El F-35 y la superioridad naval.

Una visión estratégica del proyecto más costoso de defensa de los EE.UU. analizado desde el punto de vista de su utilidad para efrentar un conflicto convencional de alta intesidad, cual sería un enfrentamiento entre China y los EE.UU.

Over the Horizon: The Transformative Capabilities of the F-35B

By Robert Farley | 05 Oct 2011

On Monday, an F-35B Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter completed its first vertical landing at sea, aboard the amphibious assault ship USS Wasp. The F-35B has been the most troubled of the problem-beset F-35 family, suffering from a variety of teething pains as well as concerns about range, payload and stealth characteristics. As the Defense Department worries about austerity, some have targeted the F-35, and the B model in particular, for cuts. A recent article in the Marine Corps Gazette suggested that the United States Marine Corps, heretofore the strongest proponent of the F-35B, should abandon the aircraft in favor of a mix of F-22 Raptors and light attack aircraft.


Given Congress' unwillingness to pursue additional revenue, the current Defense Department budget cannot be sustained. Cuts will be necessary, but the F-35B is the wrong place to look. The F-35B provides a virtually unique capability for transforming amphibious assault ships into light strike/air superiority aircraft carriers. In export and international production, the F-35B can similarly transform warships such as the Japanese Hyuga-class Helicopter-Carrying Destroyer into light carriers capable of strike and air superiority missions. The F-35B is a force multiplier in the literal sense: It turns amphibious warships with limited strike capabilities into aircraft carriers roughly as capable as their most formidable foreign counterparts.

The pursuit of aircraft that could perform conventional roles from small aircraft carriers is nothing new. During the Cold War, both NATO and the Soviet Union attempted to develop vertical or short takeoff and landing (VSTOL) fighter aircraft that could conduct strike and air superiority missions with constrained deck space. The United Kingdom and the United States developed the Harrier "jump jet" family, including the AV-8A Harrier, the AV-8B Harrier II and the Sea Harrier. The Royal Navy used the Sea Harrier to devastating effect against the Argentine air force during the Falklands War, achieving 20 air-to-air kills against no losses, although one Sea Harrier was lost to ground fire. The Sea Harriers flew from relatively small British aircraft carriers, including HMS Invincible and HMS Hermes. Soviet efforts were somewhat less successful. The Yak-38 "Forger" was intended to perform strike and air superiority missions from the Soviet Navy's four Kiev-class aircraft carrier/cruisers. However, the aircraft had such a limited range and armament, and performed so poorly in high heat and humidity conditions, that Soviet pilots referred to it as "a pigeon of peace." For the most part, naval aviators resigned themselves to the fact that aircraft with high-performance capabilities would require large-deck aircraft carriers and catapult- or in some cases ski-jump-assisted takeoffs.

Nevertheless, VSTOL jet aircraft have repeatedly proven militarily useful when launched from amphibious warships and light aircraft carriers. In the early days of the NATO intervention in Libya, Marine AV-8B Harrier strike jets operated from USS Kearsarge, a Wasp-class amphibious assault ship. France and the United Kingdom also used amphibious warships to launch strikes, although the lack of appropriate aircraft forced both countries to rely on attack helicopters. Spain, India and Thailand also operate Harriers from small aircraft carriers.

The F-35B is more constrained in range, payload and stealth capabilities than its sisters, the F-35A and the F-35C. However, it adds air superiority and strike capabilities far beyond those currently available to the Harrier. The F-35B will also reportedly be much easier to fly than the Harrier, making it easier for pilots to remain qualified. The F-35B's capabilities, combined with the availability of numerous large-deck amphibious warships in the U.S. Navy's arsenal, prompted a Navy captain and a Marine Corps lieutenant colonel to suggest in a Proceedings article that the large-deck Nimitz class aircraft carriers were now becoming superfluous.

That article inspired a great deal of pushback from commentators who pointed out, correctly, that conventional aircraft carriers flying F/A-18s and F-35Cs were radically more capable than smaller, slower amphibious warships carrying F-35Bs. However, the more appropriate comparison is to foreign aircraft carriers, against which U.S. amphibs converted into strike carriers look much better. Foreign aircraft carriers tend to be smaller and slower than the U.S. Nimitz class. For instance, the Russian Admiral Kuznetsov, the world's largest carrier not operated by the U.S. Navy, is only a marginal improvement over an American Wasp-class amphibious assault ship -- and the former has proven much less reliable than the latter. New construction in Russia, India and China appears geared toward vessels of roughly the same girth as the biggest American amphibs. Thus, while the Kearsarge equipped with F-35Bs might suffer in comparison to the USS Ronald Reagan, it can hold its own against the best that foreign navies have to offer.

At a time when the construction of every new Russian, Chinese or Indian carrier appears to be a cause for concern in the United States, the U.S. Navy has the ability to effectively create a dozen new carriers at will, each as capable as the most effective foreign contemporaries. Moreover, while the F-35 has been developed by an international consortium, export rights for the F-35B will be controlled by the United States. As there is currently no foreign alternative to the F-35B, this effectively means that the U.S. will have the final say on which countries can turn their flat-deck helicopter-carrying warships into light strike carriers.

The F-35B is one of those exceedingly rare weapon systems with transformative capabilities. With the F-35B, the United States Navy could have the equivalent of 22 strike carriers, a number that no other country could hope to challenge. This is a capability worth paying extra for. The F-35B could become a more important system than either of its sisters, or the F-22 Raptor. Unfortunately, too many seem to miss the forest for the trees.

Dr. Robert Farley is an assistant professor at the Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce at the University of Kentucky. His interests include national security, military doctrine, and maritime affairs. He blogs at Lawyers, Guns and Money and Information Dissemination. His weekly WPR column, Over the Horizon, appears every Wednesday