Once again the aging Eagle comes into our scan, and as has been the case over the last couple months the news ain’t good. This from an LA Times story running at Military.com:
“Many of them may never fly again,” said a senior Air Force officer. The officer, like others interviewed, spoke on condition of anonymity because results of the investigation were not to be made public until today.
Many of the F-15s, long the nation’s most sophisticated front– line fighters, have been around for 30 years, and the fleet is being replaced gradually. The Air Force still relies on F-15s to protect the continental United States and to fly combat missions abroad. Newer model F-15Es are used in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan and were the first of the planes to resume flying after the mishap in November.
The problems with the F-15, Air Force officials argue, have increased the need to buy additional F-22s, a swift and stealthy but expensive new fighter plane.
“This is grave,” said a senior Air Force official. “Two hundred of our air superiority aircraft are on the ground, and we are acting like it is business as usual.”
So what do we think? No big deal considering the current lack of an air-to-air threat worldwide or time to buy more Raptors, toot sweet?
– Ward
Maybe would should take some of the mothballed Phantoms out of the bone yards. I bet they could do the job just as well. Actually I’m kidding, but the Air Force has large numbers of F16 that surely could handle just about anything in the air.. why not rely on those until we get more F22’s and F35’s?
After reading about Boyd, I keep wondering about the head-to-head air superiority capability of the F-15 v. F-16. I’ve not really heard much about this, and I suspect that the F-16 is better in a dogfight. But, I dunno. Any comments?
Solomon,
The F-22 is already designed and in production. It’s hard to see how you could achieve any cost savings by embarking on a redesign of an old aircraft, incorporating much of the same expensive avionics as the F-22, and re-starting a production line for air-to-air models that was shut down decades ago. Just buy more F-22s…
For continental air defense? Are we expecting flights of hostile Tu-160s or Ju-390s to fill our skies? If we need some interceptors to chase down airliners why not order some Gripens? Or buy some used F-16s?
Methinks there is a lack of clear thinking on this… for one reason or another.
Cranky
Consider the difference in cost between the F-15 Eagle (about 30 million per copy) and the F-22 Raptor (about 160 million per copy). Economics prohibit a one to one replacement. Now consider that the Air Force has historically moved into modernization programs for most all of the aircraft they have flown, with good success. All high performance aircraft develop cracks. That
George,
So true but my idea is for a true high low mix for the future force. The F-15E line is still up and running. If the engines, AESA and whatever other magic is readily available and makes sense to incorporate into the F-15 then lets do it. An F-15E with thrust vectoring alone (I have no idea on whether its even feasible) would instantly put it on par with anything coming out of Russia. That could allow the breathing space necessary to see whether stealth is the real transformational weapon many believe or just a longer lived B-70. Additionally while I desperately want to see the F-35B in USMC and UK hands, I’m not sure it wouldn’t be a step back for the USAF in terms of air to air combat. Just my two cents.
Well said Cole. I could not agree more. Perhaps one justify the procurement of several more F22s, but there is no way we buy more than 200 F22’s. The AF will just have to manage their questionable mission with 200 fewer fighters.
There was an F-15 vectored thrust variant designed, built, and tested back in the late 90’s. NASA Dryden has a photo collection of one in flight.
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/gallery/photo/F-15ACTIVE/index.html
It would require retooling of the existing F-15E production line to produce them, I would bet. In a similar line of thinking, is the F-16 XL “Cranked Arrow”, which was designed and tested, which featured a delta wing, canard and supersonic cruise. It lost in competition to the F-15E, and wasn’t produced.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-16ef-xl.htm
Is there any discussion of why the F-15C’s can’t just be fixed, rather than buying a whole pile of new F-22’s? I think the F-22 and F-35 will prove valuable airframes down the line, but I don’t see them as a critical need unless someone really thinks we’re in for a serious air war sometime in the near future. Surely the F-18’s, F-15’s, and F-16’s we have in the Middle East could handle Iranian F-14A’s and Migs?
Sell the “broken” F-15s to the Israelis. I’m sure they’d cook up some magical, cheap fix and make us look stupid though. A branch that gets all the expensive toys it wants is now pushing for more. Not surprising. I don’t mind the Navy spending tons, because frankly, shipping makes the world go round and a powerful Navy is a good investment. Uber planes that will never be challenged that cost many times their legacy craft are not good investments.
Why don’t we divert some of the wasted/saved money that has caused the appropriate (as noted by cole) shrinkage of the F15 fleet to the services that are actually fighting? The Marines and Army. They have their share of useless spending but are brutally efficient when compared to the wasteful air force.
Also, there is no air force that will ever oppose the United States in the future worth noting. Russia and China are far far too economically dependent on each other and the United States to start a war with us. The F22 is a halo plane that will never come close to being matched. Why field 1 F22 when you can field 100 drones in the future? The US may face smaller air powers like Iran but I’m not even sure the Iranians are stupid enough to fly against the US Air Force.
The whole notion of superpower vs superpower wars in the nuclear age is ridiculous and outdated. It’s just not going to happen. It’s nice to have big sticks like the F22 just to say “well in case…” but more money and effort needs to be focused on technologies that can fight the smaller battles and be more adaptive. That goes for all services.
The F15C’s were made during the Cold War facing hundreds of Migs in East Germany. Whatever is left of the Russian airforce is 1000 miles east. As for China– well almost everything we buy is made there so I really don’t see a need to start an arms race with them.
Sounds like “Neville” thinking to me. So if we had bought materials from the USSR, we wouldn’t have needed to invest in the defense of ourselves and our allies? Also when the F-15C was at its prime, it was facing Mig-29 etc. The evolutionary product coming out of Russia TODAY is a great deal better. I haven’t seen the results of the mock combat between US and Indian aircraft but supposedly its some shocking stuff. Supposedly the UK had the same experience when they pitted their Typhoons against them. The SU-35 is being improved as we speak and its getting engines that will allow supercruise, a bigger AESA setup, they’re supposedly doing astonishing things with infra-red (as a countermeasure to stealth) and things are only going to devolve once they add Indian expertise (with a dose of Israeli ingenuity) to the building of a 5th gen aircraft. So in short, yeah we need to get busy on getting the services up to speed to meet emerging threats while we bust-up the terrorists.
Oh and 3,000 Marines are going to Afghanistan. Looks like the Commandant won that political battle. Thats a MEB(-) or MEU(+) depending on your outlook.
I call bs on this whole issue.
Just tell the air force “Oh well, it looks like your just gonna have 500 fewer planes, then. I guess we can reduce your logistics and training budget by 30% as well” and watch how fast this problem disappears.
I find it interesting how the congress constantly cuts back on the military budget while spending wildly on every form of free handout they can think of. The result is what we read here, military services fighting over the scraps like a bunch of wolves tearing at a dead animal. Yes, our military costs BILLIONS to maintain. Big deal. This is peanuts in the grand scheme of government spending.
As for the idea that we just refit the older planes because they are currently good enough. The purpose of military technology is not to be as good as your enemy. Its purpose is to be so far advanced ahead of any possible enemy that they would be crazy/stupid (or variant islam) to attack us.
Even if we did decide to refit the F15, our future enemies are continuing to advance their technology. Russia is once again flying TU-95’s down our coasts just like in the cold war. And although much of our market place is full of Chinese products, they themselves continue to advance all of their technologies in preparation of a definite future conflict. They have had successful anti-satellite tests!
Again, the problems are that our government loves to spend money on anything but the military, and that too many perceive defense too myopically, and too nearsightedly.
I’m all for interservice rivalry and ribbing (just ask my jarhead friend Solomon). But give me a break.
Why are we looking at the threats of today and saying that everything is jut peachy without the F-15 and a few F-22s? If we stop producing F-22s at 183, then it will stop in 2010. That means no more F-22s can be produced, zip, zero, nada. And it would make supporting such a limited fleet of aircraft that much more expensive.
Solomon is right on the SU-35. We don’t have a fighter that can match it in a 1 vs 1 dogfight. And there has been talk of Iran buying 200+ of these planes.
The Air Force is having some major age issues on their entire fleet of aircraft. From bombers, tankers, CAS aircraft, and fighters. What we need to do (and sorry Solomon but I’ve got to say it) is dump the F-35. It is a complete waste of money, especially for the Air Force. With that savings you can buy more F-22s and F-16 Block 60s. That takes care of your fighter fleet. And the Block 60s have IRST, AESA, JHMCS, and all other typs of acronyms that sound cool.
I’m sorry, but the Army and Marines are not going without during this war. They are making the most sacrifices, but they are being taken care of.
DC2
Ward, no fair man! Pre-loading that question to set off the flying monkeys is evil! You know there
CTR1,
A few billion? Try a few hundred billion. If 8% of our budget was not going to pay the federal debt everybody would be happy.
DC2
MAC,
I couldn’t agree with you more on that subject (believe it or not). Without air superiority your enemy will defeat you on the battlefield.
DC2
Yeah Ward is good at getting the fur flying and then sitting back to watch the fun. That’s either brilliant or sick…I’m not sure which.
I still am wondering how many “many,” is. I am just barely remembering but I thought read that out of 50–200 inspected they had found 2–4 with cracks. at one point
lol i vote evil!
lol but seriously i think part of the problem with the f22 is well…its crap its so ungodly powerful we cant let it get to our enemies(of course were selling to japan.whose ppls leak like a damn foset) but its so good we cant mass produce it realy and for those of you who dont believe china is a threat heres somethin(and either way you look at it enviromentalist are pataly to blame…excellent0 look at china 1bil+ ppls well because of our new love of bio fuel there s not as much food made which also makes it more expensive to china who has so seriously revamped to make our…well everything that agriculture has sufferd in fact riots about food have already started add eourupe to the mix with the fact that food prodution also suffers there.
well ive been readin and apparently the sun could enter into a cool phayse(dont start about spelling!)ruining crops in like 3 yrs and continue for 20yrs (yes its possible one reason russia handed nepolion his ass)how may china make up this well seeing the current supreme leadership in china one expansion like tiwan maybe into south asia(add there cosy relationship with india and to a lesser extent russia)which is kinda scarry as to the fact thats about 2.8bil ppls our somethin and growin and a nightmare unfolds WE WOULD NOT SURVIVE A GROUND WAR well we need a strong navy(ps i hate DDX bigest mistake navl ever made yes your going to have to switch to nuke powered heavy crusiers that have ARMOR and as for the 22 well look at it this way i saw a artical a few weeks ago some one figured out how to negate the f22s steath advantage so should we keep beig ubsessed with steath of just a sterdy powerful plane(bit me zoomies)
and drones arnt the answer already having probblems with hackers and drones use sats and comps so no sounds good but bad idea
we do need a litoral combat vessel but it needs to be way cheaper have more armor
also anyone explain why we dont use trimaridian hulls heard there good in pretty much all catagories
f22 good to expensive
f35 good to expensive to reliant on stealth
f15s maybe too old retire the recycle them to somethin new
ps some one tell the airforce they dont need a new nuke bomber and to settle with missiles
I’ve calmed down a bit. At the time, I had googled news on F-15 and had read numerous articles with unnamed USAF pilots claiming the sky was falling. Nobody emphasized that 265 F-15A-D aircraft were now ABLE TO FLY AGAIN…and 20 more aircraft were supposedly not yet inspected.
If the F-22 wasn’t so good, if the F-35 wasn’t coming, if the F-16/FA-18 weren’t still so awesome and numerous, if we didn’t have such great allies, and great air defenses of our own.…then it WOULD be foolish not to replace F-15s one-for-one out to a reasonable point. But we are that good. Nothing in the foreseeable future can touch us. The stealth, the radar/avionics, the missiles/bombs, the AWACS, the ECM, the comms, the aerial refuelers, THE TRAINING. Anyone care to wager that the Russians, Chinese, Indians have the same quality of training and simulation? Only Israel may be better and they are on our side.…as I would hope India is.;)
I found this blog entry enlightening. I had read before about how the USAF was handicapped purposely in two exercises versus India in 2004 and 2005. This gave more details:
http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/007810.php
So we fought them with one hand tied behind our back, without our technological advantages and typical TTP practiced in training, and wonder why they prevailed. Who’s zooming who here folks. Pun intended.
Others said it well. We need air dominance or we lose the battlefield. The F-22 delivers it.
Double down already.
Oh and this:…“if we didn’t have such great allies,…“
HI-larious. 3000 Marines going to Afghanistan. Why? Cause NATO won’t deliver. 500 million Europeans, and they cannot chop out 3000 soldiers–if they still got ‘em–to the “good war”, the war we all agree was right and proper, Afghanistan.
There’s only the US, Australia, Israel and Japan. Period. (I’ve met many other member’s militaries; great people; derelict governments)
What threat? How many decades before we lose air dominance?
This kind of cold war hysteria might be fun for some, but in case people had not noticed we’re fighting a couple of wars and the funds are badly needed. Yeah, it’s nice for the fighter jocks to have a few more toys, but that’s not much consolation if we lose Iraq/Afghanistan.
A few billion on F-22s against a non-existent threat vs we can’t afford better body armor for the guys who are dying on the front line. Reality check?
USAF is out of money. U.S. is debt and running wars on Chicom credit. USAF current “strategy” is: survive till the next budget loads up. Over-fixating our defense on operations useless dirt 1 and 2 and letting big war defense items go to seed is dumb.
F-15s that are air to air only don’t bring much to a fight anymore. We should only invest in aircraft that can do both missions: F-22, F-15E, F-16.
JSF will show up whenever it shows up, but until it gets more testing done, we are just guessing how much it will cost and when it will show up. If it is way late, older F-16s start retiring not too far into the future. We are running out of airframes and we don’t have any money. Not good.
Vercingetorix
>if they still got ‘em–to the “good war”, the war >we all agree was right and proper, Afghanistan.
the war YOU all agree, not the NATO
>There’s only the US, Australia, Israel and Japan.
…and over 1200 from Poland, from the beginning… “expert”…
Cole,
What if your beloved Army M-1s started crapping out and blowing up. Would you push for a replacement ASAP? There is no perceived threat that would we could not defeat without the M-1 right now.
We are talking about overwhelming dominance in all facets of the game here. And we cannot rely on our allies, even in their own backyard. Kosovo proved that one. We are going through the same thing in Afghanistan right now. NATO asks for mroe equipment and personnel but nobody steps up to the plate. Yes other countries are sacrificing, but only to the extent they are willing to.
And having a 1 vs 1 dogfight is not considered fighting with one hand tied behind your back. Just because we didn’t not have AWACS and every other support aircraft flying around to assist.
And Wembley I will say this again: anything and everything the ground pounders need in Iraq and Afghanistan is being delivered to them. If there was better body armour they would have it. In fact there is testing being lined up to determine if there is. Unfortunately (as has been reported on this site) the manufacurers aren’t ready. We have MRAPS being flown to Iraq, the most expensive way to send them there, on C-17s and C-5s as they come off the assembly line.
The F-15s need to be replaced. Bottom line. They do not need to be replaced one for one and the Air Foce isn’t asking for that to happen. In fact, they are asking for double the amount currently planned (approx. 360).
DC2
Vercingetorix
what about the British Army and the Royal Marines who are fighting, gloves off at the highest intensity in southern Afghanistan’s since Korea or even WW2. That includes the Falklands War.
If you’re going to make sweeping statements about Europeans make an attempt to be informed about the second largest NATO contributor please.
For those questioning our allies, I was referring to air capabilities. But they have been there for us to varying degrees in both Iraq and Afghanistan, as well. NATO presence, especially, in more stable areas of Afghanistan made it possible for us to conduct combat ops in more troubled regions.
However, recently, it sounds like both the Dutch and Canadians have been assigned to more contentious zones in Afghanistan.
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2007/10/c9602bce-e841-4bf8-a2f9-3253de930cef.html
Also click on the article on the upper right about other allied support.
The Brits certainly pulled their weight in Southern Iraq, and numerous smaller contingents have pitched in.
However, the fact that we are sending 3,000 Marines to Afghanistan with the possible pull-out of Canadians and Netherlands, indicates the crucial need to grow the size of our Army and Marines. Between now and 2013, forward-deployed Army forces also are returning stateside in moves and reorganizations that will cost billions.
It’s no time to be wasting money on imagined current air threats. I will give the USAF credit for dropping something like 40,000 lbs of bombs in the last 24 hours in Iraq. That was 40 targets in a ten minute period north of Baghdad that should have helped ground forces. Thanks USAF.
If the Abrams tank breaks from overuse, we refit it. We upgrade it with FCS technologies. We field FCS to grow the Army and upgrade the rest. The refit of current equipment will cost substantially less than buying too many new 5th generation fighters.
FCS, admittedly is a big ticket item, and guess its time to play honest broker and admit that I’m one of tens of thousands of peons working hard on that program. Threats that those technologies address will be the same ones we face now and into the indefinite future.…getting substantial combat power on the ground fast…and finding, destroying, and surviving against an elusive enemy on the ground with the help of air support. The days of easy massed targets are long gone.
It doesn’t take a lot of thought to foresee a budget crunchtime coming. Just want to make sure our priorities are straight when that time comes.
come on Cole
>It’s no time to be wasting money on imagined >current air threats.
“money, money, money…“
come on…they can’t stop. Military always wants to have sth better and better ( read expensive) no matter how good the enemy is. Partially this is their job to “take care” of superiority/dominance/or-anything-they-can-imagine-and-you-can-pay
Yeah, but what if there as an inherent structural flaw in the M-1 that required the tank to be replaced. That is my point.
And I fully support the FCS. Full integration of all forces (land, sea, air) is essential in us dominating on the battlefield.
And I’m not talking about spending more money than we already have allocated to replace the F-15s. I’m talking about getting rid of the F-35 program so the Air Force can recapitalize their fleet of fighter aircraft.
Everyone here is making a perfectly good point: our beloved military is moving closer and closer to the breaking point. What are we doing to do when these wars are over and all of our ground equipment needs to be replaced or rebuilt? And if there is no money available (since we are currently in debt fiscally) then what happens? Are we going to tell the elderly they can’t get their Social Security check or Medicare coverage? Or are we going to raise taxes and possibly send our economy into a nosedive.
These days our own worst enemy is ourselves and the irresponsible decisions we make that affect us years into the future. Whether it is oil dependence, borrowing money from China, desolving our military capabilities, outsourcing everything we need to Asia (including fixing my Dell!!!), or starting wars without understanding the ramifications in the future; our leaders are making very bad decisions. which will affect us for decades.
DC2
I see many pretty foolish comments on here. How long will the f-15 be good for? 30 years is enough, time to replace them. So you propose we wait for our enemys to pass us, that is sheer nonsense. We need to advance on all fronts in the military army navy marines and the air force quite honestly. The 5–15’s currently have doppler radars. They have been on flight restrictions since the 90’s, they can’t even pull full manoveours. Placing all your eggs in an AWACS basket is simply foolish, what if you loose that single asset, loose the battle then? Unfortunately its time for new equipment, and I for one would rather get jets and tanks to protect America’s interest then pay for everyone in the countries healthcare.
>What are we doing to do when these wars are over
certainly “these wars” are NOT over.
North Korea, Iran, China maybe…
I will tell you some up-to-date russian joke:
“Americans found Iraq
I live here in St. Louis MO, on my way to work today I saw 2 F-15’s screaming out of Lambert International almost full burners on. Couldn’t tell the specific model because I was doing mach 1 on the highway myself but aren’t all versions for Air Nation Guard grounded? If not, what model do they use?
I live here in St. Louis MO, on my way to work today I saw 2 F-15’s screaming out of Lambert International almost full burners on. Couldn’t tell the specific model because I was doing mach 1 on the highway myself but aren’t all versions for Air Nation Guard grounded? If not, what model do they use?
Interesting, I just comment about this on my blog.
My assessment is that the USAF is attempting to hold readiness as a hostage for more F-22s.
It will be a bit of money (probably less than $500K) to fix the F-15s, but as compared to a $150 million plane, it’s a good deal).
Also, if you put an AESE in an F-15, it’s a better cruise missile hunger, because it has a bigger antenna.
It should be obvious that the F-15 should continue as America’s front line fighter for years to come. Heck its only 25+ years old. Russians, Chinese, and many others will be saved time and money of lifting the secrets of the F-22 & F-35…we’re friends right? By now they already pilfered the F-15 secrets long ago, so why not have our pilots fly a plane our friends already know so well? Also when our F-15 fly near Russia or China, we want to fly friendly and be easily seen on their radars…nothing irritates me more when my friends come to my house unannounced.
I like to drive a car until its 10 years old at least. I enjoy rebuilding it on the fly as things corrode, wear out or just break. Driving at up to 80 mph of course doesn’t compare to doing the same thing in a F-15 flying at 1000+mph, but at least those pilots have parachutes! Lucky guys.
carpteros, I did not forget. I pointedly left them out. The British have just about ceded Southern Iraq. ‘Softly, softly’ works in Ireland; in Iraq, it is catastrophic, it is weakness. And Gordon Brown will make things worse. It is a trendline going down.
And I value all of our allies, from Mongolia to Poland, but if the question is ‘how much of our defense can our allies support’, I’m really only comfortable relying on Japan.
> I live here in St. Louis MO, on my way to work
> today I saw 2 F-15’s screaming out of Lambert
> International almost full burners on. Couldn’t
> tell the specific model because I was doing mach 1
> on the highway myself but aren’t all versions for
> Air Nation Guard grounded?
Most likely F-15Ks for the Korea order.
Cranky
Actually a news article at military.com indicates that the F-15 has now been cleared. Well, with the exception of the 160+ that failed inspection.
But apparently we can repair those pretty cheaply according to someone’s post. Of course another poster said that only 20 aircraft failed inspection.
DC2
Air Combat Command clears selected F-15s for flight
Link:http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/airforce/Air_Combat_Command_clears_selected_F-15s_for_flight100014745.php
DC2,
I mentioned that about 20 had yet to be inspected, implying that some of them may be flyable as well…say about 8? Today it is 19 (6th paragraph down)uninspected aircraft:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5ga1mSJGW4BfFiO6Dn01Hd4hwusSgD8U35FTO0
I like this article where when it says it would cost about $500K to repair each aircraft, Loren Thompson quips that something else might break…implying we should spend $160 million each instead.
That is kind of like buying a new $24K car because you don’t want to make a $75 repair. Geez, that is a 320:1 expense ratio. How hard is it to fly air-to-air against an airliner or Bear bomber,
It’s a testament to their shortsightedness that so many people argue that building fighters is needless due to paucity of air to air combat in recent years. We aren’t challenged in air to air combat because we have maintained such dominance that our enemies usually just don’t bother trying. If we allow that dominance to lapse, our enemies will take advantage of it.
The same short sighted people who argue against building fighters seem to be the same folks who get upset over our casualty rate in the current war, despite the fact that we are losing soldiers at a historically unprecedented low rate. A marine at Iwo Jima, or an airman in the 8th air Force, not to mention an infantryman at Antietam, would happily trade for even the most hazardous position in Iraq. Ironically, allowing our air dominance to lapse would put our current loss rate in perspective by demonstrating just how bad things can be. Airplanes are surprisingly good at making things on the ground disintegrate, especially when piloted by people who don’t give a rat’s ass about collateral damage.
Which brings me to my next point. Part of the reason why air power seems less important than it used to be is that our self imposed rules of engagement have limited our ability to leverage it in effective ways. The fact is we go to a lot of trouble to deal with problems in a sensitive matter when we could, with far less expense, simply annihilate the problem from the air. Unfortunately a misguided sense of compassion prevents us from waging that kind of war any more, despite the fact that it was extremely effective in World War II and the fact that our enemies would jump at the chance to do it to us.
Is it mean to use our air force to pummel an enemy into submission? Hell yes, but war is a mean thing. Perhaps if the consequences of attacking the US or supporting said attackers were massive retaliation that left one’s military and industrial capabilities utterly smashed, those people would be less apt to initiate a conflict. Our current hyper sensitive system rewards the enemy for intentionally putting civilians at risk. Why bother building an air force when you can just put your missile factory inside an orphanage? Good bet the US won’t attack the factory from the air, and even if they do you just go to the international media and make a big stink over excessive force and civilian casualties, which the US will take to heart rather than ignoring as it generally should.
Which brings us back to short sightedness. Honestly, how many lives are really saved by doing the feel good thing and sending in our ground forces when you factor in the negative hit to our deterrent factor? How many battles will we have that we could have avoided if our enemies were actually scared that we would use the full might of our military forces against them?
ADyer.….
Ah! Indeed, that’s why God made the CBU-58.
Cole,
How many tanks does it take to defeat an insurgent with an AK-47?
We have new build H-60s, H-47s, and AH-64s coming off the line every day. Not so for the F-15.
DC2
ADyer,
Hope you are joking. The success of the surge and gains made by practicing COIN in Iraq would go out the window if we did as you suggest. Can you say Anbar Snoozing or more appropriately, a return to the grasp of Al Qaeda.
We could get into the ethics of firebombing German and Japanese cities. Could use it and the Blitz as examples that bombs don’t win wars, along with a whole bunch of other historical examples. Yeah nukes worked in Japan…but it’s different when both side have them.
But let’s just stick with the fact that we’ve finally seen the light and realize that it does not help your cause to harm innocent civilians, infrastructure if avoidable, and religious/medical/cultural sites.
Not sure what the 40,000 lbs of bombs dropped yesterday accomplished, but I’m confident that their targets were carefully planned to minimize collateral damage.
I would argue instead of the CBU-58, the Air Force has seen the light with the Small Diameter Bomb. Although perhaps they used the former yesterday if the intent was to burn down orchards where insurgents might be hiding or where caches/IEDs were buried. That was impressive with the few aircraft used. The B-1 is a beast.
Cole, your counter proves ADyer’s point, not your own. We had to invade another country and spend years in war to figure out a COIN strategy that works. Some lessons from Iraq are universal, many are not. We may or may not be able to reproduce it at will.
So your point that we should invest every lawless region or terrorist breeding ground and apply COIN is fanciful at best. An Iraq is a once every generation type of thing.
So the air strike will be a major tool for the foreseeable future. Indeed, it is one of the reasons that we have 4000 dead, not tens of thousands.
Cole, if your military plan is to avoid war, versus fight it, man, that’s just a bad, bad idea. Granted, we should not be PURSUING war with China, but they are no bigger threat than the USSR and we still maintained a much more aggressive defense budget with them. We have a 10 trillion dollar/year economy. We’re talking about 100’s of billions of dollars over almost a decade, proportionally equal to the initial expenditure for the F-15 program. It costs more because it is a more powerful weapon system.
And the F-22 doesn’t just replace the F-15, it basically replaces the F-117 as well, which is another legacy airframe rapidly losing effectiveness. Has someone just neutralized stealth while I have been sleeping? We need these aircraft, they are fantastic and AND they are already in production.
You want to spend that money on WIC or Pell grants or body armor or Masadas for the grunts, great, good for you, but defense programs are geared for the next war, not the last. If we have an advantage, protect it. Parity is garbage.