Trouble for the USAF from its own politicians




The extremely unfortunate week was for the US Air Force, writes well-known military expert Lauren Thomson, Ph.D. at the USA Lexington Institute, DefPro reports. First of all, the “black” past week for the US Air Force made the senior members of the Senate Commission for the Armed Forces of the state write angry letters to the Pentagon criticizing the current programs designed to completely replace obsolete aircraft in the US Navy.

In one of the letters signed by Karl Levin, chairman of the commission, and John McCain, the oldest member of the Senate commission from the minority party, politicians expressed frank dissatisfaction with the increase in financial costs of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program, officially launched in 1996, and they demanded to make final calculations in order to stop work on the program in case of unreasonable high cost of aircraft.

F-35 Lightning II is a 5-generation subtle, promising fighter-bomber created by the American company Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company and presented in three versions: for the US Air Force - ground-based fighter - CTOL, for the American Marine Corps - fighter with vertical landing and short take-off - STOVL, for the Royal fleet Britain and the United States Navy - carrier based fighter - CV.

According to most experts, the aircraft does not meet the large number of requirements for the 5 generation fighter and is nothing more than the 4 + generation fighter due to the lack of ability to fly at supersonic speed without the use of an afterburner, relatively high ESR, low thrust ratio, and low survivability and lack of necessary maneuverability. To develop this aircraft for April 2011, more than $ 56 billion has already been spent.

In another letter, which John McCain himself wrote, the politician warns the US Congress not to allow increasing costs, which will later lead to cost overruns under the current KC-46 program, aimed at creating a completely new generation tanker aircraft. These letters extremely outraged Loren Thomson as an expert.

The KC-46 tanker aircraft, he points out, was to replace the existing thousands of planes of a similar type that had been created under President Eisenhower and which are the basis of the modern fleet of aircraft of the US Air Force, according to plans by the US Air Force.

The KC-46 was developed on the basis of the current tanker KC-767, a classic machine of its class, which was created, in turn, on the basis of the version of the 767-200 aircraft. Two economical GE CF6-80C2 turbofan engines allow an aircraft to bring its normal cruising speed (851 km / h) to the highest (915 km / h).

Without adopting new fighter aircraft, the US Air Force gradually risks completely losing the ability to operate effectively in the airspace of a potential enemy. The expert also recalled that the US Air Force began to buy new F-22 fighter jets, but this program was stopped, hardly satisfying even half the needs of the US military. So today, the F-35 program is obliged to bear the brunt of providing the US air force with modern fighters, while there is still time, the author of the article warns about the angry letters of politicians.

It would be difficult to even imagine what would happen if they decide to stop funding two currently important programs to update the US Air Force fleet, it is not clear that the article would be reasonable. The F-35 fighter will need at least a dozen years to reach its current state and many more years to be accepted as a combat unit and eventually it became active on the real battlefield.

Start all over again? This will be the collapse of all the ideas of the United States to have superiority in the airspace over such rapidly developing countries as, for example, China. It is not even about losing the billions of dollars already spent.

Such a regression in the modernization of the US Air Force is just the last episode in the endless saga of the struggle to improve the US flight service, left alone with the outdated technology of the Cold War years. Most aspirations to acquire a modern aircraft for the US Air Force end in failure. Because of this, America is losing its former air superiority. Russia and China are not standing still and are constantly working to improve their aircraft. The United States is simply obliged to continue replacing outdated aircraft with modern ones, before it’s too late, as the result in its article indicates Loren Thomson.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

14 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. cVM
    cVM 26 July 2011 11: 18 New
    • -5
    • 0
    -5
    why they are afraid in Russia 2 thousand Soviet-made destroyers with a maximum of 350 newest units and in the USA all new and modern destroyers the number of which reaches 20 thousand 10 times more than in Russia, China has 4 thousand units of its own and conscience production
    1. PIRAT
      PIRAT 26 July 2011 21: 32 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      They may exceed the number of aircraft, but they are definitely not modern. As far as I know, they did not fulfill the F-22 procurement plan and there were some problems with the F-35, for example, they didn’t bomb Libya on modern ones ...
  2. Romich_S1
    Romich_S1 26 July 2011 18: 00 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    cVM! According to Wikipedia, in 2010 the United States had 2158 fighters and 390 attack aircraft at the Air Force and 731 aircraft at the Navy. Where does the number 20 thousand come from? After the victory in the Cold War and against the background of a total reduction in our armed forces, the United States also began to gradually reduce its forces. In addition, the purchase of new aircraft and the modernization of old ones in the United States was almost never carried out. Congress wanted to reduce the already inflated military budget, hoping just on the F-35. This aircraft was scheduled to be delivered as early as 2006 and, taking into account the cost, the F-35s wanted to buy 3200 units for 350 F-22s. But it turned out that F-22 purchased 2 times less, and about 35 already want to buy F-1500 ... So the United States has no quantitative or qualitative advantage over us, and if default breaks out .....
    1. Esso 26 July 2011 19: 05 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Dear, the exact number of military equipment is top secret information. You can’t believe the word Wikipedia in any way. Few people know the exact number of combat equipment. We have so many equipment in the secret warehouses, we don’t know what to do. The exact number is unknown. Do not carry nonsense.
      1. Romich_S1
        Romich_S1 27 July 2011 09: 56 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        I read a fairly large number of articles about aviation in Russia and the United States, written by military journalists, analysts and historians, and I have never seen any of them doubt the information about the number of aircraft in these countries. No one said that the number may not be accurate, or it is not known exactly. Moreover, the number of models, modifications and aircraft age is always called. Storage aircraft do exist, but as I understand it, the secret is the place of their deployment and not the quantity.
        1. Esso 27 July 2011 10: 19 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          The number is also a secret, journalists write their articles according to data that are not always verified, I also read many articles, but I believe more in familiar military men who say that the number of military equipment is not combat-ready, this information is STATE SECRET. They themselves do not know what, where and how it lies. The United States can merge misinformation simply to mislead a potential adversary.
  3. cVM
    cVM 26 July 2011 19: 05 New
    • -6
    • 0
    -6
    do you think the default will be? Yes, if there will be a default, it’s not the current in the USA, but the whole world will turn up, the USA is the greatest economy. I had in mind 20 thousand not only transport attack helicopters, UAVs, etc. Aviation in a word, the Russian Federation before 1991 had 4 thousand aviation at the moment 2,700 is not more. and by the quality of the USA in 1 place, their destroyers cannot even be compared with ours. Well, think about yourself where the F-22 is to the MiG-35)). The United States also has bombers such as the B-2 Spilit, which costs more than 3 billion per unit, while Russia does not have a bomber, only Soviet Tu-160s and that’s all, I think the defense min should order and start exploring new programs to create a bomber
    1. Romich_S1
      Romich_S1 27 July 2011 10: 12 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      At the beginning of this century, I also extolled US technology, considering it the best, but eventually changed my mind. After the famous incident of flying Tu-160 near Britain, I consider it the best in the world. About 3 years ago 2 “white swans” flew up unnoticed to the territory of Great Britain and the interceptor planes were raised by alarm when our planes were already leaving home. For a week, British media and warriors stood on their ears.
    2. Snake831 30 November 2011 16: 40 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Boy! Where did you get out from? Get back in please! Your F-22 is a complete shit! TTX look! Their entire Air Force is designed for a knowingly weak enemy! What can be envied is the traction of the Lizard engines! But that's all! The rest is better with us! Who bothered you to compare “Spirit” with the Tu-160? Your “Spirit” is the same advertising cheap as the “Lizard”! The Tu-160 will still give 100 points ahead and will remain the fastest, inconspicuous for a long time and a powerful "strategist" in the world! If there are no brains, then better sit and shut up! B_A_R_A_N! Learn to write!
    3. svvaulsh
      svvaulsh 30 November 2011 16: 56 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: cVM
      bombers such as B-2 Spilit


      Explain who "cut"? It looks like you studied at an American school, at least there you studied Russian!
  4. APASUS 26 July 2011 19: 19 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    As I understand it, the corporations grabbed the palm - cutting the official grandmothers. I remember about 25 years ago, members of the Senate commission on the affairs of the armed forces already considered the case of installing a toilet! The Boeing company installed a toilet in the civilian version of the Boeing 777 for just $ 128 but installing a toilet in a Boeing 777 for the Pentagon cost the military department as much as $ 800.
  5. datur 26 July 2011 19: 35 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    an ax for the price of an airplane is normal practice.
  6. spirit 26 July 2011 20: 57 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Yes, with F22 they were fucking crazy. Replacing the entire fleet with such expensive planes is unrealistic. We wanted a super plane, So we got a super plane with a super price.
    1. APASUS 26 July 2011 21: 08 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      spirit
      They laughed at a price, the aircraft is still damp !!! F-22 has a number of unresolved problems, but the money to solve these problems was cut off in the Senate.