Aircraft (formerly Air Domain): –
Problem Statement and Research Question
As the United States (US) returns to strategic competition and contemplates large scale conventional conflict once again, several factors make a World War II-era surge of military aircraft production highly unlikely. The need for aerial mass, and the associated limitations to mass production in the military aviation industry, together constitute the problem addressed by this report, whose research question is: given constraints in tools, technology, training, and policy within the military aviation industry, what steps can the US government take to ensure sufficient mass for strategic competition?
Research Methods
This report encapsulates five months of extensive study of the aircraft industry by the 2022 Aircraft Industry Study Seminar at the Dwight D. Eisenhower School for National Security and Resource Strategy, conducted from January to May 2022. Beginning from an expansive definition of mass as a “superior combination of materiel and effects,” the Seminar examined markets across the aviation industry, including fighter aircraft, large fixed-wing aircraft, rotorcraft, and unmanned aerial systems (UAS). Within these markets, the Seminar gathered data concerning key drivers of aerial mass in the US, the European Union (EU), China, and Russia via literature review, field studies, and interviews with experts in industry, academia, and government. The Seminar then parsed this data across multiple levels of analysis including the strategic environment, determinants of national competitiveness, domestic stakeholders, military aircraft requirements, and detailed market analysis. In doing so, the Seminar applied several business and public policy frameworks including Porter’s Model of National Competitiveness, the Iron Triangle of Defense Acquisitions, Industry Structure-Conduct-Performance, and Porter’s Five Forces to identify opportunities and barriers to aerial mass through 2030.
Research Findings and Recommendations
Drawing from the Seminar’s professional experience in aircraft operations, acquisitions, logistics, and intelligence, this report finds that to ensure sufficient mass for strategic competitiveness in the military aviation industry, the US government should take assertive steps across the tools, technology, training, and policy framework to a) protect key supply chains, b) reform budget allocation processes for rapid acquisitions, c) accelerate purchases of low-cost platforms and cross-platform technologies, d) incentivize Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) degrees and skilled labor, and e) reduce regulatory burden. Specifically, the report outlines the following six key findings and ten recommendations:
Tools
Finding 1: The US needs targeted industrial policy to protect key elements of the military aviation industry supply chain.
- Recommendation 1: Develop targeted industrial policy to protect vulnerable supply chains.
- Recommendation 2: Improve incentives and coordination for small and mid-sized enterprises (SMEs) to invest in advanced manufacturing.
Finding 2: The US needs Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) reform to capitalize on the pace of commercial innovation.
- Recommendation 3: Reform the PPBE system to transition new technology across the “valley of death.”
Technology
Finding 3: The US needs to accelerate purchases of low-cost and advanced cross-platform capabilities to increase aerial mass.
- Recommendation 4: Accelerate acquisitions of larger quantities of low-cost unmanned platforms in exchange for fewer expensive and exquisite platforms.
- Recommendation 5: Increase aviation mass with cross-platform technologies including AI, sensors, and networks.
Training
Finding 4: The US needs to incentivize STEM and skilled labor education to ensure the military aviation industry remains competitive.
- Recommendation 6: Reform immigration and educational policy to encourage foreign students who study in the US to stay and contribute to the defense industrial base.
- Recommendation 7: Incentivize US citizens to study in key technology fields and work in the defense industrial base.
- Recommendation 8: Develop and apply aviation-specific talent management schemes within the Department of Defense (DoD) that allow for non-traditional career paths.
Policy
Finding 5: The US needs to reform the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) to enable global exports of UAS technology.
- Recommendation 9: Modernize the MTCR to expand US UAS exports while continuing support for non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) delivery systems.
Finding 6: The US needs to establish clear roles between the government and industry in developing best practices for key technologies.
- Recommendation 10: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) accelerates policy development for integrating UAS in the national airspace system (NAS).
Conclusions
The resurgence of strategic competition highlights the need for aerial mass, yet the defense industrial base is limited in its ability to surge to meet defense requirements. Expanding the definition of mass to “a superior combination of materiel and effects,” this report finds that several drivers of US national competitiveness and market forces across the tools, technology, training, and policy framework favor the rapid development of aerial mass. By applying this report’s recommendations and preparing for competitor responses, the US government can set conditions for the military aviation industry to generate sufficient aerial mass for renewed strategic competition.