The Ill-Defined Bomber Mission

The Ill-Defined Bomber Mission: The reason the next-generation bomber got kicked down the road—yet again—is because Defense Secretary Robert Gates "wasn’t comfortable" with how the Air Force was defining the mission and consequently, felt it was premature to establish requirements for the aircraft. So said Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz at a Brookings Institution event in Washington on Friday. "It was clear the Secretary was not comfortable … with how we define what attributes this aircraft will have," Schwartz said. He added, "There is no question in my mind that there is a need for long-range strike in our portfolio," but that Gates wants to be further "persuaded" on what the "essential characteristics" of the next bomber should be. He said, "Certainly that’s what we intend to do, here in this upcoming cycle." The characteristics will be some mix of stealth, speed, payload, persistence, and whether the aircraft should be manned or unmanned. Schwartz later conceded to the Daily Report that “maybe we didn’t do our best job” in explaining the mission or requirements to Gates, but he doesn’t think Gates is "sort of predisposed against long-range strike." Schwartz said that Gates wants to know whether the platform fits into what is likely to be the next shooting war. He noted, "And, I don’t think we got it just right."

4/27/2009

Verbatim

No Dog, Just Concern
"You know it concerns me that we keep hearing, 'Well this is something that the military doesn't want. They didn't ask for,' and all that. Then I go over there [Southwest Asia theater], and that's not their attitude at all. They have needs over there. Our lift capacity is in dire straights. … Now on the F-22—just yesterday we read about the T-50 … a fifth generation [fighter] that the Russians have. … I'm concerned about this. And I guess, you know, if we're down to 187 F-22s, and I think out of that only—what 120 are actually combat ready and used for combat. … I look at our committee—the Senate Armed Services Committee—and on these two vehicles I mentioned—the F-22 and the C-17—in Oklahoma. I don't have a dog in that fight. We don't have any parochial interest there. But it's the capability that we're going to need."
—Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), speaking during the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the Fiscal 2011 defense budget, Feb. 2, 2010.

Verbatim

Taming Expectations
"Every QDR disappoints those who look for radical reallocation of resources. The current fiscal environment is compounding that trend."
—Jim Thomas, vice president for studies at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, briefing reporters in Washington, D.C., Jan. 26, 2010.