The World 's First 5th Generation Air Superiority Fighter

The Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) examines “the national defense strategy and priorities”, and “sets a long-term course for the DoD”. The QDR "assesses the threats and challenges that the nation faces, while seeking to re-balance DoD‘s strategies, capabilities, and forces to address today‘s conflicts and tomorrow's threats." The QDR is required by Congress every four years and is produced by the Secretary of Defense (SecDef). The three pillars that the 2014 QDR rests on are: protect the homeland; build security globally; and project power and win decisively. One of the ways that the US armed forces support the QDR is through the application of airpower. Airpower is “the ability to project military power or influence through the

Despite the complexity of this environment and fiscal austerity, the JF25 must “protect our Nation and win our wars.” It must deter and defeat state adversaries, disrupt and defeat terrorist organizations, and strengthen the global network of allies and partners.” The prioritized capabilities required for Joint Force 2025 are linked to the imperatives of securing the homeland and maintaining strategic agility. This essay discusses general attributes of the JF, specific capability requirements by service, and the risk associated with focusing the rebalance on these two imperatives.

In conclusion, most of Aspin?s assumptions in ?The Bottom-up Review? were boundless and unfounded. In a perfect world, a defense strategist would have an endless budget and reach for all of the advancements he wants in his military. However, a more reasonable plan would have reflected the prudence of the President?s newly executed defense

In a 2015 article, “Is U.S. military becoming outdated?” written by Stuart Bradin, Keenan Yoho, and Meaghan Keeler-Pettigrew, the authors argued that despite the U.S. military maintaining a position of global dominance “without peer” during conventional operations, it is not the ideal force against current and future threats. The authors claim that there are several negative factors arising due to the past sixteen years of war against several state and non-state elements, inferior cultural differences of government bureaucracy compared to commercial firms, and a misallocation of defense spending that leaves the US military waging war inefficiently while simultaneously losing technological dominance against current and future threats.

With Trump’s election this year, his rhetoric of “Making America Great Again” and therefore revitalizing our military will soon become a reality. Trump has formally requested a reappropriation of funds; around $54 Billion, towards the US military. Part of Trump’s campaign promises had to do with making the military more robust; ensuring America’s title of militarily strongest in the world. In order to achieve this goal. Trump’s federal government has the option of many different aspects of the military to focus on. Of these, funding weapons of mass destruction, cyber security, and further military research and development prove themselves as most relevant in the contemporary military.

Since the events of 9/11, drone strikes have become a tool for the United States as it fights a global war against terrorist organizations. The advantages and disadvantages of this particular counterterrorism option continue to be debated. Instead of sending in warfighters to achieve specific objectives, many argue that unmanned combat aerial vehicles provide the U.S. military and government with low-risk and low-cost options as it engages in military operations in other regions of the world. Compared with manned fighter aircraft, some of these unmanned vehicles are able to fly longer without stopping, which affords the U.S. with better intelligence collection and targeting opportunities. Even if the aircraft were shot down, there is not

Following over a decade of irregular war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. military is attempting to reset towards a conventional, regular type of warfare. The 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review describes a U.S. military shift to the Pacific and the supremacy of capability against near peer nations rather than support irregular of and counterinsurgency operations. As the QDR points out the U.S. military must “be prepared to battle increasingly sophisticated adversaries who could employ advanced warfighting capabilities while simultaneously attempting to deny U.S. forces the advantages they currently enjoy in space and cyberspace.” This is balanced against the reality that “our forces will no longer be sized to conduct large-scale prolonged

The F-35 JSF will be an excellent addition to the current fleet of conventional fighters. However, it is not worth the current investment to replace the entire fleet with fifth gen aircraft. As seen with the F-22 oxygen system failures in 2011, a simple problem has the capability to ground an entire fleet of aircraft.9 In the case of the F-35, a grounding problem at operational volume has the potential to ground the Air Force’s entire fleet of fighter aircraft, essentially leaving the United States powerless in the air. Leaders are taught to always have backup plans if one should fail, the United States is placing all hopes into one multi-purpose airframe. Although cheap, the F-35 is a jack of all trades, but a master of

As Krepinevich contends in our reading, from 1932-1938 the United States allowed its combat aircraft inventory size to remain unchanged, however, it still maintained a variety of platforms. “Rather than invest scare resources in maintaining a large inventory of rapidly obsolescing planes, the service wisely concentrated on keeping up with technology.” (Krepinevich, p14) Technology was changing at such a rate that the

The Department of Defense (DOD) must decide how to rebalance the armed forces general force structure to meet future challenges and opportunities in an austere fiscal environment. The general force structure and capabilities of Joint Force 2020 necessary to adjust the force based on current strategic direction and fiscal constraints is a smaller, efficient, adaptable and integrated joint force. The 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) emphasizes US military forces will evolve and remain modern, capable, and ready while accepting some increased risk through force reductions. Rebalancing will require innovative approaches and solutions to protect the homeland, build global security, project power, and win decisively with a leaner force.

In 1993, the Secretary of Defense’s Bottom-up Review acknowledged the Services’ need to affordably replace their aging strike assets in order to maintain the Nation’s technological combat edge.1 Identifying a affordable solution to the already costly management of multiple programs and aging platforms after the initial failures of V-22 program became paramount. The 31st Commandant, Gen Charles C. Krulak charged Marine Aviation to find a platform “enhancing its expeditionary utility by reducing the

In order to achieve overwhelming defeat of our adversaries, The United States must apply the proper amount of force at the appropriate time and place. To accomplish mission success, defeating the enemy requires future technological superiority as it relates to rebalancing the joint force in 2025. The focus of this paper will touch on the strategic guidance as a background to validate the requirement for technological superiority. Secondly, this brief will discuss specific capability requirements of the joint force by component. Lastly, this paper will discuss the associated risks inherent in developing technological superiority and the steps to mitigate these risks.

should adjust its priorities and spending to address the changing nature of threats in the world: What all these potential adversaries—from terrorist cells to rogue nations to rising powers—have in common is that they have learned that it is unwise to confront the United States directly on conventional military terms. The United States cannot take its current dominance for granted and needs to invest in the programs, platforms, and personnel that will ensure that dominance's persistence. But it is also important to keep some perspective. As much as the U.S. Navy has shrunk since the end of the Cold War, for example, in terms of tonnage, its battle fleet is still larger than the next 13 navies combined—and 11 of those 13 navies are U.S. allies or partners." (Staff,

The United States will only be able to rebalance the Joint Force in 2025 if adequate resources are available. Even with adequate funding, combatant commanders will experience considerable challenges operating in the global security environment. The current strategic direction has prompted a shift of military resources to the Asia-Pacific. This trend will continue. Additionally, globalization, cyber-attacks and advances in technology will further challenge the Joint Forces in the next ten years . The U.S. Joint Forces must identify and develop critical technology now in order to overcome future challenges risk in 2025. Diminishing resources and lack of predictability within the military budget process will introduce significant strategic, military and political risk . While no major organizational changes or force reductions are recommended for the Joint Force, finding the right balance between Active duty and Reserve end strength and missions will be necessary . Each of the Services will need to continue to man, equip and train forces to effectively integrate operations across the Joint Force. Anticipating, developing and fielding capabilities will be key for the Joint Forces to shape or respond to the challenges associated with the global security environment in 2025. Military advantages within the U.S. and allies will continue to diminish if not adequately funded, especially as globalization and the growth of immerging state and non-state proxies become more capable to

President Obama has cut the nation’s defense budget in an effort to decrease the overall spending and national debt. However, by cutting the size of the country’s military, any actions that anger the leaders of another nation – particularly if that nation is China or Russia – is putting each citizen of the United States in personal jeopardy. As recently as February 2014 Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel announced that the size of the United States Army would be cut to its smallest size since before World War II (Hagel).