that we reflect what that operating envelope is and it's just as important an operating envelope as any of those other constraints and boundaries that we have I look at our force now I look at the amazing things that the typhoon force has done this year alone and there was one point in August where we had half a typhoon squadron in Australia we had typhoons in Saudi Arabia and Cyprus we had typhoons in Romania patrolling the contributing to NATO air policing we had typhoons on quick reaction alert in the UK and in the Falkland Islands and we had typhoons doing daily strategic messaging sorties into the Baltics and into Scandinavia exercising with our NATO Allies there or soon to be NATO Allies there when you look at the scale of presence that the level of operational activity the global deployments we realize that we've got an air force which is a truly global air force it's agile it's able to respond as I say to those strategic shocks and we meet the demands of our government and we remain a benchmark air force that air forces of the world look to for our the way we think about employing equipment the equipment we operate how we train our people so all of those tell me that we're doing some things right and in a less resource constrained time there are areas that clearly I would like to see grow but that's for the wider conversation around the integrated review the refresh of the integrated review what do you think should be included in that refresh of the integrated review and the subsequent revision of the defence command paper well I we're doing a refresh because of not because the integrated review that was published last year so the spring of 2021 had any shortcomings actually as I go around the world as I speak to my counterparts and government officials from other countries and particularly around NATO that the integrated review as published so global Britain in a competitive age is widely regarded as a best in class demonstration of how a government positions itself in a security and defence context in an uncertain world and it's in the title and in an era of strategic competition so I think everything that's happened since then in Europe with the invasion of Ukraine with China being more assertive taking more bullying stance with its regional neighbours all of those the continued toxic ideology underpinning violent extremism all of those were highlighted in the integrated review and I think where we were probably most taken aback was the speed with which they have come to pass the ink was barely dry on the integrated review in in 2021 when Russia first threatened invading Ukraine and then subsequent we saw this year that brutal invasion Russia was called out as the most pressing threat in the integrated review but things have happened so quickly so I think it's right that we take a stock check I think the government has been very clear that the threats that we face means that they will need to be an increase in defence funds and that's what the purpose of the work going on to refresh next year over the course of 2023 will lead to a revision of defence funding an increase in funding to reflect a more dangerous uncertain world and with that making sure we've right-sized the armed forces for that will that be a meaningful refresh if you have general election coming up yes I do absolutely believe it will be because whilst there's a clearly there's a political sign off it's driven by the Prime Minister this is the the work is the result of academic input, industry defence and security officials military leaders so it is a comprehensive review now of course any government any change of government means a review of priorities and a review of spending priorities in particular but the essence of the integration review the essence that the world is a more dangerous place that there are more challenges that are manifesting in ways that we need to be prepared for and that ambition for the UK to be a problem solving burden sharing nation active on the world stage these are these are principles that we can be very proud of as a way that Britain is positioned as a net contributor to global security and global stability and if we're talking about reviews you led on the goal of net zero 2040 you spoke about that here last year if you look at the performance review your performance over the last year how do you think it's going for the RAF but also for aviation more generally I think it's a really it's a really positive story and we have had really genuinely exciting milestones over the last year I think the one that I am I mean there have been some great achievements the one I am most pleased about is a conversation that we started with my fellow defence air chiefs from around the world who all immediately saw the value of what we were doing and were keen to join in so we've established a global air chiefs climate change initiative and this summer over 40 air chiefs signed up to that and it's it's a giant information sharing pool where where this is a transnational challenge it is a transnational threat to our security and broadly we face the same challenges as air forces so to have a conglomeration of air forces large and small use staff all the way down to some of the small island air forces that those are that's a hugely rewarding international leadership role for the Royal Air Force we've had some significant technical successes from flying the world's first piloted aircraft with synthetic fuel which is fuel that was made from hydrogen captured from the atmosphere, carbon captured from the atmosphere it's an electro fuel so catalysts, heat pressure outcomes petrol and it sounds like alchemy and it is alchemy but it works and we're continuing to pursue that we've done the same with another synthetic fuel process and flown a drone with that and then a couple of weeks ago we flew one of our voyagers entirely of waste cooking oil now it's been done before with aircraft with isolated fuel systems where they've flown on one of their two engines four engines this was the first time where every bit of fuel in that aircraft had previously been cooking oil or equivalent and it had been recycled and we flew a test flight and these are leadership steps that the Royal Air Force is taking which send a signal it's exactly in step with what the UK government is doing through the Department of Transport and and Bayes through their Jet Zero initiative to get net zero transatlantic flight and there's an opportunity there's a prosperity opportunity for the UK to lead in this technology I'm really pleased that the Air Force is leading the way in that but there is a I freely admit there's a self-interested part in this as well and the self-interested part is that if we can address our energy needs, if we can find a way of powering our bases, powering our deployments, powering our aircraft using renewable energy sources energy sources that are produced at the point of use that has untold operational value that whole energy supply chain that whole remember it from Afghanistan the endless miles of convoys of fuel tankers where the drivers put in their lives at risk day in and day out all of those things could become something of the past and we need to sort of not constrain our imagination by having to go to the petrol pump every thousand miles and these are this is where as I say a self-interested resilience aspect of net zero suddenly opens up all sorts of new opportunities and the technology is there now and it's just a matter of scaling it that was a long answer, sorry fascinating I'm keeping one eye on the clock because I think in a few minutes we're going to start taking Q&A from here in the audience but also online but there's a couple more questions that I had, I mean you've talked a lot about leadership and the importance of that and you put your name to I think it was a 2019 MOD report looking into inappropriate behaviour within the armed forces looking at allegations of bullying of discrimination, harassment how those were dealt with and your review then concluded we have to do better given the recent stories about those inappropriate behaviours within not just the services and not just the RAF even within the red arrows what still needs to be done now to address those issues it is I mean as I sort of identified in 2019 and other people have done other similar reports into behaviours in different organisations but the report I did just before I became chief to me it was clear that we weren't doing enough as an organisation across the Ministry of Defence to prevent inappropriate, unacceptable behaviour happening in the first place and then we were not doing we were certainly not doing well enough to deal with the consequences of it particularly for the victims and that came out very clear to me so there was a sort of up-screen issue which has changed the culture there was a down-stream issue with it better and that dealing with it better meant that people who were victims who had been harmed had lost faith in the organisation that should be looking after them to actually do anything about it and that was very painful to me and it's something that has shaped my approach to being Chief of the Air Staff remembering hearing testimony from victims and I think I got a very small insight to something that was actually done on a much larger scale last year by Sarah Atherton or into this year by Sarah Atherton where she called for evidence through the House of Commons Defence Committee and that upstream bit that cultural change it is culture it's something that does take years but that and that's recognised that it's a journey of years but sometimes when you say that it's a journey of years that's an excuse for people to say well there's nothing I can do about it it's the next person's job and somewhere you've got to make you've got to make a start and I think my the headline I would say about inappropriate behaviours it is about the determination of the leadership to change the culture and that determination then sets the tone into the organisation a few years to rattle its way down the organisation but that determination and that consistent determination to change the culture and then it needs it just needs that authentic leadership so it has to not only as it has to be talking the talk there has to be evidence that it's meaningful it has to be relentless repetition of the message and very clear communications and with that we will make the changes we need to for this audience and there are some colleagues in here the vast majority of people in the armed forces are good people who do amazing things for our country but there are still pockets where people are behaving not as they should not to our standards and people are getting harmed as a result so the leadership does come from the top and I do credit Ben Wallace and people have heard me talk about this as well before but Ben Wallace has been absolutely clear and very decisive in the way that he has introduced new policies it was his leadership that brought in a zero tolerance and presumption of exit for any inappropriate behaviours of a sexual nature that was policy that was incorporated last month but announced in July we've got the defence serious crimes unit that was launched today again all of these driven by Ben Wallace he meets the women and gender networks regularly he is absolutely demonstrating clearly his determination to change the culture and that's something that Ben Wallace and I and down as the organisation are determined to continue to get after it is disappointing, frustrating when it happens at the end of it is somebody who has been harmed who is somebody who is excluded, who is not able to give their all who feels that they no longer have a part in the organisation we lose at every level when people behave below the standard expected and so it must be a high priority and again I've said this before it impacts our effectiveness as a fighting force because we lose our reputation for professionalism and discipline as a fighting force and frankly it turns people off from wanting to join us particularly parents and community leaders who look at some of the stories and say well that's not a place for you you know and so we are harmed at many levels above the actual individual harm to individuals so this is absolutely something worth going after and you mentioned the red arrows we were very clear we became aware of standards behaviours below the standard expected, we investigated and five people were sanctioned including dismissals from the service and the team has turned a corner and I have absolute admiration for what the team has done just over the last month in the Middle East engaging with governments engaging with society across countries in the Middle East and we have done it whilst dealing with a significant term as they've come to terms with what has gone on in the past but that is a better team without a shadow without a better team now. Thank you and I have 20 more questions but I've run out of time for mine so it is your turn now the Q&A is on the record for those online do use the Q&A function space institute is collating those online questions. If you're here in the room and have a question, put your hand up and first question. It used to be the case with the Royal Air Force and the Royal Navy, as well as the British Army, that those forces were a source of a copy of the British Army, of the US Army and reflective armed forces, just a slightly smaller one, slightly. However, in the recent years, in all of those forces, certain changes were made that no longer reflect the wide array of capabilities of those forces in the US. In the case of the Royal Air Force, there are no longer any long range strategic bombers, there are no longer air superiority fighters, and this affects the capabilities of the Royal Air Force. How concerned would you be with those changes of those capabilities of the Royal Air Force? How do those changes affect its position in the world? And one last little question. How concerned are you with a recent use of the dagger missile by the Russian Federation in Ukraine, a hypersonic missile that has been used successfully in Ukraine and the United Kingdom does not have any means of countering it? How would you refer to that? Thank you. Two, possibly three, gusting four questions there. If I may, and I absolutely get the thrust of your question, but I will challenge you on air superiority fighters. We've got one of the best air superiority fighters in the world with Typhoon, and when we put the electronically scanned radar in it, it will go up another level of technology. When we link it into the E7 Wedgetail, we will be right there at the cutting edge of, sorry, the Wedgetail airborne early warning aircraft. We'll be right there at the cutting edge of air dominance, air superiority. But I think your wider point is well made, and it goes back to that point I made earlier that we do exist in a resource constrained environment. We have to recognise that there are other pressures on our government's spending. We can't be everything that we would wish to be, and that goes for the Navy and that goes for the Army. But as a benchmark air force, there is no doubt in my mind that we, for the money that is spent, for the force you get from that, for the concepts and doctrine that we develop, for the new technologies that we field, I think most air forces in the world and probably Stamfast China, most air forces in the world recognise that they're not going to be able to emulate the United States. I was privileged to be at the B-21 radar roll out on Friday. It is unlike anything that we are going to field any time soon. The billions of pounds that has been spent on that to get that into a, to be rolled out. However, air forces like the Royal Air Force, like the French Air Force, are air forces that work at another level, and we are able to project ourselves globally. We demonstrate day in, day out the utility of air power and increasingly space power across many of the roles. We can't do everything, but by goodness me we contribute to the UK's place in the world and we contribute to the UK's security and the UK's prosperity as well through our amazing industrial base, aerospace industrial base. Your point about hypersonic missiles and the defence of the UK, well we are part of NATO and NATO is in part there to defend and is developing means to defend against these missiles. It is developing technology, it is absolutely something that we are all concerned about because of the threat, because of the, whereas a ballistic missile is predictable and is relatively easy to defend against. A manoeuvring hypersonic missile is an entirely different level of technological challenge to be able to defend against and that's where it has, you know, is of concern to all of us. And I think we should be, we should recognise that what Russia achieved in Ukraine on its first night, it had over a dozen strategic bombers airborne, over 100 missiles in the air, cruise missiles, it's capable of mass precision attack and it is still capable of mass precision attack and that is why it is so important that Russia is defeated in Ukraine that Ukraine prevails because if Russia gets away with what it's doing in Ukraine it will come back for more and it will come back for more and I absolutely believe our Baltic partners, countries like Poland who are very clear of the threat that Russia presents today and that is why the efforts of our government, of other governments to ensure that the Ukraine survives, prevails and Russia fails. Well, that is about European security, it's about global security. So, we are working on how to defend against the hypersonic threat. It is a core Russian development programme, Chinese as well and it's something that we will continually focus, you know, continue to focus on. Let's take another question here. If we can bring the microphone across and maybe take two at once, so hand it over once we've asked you a question just because we're running out of time. Thank you. So, you were talking about misconduct within the service. There was a report about certain XRAF pilots training Chinese pilots to shoot down, I think it was, F-16s. So, what do you, is that in your jurisdiction and do you tell me if the question is inappropriate? It's all right. Good. Let's just have the next question then we'll group. You mentioned trench art, I'm just wondering what specific constants do you believe need to be maintained and your particular value in the modern RAF? You said again, sorry. You mentioned trench art, I'm just wondering what specific constants you believe need to be maintained and what your particular value. Yeah. So, I'll start with the Chinese aircrew training and without it sounding like I'm sleeping shoulders, it wasn't just Royal Air Force fast jet pilots and it was actually a multinational problem and the first international arrest has actually been made of a United States Marine Corps Harrier pilot who has been extradited back to the United States and is facing trial. So, it is an issue for all of us. We condemned it in the clearest terms. It is not appropriate that people that have been privy to some sensitive information might find themselves in a way that gives advantage to a potential adversary and whether that's China or any other potential adversary, all of these people signed up to the Official Secrets Act and that should be enough. Their actions demonstrated that it wasn't enough and that's why the National Security Bill will strengthen our ability to sanction people in a way and we're exploring ways in which the National Security Bill can prevent this happening in future. So, it was down to some very aggressive recruiting through second and third parties. Some of those that I genuinely believed didn't realise what they were part of but ultimately it's been called out publicly and it's the right thing to do and as I say it wasn't just a Royal Air Force fast jet problem. The culture question goes back to what I think I said earlier. Whilst our uniform hasn't changed much since the 1920s, 1930s, actually that's inconsequential to my mind and good luck to somebody who might look to change it in the future. Actually, what Trenshard set in place was that air-minded culture, that culture of difference, that culture of air power being decisive of itself but being the decisive enabler of activities in the land and maritime environments, that need for a group of people who are advocates of this amazing new technology. Now, the technology of flight is now no longer an amazing new technology but there are new things coming along that we are equally the advocates for. We are at the cutting edge of so many of the technologies that the British Defence Forces are fielding now and we will continue to be so and that innovative DNA is at the heart of that culture and I think it's that that I would say is the thing that we have to preserve and we occasionally have to wake it up as well, wake up that sleepy DNA when we forget that we should be innovative and I'm delighted to say that we are being pretty innovative at the moment and doing some really exciting things across the range of air and space power. Check on online questions now. Apologies to the online participants but let me start with a question relating to the B21. There have been a couple of questions asked by Tony Osborne, Mike Harwood about this. Tony Osborne asks about the nature of the B21 capability. He says that as a nation which gave up a bomber capability, do we think that capability is still relevant? Well, Mike Harwood, sorry, asks, was there any particular reason why the USF Chief of Staff wanted both the UK and Australians present at the B21 and availing was there any subliminal messaging going on there? I think Mike Harwood's question is probably one for Chief Brown but I think there was clearly a message in that the Australian Chief and I were privy to that, to be unveiling and we all recognise the role of a long-range strategic bomber and we are very fortunate indeed to have partners like the United States, like the United States Air Force where we are interchangeable in so many ways with what they do and how they operate. It is a role that we used to have as an Air Force. We led the world in it both in the Second World War and the immediate aftermath with the V-bombers that emerged in the immediate aftermath of the Second World War. It goes back to that earlier question. There are some things that I would like to do but I have to operate within the resources I'm given and the phenomenal capability of that as a war-fighting platform is finally balanced against the significant cost of it, the significant unit cost of it. But it is something needless to say that we and the Australians are closely engaged with and we will continue to be so and in that respect that relationship with the United States, particularly around the potential threats to security in the Indo-Pacific region speaks to why we have a live conversation about the roll-out of that capability. Thank you and a question from Catherine Courtney relating to space or two-part question in many ways. She notes that the Russians have taken the view that commercial satellites providing intelligence particularly for war crimes. They have taken the view that this makes commercial platforms potentially legitimate military targets which obviously is a view open to a particular debate I suspect. But she wonders what the military's responsibility for ensuring the ongoing sustainability of the space environment might look like and how commercial assets might be protected from hostile attack by nations that have chosen to see them as part of the enemy's ISR nexus. Those are amazing questions and Sophie if you were looking for ideas for the chief's presentation next year I think that would be a good basis for it. I will try and be very brief. There is a whole new field of and actually it starts with academic understanding and discussions. I know that we have got fellows here who are looking at these aspects. But understanding about deterrence in space, understanding how the laws of armed conflict and international humanitarian law apply to space, how that very important link between commercial satellite services and military use and operational use, how that affects that calculus. But whilst we talk about from our perspective getting our heads around the law of armed conflict and international humanitarian law and then when you look at what Russia is doing to this civilian infrastructure in Ukraine today, taking down power, water, denying the population those fundamental, fundamental ability to live, all of that speaks to the challenge of being up against a ruthless, reckless adversary. There is a risk that a detonation in space could cause a chain reaction of debris clouds which actually deny huge parts of space that we rely on in our day-to-day lives for everything from getting food on the shelves to petrol in the pumps to cash in our bank accounts. The risks now to space, the risks to an open and resilient space domain where everybody can benefit it from it are so great now that it requires organisations like the Royal Air Force, like the Ministry of Defence to really take it seriously and to think through how we can understand what is going on, what our potential adversaries, the nefarious actors in space are doing, think through how we can protect what we do in space better and ultimately be ready to defend in space. It is a rich seam of work for us as military concepts and doctrine in thinking through those aspects and also on the academic side, the theoretical aspects of it. It's a fascinating topic and there's a lot more we've got to understand. So having an Air and Space Institute is quite a useful thing. I fear we have run out of time, unless we're allowed to go over. I think we probably run the risk of causing all sorts of problems. I think I'll just apologise again to those who ask questions online which we're not able to give them to give their questions sufficient justice in the answer and hand back to you. Thank you, Sir Mike. Thank you all for breathing the cold, for being here in person. Thank you to all of those watching online. Thank you. I would conclude by thanking all of you for coming this evening and joining us. Obviously I'd repeat the thanks that Wynn gave at the start to Caroline for leading the discussion and to the Chief of the Air Staff for giving us these frank views on a variety of things and tackling the questions with such candour and offering us such great insights and we're very grateful to the ongoing support that we've received at the Freeman Air and Space Institute since we were established in the midst of a pandemic which is not the best way of doing face-to-face events we discovered fairly quickly but thank you for all that support. I'll draw the evening to a conclusion by saying that for those of you who are joining us for the reception if you come in through, and forgive me I'm going to do the fire exit thing, if you're coming through the doors at the back which you came in through please and you'll be guided out to there. To those of you who aren't joining us again many thanks for your attendance and we look forward to seeing you at future events but I would conclude by asking you to join with me in thanking both Caroline and Sir Michael.