PDA

View Full Version : Air Guard losing its fighter punch


CommunityEditor
03-30-2009, 08:42 PM
A coming wave of fighter jet decommissionings and the lack of a firm plan to replace them has the Air National Guard on a steady path to a decade of mission cutbacks and deep reductions in the ranks of pilots and maintainers.

The decommissionings most widely and immediately affect the Guard’s fleet of F-16s, which comprise 495 of the component’s 746 fighter craft. Starting in 2011, F-16s pushing 30 years on the job start heading to the boneyard, a process that would eliminate the entire fleet by 2026, absent replacements.

Beyond a vague outline, there are no set plans to replace the aircraft, which generally is done as the active force picks up new aircraft and cycles its old fighters to the Guard. But currently, schedules to replace aircraft in the active force fall far short of keeping the Air Guard’s fleet at necessary levels.

“The [active] Air Force has their problems, but it’s more pronounced in the Air National Guard. We see the potential in some gaps in our fighters,” said Lt. Col. Don Bevis, a Guard Bureau liaison to Congress.

The gap is so pronounced that of the Air Guard’s 30 fighter units, more than half could be fighterless by 2022.

Air sovereignty at risk
Currently, the Guard is responsible for the bulk of Operation Noble Eagle, the Air Force’s air sovereignty mission to protect North America against attack. That mission is threatened by the pace of fighter decommissionings.

“If aircraft are not replaced by 2020, 11 of the 18 current air sovereignty alert sites could be without aircraft. The Air Force has not developed plans to mitigate these challenges because it has been focused on other priorities,” concluded a report released in January by the Government Accountability Office.

In a Defense Department response to a draft of the GAO report, planners said the gap in fighters and improvements to the air sovereignty mission would be addressed in the fiscal 2010 budget, scheduled for release in early April.

But the writing on the bureau wall points to the Guard losing fighters, rather than gaining them, in the short term.

An August internal Defense Department document laid out plans to cut 137 F-15s, 177 F-16s and nine A-10s across the Air Force to save $3.4 billion over five years.

About half of those fighters could come from the Guard, said Col. Rick Dennee, with the Guard’s planning and programming arm.

In the last week of February, the 54 adjutants general for the National Guard met to hammer out their pitch for funds.

Experts, analysts and Guard leaders look to the 2010 defense budget for a plan to fill the Guard fighter need for at least the next two decades. But the solution is not clear. Buying more aircraft is not a simple proposition — and not just because of looming cuts in defense spending. Much hinges on buying more F-22s and F-35s.

The F-22, the service’s most capable and expensive fighter, is unlikely to trickle down into the Guard’s arsenal for decades. Guard flyers are currently partnered with active units in Hawaii and Virginia that fly the F-22. Loose estimates for the F-35 reaching the Guard are 2015 at the earliest.

The Air Force is committed to the next generation of fighters to fill the coming fighter gap, National Guard Bureau Chief Gen. Craig McKinley told reporters in late February.

Planners have not ruled out buying less-expensive F-15s and F-16s, both of which still have active production lines for foreign military sales, he said.

But the Air Force isn’t into buying more legacy airframes, said Andrew Krepinevich, president of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. In a briefing to reporters on what the CSBA expects the budget to look like, Krepinevich said his consultations with Pentagon insiders indicate that legacy F-15s and F-16s aren’t even discussed as an option for new fighters.

Winslow Wheeler, a defense analyst with the Center for Defense Information, said the Air Force is risking its air dominance role by ignoring F-15s and F-16s.

“Buying more F-22s will make all of those problems worse and all those problems are extremely serious. ... The F-35 is even worse,” said Wheeler, who added that the F-35 is untested and still early in its development.

The official unit price for an F-22 is $142 million and the F-35 is $80 million, though Wheeler said he estimates the F-35 cost as closer to $120 million. A top-of-the-line F-16 costs around $80 million.

Wheeler said he thinks the Air Force should modernize existing F-15s and F-16s instead of buying the new fighters.

But Pentagon planners are taciturn about spending plans, leaving advocacy organizations and Congress little information to fight Air Guard budget battles.

“What kind of role is the Air Guard going to have?” said Rep. Joe Courtney, a Connecticut Democrat and member of the House Armed Services Committee.

“This is not just budget driven,” Courtney said. The lack of a clear plan “really goes to a structural question on the viability of the Air Guard.”

The fighter gap for the Guard runs the risk of causing wider pain. The Guard is responsible for 31 percent of the combined Air Force fighter mission, according to data from the National Guard Bureau. Moreover, the Air Guard is a major player in the air wars over Iraq and Afghanistan, said Lawrence J. Korb, former assistant defense secretary for manpower and a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress.

“The Air Guard pilots get as much flying hours as the regulars,” Korb said. “They really are integrated and those guys are really, really good.”

In the last quarter of 2008, Guard F-16 pilots flew 4,533 hours over Iraq, compared with 10,851 by active forces, according to data from the Air Force.

But if the Guard’s fighter force shrinks, that could translate to fewer units that can fly and maintain active iron in theater, Korb said. As of late February, the Air Guard didn’t have any of its aircraft in Iraq, but pilots and maintainers work on active aircraft, too.

Unlike the active service, the Guard can’t compel members to move if a mission closes or changes station. Without fighters, Guard units risk losing seasoned maintainers and pilots needed by the active service, Korb said.


Article: http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2009/03/airforce_air_guard_032909/

CommunityEditor
03-30-2009, 08:43 PM
Backtalk: Straighten up and fly right (http://www.airforcetimes.com/community/opinion/airforce_backtalk_guard_020909/)


As base realignment decisions and reviews of Pentagon strategy strip some Air National Guard units of their fighters, the 122nd Fighter Wing in Indiana is one of the lucky ones. While other Guard units convert to unmanned aerial vehicles or the C-27A Joint Cargo Aircraft, the “Blacksnakes” at Baer Field in Fort Wayne continue to fly the F-16C/D Fighting Falcon — a plane that never gets enough recognition for its value to troops and taxpayers.

“I’m a big F-16 fan,” said Col. James C. “Chris” Luithly, vice wing commander for the 122nd.

Guard leaders want to continue to provide about 50 percent of the F-16s in the total force. Some even favor new production of improved versions as a cost-saving alternative to the F-22 Raptor.

“The defense of the homeland, which is a core Guard job, doesn’t require a generation 5.0 fighter,” said Gen. Craig McKinley, commander of the National Guard Bureau. “We need an aircraft able to scramble quickly. The F-15 and F-16 have not been in production for U.S. forces in recent years. If we can get the right mix of cost and capabilities, we might look at [resuming production].”

But the future of the Guard fighter force isn’t rosy. Although they haven’t said so publicly, the last two Air Force chiefs of staff have sought to shift some fighters from Guard to active-duty units — even though guardsmen excel in realistic training exercises and in real-life combat.

The guardsmen at Baer Field are sensitive to their traditions. They recently painted a “heritage jet,” an F-16C block 25, in the markings of the wing’s predecessor, the 358th Fighter Group.

“It’s a nostalgic feeling to fly that jet, look out at the wing, and see invasion stripes,” said Luithly. During the Normandy invasion in 1944, Allied planes were marked for the benefit of friendly gunners with prominent black and white stripes on wing and fuselage.

The 122nd Wing welcomed veterans of the 358th group for a reunion last fall. “We were able to see how our old outfit stays ready to fly and fight in a new world,” said former Staff Sgt. Bert Lok, a World War II crew chief.

In the overall scheme of things, Indiana’s “Blacksnakes” are fortunate. The 122nd Wing, for now, is completing a transition from block 25 to block 30 Fighting Falcons. Block 30s, while old, have been upgraded to enhance their night-fighting capabilities.

Guard fighters may not have all the latest bells and whistles, but they protect us daily. Cutting the Guard fighter force is a bad idea. Leaders in Washington should try harder to remember where we came from and think seriously about where we’re going.

Gunner7
03-31-2009, 09:48 AM
Exactly what have the Conus CAPs accomplished? I am all for deterence but this is another ANG "jobs" program gone wrong.

Laxman
06-11-2009, 02:17 PM
Exactly what have the Conus CAPs accomplished? I am all for deterence but this is another ANG "jobs" program gone wrong.

The question should not be "what has it accomplished?" The question should be, "what are we willing to give up to make mission?"

The fact remains, CONUS CAPs have historically been used to chase down civilian pilots that get lost or do not read NOTAMs and escort them away from the nations leadership or other high value items. If something were to happen, the political fallout would crush whomever is to be the scapegoat. CONUS CAP is accomplished at 10s of thousands of dollars an hour. Moreso if you consider the cost of flying the F-22 and the maintenance to keep it operational. By leveraging away Guard fighters, Active Duty units will have to fulfill the role taking men and women away from their families for even more of the year. Furthermore, training suffers for the units covering the CAP that are supposed to deploy or retain high levels of operational expertise. BTW, with less fighters being available for operations CONUS and abroad, how can the AF effectively cover all the areas the Chief of Staff has promised?

ringjamesa
06-11-2009, 02:22 PM
Exactly what have the Conus CAPs accomplished? I am all for deterence but this is another ANG "jobs" program gone wrong.

CAPs? .......?