The U.S. Military's 'Top Guns' in the Air Have a Big Weakness

The National Interest ^ | October 13, 2015 | Dave Majumdar

[2ndDivisionVet]

In the 25 years since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Pentagon has more or less taken air superiority for granted; but that complacency is coming back to haunt the Department of Defense.

Neither Donald Rumsfeld nor Robert Gates took air power seriously, and as such, the U.S. Air Force is left with a tiny fleet of 186 Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptors instead of the minimum 381 it needs. If that wasn’t bad enough, those F-22s have not received the upgrades that would keep them at the top of their game. The Raptor doesn’t even have a helmet-mounted cueing system or the latest AIM-9X version of the Sidewinder missile integrated onboard yet. Perhaps more troubling is that while the Air Force is working on integrating the AIM-120D AMRAAM onboard the jet, even this newest version of the venerable active radar-guided air-to-air missile is already being challenged by enemy digital radio frequency memory (DRFM) jammers and will soon be outranged by new Russian and Chinese weapons.

In recent weeks, the Air Force has come out publicly about the need to develop a new long-range air-to-air missile. Service officials have been privately complaining about the problem for the last several years. The reason for that is China’s new PL-15 long-range air-to-air missile—which if the artist’s impressions are accurate—bears more than a passing resemblance to the European ramjet-powered MBDA Meteor missile. A ramjet-powered missile would have longer-range than a purely rocket-powered weapon and it would have exponentially better terminal phase performance. Indeed, the Chinese reportedly test fired the first PL-15 test article last month on Sept. 15. Meanwhile, Russia, too, has its own ultra long-range air-to-air missile named the K-37M—and possibly another weapon called the izdeliye 810—in development.

Air Combat Command commander Gen. Hawk Carlisle is well aware of the problem—he told reporters as such at the Air Force Association convention in National Habour, Md., last month. A new weapon that can outrange the PL-15 and operate in a DRFM jamming environment is an “exceedingly high priority” for the Air Force, he told reporters. “The PL-15 and the range of that missile, we’ve got to be able to out-stick that missile,” Carlisle said—as quoted by Flightglobal.

The problem is even more acute for the U.S. Navy, whose aircraft are not nearly as spritely as the Air Force’s F-15C Eagle—let alone the high-flying, supersonically cruising Raptor. “Carrier fighters need a long-range air-to-air missile (LRAAM), preferably with a hybrid seeker. The United States AIM-120C/D missiles are either comparable to or outranged by Chinese and Russian multi-seeker missiles, placing U.S. fighters at a disadvantage,” states a new Hudson Institute report titled Sharpening the Spear: The Carrier, the Joint Force, and High-End Conflict, which is written by The National Interest contributors Seth Cropsey, Bryan McGrath and Timothy A. Walton. “This disadvantage is compounded by the aerodynamic inferiority of U.S. carrier aircraft compared to the best Chinese and Russian fighters, which grants enemy missiles a longer lofted range.”

Indeed, for the Navy, a new missile is critical, as the authors of the report note. “Overall, a situation exists in which enemy fighters are likely to have a qualitative advantage over many U.S. naval fighter aircraft,” the Hudson Institute report reads. “An LRAAM would work to offset that situation for both U.S. existing and projected fighter aircraft. Similarly, the introduction of aerial search Infra-Red Search and Tracking systems to F-18 aircraft could improve their performance by reducing their reliance on active sensor operation.”

The Navy and the Air Force are starting to equip the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and F-15 Eagle with infrared search and track systems because DRFM jammers wreak havoc on even active electronically scanned array (AESA) radars. The best option to counter DRFM jammers is to get out of using X-band radar—or to even ditch the radar in favor of infrared. “Getting out of X band is one option,” said one senior Air Force official. “Our fourth-gen AESAs aren't a big advantage. They're more to get us back in the game against jamming.”

While a new U.S. air-to-air missile may or may not have ramjet propulsion, it is a likely candidate, an Air Force official told me. The Pentagon is also likely to develop such a weapon with multiple sensor types onboard. Previous abortive efforts to develop a new missile included several sensor types to counter the jamming problem. As such, a new missile effort will likely feature some sort of combination of AESA radar and infrared guidance. But whatever the Pentagon decides to do, it needs to hurry up and do it—time is running out.

Failure to equip a new aircraft with an appropriate weapon system has always been a uniquely American blind-spot. For example, when the McDonnell Douglas F-15A Eagle became operational in 1976, it used the same armament as its F-4 Phantom II predecessor. It wasn’t until the introduction of the AMRAAM in 1991—twenty-five years ago—that the Air Force gave the Eagle a weapon that could take full advantage of the jet’s capability. Likewise, the F-22 Raptor is by far the best air-to-air fighter America has ever built—but it too is being short-changed by inadequate weapons. It’s time to fix that.

[Darteaus94025]

The US armed forces need to focus on Muslim outreach, cultural diversity, limiting Christianity and integration of women into combat roles.

Only then will US influence be sufficiently degraded for the haters of the West (Obama, Jarrett, China, Iran, Putin, etc.) to be able to forcefully exert their power on the world stage.

[dp0622]

so what’s the verdict?

Could we whip Russia or China right now or no?

[MarchonDC09122009]

That was Obola’s promise to fundamentally transform this nation.
All is going according to plan.
I really feel sorry everyone in our military - their commander in chief has mortally demoralized our forces.

“Only then will US influence be sufficiently degraded for the haters of the West (Obama, Jarrett, China, Iran, Putin, etc.) to be able to forcefully exert their power on the world stage.”

[43north]

“The US armed forces need to focus on Muslim outreach, cultural diversity, limiting Christianity and integration of women into combat roles.”

How could you forget the GREATEST threat humankind has EVER faced - climate change?

[Fraxinus]

Failure to equip a new aircraft with an appropriate weapon system has always been a uniquely American blind-spot.

While I think the author has a point I think he protests too much with this line. It is good to have weapons development and air frame development to be done by completely separate teams, and for a new weapon to be dependent and a new air frame. At the same time the British waited untill well into WWII to up gun their planes from .30 to .50 machineguns. The US was arming all new aircraft with Ma Deuce from ~1936 untill well after it was shown to be inadequate ~1950. The Brits were using 20MM machine guns in some Spitfires before the end of WWII

[Roger Kaputnik]

“The US armed forces need to focus on Muslim outreach...”

I thought that was NASA’s responsibility. /s

[USNBandit]

One of the downsides to internal weapons bays is that the weapons have to fit. The military restricted itself to weapons that would fit in stealth aircraft.

[dp0622]

is the raptor not stealth?

[pfflier]

Yes. But, Americans are getting used to "bloodless" precision warfare and total air superority from the get go.

Any conflict with Russia or China would involve casualties that make 6K dead in Iraq and Afghanistan over 12 years pale in comparison. We would be looking at casualty numbers like that in hours, maybe days, not years of conflict.

The Chinese are way behind in several critical areas one being numbers of 5th gen airplanes. They are learning as a nation, about independent R&D and high rate production. They and the Russians are flying and testing prototypes of challenge airplanes. Typically they would be years from full scale production yet.

Russia is over rated in almost every area, a scenario reminiscent of the bomber and missile gaps of the cold war. Russian hardware is crap, their air to air fighting doctrine is crap. They would have an apparent short success but that would be because they would start with the initiative.

The whole premis that the DoD is the cause behind the air superority power curve is also a myth. The dim congress of the 90's and millenium killed F-22 production limiting the USAF to 187 jets when we should have close to 500. If we had that many F-22s right now, the F-35 program would have had an entirely different complexion.

[USNBandit]

It is, but it's really about a mindset. The United States has generally had a huge radar, aircraft, and weapon advantage for the last 50 years. Giving up the advantage in "stick length" makes everybody uncomfortable. The other fear is the development of DRFM jammers. People are scared they will show up for the next air war and none of the weapons will work.

As a platform the F-22 is vastly superior to all of its competitors in the air to air arena. That doesn't mean the Air Force won't try whining for additional funds to make it better. That's the Air Force way.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Gotta have more money for Obamaphones.

[pfflier]

The British Germans and Japanese all used armament involving rifle caliber (~.30 cal) ammunition. The Germans and Japanese supplemented that with 20mm cannon but in relatively small numbers (one or two per plane) using them for close range shots. As you said, the British up gunned to the 20mm late in the war.

Without a doubt, the Germans were best at using their cannon caliber weapons to devastate 8th AF bombers and the Russians through 1943 and into 1944.

The .50 cal had better ballistics and higher rates of fire than the 20mm used in WWII. For the US it also meant all airplanes used the same ammunition, easier to deal with logistically.

Even post WWII the 20mm was a marginal performer because of operational problems causing jamming at altitude and under G loads. The first really effective US 20mm was the M-61 (Vulcan) multi barreled cannon fielded on the F-104 to present. The navy used single barrel cannon through the F-8 and only used the M-61 starting with the F-14.

[Southack]

These sorts of crap articles get pushed every time some hawk wants a budget increase.

You can always tell the fake ones from genuine because the fake articles for $$ always...always offer bi-partisan criticism so as to not “offend” any 1 group of Congressional votes.

[blueunicorn6]

It’s a good thing the Democrats used that Peace Dividend from the 90s to fix all our problems.

You know, problems like Democrats without Hawaiian condos.

[SkyPilot]

During WW II, we could design, manufacture, and field weapons with alarming speed.

For example, the P-51 went from drawing on a napkin to a flying prototype in 102 days.

This cannot occur today. It take years, sometimes decades, to field weapons systems.

Wars are "come as you are."

If war breaks out with Russia, China, or Iran, we are more than screwed. Years of deep budget cuts, with Sequestration on top of those cuts, have made our military readiness a disaster waiting to happen.

Add morale killing policies and using the military as a Marxist social experiment, and the next conflict will become a bloody mess in very short order.

Nothing is being done to correct the problem - we are in 5th gear at 90 mph and heading straight for the brick wall.

[SkyPilot]

Americans are getting used to "bloodless" precision warfare and total air superority from the get go. Any conflict with Russia or China would involve casualties that make 6K dead in Iraq and Afghanistan over 12 years pale in comparison. We would be looking at casualty numbers like that in hours, maybe days, not years of conflict.

I was at an Army base recently. Within 5 minutes, I saw a half dozen grossly overweight women in uniform, with 2 wearing sneakers with their ACU.

If a real shooting war pops up, I don't know if we could mobilize.

[PapaBear3625]

The Chinese are way behind in several critical areas one being numbers of 5th gen airplanes. They are learning as a nation, about independent R&D and high rate production. They and the Russians are flying and testing prototypes of challenge airplanes. Typically they would be years from full scale production yet.

The advantage of being the aggressor is that you get to pick when the fight starts.

This means that you can focus on your economy until it's good enough to produce the weapons you need to win.

[pfflier]

Well now, thats a whole ‘nother bag of worms. Are we “fit to fight” any war that doesn’t involve RPVs?

[zzwhale]

yes they do.......
THE traitor in the WHITE HOUSE
and the ex secretary of state and the current one...