Red Air options: Contracted Aggressors

Interesting read about future Red Air options for the US Air Force. The Air Force was short 3,000 sorties of Red Air at Nellis last year, and is examining contractor owned, contractor operated (COCO) Red Air. They're expecting to be short even more sorties as F-35 training ramps up. The Air Force currently operates two Aggressor squadrons, the 18th AGRS in Alaska, and the 64th AGRS at Nellis. The 65th AGRS, which flew F-15s was shut down in 2014.

Contractors include Draken, who was given a one year proof of concept contract, Discovery Air, and others. Draken flies refurbished, radar equipped A-4s, L159s, MB339CBs, and MiG-21s. Discovery flies A-4s and Alpha Jets. There are rumors that at least one company is interested in buying the retired Israeli F-16s, but as Draken points out, they're some of the oldest F-16s flying, and have few modifications. That would result in the Air Force paying the same that they do now, for their own aircraft, and not saving any money. A recently released RFI calls for supersonic aircraft, with limited radar and datalink capability to play aggressor for various exercises, including Red Flag.

The USAF has issued a Request for Information (FRI) as it studies the possibility of increasing the use of contractor owned, contractor operated (COCO) adversary aircraft. Air Combat Command (ACC) is conducting an analysis of Adversary Air (ADAIR) capabilities to fill a ‘significant gap’ in its training requirements. The service reportedly suffered from a shortage of adversary 3,000 sorties at Nellis AFB, Nevada, during 2016 and that number is expected to rise as F-35 training ramps up.

The USAF currently only operates two aggressor squadrons; the 18th AGRS at Eielson AFB, Alaska, and the 64th AGRS at Nellis. The 65th AGRS, that flew F-15C/Ds, disbanded in 2014. Draken International and Discovery Air Defence Services are both offering contractor air services, along with Textron, which has recently purchased the former ATAC (Airborne Tactical Advantage Co).

The service first evaluated the use of commercial ‘Red Air’ when it awarded a one-year contract to Draken International last September. During the ‘proof-of-concept’ evaluation Draken’s radar-equipped Skyhawks have been flying sorties from Nellis in support of the USAF Weapons School and the F-35 Joint Operational Test Team.

www.combataircraft.net...

Excuse my ignorance is Red air some sort of Top gun programme?

a reply to: khnum

Red Air plays the bad guys for exercises like Red and Green Flag, as well as for smaller exercises. The military units that fly them are trained to fly and fight like any potential opponents we might face. They're called Red Air because the military uses Red for opposing forces, and Blue for allied forces.

a reply to: Zaphod58

No expert certainly , but would they not be better off flying against designs as close to Russian and Chinese designs as possible .

a reply to: Zaphod58

Your going to have to simulate Mig 35's what about the Eurofighter typhoon?

a reply to: hutch622

Yes and no. Dissimilar Air Combat largely just needs to be up against something that's NOT what you're flying. During Vietnam they flew ACT versus the same aircraft type (F-4 vs F-4, etc) and it turned into a disaster in real world combat. It's not so much learning to fight a specific type of aircraft, like the Su-27, as it's learning to fight something that's different. If you're learning to fight against something that's tiny, maneuverable, and energy efficient, and you go up against a Russian built aircraft that is maneuverable and energy efficient, you fight it the same way.

a reply to: khnum

Cost. You'd be looking at $183M if you buy them outright, or having to pay to ferry them to the US every time you wanted to train against them. That would add up to a lot of money. You don't have to simulate the exact type of aircraft though, just how to fight against its characteristics.

a reply to: Zaphod58

So make a mig 21 fly like a mig 29 . At least tactics wise , not sure if they have the same flight characteristics .

a reply to: hutch622

The MiG-21 is rarely used. It doesn't really meet the requirements for many of the missions they're flying. That's one reason they added the L159. They have the MiG-21s stored in Florida, and only use them for certain requirements.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Just get the actual Russians on board for a mock weapons reality show. Why spend money, when you can make money? Win/Win!

A persistent rumor has ATAC getting a few F-5's from Jordan, and possibly a number of the ex-Israeli F-16A's

a reply to: EBJet

I tend to agree with the comments regarding the F-16s. Too little return for the money for most people. The F-5 deal I've heard is basically done short of handing over the check.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I also agree regarding the F-16's, but then again, it isn't my money

a reply to: EBJet

An acquaintance of mine flew for ATAC. He was killed in a Kfir crash a few years ago.

a reply to: JIMC5499

The Fallon crash?

Speaking of the Jordanian F-5s,they're being moved to the Northrop facility in Florida. No word on why or for who, but it turns out that you can fit four of them into a 747 freighter at once.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Yes. I had met Carroll LeFon when he was a LTJG in the Navy. After 9-11 I found the Steeljaw Scribe blog and from there a link to the Neptunus Lex blog site, which I followed until his death.

There are now sources that seem to confirm reports that ATAC paid €300M for 63 retired French Mirage F1 aircraft, with the intention to return 30-45 to flying for use as Red Air.

theaviationgeekclub.com...

Well they are running out of Hunters..

a reply to: Blackfinger

They bought two Su-27s, but they disappeared after being modded.