Carlton Meyer
The U.S. Air Force could easily expand its capabilites by adding fighter attachment points on its KC-135 and KC-10 refueler aircraft. Hardpoints on the bottom of the aircraft, similar to a bomb attachment hardpoints, would allow modified fighters to dock. Once inflight, fighter aircraft could latch onto the tankers in the same way they marry-up for fuel. This would allow a tanker to carry several fighters to distant overseas bases. Once docked, the fighters could idle their engine and take a nap. When they reach their destination, the tanker crew could wake up the pilots and release them to land.
In order to deploy overseas today, fighters must link up with several refuelers enroute. This is complicated, especially at night. The refuelers require overseas bases and burn up a lot a fuel to just link up with the fighters. The fighter pilots arrive exhausted and the long journey causes wear on the engine. Allowing a refueler to act as an "Airborne Aircraft Carrier" and ferry fighter aircraft overseas is simple and less costly.
21st Century Weapons
e-mail May 1998
In fact, the USAF actually deployed F-84 fighters to escort photo recon B-36 bombers in the 1950s using the FICON concept. The F-85 "Goblin" fighter was developed to be used with B-36 bombers using a trapeze arm from the bomb-bay but discontinued because it was thought air-refueling would allow fighters to accompany strategic bombers all the way to the target. The truth is that they couldn't without multiple air-refuelings and the B-36s, B-47s, B-52s, B-58s, FB-111s, and now B-1 and B-2s are left to penetrate enemy air space by themselves. During the Vietnam War, it was discovered that "Fighter-Bombers" could bomb strategic targets if they are based close enough or refueled constantly. By having hardpoints and hooks to tankers we are doing a simpler version of the FICON without bombays, more like the "Tom Tom" project where the fighter joined the "mother" aircraft at the wings. The Air Force will quickly realize that this provides very long-range strike options. Imagine eight KC-10s, each flying with three-six F-16C fighter-bombers attached, escorted by an AWACs airborne radar plane. If enemy fighters approach, the 48 F-16Cs could be released to fight, otherwise they could conduct a strike mission. Afterwards they could link up with the KC-10s and dock for the long-ride home. This would allow Air Force squadrons from Virginia to conduct strikes against Libya without having the pilots to refuel several times and be worn out flying to the target. They would be alert and ready to fly their combat missions, even returning back to the Airborne Aircraft carrier for the return trip back to base.
This is not ideal, but if the situation is urgent, or friendly airbases are not available, the Air Force could conduct long-range strikes in this manner. This would provide the Air Force with an even greater "Global Reach" similar to Navy aircraft carriers. This may seem expensive, but a 48-aircraft strike from an Navy aircraft carrier requires billions of dollars in ships and 6000 crewmen. A round-trip flight by eight KC-10s is much cheaper, and doesn't need a fleet to protect the carriers from being sunk.
RETURN TO 21st CENTURY WEAPONS