The U.S. Air Force, which is conducting a study of options for its next air-to-air fighter, expects to finish that review in about a year, a service official said July 10.
The study, or analysis of alternatives, began about six months ago under the name “next generation air dominance” and will determine the attributes of the future fighter, known as the penetrating counter-air (PCA) aircraft, said Col. Tom Coglitore, chief of Air Combat Command’s air superiority core function team.
While the PCA will likely have the traditional “F” fighter designation, it will be “more than just a fighter” and will be more like “a weapons or a sensor truck,” Coglitore said.
Air Force Brig. Gen. Alex Grynkewich, who collaborated with Coglitore on an earlier air-superiority study, described PCA as a “sensor-shooter,” with the sensor role probably being the most important. It will be a “key node” in the Air Force’s information network to help other aircraft and stand-off weapons find targets.
“And since it’s there, it may as well complete some of the kill chain some of the time to kill whatever is there or engage it in whatever manner seems appropriate,” the general said. The kill mechanism could be kinetic or non-kinetic.
Grynkewich, who now works on the Joint Staff, believes the PCA will need more range, persistence and survivability than the Air Force’s current premier air-to-air fighter, the Lockheed Martin [LMT] F-22 Raptor, because the proliferation of advanced enemy weapons, such as ballistic and cruise missiles, will compel U.S. forces to operate from greater distances by 2030.
But the PCA is not expected to match the range of a bomber, such as the Northrop Grumman [NOC] B-2 Spirit, which has conducted overseas combat missions from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri.
“Flying from Whiteman with an air-superiority platform would be fantastic, but that might not be physics that we can work out,” Grynkewich said.
Due to the Air Force’s unique air-superiority requirements, Grynkewich doubts PCA will be a joint program like the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which is mainly an air-to-surface fighter.
“The air-superiority mission is fundamentally a different set of problems,” he said. While the Navy is focused on fleet defense, “for the Air Force, it’s about how do I go wherever I need to go in the world and hold targets at risk.”
Coglitore and Grynkewich both spoke at a Capitol Hill event sponsored by the Air Force Association’s Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies and the War on the Rocks web publication.