via The National Interest.
Of the three military departments, the U.S. Air Force is buying the fewest total amount of new aircraft, purchasing the fewest types of aircraft, and retiring the most airplanesEaglen turns the story into a bitch session, crying about how the US Navy's purchase of Super Hornets is a by product of the USAF having F-22s and the future F-35 to defend against high tech threats but that misses the point.
Since defense budgets peaked in 2010, and continuing through the 2015 budget request, the U.S. Navy is on a path to have acquired 1,133 new aircraft while the Air Force will have bought 824. Of these planes, the Navy will acquire 264 fighters (including the EA-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft) to the Air Force’s 117.
Excluding Remotely Piloted Vehicles (RPVs)—or drones—the Navy is on a path to have purchased 1,039 new aircraft, and the Air Force just 400 airplanes between 2010 and 2015.
This shows just how much the Air Force aircraft replacement rate is slowing, which means the already smaller force is getting older, faster.
The think tank gurus have failed to come to grips with the burning question.
IS STEALTH THE KEY TO FUTURE AERIAL WARFARE?
The US Navy doesn't think so and all open source material points to them being right. Additionally the Europeans haven't been sold and even the Russians haven't joined the "full stealth" bandwagon with their latest airplane in development.
Eaglen said it best near the end of her article....
But even if full sequestration does not continue throughout the decade, “sequestration-lite” is here to stay.The USAF is in a hurt locker of their own making. They bet their future on the concept of an all stealth air force...and since they're unwilling to admit the mistake and correct it, they've doomed their service and the nation to the ramifications of that decision.
The force will be smaller, more expensive and less capable in the future.
In March, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert told lawmakers that the Navy would need a 450-ship fleet in order to meet the global needs of combatant commanders (COCOM). "For us to meet what combatant commanders request, we need a Navy of 450 ships," he told the House Armed Services Committee.
ReplyDeleteNever happen. Given its shipbuilding travails, the Navy will do well to keep its 289 ships (and its similar number of admirals, but that's another story). And they may have to start counting rowboats to do it.
For its part, the U.S. Air Force, presumably responding in similar fashion to COCOM requirements, has maintained a procurement goal of 1,763 F-35A steadily since the late 1990s. F-35A is currently supporting zero percent of COCOM requirements, but presumably all 1,763 of the USAF’s F-35A’s figure into future planning scenarios. But whatever course of action analyses fed this new need for a 450-ship navy have not, apparently, driven a change in demand for 1,763 F-35A in the Air Force.
h/t Dave Foster of Naval Air Systems Command
nicely done Don! the same calculations can be applied to the US Army and Marine Corps! but the dirty secret is that the requirements of Combatant Commanders are inflated.
Deletewhen we return to sizing the US military to US needs then we'll have a real number on everything...not just the number of fighters that the US needs.
@Don. You touched upon something I have been wondering about and haven't had the time to look at the numbers. When you look at USAF divesting A10s, older Block F16s, most F15C/Ds except for golden 100,etc...plus you figure ANG units are going to get hit eventually, just give it time because USAF needs the money...F15Es and F22s aren't touched but has anyone looked at a potential 2020 USAF inventory? My guess is that 1700 F35s is way past what will still be flying and I wonder how USAF generals are going to justify buying that many when the inventory is going to be SMALLER....plus the fact that "everyone" knows that the F35 is SO much more lethal than 4 Gen fighters, why do you need to buy that many more than what is still in inventory?!?!?
DeleteI've got the numbers, NICO. They're not pretty though:
DeleteThe Air Force has decided to not upgrade any of their F-16 fleet of over 1,000 and has instead decided to launch a service life extension of only a few of the latest models. I don't know how many of their F-16s they plan on going through this program, but they took the money from a upgrade program for 300 F-16s and my best guess is that those 300 F-16s that were picked out are the same ones going to be put through the service life extension program. They have 254 F-15C/D's with an average age pushing nearly 30 years old now, which is older than most of the F-16s including some of the ones they are retiring. They plan on killing the A-10. They already retired the F-117. Their younger fighter fleet consists of only 220 F-15E's and 187 F-22's. Pretty dire looking isn't it?
@NICO
DeleteThey can't justify it -- that's the point. It (1,763) is a long-term number and it has no immediate impact, but hey General Welsh, let's get real. You don't need to suck up THAT far.
What has an immediate impact is the large number of faulty F-35 prototypes that the AF is procuring, four years before a production decision. Seventy-five in the last few years at five for a billion begins to add up and affect other programs. Come on Welsh, get a backbone and consider the total force and the people in it. Stop sucking up to LM and observe the law.
Thanks Andrew! Sooner or later someone in Congress will wake up to the fact that in a few years, USAF will have between 300 to 500 SLEPed F16s, maybe 100+ F15C/Ds, no more A10s, F117s long gone....ANG fighters will be sent to the bone-yard and replaced with Predators,etc....then again, why do you need so many 5th Gen fighters to replace that few 4th Gen remaining fighters? Those Generals better have a better reason or hope for another Cold War with Russia or China to "justify" those numbers....
DeleteHere's an interesting piece on bestfighter4canada.
ReplyDeletehttp://bestfighter4canada.blogspot.ca/2014/05/the-comanche-and-albatross-voice-of.html
Col. Pietrucha USAF presentation that the F-35 is wrong and that the USAF should be investing in an F-15 Growler type aircraft and F-16 Block 70 aircraft in numbers.
Looks like the A-10 survives...
ReplyDeletehttp://allthingsaero.com/military-aviation/us-air-force/gallery-the-a-10-survives-congressional-cuts
For some reason the Super Hornet seems to piss off everybody except the Navy. The Navy loves them, but every time there is a purchase of new Super Hornets or Super Hornet upgrades it causes an angry flurry in the Air Force, the Marine Corps, and even the Pentagon (which tried to kill the Super Hornet back in 2011-2012).
ReplyDeleteIt's almost entertaining to watch if it wasn't for the fact that the security and effectiveness of our nation and military is now set to depend on the Super Hornet for some time. The Air Force is shrinking while its legacy jets are aging, the Marines are soon going to only have upgraded Harriers with very sensitive limits to range and payload, and the F-35 that both services bet on is not going to have the full combat ready software until something like 2019-2020 (or so Lockheed claims). Super Hornets and Growlers are going to have to hold down the fort until F/A-XX arrives and the other services sort things out with their JSFs.
By the way, Sol, I just learned of a small Boeing victory. Congress has added 5 Growlers to the 2015 budget. These are NEW planes on order!!!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2014/05/08/house-adds-5-growlers-amphib-to-defense-budget/
Andrew, I find this line in the article you cited to be if particular interest -
Delete"Instead, the bipartisan amendment prohibits such a move, or a retirement, until the US comptroller general makes a number of certifications and completes several studies, including a report to evaluate all Air Force platforms that are used for close-air-support (CAS) missions."
Would be very interesting to see how the F-35 stacks up in terms of CAS.