Review: Air Force could purchase fewer JSFs - Air Force News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Air Force Times

Review: Air Force could purchase fewer JSFs

The cash-strapped Air Force could cut the number of F-35 Lightning IIs it intends to buy without hurting its ability to attack ground targets, an outside review of fighter modernization efforts concluded.

The service’s plan to buy 1,763 F-35s — also called the Joint Strike Fighter — is based on outdated assumptions about the number of fighters needed to destroy ground targets, said Barry Watts, an analyst with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments in Washington, D.C.

“Cold War notions about how much is enough have changed,” said Watts, a retired Air Force fighter pilot.

Purchasing fewer F-35s could allow the Air Force to invest more money in a new long-range bomber, which the Defense Department wants in the air by 2018, Watts added.

To address its cash crunch, the Air Force is cutting 40,000 full-time positions and lobbying Congress for a budget increase of about $20 billion annually.

Steve Kosiak, a budget analyst who co-wrote the study with Watts, said it is unlikely Congress or the next president will push for such a large increase.

In fact, Defense Department budget estimates through 2013 project a slight decrease in military spending, he said. And if there are extra dollars, that money could be spent training and equipping the additional 92,000 soldiers and Marines requested by President Bush.

Better bombs, fewer fighters

Improvements to bomb-targeting technology, Watts explained, would allow the Air Force to get by with fewer fighters. A fleet of 800 to 1,000 stealthy F-35s equipped with satellite- and laser-guided bombs could match the capability of its 1,300 F-16s, he said.

One F-35 loaded with satellite-guided Small Diameter Bombs could hit 12 targets in any weather. During the Vietnam War, by contrast, eight or 12 fighters loaded with unguided bombs would be dispatched to knock out a single bridge.

With each Air Force F-35 expected to cost about $74 million, the center’s proposed production cut could save the service about $56 billion over several years.

The Air Force also views the F-35 as replacement for roughly 350 A-10 Thunderbolts and 223 F-15E Strike Eagles. Both are expected to stay in service past 2025.

In the long term, there may be less of a need for Air Force fighters to fly close-air support missions because the Army is making strides with precision-guided artillery and rocket batteries, Watts said.

The Air Force also has the option to buy new F-16s to fly missions that don’t require stealth, the analysts noted. The latest version of the F-16, the Block 60, costs about $24 million less than an F-35.

“It’s hard to make a case that all planes need all-aspect stealth,” Kosiak said.

Fighter, bomber balance

The analysts said the Air Force’s drive to buy 1,763 F-35s could create an imbalance between the service’s short-range strike capabilities provided by fighters and the long-range strike of bombers.

Watts pointed out that during the Cold War, a fighter at Ramstein Air Base in Germany could strike Soviet bloc targets without refueling. But if a fighter had to attack a target deep inside China, for example, it would need to be refueled behind enemy lines.

The only planes that can reach targets deep inside enemy airspace are long-range bombers, Watts said. While the Air Force is looking at options for a bomber, the service hasn’t reached the stage of seeking bids.

To meet the 2018 deadline, Air Force leaders said the bomber would likely have to depend on existing technology and be a subsonic stealth aircraft. A supersonic bomber, perhaps using scramjet technology, wouldn’t be available until after 2025.

The Air Force is buying the F-35 together with the Navy, Marine Corps and several foreign nations.

The combined Navy and Marine Corps buy is expected to total about 680 aircraft, with 350 going to the Marines and 330 to the Navy. The jets are expected to cost about $97 million each in today’s dollars.

The Navy edition, the F-35C, intended to survive the rigors of carrier takeoffs and landings, could be a candidate for cancellation, the study found.

Money saved by forgoing the carrier version could be used to develop a long-range and stealthy aircraft known as the Unmanned Combat Air System Carrier-Demonstration, Watts said.

Watts doubted that the Marine Corps version, the F-35B, which will be able to take off and land from a hover like the AV-8B Harrier, will be canceled because the British military intends to buy it as well.