The United States is preparing a war

Plan the Air Force of America, how to bomb Russia and China

How freely did American combat pilots feel in the sky since the early 1990s – almost 20 years of undivided air supremacy! No Russians, neither Chinese. Aviation of the first fell to the ground in the 90 s; the latter had not yet managed to establish their own serial production of combat aircraft.

  • And why, John, do not we fly to bomb Baghdad?
  • We’re tired already, Billy, as long as you can; let s fly and bomb some Tripoli for difference.

Americans bombed a lot, and often with impunity, the largest losses of aircraft equipment fell on operations in Iraq, but with a few dozen downed and damaged aircraft were not considered particularly. After all, the USA still has the largest fleet of combat aircraft.

Now it turned out that this is not enough.

– The US Air Force needs urgent and full-scale modernization to be ready for hypothetical conflicts with Russia and China, – concluded the research company Miter Corp. And the US Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA). And although the development of the air force according to the plan “US Air Forces: Challenge to the Future” has been underway since 2013, it turned out that the United States lacks combat aircraft — bomber, fighter, reconnaissance aircraft, and also tanker aircraft.

What kind of planes does the US Air Force need in order to penetrate the defense of the air defense system, to cope with fighter aircraft, and, ultimately, to be able to defeat China and Russia? Their number is important as well.

Back in September 2018, the military aviation command itself announced that they needed a total of 386 combat squadrons (with the current 312) in order to successfully counter future threats. They asked “modestly”, but, according to the US Congress, this number of aircraft may not be enough. The senators were based on the research of CSBA specialists, who pointed out the need to develop a number of new technologies, including an inconspicuous drone with weapons on board and a reconnaissance drone. Also, attention was drawn to the critical shortage of tanker aircraft, bombers, fighters, reconnaissance and drone UAVs.

The proposals of experts surpassed even the most daring requests of the Pentagon. According to the conclusions of the CSBA, the number of bomber aviation should increase from 10 squadrons that they have today to 24. The number of fighter squadrons should increase from 55 to 65, the fleet of tanker aircraft should be increased from 40 to 58 squadrons. An increase in reconnaissance-impact drones is proposed from 25 to 43. At the same time, the compilers of the report for the Congress on the prospects for the development of combat aviation have included in the list of expansion even those aircrafts that are not even in development.

According to experts at the analytical center, so far only the Northrop Grumman B-21 bomber meets future requirements and can lead battles (it will go into service no earlier than 2020). At the same time, the CSBA believes that Russia and China will not stand still either and will noticeably advance in the development of both combat aircraft and air defense systems. (Do not even hesitate!).

The US Air Force Command, which conducted its own research, does not fully agree with the estimates of the CSBA, and also draws attention to the development of such types of compounds that relate to space, cyberspace, missiles, air transportation, and combat and rescue operations in combat conditions. The US military turned out to be more pragmatic (they thought about saving the downed pilots) and more economical – in their opinion a few smaller number of air squadrons are enough. At the same time, as follows from two parallel studies on one topic, experts from the Air Force and the analytical center were based on different lists of threats. For example, the Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force, General David Goldfein, believes that they need the declared 386 squadrons in order to “defeat an equal in strength threat and be able to contain an almost equal in strength threat.”

CSBA also proposes to create such an air force that can achieve more ambitious goals.

According to their scenario, the United States at the first stage may be drawn into a large-scale conflict with an almost equal rival – for example, as a result of “large-scale military actions of the PRC in the South China Sea”. After a short time, the American air forces will have to withstand the aggressive actions of the second, almost equal in strength rival – suppose, as a result of “Russia’s invasion of one or more Baltic countries”. Within the framework of such a scenario, experts of the strategic center believe, Russia and China will be able to effectively defend themselves by turning what is now a challenged medium into an “acutely challenged medium” characterized by mobile overlapping and interconnected ground-to-air missile systems. used sensors and other methods so that the American equipment does not fix them.

The approach of CSBA experts to the compilation of a report for the US Aviation Development Congress is reminiscent of the principles and methods of computer games (they played exactly the “Strategy” as a child), on which they seem to have developed deep analytical skills. He jabbed his finger at the program – oops, and here is the ready solution. It is not surprising that they so easily develop scenarios of wars with Russia and China, counting the number of airplanes needed to achieve victory. At the same time, pay attention, the proposed theater of military operations – the South China Sea, the Baltic countries. The continental part of the United States is not even considered here, the Americans are not accustomed to fighting on their territory, and the younger generation no longer remembers that the Russians are not used to stop even in Paris, although it’s not a problem to get to Berlin, even if at a great price. And then what is Washington exception?

But General David Goldfein is cautious and speaks only about the possibility of restraining practically equal force, because he has a feeling for himself what real war, not computer war, is. On May 2, 1999, his F-16 was shot down by a Soviet-made rocket in the sky over Yugoslavia, and a NATO helicopter arrived at the place where the American pilot landed with a parachute and Goldfein was not captured. And he is also aware of the real number and condition of the aircraft fleet of US Air Force combat vehicles, in which in 2010 alone, almost 250 F-15 and F-16 aircraft were written off, and the much-praised new F-35 fighter bomber, despite all the mass production still in a state of refinement.

  • A sharp increase in the aircraft fleet of combat aircraft or plans for building capacity in the air can only indicate preparation for offensive operations,” says Leonid Ivashov, president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems.
  • We can also recall historical examples before the start of the Second World War, and the arms race, when NATO and the Warsaw Pact stood on the threshold of a new world war. The same Americans before the invasion of Vietnam significantly increased the number of aircraft and helicopters. Now, statements about the need to update the US Air Force, increase the number of aircraft squadrons, also suggest that the Americans are going to fight, albeit in the long term.

This is an offensive policy, and not in any way deterrent, as for example in Russia, which pays great attention to air defense weapons – to prevent attacks. Another nuance is that the United States has relaxed somewhat in recent decades and has slowed down somewhere in the development of aviation, especially as regards strategic bombers. Plus, they have a “transition period” in fighter aircraft, when old aircraft are already being written off, and new developments have not yet filled their niche. Nevertheless, the very fact of “building up muscles” is rather alarming, and in this situation neither Russia nor China can rest on their laurels and certainly don’t rely on the policy of hats.

According to their scenario, the United States at the first stage may be drawn into a large-scale conflict with an almost equal rival – for example, as a result of “large-scale military actions of the PRC in the South China Sea”. After a short time, the American air ass will have to withstand the aggressive actions of the second, almost equal in strength rival – suppose, as a result of “Russia’s invasion of one or more Baltic countries”. Within the framework of such a scenario, experts of the strategic center believe, Russia and China will be able to effectively defend themselves by turning what is now a challenged medium into an “acutely challenged medium” characterized by mobile overlapping and interconnected ground-to-air missile systems. used sensors and other methods so that the American equipment does not fix them.

The approach of CSBA experts to the compilation of a report for the US Aviation Development Congress is reminiscent of the principles and methods of computer games (they played exactly the “Strategy” as a child), on which they seem to have developed deep analytical skills. He jabbed his finger at the program – oops, and here is the ready solution. It is not surprising that they so easily develop scenarios of wars with Russia and China, counting the number of airplanes needed to achieve victory. At the same time, pay attention, the proposed theater of military operations – the South China Sea, the Baltic countries. The continental part of the United States is not even considered here, the Americans are not accustomed to fighting on their territory, and the younger generation no longer remembers that the Russians are not used to stopping them even to Paris, although it’s not a problem to get to Berlin, even if at a great price. And then what is Washington exception?

But General David Goldfein is cautious and speaks only about the possibility of restraining practically equal force, because he has a feeling for himself what real war, not computer war, is. On May 2, 1999, his F-16 was shot down by a Soviet-made rocket in the sky over Yugoslavia, and a NATO helicopter arrived at the place where the American pilot landed with a parachute and Goldfein was not captured. And he is also aware of the real number and condition of the aircraft fleet of US Air Force combat vehicles, in which in 2010 alone, almost 250 F-15 and F-16 aircraft were written off, and the much-praised new F-35 fighter bomber, despite all the mass production still in a state of refinement.

This is an offensive policy, and not in any way deterrent, as for example in Russia, which pays great attention to air defense weapons – to prevent attacks. Another nuance is that the United States has relaxed somewhat in recent decades and has slowed down somewhere in the development of aviation, especially as regards strategic bombers. Plus, they have a “transition period” in fighter aircraft, when old aircraft are already being written off, and new developments have not yet filled their niche. Nevertheless, the very fact of “building up muscles” is rather alarming, and in this situation neither Russia nor China can rest on their laurels and certainly don’t rely on the policy of throwing your hats.

(That s how Russians call the silly believe you can win just relying on number. Like every soldier will throw his hat and if the army is quit big, you can win the war).