USAF to have F-22 compromise.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gene...eadline=USAF Expected To Push F-22 Compromise
U.S. Air Force senior leadership will be returning soon to Congress to propose a new requirement for F-22 Raptors of between 250-275 aircraft, a cut of more than 100 F-22s in the service’s current baseline.
It is a compromise based on economic realities that is less than the service’s requirement of 381, but more than the current 183, according to aerospace industry analysts. That would allow the Air Force the options of fielding seven squadrons of 24 aircraft (two in Alaska, two in Virginia, one in Hawaii and two in New Mexico) or 10 squadrons of 18 aircraft if the service wants more squadrons and is willing to take the risk of having fewer backup aircraft.
“The Air Force is very close to a compromise between those two numbers,” says a participant in some of the discussions. “That’s not to say the requirement for 381 is not valid. But they’ve had to examine the fiscal realities and accept some [operational] risks by taking fewer than they want.”
That compromise number is sure to run into opposition from senior Pentagon officials such as Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England — considered the primary impediment to further F-22 production — as well as acquisition chief John Young. The pair have also tried to cut the alternative engine program for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter as a cost-savings measure and are withholding money that Congress approved for the engine and for advanced procurement of 20 more F-22s and upgrades, including advanced software packages.
Nobody has articulated President-elect Barack Obama’s final defense policy. But those involved in the transition say the lineup of Obama’s defense advisors — including several F-22-savvy members like former Air Force Secretary F. Whitten Peters and former Pentagon acquisition chiefs Paul Kaminski and Jacques Gansler — may indicate the new administration is likely to support production of several more lots of Raptors and, equally important, fund the classified electronic attack, electronic warfare and information warfare upgrades.
“The problem is that the programs of record aren’t properly funded,” a defense consultant says. “For example, cost overruns are often driven by the millions of lines of code that have to be developed. Obama’s team thinks that spiral upgrades of existing programs can avoid the software-related cost overruns with new programs.”
While awaiting a close examination of the Pentagon’s programs, the attraction to avoid new costs is creating an early inclination to support continued production of the F-22 and to reject a plan to accelerate the F-35 program at the Raptor’s expense.
“It won’t give you 10 squadrons of 24 aircraft, but it’s a sustainable force,” the consultant says. “Eighteen is possible if the aircraft has a very high utility rate.”
Obama’s stance is expected to fall between Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ policy of focusing intensely “on the war we have” and the stance of former Air Force Secretary Mike Wynne and retired Air Force chief Gen. T. Michael Moseley — both of whom Gates fired – of preparing for the war of 20 years from now.
“My guess is that Obama’s stance is going to be more progressive than Gates, but less futuristic than Wynne and Moseley,” the consultant says. “Chances are that they will go for a F-22 force of 250.”
England has called for ending production of the F-22 and pushing production of the F-35.
“That strategy of accelerating the F-35 program really doesn’t make sense,” the Obama consultant said. “It’s not a coherent theory to keep the Air Force modernized.”
