The Future Air Wing

The Navy has begun the process of designing the next generation (I absolutely despise that term as it implies that we’ll leap a generation ahead, which never works) carrier fighter.  The Navy is supposedly, also, preparing for future war with China although you’d never know it from the lackadaisical approach they’re taking.  Regardless, this all brings to mind the composition of the future carrier air wing. 

 

The Navy seems utterly confused.  They claim to want long range aircraft but continue to acquire short to medium range Hornets and F-35s.  They seem to want to emphasize unmanned but have refused to develop unmanned combat aircraft and are content with a tanker.  They say that anti-submarine warfare is important but show no interest in a new S-3 Viking equivalent.  They say that sortie rate is a paramount design factor even though that claim has been thoroughly debunked.  They’re building bigger Ford class carriers even though the air wings are steadily shrinking.  They claim resupply (COD) is important but replaced the C-2 Greyhound with a less capable MV-22 variant.  And so on …

 

So, if the Navy has it wrong, what is the right air wing for the future? 

 

Obviously, the air wing composition depends on the missions it will be given so we have to start by defining the mission.  Unlike many observers and the Navy, itself, ComNavOps does not see strike as being a main air wing mission in a future war.  I’ve posted that the task of future aircraft carriers is to escort Burke Tomahawk shooters and to establish mobile, local air superiority for other operations such as landings, Air Force bomber strikes, or cruise missile attack streams (basically escorting cruise missiles so that they can’t be significantly attrited during flight).  The common requirement from those missions is for a very long range, very high weapons capacity, long endurance/loiter air superiority fighter.  In order to meet those requirements, the aircraft will have to be quite large compared to what we’re used to today.

 

Let’s look, first, at the aircraft types our future air wing will need.

 

Fighter – There will be no more design-compromised strike/fighters.  We need single purpose, exquisitely optimized air superiority fighters to deal with the stealth fighters that the Chinese are developing and now fielding.  A semi-fighter / semi-strike aircraft isn’t going to be good at anything – witness the Hornet. 

 

The fighter we need will be a very long range, very high weapons capacity (12-18 missiles), long endurance/loiter air superiority fighter.  The aircraft will need good speed to enable it to reach the far off operational areas in time to be effective (we don’t want to spend half a day slowly cruising to reach the operation area only to arrive with exhausted pilots).  This suggests the need for sustained, economical supercruise.  All of this strongly suggests a much larger size fighter although I’ll leave the actual dimensions to the design engineers.

 

ASW – We desperately need to reconstitute fixed wing ASW to provide distant, outer layer ASW.  We need a modernized S-3 Viking with basic stealth shaping, decent speed, and good loiter time.

 

Tanker – Since we’re contemplating long range air superiority engagements, we’ll need a dedicated, long range tanker.  The idiocy of using front line combat aircraft as tankers is over.  The tanker needs to be a fairly large aircraft in order to carry enough fuel to be efficient and effective.  The problem with the Hornet as a tanker (aside from the idiocy of using a front line combat aircraft as a fuel truck) is that it couldn’t carry enough fuel to be effective for anything other than overhead recovery tanking.  Unfortunately, even the Navy’s new unmanned tanker carries too little fuel to be effective.  We need something on the order of a Viking or A-3 Skywarrior.  Of course, if it’s going to be in the vicinity of engagements, it will need basic stealth shaping.  Obviously, it will need enough speed to reach its refueling points in a timely manner.

 

Airborne Early Warning (AEW) – We’ve previously discussed the vulnerability of the current E-2 Hawkeye and the need to replace it with a stealthy B-21 variant (see, “B-21 Hawkeye”) or equivalent.  This will allow the Hawkeye to accompany and support far flung engagements without being a large, slow, blinking target.

 

Electronic Warfare (EW) – The EA-6B Prowler and EA-18G Growler have proven their value many times over and that value has only increased with modern electronic warfare.  We need a new EW aircraft that has the stealth, speed, range, and endurance to operate with the fighters, providing direct support at great distance from the carrier.  Presumably, this would be an electronic variant of the air superiority fighter which, since it would be a larger aircraft, would dovetail nicely with the EW requirements by being large enough to carry more equipment, pods, and operators.

 

Strike – While strike is not a primary mission, there is a need for a secondary strike aircraft.  This would be a modernized A-6 Intruder with good payload, basic stealth shaping, decent range, and good ground sensors.  These would not be used for 1000+ mile, deep penetration strikes but, rather, for medium range, moderately contested strikes that, for whatever reason(s) don’t warrant cruise missile attacks.

 

Now, let’s look at the numbers.

 

 

Type		Squadrons	Squadron Size	Number of Aircraft
Fighter	VF	4	14	56
Strike	VA	1(a)	10	10
AEW	VAW	1	8	8
ASW	VS	1	8	8
EW	VAQ	1	8	8
Tanker		1	10	10
				Total = 100

 

^(a)Depending on the mission, an additional VF squadron could replace the VA.

 

 

 

Operating in a wartime 4-carrier group, this gives us 400 aircraft including 224 fighters.

 

This air wing composition and size provides an effective means of accomplishing the carrier’s main mission of air superiority.  It is worth recalling that ‘stealth’ can be achieved not just via the aircraft’s inherent stealth characteristics but also through the use of supporting electronic warfare measures (see, “Alternative Stealth”).  For example, if the enemy’s radar can be disrupted then our aircraft are ‘hidden’.  EW will be extremely important in future aerial battles and this air wing provides a strong measure of EW support that is integrated directly into the fighter’s efforts.  Added to that is the ability to provide battle direction/management via stealthy AEW aircraft.  This ability to bring an E-2 Hawkeye forward in the form of a B-21 Hawkeye and provide battle management is a force multiplier, itself.  Overall, this is a balanced air wing with enough aircraft to accomplish its mission.

 

There you have it.  Having defined the proper role of the carrier, we were able to define the type and size of air wing needed to fill that role.  It is one of heavy air superiority with most of the remaining aircraft devoted to supporting the fighters in the air superiority role.