13 septembre 2018 | International, Aérospatial

Air Force not considering new F-15 or hybrid F-22/F-35, top civilian says

By:

WASHINGTON — The two biggest manufacturers of military aircraft have been busy marketing new versions of their fighter jets to the U.S. Air Force, but the service's top official told Defense News in an exclusive interview that it's not actually interested in purchasing either of them at the current moment.

This summer, Defense One broke two major stories about sales pitches from Boeing, which is proposing an advanced version of the F-15 to the Air Force, and Lockheed Martin, which has been pushing a hybrid version of the F-22 Raptor and F-35 joint strike fighter similar to what it is reportedly offering Japan.

But just because those companies are offering new jets, doesn't mean that the Air Force wants them.

In an exclusive Sept. 5 interview, Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson said she believes the service needs to expend its precious financial resources on stealthy, fifth-generation platforms — specifically the F-35 — and thus buying even an advanced fourth generation fighter like the so-called F-15X is not in the cards.

"We are currently 80 percent fourth-gen aircraft and 20 percent fifth generation aircraft,” she said. "In any of the fights that we have been asked to plan for, more fifth gen aircraft make a huge difference, and we think that getting to 50-50 means not buying new fourth gen aircraft, it means continuing to increase the fifth generation.”

What about a new fifth generation plane that would combine the F-35 and F-22?

Wilson shut down that idea as well, saying that proposal "is not something we're currently considering.”

In a statement, a Lockheed spokesman said that the company was focused on the F-35 program but also looking into generational leaps in capability “to ensure our technology, including existing aircraft, remains a step ahead of advancing threats.”

Boeing declined to comment on this story.

The Air Force secretary's proclamations seem to pour cold water on both Lockheed and Boeing's sales pitches, but it is always possible that others inside the service are in favor of buying the F-15X and F-22/F-35 hybrid — and that they could continue making the case to Air Force leadership, potentially winning them over.

Sources that spoke to The War Zone said Boeing was in “very serious” talks with the Air Force over the F-15X, but that the service had shied away from making its interest public so as to not to derail it's number-one procurement priority, the F-35. Defense News has also heard from multiple sources that the Air Force has been in talks with Boeing over the F-15X for over a year, though it's unknown at what levels those conversations currently reside.

Experts who spoke with Defense News said it's very likely that the Air Force intends to keep its focus on ramping up F-35 production for the time being, but that alternative platforms could very well be considered in future years.

However, it is the F-22/F-35 hybrid, not the F-15X, that they believe stands a better chance of being adopted by the Air Force.

Defense One, which broke the story about Lockheed's hybrid offer, wrote that the proposed jet would involve taking the F-22 airframe and outfitting it with some of the F-35's more advanced mission systems, though some structural changes could also be involved.

“Every F-22 hybrid or derivative I've seen has been great,” said Rebecca Grant, a defense analyst with IRIS independent Research.

The Air Force is in great need of such a stealthy air superiority aircraft because it only procured 183 F-22s, she said. Its other plane that specializes in the air-to-air fight, the F-15C/D, was originally fielded in the 1970s.

Grant said she interprets Wilson's dismissal of the F-22/F-35 hybrid as a reflection of near-term requirements and priorities, noting that “job one is acquiring the F-35.” But in the future, that jet could be what the service decides it needs to contend with current and future threats.

David Deptula, the dean of the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Power Studies and a retired Air Force lieutenant general, agreed that the service should continue buying F-35s for the time being.

However, the F-22/F-35 hybrid might be a good option for the service in the future, when it begins looking for a next-generation air superiority jet, which the Air Force has variously called Penetrating Counter Air and Next Generation Air Dominance.

Full article: https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/air-force-association/2018/09/12/air-force-not-considering-new-f-15-or-hybrid-f-22f-35-top-civilian-says/

Sur le même sujet

  • Is the Air Force’s Advanced Battle Management System program gearing up to be the next major acquisition failure?

    21 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial

    Is the Air Force’s Advanced Battle Management System program gearing up to be the next major acquisition failure?

    Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — Since Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein took over as the service's top general in 2016, the Air Force has made figuring out how to connect its weapons with those of the Army, Navy and Marine Corps its biggest priority. The Air Force is set to have spent $300 million on the Advanced Battle Management System through fiscal year 2021. However, the service is still struggling to define what ABMS needs to do and how much it will cost, the Government Accountability Office said in a report released April 16. "The Air Force has not established a plan or business case for ABMS that identifies its requirements, a plan to attain mature technologies when needed, a cost estimate, and an affordability analysis. ... To date, the Air Force has not identified a development schedule for ABMS, and it has not formally documented requirements,” it read. That could have significant consequences for the program down the road, GAO continued: “GAO's previous work has shown that weapon systems without a sound business case are at greater risk for schedule delays, cost growth, and integration issues.” The GAO made four recommendations: create a cost estimate and a plan laying out how to afford the program, formalize the decision-making authorities of those involved in ABMS, and develop a list of technologies that are expected to fit into the initial system. In a response to the report, Kevin Fahey, the assistant secretary of defense for acquisition, concurred with all four recommendations — a sign that, going forward, the Air Force may be required to solidify more of its ABMS plans. The Air Force has maintained that the program's unconventional structure and methodology is a feature, not a bug. It wants to use a series of experiments to help discover and mature new technologies that can be weaved in alongside legacy platforms. For instance, the first ABMS experiment connected SpaceX's Starlink constellation with an AC-130 gunship, and the next demo will employ a Kratos Valkyrie drone carrying communications gear that enables the F-22 and F-35 to securely share data while allowing them to maintain stealth. Air Force officials have said technologies that are proven to be successful and mature during the experiments could become programs of record inside the ABMS family of systems. However, the Air Force does not seem to have a firm plan for what technologies it needs and when to bring them online, the GAO said. The service has identified 28 development areas that includes a new cloud network, a new common radio, and apps that provide different ways of presenting and fusing data. However, none of those areas are linked to specific technical requirements, and the Air Force hasn't explained what organizations are responsible for the development of those products. In one damning section, GAO compared ABMS with several cancelled programs with similar aims, such as the Army's Future Combat Systems program that sought to field a family of manned and unmanned technologies and the Joint Tactical Radio System, which was intended to create a government-owned software defined radio. These programs publicly flamed out after millions of dollars were spent in development, in part because certain technologies were not mature enough and caused the schedule to unravel. The scope of ABMS will be far larger than those previous programs, the Pentagon's Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation told the GAO. But because the Air Force has not provided a detailed acquisition strategy, CAPE does not have confidence that the Air Force will be able succeed where those programs have failed. “Given the criticality of the battle management command and control mission and the planned retirement of legacy programs, the lack of an ABMS business case introduces uncertainty regarding whether the needed capabilities will be developed within required time frames,” the GAO said. Figuring out who has responsibility and decision-making authority for ABMS is also a messy proposition, the GAO said. The ABMS effort is led by a chief architect, Preston Dunlap, who is responsible for managing tradeoffs among the portfolio of technologies and guide experimentation efforts. However, existing programs that will be part of the ABMS family will retain their separate program office with their own independent management, and the Air Force has yet to clarify whether Dunlap will be able to redirect those program's funding to fall in line with ABMS objectives. For example, the Air Force's program office for space is currently working on a data integration project that could correspond with ABMS efforts to field a cloud network. But “although some ABMS funds have been obligated for this project, there is no documentation to support that the Chief Architect will be able to direct the PEO to change the project objectives or timeline to align with ABMS requirements once they are defined,” the GAO said. The role of the Air Force Warfighting Integration Capability or AFWIC, which was established in 2017 to help define how the service will fight wars in the future, is also unclear. An AFWIC senior official told the GAO that the organization began leading the service's multidomain command and control initiatives in 2019, but it is uncertain whether AFWIC also has the power to change the direction of the ABMS program. https://www.c4isrnet.com/c2-comms/2020/04/20/is-the-air-forces-advanced-battle-management-system-program-gearing-up-to-be-the-next-major-acquisition-failure/

  • Lockheed Martin chosen to lead OSA study for NATO NGRC - Skies Mag

    4 février 2024 | International, Terrestre

    Lockheed Martin chosen to lead OSA study for NATO NGRC - Skies Mag

    While the RCAF is closely monitoring U.S. Army programs, it has observer status to the European effort to develop a next generation tactical helicopter.

  • US joins G7 artificial intelligence group to counter China

    1 juin 2020 | International, C4ISR

    US joins G7 artificial intelligence group to counter China

    By: Matt O'Brien, The Associated Press The U.S. has joined an international panel for setting ethical guidelines for the use of artificial intelligence, a move previously dismissed by the Trump administration. The White House's chief technology officer, Michael Kratsios, told The Associated Press on Thursday it is important to establish shared democratic principles as a counter to China's record of “twisting technology” in ways that threaten civil liberties. “Chinese technology companies are attempting to shape international standards on facial recognition and surveillance at the United Nations," he said. The Trump administration had been the lone holdout among leaders of the Group of Seven — the world's wealthiest democracies — in setting up the Global Partnership on AI. The partnership launched Thursday after a virtual meeting between national technology ministers. It was nearly two years after the leaders of Canada and France announced they were forming a group to guide the responsible adoption of AI based on shared principles of "human rights, inclusion, diversity, innovation and economic growth.” The Trump administration objected to that approach, arguing that too much focus on regulation would hamper U.S. innovation. But negotiations over the past year and changes to the group's scope led the U.S. to join, Kratsios said. “We worked very hard to make it clear that it would not be a standard-setting or policy-making body,” he said. U.S. involvement is important because of the large role that American tech firms play globally and its historic advocacy for human rights, said Kay Mathiesen, an associate professor focused on computer ethics at Northeastern University in Boston. “U.S. tech companies such as Microsoft, Google and Apple are all concerned about what guidelines they should be following to use AI responsibly,” she said. “Given their global presence, the fact that the U.S. wasn't involved does not mean that they would not end up having to follow any regulations developed by the rest of the G7.” The U.S. push to scrutinize AI-assisted surveillance tools built by China also fits into a broader trade war in which both countries are vying for technological dominance. Beijing on Monday demanded that Washington withdraw the latest round of export sanctions imposed on Chinese tech companies accused of playing roles in a crackdown in its Muslim northwestern region of Xinjiang. https://www.defensenews.com/global/the-americas/2020/05/29/us-joins-g7-artificial-intelligence-group-to-counter-china/

Toutes les nouvelles