09 Oct 14. Questions Ahead for JSTARS Replacement. The service’s joint surveillance target attack radar system (JSTARS) aircraft fleet is due for a replacement, but questions remain whether the program is viewed as a large enough priority in Congress to secure funding. And even if the service manages to get the cash, just what the new airplane will look like is unclear. The argument for replacing JSTARS is twofold. First, the current fleet of Northrop Grumman E-8 planes is based on an old Boeing 707 model, which is no longer in production, meaning parts and sustainment costs are only going to go up. Those planes are less fuel efficient and have less power for advanced systems. Secondly, the dramatic advance in technology over the past decade would allow more capability to be put on the planes, and proponents of the new program say that updating the old models to accommodate these new technologies could be nearly as expensive as simply buying new planes. Given the improvements in capability and cost, a new JSTARS should be an ‘easy sell’ in any other budget environment. But with the Pentagon’s noted budget crunch, the Air Force is aware it will need to sell, and sell hard, if it wants a new fleet. The Air Force has gone through a significant analysis of alternatives on the options for the new JSTARS. But when asked what requirements he would like to see for a new system, Gen. Mark Welsh, Air Force chief of staff, warned not to get ahead of congressional decisions.
“There is debate going on in Congress on the Hill about the JSTARS program. There are people who support us in this effort and people who don’t think this is a good idea,” Welsh said in September. “As that is resolved, we’ll decide how we can move forward. But getting too far ahead of the curve before we know we have the support of our financial partners might not be a great idea.”
The E-8s provide ‘tremendous’ capability against ground-based targets, said James Poss, a retired major general and deputy chief of staff for ISR for the US Air Force. He notes the planes are likely playing a key role in Syria and would have a huge role in any operations against Russian or North Korean ground forces.
But Poss acknowledged persuading Congress to spend now in order to reap savings later is a hard argument to make in the era of sequestration.
“You need to recap in the front end to see substantial savings in the back end, and that’s difficult to do in a declining budget,” Poss said. “You have a real balancing act in order to keep doing what you’re doing while recapitalizing a fleet.”
Richard Aboulafia, an analyst with the Teal Group, called the JSTARS replacement a “great idea in need of a champion.”
“In terms of technology, it makes so much sense to recapitalize,” Aboulafia said. “Anything that gets you from a four-engine obsolete jetliner to a modern twinjet just pays for itself very quickly, gives you a lot more operational flexibility too, and by the way it also presents a smaller target for the enemy.”
The question at the core of the JSTARS fight is the size of the plane, with both Boeing and Northrop making big bets that they can convince the Air Force that their solution is the right one. Boeing is offering a modification of its 737-700 commercial airliner. Rod Meranda, business development lead for the Boeing JSTARS program, told reporters in September that they opted for a bigger aircraft in order to meet future requirements.
“Smaller jets have a harder time based on the size of the engine to go ahead and produce the power and the cooling that future requirements may need, “Meranda said.
Another benefit to the 737-700 design is the worldwide infrastructure already in place for the commercial airliner, an argument Boeing has been using as it leans more on commercial derivatives for military programs. A JSTARS design would have “75 to 80 percent” commonality with its commercial cousins, with parts located at airfields globally, Meranda said. On the flip side is