In a vote sure to be read as a sign of the Obama administrations power on defense matters, the Senate voted by a lopsided 40–58 in favor of an amendment stripping $1.75 billion for the F-22 from the defense authorization bill.

You could almost hear the whoops in Defense Secretary Robert Gates offices as he and his team scored a decisive victory. Gates reputation as a man willing to take tough decisions and to stick with them gained greatly and won enhanced credibility with the vote. He will be difficult to defeat on any major program decision he takes for the forseeable future.

Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he knew stopping production of the fighter would be painful but he and his fellow lawmakers had to grasp such nettles based on what is best for the nation and what is best for the men and women of the armed forces. Another factor that clearly played a role in swinging reluctant lawmakers behind Levin and Sen. John McCain were the clear signals sent from the Pentagon that F-22 production should be stopped. The recommendation is strong and clear, as strong and clear as I have ever heard, Levin said on the Senate floor.

– Colin Clark

I guess I’m going to have to dive in here…though I’m reluctant to because the sides are so polarized in the issue.

The fight in the Senate is going on over the added funding for F-22s inserted into the 2010 DoD budget by Raptor allies in states with key Raptor manufacturing facilities. Sens. McCain and Levin are on the administration’s side on this one, arguing that the budget should stick with the 187 plane plan. Obama has said he’ll veto the DoD budget bill if it includes any (seven in the Senate, 12 in the House) additional F-22s over his plan.

Advocates argue that 187 is far too few aircraft to maintain air superiority in the future, even one still dominated by US airpower. And the undercurrent also flows with job-loss worries — particularly in Georgia, where a large portion of the manufacturing will be done.

They’re both right.

On the one hand we have Winslow Wheeler and his bros arguing that the F-22 is the poster child for a Pentagon procurement system run amok and that it’s aided and abetted by a Congress always looking for pork to fry up for its constituents. And on the other, there’s an eloquent argument made by Air Force Association president Lt. Gen. Mike Dunn that the 187 F-22s is really 100 operational F-22s and that’s way too few even for the most optimistic scenarios.

Arguably it’s not about raw numbers — people can debate 200 vs. 800 vs. 100 all day long. On the one hand, it seems to me a good idea to have the most advanced fighter in the world in our inventory — and to have a good amount of them (no fair fights). But on the other hand it has been frustrating that the Raptor has taken so damned long to field. I’ve been in the defense reporting biz for a while and I can remember doing stories in F-22 development (and even the competition for the Raptor) and seeing some stat that the components on it were from the 1980s…that’s a problem.

So maybe the F-22 is the B-2 of the fighter world. We need to call it a loss and keep a silver bullet fleet to satisfy all the constituencies involved and turn the chapter on this one. As far as I’m concerned, the future belongs to unmanned aircraft and it may be that we’ll go counter to our usual practice and throw dozens of cheap drones at an air superiority problem in the next two decades rather than send up one or two Gucci fighters to knock down Mig-15s, if you know what I mean.

So I’ll reluctantly side with McCain/Levin/Obama on this one (though I don’t think it’s worth vetoing the entire defense bill over seven more Raptors). But I’ll be sad to witness the final death throes of the manned fighter air superiority era…

– Christian

According to the report “European industry executives said there might have been concerns over whether the stealth plane would be exposed to radar trying to unlock its secrets.” Apparently this concern is based on the F-117 Steath Fighter’s 1991 (yes, you read that right) appearance when, according to an unnamed industry exec, the French government had reportedly used its ultra low-frequency, long-range radar to track the aircraft on its approach to the airfield. (Man, I’ll be the Iraqis had wished they’d had that capability a few months earlier when they were getting hammered by sortie after sortie of F-117s during Desert Storm.)

Or maybe the Raptor has pulled out because of the small detail that Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has told our closest allies (including Japan) that it’s not for sale. (Of course, there’s always the opportunity to taunt your allies with cool Made-in-America-type techology. What red-blooded Yankee doesn’t hate to miss that?)

Read the entire article here.
And for all the latest gouge from the Paris Air Show, check out DoD Buzz throughout the day this entire week.

– Ward

The facts are a bit sketchy here. This clip was posted to YouTube on 18 April by an anonymous user named “d43e49”. The video identifies the attacking aircraft as a T-38, but it’s not confirmed by anything shown within the clip. At the 35-sec mark, the F-22’s shape is clearly visible as it emerges above the target sight after the kill.

As far as I know, this is the first video clip of a simulated F-22 shootdown to reach the public domain. That is newsworthy by itself. Let’s also be very clear: a single simulated kill without context says nothing meaningful about the F-22’s dogfighting or aerial prowess. Even an EA-18G can apparently get lucky once.

If a T-38 was really involved, then congratulations to the pilot. Your are either absurdly lucky or insanely skilled.

– Steve Trimble

UPDATE: Unfortunately it looks as if the pilot of the doomed F-22, a Lockheed Martin tester named David Cooley, did not survive the crash. Cooley is a 29 year Air Force veteran and joined LockMart in 2003 as a test pilot.

Also, DT commenter Drake wonders if the accident might have had something to do with weapons bay testing that Flight International reported nearly caused some incidents in the past.

Colin reports at DoD Buzz that the Air Force congressional liaison office has sent out notices to key lawmakers they the service will update them as details emerge. The USAF is so terrified of bad publicity around the aircraft during the run up to budget wrangling that they’ll stumble over themselves to paint a pretty picture. We don’t, of course, know what caused the crash, but any bad publicity or delay in production will hurt the Air Force and F-22 backers on the Hill.

My question is, two crashes in five years after twenty years of testing and development…why aren’t the Osprey analogies coming out?..

All debates aside, our thoughts and prayers go out to the family, friends and colleagues of the downed pilot. It’s a terrible tragedy for all.

The Air Force is reporting that an F-22 Raptor has crashed near Edwards AFB in California today.

The pilot was on a training mission near Edwards AFB, Calif., and crashed about 35 miles north of the base at 10am Pacific time.

The Air Force is saying the condition of the pilot is unknown, which is strange given the proximity of rescue units, other aircraft in the area and communications capabilities.

Another F-22 crashed in training in the Nevada desert in 2004. That pilot survived after ejecting from the stricken jet.

We’ll keep you up to date as this develops and welcome any first hand info from readers…

– Christian

Prodded specifically by the Senate Armed Services Committee chairman for their personal opinions, U.S. Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne and chief Gen. T. Michael Moseley allowed that their own preferences would be for additional F-22 Raptor fighters and an alternative Joint Strike Fighter engine.

The top two Air Force leaders repeatedly stressed their support for President Bush’s fiscal 2009 budget request and outyear defense budget planning. Moreover, during the Wednesday hearing in front of the SASC they noted profound efforts to “salute smartly” in response to all budget-making guidance from White House and Pentagon superiors.

But explicitly asked by Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) to offer their personal assessments, Wynne and Moseley made clear their own desires for more Raptors and an alternative JSF engine. The Air Force leaders suggested the SASC chairman ask them for their personal opinions after Levin grew momentarily frustrated with their hesitation to respond to his direct questions on the issues.

The secretary said he believes the minimum number of Raptors needed to meet future requirements is probably the previous estimate of 277. Moseley stated that he personally does not believe that the official Defense Department plan for just 183 of the Lockheed Martin-made fighters is enough.

“No, sir,” the chief of staff told Levin when the senator asked him.

Both men also allowed that a second JSF engine could be a smart move by Washington, citing engine experiences with F-16s. Wynne acknowledged that the “business case” for a second JSF engine undermines such an effort on that specific cost analysis, but the question for defense leaders and lawmakers might be more one of confidence in meeting capabilities rather than strict budget concerns.

“Affordability can’t always be the rule,” the secretary said.

Indeed, highlighting redundancy and reliability above cost concerns played a major role in Wynne’s explanations for more Raptors, in light of planned JSFs, as well as another JSF engine. He recalled being able to rely on F-16s when F-15s had to be grounded after longeron failures were identified last fall following an F-15 crash.

Moseley said the Air Force tries to craft its official budget request following affordability guidance provided from above, but it also stands ready to answer where further dollars would be best spent. “We owe you what we believe it takes,” the chief also said.

Read the rest of this story and more great stuff from our Aviation Week colleagues at Military.com.

– Christian

Our friend and sometimes DT poster Bob Cox of Fort Worth Star-Telegram fame had this piece on Saturday:

General reprimanded for disagreeing on F-22

A senior Air Force general picked a bad time to publicly disagree with Defense Secretary Robert Gates over his opposition to buying more F-22 Raptors.

After weeks of debate over the future of Lockheed Martin’s high-priced stealth fighter jet, Gates sent Air Force leaders a message to tone down the rhetoric by having a top general reprimanded for suggesting that the service would find a way to circumvent Pentagon and White House objections.

Experts don’t expect Air Force officials to change their minds about the need to buy more F-22s after the disciplining of Gen. Bruce Carlson. But a Washington insider said Friday that service leaders will turn down the volume.

“The secretary of the Air Force has sent a message to all of his four stars [generals] saying they need to be more circumspect in their language,” said Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute, who has close ties to the Air Force and is a consultant to Lockheed.

Leaders of the Air Force and the Pentagon have been engaged for weeks in an unusually public and testy disagreement about the future of the F-22 program.

The latest developments were spurred by Carlson’s comments published this week in the trade journal Aviation Week.

The general, speaking to reporters Wednesday, said the Air Force was “committed to funding 380″ F-22s regardless of the Bush administration’s budget policies. “We’re building a program right now to do that. It’s going to be incredibly difficult … but we’ve done this before.”

Carlson’s comments came as Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England was testifying before congressional committees.

In an exchange during a Senate Budget Committee hearing Tuesday, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, asked whether the Pentagon would buy F-22s to replace aging F-15s, some of which have been grounded because of structural defects.

“I do not believe the F-22 will be the replacement for the F-15,” England said. “I would expect instead to try and accelerate the [F-35] joint strike fighter,” which he called a capable and far less costly replacement.

The Air Force has long insisted that it needs at least 381 F-22s, which cost about $175 million each, according to budget documents. Bush’s 2009 defense budget provides funds to buy 20 F-22s, which would bring the total force to 183 planes.

England and Gates have insisted that they do not see a compelling need to buy more than a few additional F-22s, especially with the government facing the costs of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as developing and procuring future weapons.

“The reality is, we are fighting two wars … and the F-22 has not performed a single mission in either theater,” Gates said in an appearance before a Senate committee last week.

Without an additional multiyear order for F-22s, Lockheed says it will have to begin shutting down the assembly line.

The company builds the plane’s midfuselage in Fort Worth, where about 1,800 people work on the program. It assembles the plane in Marietta, Ga.

About 8,000 people at Lockheed’s Fort Worth plant are working on the F-35 program, which is expected to provide most of the facility’s work for the next 20 to 30 years.

Winslow Wheeler, an analyst with the Center for Defense Information in Washington and a critic of the F-22 program, said Gates’ rebuke would have little effect on the argument over the F-22 because Congress will likely grant the wishes of the Air Force and Lockheed and provide money for more F-22s.

“There’s 44 states where there’s F-22 production,” Wheeler said, adding that even liberal Democrats such as Wyden like to preserve defense jobs.

The office of Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne released a statement late Friday saying that the “F-22 program is critical for the nation’s defense” but that Carlson’s comments “misrepresent the position of the U.S. Air Force. The Air Force wholeheartedly supports the President’s budget request for the F-22 program.“

– Christian

I LOVE it!

From today’s LA Times:

In an intensifying dispute over weapons priorities, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates on Thursday privately rebuked a four-star general for suggesting the Air Force intended to buy twice as many sophisticated F-22 Raptor aircraft as the Bush administration had approved, according to Air Force officials.

One senior defense official called the remarks by Gen. Bruce Carlson, who heads the Air Force command responsible for testing and developing new weapons, “borderline insubordination,” because they contradicted a decision by the president.

In its 2009 budget submitted to Congress earlier this month, the White House approved multiyear plans to buy 183 of the stealthy new fighters at an estimated $140 million apiece. Many Air Force officials, however, continue to insist they need 381 of the F-22s to deter global threats.

The rebuke by Gates on Thursday, in a telephone call to Carlson’s superior, reflects a deepening debate within the Defense Department over the direction of the military in the post-Iraq era. In particular, the clash over the F-22 — the Air Force’s premier fighter plane — has become a microcosm of the argument over what kind of wars the United States is likely to encounter in the future.

With defense spending expected to decline as U.S. troops withdraw from Iraq, some in the Pentagon have argued for shifting money to high-end weapons systems, like fighters and Navy ships, that can be used if needed against rivals with larger militaries, like China and Russia.

Gates prefers a focus on equipment and personnel needed to wage low-grade counterinsurgencies, like Iraq, arguing that such fights are more likely to occur in the near future.

“The reality is we are fighting two wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the F-22 has not performed a single mission in either theater,” Gates told a Senate committee last week.

Carlson, however, told a group of reporters earlier in the week that the Air Force was “committed to funding 380″ of the fighters, regardless of the Bush administration’s decision.

According to an Air Force official briefed on the Thursday rebuke, Gates telephoned Air Force Secretary Michael W. Wynne, who was on vacation at the time, to express his displeasure with Carlson.

The senior defense official said Carlson’s remarks, reported Thursday by the trade publication Aerospace Daily, angered the Pentagon’s top leadership, adding that they were “completely unacceptable and out of line.”

“Gen. Carlson and others in the Air Force may not like it, but 183 is the number of F-22s approved first by Defense Secretary [Donald H.] Rumsfeld, then reaffirmed by Defense Secretary Gates and provided for in budgets presented to Congress by President Bush — Gen. Carlson’s commander in chief,” the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity when discussing internal debates.

Although the comments by Carlson reflect widespread thinking within the service, Gen. T. Michael Moseley, the Air Force chief of staff, has been careful in recent weeks to shy away from a direct confrontation with Gates, saying he would take the F-22 up again with the new administration.

“I’m being very, very, very careful not to get pitted against Dr. Gates, because I’ve said to him over and over, when we’ve had this conversation, ‘Just don’t shut the [assembly] lines down,’ ” Moseley said in an interview with The Times last week.

Oh I bet Moseley is being VERY careful…

(Gouge: NC)

– Christian

Move over grounded F-15s, there’s a new sherriff in town.

From an end-zone dancing Lockheed Martin:

The U.S. Air Force declared Full Operational Capability (FOC) for Lockheed Martins F-22 Raptor today, marking another historic occasion for the worlds only 5th generation fighter in production. Gen. John Corley, Air Combat Command Commander (ACC), made the announcement from Langley Air Force Base, Va., home of ACC headquarters and the 1st Fighter Wing, the first unit to fly the F-22 operationally.

After years of collaborative effort, a key milestone for the F-22 has been reached, said Gen. Corley. The Raptors success at Langley with the integration of active duty and Guard airmen is the showcase example of ACCs shared vision with Air Force leadership for the Total Force Integration of tomorrow.

FOC signifies the Raptor has fulfilled all performance and operational requirements for the weapon system, Gen. Corley said. It affirms the entire program, from the aircraft to the pilots and maintenance crews, is ready for a myriad of operations, including employment in a wartime environment.

This announcement means the F-22 is ready for world-wide operations, should it be called upon, said Larry Lawson, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics executive vice president and F-22 general manager. Its a great day for our nation and for the men and women who fly and maintain this incredible aircraft. They deserve the best our country can provide, and the F-22 will stand in the gap providing air dominance and air cover for those who defend us on the ground for the next four decades.

The 27th Fighter Squadron at Langley was the first squadron to become operational with the F-22. Since the initial operational capability announcement in 2005, Raptors have been delivered to three additional squadrons, which, along with an Air National Guard associate unit and an Air Force Reserve associate unit, have truly made the Raptor a Total Force asset.

The F-22 has proven its operational capability and maturity leading up to this important announcement, said Lawson. The Air Force declares Full Operational Capability after excelling in numerous operational tests such as the deployment to Kadena Air Base in Japan, Red Flag, Combat Hammer and the Northern Edge exercise in Alaska along with completing aircraft deliveries to the 1st Fighter Wing at Langley AFB.

Raptors are currently assigned to five U.S. bases. Flight testing takes place at Edwards AFB, Calif. Operational tactics development is ongoing at Nellis AFB, Nev. Pilot and maintainer training takes place at Tyndall AFB, Fla. Operational Raptors are assigned to Langley AFB, Va. and at Elmendorf AFB, Alaska. Raptors will also be based at Holloman AFB, N.M., and Hickam AFB, Hawaii.

– Christian

I asked the Raptor jockeys at Virginia’s Langley Air Force Base about this last year and they shifted uncomfortably in their seats while feeding me some line about how voice comms work just fine. Then they quiety stressed that fixes were being planned. Now those fixes are finally firming up, according to Aerospace Daily & Defense Report:

The F-22 Raptor’s “embarrassing success” has created a need for rapid modification of the fighter, says Air Force Gen. Ronald Keys, chief of Air Combat Command. ACC wants a stealthy “tactical target network” data link that can quickly pass key parameters on enemy targets without giving away its position. In initial exercises, the F-22 “was much better at [intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance] and absorbing signals than we had anticipated,” Keys says.

Keys went on to say that fixes were planned for the 2008–2013 period, by which time all 180 Raptors should be in squadron service at Langley and in Alaska and New Mexico. The general didn’t exactly specify which datalink would be fitted, but recent Air Force experiments, as reported in Defense News last summer, might offer a clue:

The proposed Tactical Targeting Network Technology (TTNT) proved its mettle during a recent two-week exercise in Nevada, allowing troops and military platforms to swap information with Internet-like speed and ease. F-15 and F/A-18 fighter jets took in information about proposed targets, gathered sensor data, and sent it to ground stations to be fused with other data for more precise targeting, Boeing Advanced Systems President George Muellner said May 11. And its all machine-to-machine, Muellner said.

– David Axe, cross-posted at Ares and War Is Boring

UPDATE 01/29/07 2:44 PM: “The stealthy Raptor fighter and intelligence-gathering aircraft is ready for war, but probably not the war we’ve got, Air Combat Command’s chief, Gen. Ronald E. Keys, tells Aviation Week.”

Essential electronic surveillance systems may be too sensitive–overwhelmed by the density of U.S. and allied emitters–to be useful in the electronically polluted environment of Baghdad, the main focus of the new U.S. military surge.
“If war breaks out, I’m sending the F-22,” Keys said last week. But not for operations in Iraq or Afghanistan. “I didn’t buy the F-22 for Iraq. We’re looking for what can sop up intelligence, reconnaissance and surveillance [ISR] in Iraq and Afghanistan. Is the investment [of sending the F-22] worth it? Is it a good idea or just an attractive idea? Will it complicate the air component commander’s problems for no gain?”