The Amazing Shrinking Air Force

19.10.08

Categorie: Air, Industry |

To pay for rising costs for F-22s, F-35s, KC-45 tankers and other new planes, the Air Force will cut around 300 fighters from its 2,000-strong force. But that won’t do anything to fix the programs themselves: costs will continue to rise and numbers of new planes will continue to shrink amid an overall force structure on a steady decline to irrelevance.

What’s going on here? Bad strategy. Overly-complex designs. Inadequate cost controls. Sloppy, corrupt management. It’s the same old sad tale. In a new book, America’s Defense Meltdown, Robert Dilger and F-16 designer Pierre Sprey propose a radical new procurement strategy to not only stop the force decline, but reverse it, buying some 9,000 new planes in just 20 years within existing budgets. Buy the book, when it’s out. In the meantime, here’s a teaser.

The authors propose to rebuild the Air Force focused on just two combat missions, close air support and air superiority, thus abandoning strategic bombing, which many believe is a flawed concept. This new Air Force needs two new combat planes in large numbers, Dilger and Sprey contend:

The Close Support Fighter: This is a significantly smaller, more maneuverable and even more survivable improvement on the A-10. It is based on two, off-the-shelf, 9,000-pound class commercial/military turbofan engines. The aircraft would mount a much more compact, lighter and quicker-accelerating cannon system that fires the same highly lethal, combat-proven 30 mm round at the same muzzle velocity as the A-10. The weight savings of just using the smaller gun should be around 7,500 pounds. With a much smaller aircraft size also permitted by the more compact gun, and with other weight savings, the Close Support Fighter is projected to have an empty weight of less than 14,000 pounds compared to the A-10′s 25,000 pounds. With 10,000 pounds internal fuel this aircraft will have range and loiter well beyond the A-10. Combat takeoff weight will be less than 25,000 pounds. At the mid-point of its combat mission, it would have a near 1:1 thrust to weight ratio. The sustained G, acceleration, quick re-attack time, and rate-of-climb will be world class for a close-support aircraft. Survivability will be even better than the A-10, due to higher maneuverability, smaller size and new improvements in control-system hardness and fire suppression. The unit cost of $15 million is based on the actual production price of the A-10, inflated to today’s dollars plus 30 percent. In other words, we are using as a model the price of an airplane that is 50 percent larger than the Close Support Fighter and have added another 30 percent to the cost just for conservatism.  

Air-to-Air Fighter: This fighter is 30 percent smaller than the F-16 with vastly better acceleration and turning performance. It will be, by a large margin, the hottest performing and most maneuverable fighter in the world — both subsonically and supersonically. Size is 18,500 pounds gross weight with a current in-production engine of 32,500 pounds thrust, or more. It will be able to accelerate to supersonic speeds going straight up without using afterburner. Electronics will be cutting edge, all-passive with 360-degree infrared and radar warning gear. Weapons will be the most advanced and effective (as demonstrated by realistic, live-fire testing) current IR air-to-air missile, a passive radar-homing air-to-air missile for attacking any stealth/non-stealth fighter radar in the world; and a new, more lethal, higher velocity 20-mm cannon based on an in-production round. The small size and the 100-percent passive electronics and weapons approach will maximize surprise relative to the always-larger stealth fighters or any radar-using fighter in the world. (Surprise is the number one factor in achieving aerial victories.) Unit cost is estimated at $40 million, about 20 percent below the cost of the currently overloaded, radar and avionics-laden F-16 now in very low-rate production. We assess the cost estimate as conservative because this new fighter is 30 percent smaller than the current model of the F-16, the avionics suite is three times smaller and half the complexity of the radar-/radar missile-based F-16, and the annual production rate would be a multiple of the current F-16 rate.

(Photo: BW Jones)

|

12 Responses to “The Amazing Shrinking Air Force”

  1. km says:

    I remember back in the 80s, when Sprey hated, hated, hated the F-15 and loved the F-16.

    Is it me, or is there a disconnect there when he talks about a radar-homing AAM for use against stealth fighters? If the missile is radar homing and the plane is stealthy…um, what?

    How about being a bit creative and pushing for a EO missile, like the EO version of the Sparrow they were messing around with 20 years ago? Totally passive and invulnerable to stealth.

  2. Denny says:

    Still cling to guns :-)

  3. Robert says:

    fewer is better in some cases; at the very least, we wouldn’t be so bold to piss everyone off around the globe with our marvelous bomb & bullet. related video: $300 billion betrayal

  4. duuude says:

    “Is it me, or is there a disconnect there when he talks about a radar-homing AAM for use against stealth fighters? If the missile is radar homing and the plane is stealthy…um, what?”

    Sprey means a missile that homes in on the target plane’s radar emissions.

  5. u2 says:

    wouldn’t it be easier to just make a supercruising version of the F-16 MATV instead of developing an all new plane? That plane’s agility is amazing, and the tech is readily available.

  6. [...] Related: Russian Super-Fighter Not So Scary In 2014, the F-35 Might Cost More than the F-22 600 F-22s? Hilarious F-35 jumps the shark Raptors in Japan New Russian fighter to challenge F-35 The amazing shrinking air force 2 Comments so far Leave a comment [...]

  7. [...] Related: A U.S. Navy F-22? Don’t Hold Your Breath Nearly 100,000 Jobs Depend on the F-22? Not Really Only 60 More Raptors? Everybody Panic! Russian Super-Fighter Not So Scary In 2014, the F-35 Might Cost More than the F-22 600 F-22s? Hilarious F-35 jumps the shark Raptors in Japan New Russian fighter to challenge F-35 The amazing shrinking air force No Comments so far Leave a comment RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI Leave a comment Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong> [...]

  8. [...] Related: Growler Chomps on Raptor A U.S. Navy F-22? Don’t Hold Your Breath Nearly 100,000 Jobs Depend on the F-22? Not Really Only 60 More Raptors? Everybody Panic! Russian Super-Fighter Not So Scary In 2014, the F-35 Might Cost More than the F-22 600 F-22s? Hilarious F-35 jumps the shark Raptors in Japan New Russian fighter to challenge F-35 The amazing shrinking air force No Comments so far Leave a comment RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI Leave a comment Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong> [...]

  9. [...] Related: Analysts: Buy Fighters, or Die Boeing Unveils New “Stealthy” F-15 Getting the Most from Your New F-22 F-22s to Darfur? Not so Fast … Advocating a Systemic View of Air Superiority More fighter-jet hyperventilating Growler Chomps on Raptor A U.S. Navy F-22? Don’t Hold Your Breath Nearly 100,000 Jobs Depend on the F-22? Not Really Only 60 More Raptors? Everybody Panic! Russian Super-Fighter Not So Scary In 2014, the F-35 Might Cost More than the F-22 600 F-22s? Hilarious F-35 jumps the shark Raptors in Japan New Russian fighter to challenge F-35 The amazing shrinking air force No Comments so far Leave a comment RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI Leave a comment Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong> [...]

  10. [...] Smarter Hogs. Close air aupport improves with A-10C and new attack terminals. War is Boring: The Amazing Shrinking Air Force. The Washington Independent: Reigning in Military Contracts, Part Two. War is Boring: Choose Your [...]

  11. picard578 says:

    This is a good proposal, but it won’t happen; many people (wrongly) believe that more expensive is automatically better, and USAF doesn’t want to hear anything about cheap weapons. That is one of reasons it wants to replace A-10 and F-16 with many times more expensive (but less capable) F-35.

  12. I always used to read post in news papers but now as I am a
    user of net thus from now I am using net for articles, thanks to web.

Leave a Reply