Latest news with #B-21
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Pentagon Wants To Shift Funds From Navy F/A-XX To USAF F-47: Report
The U.S. Navy's F/A-XX sixth-generation fighter program looks to have hit another snag, with the Pentagon reportedly prioritizing the Air Force's F-47 stealth fighter, amid concerns about how to run the two efforts simultaneously. Already, the F/A-XX was in limbo, with a U.S. official telling TWZ last month that the future of the program was still being reviewed. This came after reports that a contract award for the Navy's new combat jet could be delayed by as much as three years. Navy officials, meanwhile, continue to stress the importance of the F/A-XX to their plans. 'There's certainly a strong requirement for a sixth-gen fighter still,' Dr. Brett A. Seidle, Acting Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition (RD&A), said yesterday. 'I know there's a lot of discussion about [F/A-XX] right now, but the Navy position on that is there's a requirement that's necessary.' Seidle was speaking at a House Armed Services Committee hearing on Seapower and Projection Forces. His comments came in response to questions from U.S. Rep. Joseph David Courtney, the Democrat representative for Connecticut's 2nd congressional district. You can see that exchange in the video below, starting at the 35.25 mark: The hearing followed a Pentagon request last month to the House and Senate defense policy committees, which was seen by Bloomberg News, warning that 'Simultaneously pursuing two sixth-generation fighters risks under-delivery on both.' 'Given the schedule delays and cost growth across numerous airframes, DoD recommends a focus on the F-47, giving the Navy's F/A-XX program time for technical maturity and development,' the Pentagon request added. 'Phasing the F/A-XX after the Air Force's initial F-47 development will alleviate capacity concerns in the industrial base.' Exactly why there should be concerns about industrial capacity is somewhat unclear, although that could be a factor were Boeing to win the F/A-XX contract on top of the F-47. On the other hand, with Northrop Grumman busy with the B-21 stealth bomber, which still needs to get through flight testing, adding a few years to the F/A-XX timeline could mitigate risk there, were this contractor to walk away with F/A-XX. Reportedly, the U.S. Department of Defense requested that Congress shift $500 million from F/A-XX to the F-47, the contract for which was awarded to Boeing in March. Previously, these funds were allocated for the 'accelerated development' of the Navy fighter. There is now something of a battle between the Pentagon Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and the House Armed Services Committee (HASC). On the one hand, the F-47 is considered by the Pentagon to have 'full presidential support,' making it a priority for the $500 million that the House Armed Services Committee had added to the F/A-XX program under President Donald Trump's sweeping $3.9-trillion tax breaks package. While we previously reported on Pentagon recommendations to withhold $500 million from the F/A-XX program, it wasn't previously understood that it wanted to redirect this to the Air Force's equivalent effort, the F-47. The House Armed Services Committee is now seeking to block the funds from being redirected to the F-47, arguing that the Pentagon hasn't provided an adequate reason for this. Heather Vaughan, a committee spokesperson, told Bloomberg News that the Pentagon 'has yet to brief the committee on any changes for its plans to develop and procure' the Navy's new stealth jet. 'Absent any new information from the Navy concerning revision to defined capability gaps and shortfalls, mission requirements, cost, or acquisition strategy for F/A-XX, the committee continues to support the development of this critical platform,' Vaughan added. Earlier this week, the Senate Armed Services Committee released its defense section of the tax breaks package, which includes $750 million to 'accelerate the F/A-XX aircraft.' Originally, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman were all in the running to develop the F/A-XX. However, Lockheed Martin was reportedly eliminated from the competition in March because its proposal 'did not satisfy the service's criteria,' according to Breaking Defense, whose story cited an unnamed source with knowledge of the program. Any holdups to the F/A-XX program will be a worry for the Navy. The service considers a sixth-generation combat aircraft as a prerequisite for the future carrier air wing, especially in terms of a potential confrontation with China in the Indo-Pacific theater. 'The sixth-gen fighter has some capabilities that we need to counter the PRC,' Navy Adm. James W. Kilby, acting Chief of Naval Operations, said of the F/A-XX last month. 'Those are signatures, those are range, those are different engines. Those are all the things that will make it survivable. The Air Force and Navy have different missions, but we're going against the same threat.' Last month, a U.S. official, speaking to TWZ on condition of anonymity, denied reports that the F/A-XX program contract award could be delayed by as much as three years. 'Nothing is being delayed,' the official stated. 'A decision hasn't been made yet. That decision is still being determined by [the Pentagon] and service leaders, with conversations among Congress as well. It's a big program. Obviously, these things don't get settled on by one individual. Leaders are making a decision on whether to invest. It's all part of the process.' The Navy had planned for the F/A-XX aircraft to enter service in the 2030s and thereafter to replace F/A-18E/F Super Hornet strike fighters and EA-18G Growler electronic attack jets. According to a 2025 Naval Aviation Playbook, the F/A-XX 'is expected to feature superior range, speed, and sensor capabilities, with an emphasis on integrating manned and unmanned systems. This includes collaboration with autonomous drones serving as force multipliers and electronic warfare assets.' In regards to the range, it emerged earlier this year that the F/A-XX may offer just a 25 percent increase in this respect over the existing tactical combat jets in its carrier air wings. That disclosure is surprising, given that the service consistently makes it clear that extending the reach of its carrier strike groups and thus enhancing their survivability is a critical priority, as the range of expected threats also continues to grow. Regardless, the continued funding dispute may well still derail the current timeline for F/A-XX. In a report last month, Reuters wrote that the Pentagon's main issue about the F/A-XX program was 'concerns about engineering and production capacity,' but didn't elaborate further. If the F/A-XX does end up being delayed, the Navy might well have to look again at its tactical fighter fleet to avoid shortfalls. One immediate result would be the service relying longer than expected on its aging fleets of Super Hornets and Growlers. At one stage, the Super Hornet production line was expected to be shut down this year. However, in March of last year, the Navy issued Boeing a $1.3-billion contract for 17 new Super Hornets with a final delivery planned for spring 2027 at the latest. Buying more Super Hornets could be an option, but such a move would have to be made before the line is closed. An alternative would be to push more resources toward the F-35C stealth fighter, which the Navy has introduced to replace the last of its 'legacy' Hornets. As well as the baseline F-35C, Lockheed Martin is increasingly looking at the potential of further advanced developments of the Joint Strike Fighter, something the company has previously described as a 'Ferrari' or 'NASCAR upgrade' to the F-35's core 'chassis.' This could include a substantial fuselage redesign. With a future Pacific fight very much on its mind, neither of these options would be ideal for the Navy, and the current uncertainty around the F/A-XX program is very much bad news for the service. It's also worth considering the Navy's approach for the fleets of carrier-capable drone wingmen that it wants to accompany crewed combat aircraft in the future. As it now stands, the service wants its Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) designs to cost no more than $15 million to buy and have zero long-term sustainment costs. At the same time, there are signs the Navy may not be moving as quickly on CCAs as the Air Force, as you can read about here. Meanwhile, if the Pentagon gets its way and is able to inject another $500 million into the F-47, that will only help realize its goal to have the next-generation Air Force combat jet flying before the end of the current Trump administration. Contact the author: thomas@
Mint
5 days ago
- Politics
- Mint
Ukraine's drone strike is a warning—for the US
By now Americans know about Ukraine's remarkable drone strike on Sunday that damaged as many as 40 aircraft deep inside Russia as strategic bombers sat like ducks in a row on military bases. One urgent lesson beyond that conflict is that the U.S. homeland is far more vulnerable than most Americans realize. The details about Ukraine's daring operation are few, but Kyiv managed to sneak cheap drones across the border and use them to destroy costly Russian military assets. The bang for Ukraine's buck was considerable. You don't have to be a fan of thrillers to imagine a similar scenario in the United States. 'Could those have been B-2s at the hands of Iranian drones flying out of containers, let alone Chinese?" military analyst Fred Kagan asked this week. The U.S. strategic bomber fleet is small (about one-third the size it was in the Cold War) and concentrated at a handful of bases. See the aerial photo flying across social media of B-52 bombers lined up at Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana. The story is similar for fighters and capital assets like aircraft carriers. One lesson is that President Trump's planned Golden Dome missile-defense shield isn't the boondoggle it's portrayed to be in the press. The headlines are preoccupied with space-based interceptors. But the U.S. is exposed to many threats besides ballistic missiles—from drones and spy blimps to cruise missiles launched off submarines. The bipartisan Strategic Posture Commission warned in 2023 that the U.S. needs better integrated air and missile defenses against 'coercive attacks" from Russia and China, and such an attack could come from conventional weapons. In a crisis over the Taiwan Strait, Xi Jinping might threaten the Commander in Chief: Stay out of the Western Pacific or you never know what might happen to your pricey F-22s in Alaska. That's one reason the U.S. needs a layered missile shield that exploits new technology and existing systems like the Patriot. Israel's recent success shooting down drones with lasers shows that innovative and affluent societies can meet new threats. President Trump deserves credit for elevating missile defense as a presidential priority. But the U.S. has lost some basic muscle memory since the Cold War on living in a dangerous world. A prescient report this year from Thomas Shugart and Timothy Walton at the Hudson Institute warned about highly vulnerable U.S. airfields, especially in the Western Pacific. For the new B-21 bomber, the Air Force is looking at shelters 'akin to sunshades," Messrs. Shugart and Walton write, that could leave the aircraft 'exposed to threats, including lethal" unmanned aerial vehicles. 'Not building approximately $30 million" hardened aircraft shelters 'for over-$600 million B-21 bombers is an unwise decision that could endanger the US's ability to strike globally," they write. Such shelters always end up being a low budget priority compared with airplanes and missiles, and the message here is that defense spending can't stay at 3% of the economy and provide the security Americans expect. The bill moving through Congress puts up $25 billion for Golden Dome. But a national air defense won't be built by a one-time cash infusion, and the Administration is ducking a sustained defense buildup to mollify its fiscal hawks. Americans are accustomed to wars fought far from home by a force of volunteers, but everyone in the U.S. will be on the front lines of the next conflict. Political leaders could be doing much more to educate the country about this vulnerability, rather than boasting that the U.S. military is the best it has ever been. It isn't. Ukraine did the U.S. a favor by destroying bombers of a U.S. adversary—and sending America a wake up call about its own complacency.
Asia Times
07-05-2025
- Business
- Asia Times
Will a $1 trillion defense budget better protect America?
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has sent the Trump administration's FY2026 'Skinny Budget' to Congress, and it's a whopper. Overall, it cuts billions of dollars of spending, but for the first time, the proposed defense budget tops US$1 trillion. It far exceeds armaments spending anywhere in the world. And it is supposed to protect US territory and to assure American military dominance globally. But does it? Note that a 'Skinny Budget' is just that – an outline that lacks detail about where the money will go. Details are left for the 'real' budget submission that will be sent to Congress later this year. Note, too, that while the proposed expenditures are for 2026, they create obligations that will last for years and in some cases decades. New programs, except under unusual circumstances, will be paid for in future budgets for their projected lifespan. The new budget has big money for the B-21 'Raider,' a $700 million unarmed platform that is supposed to replace the B-2 'Spirit' bomber, which costs $2 billion per unit. But don't believe the B-21 price tag because it will be far more, probably coming close to the B-2's outlay. Why not keep the B-2 for the long term and drop the B-21? Because common sense and cost saving are apparently not part of the US Air Force's arsenal. The US Army, after what it has seen in Ukraine, is making changes. One good sign is getting rid of the new M-10 Light Tank, which was too heavy to cross many European bridges and to be airlifted into conflict areas. Nor was it survivable. The delivered current cost is $15 million per unit. Apparently, 80 have been sent to the Army, and the sunk cost in the program is reportedly $7.2 billion – money down the drain. Members of the North Carolina Air National Guard assess an Army M10 Booker Combat Vehicle before it is loaded onto a C-17 Globemaster III aircraft in North Carolina on Aug. 3, 2024. Photo: US Army / Staff Sgt. Reanna Hartgrove The Army is also divesting itself of other redundant or ineffective systems. The Skinny Budget, however, does not explain what will happen to the Abrams M-1 tank. Projected to be a game-changer in Ukraine, it failed to be that after being sent without active protection systems on board. Or even the extra armor that was welded onto some Abrams deployed in Europe. The Russians enjoyed bagging the Abrams and showing off captured ones in a Moscow park. A wrecked Abrams in Moscow. The Army has cancelled a planned Abrams tank upgrade but says it is pursuing a 'new' tank, which will mostly be an old tank with new paint and some added gadgets. For example, it wants to replace Israel's highly regarded Trophy active protection system (which is now an add-on for a hundred or so Abrams tanks) with an undocumented and unproven 'new' integrated one. The Trophy could be integrated just with software, but the Army spendthrifts want a new active defense system and a new tank. This will likely cost tens of billions of dollars, render the existing tank fleet obsolete and unsupported, and may not improve the tank's survivability in any meaningful way. The Army would be better off spending its money on drone protection, but that is not as sexy as a new tank. Meanwhile, the existing inventory of 5,000 Abrams tanks (3,600 in storage) will not be maintained and will never see a battlefield. There is some good news. The Skinny Budget goes all in on supporting President Donald Trump's Golden Dome strategic defense system. The so-far notional plan recognizes that the US needs continental air defenses against long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). Lowell Wood (sitting up, center left) and Edward Teller (leaning back, white suit) present their Brilliant Pebbles concept to Ronald Reagan and the SDIO staff. The model of the pebble interceptor has been draped in black cloth. The Russians have demonstrated with their Oreshnik hypersonic missile against a target in Ukraine that their longer-range hypersonic strategic systems, particularly Avangard, are an unprecedented threat. The Golden Dome is at least a partial solution to the threat. A display of a flight of the warhead of the Avangard hypersonic boost-glide weapon. Given current technology and the problem of locating hypersonic missiles and glide vehicles (e.g. Avangard), 'traditional' air defenses won't work. Once a hypersonic threat is at top speed, it generates a type of plasma shield that makes radar detection and tracking almost impossible. Even systems that can intercept in space, such as the US Ground-Based Interceptor (GBI) or the Israeli Arrow 3, are limited. The US is said to be redesigning the interceptor for the GBI, but that is years away. Today, the US has only 44 GBI interceptors, while the number of working interceptors is unclear. Of these, 40 are in Greely, Alaska, and four are at Vandenberg AF Base in California, ostensibly to protect against North Korean long-range missiles. The rest of the US is not protected in any legitimate manner. The US does have AEGIS cruisers and destroyers (why the Navy is prematurely dumping Ticonderoga-class cruisers and reducing sea-based air defenses is inexplicable) and has installed AEGIS onshore in Poland and Romania, as well as THAAD in the Middle East and South Korea. These, at best, are air defense stopgaps. Golden Dome almost certainly has to be a space-based system made up of armed satellites that can take down Russian or Chinese hypersonic missiles in the boost phase, when they are not yet hypersonic and at least technically vulnerable. Historical note: This was the Reagan-era plan for a system known as Brilliant Pebbles. The armed satellites were proposed by nuclear scientist Edward Teller and astrophysicist Lowell Wood in 1983. More than a thousand of these satellites were called for at the time. Present note: The only organization with the ability to put masses of satellites in orbit is Elon Musk's SpaceX. SpaceX has pioneered reusable rocket boosters, and its Starlink system has already put more than 7,000 satellites in orbit. The plan is to increase Starlink to 42,000 satellites in the next decade. Neither Russia nor China nor any other US company can match SpaceX's launch capabilities. Golden Dome is an ambitious, if undefined, new program. But it does not include defense against other territorial threats, especially drone attacks that can be supported by non-state actors and hostile countries. As the Ukraine war demonstrates, the Russians and Ukrainians can attack each other with long-range drones. Ukraine hit Moscow, including Putin's Kremlin office, with drones that flew 1,688 kilometers to their target. Any US enemy can do the same, either from land (including drones launched from inside the US) or from the sea. The US has no comprehensive air defense system and is badly exposed to an enemy attack, including against sensitive government installations, nuclear power plants, reservoirs and dams, and the population itself. Imagine, for instance, a drone crashing into the Super Bowl. As it stands, the Skinny Budget is a mixed bag that needs a lot of work. This time around, the problem is not just money but where it is spent and how well it will protect the United States, its people and its assets. Stephen Bryen is a special correspondent to Asia Times and former US deputy undersecretary of defense for policy. This article, which originally appeared on his Substack newsletter Weapons and Strategy, is republished with permission.
South China Morning Post
05-05-2025
- Business
- South China Morning Post
Sixth-gen fighter could block airspace 1,000km from Chinese shore, military article says
In a future conflict over Taiwan, Beijing's sixth-generation fighter could block the airspace to foreign bases in Guam for up to two hours from 1,000km away, according to a mainland Chinese military magazine. Advertisement The goal involving the next-gen fighter was created in view of People's Liberation Army weaknesses against the American B-21 stealth bomber in a conflict within the first island chain, it said. The ginkgo leaf-shaped fighter is unofficially dubbed the J-36 and is in development by the PLA. According to the article in Shipborne Weapons, a publication owned by China Shipbuilding Industry Corporation, when the sixth-generation fighter is in service, the PLA will be able to intercept US warplanes trying to penetrate the first island chain. It said it would also be possible to conduct airspace blockades lasting one to two hours and to suppress the air defence of bases in Guam from a distance. 01:09 New Chinese fighter jet seen over Chengdu tacitly confirmed by military New Chinese fighter jet seen over Chengdu tacitly confirmed by military 'This will make it difficult for the US Navy and Air Force to maintain air superiority over the western Pacific and to intervene militarily in a series of operations by the Chinese military within the first island chain,' the analysis in the magazine's March edition said. Should they ever engage in a war over Taiwan, the mainland Chinese and US air forces would most likely focus on fighting for control of the airspace about 1,000km (621 miles) from the Chinese coast, the article said. In recent weeks, the Chinese stealth aircraft under development has been spotted repeatedly undergoing test flights near the base of its developer, the Chengdu Aircraft Industry Corporation, suggesting it is making rapid progress. Advertisement In March, the US also announced its sixth-generation fighter, the F-47, but has revealed little further detail. However, the B-21 Raider – described as the world's first sixth-generation bomber by its developer Northrop Grumman – had its maiden flight in November 2023. The firm declared that production was 'ahead of schedule and on budget' and that it aimed to deliver at least 100 aircraft to the air force in the mid-2020s.
South China Morning Post
05-05-2025
- Business
- South China Morning Post
Sixth-gen fighter could block airspace 1,000km from Chinese shore: military article
In a future conflict over Taiwan, Beijing's sixth-generation fighter could block the airspace to foreign bases in Guam for up to two hours from 1,000km away, according to a mainland Chinese military magazine. Advertisement The goal involving the next-gen fighter was created in view of People's Liberation Army weaknesses against the American B-21 stealth bomber in a conflict within the first island chain, it said. The ginkgo leaf-shaped fighter is unofficially dubbed the J-36 and is in development by the PLA. According to the article in Shipborne Weapons, a publication owned by China Shipbuilding Industry Corporation, when China's sixth-generation fighter is in service, the PLA could not only intercept United States' warplanes from penetrating the first island chain, but also conduct airspace blockades lasting one to two hours and suppress the air defence of bases in Guam from a distance. 01:09 New Chinese fighter jet seen over Chengdu tacitly confirmed by military New Chinese fighter jet seen over Chengdu tacitly confirmed by military 'This will make it difficult for the US Navy and Air Force to maintain air superiority over the western Pacific and to intervene militarily in a series of operations by the Chinese military within the first island chain,' the Chinese magazine wrote in an analysis in the March edition. Should they ever engage in a war over Taiwan, the mainland Chinese and US air forces would most likely focus on the fighting for control of the airspace about 1,000km (621 miles) from the Chinese coast, the article said. In recent weeks, the Chinese stealth aircraft under development has been spotted repeatedly undergoing flight tests near the base of its developer, the Chengdu Aircraft Industry Corporation, suggesting it is making rapid progress in its development. Advertisement In March, the US also announced its sixth-generation fighter, the F-47, but has revealed little further detail. However, the B-21 Raider – described as the world's first sixth-generation bomber by its developer Northrop Grumman – had its maiden flight in November 2023. The firm declared that production was 'ahead of schedule and on budget' and that it aimed to deliver at least 100 aircraft to the air force in the mid-2020s.
