WASHINGTON - Today, Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA), Chairman of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces, made the following opening remarks for the subcommittee hearing titled "The Future of Air Force Long-Range Strike - current requirements and future vision:"
Today, Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA), Chairman of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces, made the following opening remarks for the subcommittee hearing titled "The Future of Air Force Long-Range Strike - current requirements and future vision:"
"Earlier this month, our committee met with an outside panel of witnesses to discuss the future of Air Force Long Range Strike capabilities and employment concepts. Today, the subcommittee plans to continue this effort and to better understand the Air Force’s perspective on the future of Long Range Strike.
Long-range bomber aircraft have been a central element of America’s power projection forces since the Second World War. But after several decades of relative neglect, the Air Force’s bomber fleet is now the smallest and oldest it has ever been. Overall, our 159 bombers have an average age of 39 years—older than most of their pilots—and less than half of the force is 'mission capable' in at least one mission area.
The readiness level of our bomber fleet is disconcerting. Of these aircraft, only 20 B-2s are 'stealth bombers' capable of penetrating the integrated air defense systems being fielded (and exported abroad) by countries like Russia and China. Our 139 older B-1 and B-52 bombers are best suited for operating in low-threat environments and launching standoff missile strikes. While newer multi-role fighters like the F-22 and F-35 may be able to penetrate modern defenses, they lack the range, endurance, and payload needed to operate from bases outside the range of enemy missiles and hold at risk the larger and more challenging target sets our military is likely to face in the future.
As a result, the United States has a serious shortfall in long-range penetrating strike capability and capacity that affects our security in several important ways. First, by limiting our ability to respond promptly to aggression and hold at risk high-value targets (such as enemy leaders or weapons of mass destruction) inside defended airspace, it emboldens our strategic competitors and undermines deterrence. Second, it undermines the confidence of our allies and partners that we can respond rapidly and decisively if and when they are attacked. Third, it forces short-range U.S. air forces to operate from bases within the range of enemy missiles and other threats, playing to the strengths of our competitors’ anti-access strategies and imposing upon the United States the high costs of countering them. For all of these reasons, I believe it is imperative that we expeditiously acquire the new Long Range Strike aircraft.
As to our hearing, I look forward to discussing the Air Force’s ability to provide a ready force now and to maintain and transition the current force to a new LRS-B centered force in the 2040 timeframe. Additionally, the committee has concerns about the ability of the Air Force to manage program costs given Tony Capaccio’s recent Bloomberg article that brought to light a 10-year cost estimate error running in the multiple billions of dollars between FY15 and FY16. Finally, I am concerned about the continued delay in the LRS-B award that in my estimation is costing the USAF approximately $100 million a month and will undoubtedly result in reduced LRS-B FY16 authorizations and appropriations.
Once again I want to thank our witness for participating in our hearing this afternoon and I look forward to discussing this important topic."
