A Comparative Study of Global Fighter Development Timelines

STUDY OF INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY IN CHINA POLICY BRIEF 2014-3 January 2014

Maggie MARCUM

This policy brief provides a summary of trends in the research, development, 1970s to modern times. This paper expands the evolving practice of RDA and acquisition (RDA) practices of fighter aircraft programs from the analysis by incorporating timeline analysis to compare the length of time the United States, Russia, China, and India take to design, produce, test, and

field military fighters. The research suggests that while the United States countries such as China are able to rapidly bridge the gap by copying foreign remains the leader in fighter designs and advanced technology development, designs and building on the experience of collaborative partners. The brief lays the foundation for additional comparative studies that will focus on technology development and the ability of technology followers to emulate

sophisticated capabilities for the next generation of fighter aircraft.

The Study of Innovation and Technology in China (SITC) is a project of the University of California Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation. SITC Research Briefs provide analysis and recommendations based on the work of project participants. This material is based upon work supported by, or in part by, the U.S. Army Research Laboratory and the U.S. Army Research Office through the Minerva Initiative under grant #W911NF-09-1-0081. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Army Research Laboratory and the U.S. Army Research Office.

1 METHODOLOGY tion through the use of key terms to 1940s with advances in technologies and capabilities leading to the Cold The goal of timeline analysis, as part data mining process. The generic War era quest for military advantage of the RDA analytic framework, is to RDAnarrow process the research framework field providesduring the a between the United States and the capture and categorize activities over structure to cluster key data points Soviet Union. The end of the Korean the life of select programs. This study for comparative timeline analysis. For War is seen as the advent of the avia- examines the development timelines this study, the indicators detailed in tion technology arms race as the Table 1 were used to categorize infor- countries faced off for air superiority. on the United States, Russia, China, mation and to track the length of time of 14 fighter programs while focusing and India to compare the RDA pro- a foundation for the most enduring These early-generation fighters laid betweenThe RDA fourth- process and frameworkfifth-generation pro- that still inspire imitation in develop- cesses for fourth- and fifth-generation may help to bring greater certainty videsfighter a programway to organize, milestones. diagram, and ingand defensetechnologically industrial advanced bases fighterssuch as fighters. Documenting past practices when predicting future trends by present data that can later be trans- China and India. identifying indicators that might ferred to a timeline graphic to indi- signal the start and progression of a cate key observable events. RDA sign- Fourth-Generation Fighters posts are plotted and updated as new The stages of a defense RDA pro- information becomes available, high- The 1991 Gulf War air campaign dem- sixth-generation fighter program. cess include milestones for S&T lighting changes in the length of time onstrated the technical prowess of the studies, requirement and concept between milestones from program to United States. Within 10 years of the development, technical and systems production of US F-15 and F-16 and development, testing, production, and exact dates for R&D, therefore this - delivery of military equipment. Earlier briefprogram. uses It the often most is difficult widely toaccepted obtain ers, other design and development the Russian Su-27 and Mig-29 fight studies of defense RDA systems sug- milestones available. teams emulated these programs with gest a similar basic defense develop- their own fourth-generation variants. Analysis of the development mile- RDA process. The literature describes JET FIGHTER DEVELOPMENT stones for select fourth-generation thement use structure, of timelines defined as an as analytic the generic tool to manage large amounts of informa- can trace their origin to the late United States and Russia took an Leaders in jet fighter development fighter programs suggests that the Table 1.

Pre-ProgramKey indicatorsRequirements for timeline analysisResearch of fighter and aircraftDevelopment development and Production Operations and Design Demonstration Maintenance

- Air Force re- Research, dem- Systems inte- Production Rollout quirements onstration, and approval gration Service acceptance Fourth, fifth-gen validation Technology re- Acquisition plan Production strategy eration fighter Preliminary and Maintenance plans search program Acquisition Requirements Production rates strategy Technology gaps Technology study or system Model simulation established programs Develop concept final design Full-scale pro- operational performance Develop prototypes upgrades duction specifications/concepts/threats objectives and pilot models Modifications/recommended Follow-on Acceptance testing Reconfigured System capability Project analysis Prototype testing Retired requirements/ and evaluation Final production Systems/technol- capability gap ogy integra- Design modi- Feasibility study/ tion plan project scope Performance Delivery/fielding Risk assessments fications - criteria Contract com- tion/request pletion Final approval Projectfor proposals defini and validation or information Contract award Low rate/initial Budget Delivery projection production Life cycle costs Technology development

2 YEARS 0–5 5–10 10–15 15–20 20–25 25–30 30–35

F-15 4 1 3 4

F-16 1 3 2 3

Su-27 1 7 3 8

MiG29 3 1 3 7

PROGRAMS Euro 4 4 8 4

J-11B 20 (approximated) 7 4–5 3

J-10 5 15 2 2–3

Figure 1.

Overview of fourth-generation fighter timelines average of 12 years from study to When countries that are still de- France withdrew from the consor- delivery of their fourth-generation veloping their defense industrial bas- tium and returned to developing its - es attempt to indigenously design and opment program took about 17 years - fromsystems. program The Eurofighter initiation tojoint delivery. devel ger development timelines because generationown fighter. Rafael, It would just takeshy of some the 17 14 China was able to cut corners when theyproduce are aincapable fighter they of completeoften face self-lon years from for France program to fieldinitiation its fourth-to de- it replicated Russia’s Su-27 designs reliance. This is the case with India’s to springboard its J-11B version some Tejas program, which began with Late Followers seven years later. The J-10, however, technical studies in the mid-1970s livery of the Eurofighter. Other country’s designs have been shows the weakness in China’s tech- and has yet to be delivered to opera- nical skills and experience, leading to tional forces. - a much longer timeline of nearly 25 Joint Programs ers.influenced China byhas the successfully capabilities ofincor U.S.- years to convert foreign designs and Unable to individually develop a poratedand Russian knowledge fourth-generation gained through fight its collaboration with Russia on the Figure 1). assistance to a fielded fighter (see Kingdom and Germany in 1983 be- Su-27 licensed production to emu- Technology Innovators ganfourth-generation plans to design fighter, and thebuild United the late an advanced program. India, on The fourth-generation capabilities of the other hand, continues its attempt the United States are built on a histo- ry of incrementally improved techni- previousEurofighter research Typhoon studies collaborative conducted press coverage reports numerous de- cal levels. Russia has drawn from the byfighter. the United The program Kingdom, drew France, heavily Spain, on laysto develop because the of Tejas funding, fighter, political although bat- and Italy, with each committing to tles over the program, lack of domes- fourth-generation capabilities. France contribute designs and technologies tic technical capabilities, and a culture andSukhoi Sweden, and MiG too, fighterbuilt on family predecessor for its from their own studies. Although ill-prepared to implement a complex designs for the Rafael and Gripen, tak- on the surface this seemed to be the ing a little more than 15 years from best bet for the partners to develop a India committed to indigenous design - andfighter production program. of Nearly a fourth-generation 40 years after tion variants. program was daunting. Eventually, study to fielding their fourth-genera multi-role fighter, management of the fighter, it has yet to deliver. 3 China entered the era of fourth- concept development. Aviation ex- have begun as early as 1993, draw- perts continue to debate the existence ing from the Su-27 family of designs. production of Russia’s Su-27SK. It is uncleargeneration when fighters China withbegan its research licensed- new avionics, radar, and a reduced ra- ing the technology to build its own thatof a breakawayit is more aboutcapability marketing that defines than Sukhoi is promoting a fighter with abouta fifth newgeneration, capabilities. with some claiming testing in 2007 and was in assembly Russia arrived in China around 1999 The F-22 was developed in re- asdar of signature. 2011. Russia The fighter may beganexport flight the andversion; within however, a few theyears first China kits fromcan- sponse to a U.S. Air Force requirement celled its contract for future deliveries to replace and/or improve the capa- - of kits. By 2002, China had announced bilities of the F-15 and F-16. The new ingcompleted a sale. Undoubtedly,fighter to China, China although hopes that it had indigenized Russia’s air- tothere gain are access conflicting to Russia’s reports technology regard craft. to bolster its domestic programs. It Some observers argue that the Fromfighter concept emerged to afteroperation, years the of study pro- has taken more than 20 years to de- gramand a rigorousspanned five-yearmore than competition. 25 years. sign and test the prototypes of this Russian-provided variant, and China The program was costly, and in 2009 advanced program. continuesJ-11B is sufficiently to tweak follow-ondifferent fromvariants the the U.S. Senate voted to end the pro- Russia continues to develop the with improved technical capabilities. After investing nearly 20 years main- delivered. it has extended the projected full taining previously purchased Su-27 gram.The By Joint May Strike 2012 Fighterthe final (JSF) F-22 F-35 was operationallong-awaited capability T-50 fighter; date however,to 2016. - Russia could slip the date again if it is production process, China was able to er, combining advanced stealth with - fighters and learning through the kit is defined as “a fifth-generation fight ties associated with the complex de- Su-27/J-11B in about 14 years. sensor information, network-enabled sign.unable The to overcomeT-50 received technical government difficul deliverChina the moved first hybrid further version into of pro the- operations,fighter speed advanced and agility, sustainment, fully fused endorsement and funding in 2002 as and lower operational and support a joint Russia-India venture known as the PAK-FA aircraft. Press reports reportsduction suggestof fourth-generation that the J-10 fightersis a de- - signwith drawnits foreign-influenced from the Israeli J-10. Lavi Some proj- runcosts.” smoothly, The multinational in large part program,because proved in 2010, although R&D likely ect, while other reports indicate that oflike the that high of thecosts Eurofighter, and risks hasassoci not- beganindicate in that the theearly final 2000s. design Blueprints was ap Chengdu Aircraft began to work with ated with the integration of emergent were completed for prototype devel- designs in the mid-1980s and was in- technologies. The program is now in opment and testing began in 2010; testing and evaluation and it could however, series production with India MiG-29. By the mid-1980s, China’s take the United States approximately is not expected before 2022. aviationfluenced groupby the was U.S. ableF-16 to and draw Russian from China’s J-20 program remains a its domestic practice of copying and emulation to produce improved vari- 24 Some years argue to develop that Russia and and field China this ants. It took China approximately 25 arecomplex unlikely fighter. to replicate the stealth ca- expertsclosely guardedagree that secret the despiteprogram a firsthas years from study to delivery of its pabilities of the F-22 or the improved progressedflight in January at an 2011. accelerated Most aviation pace, radar and sensor powers of the F-35. suggesting a higher degree of com- Russia is developing the T-50 while petency in the design and develop- first nearly-indigenously designed China has begun testing of the J-20. ment stages. There is some debate advancedFifth-Generation fighter. Fighters Many experts suggest that these air- By the 1990s, the United States, craft lack the technical parameters the J-20, with some pointing to the Russia, and China were studying U.S.regarding F-22 and the the design Russian influence T-50. The for new concepts in air superiority, in- more likely just incrementally im- J-20 has some similarities to the cluding stealth technology, precision of a fifth-generation fighter and are J-10 and it may incorporate some of weapons, improved avionics, and the India reportedly has a requirement the advanced features of the follow- ability to operate in a networked en- proved fourth-generation fighters.- on J-10B, creating questions about vironment. The complexity of these nated the MMRCA, to match the capa- emerging capabilities has resulted bilitiesfor a medium of the U.S.multirole F-22 Raptor. fighter, desig in longer development timelines. At Russia is developing the Su-35S dataits designation regarding asthe a development fifth-generation of - thefighter. J-20, Based it probably on the has limited taken known China may be in development worldwide, at least 12 years to reach the point of least eight fifth-generation fighters fighter, often described as a “4++ gen testing an aircraft, and past practices eration fighter using fifth-generation with the U.S. F-22 design influencing technology.” The Su-35 program may

4 It is likely that it will take most devel- years to deliver a completed aircraft. opers about 25 years to conceptualize suggestChina it ismay not take content an additional to have justfive of fighters will have increased speed, one stealth aircraft program. Initial longer range, and even “self-healing because of the complexity of the tech- reports suggest that the developmen- bystructures previous and variants, multi-spectral the same stealth.” may nologiesand deliver and a components. fifth-generation It is imporfighter- tal J-31 is smaller and lighter than holdSince true most for fighters the werenext-generation influenced tant to remember that only the United the J-20; however, even fewer details - States has actually produced and de- are available on this aircraft. The J-31 throughs, including application of - - emergingfighter. However, technologies technical and concepts break ing into question the ability of other ditional analysis is needed to under- such as hypersonics, directed energy, countrieslivered a fifth-generation to replicate U.S. fighter,technologi call- first flew in November 2012 but ad new materials, advanced microelec- cal advances. means for China’s defense industrial - China only recently entered the capabilitiesstand what as a secondwell as stealth its ability fighter to - bring two complex programs to the teristicstronics, andin future the “stuffprograms. of science fic - tion,” may lead to unexpected charac playing field and it is unclear what- capabilities its purported fifth-gener years. CONCLUSION operational field in the coming 5–10 Unitedation fighter States will and display. Russia, China, which how may What’s Next? - helpever, tohas shorten the benefit its development of watching time the- - grams have lagged some 20 years lines. behindChina’s western fighter technology development develop pro- It is difficult to discuss a sixth-gen ments, but appear to be closing the eration fighter when most countries gap in terms of aircraft capabilities Maggie MARCUM is an independent continue to develop fourth plus/fifth- and manufacturing know-how. The consultant and recognized expert on defense industrial programs specializing thegeneration timeline fighters.analysis of However, creating givenearly United States and Russia took an aver- in development of analytic frameworks R&Dthe commonstudy groups, practice it is identifiedhighly likely in age of 12 years from study to delivery related to research, development, and that defense planners, including the of their fourth-generation systems. acquisition (RDA) process for weapons United States, Russia, and China, are The Chinese fourth-generation J-10, development. As a member of the U.S. already exploring options for a future however, has taken 25 years to de- intelligence community she authored complex assessments of foreign pro- - velop. grams for the White House, Department ture reveals any number of possible of Defense, State Department, and optionsfighter aircraft. for the Afuture, study butof the most litera ar- the Department of Commerce. ticles suggest that the next generation be moreThe timelinein line with for other fielding countries. China’s fifth-generation fighters appears to