国际战略研究中心-军用发动机的未来（英文）-2021.3-82页_10mb

The Future of Military Engines Summary

Core Content

This report, authored by Gabriel Coll, Andrew P. Hunter, Asya Akca, and Schuyler Moore for the CSIS Defense-Industrial Initiatives Group, examines the future of the U.S. military engine industrial base. It highlights the historical and current trends in military engine development, the policy choices facing defense decisionmakers, and the implications of these choices on national security and technological leadership.

Main Policy Choices

1. Priority

The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) must determine the priority of fighter engine development in the context of evolving military needs. While the focus has shifted from engine-centric advantages to stealth, situational awareness, and other technologies, fighter engines remain critical for operational capabilities such as range and power generation. Maintaining a technological edge is essential, especially as adversaries like Russia and China invest heavily in their own engine programs.

2. Allocation of Resources

The DoD must decide where to invest in engine technology, considering different stages of development:

• Foundational technologies (e.g., materials and manufacturing)
• Improving existing engines
• Designing new fighter engines

There are also three generational options for engine deployment:

• Upgrades to current fifth-generation fighters
• Creating a "4.5 generation" fighter through fourth-generation engine improvements
• Developing engines for the next-generation sixth-generation combat aircraft

The report emphasizes that more extensive design efforts lead to greater improvements in operational capabilities, but also higher costs. Limited efforts may be more affordable, enabling multiple vendors and broader industrial capabilities.

3. Business Model

The DoD must choose a business model to support fighter engine development. Options include:

• Traditional defense acquisition model: Government bears most of the risk and cost, with limited industry profit.
• Commercial aviation development model: Industry develops and recovers costs through sales.
• Commercial aviation sustainment model: Industry recovers costs through long-term sustainment contracts.

Each model affects incentives for industry and the overall budget. The traditional model is closely tied to the structure of the DoD and requires significant leadership commitment to change.

4. Competition

Policymakers must consider how to foster competition within the military engine industrial base. While the DoD has historically supported multiple competitors, recent decisions like the cancellation of the F136 engine program have raised questions about its commitment to competition. However, the DoD has continued to fund multiple vendors for next-generation technologies, indicating that competition is still valued.

Key Information

• Fighter engines have historically driven engine technology, but this trend has reversed as commercial engines now lead innovation.
• Fuel efficiency and thermal management are two key operational needs that advanced fighter engines can address.
• The F-35 and F-22 programs exemplify the importance of engine technology in achieving air superiority.
• The AETP program (Adaptive Engine Transition Program) is a key initiative aimed at improving fighter engine performance and is set to conclude in 2021.
• Commercial and military engines are closely related, with the same companies (e.g., General Electric and Pratt & Whitney) producing both. However, they serve different operational needs.
• Fuel costs are a major concern for commercial airlines, which influences the development of more efficient engines. Military engines, on the other hand, must meet performance and maneuverability requirements that are not as critical for commercial use.
• Investment in engine technology is essential to maintain the U.S. lead in fighter engine design and production, especially as adversaries advance their capabilities.
• Industrial base sustainability depends on continued government investment, as commercial markets alone cannot sustain the necessary design and production capabilities for military engines.

Conclusion

The report underscores that the U.S. military engine industrial base is at a critical inflection point. While commercial engines are driving technological progress, the DoD must make strategic choices regarding priority, resource allocation, business model, and competition to ensure continued innovation and operational superiority. These choices are vital for maintaining the U.S. lead in fighter engine technology and for supporting future air campaigns against peer competitors.

Appendices

• Methodology: Includes inventory, contracts, and budget analysis to inform the report's findings.
• About the Authors: Provides details on the authors and their affiliations.

This report serves as a foundational analysis for understanding the future of military engines and guiding policy decisions in the defense sector.