Submission Guidelines

DUTIES OF AUTHORS	DUTIES OF REVIEWERS
Reporting standards Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Originality and Plagiarism The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Acknowledgement of Sources Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Authorship of the Work Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as coauthors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors and no inappropriate coauthors are included on the paper, and that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Fundamental errors in published works When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.	Contribution to Editorial Decisions Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Promptness Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and be excused from the review process. Confidentiality Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor. Standards of Objectivity Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Acknowledgement of Sources Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

DUTIES OF AUTHORS

DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

Reporting standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Work
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as coauthors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors and no inappropriate coauthors are included on the paper, and that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and be excused from the review process.

Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Publication Ethics: Information that follows is based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) core practices. More information may be found here: https://publicationethics.org.

Publication decisions

The editor of Air & Space Operations Review (ASOR) is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor may be constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play

An editor will at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

Contributions to Æther: A Journal of Strategic Airpower & Spacepower (Æther) will be original articles not under consideration for publication elsewhere or previously published, and will explore military, Air Force, and Space Force doctrine, force structure, readiness, innovation, and other matters of national defense related to air and space operations. 

Articles must be submitted in Microsoft Word, follow Chicago Manual of Style (18th ed.), and fall within the following range: 4,000–6,500 words, including footnotes.

To publish an article, please submit an abstract of no more than 150 words to aether-journal@au.af.edu for review by the editors. Abstracts must explicitly address these elements:

Thesis (1–2 sentences)
Research approach
Contribution to the field of study/issue (what is new?)
Relevance to the Department of the Air Force and senior Department of Defense and civilian national security decisionmakers

To check the status of your submission or if you have questions concerning our article review and publication process, please contact us at aether-journal@au.af.edu.

*Please note: the inbox with a .mil extension is not monitored. Emails must be sent to the email address with the .edu extension. 

2025 Publication Submission Deadline

Spring	Summer	Fall	Winter
30 Dec 24	15 Mar 25	---	---

AI Policy
Artificial intelligence (AI)-generated submissions are not permitted. If AI is used to generate specific text in an article, it must be used sparingly, be treated as a direct quote, and be sourced accordingly, per Chicago Manual of Style guidelines for AI content. If it is used to create a graphic, it must also be sourced. Violators will be ineligible for future publication consideration. 
Contact Us
Please e-mail your comments, suggestions, or address change to
Aether-Journal@au.af.edu

Human Research Disclaimer
If your submission contains human subject research (interviews, surveys, etc.), you must obtain a formal institutional review board (IRB) review of your submission indicating compliance or an exemption. If you are an active duty independent researcher, we recommend reaching out to your most recent Air University or other military PME program/school for their IRB POC. More information about federal regulations protecting human subject research can be found here.
Security Policy
Æther publications must undergo security clearance and policy review to ensure that they contain no classified and sensitive information and do not misrepresent current Air Force policy. Normally, the public affairs (PA) office at Maxwell completes the review, but DOD-affiliated authors may have their manuscript cleared by their local PA office. If you do so, please provide us with the clearance/case number assigned by that office.

Text/HTML

Text/HTML

Publication decisions

Fair play

Confidentiality

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Article Submission Guidelines