The "F" stands for "Fighter"

Over at The Heritage Foundation, frequent Midrats guest Mackenzie Eaglen along with Lajos F. Szaszdi, PhD have a very timely and well done report out, What Russia’s Stealth Fighter Developments Mean for America.

Remember, it isn't so much the Russians you need to worry about - it is those who buy or license build their technology.

In the backgrounder, they raise some critical points that need to be remembered for this simple reason; our forces rely on air supremacy as an enabler for everything we do.

It has been almost 40 years since we have faced a legitimate opponent in the air - and over 65 years since our ground forces faced any real threat from the air. That didn't happen by accident. If we get complacent, we will get in trouble.

You aren't born with a right to supremacy - you have to earn it, keep it, and maintain it.

Here are the talking points from the backgrounder.

• Russia recently unveiled its PAK FA stealth fighter, which may prove superior to all fighters except the U.S. F-22.
• Russia will develop the PAK FA in partnership with India and could sell it to China, Libya, Venezuela, Algeria, Syria, and Iran, which would be destabilizing and have unintended consequences.
• With the closure of the F-22 production line underway, the U.S. has effectively lost its ability to hedge against PAK FA proliferation.
• Delays and other problems plaguing the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program are worrisome because the F-35 may be less effective as a force multiplier for the F-22 if it is built in insufficient numbers.
• American air supremacy is no longer as assured as the U.S. Department of Defense once predicted.
• To preserve a favorable balance of power in the skies, the U.S. will need to increase investment
in modernization and explore new partnerships with its allies, such as Japan and Israel.

The abstract:

Russia’s development of the PAK FA fifth generation stealth fighter could challenge American air supremacy, especially if Russia sells the PAK FA to its usual buyers of military equipment. In the U.S., closure of the F-22 production line has severely limited America’s ability to respond to PAK FA proliferation by building more F-22s and potentially selling them to U.S. allies. The U.S. needs to revise its assessment of U.S. air superiority needs and then explore ways to modernize and strengthen the U.S. tactical fighter force.

As with most discussions of air superiority, there is a focus on the F-22 and then a discussion of the F-35.

The F-35 is a strike fighter - it is not like the F-22, an air superiority fighter. Kind of like the difference between a P-47 and a P-51, though the comparison is inexact.

Enough of the ground centric discussion, maybe we should be thinking more along the lines of the F-4/F-8 vs. the A-4/A-7 and the Navy. Not so much the F-14A/B vs. A-6, they were too pure in their roles No, from a historical perspective, right now we have a deck full of A-4/A-7, and no F-4.

Can you go against a MiG-21 with a A-4 or A-7? Sure. Do you want to? No.

When the 21st Century hostile fighter heads towards our Fleet, why do we assume that we will always have the F-22 out there to protect it? When you go to intercept and then go into the merge - does the F-18 and/or the F-35 have what it takes? Are they really a viable Fleet Air Defense Fighter?

Has the time returned to start thinking that way again - just when we can't afford it?

Another thing - I love me some BVR ... but in a day where you have to positively ID everything most of the time - do we not put ourselves at risk if we lean too much on BVR? What happens if the fight doesn't happen until after the merge?

I think Navy Air knows this. Take a peek at the following - specifically read the intro and then skip to the meaty parts of para 5. Yes, I know there are about 6 posts in this message alone - but let's try to focus.

POST WIKILEAKS NOTE: This is an UNCLAS message. This is open source and is being emailed all over the place, as have other POM messages through the years - and other such items related to priority lists. As I get these "take this post down" emails everytime I post an UNCLAS message - once again, this is not classified, it isn't even FOUO. As if I need to say this; I would never publish anything classified.

R 230330Z NOV 10
FM COMNAVAIRFOR SAN DIEGO CA//N00//
{multiple addressees removed for post}

BT
UNCLAS //N00000//
SECTION 01 OF 03
SECINFO/-/-//
MSGID/GENADMIN,USMTF,2008/COMNAVAIRFOR SAN DIEGO CA//
SUBJ/AVIATION TYCOM PRIORITY LIST (TPL) FOR POM-13//
REF/A/MSGID:MSG/COMNAVAIRFOR/250130ZNOV2009//
REF/B/MSGID:MSG/COMNAVAIRFOR/250330ZFEB2010//
NARR/REFS A AND B ARE CNAF TYCOM PRIORITY LISTS (TPL) FOR POM-12//
GENTEXT/REMARKS/1. THIS TPL IDENTIFIES CNAF'S POM-13 PRIORITIES TO OPNAV RESOURCE SPONSORS AND NAVAL AVIATION STAKEHOLDERS. THERE MAY BE REFINEMENT OF THIS INPUT AS WE EXECUTE FLEET FORCES COMMAND'S READINESS AND WARFIGHTING CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS GENERATION PROCESS PRODUCING FORMAL PROGRAM ENHANCEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS TO OPNAV.
2. THIS MESSAGE SEEKS TO HIGHLIGHT THE MOST IMPORTANT PROGRAMS AS THEY RELATE TO OPNAV N88 AND N2N6. OPNAV N4 SPONSORED READINESS PROGRAMS ARE IN DEVELOPMENT AND WILL BE THE SUBJECT OF A LATER N4 READINESS/INFRASTRUCTURE SPECIFIC TPL.
3. THIS TPL REPRESENTS CNAF'S KEY ISSUES FOR POM-13 AND IS ENDORSED BY NAVAIR, CNAFR AND CNATRA. CNAF'S OVERARCHING
PRIORITIES HAVE REMAINED CONSISTENT FROM POM-04 TO THE POM-13 BUDGET CYCLE:
1. SUSTAIN THE FORCE TO GET TO THE RECAP VISION.
2. RECAPITALIZE TO FIELD THE FUTURE FORCE.
3. MODERNIZE TO PACE THE THREAT.
4. POM-13 PORTENDS TO BE A FISCALLY AUSTERE BUDGET CYCLE. AS SUCH, ALL PROPOSED INVESTMENTS SHOULD BE CAREFULLY SCRUTINIZED AND MUST PRODUCE THE REQUIRED CAPABILITY IMPROVEMENTS TO ELIMINATE GAPS OR PLATFORM WHOLENESS ENHANCEMENTS TO ENSURE THE RIGHT READINESS AT THE RIGHT TIME AND COST. IN ADDITION TO THE PRIORITIZED ITEMS LISTED IN PARA 5, ISSUES RELATING TO THE FOLLOWING KEY AREAS MUST ALSO BE ADDRESSED IN POM-13:
...
5. SUB-PARAS A AND B TOPICS ARE SEPARATED BY RESOURCE SPONSOR, PRIORITIZED, AND ARE ALL CONSIDERED MUST FUND. FUNDING VALUES ARE BASED ON BEST KNOWN DATA AS OF 01 NOV 10.
A. N88 ISSUES
(1) MISSION PLANNING. JMPS IS THE NUMBER ONE N88 AND N2N6 FLEET PRIORITY FOR POM-13. JMPS IS A CRITICAL ENABLER REQUIRED FOR PLATFORMS TO FULLY UTILIZE THEIR AVIONICS/WEAPONS SYSTEMS AND EMPLOY WEAPONS. N88 FUNDING IS NEEDED TO UPDATE THE F/A-18 AND EA-18G UNIQUE MISSION PLANNING COMPONENTS (UPC) IN ORDER TO OPERATE IN THE NEW WINDOWS 7 MISSION PLANNING ENVIRONMENT (MPE) SCHEDULED FOR A 2014 MIGRATION. WITHOUT FUNDING, THE F/A-18 AND EA-18G WILL NOT BE FULLY MISSION CAPABLE AND THEREFORE UNABLE TO SUPPORT KEY MCO MISSION REQUIREMENTS. (FY13 $17.0M FYDP $31.1M)
...
(3) AIM-120 IMPROVEMENTS (KINEMATICS, EPIP). ANALYSIS REVEALS SIGNIFICANT USN STRIKE FIGHTER CAPABILITY GAPS AGAINST THREAT REPRESENTATIVE AIRCRAFT EMPLOYING ENHANCED A/A MISSILES. ... WITHOUT FUNDING, ADVERSARY A/A CAPABILITIES WILL CONTINUE TO EXCEED THAT OF DON TACAIR.
(KINEMATICS FY13 $42.7M, FYDP $214.0M), (EPIP FY13 $13.6, FYDP $44.3M)
(4) AIM-9X BLOCK 2 INTEGRATION. BLOCK 2 UPGRADE, WHEN FULLY DEVELOPED, WILL PROVIDE EXCEPTIONAL CAPABILITY AGAINST EVER-IMPROVING THREAT AIRCRAFT CAPABILITIES. ...
...
(11) C-40A ACCELERATED PROCUREMENT. TWO YEAR ACCELERATION OF C-40A WOULD COMPLETE THE 17 AIRCRAFT REQUIREMENT AND ALLOW FOR A $377M LIFE-CYCLE COST SAVINGS THROUGH EARLY C-9 DIVESTMENT. WITHOUT ACCELERATED PROCUREMENT, POTENTIAL SAVINGS FROM THE C-9 DIVESTITURE WILL BE WILL BE LOST. (FY13 $237.0M, FYDP $-11.0M).
...
(17) COD RECAPITALIZATION. CURRENT C-2A AIRCRAFT ARE PROJECTED TO BEGIN RETIRING IN LARGE NUMBERS AS THEY REACH THEIR FATIGUE SERVICE LIFE LIMITS AS EARLY AS 2019. IN ORDER TO ENABLE A POM-14 NAVY DECISION FOR C-2A CAPABILITY RECAPITALIZATION STRATEGY, POM-13 FUNDING IS REQUIRED TO FUND FATIGUE LIFE ASSESSMENTS AND COMPLETE A REPLACEMENT CDD AS WELL AS OTHER PRE-MATERIAL SOLUTION PHASE EFFORTS. IF NO POM-13 FUNDING IS PROVIDED, THE LOGISTICS SUPPORT OF CVN/CSGS IN THE FUTURE WILL BE IN JEOPARDY. (FY13 $3.5M, FYDP $10.5M)
...
6. POM-13 WILL BE A RESOURCE CONSTRAINED BUDGET CYCLE, SO EACH ISSUE BEING CONTEMPLATED FOR FUNDING MUST BE CONSIDERED CRITICAL TO NAVAL AVIATION AND MUST MAXIMIZE THE CONTRIBUTION TO READINESS OR WARFIGHTING CAPABILITY. ALL OF THE ABOVE ISSUES MEET THESE CRITERIA AND THEREFORE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN PENDING DELIBERATIONS AS THE HIGHEST PRIORITY FOR NAVAL AIR FORCES.//
BT

Lex is pondering as well.