MAY 2009

Alternatives forModernizing

U.S.Fighter Forces

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATESCONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE

A

S T U D YCBO

Pub. No. 3198

A

S T U D Y

CBO

Alternatives for Modernizing U.S. Fighter Forces

May 2009

The Congress of the United States O Congressional Budget Office

Notes

Unless otherwise specified, all years referred to in this study are federal fiscal years, and costs are expressed in constant 2009 dollars.

Cover photograph of the Joint Strike Fighter courtesy of Lockheed Martin.

Preface

The United States Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps have long maintained tactical fighter forces that provide capabilities for air-to-air combat and air-to-ground attack. The three services are in the process of replacing the bulk of todays fighter aircraftmost of which were purchased in the 1980swith new F/A-18E/F, F-22, and F-35 (Joint Strike Fighter) aircraft. Although current procurement plans call for the purchase of about 2,500 aircraft over the next 25 years, the services are projecting that those purchases will not keep pace with the need to retire todays aircraft as they reach the limit of their service life.

The Senate Report on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 directed the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to prepare a study examining the capabilities and costs of the fighter force that would be fielded under the Department of Defenses fiscal year 2009 plans and the potential implications for DoDs long-term budget and inventory levels if planned purchases of new aircraft are insufficient to maintain fighter inventories at levels called for by current service requirements. (Just prior to the publication of this report, the new Administration released its budget request for fiscal year 2010. Although the general implica-tions of the changes in DoDs plans are discussed in the Summary, sufficient details for a com-plete reassessment of DoDs new plans were unavailable when this report went to press.) The study also compares the advantages, disadvantages, and costs of seven alternative approaches that DoD might adopt to modernize its fighter forcesthree that satisfy todays inventory requirements, two that maintain aggregate weapons capacity with fewer aircraft, and two that replace portions of the fighter force with longer-range aircraft. In keeping with CBOs man-date to provide objective, impartial analysis, this study makes no recommendations.

David Arthur and Kevin Eveker of CBOs National Security Division prepared the study under the supervision of J. Michael Gilmore. David Newman of CBOs Budget Analysis Division prepared the cost estimates under the supervision of Sarah Jennings. Alec Johnson assisted with fact checking the document. Christopher Wright of the Johns Hopkins Univer-sity Applied Physics Laboratory provided thoughtful comments. (The assistance of external reviewers implies no responsibility for the final product, which rests solely with CBO.)

Loretta Lettner edited the study, and Sherry Snyder proofread it. Cynthia Cleveland produced drafts of the report. Maureen Costantino designed the cover and prepared the documentfor publication. Lenny Skutnik oversaw the printing of the report, Linda Schimmel handled the print distribution, and Simone Thomas prepared the electronic version for CBOs Web site (www.cbo.gov).

Douglas W. ElmendorfDirector

May 2009

http://www.cbo.govMaureenCDouglas W. Elmendorf

Contents

CBO

Summary ix

1 The Department of Defenses Plans for Modernizing Fighter Forces 1Todays Fighter Forces 1DoDs Fiscal Year 2009 Plans for Modernizing U.S. Fighter Forces 3Future Fighter Inventories Under DoDs Fiscal Year 2009 Plans 6

2 The Capabilities of Fighter Forces Under DoDs Plans for Modernization 15Air-to-Ground Capabilities 16Air-to-Air Capabilities 20

3 Alternatives to DoDs Plans for Modernizing Fighter Forces 25Alternatives 1 Through 3: Forces That Satisfy the Services Inventory Requirements 26Alternatives 4 and 5: Forces That Maintain Current Air-to-Ground

Weapons Capacity 34Alternatives 6 and 7: Forces That Provide Longer Flight Range 39

A Details Underlying CBOs Cost Analysis 45

VI ALTERNATIVES FOR MODERNIZING U.S. FIGHTER FORCES

CBO

Tables

S-1.

Costs of Fighter Aircraft Under DoDs Fiscal Year 2009 Modernization Plans and Seven Alternative Plans xvii

1-1.

Configuration and Capabilities of Fighter Aircraft in the Air Forces Current Inventory and Under DoDs Modernization Plans 2

1-2.

Configuration and Capabilities of Fighter Aircraft in the Navys and Marine Corps Current Inventory and Under DoDs Modernization Plans 3

2-1.

Weapons Capacity and Mission Range of the Air Forces Current and Future Fighter Aircraft 17

2-2.

Weapons Capacity and Mission Range of the Navys and Marine Corps Current and Future Fighter Aircraft 20

3-1.

Quantities and Costs of Fighter Aircraft Under DoDs Fiscal Year 2009 Modernization Plans and Seven Alternative Plans 28

Figures

S-1.

Potential Fighter Inventories Under a Range of Projections xii

S-2.

Changes in the Weapons Capacity of Fighter Forces Under DoDs Fiscal Year 2009 Modernization Plans xiv

S-3.

Weapons Capacity of Fighter Forces Under DoDs Fiscal Year 2009 Plans and Seven Alternative Plans xx

S-4.

Composition of Fighter Inventories Under DoDs Fiscal Year 2009Modernization Plans and Seven Alternative Plans xxi

1-1.

Number of Fighter Aircraft Scheduled for Purchase and Associated Investment Costs Under DoDs Fiscal Year 2009 Modernization Plans 4

1-2.

The Air Forces Current Inventory of Fighter Aircraft, by Year of Delivery and Percentage of Service Life Expended 9

1-3.

Potential Fighter Inventories Under a Range of Projections 10

1-4.

The Navys and Marine Corps Current Inventory of Fighter Aircraft, by Year of Delivery and Percentage of Service Life Expended 12

2-1.

Changes in the Air-to-Ground Weapons Capacity and Inventory Composition of theAir Forces Fighter Force Under DoDs Fiscal Year 2009 Plans 18

2-2.

Changes in the Air-to-Ground Weapons Capacity and Inventory Composition of the Navys and Marine Corps Fighter Force Under DoDs Fiscal Year 2009 Plans 21

2-3.

Changes in the Air-to-Air Weapons Capacity of Fighter Forces Under DoDs Fiscal Year 2009 Modernization Plans 22

CONTENTS ALTERNATIVES FOR MODERNIZING U.S. FIGHTER FORCES VII

3-1.

Quantities and Costs of New Fighter Aircraft Under DoDs Fiscal Year 2009 Modernization Plans and Alternatives That Satisfy the Services Inventory Requirements 27

3-2.

Configuration and Capabilities of Fighter Forces Under DoDs Fiscal Year 2009 Modernization Plans and Alternatives That Satisfy the Services Inventory Requirements 32

3-3.

Quantities and Costs of New Fighter Aircraft Under DoDs Fiscal Year 2009 Modernization Plans and Alternatives That Maintain Todays Weapons Capacity 35

3-4.

Configuration and Capabilities of Fighter Forces Under DoDs Fiscal Year 2009 Modernization Plans and Alternatives That Maintain Todays Weapons Capacity 36

3-5.

Quantities and Costs of New Fighter Aircraft Under DoDs Fiscal Year 2009 Modernization Plans and Alternatives That Expand Mission Range 40

3-6.

Configuration and Capabilities of Fighter Forces Under DoDs Fiscal Year 2009 Modernization Plans and Alternatives That Expand Mission Range 41

3-7.

Weapons Capacity and Mission Range of Todays Fighter Forces Under DoDs Fiscal Year 2009 Modernization Plans and Under an Alternative Plan 42

3-8.

Mission Ranges of Aircraft from Selected Locations 43

Boxes

S-1.

Implications of the New Administrations Fiscal Year 2010 Plans for Modernizing Fighter Forces x

S-2.

The Possible Role of the F-22 Program in Mitigating the Air Forces Projected Inventory Shortfall xvi

1-1.

CBOs Method of Estimating the Retirement Rate of Fighter Aircraft 8

Figures (Continued)

CBO

CBO

Summary

The United States Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps maintain an inventory of approximately 3,500 fixed-wing fighter and attack aircraft that provide unsur-passed air-to-air and air-to-ground combat capabilities. Most of those aircraft were purchased at high annual rates during the 1980s, however, and are expected to reach the end of their service life at similarly high rates over the next decade. To counteract those impending retirements and simultaneously modernize their fleets, the service branches have outlined acquisition plans for equipping their force structures with new aircraft over the next 25 years. Specifically, the Air Force plans to replace the A-10 Thunderbolt II, the F-16 Fighting Falcon, and the F-15 Eagle with two types of aircraft: the F-22 Raptor and the F-35A Lightning II, the land-based version of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF).1 The Navy and Marine Corps plan to replace the AV-8B Harrier and F/A-18A/B/C/D Hornet with three types of aircraft: the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet; the F-35B, the short takeoff vertical landing ver-sion of the JSF; and the F-35C, the carrier-based version of the JSF.

The F-22 and F/A-18E/F are in active service today, but production of those aircraft is slated to end in 2011 and 2014, respectively. Development of the F-35 began in the 1990s, and initial production began in 2007. The services schedules call for the first squadrons of F-35s to be operational in the Marine Corps, Air Force, and Navy by 2012, 2013, and 2015, respectively. Procurement is expected to continue through 2025 for the F-35B/C and through 2034 for the F-35A.

Those procurement plans notwithstanding, the Air Force and Navy have projected that, as laid out in fiscal year 2009 plans developed by the previous Administrat