The U.S. Air Force Has a Size Problem

The United States Air Force (USAF) has taken the strange approach to its mission of “air dominance.” According to Joseph Trevithick of The Drive, the Air Force appears intent on “cutting airpower capacity now and ‘accepting some risk’ in hopes of acquiring far more advanced systems sometime in the future.” 

This is, of course, the equivalent of putting the cart before the horse in terms of procurement. Or of tailoring missions to meet the Air Force’s preferred weapons rather than acquiring platforms to respond to the mission. 

It is an entirely backward approach that has come to define modern acquisition processes in the Pentagon. What’s more, this method has created some truly short-sighted decisions which have led to real strategic shortfalls for the US military today. 

Especially because so many of the systems the military is procuring today are designed to fight yesterday’s wars or the fantastical wars that only the greediest of Northern Virginia-based defense contractors could dream of in order to win lucrative contracts for themselves.

Acquisition Troubles 

Meanwhile, as the costs for the military continue to suck up more of America’s limited budget and resources, thereby incurring the wrath of dubious elected officials from both sides who believe that money could be better spent on domestic concerns, the USAF holds out hope that they will be able to cut their super expensive fifth-generation warplanes (the F-22 Raptor and the F-35).

They want to get rid of these programs which cost, in terms of the F-35, $1.7 trillion over the course of its lifetime, to get even more money to build their vaunted sixth-generation warplane.

What does the cost of this proposed wünderwaffe have on the present? 

Well, for starters, the USAF appears to be engaged in a process akin to autophagy. When a body is being starved, the body will start breaking down itself in a futile attempt to keep the body nourished. 

Something similar is happening in the Air Force. 

For example, this year’s proposed USAF budget included the cutting of 310 aircraft and the purchase of only 95 new ones. I’m not a math major, but that seems disproportionate. It looks a lot like we’re cutting more than we’re getting. 

The point of cutting old systems is to upgrade the force with newer systems and, with the money saved, to purchase the next generation of aircraft that will augment the force.

Even though the newer craft are technically more sophisticated than the ones they’re replacing, the Air Force presently enjoys a critical numerical advantage over most of its rivals. Should these cuts continue apace, though, that numerical advantage will be dangerously reduced. 

All on the empty hopes that an already cash-strapped Congress would throw money into the massively expensive, long-term sixth-generation program.

China’s Air Force Challenge

Meanwhile, China continues its military buildup. The Pentagon places China’s air force, the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) in third place, in terms of largest air forces in the world. 

The PLAAF is estimated to have more than 3,000 aircraft at its disposal. 

Of that number, 2,250 are believed to be combat aircraft while around 1,200 are fighter craft. On paper, at least, the USAF still has a larger force. But those planes are dispersed globally whereas China’s air fleet is finely focused on the Indo-Pacific region.

There’s the added problem of geography and force structure. Of course, the US military is the most integrated force in the world—as well as interoperable with multiple allied militaries in the region, such as Japan. 

But much of that interoperability and synergy among the various branches of the US military relies upon technological interlinks, such as those provided by cyber, EM spectrum, and satellites in space, all of which would be immediately targeted for degradation and destruction, when China finally decides to invade Taiwan.

What’s more, as Kris Osborn of Warrior Maven articulates, the PLAAF’s lack of numerical superiority over the USAF should not be taken as an advantage for the Americans. After all, the entire strategic culture governing the PLA is based upon Sun Tzu’s age-old notion of “all warfare is based upon deception” and the idea that China prefers to match their strengths against America’s weaknesses. 

So, engaging the Americans in a fair, conventional military fight is not in China’s best interests.

China seeks to balance the equation in their favor by using their massive regional missile capabilities to destroy major US military (and allied) air bases from where America’s vaunted fifth-generation warplanes, such as the F-22 and F-35, can deploy. 

It is widely believed that the one thing that can override China’s air force in a conflict over Taiwan would be the presence of a sizable number of fifth-generation warplanes. But if they are not already pre-positioned safely in the region, then the PLAAF’s threat to Taiwan and whatever US units are operating in-theater becomes significantly greater. If, however, the forces are pre-positioned in large numbers, there’s a great risk that China could knock those platforms out in a bolt-from-the-blue attack.

Chinese war planners are already planning to target strategic US bases and airfields in the run-up to any conflict with America over Taiwan. 

What’s more, as was discussed in another piece by me at this site, China plans to use its massive arsenal of anti-ship ballistic missiles to deter the United States from daring to deploy its expensive and nearly irreplaceable aircraft carriers into the region, when a war over Taiwan begins. 

And without those vaunted fifth-generation warplanes—specifically the F-22, which the Air Force has been systematically reducing in number since 2009—then America’s air force is at-risk of defeat.

Further, China’s emphasis on technological innovation and their country’s mass production capabilities (compared to America’s lack of industrial capabilities), makes China’s air force more of a threat than many realize. 

The increasing synergy between China’s land, air, and maritime forces will also help to offset the perceived American advantages in the air. 

Beyond that, China rightly recognizes the importance that their navy will play in augmenting their airpower, which is why China’s naval modernization has been the main priority for over the last 20 years.

If the Fifth-Generation Warplanes are So Great, Why Are We Wasting Money on F-15s?

There are greater problems facing the USAF beyond the insane decision to reduce the number of its aircraft without a requisite number of replacements being on hand. The aforementioned cost and complexity of the vaunted fifth-generation warplanes that will prove decisive in any war with China means that the United States is increasingly looking backward, to the fourth-generation warplanes that were first deployed in the 1970s and 1980s. 

Rather than expand the inventory of F-35s, because of congressional resistance, the Air Force is purchasing upgraded F-15EX Eagle IIs as a stop-gap.

But even the F-35 is not the correct weapon that is needed against a near-peer rival. American strategists know this, too. 

Sadly, the Obama Administration’s short-sighted decision to cut the F-22 Raptor’s production line in favor of the F-35 has done immense damage. The F-22 was designed as an air-to-air fighter. 

While the F-22 was not all that helpful against the enemies of the last 20 years, such as insurgents and tinpot dictatorships in the Middle East, this warplane is essential in challenging the kind of near-peer competitor that China is. 

The F-35 was really meant to bomb targets while operating in tandem with F-22 Raptors protecting them. The F-35 can also—and will be used to do so—be used as an air-to-air fighter. But the F-22 was much better at that role. 

In 2009, President Barack Obama opted to cut the F-22 program in favor of the F-35. Yet, the F-35 is still too costly under present budgetary conditions, meaning that the Air Force is buying more fourth-generation fighters. 

It begs the question: if the fifth-generation warplane is so important in the fight against China, as nearly every planner says it is, then why even waste tax dollars on older models of planes?

Quantity Has a Quality All of Its Own…

Lastly, the problem of attrition is real. 

Any fight against a near-peer competitor, such as China, will see the US military’s capabilities severely degraded. Whatever USAF planes make it into the skies before their bases or aircraft carriers are destroyed by Chinese missiles, will then have to risk being disadvantaged against Chinese fighters. 

Our pilots are trained better and much of our equipment is technologically superior. 

Yet, if we don’t have enough replacements on hand for that equipment—or those skilled pilots—then the Americans will not be able to stay in the fight long enough to provide the kind of assistance to the Taiwanese that would be required. 

That’s to say nothing of the kind of severe damage that China’s forces would do to Taiwan’s air force when they decided to initiate their attack on Taiwan.

So, yes, not only is the US Air Force getting too small to meet its global obligations, notably in regard to handling the China threat, but it is also struggling to overcome logistical and geographical problems that arise from facing a dynamic, technologically sophisticated near-peer rival, like China. 

No one in Washington has offered an acceptable solution to this problem. The longer we wait to address it—or if we simply decide to keep doing what we’ve been doing—the United States will wake up to a very painful day in which China’s forces negate our air force’s ability to obtain air dominance.

About the Author 

Brandon J. Weichert is a former Congressional staffer and geopolitical analyst who is a contributor at The Washington Times, as well as at the Asia Times. He is the author of Winning Space: How America Remains a Superpower (Republic Book Publishers), Biohacked: China’s Race to Control Life (Encounter Books), and The Shadow War: Iran’s Quest for Supremacy. Weichert occasionally serves as a Subject Matter Expert for various organizations, including the Department of Defense. He can be followed via Twitter @WeTheBrandon.