So long, F-22
posted at 3:36 pm on April 22, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
The high-level campaign to save the F-22 as a production system has likely come to an end. Lockheed Martin, the program’s prime contractor, announced that they would cease all lobbying activity after Defense Secretary Robert Gates scratched the Raptor in a series of cost-cutting moves at the Pentagon. That leaves 95,000 jobs at risk:
Lockheed Martin will not spend any more time and effort trying to overturn Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ decision to halt production of F-22 Raptor fighter jets, a top company official said Tuesday.
After making a vigorous case for the F-22 with Gates, other senior Pentagon officials and Congress in recent months, Lockheed plans to move on and meet its commitments for other major defense programs such as the F-35 joint strike fighter. …
Lockheed had lobbied the Pentagon and Congress for months to counter public statements by Gates and former Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England that the Air Force did not need to buy more F-22s after pending orders for 187 planes are filled.
The company even bought ads in Washington newspapers and on bus-stop benches extolling the F-22’s virtues.
Lockheed instead will focus on accelerating deliveries of the F-35 Lightning II fighter, which Gates chose as priority over the F-22. They want to push the schedule so that they can make up the difference in revenue quickly, as the lack of sales would likely force layoffs rather than transfers to the new program. They scheduled F-35 deliveries originally to begin in 2010 and to meet operational levels in 2012, but with the extra labor and narrower focus, perhaps Lockheed can move those dates up a bit.
The withdrawal will likely close a minor debate point from President Obama’s critics, who looked at the scale of government stimulus spending in other sectors and wondered why the F-22 wouldn’t make a good subject for job preservation. The entire production chain employed 95,000 people by its advocates’ estimates, and the price of delivering the remaining Raptors would have been dwarfed by the rest of Porkulus. With Lockheed conceding the point, the question is now moot.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
95,000 jobs
savedkilledyoungO on April 22, 2009 at 4:37 PM
The loss of the 22 is just stupid. It had a role in the combined arms integration, it fit the stimulas plan and it was just a damn good weapons platform.
Way to go libs.
(SPC Steve, if you make me lose my M4 with my Weaver Handgrip and swoopy forward grip combo squeeze drop down bi-pod attachment, I’m going to have someone in your command drop you for push-ups. That weapon is the only one that fits like a bug in rug next to my seat in the cockpit.)
hawkdriver on April 22, 2009 at 4:37 PM
I am an avid hawk when it comes to this country’s defense. I am not going to loose any sleep over the decision to cut back on the F-22 production. In the next 25 years we may begin to see the advent of the unmanned fighter aircraft….. while, at the same time the nearly 80 year-old B-52 will still be flying.
SC.Charlie on April 22, 2009 at 4:37 PM
Thank you Squid and Dragoonchris for your comments.
ColtsFan on April 22, 2009 at 4:38 PM
F-22 Sonic booms in my skies…..sounds like Freedom!
HornetSting on April 22, 2009 at 4:38 PM
Oooooo I almost forgot, next gen CIWS….
Squid Shark on April 22, 2009 at 4:40 PM
Why do we need the F-22? We have Obama and world peace.
Wade on April 22, 2009 at 4:41 PM
If only they had the UAW or NEA OBAMBI would step in.
faol on April 22, 2009 at 4:41 PM
Yikes. By no means. One is merely an accident, the other is murder. I just meant to interject some strategic perspective. It may be unfortunate, but it is statistics, not tragedy, that are of concern at the strategic level.
Count to 10 on April 22, 2009 at 4:42 PM
Here are my takes on the answers to your questions:
1) Heck yes. We have the largest, baddest Navy the world has ever seen. Technologically and numerically we have clear advantages over many other of the world’s navies. We have numerous assets forward deployed at any given time and whenever there is a natural disaster, U.S. Navy ships are first on scene delivering relief supplies.
2) As far as I understand it diesel subs, which the Chinese and most other navies have, are quiet but have limited range. Nuclear subs, which we have, are also quiet and have ranges and deployments restricted only by food. As to how quiet and how fast these subs can go in comparison to one another, I couldn’t tell you. Saying a Chinese sub can go faster than an American is a little silly since the top speed of U.S. ships is always classified (making direct comparisons a little hard) and it depends which class of subs you are talking about.
Hope that helps.
Rightwingguy on April 22, 2009 at 4:43 PM
Stimulus plan: Buy some planes rather than art for the NEA
Dpet on April 22, 2009 at 4:44 PM
I also love the M4, so much so that I bought one to train with in my personal time. I was just curious what some of the ground guys thought.
But a bi-pod? What’s the matter, not strong enough to fire in the prone without it?
; )
BadgerHawk on April 22, 2009 at 4:46 PM
After World War II the U.K. cut their navy’s budget by a lot. At the time of the conflict the Royal navy had 0 troop transports, unthinkable in our Navy. Pretty much they were caught with their pants down, but they mad one helluva recover.
Rightwingguy on April 22, 2009 at 4:47 PM
If this were “normal” circumstances, I wouldn’t have a problem shorting the F-22 either. The problem is it is the only new air superiority fighter we have produced in something like thirty years. We already have a gap, and the newer our hardware is, the faster it wears out.
Count to 10 on April 22, 2009 at 4:47 PM
And I gave you the benefit of the doubt, from reading previous posts of yours for some time. It just sounded, not good, the way it was written. No worries.
BadgerHawk on April 22, 2009 at 4:48 PM
Criminal! This is national security sacrificed on the altar of leftist political ideology.
MCPO Airdale on April 22, 2009 at 4:49 PM
Thanks. Maybe the problem was, oddly enough, that I was underestimating the number of traffic deaths (by an order of magnitude or two, apparently).
Count to 10 on April 22, 2009 at 4:50 PM
An awful lot of them are in CT.
drjohn on April 22, 2009 at 4:50 PM
Thank you for your informative comment.
ColtsFan on April 22, 2009 at 4:51 PM
Good luck with that!!!! I work on the avionics for the F-35 and let me tell you: its f-cked up. Crap software. Crap hardware. This thing ain’t gonna be ready for prime time anytime soon. Not to mention the radar is already too expensive and not as good as the Israeli Elta system. But hey, maybe the other countries like Turkey can step-up and build better sensor systems. Its certainly not gonna be Israel since they weren’t invited to this party, being Jews and all.
Andy in Agoura Hills on April 22, 2009 at 4:51 PM
So Lockheed loses 95,000 employees but still retains the other 51,000? That means Obama SAVED 51,000 jobs in one company alone! WOW!
See? His plan works.
CookeyD on April 22, 2009 at 4:51 PM
Some Conservatives commenting here could be accused of being shallow thinkers with an inflexible populist bent.
Every dollar saved (and there’s lots of them) on this obsolete, overly expensive, hopelessly outdated and manpower intensive F-22 make-work project will be well spent on robotic equipment.
Robots fly planes farther, faster, cheaper, more accurately, without complaining, without supplemental oxygen, without human support staff, 24-7-365 and are completely expendable with huge bang for the buck.
Robot aircraft never require VA benefits, pension benefits, pep talks, commanders, ejection seats, paychecks, housing, medical benefits, doctors, psychiatrists, food, clothing, education, transportation, chaplains, punishment, supervision, morale, safety nets, dental checkups, sleep, you name it.
Robot aircraft never disobey orders, consciensciously object, miss their targets, lie cheat or steal, vote for Obama, or form PAC’s of self-interested government employees.
The biggest thing holding back aviation, military and civilian, is the human special interest and ”human in the loop” safety voodoo.
epluribusunum on April 22, 2009 at 4:51 PM
Squid, stop with your self-serving bias, it only helps those that are against all military spending they will target our naval assets next. The F22 is an air superiority platform and as such will help keep you navy folks dry, remember combined arms doctrine? The F35 is an untested, unproven tactical fighter-bomber, exactly the type of aircraft the F22 is designed to destroy with impunity.
you just don’t listen or learn, this topic has been discussed at length yet spew useless propaganda. The C-5M and AMP program has been reduced in scale and scope and the 130J line will not add jobs regardless of what a local paper claims. Try and think, neither the C-5 nor the C-130 would last a minute in hostile airspace. But all of this may be a moot point because nObama has deferred the new tanker decision indefinitely.
nObama and Die
dmann on April 22, 2009 at 4:52 PM
You CLEARLY haven’t seen the movie Stealth.
Rightwingguy on April 22, 2009 at 4:55 PM
My M-4 and ACOG were indispensable before the bad guys sucked punched me. As an SDM the Bi-pods were pretty important. For anyone else they are just personal preference.
Dragoonchris on April 22, 2009 at 4:56 PM
You are absolutely wrong. UAVs and UCAVs are not the panacea you so inaccurately describe. Sure they can certainly augment air superiority, but they will never control airspace like a manned platform. The main reason: SAMs and AAMs can easily shoot them down.
Andy in Agoura Hills on April 22, 2009 at 4:56 PM
I can’t tell if that’s a joke or not.
BadgerHawk on April 22, 2009 at 4:57 PM
Wait, Turkey is getting F-35′s but Israel is not?
How screwed up is that?
Count to 10 on April 22, 2009 at 4:57 PM
Ok, so a lot of people are talking about the importance of investing billions in the production of incredibly expensive airplanes that will sit idle in favor of relatively cheap aircraft already in use in our current low-density conflicts which stand to last a very long time and are a proven means by which the enemies of the United States have intended to hamstring us both at home and abroad…for a hypothetical war with China.
I’m saying this as an enlisted, ex-combat arms guy. When I call in for air support, I hope to see A-10s, because they’re intimidating and I know they work, and I think the Air Force can keep their sci-fi war porn toys if it meant having a weapon in my hands that I am confident won’t jam, whether I cleaned it 2 or 22 hours ago. So the F-22 won’t even get crocodile tears from me.
Spc Steve on April 22, 2009 at 4:58 PM
Dragoonchris on April 22, 2009 at 5:00 PM
Well, the ISAF patch I wear should stand for “I Suck At Firefights”. The difference with either one of my two personal AR15s (Superior Arms and a Bush)firing from “any” position as opposed to prone on the bi-pod with my left hand on top of the grip holding the muzzle down is like night and day. Firing like that I can empty a 30 round magazine in just over a minute and not stray from center by much more than 2-3 inches on a 100 yd range.
hawkdriver on April 22, 2009 at 5:00 PM
People are still working on making a robot that walks, and you are talking about one that can not only pilot an aircraft, but operate target acquisition and determine whether or not it should fire autonomously?
Count to 10 on April 22, 2009 at 5:01 PM
Exocet Missile.
hawkdriver on April 22, 2009 at 5:01 PM
And in the mean time?
Johan Klaus on April 22, 2009 at 5:03 PM
Hey what else don’t robotic aircraft need that human military pilots need,
Golf courses, washing machines and dryers, bowling alleys, mess halls, codes of conduct, training, more training, even more training, parachutes, helmets, flight suits, instruments, gauges, cockpits, canopies, paperwork, insurance, athletic equipment and facilities, water, sewer, roads, automobiles, lines painted on the tarmac, orders, telephones, clear visibility…
Did I miss any?
epluribusunum on April 22, 2009 at 5:03 PM
Well if it makes anyone feel better, we do still have nukes….. Then again we would destroy the baddies AND us. But hey, trumps the F-22, right?
Rightwingguy on April 22, 2009 at 5:04 PM
To save Obama the trouble, I’m terribly sorry the US even thought up the F-22. I’m also sorry we considered missile defense in Eastern Europe. Did I mention that there’s no need for aircraft carriers since they might make us unpopular among dictators and evil doers? Terribly sorry. We won’t build one again. On the other hand, I think we can all look forward to the day when we put all of Afghanistan on medicaid and social security. Those who hate us will weep with joy and reconsider how they could ever have imagined a powerful United States.
NNtrancer on April 22, 2009 at 5:04 PM
They aren’t a panacea but think about your comment here. Some of the newer models are stealthier and easily more agile than any manned aircraft can be… so why would they be easily shot down? I think their control via satellite link is their weakness… and that is about it.
lexhamfox on April 22, 2009 at 5:05 PM
That was so good it was scary.
Rightwingguy on April 22, 2009 at 5:06 PM
As I understand the B-52 fleet is undergoing a refit with new engines and the A-10 fleet is being stripped down to the frame and rebuilt from the inside out. The F-15 Eagle, our current air dominance fighter, is getting old. No air force in this world has the number of top notch pilots. We also have and the knowledge of how to train new pilots.
SC.Charlie on April 22, 2009 at 5:07 PM
French
Dragoonchris on April 22, 2009 at 5:07 PM
Unless I’m mistaken, the A-10 is on its way out, to be replaced by the F-35. You got to love the gun with wings, but the tactics are shifting to guided weapons from stand off positions. I have been told the A-10 was supposed to part of a strategy of a fighting retreat as masses of Russian tanks took Europe.
Don’t forget, the more sophisticated things get, the shorter they last.
Count to 10 on April 22, 2009 at 5:07 PM
And fingers crossed they don’t need moral judgment, decision making skills, on the fly learning, adaptation, improvisation, heart, or dedication to duty. Since those are the sorts of things you only tend to get from human military service members.
Spc Steve on April 22, 2009 at 5:08 PM
The A-10s sit on the ground until the war porn toys make the skies safe for them.
pedestrian on April 22, 2009 at 5:09 PM
Are you active duty too? I didn’t know.
I know this is what you meant to say.
hawkdriver on April 22, 2009 at 5:09 PM
Does it surrender BEFORE or AFTER launching? Actually, we had a ship hit by an exocet missle during the Iran-Iraq war. Its actually a case study. How the radar guys messed up and didn’t realize they had been shot at and how the crew busted tail to save the ship from sinking. Interesting story.
Rightwingguy on April 22, 2009 at 5:09 PM
That made me LOL.
Rightwingguy on April 22, 2009 at 5:10 PM
And remember that the reason the Exocet missile was so effective was that the British systems had it listed as non-hostile, because it was supposedly French.
pedestrian on April 22, 2009 at 5:11 PM
Jimmy Carter did the same thing with the B-1. The next administration will reinstate the F-22 just as Reagan did with the B-1. The libtards disarm us, and then after they’re going we just undo their changes.
Vegi on April 22, 2009 at 5:11 PM
A pilot doesn’t know jack, until his computer tells him that a missile is tracking him, or a threat is imminent. The human pilot is 100% dependent upon computer sensors to begin with. The human is the weakest, most expensive link.
Anybody who is anybody knows that computers driven machinery such as aircraft is not perfect, but is also 1000’s of time more reliable, better, quicker and expendable than humans. When weighed side by side, robots win. The vast majority of aircraft accidents are pilot error!
epluribusunum on April 22, 2009 at 5:12 PM
Make that everything is going to be okay…
Retention bonuses.
(smart ass) ;-)
hawkdriver on April 22, 2009 at 5:12 PM
USS Stark if im not mistaken, Oliver Hazard Perry Class frigate. tough lil guys.
Dragoonchris on April 22, 2009 at 5:12 PM
Heh. I imagine having someone hovering right above you is more reassuring than someone who is just making passes.
Count to 10 on April 22, 2009 at 5:13 PM
And they dont need caskets, funerals, color guards, recognition, prestige, supporting families, television….
epluribusunum on April 22, 2009 at 5:14 PM
Well, I was a Bradley guy. And on the rare occasion a 25mm wasn’t solving our problems, we don’t really care what shows up, so love as it’s packing more heat than us.
Spc Steve on April 22, 2009 at 5:16 PM
No. I do the same thing you do, only with far fewer hours in a far new model.
BadgerHawk on April 22, 2009 at 5:16 PM
Big ops would have them all there stacked. AC130s too.
hawkdriver on April 22, 2009 at 5:16 PM
You are correct, Apaches and lil bro Kiowa are beautiful things to the Infantryman.
Dragoonchris on April 22, 2009 at 5:16 PM
So now you are talking about getting rid of the entire U.S.A.F.. When the military started installing missiles , when I was in the U.S.A.F. in the 50′s, people were saying that fighter aircraft were obsolete. What is this now, like 2009?
Johan Klaus on April 22, 2009 at 5:16 PM
reference: Carter – Clinton
Wade on April 22, 2009 at 5:17 PM
And yet the pilot has to make hundreds of judgment calls in a sortie that current robots wouldn’t even recognize, let alone know how to deal with.
Get back to me when city buses are driven by computers for a year or two without running over anyone.
Count to 10 on April 22, 2009 at 5:17 PM
Heh – WSBTV in Atlanta reported on this story a few weeks back from Lockheed’s Marietta facility. One of the people they interviewed was a woman wearing an Obama hat fretting about losing her job. Schadenfreude at its best…
Diogenes Online on April 22, 2009 at 5:19 PM
Completely bogus, ill-informed, non-verifiable, ignorant of fact, techophobic comment.
epluribusunum on April 22, 2009 at 5:19 PM
Do you understand different weapons for different missions.
Wade on April 22, 2009 at 5:20 PM
I don’t know. I’ve hovered behind a Brad shooting that chaingun and it’s pretty impressive. At least for Iraq it was.
One of my favorite stories about the Right Hook for the 1st Gulf War was the Iraqis waiting until the M1s passed thinking they were going to be able to pop up and pop the backs of the tanks with their RPGs. What they weren’t aware of was the Brads in a spread formation bringing up the rear.
Mr. Fish, meet Mr. Barrel.
hawkdriver on April 22, 2009 at 5:21 PM
Is this a running joke or something? That’s an honest question.
BadgerHawk on April 22, 2009 at 5:21 PM
I’m to old for this discussion, US Army 1970 -1971.
All I know is, if you don’t have the best kick ass toys you get your ass kicked.
That being said, in Nam I used a 14 and a 12 gage with my own loads. The AK-47 was nice but……, I didn’t trust the M-16 but that 14 was my girl friend and I loved her. Sometimes old is good on the ground but now days, in the air….not so much.
I think the F-22 is worth every damn penny.
Just a short rambling from an old soldier.
Old Hippie Vet on April 22, 2009 at 5:21 PM
You’re flying the Mike Model?
hawkdriver on April 22, 2009 at 5:22 PM
Huh?
Wade on April 22, 2009 at 5:22 PM
Name something better, that we have now.
Johan Klaus on April 22, 2009 at 5:22 PM
Yes, and it’s teh awesome.
BadgerHawk on April 22, 2009 at 5:23 PM
Hardly.
I fully intend to concede the point when we can manage autonomous robot city buses, and I expect we will get there in not too long.
But then isn’t now, so it isn’t going to do us any good in the near future.
…and do you really want to call someone who is commenting on an internet blog a “technophobe”?
Count to 10 on April 22, 2009 at 5:23 PM
And in many cases the war toys negate the need for ground troops.
Wade on April 22, 2009 at 5:26 PM
No. NO! Noooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!111111
That would be impossible with an AK.
pseudonominus on April 22, 2009 at 5:27 PM
The John Murtha Airport“
Wade on April 22, 2009 at 5:28 PM
Because you can fire up Internet Explorer does not make you an expert in networks,automation sytems and data aquisition. Because if it did, my Granny will design you a next generation autonomous fighter right after she stops surfing E-Bay!
epluribusunum on April 22, 2009 at 5:28 PM
Yes. I completely understand. And I also understand that, whenever possible, we should have the best weaponry available. So here is my question: How many lives do you think would be saved if every F-15 and F-16 in Iraq and Afghanistan were to be replaced with F-22s? On the other hand, a question for comparison: How many lives do you think would be saved if every swinging richard 11B, 0300, Infantryman of all American services in Iraq or Afghanistan had their M4s or M16s replaced with a weapon system that has proven to be superior to the Stoner63 system in its resistance to jamming in harsh desert environment after prolonged use?
Spc Steve on April 22, 2009 at 5:28 PM
Was it the awkward phrasing?
Seriously, cars from the 50′s are still running, if maintained, but how many 80′s cars can you say that about? The B-52 may still be in the air, but the F-14 has already been retired. The older something is, the longer it lasts, and heavy payload bombing is about the least stressing mission a combat aircraft can be on, so the B-52 is never going to be obsolete no matter how badly it does the job.
Air superiority, though, is cutting edge. Complacence is death.
Count to 10 on April 22, 2009 at 5:29 PM
Nothing better to give away your position.
Wade on April 22, 2009 at 5:29 PM
who needs crap like this F-22 thingy when all our enemies ever needed was a good old sit down with the Chosen One…..
SDarchitect on April 22, 2009 at 5:32 PM
After killing the F22 and closing the GM plant in Arlington TX it’s easy to see all the job creation by Barry and fools.
The latest is to make unemployment go away by not reporting it.
lasertex on April 22, 2009 at 5:33 PM
I take offense … at being labeled an IE user. And, while I will concede your point that opening a browser hardly makes me an expert, my point was that I am using technology right now, so the label of technophobe is a little much. Note that I didn’t object to the “ignorant” part of your rant. :)
Count to 10 on April 22, 2009 at 5:34 PM
There you go again, dang that logic.
Johan Klaus on April 22, 2009 at 5:35 PM
There is no “air superiority” requirement per se in Afghanistan or Iraq. The F-22 is designed to clear the skies of hostile craft and keep it clear so it’s safe for our aircraft. In addition, having control of the skies keeps our ground forces safe from attack from the air by hostiles.
darwin on April 22, 2009 at 5:35 PM
I’m guessing that if you are in a situation where you want their reassurance, giving away your position is already irrelevant.
Count to 10 on April 22, 2009 at 5:36 PM
Showoff! ;-)
All kidding aside, I would have loved to been the next organization to get them and have AQCed our lift and GSAB battalions before we deployed if for nothing else, the environmental landings and takeoffs. The brownouts over our deployments have ruined more aircraft than OPFOR ever dreamed of. If you’ve never put any thought into the irony of our envoronmental training, think about this. For instrument flight, we have both takeoff and landing ceiling and visibility minimums (except for PCs with 50 hours AWT for T/Os of course) but I can take some W2 or LT and watch him execute three of each and he or she is absolutely legal to land or takeoff 0/0 in the desert. I’m ruined more seat cushions doing dust-landing than anything else. They’re not much good after I pull them out of my a$$.
The folks we’re RIPing with have Mikes. We had to get a few of their IPs current in the Limas and Alphas to even get started.
Are you a Commisioned or Warrant? (Or a commisioned warrant?)
hawkdriver on April 22, 2009 at 5:37 PM
Hey, I’m a one trick pony.
Count to 10 on April 22, 2009 at 5:38 PM
“Say it ain’t so, Joe”.
Johan Klaus on April 22, 2009 at 5:39 PM
Our Attack guys are awesome. IMHO, the 1-82 Wolfpack had as big of an effect on The Surge as any other unit deployed there at the time.
hawkdriver on April 22, 2009 at 5:43 PM
Let me say something about the Exocet missile the Argentinians used in the Falklands. The majority of those weapons failed to detonate. HMS Sheffield, struck by an Exocet, was lost primarily due to poor design and governmental restrictions when she was built. The missile that struck Sheffield also failed to explode, however, residual fuel in the missile’s motor started a fire that quickly spread out of control.
That fire was fed by vinyl floor tiles and passageway insulation, installed because the Labour Government demanded massive cuts. Because of those same cuts, she only had one firemain system, unlike US vessels which have redundant systems. When the Exocet slammed into HMS Sheffield, it severed that firemain, and,coupled with the thick toxic smoke coming from vinyl-fed fires, it was almost impossible to fight. DC teams had to stretch hoses from other parts of the ship to reach the blaze. By then, it was out of control.
The majority of Sheffield’s casualties died from smoke inhalation. She sank in heavy seas while being towed clear of the area. Had she kept her redundant firemain systems, and been built with fire-resistant insulation and flooring, and less aluminum, there is every reason to believe she would have been saved.
I post this to note that these same sorts of idiotic, cost-saving demands are STILL being forced on the US Navy, along with systems and hulls that are simply NOT needed.
I understand why Gates called for termination of the F-22 program, but it’s a false economy. Even with an accelerated introduction of the F-35, the Airforce is losing F-15 & F-16 airframes at a rapid rate due to structural failure, metal fatigue, and simply wearing them out through extended use in combat. We will be trying to do more with less as these numbers of total available aircraft diminish.
Same goes for our fleet. We need evolutionary ship construction, not revolutionary. It doesn’t matter if we have top of the line vessels if we only have a handful. The biggest crock is the new DD-1000, the “Zumwalt” class. The navy is only going to build three of them, and there is yet to be a solid, definable mission for them. They are called destroyers, but at 14,000 tons and 600 feet of length, they are the same size as the WWII German pocket battleship Graf Spee. They are supposed to be the cutting edge of the fleet, but have limited weapons and some of the technology supposed to be used hasn’t even beed developed yet.
What DoD needs to do, more than anything else, is to sit ALL the services down, and have a “Come to Jesus” moment about what this country actually NEEDS, as opposed to what the defense industry wants to sell us.
I’m a former Navy man. I am all about preparing for whatever conflicts we may face in the near and far future, as well as what we need NOW. However, our current procurement system is broken, and that badly, with program managers at GO & Flag level more interested in their post-retirement employment than in doing what is right for our nation.
I could say a lot more, but that’s enough for one “comment”.. :)
AW1 Tim on April 22, 2009 at 5:45 PM
When I was on a B-52 crew, we considered the B-52 to be a target.
Johan Klaus on April 22, 2009 at 5:46 PM
And BTW, present day scenario, the Aphache would be responding to a Troops In Contact (TIC) after the fact and the enemy would already know where the ground unit was.
hawkdriver on April 22, 2009 at 5:47 PM
I read this with a heavy heart. With Israel now frozen out of upgrading F35 systems, and the spiraling cost of the F35 now doubling initial projections upwards to 100 million dollars we have re-evaluated our intent to purchase 75 F35s..
At that cost, we would have considered perhaps 30-40 F22s instead of that purchase, Japan perhaps also would purchase – if the Administration would open up the exports.. This would allow production to continue without costing as much for US tax payers, we also would have perhaps been able to work with the US to maybe even give a bit more edge to the already highly competent F-22 in an effort to squeeze out more strike capability.. The F35 is a mass production aircraft, but so far our own airforce is less than stellar impressed with its current systems.
It looks like we will buy more F15s now, a new model with some advanced reflective paint to lower signatures. This says a lot about the F35 in its current state.. With decent weapon loads the F35 is like an F-16, loses stealth characteristics etc.
saus on April 22, 2009 at 5:47 PM
Apache…
hawkdriver on April 22, 2009 at 5:48 PM
‘Nough said.
Johan Klaus on April 22, 2009 at 5:51 PM
Why spend money on defense when you can use it to buy more ACORN troops? I mean, it’s all what your goal is … and it’s obvious maintaining US strength, defense and superior equipment isn’t high on our Commander in Chiefs list, but destroying the political opposition is.
darwin on April 22, 2009 at 5:51 PM
How so?…unless you are talking nukes, and even then some poor runt is going to have to go do clean up.
Old Hippie Vet on April 22, 2009 at 5:51 PM
Lets hear a cheer for Obama and his boys (girls too). Oh, did I forget those wonderful ‘hostiles’ ( is this politically correct, damn, I hope it is), who would love the OBAMA STATE OF AMERICA to totally cut production of EVERYTHING.
foxone on April 22, 2009 at 5:51 PM
Cut the production of beer and things will get real ugly real fast.
I’m just sayin…………….
Old Hippie Vet on April 22, 2009 at 5:54 PM
the OBAMA STATE OF AMERICA to totally cut production of EVERYTHING.
foxone on April 22, 2009 at 5:51 PM
Cut the production of beer and things will get real ugly real fast.
I’m just sayin…………….
Old Hippie Vet on April 22, 2009 at 5:54 PM
OH MY GOD (OR SOMEONES GOD), CUT PRODUCTION OF BEER, WHERE IS MY GUN.
foxone on April 22, 2009 at 5:56 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »