Flying Higher and Farther: The Strategic Impact of Aviation Capabilities

Charles W. King

Since the advent of heavier than air flight in the twentieth century military leaders have sought to leverage this technology into a military asset. The First and Second World Wars as well as the decades in-between were a period of great experimentation. New kinds of aircraft were developed and turned to new uses. The ideas of air superiority, close air support, aerial reconnaissance, and strategic bombing were developed. The wars put a priority on the development of new aircraft and dozens were developed and deployed. Subsequent analysis of the war in the skies by the United States and its allies revealed that while obvious capabilities like top speed, acceleration, and maneuverability were an asset to aircraft the two most important attributes were range and operational flight ceiling, for all sizes and shapes of aircraft.

Range allowed both greater operational areas, facilitating strategic bombing raids deeper into enemy territory, as well as increased time on station for close air support. Range was also easily apparent to the generals and designers in charge of developing new aircraft. It took longer to realize the importance of flight ceiling. Being able to operate at a higher altitude is an advantage not only for bombers attempting to avoid ground based air defenses, but also for smaller aircraft that can leverage altitude for tactical advantages. Both range and flight ceiling provided greater flexibility to both strategic planners and pilots, making them much more valuable than increasing more specific attributes of airframes like top speed.

In the twenty-first century both range and operational flight ceiling remain important, but it is the former that distinguishes the strategic advantage that the United States possesses over both its allies like the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Japan, and South Korea  and its rivals like Russia and China. The United States is the only country that possesses bombers of the range of B-52’s and B-2’s. Not only does it operate more aircraft carriers than any other nation, but its carriers are of a size and type that only the recently finished HMS Queen Elizabeth comes close to. American mid-air refueling capability is second to none. Even nations whose aviation capabilities must be considered serious like China and Russia do not possess the capability to operate beyond their own near abroad in the way that the United States can. The United States is able to project air power across the globe because of its logistical assets, including its fleet of aircraft carriers.

When assessing the future development of the military capabilities of foreign powers it is essential to not only examine the new fighter or bomber aircraft they are developing, but what logistical assets they are developing. Are they developing tankers capable of mid-air refueling? What is the state of their naval aviation and airborne radar capabilities? All of these things will indicate a development of the ability to operate beyond the kind of airbases and ground based assets that are confined to domestic bases. It is these kinds of support aircraft that will indicate which nations are developing from regional powers to global ones.