UNITED STATES
IN THE film business, one year’s summertime success will often produce a sequel the following year, a different title, bringing back some (but not all) of the original cast with a similar subject and plot. The Light Attack Experiment (LAE) was the 2018 sequel to the US Air Force’s 2017 Observation Attack – Experiment (OA-X). Some of last year’s cast returned to Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico, scene of last year’s OA-X, for what was to have been three months of intensive flying for the LAE by two of the five OA-X participants: the Embraer-Sierra Nevada A-29 Super Tucano and the Textron AT-6 Wolverine. For those who are unfamiliar with the types, both are single-turboprop light attack and armed trainer designs.
The first test aircraft arrived at Holloman on May 7. (It had originally been scheduled for earlier in 2018 at Davis Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona.) Speaking at a briefing in Washington DC that day, US Air Force deputy chief of staff for strategic plans and requirements Lieutenant General Jerry Harris said: “We are bringing the team together in the desert again and looking primarily at logistics, but also at weapons integration.” The Air Force had previously considered deploying LAE contending aircraft to the Central Command area of responsibility to fly combat missions in Syria or Afghanistan, but Holloman permitted sustained flying, involving up to six sorties per aircraft per day.
LAE flight operations from Holloman were brought to an unplanned halt after the crash of an A-29 on June 22 at a Rio Red weapons range in New Mexico, killing a US Navy pilot. This did not, however, end the LAE itself.
OA-X to LAE
Since last summer’s OA-X, the new US National Defense Strategy document redefined the primary threat to US security as greatpower competitors (such as Russia and China), rather than terrorists and insurgents as had been the main targets of US (and coalition) airpower since 2001. The Air Force’s planned 57-squadron force of fourth and fifth-generation fighters will prioritise preparing for the “high-end fight”. Light attack aircraft – including similar aircraft flown by local coalition allies – will carry on the fight against terrorists and insurgents.
Any future US Air Force light attack aircraft are also likely to provide training for a broad range of missions, including transition training for fighter pilots and air-toground training for joint terminal attack controllers. James Dunn, the deputy director for plans, programs and requirements in Air Combat Command (ACC) at Langley Air Force Base, Virginia, said at a briefing in Washington on May 18 that ACC wanted light attack aircraft to provide the “ability to accept additional pilots coming out of the [training] pipeline …Five hundred hours in light combat aircraft will be meaningful preparation for progressing to fourth or fifthgeneration combat aircraft.”
Logging 500 hours on a light combat aircraft that is much cheaper to fly than today’s fighters makes sense to the Air Force, investing procurement dollars to save operations and maintenance dollars in the future, while preventing the service life of fourth and fifth-generation fighters being used up either in low-intensity conflicts or for proficiency training of entry-level pilots. The per-hour flying cost of either LAE aircraft types is about $2,000, compared to $19,000 to $24,000 for an F-16 Fighting Falcon and, currently, some $50,000 for the F-35A Lightning II; these figures represent the total cost of ownership divided by the number of flight hours.
Weapons integration
At Holloman, the LAE aircraft used live and simulated fires, including night and day missions, air interdiction, close air support, armed over watch and combat SAR, primarily using precisionguided munitions that enable the aircraft to remain out of range of most man-portable air defence systems. Both the A-29 and the AT- 6C are equipped with Link 16 data link, as well as other exportable and US-only secure communication systems providing battlespace network capability.
Referring to the need for data link capability when speaking at the Atlantic Council in Washington on May 29, Secretary of the Air Force Dr Heather Wilson said: “We always want our allies to have equipment that’s interoperable. The light attack aircraft are designed for export from the very beginning, so we can all operate off the same equipment.”
As for other possible mission sets, a future light attack aircraft could also be tasked with intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance missions, using ventral turretmounted electro-optical and infrared imaging sensors, as well as pod-mounted sensor systems, many with integral data links.
Dunn said: “General Holmes [Commander, Air Combat Command] supports the idea of moving forward with light attack and is also interested in a light ISR-capable platform, though Air Combat Command’s basic preference is for an offthe- shelf system, with additional capabilities not being part of the basic system.”
General Harris said the Air Force was unsure of the requirement: “Light ISR seems to work with light attack, but we don’t know if it would be a separate platform or an extension of current light attack capabilities; we are doing our best to minimise new developments.” The US Marine Corps has been monitoring the Air Force OA-X and LAE efforts and its aviation master plan includes up to 48 light attack aircraft, used primarily for air-toground training.
Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) has a longstanding interest in both light attack and ISR aircraft. It would use such aircraft operationally, as well as to train coalition partners, US instructors and advisors. According to a June 3 announcement, AFSOC plans to double the number of combat aviation advisors. For the light ISR role, AFSOC is looking for a near-term replacement of its U-28A (the unarmed ISR version of the Pilatus PC-12) that has seen extensive service in Africa. Dunn said: “We are in discussions with AFSOC. It will have its own aircraft. AFSOC has a role in mind for these aircraft. AFSOC is going to have to make some decisions.”
Transition to procurement?
After visiting the LAE at Holloman, General Holmes is reportedly supporting a rapid transition to procurement. The Air Force could issue a request for proposal for a production quantity of light attack aircraft before the end of 2018 and make a decision between competitors within six months, with aircraft in service within four or five years of that decision. This timeframe makes the programme eligible to be the first Air Force aircraft procured under the streamlined procedures of the new Section 804 rapid prototyping authority enacted by Congress, though this would effective ly prevent selecting a light attack aircraft without a US production line set-up and running.
From an ACC perspective, Dunn sees a need to “throttle people who want to creep upwards the requirements for these platforms; we need to constrain the nice-to-have and look solely at the must-have.”
The Air Force had been expected to include procurement of a light attack aircraft in its FY2020 budget request, some $2.5 billion over five years, and has included this in its budgeting. However, the provisions of the Budget Control Act – with their potential for sequestration – will return in FY2020 after a two-year hiatus. This year’s US mid-term election may change the majority party in one or both houses of Congress.
New committee chairs may wish to revisit oversight of the programme under their own direction. The transition of light attack from experiments to procurement may have to be done quickly, if it is to take place at all.
However, the transition from an experiment to procurement would depend on Congress. Heather Wilson has said that the Air Force may ask Congress to reprogramme FY2019 funds to allow light attack procurement to start. The Air Force has been consistent in stating it will trade away none of its 57 squadrons of fourth and fifthgeneration combat aircraft to pay for light attack aircraft.
Dunn said: “Light combat aircraft cannot rob funds from programmes tied to existential threats.”
Congress may add money for light attack, at a time when it has many competing priorities, in the FY2019 defence authorisation and appropriation bills, both of which are supposed to be passed by Congress and signed into law by the President no later than September 30. The Senate has included language that would authorise $350 million to the enable the Air Force to start light attack procurement in FY2019. The Senate version of the FY2019 defence authorisation bill includes $350 million for Air Force and $100 million for Marine Corps light attack aircraft. In the report accompanying the bill, which passed the Senate on June 18, the Air Force was criticised for “moving slower than is warranted” towards buying light attack aircraft. The House version of the bill, passed on May 24, included no light attack procurement funding. The Senate’s FY2019 appropriation bill provided $300 million for Air Force light attack and required the Senate to be briefed before they actually bought any, while the House appropriations bill had the same briefing language, but only $40 million funding. Differences between the Senate and House versions of both bills will have to be worked out in a conference committee.
“Light combat aircraft cannot rob funds from programmes tied to existential threats.”
