Posted on 09/14/2010 2:19:37 PM PDT by Jet Jaguar
OXON HILL, Md. — The U.S. Air Force’s former top intelligence officer warned a roomful of generals this week that the U.S. has lost its air power advantages and is dangerously ill-prepared to stop the gap-closing efforts of China and Russia.
Lt. Gen. David Deptula, a former F-15 pilot , challenged Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ fundamental belief that U.S. air power vastly overmatches any foreign military.
“For the first time, our claim to air supremacy is in jeopardy,” Deptula told the Air Force Association’s national convention on Monday.
At the same forum last year, Gates defended ordering a halt to the production of the Air Force’s vaunted F-22, saying that by the time China produces a fighter comparable to the F-22, the U.S. will have more than 1,000 F-22s and F-35s.
The Air Force Association has openly opposed Gates’ stance and this year Deptula came armed with a 15-minute bombastic video titled “Threats to 2010 Air Supremacy.” His presentation attempted to reopen more than just the F-22 fight, warning that from surface-to-air defenses to air-to-air fighters, the U.S. was letting others catch up. These future threats, he said, are now current.
There is “a global revolution to modernize air defense systems,” the video’s narrator explained. Russia and China are deploying or building better surface-to-air missile, or SAM, systems that could one day prove too much for U.S. fighter aircraft.
Within the decade, it said, both nations could field fighter jets nearly comparable to the F-22.
“When taken in total, our potential adversaries can create a nearly impenetrable box that our legacy fighters cannot enter, thus denying us our air supremecy,” it said.
After showing the video, Deptula dismissed “the notion of overmatch in the realm of air dominance,” a reference to the Gates position.
It is unclear how much weight Deptula will be able to lend to those in the Air Force, or on Capitol Hill, clamoring to defend air power procurement programs. Gates frequently has said he wants the Pentagon to prioritize building a force and arsenal ready to meet the most current and plausible threats.
So far, Gates has been largly successful, and Deputla’s presentation was riddled with worst-case scenarios.
“The dominance we’ve enjoyed in the aerial domain is no longer ours for the taking,” Deptula said.
Obama is achieving his objectives.
We´re going to get burned here, likely sooner rather than later.
Russia’s fighter development will be sped along since Israel has been forced to partner with Russia and India due to Obama’s refusal to sell the F-22 or allow Israel to have ability to modify or maintain the F-35.
Between Israel, India, and Russia an F-22 killer can easily be developed.
This is looking more and more like a repeat of the 70’s. Here’s to hoping we have another Reagan recovery left in us.
The list, ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
How is it possible to have more than 1000 F-22's when the production of the fighter was halted? Gate's is another example of stupid being in charge.
I’m more worried about our aging nuclear stockpile than the possibly of sharing our airspace to our near future rivals.
Why, when we need them we'll simply cut a purchase order and specify delivery within the month. Nothing could be simpler.
Then we'll have Israel send us a couple, pay us back for the billions in military aid.
Does any have the briefing material mentioned in the article? “Threats to 2010 Air Supremacy”
All I can find is the below YT videos from 2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ej7LxN-1FM&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbsrD5-5FoA&feature=related
In a nutshell, what the future holds for air war is a peculiar combination of three things that hearken back to ancient military theory, and yet are high tech. It helps to think of things in terms of three “echelons” of aircraft activity.
The third echelon, the rear area, is where the airbases are located, as they are now. Bringing supplies in are non-combatant drone transport aircraft. These are also used to deliver supplies in the field to ground forces, once friendly forces have established control of the airspace.
The second echelon has high performance, manned aircraft to act as a second line of defense against any enemy breakthroughs. Also, at high altitude are bombers that can drop precision small diameter bombs that glide into enemy territory.
The first echelon is the most active, yet the most futuristic. A vast armada of inexpensive (<$100,000 each) drone aircraft that use their force of sheer numbers, instead of high technology, to overwhelm the enemy.
They have a frame, engine, fuel tank, literal guide by wire steering, simple wheels, and a small pre-programmed computer brain and GPS. Each has a single weapons system, either an anti-aircraft machine gun, or a 1000lb bomb. They are expendable.
Advanced fighter aircraft can engage up to six targets simultaneously. But if they face two dozen targets, they will lose, even if those targets just have machine guns.
For the price of a single F-22 Raptor, you could produce 1,500 of these $100,000 expendable aircraft.
And this is why they are the first echelon. The only practical way to fight them is with another air armada.
And if two air armadas fight, the few aircraft that can break through the first echelon will meet manned, high performance aircraft, who can easily take them out.
A vast armada of inexpensive drone aircraft that use their force of sheer numbers,...
If anyone’s askin’ me, you smart, Y. I think you’re seeing the future.
Of course, but military leadership, sworn to defend our Constitution, has known since 2008 or before, that Obama was born of a non-citizen father, and eagerly executed his rules of engagement. Just as “Rinos” are being purged from the presumably conservative party, ‘GAGA’ (go along to get along) officers must purged from the officers corp who can't read or won't honor:
“The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”
The citation, from Minor v. Happersett, was referenced by Justice Gray in Wong Kim Ark, as the court's definition of natural born citizenship.
Obama’s orders, as commander in chief, have no Constitutional authority, and our military officers, for failing to validate Obama’s authority, are committing treason.
You might want to check your math and return on investment.
Let's say they send half (750) after a carrier group, which is composed of one carrier, one cruiser, two destroyers, and a frigate. The carrier launches all of its fighters (48) and they go after the incoming strike force. Even if they are not forced to expend weapons against Chinese fighters, these American aircraft will be able to down, at most, 300 Chinese fighter-bombers.
Then the SAM's come into play. The cruiser is armed with 156 SAM's and the destroyers have 96 each, so if they achieve an 80% kill rate (which is high, but they will be going up against elderly EW systems), they have killed another 278 aircraft.
Now, the remaining 172 fighter-bombers will be engaged by the holdout SAM's on the carrier and frigate, which might account for 30 aircraft, while the CIWS on the ships might be able to get another 30 before they run out of ammo or are destroyed.
This leaves 112+ fighter-bombers to sweep over the task force and unleash their weaponry. Yes, the Chinese force has suffered heavy (85%) losses, but this is a worst-case scenario for them. Most likely they will have fighters and jamming aircraft accompanying the strike, so their losses will be much lower than this.
The most important weapon for air superiority is a companion UAV corps for our fighters and bombers.
UAVs do not have the limitations on maneuverability that pilotted craft do.
Fighters and bombers (well, the B52 is already designed to do anything) designed to use and to counter UAVs should be coming off our drawing boards now.
A long range bomber dropping off its own robot fighter escort is a pretty cool idea.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.