Politics

[Print]  [Email]        

Peter W. Singer: From crop-dusting to counterinsurgency?

By: Peter W. Singer
Examiner National Security Columnist
September 22, 2009

In the 1992 film "Iron Eagle III," a retired U.S. Air Force fighter ace is asked by a buxom South American woman to defend her village against narco-terrorists led by a former Nazi. He does the only logical thing: He rounds up some vintage World War II-era propeller planes, updates them with laser-guided bombs and flies down to teach the bad guys a lesson. It is great to see those beautiful old planes in action, but all the nostalgia in the world cannot rescue a bad idea of a movie.

I thought about this recently when the Air Force announced its plan to explore purchasing 100 "light fighters." The planes must be able to cruise 180 knots for at least five hours on mission, carry at least two 500-pound bombs and operate out of rugged bases in the field. The contenders for the potential contract include propeller planes used by Third World militaries and a converted crop-duster.

Supporters argue that, compared with the modern jets we now use in Afghanistan and Iraq, such light planes could fly closer to the ground at slower speeds, giving a better view of what is happening, as well as be used to train and advise foreign partners' air forces. It is also a symbolic way for the Air Force to show that it is finally buying into the Pentagon's focus on current counterinsurgencies. It is a good counter to the criticism the Air Force has taken for seeming only to want to fight the next war, such as with its last purchase, the high-priced stealthy F-22 jet fighter.

Just like the movie, though, this plan may seem appealing because of the guts and glory of the pilots who would fly these fabulous old planes back into battle (indeed, one of the entrants is even a version of the P-51 Mustang). But it doesn't stand up to much scrutiny. It is somewhat questionable to add 100 new planes (if one can describe 50-year-old designs as "new") at the very same time that the Air Force is seeking to accelerate the retirement of about 250 F-15s, F-16s and A-10s. Unlike these proven multi-role aircraft, light propeller planes could only be used at the low end of war, not against China or even Iran.

Moreover, in its haste to show that it is not focused on the next war, the Air Force may be trying to fight the last war. These planes won't be deployable for use in Iraq or Afghanistan until 2013 at best. The plan thus rests on two huge assumptions: 1) that we'll still be fighting counterinsurgencies there or elsewhere for which we'll need 100 more planes, and 2) while we are going back in time militarily, our enemies won't be going forward. Even within insurgencies, various non-state actors like Hezbollah already field anti-aircraft artillery and surface-to-air missiles; now we would just be providing them with easier targets.

For operations that need planes to fly low and slow in support of troops on the ground, actually new technologies, like the MQ-9 Reaper unmanned system, have already proved to be far more effective. The old planes rely on the pilot's "Mark II eyeballs"; the drone carries Gorgon Stare, a technology that monitors 12 high-powered cameras at once. Reaper also carries almost double the weapons and can stay on the scene four times as long. Drones are admittedly less fun to fly, but that's not how we are supposed to make serious weapons decisions.

The ultimate kicker is that the very partners the Air Force claims it is buying the planes to train and fight with don't actually want them. The head of the Iraqi air force reportedly wants F-16s instead, while the head of the Afghan National Army Air Corps wants Predators. Perhaps they haven't seen the movie?

The U.S. Air Force is in a time of great transition, wrestling with everything from how to integrate 21st-century unmanned technologies to the very roles and missions it is to perform in our nation's grand strategy. No matter how neat it would be to return to an era of brave men in white scarves flying those fabulous old flying machines, going back in time is not the answer.

Peter W. Singer, director of the 21st Century Defense Initiative at the Brookings Institution, is one of four defense experts who contribute monthly columns to The Washington Examiner. He is the author of "Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century" (Penguin, 2009).



beltway confidential

The extraordinary thing about the dramatic events surrounding the health care bill in the Senate is that there is any drama in it at all. Lawmakers are simply voting to begin...

Lincoln a 'Yes' Senate Democrats will be able to begin debate on an $849 billion health care reform bill now that Sen. Blanche Lincoln has committed to voting to move the...

In his weekly radio and YouTube address, President Obama this week makes the case for his recent trip to Asia, saying one of the main reasons for going was helping the U.S....

Call it what you like -- it deserves a complete investigation. (afp) Any reporter worth their salt knows that when government decides to investigate itself, exonerations tend...


To view this site, you need to have Flash Player 8.0 or later installed. Click here to get the latest Flash player.


Most Popular Headlines





 


 



 

Reader Comments

All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Examiner or its staff. Comment box is limited to 250 words.

airplanejim

Sep 22, 2009

Mr. Singer seems to have lost his perspective of what the purpose of a counterinsurgency aircraft is. First of all it is not a first strike aircraft. It is a small force anti-personnel weapon to support our troops on the ground. Mr. Singer is still in the multi use mode of the F-35 or the airplane that can do "everything". I predict that the F-35 will be an overly expensive jack of all trades and master of none. What shape the counterinsurgency aircraft will take and the power it will employ I will let to the military but thank you as a foot soldier on the ground I would rather have a pilot in a low and slow aircraft supporting me rather than a robot being flown by someone thousands of miles away with 5 second time delays. As for the technology aboard you can replicate everything on an MQ-9 on any manned aircraft.

 


Post a comment


Email:
(This will not be displayed or shared. Privacy Policy)

Display Name:

Comment:




Sports

Suspended NASCAR Sprint Cup driver Jeremy Mayfield chats with attendees during a public auction Friday, Nov. 20, 2009, at his Catawba, N.C. property. As NASCAR prepares to crown a champion in its fina...

Long way from the track, suspended Mayfield holds large auction to help pay for court fight

Jeremy Mayfield sat in the back of his large barn Friday morning about 800 miles from where NASCAR's season-ending weekend was kicking off. Several hundred people surrounded him, listening intently as a fast-speaking auctioneer sold dozens of items. Full story

Economy

Venezuela seeks to annul pharmaceutical patents for antibiotic produced by Bayer HealthCare

Venezuela's trade minister says the government plans to annul the pharmaceutical patents for an antibiotic produced by Bayer HealthCare. Full story

Entertainment

Pedro Almodovar discusses his childhood, his influences and what he won't put on film

Sex. Drugs. Prostitution. Pedophilia. Rape. Pedro Almodovar has been able to translate some of the most delicate subjects to the big screen with grace and humor. Full story