SPONSORED BY:

Attack of the Drones

Now that congress has killed the F-22, the Air Force is facing another shock to the system: planes without pilots.

 
PHOTOS
Weapons Porn

The greatest, weirdest, coolest hardware in the American arsenal.

 
 

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

Separate multiple addresses with commas

SPONSORED BY
 

Correction (published Oct. 8, 2009): This story originally reported incorrectly that Gen. Curtis LeMay was the first head of the SAC. NEWSWEEK regrets the error.

For more than 60 years, the Air Force has trumpeted itself as the service of glamour, its pilots ruling the skies, soaring, diving, bombing, and strafing from far above—yet still commanding the clash of armies on the ground. In movies, they wore white scarves and set the girls' hearts aflutter.

But all that is changing in ways that few outsiders understand. A fierce fight is on for the mission, culture, and identity of the Air Force, and the Top Guns are losing. This is the real story behind a passionate political struggle this past summer over a major weapons system, the F-22 Raptor, the world's most sophisticated fighter plane.

On its face, the F-22 debate was a straightforward budget battle. The Air Force had 183 of the stealth fighters in its fleet, and another four on the way. It wanted $4 billion for 20 more planes in the next year—a down payment on 200 more it hoped to build in the next decade, for a total of 387.

For years, senior Air Force officers had pushed for the F-22 with an intense, almost messianic passion. Congress complied, largely because huge sums of money were at stake. (The Air Force had shrewdly spread the plane's contracts and subcontracts across 46 states.) But the request came at a time of economic calamity, mounting national debt, and a shift in thinking about military requirements. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said no, and President Obama announced he would veto the entire defense budget if it contained money for even one more F-22. The project was killed, story over.

But the struggle goes much deeper than that, and its consequences are more profound. To understand why, you need to go back to the beginning: 1981, the height of the Cold War, when the F-22 was born.

Its mission was air-to-air combat—keeping control of the sky during a major war, so that bombers could reach their targets, and soldiers down below could fight without worrying about enemy aerial attacks. With its stealth technology (making it much less visible to radar) and high-tech electronics (making it more powerful at longer ranges), the plane was designed to shoot down the latest Soviet combat planes with greater ease than anything else in the sky.

But the first operational F-22 didn't roll onto a runway until the end of 2005, after nearly a quarter century of delays, technical setbacks, and massive cost overruns. By that time, the Cold War was long over.

No country on earth had an air force remotely capable of going up against the latest versions of the U.S. F-15 and F-18 fighter planes, much less something newer. Many in Congress, and some civilian analysts in the Pentagon, wanted to cut our losses and kill the F-22 outright. But defenders of the plane were more powerful. To them, the Air Force meant fast, agile planes dogfighting high in the sky. To kill the most advanced fighter plane was tantamount to killing the Air Force. So they did what they do best: they put up a fight.

Label

Newsweek Top Stories
Gone Rogue
Gone Rogue

How Sarah Palin hurts the GOP … and America.

The Decade's Best Quotes
The Decade's Best Quotes

NEWSWEEK's 20/10 Project recalls the lines we'll never forget.

Best Celebrity Mugshots
Best Celebrity Mugshots

10 unforgettable arrest photos from the 2000s.

An Evolutionary Edge
An Evolutionary Edge

How grandmas may play favorites.

Discuss

Sponsored by

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Cuteasafruit @ 10/13/2009 3:17:49 PM

    While, I agree that fighter pilots are a thing of the past, I disagree with your opinion that drone pilots will become the future leadership of the Air Force. The various ISR platforms (the predator, global hawk, U2, etc) are vital to the Air Force mission in Iraq and Afghanistan, but pilots are not running the missions made possible by these platforms, intel guys are. The Air Force intelligence community plays a vital role in supporting ground operations, and drones are a key asset to their missions. The future leaders of the Air Force will most likely come from intelligence, not drone pilots. These guys have real experience in leadership and working with a team in order to support the other branches of the military.

  • Posted By: DKnorr @ 09/29/2009 5:56:31 PM

    I respectfully disagree with the Pentagon official that thinks that UAV pilots don???t need to be pilots. As an airline pilot for a regional airline that operates from coast-to-coast, border-to-border, and into some Canadian airports; I believe that UAV pilots should be required to at least complete basic flight training. With the increased use of UAVs in Iraq and Afghanistan and soon to be used to help patrol the borders, if they???re not already being used along the borders, it???s even more important that UAV pilots need to be pilots. I don???t believe that they need to be required to complete fighter training, but they should be required to complete basic flight training.

    If UAVs are going to be used in the same airspace as civilian aircraft, the UAV pilots need to know the basic flight knowledge that all pilots need to know to operate in the National Airspace System.

  • Posted By: jlevyellow @ 09/27/2009 4:00:53 PM

    I am amazed at the short-sightedness of those who killed the F22 program. It is clear that in any conflict reaction time is a pivotal issue. Controlling UAVs from a distance increases their vulnerability from a time perspective and thus jeopardizes their ability to complete a mission. Moreover, electronic control is vulnerable to a sophisticated enemy. In hindsight those who killed this program will regret it when communications between joystick and UAV are compromised.

    No mention is made of the export value of the F22. Among others, Israel and Japan wanted this jet, but those who killed the program preferred the loss of 9000+ American jobs to having an export item that could diminish our foreign trade deficit. Why is this factor not mentioned in the article? Perhaps the demise of the program was more political than economic or strategic.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse

My Take

Customize the NEWSWEEK homepage
to feature your favorite columnists.

Customize Now