US Defense Budget: More for Stealth less for Legacy?

If you feel you absolutely must talk about cars, morality, or anything else not related to the F-16, do it here.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2898
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post15 Apr 2021, 03:54

I think Gen Spatz covered the Charlie Browns of the world when he gave some advice to one young man by the name of Olds.
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1793
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post15 Apr 2021, 07:12

Corsair1963 wrote:Honestly, doesn't save as much as many may think it would. Unless, you retire an entire type from service. Let's see if the Biden Administration has the guts to do that???


The B-1B must go ... it's the only way to preserve long term funding for the A-10C.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2580
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post15 Apr 2021, 07:39

I went thru the general's tweets & reports regarding his view and feel that it may have been somewhat mis-represented or interpreted. What he did say was that the F-35s weren't used in the infiltration during the wargame (quote below) and they used NGAD instead. Doesn't seem to come across as anti-F-35 which would be surprising since he has flown both F16s & F117s so he'd be clear what exactly the F-35 can do. I think are incorrectly reading it to mean that the F-35 doesn't work or can't do infiltration which would be strange indeed.

https://www.defensenews.com/training-si ... a-in-2030/
However, in the war game, that role was played by the more survivable NGAD, in part due to the F-35′s inability to traverse the long ranges of the Pacific without a tanker nearby, Hinote said.


If the air force had a better plane, why shouldn't they use a better plane? Also, its prep for NGAD funding. They need to fund this. The criticism seems a bit misplaced.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7632
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post15 Apr 2021, 08:35

element1loop wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:Honestly, doesn't save as much as many may think it would. Unless, you retire an entire type from service. Let's see if the Biden Administration has the guts to do that???


The B-1B must go ... it's the only way to preserve long term funding for the A-10C.


Clearly, the B-1B fleet is costly to operate and maintain. Yet, problem with retiring it. Is the USAF has so few bombers to begin with....While, the New B-21 is still many years off.


This while China and Russia are becoming more aggressive by the day! So, is this really a good time to retire the BONE???


Also, you could make a far better case to retire the A-10. As a number of other types could take over the role. Same can't be said of the B-1B...
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3583
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post15 Apr 2021, 12:48

weasel1962 wrote:I went thru the general's tweets & reports regarding his view and feel that it may have been somewhat mis-represented or interpreted. What he did say was that the F-35s weren't used in the infiltration during the wargame (quote below) and they used NGAD instead. Doesn't seem to come across as anti-F-35 which would be surprising since he has flown both F16s & F117s so he'd be clear what exactly the F-35 can do. I think are incorrectly reading it to mean that the F-35 doesn't work or can't do infiltration which would be strange indeed.

https://www.defensenews.com/training-si ... a-in-2030/
However, in the war game, that role was played by the more survivable NGAD, in part due to the F-35′s inability to traverse the long ranges of the Pacific without a tanker nearby, Hinote said.


If the air force had a better plane, why shouldn't they use a better plane? Also, its prep for NGAD funding. They need to fund this. The criticism seems a bit misplaced.


The highly advanced Next Generation Air Dominance aircraft, or NGAD, and its associated systems, which were capable of penetrating highly contested airspace.


For years, Air Force officials have portrayed the F-35 as the aircraft that it would use to infiltrate into enemy airspace to knock out surface-to-air missiles and other threats without being seen. However, in the war game, that role was played by the more survivable NGAD, in part due to the F-35′s inability to traverse the long ranges of the Pacific without a tanker nearby, Hinote said.

Instead, the F-35 attacked Chinese surface ships and ground targets, protected American and Taiwanese assets from Chinese aircraft, and provided cruise missile defense during the exercise. But “it’s not the one that’s pushing all the way in [Chinese airspace], or even over China’s territory,” Hinote said.


This sounds like NGAD is a lot closer to B-21 than F-22 or even F-35. But why not then just use B-21? Having an aircraft enough range to traverse the Pacific and over China's territory means a big aircraft with a lot of gas. That kind of aircraft would also need to carry a lot of weapons to have a really meaningful impact. Flying aircraft half way over the Pacific into Chinese airspace takes a lot of time meaning that they could make maybe one sortie a day. Sounds a lot like modern version of FB-111 or something like that. I could see this being something like 60,000 pound empty weight twin-engined development of F-35 actually. But if we add high maneuverability, supercruise and such, it will be a very expensive aircraft.
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1793
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post16 Apr 2021, 03:37

Corsair1963 wrote:
element1loop wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:Honestly, doesn't save as much as many may think it would. Unless, you retire an entire type from service. Let's see if the Biden Administration has the guts to do that???


The B-1B must go ... it's the only way to preserve long term funding for the A-10C.


Clearly, the B-1B fleet is costly to operate and maintain. Yet, problem with retiring it. Is the USAF has so few bombers to begin with....While, the New B-21 is still many years off.


This while China and Russia are becoming more aggressive by the day! So, is this really a good time to retire the BONE???


Also, you could make a far better case to retire the A-10. As a number of other types could take over the role. Same can't be said of the B-1B...


dude! /SARC!
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1793
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post16 Apr 2021, 03:47

hornetfinn wrote:This sounds like NGAD is a lot closer to B-21 than F-22 or even F-35. But why not then just use B-21? Having an aircraft enough range to traverse the Pacific and over China's territory means a big aircraft with a lot of gas. That kind of aircraft would also need to carry a lot of weapons to have a really meaningful impact. Flying aircraft half way over the Pacific into Chinese airspace takes a lot of time meaning that they could make maybe one sortie a day. Sounds a lot like modern version of FB-111 or something like that. I could see this being something like 60,000 pound empty weight twin-engined development of F-35 actually. But if we add high maneuverability, supercruise and such, it will be a very expensive aircraft.


Alternatively, accelerating Bk4 with EFTs, (plus s__tcan the KC-46 and buy KC-30A, instead) plus go for the much cheaper faster solution of a very long-range high altitude air-launched hypersonic weapon, plus a JASSM-XR instead of this PCA-type NGAD option. And like you say, fit B-21 with same weapons, and let it do the deeper hammering, like it is supposed to (and does the B-2 no longer exist or something?).

Plus a disposable strike drone with a standoff-weapon for deep-deep attack where a return is not as necessary as killing a target. The fact is F-35A BK4 with EFT and long-range standoff weapon will match or else beat FB-111 on strike range, clout, and survivability/repeatability with very low attrition. And it can take a teamed-drone with it to ensure it succeeds.

Consider this also:
Image

The possibilities are interesting, to say the least.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline
User avatar

doge

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 799
  • Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 16:07

Unread post06 May 2021, 18:15



I have read those articles. 8)
The Warzone's annual Clickbait headline ! :doh:
To me, they only seem to be begging for something that doesn't exist, saying, "We can win if we have XXX, so give us the money."
I don't think the game is more valuable than real-life the Flag exercises or large-scale the JSE simulations. 8)
The Lockheed Martin-made F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which operated as a “workhorse” aircraft attacking targets at short ranges.

The range of F-35 is short !? :shock: What's that joke ! :doh: Please tell me a single engine fighter with F-35 or higher Fuel! :bang:
How many years will it take for that non-existent Fighters to "squadron is complete", "IOC", "100,000 flight hours", and "higher Readiness or MC rates"? :roll: (My Doubt.)
    ____________________________2021______________2030s
    NGAD: _______________________0_________________???
    F-15EX: ______________________2_________________???
    F-15EX's Hypersonic Missile______0_________________???
    F-35A:______________________300(USAF)_________1,000+
Way to counter China.
    1. Invest in non-existent NGAD.
    2. Invest in non-existent hypersonic missile for the F-15EX.
    3. Increase the number of F-35s
In my case, I steadily choose the third. 3. 8) I'm a realist.
Doge Roar! :devil:
Attachments
Doge Roar.jpg
Offline
User avatar

jetblast16

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 893
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2004, 00:12
  • Location: USA

Unread post06 May 2021, 18:52

Invest in non-existent NGAD.


NGAD is not non-existent. According to the Air Force, a prototype has already flown, and evidently, at least once, in formation with an F-35.

Technology (time) waits for no one. By 2025, the F-22 will have been in service for 20 years. The Air Force has start planning for its eventual replacement...
Have F110, Block 70, will travel
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2580
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post07 May 2021, 08:46

One issue that is cropping up is how relevant is the budget for the various forces to a China contingency?

Most of USAF & USN can be regarded as applicable to a China contingency (just the degree of effectiveness between legacy & stealth 5G). However for US Army which is 1/3 the budget, it is clear any brigade is useless unless they are brought into the fight by either USAF or USN. The navy would likely be preoccupied with moving marines first? Airborne/Stryker brigades were originally created precisely for quick re-deployments but actual performance is a multiple of the original deployment times. That's already assuming permissible entry/air landing points, not contested A2AD scenarios. Hence no surprise that army budget is most at risk. If army brigades can't join the fight, still need so many?

https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1606.html

My reason for bringing this up is that there are cross service opportunities for squeezing some budget for the F-35 program (but will face hurdles). For example, the USMC force design 2030 is moving toward Himars (sacrificing a lot of everything else). If Army supplies their existing Himars to the grunts (exchanged for the M777s), the grunts don't have to spend on more himars which would free up some budget to go to the F-35Bs. This esp when the USMC will have the resources (& strategy) to move these to the right places and they can convert to the new force design a lot quicker. The main downside is there's no incentive for the Army to do just that.
Previous

Return to Off-topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests