North Korea Seems Hellbent on Starting a Crisis. That's Bad News for Moon Jae-in. Unfortunately for Seoul, it appears Kim Jong-un is setting a course that will end in the rollback the very Panmunjom and Pyongyang declarations that Moon Jae-in banked his entire presidency on. by Daniel R. DePetris

The Kim regime is no longer playing nice with South Korea. In fact, North Korean officials aren’t even pretending anymore to be interested in furthering a dialogue.

Analysts and reporters covering the reclusive dynasty are naturally trained to read between the lines of a North Korean policy statement or a comment published by the state flagship Korean Central News Agency. This is for good reason; the prickly North can be very caustic with their remarks. It’s tempting for those monitoring the North to get swept away with all of the slime and venom pumped out by the North Korean propaganda machine on a daily basis and chalk all of it up to a kind of disturbing lunacy. The Kim regime, however, isn’t crazy—nor is the man at the top of the system. If anything, Kim Jong-un—with his funny haircut and penchant to eliminate all sources of discontent or prospective competition—is brutally rational.

North Korea’s statements as of late have taken on a different tone. Gone are the days when Pyongyang would trash Seoul and Washington for being irreconcilable while at the same time leaving a small window open for more discussions in the future. It’s all fire and brimstone now. Kim Yo-jong is comparing North Korean defectors in the South to “mongrel dogs” and ordering the North Korean high command to prepare for additional retaliation against Seoul. 2020 is quickly turning out to be the exact opposite of 2018, the year when South Korean President Moon Jae-in, U.S. President Donald Trump, and Kim smiled at each other like long-lost friends.

The downward spiral was a long time coming. If 2018 was the year of the blossoming flower, 2019 was the year when the flower started losing some of its petals. The entire diplomatic process Trump gambled on at considerable risk to his political and personal capital (his former national security advisers opposed his first summit with Kim) largely lost momentum immediately after the 2019 summit in Hanoi, when Kim and Trump both walked away disappointed and empty-handed. Working-level talks have been…well…hardly working at all. The last time U.S. and North Korean officials met face-to-face was October 2019, when the two sides couldn’t even agree on how the interaction went. The entire episode smells like one, big, missed opportunity by two countries—the United States and North Korea—who are too closed-minded in their positions and too unshakeable in their ways.

The biggest loser in all of this is President Moon, a former peace activist, presidential adviser, and long-time believer in the virtues of inter-Korean rapprochement whose own peace initiative with the North may have already reached the point of death. One can easily envision an uncensured Moon expressing his frustration at the lack of progress in inter-Korean relations over the previous year—due to in part to his own idealism, Kim’s stubbornness, and Washington’s inability to separate the peace track with the denuclearization track. We could be days away from watching the joint inter-Korean liaison office demolished by the North, an act that would be perfect symbolism to the end of whatever Moon hoped to accomplish on the peace front during his tenure.

In 2018, Moon was delivering grand speeches about the Korean Peninsula undergoing a historic transformation. Now, he and his advisers are begging the North Koreans to come to their senses and not to escalate the situation.

Unfortunately for Seoul, it appears Kim Jong-un is setting a course that will end in the rollback the very Panmunjom and Pyongyang declarations that Moon Jae-in banked his entire presidency on. 

Meet the U.S. Navy's New High-Tech Bomb A millimeter-wave radar gives this weapon an ability to navigate through adverse weather, conditions in which other guidance systems might encounter problems reaching or pinpointing targets. by Kris Osborn

The U.S. Navy has launched a new high-tech, long-range, all-weather bomb for the first time from an F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, marking a new era of attack possibilities for carrier-launched fighters in terms of precision, range and an ability to destroy moving targets from the air.  

A key part of the weapon, called Stormbreaker, is “tri-mode” seeker technology—a guidance system that can direct the weapon using a millimeter-wave radar, uncooled imaging infrared guidance and semi-active laser technology. The weapon can track and destroy targets from as far away as forty miles.  

Raytheon weapons developers say the tri-mode seeker provides a range of guidance and targeting options typically not used together in one system. Millimeter-wave radar gives the weapon an ability to navigate through adverse weather, conditions in which other guidance systems might encounter problems reaching or pinpointing targets. Imagining infrared guidance allows the weapon to track and hone in on heat signatures such as the temperature of an enemy vehicle. With semi-active laser technology, the weapon can be guided to an exact point using a laser designator or laser illuminator coming from the air or the ground. One Raytheon developer told Warrior in an interview in 2018, during an earlier phase of the weapon’s development,  that “the millimeter wave radar turns on first. Then the data link gives it a cue and tells the seeker where to open up and look. Then, the weapon can turn on its IR (infrared) which uses heat seeking technology.”

“Stormbreaker is the only weapon that enables pilots to hit moving targets in bad weather or if dust and smoke are in the area. Super Hornet pilots will be able to use poor visibility to their advantage when Stormbreaker integration is complete,” Stormbreaker Program Director Cristy Stagg, Stormbreaker program director said in a company statement. 

StormBreaker detects, classifies, and tracks a wide array of targets, both moving and stationary. Developers have completed a series of wind tunnel tests and finished Developmental Testing and Government Confidence Testing. A Raytheon statement also added that the bomb has “demonstrated all operating modes, the capability to send, receive, and process data-link messages via both link-16 and UHF, Raytheon developers said. “StormBreaker™ uses Universal Armament Interface protocol to make the weapon/aircraft interface compatible with a wide range of aircraft, including F-35.”

GPS- and laser-guided weapons such as Joint Direct Attack Munitions have been around for decades, however, they have primarily been designed for use against fixed or stationary targets. While the Air Force currently uses a laser-guided bomb called the GBU-54 able to destroy moving targets, the new Stormbreaker will be able to do this at longer ranges and in all kinds of weather conditions. In addition, the bomb is built with a two-way dual-band datalink, which enables it to change targets or adjust to different target locations while in flight, Raytheon developers told Warrior Maven. Stormbreaker is engineered to weigh only 208 pounds, a lighter weight than most other air-dropped bombs so that eight of them can fit on the inside of an F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, Raytheon officials explained. If weapons are kept in an internal weapons bay and not rested on an external weapons pod, then an aircraft can succeed in retaining its stealth properties because the shapes or contours of the weapons will not be visible to enemy radar.

About 105 pounds of the Stormbreaker is an explosive warhead that encompasses a “blast-frag” capability and a “plasma-jet” technology designed to pierce enemy armor. The bomb also has the ability to classify targets, meaning it could for example be programmed to hit only tanks in a convoy as opposed to other moving vehicles. The weapon can classify tanks, boats or wheeled targets, Raytheon officials added.

StormBreaker, which is also being integrated on the F-15E, is carried on the BRU-61, a four-place miniature munitions rack that fits in the F-35’s internal weapons bays. Following the successful integration of the weapon onto an F/A-18E/F, the Stormbreaker will arm the F-35B for the Marine Corps before the F-35A and F-35C.

Revealed: Why The Air Force Is So Confident In The F-35 Stealth Fighter And why China and Russia don't stand a chance. by Kris Osborn

 The idea is to enable F-35 pilots to see and destroy enemies in the air, well in advance of a potential dogfight scenario. This can be explained in terms of a well-known Air Force strategic concept pioneered years ago by air theorist and pilot Col. John Boyd, referred to as the "OODA Loop," --- for observe, orient, decide and act. The concept is to complete this process quickly and make fast decisions while in an air-to-air dogfight -- in order to get inside the enemy's decision cycle, properly anticipate, and destroy an enemy before they can destroy you.

An F-35 Joint Strike Fighter would be able to use its sensors, weapons and computer technology to destroy Russian and Chinese 5th-Generation Stealth fighters in a high-end combat fight, service officials said.

“There is nothing that I have seen from maneuvering an F-35 in a tactical environment that leads me to assume that there is any other airplane I would rather be in. I feel completely comfortable and confident in taking that airplane into any combat environment,” Lt. Col. Matt Hayden, 56th Fighter Wing, Chief of Safety, Luke AFB, Arizona, told Scout Warrior in a special pilot interview.

Furthermore, several F-35 pilots have been clear in their resolve that the multi-role fighter is able to outperform any other platform in existence.

Hayden was clear to point out he has not, as of yet, flown simulated combat missions against the emerging Russian Sukhoi T-50 PAK FA 5th-Generation stealth fighter now in development or the Chinese Shenyang J-31 5th Generation Stealth aircraft. While he said he did not personally know all of the technologies and capabilities of these Russian and Chinese aircraft, he was unambiguous in his assertion regarding confidence in the F-35. 

Available information says the Russians have built at least 6 prototype T-50 PAK FAs for their Air Force and Navy; the Chinese conducted a maiden test flight of its J-31 in 2012. In addition, China is in pre-production with its J-20 5th-Generation stealth fighter. This fighter, called the Chengdu J-20, made its first flight in 2011, and is expected to be operational by 2018, according to publicly available information and various news reports.

While Hayden did not elaborate on aspects of the J-20, he did say he would be confident flying the F-35 against any aircraft in the world.

“All those other countries (Russia and China) are trying to develop airplanes that are technologically capable as well -- from an F-35 perspective. We are no less capable than any airplane and any fighters out there,” Hayden described.  

In addition to leveraging the best available technologies on a fighter jet, winning a dog-fight or combat engagement would depend just as much on the air-tactics and decisions made by a pilot, Hayden explained.

“I have not flown against some of those aircraft. When you fight against an airplane, it depends upon the airspeed. If I maximize the effectiveness of an F-35, I can exploit the weaknesses of any other aircraft,” he said.

Many analysts have made the assessment that the J-20 does appear to be closely modelled after the F-35.

In fact, a Defense Science Board report, cited in a 2014 Congressional assessment of the Chinese military, (US-China Economic Security and Review Commission) makes reference to specific developmental information and specs of numerous U.S. weapons systems believed to be stolen by Chinese computer hackers; design specs and technologies for the F-35 were among those compromised by Chinese cyber-theft, according to the report.

An AIN Online report from the Singapore Air Show in February of last year catalogues a number of J-20 features and technologies – including those believed to be quite similar to the F-35.

Chinese 5th-Generation

From the Report:  Original AIN Online Report HERE

“The J-20 is a large multi-role fighter with stealthy features similar to those found in the American F-22 and F-35. Although very little is known about its intended purpose, the aircraft appears to offer capability in a number of roles, including long-range interception and precision attack.

In terms of weapon carriage the J-20 has a similar arrangement to that of the Lockheed Martin F-22, comprising two lateral bays for small air-to-air missiles such as the agile, imaging-infrared PL-10, and a large under-fuselage bay for accommodating larger missiles and precision-guided surface attack weapons. The 607 Institute’s new PL-15 active-radar missile is thought to be the primary long-range air-to-air weapon, reportedly having been test-fired from a Shenyang J-16 platform last year. The PL-21, a ramjet-powered weapon in the same class as the MBDA Meteor, is another possibility for the J-20.

The sensor suite includes an electro-optical targeting system (EOTS) and a large-array AESA radar, which was developed by the 14th Institute at Nanjing Research Institute of Electronics Technology (NRIET, 14th Institute), and is possibly designated Type 1475/KLJ-5. Diamond-shaped windows around the fuselage suggest that a distributed aperture infrared vision system is installed.

In the cockpit, the J-20 sports three large color displays, plus other small screens, and a holographic wide-angle head-up display. An advanced datalink has been developed, and a retractable refueling probe is located on the starboard side of the forward fuselage. Much of the avionics suite has been tested by the CFTE (China flight test establishment) aboard a modified Tupolev Tu-204C, in much the same way as the systems of the F-22 were tested in a Boeing 757.”

Regarding the Russian T-50 PAK FA Stealth fighter, numerous reports suggest the aircraft has numerous technological problems and is a 5th generation plane “in name only.”

Russian 5th-Generation 

The Following is a report on the T-50 PAK FA from Business Insider, also from this year’s Singapore Air Show….Business Insider Report HERE

“Reporting from the Singapore Airshow 2016, IHS Jane's reports that "Russian industry has consistently referred to the Sukhoi T-50 PAK FA as a fifth-generation aircraft, but a careful look at the program reveals that this is an 'in name only' designation."

This is largely because of a lack of evolutionary technology aboard the plane compared with previous jets that Russia and the US have designed. Indeed, the PAK FA's engines are the same as those aboard Russia's 4++ generation (a bridging generation between fourth- and fifth-generation aircraft) Su-35. Additionally, the PAK FA and the Su-35 share many of the same onboard systems.

And even when the PAK FA's systems are different from the Su-35's, the plane's specifications are still not up to true fifth-generation standards.

RealClearDefense, citing Indian media reports that are familiar with a PAK FA variant being constructed in India, notes that the plane has multiple technological problems. Among these problems are the plane's "engine performance, the reliability of its AESA radar, and poor stealth engineering."

F-35 Sensor Fusion: 

Despite various reports about technologies being engineered into the Russian and Chinese 5th-Generation Stealth Fighters, it is in no way clear that either aircraft is in any way comparable to the F-35. Most publicly available information seems to indicate that the F-35 is superior - however, to some extent, the issue remains an open question. More information is likely to emerge once the Russian and Chinese aircraft are operational and deployed. 

For example, the Chinese J-20 is cited as having an Electro-Optical targeting system, stealth configuration, datalink, AESA radar and precision weaponry quite similar to the F-35, according to the AIN report. 

The computer algorithms woven into the F-35 architecture are designed to leverage early iterations of what could be described as early phases of “artificial intelligence.” Broadly speaking, artificial intelligence refers to fast-evolving computer technology and processors able to gather, assess and integrate information more autonomously in order to help humans make decisions more quickly and efficiently from a position of command-and-control.

“If there is some kind of threat that I need to respond to with the airplane, I don’t have to go look at multiple sensors and multiple displays from multiple locations which could take my time and attention away from something else,” Hayden added.

The F-35 software, which shows images on display screens in the cockpit as well as on a pilot's helmet-mounted-display, is able to merge results from various radar capabilities onto a single screen for the pilot.

“The F-35 takes from multiple sensors around the airplane and combines them together in a way that is much more manageable and accessible -- while not detracting from the other tasks that the pilot is trying to accomplish,” Hayden said.

For instance, the F-35's Electro-Optical Target System, or EOTS, is an infrared sensor able to assist pilots with air and ground targeting at increased standoff ranges while also performing laser designation, laser range-finding and other tasks.

In addition, the plane's Distributed Aperture System, or DAS, is a series of six electro-optical sensors also able to give information to the pilot. The DAS includes precision tracking, fire control capabilities and the ability to warn the pilot of an approaching threat or missile.

The F-35 is also engineered with an Active Electronically Scanned Array Radar, which is able to track a host of electromagnetic signals, including returns from Synthetic Aperture Radar, or SAR. This paints a picture of the contours of the ground or surrounding terrain and, along with Ground Moving Target Indicator, or GMTI, locates something on the move on the ground and airborne objects or threats.

Hayden added that the F-35 has been training against other F-35s in simulated combat situations, testing basic fighter maneuvers. Having himself flown other fighter aircraft, he explained that many other F-35 pilots also fly the airplane after having experience flying an F-16, A-10 or other combat aircraft.

“The F-35’s low-observable technology can prevent detection. That is a strength that other airplanes do not have,” he said.

F-35 and F-22:

At the same time, senior Air Force leaders have made the point that F-35 technological superiority is intended to be paired with the pure air-to-air dogfighting ability of the service’s F-22 – a stealth aircraft, with its speed, maneuverability and thrust-to-weight ratio, is believed by many to be the most capable air-to-air platform in the world.

“Every airplane has flaws. When you design an airplane, you design an airplane with tradeoffs - give something else up. If I was flying against an adversary in actual combat, my job would be to exploit the enemy weakness and play to my strength. I can compensate for certain things,” Hayden explained. “There is a certain way to fly and fight in an airplane, using airspeed to maximize the turning performance of the airplane.” 

During a public speech in 2015, the Air Forces Air Combat Commander, Gen. Hawk Carlisle, said the F-22 is engineered such that it can complement the F-35.

“You will use the F-35 for air superiority, but you will need the raptors to do some things in a high-end fight to penetrate denied airspace,” he said. “The airplane is designed for multi-role capability, electronic warfare and sensors. The F-35 will win against any fourth-generation airplane -- in a close-in fight, it will do exceedingly well. There will be a combination of F-22s and F-35s in the future.”

Hayden further elaborated upon these claims, arguing that the F-35 has another set of strategic advantages to include an ability to use internally built sensors. This prevents the need to use external pods on a fighter jet which can add drag, slowing down and restricting maneuverability for an aircraft.

“As an F-35 pilot, I can carry bombs to a target area where I can now take out air-to-ground threats. You have to look at the overall picture of the airplane. The airplane was designed to overwhelm the battlespace in a non-permissive threatening environment where 4th-gen fighters are not going to persist,” he added.

The F-35 is engineered with a 25-mm gun and has the ability to carry and fire a wide range of weapons. The aircraft has already demonstrated an ability to fire an AMRAAM (Advanced Medium Range Air to Air Missile), JDADM (Joint Direct Attack Munition) or GBU 12 (laser-guided aerial bomb), and AIM 9X Sidewinder air-to-air missile.

So-called "Block 3F" software for the F-35 increases the weapons delivery capacity of the JSF as well, giving it the ability to drop a Small Diameter Bomb and 500-pound JDAM.

As a multi-role fighter, the F-35 is also engineered to function as an intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platform designed to apprehend and process video, data and information from long distances. Some F-35 developers have gone so far as to say the F-35 has ISR technologies comparable to many drones in service today that are able to beam a “soda straw” video view of tactically relevant combat locations in real time.

Finally, regarding dogfighting, it is pertinent to point out a “War is Boring” report from 2015 which cited an F-35 fighter pilot explaining how an F-16 was able to win a “mock dogfight” against an F-35; the F-35 Joint Program Office disputed this claim, saying the F-35 used in the scenario was in no way representative of today’s operational F-35s. The software, weapons and sensor technologies used in the mock dogfight were not comparable to the most evolved F-35.

Furthermore, F-35 proponents maintained that the aircraft’s advanced computer technology and sensors would enable it to see and destroy enemy fighters from much longer ranges – essentially destroying enemy fighters before they are seen.  

OODA Loop

The idea is to enable F-35 pilots to see and destroy enemies in the air, well in advance of a potential dogfight scenario. This can be explained in terms of a well-known Air Force strategic concept pioneered years ago by air theorist and pilot Col. John Boyd, referred to as the "OODA Loop," --- for observe, orient, decide and act. The concept is to complete this process quickly and make fast decisions while in an air-to-air dogfight -- in order to get inside the enemy's decision cycle, properly anticipate, and destroy an enemy before they can destroy you.

The F-35 is designed with long-range sensors and data fusion technologies such that, as a fifth-generation aircraft, it can complete the OODA Loop much more quickly than potential adversaries, F-35 advocates claim.

Mission Data Files

Described as the brains of the airplane, the mission data files are extensive on-board data systems compiling information on geography, air space and potential threats in known areas of the world where the F-35 might be expected to perform combat operations, Air Force officials explained.

Consisting of hardware and software, the mission data files are essentially a database of known threats and friendly aircraft in specific parts of the world. The files are being worked on at a reprogramming laboratory at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., Air Force officials told Military.com last year. The mission data files are designed to work with the aircraft's Radar Warning Receiver engineered to find and identify approaching enemy threats and hostile fire. 

The mission data packages are loaded with a wide range of information to include commercial airliner information and specifics on Russian and Chinese fighter jets. For example, the mission data system would enable a pilot to quickly identify a Russian MiG-29 if it were detected by the F-35’s sensors.

The mission data files are being engineered to adjust to new threat and intelligence information as it emerges. For instance, the system is engineered to one day have all the details on a Chinese J-20 stealth fighter or Russian T-50 PAK FA stealth aircraft.

As a high-visibility, expensive acquisition program, the F-35 has many vocal detractors and advocates; the aircraft has, to be sure, had its share of developmental problems over the years. some of these problems include complications with its main computer system, called ALIS, and a now-corrected engine fire aboard the aircraft. Overall, most critics have pointed to the program's growing costs, something program officials claim has vastly improved through various money-saving initiatives and bulk-buys. 

What Happens If Russia Joins In During An U.S.-China Clash? by Robert Farley

Here's What You Need To Remember: The United States can still fight and win two major wars at the same time, or at least come near enough to winning that neither Russia nor China would see much hope in the gamble. The United States can do this because it continues to maintain the world’s most formidable military, and because it stands at the head of an extremely powerful military alliance.

The United States discarded its oft-misunderstood “two war” doctrine, intended as a template for providing the means to fight two regional wars simultaneously, late last decade. Designed to deter North Korea from launching a war while the United States was involved in fighting against Iran or Iraq (or vice versa,) the idea helped give form to the Department of Defense’s procurement, logistical and basing strategies in the post–Cold War, when the United States no longer needed to face down the Soviet threat. The United States backed away from the doctrine because of changes in the international system, including the rising power of China and the proliferation of highly effective terrorist networks.

But what if the United States had to fight two wars today, and not against states like North Korea and Iran? What if China and Russia sufficiently coordinated with one another to engage in simultaneous hostilities in the Pacific and in Europe?

Political Coordination

Could Beijing and Moscow coordinate a pair of crises that would drive two separate U.S. military responses? Maybe, but probably not. Each country has its own goals, and works on its own timeline. More likely, one of the two would opportunistically take advantage of an existing crisis to further its regional claims. For example, Moscow might well decide to push the Baltic States if the United States became involved in a major skirmish in the South China Sea.

In any case, the war would start on the initiative of either Moscow or Beijing. The United States enjoys the benefits of the status quo in both areas, and generally (at least where great powers are concerned) prefers to use diplomatic and economic means to pursue its political ends. While the U.S. might create the conditions for war, Russia or China would pull the trigger.

Flexibility: 

On the upside, only some of the requirements for fighting in Europe and the Pacific overlap. As was the case in World War II, the U.S. Army would bear the brunt of defending Europe, while the Navy would concentrate on the Pacific. The U.S. Air Force (USAF) would play a supporting role in both theaters.

Russia lacks the ability to fight NATO in the North Atlantic, and probably has no political interest in trying. This means that while the United States and its NATO allies can allocate some resources to threatening Russia’s maritime space (and providing insurance against a Russian naval sortie,) the U.S. Navy (USN) can concentrate its forces in the Pacific. Depending on the length of the conflict and the degree of warning provided, the United States could transport considerable U.S. Army assets to Europe to assist with any serious fighting.

The bulk of American carriers, submarines and surface vessels would concentrate in the Pacific and the Indian Oceans, fighting directly against China’s A2/AD system and sitting astride China’s maritime transit lanes. Long range aviation, including stealth bombers and similar assets, would operate in both theaters as needed.

The U.S. military would be under strong pressure to deliver decisive victory in at least one theater as quickly as possible. This might push the United States to lean heavily in one direction with air, space and cyber assets, hoping to achieve a strategic and political victory that would allow the remainder of its weight to shift to the other theater. Given the strength of U.S. allies in Europe, the United States might initially focus on the conflict in the Pacific.

Alliance Structure: 

U.S. alliance structure in the Pacific differs dramatically from that of Europe. Notwithstanding concern over the commitment of specific U.S. allies in Europe, the United States has no reason to fight Russia apart from maintaining the integrity of the NATO alliance. If the United States fights, then Germany, France, Poland and the United Kingdom will follow. In most conventional scenarios, even the European allies alone would give NATO a tremendous medium term advantage over the Russians; Russia might take parts of the Baltics, but it would suffer heavily under NATO airpower, and likely couldn’t hold stolen territory for long. In this context, the USN and USAF would largely play support and coordinative roles, giving the NATO allies the advantage they needed to soundly defeat the Russians. The U.S. nuclear force would provide insurance against a Russian decision to employ tactical or strategic nuclear weapons.

The United States faces more difficult problems in the Pacific. Japan or India might have an interest in the South China Sea, but this hardly guarantees their participation in a war (or even the degree of benevolence of their neutrality.) The alliance structure of any given conflict would depend on the particulars of that conflict; any of the Philippines, Vietnam, South Korea, Japan or Taiwan could become China’s primary target. The rest, U.S. pressure aside, might well prefer to sit on the sidelines. This would put extra pressure on the United States to establish dominance in the Western Pacific with its own assets.

Parting Shots: 

The United States can still fight and win two major wars at the same time, or at least come near enough to winning that neither Russia nor China would see much hope in the gamble. The United States can do this because it continues to maintain the world’s most formidable military, and because it stands at the head of an extremely powerful military alliance. Moreover, Russia and China conveniently pose very different military problems, allowing the United States to allocate some of its assets to one, and the rest to the other.

However, it bears emphasis that this situation will not last forever. The United States cannot maintain this level of dominance indefinitely, and in the long-term will have to choose its commitments carefully. At the same time, the United States has created an international order that benefits many of the most powerful and prosperous countries in the world; it can count on their support, for a while.

The Stealthy F-117 Nighthawk Could Have Executed Nuclear Strikes Against The Soviet Union The F-117 was built with the ability to deliver nuclear bombs and the Air Force didn't forget that during the last years of the Cold War. BY TYLER ROGOWAY

The F-117 Nighthawk continues to capture the public's imagination well over a decade after it was officially retired. Even though it flies on in a limited fashion for testing and training purposes, its days as a combat aircraft are long behind it. While it was best known for snaking its way through enemy air defenses to strike fixed targets with pinpoint precision using conventional laser-guided bombs, the truth is the 'Black Jet' was fully equipped to deliver far more devastating weaponry if the balloon went up during the twilight of the Cold War. 

Originally, the Senior Trend program that gave birth to the F-117 included the goal of having the aircraft be able to carry the majority of the weapons the Air Force had to offer for its tactical fighter and attack aircraft at the time—the 1970s. The realization of the jet's limitations and strengths paired down its operational weapons menu considerably. Still, all the cockpit interfaces and diverse stores management capabilities were baked into the design—including the provision to carry and employ nuclear gravity bombs—namely the B57 and B61.

The F-117s cockpit included an Aircraft Monitoring And Control (AMAC) panel that interfaced with the Permissive Action Link (PAL) on the nuclear weapons that allowed them to be armed and programmed prior to delivery. This hard-wired nuclear capability lasted throughout the F-117's entire career, and, at least for a time, it wasn't just something the Air Force largely forgot about.

At first glance, the F-117 would have been a terrifying nuclear delivery platform for the Soviets to contend with. It was built to penetrate dense enemy air defenses via a cocktail of measures. Shaping, which accounted for roughly 75 percent of the aircraft's radar cross-section reduction, and radar-absorbent materials and coatings, which made up the rest, are the aircraft's most known and innovative traits, but its mission planning software, which was state-of-the-art at the time, was also extremely important when it came to the plane's enhanced survivability. 

The F-117's route was meticulously planned before each strike mission, with the latest electronic and other intelligence on enemy air defense threats and overall force posture factored into its every pre-planned move. Even the angle at which the F-117 presented itself to known threatening emitters was part of the computerized planning process that aimed to give the F-117 pilot the best shot at surviving based on all known factors. As such, when taking on the Russian Bear's deeply entrenched air defenses in Eastern Europe, the F-117s chances of making it to its target would likely have far eclipsed that other tactical jets in the Air Force's inventory at the time. 

Beyond these finite details, it was a stealth attack plane the likes of which the world had never seen. It represented an almost magic-like technology at the time. Without knowing its Achilles heels, it would likely have seemed invincible to Moscow. But using the stealth jets poised to strike on the front lines of the Cold War as a nuclear deterrent wasn't meant to be. 

During the mid-1980s, as the F-117 program morphed from a development and testing effort to also an operational one, the idea of forward-deploying groups of F-117s to stand nuclear alert in the United Kingdom and even South Korea were examined. The main issue with doing so was the fact that the aircraft was one of America's most closely guarded secrets, so extending operations to two points around the globe on any scale could have resulted in the aircraft's existence, and even its configuration and its general capabilities, to be known. Also consider that during this time the aircraft was such a tightly held secret that it lived at a remote, extremely high-security airfield in Southern Nevada and only came out at night. All of the sudden pushing the F-117 overseas, even in small groups, would have negated all the work that had been done and continued to be done to keep it secret.

Just the unique infrastructure the F-117s required for prolonged large-scale operations would have made such an idea highly unattainable on a security level, not to mention it being an expensive proposition, to say the least. For so few aircraft, only 59 F-117As were built, and considering it could carry just two bombs, the trade-off in secrecy and cost against the impact they would have on a sudden nuclear exchange just didn't balance. 

So, saving contingency operations, the F-117 would not serve in the nuclear alert role in any standardized fashion, at least while its existence remained highly classified.

That didn't mean that the nuclear strike mission was abandoned. Instead, operational F-117s units were well aware of the jet's latent nuclear capability and their regular precision strike training that included infiltrating deep into enemy airspace also prepared pilots for the nuclear mission, in at least a tertiary fashion. If there was a crisis that would have required the F-117's presence in a nuclear weapons delivery role, regardless of if it compromised the veil of secrecy surrounding it at the time, crews would have been able to spin up quickly for the unique mission and execute it if need be. 

The F-117 test enterprise, which was extremely active alongside the operational elements of the program throughout the aircraft's early operational days to its retirement, worked at validating various deployment profiles of at least the B61 tactical nuclear bomb throughout the 1980s. It isn't exactly clear just how diverse a set of tactics and procedures they validated, but it's safe to say that by the end of the Cold War and beyond, the jet's nuclear weapons delivery capability became more proven. This also points to the reality that the test team could have ramped up nuclear weapons delivery trials and refined existing procedures further in short order if geopolitical events required them to do so even early on in the jet's active-service career. 

One example of the ongoing nuclear delivery profile expansion testing lies in an incident with a test F-117 flying out of Groom Lake in 1985. The aircraft had a major malfunction with its v-tail section during the test flight that included at least in part, a weapons compatibility objective. While the weapon was hanging out in the slipstream during a maneuver, the aircraft began to shake violently. The pilot was able to recover safely and the issue was quickly fixed, but the weapons integration test the program was executing during that flight was for a delivery profile—supposedly a toss from medium altitude—with a dummy B61 nuclear bomb.

Veteran F-117 pilot Robert "Robson" Donaldson, Bandit #321, recently appeared on the Fighter Pilot Podcast, in which a very brief mention of the F-117's secondary nuclear mission was made, prompting our investigation. You should give the segment a listen here. We got in contact with Donaldson through our friends at the Fighter Pilot Podcast to learn more about his experience with the Nighthawk and the plane's very seldom discussed nuclear role. Considering he flew the jet at the very tail end of the Cold War, from 1989-1992, just as the aircraft was really maturing on an operational level and at the very end of its deep 'in the black' existence, he would certainly be able to clarify the off-hand mention in the podcast.

Donaldson told The War Zone that they never really practiced heavily for the mission, but it was always looming in the background. If the jets were needed in a crisis, they were prepared to deploy to the United Kingdom where they would prosecute targets in Eastern Europe. He remembers having to fully memorize the mission to hit his assigned target, which was in Rostock, East Germany, and he was tested on it in front of other officers in the unit to make sure he was fully up to speed should the call come. This was apparently a common experience across the active F-117 pilot corps at the time. His preparation for this mission was for a conventional weapons delivery—GBU-27 laser-guided bombs—but the idea of sudden snap deployment to hit targets in Eastern Europe could have ported over to the nuclear mission, as well. 

Donaldson also notes that if the aircraft were to have exercised its nuclear weapons employment capability, it would have likely used the laydown method of delivery nuclear bomb delivery profile to maximize its stealthiness and survivability. This is where the aircraft zooms overhead the target and drops a retarded nuclear bomb, which would use a parachute to slow its descent to the ground, in some cases lying in the target area for a short moment in time before detonating. This allows the aircraft to get away without being caught in the nuclear weapon's powerful shockwave. Using this method would have allowed the F-117 to maintain a relatively conservative attitude along a very carefully planned path while also minimizing the time the jet's bay doors are open, which balloons its small radar signature. 

As we just mentioned, the F-117s could have been used in the non-nuclear role during World War III, as well, knocking out key infrastructure and defenses in the opening days of a conflict. Its limited range would have curtailed just how far it could have struck into the USSR and operating over an active nuclear battlefield in an aircraft no more hardened for the nuclear combat environment than any Tactical Air Command fighter of the era, may have also been issue as the conflict matured. The question of what basing and tanker support would even have been left by the time the F-117s mobilized overseas makes their involvement in any form of World War Three, aside from the opening punches if they were forward deployed in advanced, fairly questionable.

The F-117 crept out of the darkness just as the Cold War and the 1980s were ending. Forward deploying the jets even while the program was still largely under wraps was tested successfully following the aircraft's combat debut in Panama in 1989. The F-117s recovered at England AFB in Louisiana after the mission, a detail that wasn't disclosed until many years after the mission took place. 

The F-117s executed a true test deployment, also to England Air Force Base, under far less secrecy in 1990, which really paved the way for future expeditionary operations. So, even with some of the secrecy and security restrictions having been relaxed, the question of if the world's first stealth combat aircraft would be folded into NATO's larger nuclear strategy on a consistent basis would never be answered, and thankfully so. 

While the F-117 could and did deploy overseas with some regularity after its declassification, with the threat from Russia diminished and other hotspots taking the spotlight, the notion of sending the F-117s on some sort of standing nuclear alert eroded even further. The B-2 Spirit had also transformed from dream to a flying reality in this same period and that aircraft, which was totally optimized to the deep nuclear strike mission, provided the U.S. with a penetrating stealth bomber with a huge weapons load that could duke it out with a major power during the apocalypse. The introduction of the AGM-129 stealth cruise missile into service in 1990 also made the F-117's latent nuclear capabilities even more redundant. 

So, all said, you can think of the F-117's nuclear capability as very real, but it was kept largely in reserve during the Cold War. The jet's extreme secrecy kept it from actively deterring the unthinkable, but if a major crisis in which there was time spin-up and push some of the Nighthawks to the frontline had occurred, they could have been ready to weave their way through enemy air defenses beyond the Iron Curtain and even over of the Demilitarized Zone that bisects North and South Korea, if called upon. 

As for the F-117's nuclear capability long after the Cold War ended—it never fully melted away, although by the end of the Gulf War the Nighthawk had been crowned America's silver bullet precision conventional strike superweapon and further refining that capability would continue to be the program's focus till its official retirement in 2008.