Military AI Works

This is the same song, new verse. I recall writing a staff study a thousand years ago about the advanced bomber program. That was when the B-1 was being considered. Carter Killed it and Regan revived it. But it stretched on forever it seemed. Now the NGB (gotta have a new acronym) looks like the same story.

From AF Daily Report 8 May 09

So Stealthy It's Not There: Although Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said he's only postponed the Air Force's next-generation bomber, it is "zeroed out" for 2010, deputy Air Force budget director Patricia Zarodkiewicz told reporters at a Pentagon briefing Thursday. No placeholder money is in the procurement or R&D budgets. Gates has said he wants more clarity on the NGB program—a position criticized by some defense analysts and lawmakers, who cite the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review and a decade of study. As recently as last year, the Next Generation Bomber was expected to be a $5 billion R&D effort. The budget does contain $500 million to continue upgrading and operating the existing bomber fleet, mainly with new radars and communications gear. There's another $173 million to keep 76 B-52s available as nuclear platforms. However, USAF officials could not immediately say whether there's any money for upgrade, service life extension, or replacement of the AGM-86 Air Launched Cruise Missile or AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missile, which only the B-52 carries and without which it has no nuclear mission. The Air Force announced a heavy drawdown of both missile inventories two years ago.

Reminds me of the time when the RAF wanted low level bomber. First the TSR2 was cancelled (years ahead of its time, a version of its terrain following radar is used in the Tornado today and the first a/c in the world to use a HUD). Then its replacement the F-111K was cancelled.

Later the British Govt said we are going to get the Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MRCA) developed with European manufactures. The delay was so long the RAF started to say MRCA actually meant "Must Refurbish the Canberra Again"

Well many years later the MRCA become the Tornado GR series.

From AF Daily Report 15 May 09

Bomber Timetable: Look for a new Air Force bomber "early in the 2020 decade," chief of staff Gen. Norton Schwartz said yesterday. He termed the operational date a "hunch," and as being the delay price paid for terminating the next-generation bomber program, which was supposed to have been flying by 2018. Schwartz also said he thinks the next bomber will be "evolutionary, not revolutionary." Defense Secretary Robert Gates killed the bomber, Schwartz said, because the Air Force "did not do our homework" in defining the parameters of the aircraft's mission and capabilities. Schwartz didn't say when the program would reappear in the budget, but it's zeroed in Fiscal 2010. That's significant, because it leaves no money to keep design teams together or even to conduct an analysis of alternatives. Schwartz said he doesn't think Gates or his deputies "sense any less need" for a long range strike capability, but they want more definition in the program.

The question is, will it be stealthy, just low observable or more of a workhorse a la the B-52. IOW is it going to be a new B-52, B-1 or B-2 ??

They are kicking the can down the road rather than trying to get a new bomber. It is easy to say that the AF 'hasn't defined the requirements.'
That is spin for a budget issue they don't want to address now.

Ahh.....gotcha.

From AF Daily Report 22 May 09

A Bill for the Bomber: Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) has introduced legislation aimed at restoring work now on the next generation bomber. Defense Secretary Robert Gates terminated the 2018 bomber, directed under the last Quadrennial Defense Review, with his 2010 defense budget proposal. Gates has said the Air Force did not define the new bomber's mission well and wants more study on the platform and the requirement. He has stated that he believes there is a need, just not an immediate one, for a new bomber; he has also stated it might not need a pilot in the cockpit. Some lawmakers and defense analysts have argued that the need is pressing and the requirement was set by the 2006 QDR. Air Force leaders have agreed with Gates that the service had not explained the NGB's attributes very well; however, Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz maintained there is a need for a new long-range strike platform. He expects to see one fielded in the early 2020s. For Thune and others, that is not soon enough. His bill (S. 1044), which is titled "Preserving Future United States Capability to Project Power Globally Act of 2009, would put the bomber back in the 2010 defense budget. (Thune release)

From AF Daily Report 27 May 09

Yes, New Bomber Needs a Pilot: That's the opinion of Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz, according to a report by Otto Kreisher in CongressDaily. Speaking at a Center for Strategic and International Studies-sponsored forum last week, Schwartz said he believes the new next generation bomber should have a nuclear capability and that would indicate it should have a pilot. Defense Secretary Robert Gates told lawmakers earlier this month that he was not certain a new bomber needed to be a manned platform. Schwartz acknowledged that the bomber question must await the Quadrennial Defense Review and Nuclear Posture Review, but he believes there's no question it should be nuclear capable "and that means it probably should be manned."

From AF Daily Report 5 Jun 09

NPR and the Bomber: With the Pentagon now undertaking a new Nuclear Posture Review, some in Congress are wondering how this will affect the Air Force's plans for a next-generation bomber. Appearing with a group of Defense Department and Energy Department officials before the Senate Armed Services Committee's strategic force panel June 3, Maj. Gen. Donald Alston, head of the Air Staff's new nuclear integration and strategic deterrence shop, said, when asked about this, that the Air Force is "taking a hard look at the requirements and the technology available for the platform." He said the Air Force likely will be more informed on the future course of the bomber by the outcomes of the current Quadrennial Defense Review than by the NPR. "But we do see linkage between both those examinations," he noted. When asked by panel chairman Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) if the Air Force's B-2 and B-52 bombers will be able to serve until 2030, Alston responded that the B-52 "has a lot of life left in it," while the B-2 will ultimately be facing threats that will "exceed its capability as a penetrating platform," thus driving the need for a new bomber. A preliminary report on the NPR is due to Congress in December. (Aston written testimony)

From AF Daily Report 5 Jun 09

Often Overlooked and Little Understood: With discussions having commenced with Russia on further reducing the size of the US and Russian nuclear weapons arsenals, the new commander of the Air Force's nuclear-capable B-2A and B-52H bomber force reminded lawmakers Wednesday of the continued importance of these manned bombers to the nation's strategic deterrent. In fact, they provide the most multifaceted leg in the triad, giving the President, Defense Secretary, and combatant commanders unique options that the land-based and submarine-launched nuclear missile forces cannot, Maj. Gen. Floyd Carpenter, commander of 8th Air Force at Barksdale AFB, La., wrote in his prepared statement for the June 3 hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee's strategic forces panel. The bombers, he noted, can be positioned or placed on alert to assure allies, shape the environment, dissuade potential adversaries, complicate adversary strategy, provide the US leadership with escalation-control options, and offer alternatives to the insertion of ground forces on foreign soil. And they are the only part of the triad that can currently be used both in conventional or nuclear roles. Yet, despite this versatility, Carpenter said "the importance of our bomber force to deterrence is often overlooked and little understood." Carpenter assumed command of 8th AF on June 1 (see below).