Mark Thompson (former Pulitzer prize-winning Star-Telegram reporter) has an interesting post on Time magazine's Battleland blog about the strange case of why the Air Force's F-22 Raptor, the world's pre-eminent (so its advocates say) air-to-air fighter jet wasn't used to establish the no-fly zone in Iraq.
The F-22, as Defense Secretary Bob Gates and others have pointed out, was of little use in combat in Afghanistan or Iraq. But, Thompson writes (and others have noted), "its stealthiness would have been key in enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya. Since it's supposedly immune to being shot down by Libya's air defenses, there would have been no need for that initial, largely U.S., bombing campaign to wipe them out."
Gen. Norton Schwartz, the Air Force chief of staff, told senators on March 17 – two days before the first bombs fell on Libya – that the F-22 would play a key role in any such action. "It will be -- would be -- useful, and I would have the expectation that at least in the early days it certainly would be used." He offered up that answer in response to a convenient question from Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., whose state plays a major role in building the F-22.Air Force boosters were salivating at the prospect of the F-22's combat debut.
One veteran fighter pilot privately told Aviation Week magazine Libya would be a "perfect scenario" for the F-22's baptism by fire.
Thompson has more interesting insights on the missing F-22s, which apparently were pretty close to the neighborhood of Libya:
Two weeks after telling Congress the F-22 "certainly" would be used, Air Force chief Schwartz pulled what pilots call a chandelle -- a 180-degree turn.
"Had the F-22s been in Europe, stationed in Europe both closer in proximity and therefore more available, they undoubtedly would have been used," Schwartz told a Senate panel March 30. "It really was an expedient judgment with respect to putting the plan together to executing on a very rapid timeline." (This is airpower the general is discussing -- airpower as in break-the-sound-barrier -- airpower like the B-1s and B-2 that flew missions over Libya…from their bases inside the United States.)
So much for Schwartz's "certainly" of a couple of weeks earlier. In fact, a person close to the F-22 program says six F-22s were in the neighborhood -- in the United Arab Emirates -- shortly before the Libyan action began. Specifically, they were in there from late January until early March. "The F-22 squadron was made ready to deploy for Libya ops at least twice," he adds. "The deployed unit was delayed in its redeployment for potential use, but then cleared to redeploy."
Citing a report by those boring bean counters at the Government Accountability Office, Time says the massive development and production cost increases that ultimately led to Gates cancelling the F-22 after just 188 planes were built, combined with the reduced orders, resulted the unit costs for the F-22 Raptor nearly tripling to $412 million per airplane.
So the nation has paid triple its estimated cost for an airplane apparently unsuited for any of the three wars the nation is now waging. Kind of makes you hope we do better buying the F-35 warplane, under development for the Air Force, Marines and Navy. Compared to the F-22, it's supposed to be a bargain: 2,457 planes for $383 billion, only $156 million apiece. As of today.
Also, suggested reading on Time's prescription for saving a trillion dollars on defense to help balance the U.S. budget.
No comments:
Post a Comment