Reference News, July 5 report: The U.S. "Defense News" weekly website published an article on July 4 with the title "What's in a Name? Fighters, Bombers, and Modern Air Combat," authored by Gregory Marandino and Thomas Mankins. The article is excerpted as follows:
Air combat has evolved from high-speed, maneuverable fighter aircraft dogfights to long-range duels between aircraft carrying missiles. In 2015, John Stillion foresaw this shift. His research showed that victory was no longer the result of the fastest, most maneuverable fighter destroying enemies in a dogfight. Instead, modern air combat tends to use larger, harder-to-detect aircraft, defeating opponents through network information and long-range missiles.
This shift has led to a new air combat model, where future air superiority aircraft may resemble bombers rather than fighters. It remains unclear to what extent the U.S. Air Force's F-47 and the Navy's F/A-XX reflect these design principles.
Currently, the efforts by the U.S. Air Force to gain air superiority over China reflect an assumption that aircraft with traditional fighter characteristics—high maneuverability, speed, and small size—will still be at the core of air combat. These efforts include increasing the number of missiles each F-35 can carry, purchasing F-15EX fighters, developing unmanned collaborative combat aircraft (CCA), and deploying the next-generation F-47 air superiority aircraft. These efforts conflict with the evolving nature of modern air combat. Deploying high-survivability, bomber-sized aircraft for long-range air combat can compensate for these shortcomings.
From the beginning of air combat, "see first, shoot first" has been the key to victory. Although aircraft maneuverability and speed have long been the foundation for achieving these goals, this is no longer the case. Long-range sensing and extended-range missiles have profoundly changed air combat. When information superiority is combined with weapon kinematics superiority, an aircraft can achieve "see first, shoot first." Today, an aircraft's survivability depends on reducing its signature to thwart remote detection, tracking, identification, and engagement. Speed and maneuverability remain important, but these characteristics are now more evident in weapons rather than aircraft.
Air combat increasingly favors large aircraft capable of carrying more long-range missiles and other payloads for long-distance operations. Historical examples support this trend. Over the past 33 years, the average kill probability of each AIM-120 missile fired by the U.S. Air Force has been 0.46. These engagements took place in a favorable electromagnetic environment. When facing the Chinese Air Force, U.S. aircraft will encounter complex electronic countermeasures, which will further reduce the probability of hitting a missile and increase the number of weapons needed to destroy a single target. The ability of aircraft to carry a large number of missiles is crucial in contemporary air combat.
Fighters have traditionally been small aircraft, which limits the number and size of missiles they can carry. Additionally, the small weapon bays of fighters limit the length and diameter of missiles, thereby limiting the attack range. These factors put the Air Force's traditional fighter inventory at a disadvantage, making it difficult to fully utilize the critical role of aircraft size in contemporary air combat.
Facing these challenges, what solutions can enhance the Air Force's aerial firepower? One option is to deploy more fighters; another is to increase the number of missiles each fighter carries; and the third is to increase the number of flight sorties of fighters.
Upon closer examination, these methods seem less appealing. Although buying more fighters (including CCA) might help, the inherent range and payload limitations of small aircraft affect the effectiveness of this option.
Instead, the U.S. Air Force should consider non-fighter options to address the challenges of contemporary air combat. If the Pentagon takes action and accepts Stillion's vision of air combat, it should increase the size of "fighters," perhaps to the size of current bombers. For example, the B-21 Raider bomber currently under testing (as shown in the figure) seems to have the survivability and payload required to stand out in contemporary air combat. Although designed and designated as a bomber, it is more useful to think of it as a stealthy, networked, long-range aircraft capable of carrying a large number of large weapons.
The characteristics of air combat continue to evolve, favoring reduced radar signatures and increased missile capacity rather than pursuing speed and maneuverability. The U.S. should pay attention to this. Deploying larger, high-survivability aircraft in long-range air combat will fully leverage the changes in air combat. The U.S. Air Force has a rich history of pioneering new forms of aerial power. Now is the time to break the norm and set new standards for air superiority. (Translated by Wang Haifang)
Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7523486654313644544/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion by clicking on the [up/down] buttons below.