Friday, August 11, 2017

The Future of Air Power

An oldie, but a goodie:

Vincent J. Curtis                                                                                16 March 2011


US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates gave what he called his last address to the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs as Defense Secretary in March.  Why Canadians should pay attention to his speech is that he described what he believed the USAF of the 21st century must look like, and experience and common sense say that this vision will have impact on the Canadian air force, the equipment it will have to purchase, and the training it will have to undergo.

Gates began the statement of his vision with the premise that air supremacy will continue to be indispensable for the maintenance of American military strength, deterrence, and global reach for decades to come.  That said, the traditional air missions of air-to-air combat and strategic bombing have to make room for new capabilities which unmanned aerial vehicles bring into being.  UVAs provide intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities undreamed of a decade ago, and now such capabilities are so in demand by ground commanders in Afghanistan that it outstrips supply.

Strategic and tactical air lift are, and will remain, essential to future joint operations, according to Gates.

Gates warned against the Air Force sinking back into a complacency he called the “Air Force normal.”  He asserted that stability and security missions, counterterrorism, persistent battlefield ISR, close air support, search and rescue, and transport missions are central to the role of air power for the foreseeable future, even without a repetition of Iraq or Afghanistan.

But Gates does not see anything like Iraq or Afghanistan in the future of the US military.  He does not see large US military formations on the ground in Asia for a very long time.  What he foresees instead are joint missions between the USAF and the US Navy.

Gates foresees the emergence of high end, asymmetric threats, such as long-range precision weapons, anti-ship cruise and ballistic missiles, quieter submarines, advanced air defense missiles such as China, North Korea, and Iran are developing.  He describes these as belonging to an “anti-access, area denial strategy” because these capabilities strike at the unfettered ability of the US to project power anywhere on the globe.  Even now, Gates has Pentagon strategists developing the Air-Sea Battle concept, akin to the Air-Land Battle concept.

To meet these future threats, the US is developing a new optionally-manned, nuclear-capable penetrating bomber, has built the F-22 Raptor, is building the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, is modernizing the F-15, and is developing a new medium range air-to-air missile.  He explained that the reason for developing the F-35 is for its multi-role capability.

How does this vision impact Canada?  The future uses of Canadian air power outside of North America will be as an element of some US-led NATO or coalition force.  If so, where do we stand in respect of these future missions in the face of an anti-access, area denial strategy?

With our new C-17 Globemaster, C-130J Hercules, and our Chinook helicopters, the Canadian air force has some capability in respect of strategic and tactical air lift.  One may quibble about the numbers of aircraft and the volume of lift being inadequate, but with these we have something with which to make a gesture towards our alliances.

We are behind the curve in respect of a fully integrated ISR capability with UAVs, but so is the US, according to Gates.  This is a relatively inexpensive field to enter, and a tactical ISR capability with an American-compatible UAV would make the Canadian air force operationally relevant in an overseas contingency operation.  This field practically cries out for the development of Canadian expertise and capability.

The final area to be addressed is the manned fighter-bomber.  This piece of the puzzle is solved with one of three aircraft: the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the F-22 Raptor, and the F-16 Fighting Falcon, which is still in production.  The F-35 will enable the Canadian air force to participate in most of the manned fighter-bomber missions provided the aircraft is equipped with the necessary electronic suite.  At least some of the F-35s Canada is going to buy need to be equipped with an electronic suite that will enable them to engage in air to ground missions if we are to maximize the value of this acquisition and render our fighters operationally relevant in overseas contingency operations.

If Canada is going to use the F-35 strictly for the air superiority role over North America, we might as well try to buy the F-22 Raptor, which is by far the better aircraft for that purpose.  Granted, it would require an act of congress and more money to buy the F-22, but future air superiority combats over North America may be against Chinese or Russian equivalents to the F-22 and we might as well have the very best aircraft to defend our skies.

One inexpensive option that no one has yet publicly discussed is to buy the F-16, which is now in block 60 of its development.  The F-16 is the most successful of the fourth generation fighters, and it was the one we turned down thirty years ago in favour of the CF-18.  What we need here primarily are new airframes, not necessarily new capabilities, and the F-16C/D has capabilities which will make it operationally relevant for the next twenty to thirty years.  At $20 million a copy the F-16C is less than half the cost of the F-35.  If we were to buy new F-16s to replace our aging CF-18s we would be turning over the highest end of air superiority over North American air space to the USAF; but with the F-22 Raptor the US already has taken that role.  And the Canadian air force would not have to fight with aircraft that are too precious to lose.
                                                            -XXX-


No comments:

Post a Comment