The US military will lose air superiority by 2030 unless a host of new capabilities and sweeping changes to acquisition processes can be adopted and fielded within the next 14 years, including a new penetrating counter-air system, the US Air Force says in a newly-released strategy document.

The unclassified version of the “Air Superiority Flight Plan 2030” includes a harsh assessment of the USAF’s growing limitations against an array of future airpower threats. The USAF document does not name particular adversaries, but includes a picture of the Chinese AVIC J-20 stealth fighter to illustrate concerns about growing capabilities of potential adversaries.

With the Lockheed Martin F-35A, Northrop Grumman B-21 and Boeing KC-46 still in development, the Flight Plan also includes a damning critique of the US military’s acquisition system, calling for the service to reject pushing the limits of technology within a platform-based acquisition programme. Such platforms are put “at risk of cancellation due to their nearly inevitable under-performance and results in delivery of capabilities ‘late to need’ by years or even decades”, the Flight Plan says.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-calls-for-a-penetrating-counterair-study-in-2-425940/

Not an endorsement of F-35 type of programs, is it…. Also, it is surprising that they expect to lose air superiority post 2030 after investing so much in the F-22 and F-35, two of the most expensive R&D programs ever run on this planet, and the latter not even completed yet.

Out-of-date 10-15 years after it’s completed…?

Those are NATO-countries which do not need large armed forces. Or so the thinking goes.

Well Sweden is actually not a NATO country… anyway, let’s wait and see.

The only thing I have heard from Saab is that they are expecting a 40+ requirement in Finland. As I said most communication about the program from Finnish officials, from the last year, seems to indicate that there is a will to keep the current number of fighters.

Yes, but if you look at other European countries that are in the process of buying new fighter jets, then (with the notable exception of oil-rich Norway) the numbers tend to end at the very low end; this includes the Netherlands, Denmark, and Sweden. Even 60 Gripen would be too expensive for Finland. The numbers will come down. Or they have to sacrifice something else (but what? The army? the navy?)

Emerging integrated and networked air-to-air, surface-to-air, space and cyberspace threats, as
well as aging and shrinking fleets of US weapon systems, threaten the Air Force’s ability to
provide air superiority at the times and places required in the highly contested operational
environments of 2030 and beyond.

Threat capabilities are likely to advance along two major vectors over the next 15
years. First, traditional threat systems will continue to evolve and proliferate. Along this
threat vector are advanced fighter aircraft, sensors, and weapons. While near-peers have most
of these capabilities today, advanced air and surface threats are spreading to other countries
around the world. Air superiority forces will face growing numbers of these threats across a
wide range of locations and scenarios in 2030.

The second threat vector is a series of comprehensive capabilities with a less predictable
impact on warfare. These include increased threat capabilities to negate our advantages in
the space domain, increased quantity and sophistication of cyberspace threats, and air threats
including hypersonic weapons, low observable cruise missiles, and sophisticated conventional
ballistic missile systems. How, when and where these capabilities emerge is less clear, but it is
certain air superiority forces will face many of these threats by 2030.

The Air Force’s projected force structure in 2030 is not capable of fighting and winning
against this array of potential adversary capabilities. Developing and delivering air superiority
for the highly contested environment in 2030 requires a multi-domain focus on capabilities and
capacity. Importantly, the rapidly changing operational environment means the Air Force can
no longer afford to develop weapon systems on the linear acquisition and development timelines
using traditional approaches. Air superiority capability development requires adaptable,
affordable and agile processes with increasing collaboration between science & technology
(S&T), acquisition, requirements and industry professionals. Failure to adopt agile acquisition
approaches is not an option. The traditional approach guarantees adversary cycles will outpace
U.S. development, resulting in “late-to-need” delivery of critical warfighting capabilities and
technologically superior adversary forces.

http://www.af.mil/Portals/1/documents/airpower/Air%20Superiority%202030%20Flight%20Plan.pdf

I am a bit surprised by this — 2030 is not so far away, and the F-35 (supported by F-22) will not be good enough?

Or would something I said a few years ago actually turn out to be somewhat near the truth?

I suggested a few years ago that by the time of launch of the F-35 it would be “overkill” for almost all (if not all) scenarios, due to it’s stealth, superior sensors and sensor fusion; however at the same time there is a risk that it would be out-dated sooner than expected due to the prolonged development timelines.

I recall seeing an LM ad for a 6 gen fighter, it showed a broadband all-aspect stealthy 6. gen fighter with a text along the lines of “this is what you need to survive after 2030*” — by which time a large number of F-35 remains to be produced! I am kicking myself for not taking a screendump because that ad has since been removed.

*not exact quote.

Boeing should study this list of questions carefully — perhaps it can “inspire” them to ask further questions.

I have not been impressed by how Boeing has handled this — but then again, the evaluation is so damning that they probably realize they would be wasting their time poking holes in the process. Which also begs the question why the Germans are pushing this?

Eurofighter is asking questions to the Danish eval committee.

http://nytkampfly.dk/archives/8726

They are asking some very interesting questions — not that any decisions will be changed of course…

jwcook where are you!? 🙂