Don’t let the NGAD fighter make the mistake of the F-22 Raptor.

Key points: The tumultuous history of the F-22 Raptor offers lessons for the U.S. Air Force as it develops the Next-Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) fighter.

-With the F-22 fleet limited to 183 aircraft, debates continue over whether to retire 32 older models used for training or upgrade them at a steep cost of $3.5 billion.

-Meanwhile, NGAD faces scrutiny over its projected $300 million unit price, prompting a development pause to address affordability.

-To avoid pitfalls, the NGAD program must emphasize stakeholder consensus, cost containment, and optimized production.

-A misstep could repeat the challenges faced by the F-22 and F-35 and hamper future air superiority.

What the F-22 teaches us about the next generation NGAD fighter

To retire or not to retire?

The US Air Force has left us confused about the possible divestiture of the F-22 Raptor. Some Air Force civilians and generals, as well as military analysts at think tanks, disagree about whether to upgrade 32 older F-22s used for training or retire them and invest the money in the Next-Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) fighter ) should be stuck.

Some praise the F-22 as an integral part of U.S. tactics, operations and strategy; Others say it’s time to move on from the stealth Raptor.

Obviously, history has a lot to teach us, considering that at least until recently the Air Force was considering another $300 million aircraft.

Brake NGAD

But the story of these confusing signals from the Department of Defense and Congress about the F-22 program at large is a cautionary tale for the fledgling NGAD projectwhich once cost an estimated $300 million for each next-generation fighter.

Now the NGAD program is on pause until then can reduce costs to about the level the military pays for F-35s. Before the NGAD is fully developed, further design finalization and additional research and development are required.

Bring it to lessons learned

Acquisition bosses should learn a big lesson from the F-22. The Pentagon, Congress and the White House must all be on the same page if NGAD is to make progress, because the F-22’s history is full of stops and starts.

US Air Force Airman 1st Class Jonathan Foster, 49th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron crew chief, from Holloman Air Force Base, NM, removes the intake covers from an F-22 Raptor before a training mission during Red Flag 11-3 at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada , March 2, 2011. Red Flag is a realistic combat exercise involving the air forces of the United States and its allies. The exercise is taking place north of Las Vegas at the Nevada Test and Training Range – the U.S. Air Force’s premier military training range with more than 12,000 square miles of airspace and 2.9 million acres of land. (U.S. Air Force photo by Tech Sgt. Michael R. Holzworth/Released).

The NGAD is already suffering from this disease, and that doesn’t bode well for the futuristic aircraft that so many are raving about.

What to do with the 32 F-22 orphans?

The Air Force only has 183 F-22s. In 2023, the plan was to retire 32 aging models without the latest upgrades that would have modernized the entire fleet. These 32 “orphaned” fighters were used to train new pilots or those converting from the F-15 or F-16. The plan was to not modernize the examples originally built in the late 1990s and early 2000s and to send this batch to the Boneyard in Arizona where it could rest in peace. This would save an estimated $485 million per year and $2.5 billion over five years. It will now cost $3.5 billion to bring these aging 32 F-22s back into combat readiness.

That’s a pretty penny that could go to the NGAD project. However, Congress blocked this separation from the F-22 program and military analysts at think tanks questioned whether this was the right decision.

Where should the priorities lie?

“My general reaction is ‘Hallelujah,'” David Deptula, dean of the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies and a retired Air Force lieutenant general, told Forbes that the F-22 should be a high priority.

Another think tanker had a different opinion. “It’s hard to believe that this is one of the Air Force’s top priorities. I think the B-21 and Sentinel are a higher priority,” said Mark Cancian, who is senior adviser for the international security program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, in the same article.

F-22 Raptor: Image source: Creative Commons.

You can see how difficult it is to row all the oars in the same direction. There are fans of the F-22 who don’t want to see it retired, those who question whether divestment should go to fledgling programs like the NGAD, and those who want the money to go toward a stealth bomber or a new one Nuclear missile flows.

This type of confusion could also affect the NGAD program. Perhaps the NGAD is too expensive and problematic – a repeat of the difficulties with the F-35. Or the Air Force could learn its lesson and be cautiously optimistic about the next-generation aircraft. For this reason, one of the best decisions Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall has made in recent memory is to pause the NGAD.

Make sure the NGAD program is stable

The NGAD doesn’t want to face dissolution in 20 years, when it comes to fruition and causes strife among uniformed officers, civilians and think tank members – not to mention the legislative and executive branches fighting over priorities.

One good thing about the NGAD program is that it can learn many lessons from the F-22 and F-35. First, create a consensus among everyone involved. Next, make sure offsets are in place. Then slow down design, research and development. Keep costs low. Create it using the latest techniques such as 3D printing and easy-to-update software.

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. Image source: Creative Commons.

Perhaps the U.S. military doesn’t even need the NGAD and can invest time, money and resources to keep the F-22 and F-35 in the air for decades to come. They are inconspicuous, fast and maneuverable, but expensive.

These money distribution decisions will be crucial in the coming years for a new president and existing members of Congress, who may have to make difficult decisions about the future of the Air Force, which does not have an overwhelming number of aircraft to begin with.

About the author: Dr. Brent M Eastwood

Brent M. Eastwood, PhD, is the author of Don’t Turn Your Back On the World: a Conservative Foreign Policy and Humans, Machines, and Data: Future Trends in Warfare, as well as two other books. Brent was the founder and CEO of a technology company that used artificial intelligence to predict world events. He served as a legislative fellow for U.S. Senator Tim Scott, advising the senator on defense and foreign policy issues. He taught at American University, George Washington University and George Mason University. Brent is a former U.S. Army infantry officer. He can be followed on X @BM Eastwood.