Re: 미공군은 A-10을 근시일 내에 퇴역시킬 것이며, KC-Y 브리지 탱커 계획도 취소할 것

[위종민]

https://www.airandspaceforces.com/brown-faster-than-expected-a-10-retirements-turning-41-fighter-plan-into-just-4 

A-10을 당초 예정보다 더 빨리 퇴역시켜 주요 전투기를 F-35, F-16, F-15E/EX, F-22 (NGAD 전환 전까지)으로 유지할 예정이고, KC-Y 브리지 탱커 계획을 취소하고 KC-Z 계획을 추진할 예정이라고 하네요. 

A-10C는 현재 미공군에 286기가 운용중입니다. 길어도 6, 7년이면 퇴역하겠네요.

( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_United_States_Air_Force_aircraft )

Two A-10 Thunderbolt IIs from the 355th Fighter Wing. Staff Sgt. Betty Cheval‎ier

Brown: Faster-than-Expected A-10 Retirements Turning ‘4+1’ Fighter Plan into Just ‘4’

John Tirpak

5-6 minutes

---

With Congress starting to go along with the Air Force’s wish to retire its aging A-10 fleet, Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr.’s “4+1” fighter plan of two years ago is “probably just ‘4’ now,” he said March 15.

“We’re retiring A-10s faster than we originally thought”, Brown said at the annual McAleese defense forum in Washington, D.C. “I think that’s probably the right answer.”

The A-10’s close air support mission can be carried out by a variety of other platforms, Brown said, and the Air Force must move on to cutting-edge capabilities that can survive in contested airspace and will keep the service ahead of China, the pacing threat.

The four fighters in USAF’s plan will be the the:

• F-35
• F-16
• F-15E/F-15EX
• F-22 before it transitions to the Next-Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) fighter around 2030

At the moment, the F-35 is “right behind” the F-16 in overall numbers, Brown said, and “in the not so distant future,” it will become the majority fighter in the combat air forces, presuming the Air Force continues to buy them at a rate of 48 per year.

The F-15E and F-15EX will have a “similar capability” to each other, Brown noted. The service will focus its investments on its newest F-22s and is seeking to retire 32 of the oldest airframes, a move which Congress declined to allow in the fiscal 2023 budget. But the F-22 Block 30/35s will continue to be updated and kept in service until NGAD replaces them, Brown said.

Despite retiring A-10s to find the savings needed to afford new systems, Brown said he has forbidden his staff from using the phrase “divest to invest.” Instead, “we are transitioning to the future,” Brown said.

He also said he engages frequently with staffers on Capitol Hill, where the first element of the discussion is the threat, and after that, the relative contribution of aircraft “in their district that they want to hold onto.” Brown said the Air Force is making headway getting Capitol Hill to see the need to transition to new systems.

Brown noted press coverage of Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall’s announcement at last week’s AFA Warfare Symposium that the service is pursuing a notional fleet of 1,000 Collaborative Combat Aircraft.

“I don’t know if that will be the actual number,” Brown said, but the effort has three elements.

“There’s the platform itself. There’s the autonomy. And then there’s the … organize, train and equip; the standing up units,” he said. These elements will be conducted “in parallel versus in serial” fashion, he said.

Just as important, Brown said the Air Force is investing in the munitions that will go with NGAD and CCA aircraft, and he noted emphasis on the AGM-158 JASSM-ER, the Stand-in Attack Weapon (SiAW), and AARGM-ER, the AIM-260 Joint Advanced Tactical Missile and more upgraded versions of the AIM-120 AMRAAM.

Research and Development

While the broader Pentagon focused its fiscal 2024 budget on buying things, Brown said the Air Force has put significant new funding into research, development, test, and eval‎uation. That’s being done to “give us options,” he said. As the threat evolves and advances, the Air Force needs to be able to shift gears to keep up with it, Brown said, and “you can’t produce what you haven’t started.” But not all technology initiatives will go forward.

Brown said there are no “gaping holes” in the Air Force budget, and the service is moving forward in virtually all areas where it needs to. He cited $26 billion focused on Kendall’s Operational Imperatives. The remainder of the $185.1 billion USAF “blue” budget—meaning what’s left after Space Force and ‘pass through’ funds are subtracted—is focused balancing the “fight tonight” readiness needs of the service versus “what we need for the long term,” Brown said.

Asked what Congress can do in terms of adding funds or emphasis, Brown said what USAF needs most is “a budget on time.”

Bridge Tanker

Addressing the Air Force’s recent decision to abandon its KC-X, Y, and Z plan to recapitalize the tanker fleet, Brown said the move was due to the fact that “the threat is completely different now” than when that plan was crafted more than 10 years ago.

“We will … shorten the bridge tanker” plan which was the KC-Y, and move as rapidly as possible toward what used to be the KC-Z, now known as the Next-Generation Air refueling System (NGAS), Brown said. The old method of relying on derivatives of commercial aircraft such as airliners and freighters for tankers won’t work, Brown said. Instead, NGAS will be a stealthy and more survivable aircraft, and the service is trying to move its development “to the left,” he said.

[백선호]

스텔스 급유기 KC-Z를 빨리 추진하네요.

[Minowski(김유철)]

ABMS에서 너무 공격적인 목표를 잡아 E3 대체에 혼선을 겪으면서 부랴부랴 E7 도입하게 된 거 생각하면, 참 미래전력 투자에 고심할 것도 많고.... 혁명적으로 기술이 변화하고 있으니 보수적으로 만 갈수도 없고...

[위종민]

2000년대~2010년대에 중동에 발목잡혀 낭비(?)한 시간과 자원이 이자까지 붙여 부담을 주는 것 같습니다. 2020년대 후반의 갭을 무시할 수도 없고..