“Semper Fi” to beachheads all over, maybe you missed it over the weekend between the Iron Dome coverage and the Magnitsky Act (good one by the way, DC finally doing what it is supposed to do) but the F-35B was officially declared operational on Friday November 16th when the Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 121 became the first operational F-35 Squadron in the Department of Defense, and the World.

As the officials called it “To be used to conduct a full spectrum of aviation operations in support of combat missions and maritime readiness worldwide”.

Some pretty important words in that single phrase, guess somewhere in a mountain cavern some guy is wondering why he didn’t leave those Harriers be. Gibbs’s rule nr. 1b; never mess with the marines.

So everyone likes to trash the F-35, myself included, but honor where honor is due, we were all so busy criticizing and kicking the thing around we did not see it coming of age and it is going to pick up speed from here on. Forget the helmet, they will fix that in the end, sure it will cost but look at the B-52; you think that went OK from the start? And more importantly, is anyone still complaining about that 50 years later?

That brings us to an important sideline; those who like to simplify debates for the sake of populism… Quite different form what General Powell meant when he said that great leaders have the ability to simplify complex issues for everyone to understand which is really an art.

The first category would make you believe that they do not go with stealth or the JSF because the value added is not worth the initial cost in this time of budget responsibility bla bla bla etc.

Sounds great the first second or so but let me compare this for size; “We are not investing in the jet engine because it is so much more expensive than the Spitfire and the Me-262 has yet to win a war.”

See the fallacy of such arguments? Much as I love the Spit (which was really pretty), it is an Me-262 world out there so stop your yapping and get with it.

 It is impossible to foresee the value of a system but when its time has come, like all evolutionary steps, there is no going back. You figure out the value as you go along. The guy who invented the wheel probably didn’t think of using it underneath a plane for take-off and landing.

So yes, the F-22 has issues and the F-35 will have teething problems and yes, it is not the prettiest jet around, but all that is no longer relevant  (OK, maybe it is for the sex appeal part )

What is relevant is that the US and it’s allies now have effectively changed the face of conflict, forever. Every now and again something important happens, a real game changer; the invention of black powder, the advent of carrier aviation, Precision Guided Munitions, Playboy, the I Phone…

So can we please get off the RCS comparison bandwagon, please stop to argue Terabits of blogs over whether the JSF is better than the Su-35, if the S-400 will kick the JSF etc etc etc. hot air, pure lounge room theory, going nowhere and completely besides the real point.

The F-22 / F-35 combo is out there and will not be surpassed anytime soon, not by the PAK-FA, the J-31 or anything…  Not because of some square centimeters in Radar Cross Section, no. It is not going to be surpassed because of all that is associated with it; the capabilities, the tactics, the knowledge, the networking, the penetration capability, how to use it, the huge bandwidth needs, the computing power and cooling required, the datalinks waveform, signature management… The Russians and Chinese have just started to follow the White Rabbit, and they have yet to meet the Cheshire Cat…

The F-35 – F-22 are a fantastic coalition tool with high connectivity, integration and cross platform intel and data sharing capacity. That and the fact that they are extremely tough to spot, let alone lock onto.

What does that mean? To the bad guy it means that he does not want to be anywhere in the air, ground or on water with these 2 up and about. This duo will find the bad guy faster, engage it in a much different way than ever done before, and… apply more precision then ever before, without the other guy even knowing what happened; ”the bomb out of nowhere”… “my electronics just fried”… “I was hit by some sort of light and my engine started to smoke”…”the radar scope on that latest SAM said the skies were clear”…

The only guy who will not go to a Court Martial for desertion is the odd one out who will be downed by some AIM-9X variant and forget the days that those things went straight for the heat source and the flare.

I can hear you laugh but did you know that US bombers who kept missing target over Tokyo (extremely high speeds knocked off the bomb sights precision completely) were initially suspected of psychological disorders, or worse, treason?

That is before they re-discovered the pre-war work of a rather obscure Japanese scientist who explained that the speeds those pilots spoke of were actually for real; it was called the Jet-stream. Before the B-29 the US Army Air Force never went up that high. Oops…sorry guys.

The first kids to go home, hit by the Navy’s new laser SHORAD, or Boeing EMP weapon, or JSF’s electronic attack capability will likely go down that same road.

The strategic effect of Air Power is difficult to measure but it is always present and this is no different for the F-22 / F-35 combo. A possible aggressor now has to take into account that he will attack a force that can be multiplied by allies in a matter of hours, plug and play. Multiply their targeting network, share their data, share their computers and their weapons, get live UAV feeds and satellite link updates on the whereabouts of those tank columns, just like his sons video games but this time for real.

So this would be aggressor goes back and looks at his soviet style centralized Command & Control structure, his SA-2 guidelines upgraded in the Ukraine with a computer from heaven knows where, his Chinese CB radios… He looks at his disparate, under-serviced would be air force operated by hired thugs, his jamming sensitive radar network bought by his predecessor in the 60’s. He looks at all that, thinks, goes home and joins his son in front of that Play Station.

Like the helmet, hate the helmet, adore the looks, abhor the looks but do not negate the bottom line; the F-22 / F-35 / B-2 trio are, in a way, the most Chinese aircraft that the US has ever built:

“Speak softly….Carry big stick” Old Chinese proverb.

In the early 2000’s, Vickers and Martinage wrote that military revolutions “are periods of discontinuous change that renders obsolete or subordinate existing means for conducting war”.
GW I, saw the start of RMA as evidenced by the effectiveness of guided munitions, the dawn of the stealth age and the first (public) operational use of the F-117.

Stealth was almost invented by accident; In the late 70’s, a program called “Harvey” was put out very publicly to see if anyone could do something to reduce Radar Cross Signature (RCS). Just another DARPA thing…
Then some people at the Skunk Works remembered this 20-year old paper where a Russian scientist, Piotr Ufimtsev, described a mathematical formula to estimate RCS under various angles and frequencies. Ufimtsev’s only problem at the time was that the Soviets did not have computers powerful enough to execute the formula, Lockheed did. If Ufimtsev ever got royalties remains a question but a big “Njet” seems a fair bet.

Once undersecretary William Perry saw the results, Harvey did like his bunny forefather and the whole project went invisible, literally… Even in 1991 the darned thing was nigh undetectable.

10 days later, Sadam was on his knees and the world was looking in “shock and awe” how the USA had initiated a Revolution in Military Affairs. What, you didn’t get the memo? Hate it when they do that… But to assume that this is it would be a very costly mistake, a lot of maturation and big adjustments were needed in 1991 for operational concepts, weaponry and technology.

First of all, Precision Guided Munitions have been around since WWII, becoming quite popular in Vietnam, despite the inconveniences.Pilots reported having to roll in 3 times over Hanoi because the smoke of the first bombs rendered the laser inoperable for the following bombs.

In 1991; Over 230,000 munitions were expended but 92% of those were unguided, contrary to the impression CNN put about.

In 2003; Only 28,000 munitions were dispensed of which over 65% of those were guided this time around.

Well that’s that then, hurrah, RMA now complete… The USA gets the gold medal in kicking butt, “Mission Accomplished”.

Nope, not really, dangerous assumption.

The West has only just begun to employ systems such as PGM’s, stealth, network centric warfare… Thus far against far less capable enemies; worn out armies, rag-tag insurgents, jihadist, pirates even.

As Andrew Marshall puts it; “American successes have been less about new ways of fighting and more about improving the effectiveness & efficiency of traditional methods & organizations”. We may not be ready yet to face an opponent of equal strength, possessing numbers of guided missiles, GPS bombs, Integrated Air Defenses and an effective, resilient, targeting network.

But if we were to look into a crystal ball and predict the next 50 years, what would conflict look like? What does the West need to do to prepare itself for that eventuality?

First of all, our dependance on space and cyber based systems. They cover anything from communication to ISR data to flight controls to positioning, navigation and also; precision non-nuclear strike. Of course the Chinese took a shot at it, just to see if they could when they need to, what would you have them do? Unless you are Napoleon at Waterloo you do not go head on with your opponent, you try to hit him there where it actually hurts him more than it will you.

A second possible axis could be the growing development of Area-Denial / Anti-Access systems. From the DF-21 anti-ship ballistic missile to the swarms of Iranian missile boats or mining the straits of Hormuz. In the near future it may become prohibitive for carriers to come near a conflict zone. When that happens, it will become difficult to project air power to tackle targeting networks and forceable entry will become very costly. This would possibly force NATO to re-scale its posture of interventions.

Not to forget are the “anti-stealth” technologies, such as new VHF/UHF radars and passive SIGINT units like the Kolchuga or the newer “Romachka”.
Those who say that old VHF technology is unlikely to effectively defeat a 5th generation jet by itself are right, nor that a passive ELINT might actually see an LPI (Low Probability of Intercept) signal, rather than discard it as background noise. Nevertheless the fight between the better shield and the stronger sword will never end.

Another lose-lose proposition in the near future will be large, massed, force concentrations, like those used during GW I or large bases like Kadena. A Scud missile was a blunt instrument but the latest generation of ballistic missiles can almost hit a pack of cigarettes right on the logo.

The evolutions above are more or less to be taken for granted and have been discussed in length by various authors. But what about an opponent also using stealth, against us? How will the West fight an invisible enemy that we cannot see, hear, detect or keep track of.

Example; the old carrier protection scheme was created because of the Soviet anti-ship missile threat, combined with the “Backfire” missile carrier. The Aegis radar spotted the threat and the Carrier launched F-14’s to take down the latter with the “Phoenix” missile, preferably before that Backfires were within firing range.

Now take a similar threat but from a stealth platform, using a supersonic, maneuvering, sea skimming missile. This missile could receive target updates from the same satellite feeding data to the ballistic anti-ship missile launch which will keep the Aegis occupied etc.

Data and ISR is everything and if the opponent’s targeting network is stealthy, and the enemy can keep it operational past the initial phase of the engagement, what happens next is anybody’s guess.

It is a certainty that the next conflict will come, and it will be very different from the Cold War. In the early 90’s a revolution of military affairs was started but we have yet to test its lessons in real life in an equal fight.

Ten years ago people said stealth could not be copied, now even Indonesia and Vietnam are talking to their suppliers for a 2020 delivery. Chinese designers are presenting a supersonic air-to-air combat UCAV, something the West does not have yet. Missiles used to be guided by the aircraft that shot them, now they have become mere IP addresses on a remote network. Raytheon has demonstrated the first battlefield laser to destroy mortar rounds and the likes.

The RMA is far from over, it is only just getting started. It can be argued that even those that started it cannot predict where it will lead them. The one thing that they cannot afford to have happen, the sum of all fears, would be to lose the initiative.

In times of change the probabilities for conflict increase. Weather changes, flooding, drought, migration of people, failed states, economic uncertainty, religion…  Russia kicked out USAID and Unicef because “it no longer wants handouts”. Nice strong populist language but the children over there still die and tuberculosis is nationwide.
Politicians become populists, governments become nationalists, isolationists. The cornered cat syndrome.

And what do we do in our old western democracies in reply to all of this? We cut military budgets… There is a host of disgruntled nations out there, unhappy poor hungry people with little education, crying out for potential Hitlers, who will be allowed to grow strong because we dropped the ball.

In Caen there is a memorial for D-Day, I remember one of the posters that they used for the opening; The picture of a GI lying dead with two elderly people putting flowers next to him.

The text read; “Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it”