In mild of budget constraints, advancements in technology, and the rapidly expanding threat of armed drones, the US Air Force is reevaluating its plan for the future of its heat dominance.
This month, Air &, Space Forces Magazine reported that the US Air Force is reevaluating its approach to achieving air superiority, potentially shifting away from a manned sixth-generation fighter as part of its Next-Generation Air Dominance ( NGAD ) program.
According to Air &, Space Forces Magazine, US Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall announced a “pause” on the NGAD system in July. At this week’s Defense News convention, acquisition chiefs Andrew Hunter and James Slife, the source claims, suggested reevaluating requirements.
According to the report, the review will examine whether air superiority can be achieved by combining new technologies, such as Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA ), with existing ones like the F-35, F-15EX, and F-22. It makes note of the fact that the review has been prompted by advancements in autonomy and various technologies since the first NGAD analysis.
According to Air &, Space Forces Magazine, the US Air Force intends to combine these new capabilities into a coherent system that guarantees heat superiority in contested surroundings while remaining affordable. It adds that the reassessment’s results may affect the NGAD project’s future, with potential agreement honours as early as 2025.
The US Air Force’s programs for a potential weather dominance were in turmoil in June 2024, according to Asia Times, as a result of budget constraints, aging F-22 Birds, and uncertainty surrounding the NGAD system.
The USAF’s proposed budget proposal for fiscal year 2023 was criticized by the Government Accountability Office ( GAO ) for lacking in in-depth analysis of the effects of retiring older F-22 Block 20 fighters.
Upgrading these aircraft to Block 30/35 standards had cost US$ 3.3 billion and get 15 years. Concerns about the F-22 fleet’s validity are still present after the upgrades are finished, but the US is scheduled to spend$ 22 billion on them over the next ten years.
Meanwhile, a US Department of Defense ( DOD ) report released this August shows that the F-35 program is experiencing a reduction in planned aircraft purchases. Importantly, in 2025, 42 F-35 plane are planned for purchasing, down from 48 in 2024. The cost of purchasing for 42 aircraft continues to decline through 2026, before rising to 47 aircraft in 2027.
This decrease is observed across all variations of the F-35, including the F-35A, B and C designs. Budgetary considerations and programmatic adjustments are in line with the program’s fiscal constraints and proper adjustments.
However, the NGAD system, which aims to develop a sixth-generation warrior, faces prospective cancellation due to high costs, technical challenges and evolving atmosphere dominance concepts.
The US Air Force also struggles with the cost of the B-21 Raider and Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile ( ICBM ) programs, which have been delayed in the F-35 program.
As the US Air Force plans for weather dominance, a revived light warrior strategy offers a flexible, cost-effective solution to the high-cost NGAD system, balancing value with cutting-edge capacity.
Asia Times reported in August 2024 that the US Air Force is considering revising its light warrior strategy to address issues with its next-generation warrior system. This shift aims to create flexible, cost-effective plane in response to China’s airpower progress.
The idea, resembling a scaled-down F-35, emphasizes fast software upgrades over traditional technology improvements, aligning with the NGAD program. The NGAD program’s high costs have drawn criticism because they cost almost US$ 250 million annually for each stealth fight jet of the sixth generation.
A blended fleet could be created thanks to the light fighter concept, which was entice uncrewed CCA drones while balancing high-end capabilities with affordability.
The idea also resonates with past criteria for a “high/low” mixture of fighters, which could change the aging F-16 ships and give a cost-effective answer to maintaining air superiority.
In May 2024, Asia Times reported that extremely complex and expensive sixth-generation fighters properly finally waste money and make the US less competitive in other fields, including space.
The US government perhaps be better off emphasizing unmanned systems and space-based weapons platforms that are more cost-effective, reduced and aligned with upcoming corporate requirements, the statement argued.
Instead of investing in probably useless warplanes, the US could possibly prioritize the development of space-based weapons and concentrate on building less complicated, easier-to-mass-produce systems that can do, outpace and swarming adversary targets.
The US Air Force is under increasing pressure to strike a balance between improved air defense capabilities and evolving aerial threats as drones transform the battlefield.
Clifford Lucas claims in a War on the Rocks article from May 2024 that the US Air Force is at odds with itself with a heated debate over air defense.
Lucas raises the question of whether air superiority is sufficient to shield against changing threats as drone technology develops, blurring the line between conventional aircraft and missiles.
Lucas says Lucas makes an outline of both sides of the debate, arguing that critics claim that the current air superiority doctrine places too much emphasis on manned aircraft and ignores the growing threat of unmanned aerial systems.
On the other hand, he claims that air defense advocates believe it should be given more weight because drones are more similar to missiles than conventional aircraft, necessitating a shift in attention to missile defense systems.
Lucas makes the point that US military leaders believe that air defense and superiority are separate but interdependent missions that need to evolve in tandem.
He claims that the US Air Force should reevaluate resource allocation in light of the development of ever-more sophisticated drones and advocate for better coordination between the military branches to maintain control in disputed airspaces.
He points out that the ongoing debate could influence future strategies, putting the emphasis on more adaptable, integrated defense systems that can deal with a wide range of aerial threats.
As military planners strive to secure the skies in upcoming conflicts, Lucas emphasizes that the growing threat of drones makes it imperative for a robust air defense system and modernized air superiority strategy.
He claims that the emphasis is shifting to figuring out a balance between these two priorities in light of the realities of next-generation conflict.