Obama just can’t wait to sell military aircraft to China
posted at 10:59 am on October 16, 2010 by MadisonConservative
In a complete reversal of decades of U.S. policy on geopolitics and strategic security, U.S. President Barack Obama has written to the House of Representatives and to the President of the Senate seeking a termination of suspension of Arms Exports to China and to allow the sale of C-130 medium lift transport aircrafts to China. The letter by the President claims that this is in ‘American national interest’ and is for ‘oil spill cleanup’ efforts.
American national interest? You mean like knocking out the F-22 Raptor program and effectively demolishing our air superiority? You mean like gutting jobs at the Pentagon? You mean like treating our most important ally in the Middle East like dirt? I’m genuinely curious how Obama defines “American national interest”. And oil spill cleanup efforts? Isn’t it a little late, bud? Are you expecting the Chinese to come out to the gulf to clean up the ocean floor?
No doubt that some will point out that these C-130s can be used for humanitarian efforts. Sure, I’m guessing that’s China’s interest. Nothing else. Not a thing.
The versatile airframe has found uses in a variety of other roles, including as a gunship (AC-130), for airborne assault
Okay…maybe law enforcement.
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
I’m beginning to wonder if this enemy they have elected will be allowed to finish his term…
golfmann on October 16, 2010 at 11:10 AM
This is really strange to me.
I did see that there is an agreement to sell Israel some F-35 Lightning IIs, when they go into full production.
That was a little bit of a surprise also, in the opposite direction.
Brian1972 on October 16, 2010 at 11:45 AM
Sigh.
The Chinese will reverse engineer the few parts they haven’t stolen the blueprints for. Then the Chinese will produce a knock-off for less, undercutting our current US manufacturing efforts. The US loses jobs and exports.
Even the Russians are tired of this cycle by now.
I’d ask “Why?”, but I know the answer already. This sale should be stopped.
NaCly dog on October 16, 2010 at 12:13 PM
Actually, it’s indicative of the Obama administration. They know damned well we won’t see a single plane until 2014 or later, and they could easily torpedo the production in some way before then.
MadisonConservative on October 16, 2010 at 12:16 PM
You mean kill the production entirely, or just the Israeli export version?
They put all their eggs in the F-35 basket by already trying to murder the F-22 Raptor program.
The next President should take a page from Reagan, and restore the F-22 Raptor as the Air Force’s replacement for the F-15 Eagle, which is long in the tooth these days. The newest planes in the fleet were built in the mid-’80s.
If you recall, Jimmah Carter did something very similar when he canceled the B-1 Lancer bomber program.
When Reagan came in, he restored it and they revised the electronics to produce the B-1b that we have today.
Brian1972 on October 16, 2010 at 12:37 PM
Try this again!
=================
In a complete reversal of decades of U.S. policy on geopolitics and strategic security, U.S. President Barack Obama has written to the House of Representatives and to the President of the Senate seeking a termination of suspension of Arms Exports to China and to allow the sale of C-130 medium lift transport aircrafts to China.
==================================================
UnfreagginBelievable!
I guess Hopey forgets this one,when the Chinese ran into the American plane!!
====================
Welcome Home From China – Crew of VQ-1 !
http://www.cargolaw.com/2001nightmare_apology.html
canopfor on October 16, 2010 at 12:48 PM
There are no proposals to cancel or curb F35 production. The good performance of the F35 was deemed a reason to limit F22 production to 187 planes and rely on the cheaper, more flexible design. You talk as if we are not getting any F22s and the truth is that even with more cuts our air superiority will not be threatened. The fifth generation Russian and Chinese designs are in serious trouble. The Pentagon was behind the shift as much as Obama was. It ends up making a more useful air force now.
If they wanted to reverse engineer a C130 they would have some time ago. It’s not a new design.
lexhamfox on October 16, 2010 at 12:49 PM
The F-35L2 Program
=====================
http://www.jsf.mil/
canopfor on October 16, 2010 at 12:58 PM
At what point does it become treason?
tarpon on October 16, 2010 at 1:03 PM
These are two distinctly different aircraft, they were not designed to compete with each other for the same job but to complement each other, just as the single engined F-16 Falcon and the twin engined F-15 Eagle were designed to do.
We need them both, in much larger numbers than currently proposed. All front line Eagles should be moved to the Air National Guard and replaced with Raptors. Same with the F-16.
The neat thing about the F-35 is that there are three variants to replace multiple airframes currently in service.
The Air Force is getting a variant optimized for standard runway operations to replace the F-16.
The Navy is getting a variant optimized for carrier operations, to replace the F-18C-D Hornets.
The Marines are getting a STOVL variant to replace the AV-8 Harrier jump jet.
The Raptor is meant to replace the F-15 Eagle, for air superiority, or as they call it now, air dominance.
This is an important point that gets lost in these discussions. It was never meant to be one or the other, but both.
I say stick to the plan as designed.
Brian1972 on October 16, 2010 at 1:07 PM
I’m saying the thing has been in development for damn near 15 years and is still years away from a single plane coming off the line. They’ve stated that it will not cost less than $180 million, and possibly even $200 million. It’s a jack-of-all-trades that still hasn’t outdone the F-22 as a strike fighter in tests. It’s a disaster and a money pit, and the sacking of the F-22 compounded the problem. With the way the Obama administration is going, I wouldn’t be surprised if they cut funding for the program. It’s utterly ridiculous.
Strangely enough, the production and intention for the F-35 is rather like a model of government bureaucracy: tries to do too many things, ends up doing none of them as well as others have, and it costs a fortune before it’s even gotten off the ground.
MadisonConservative on October 16, 2010 at 3:38 PM
I think a lot of the gloom and doom about this program is overstated. Every cutting edge new aircraft development program has setbacks and problems to overcome.
From what I understand, the problematic portion of the development is mainly the jump jet version.
The Air Force and Navy variants do not have the complicated thrust vectoring and lift fan system required to provide STOVL capability, and are much closer to being ready.
The UK’s RAF and RN are going to replace their Harriers with it also, and have been in on the program from the beginning. Australia and Japan have expressed interest in the AF variant, as well as Israel now.
The B-1 was attacked as a disaster boondoggle, and Carter killed it. That has turned out to be a very impressive reliable workhorse for a long time.
I think this will work itself out and be a success in the end, like many before it have.
The Raptor can do the same, given the chance.
Oh, and again this F-35 wasn’t designed to outdo the F-22.
It was designed to work with the F-22.
Brian1972 on October 16, 2010 at 3:56 PM
I suspect that the newest version of the C-130 will be reverse engineered and incorporated into the Chinese Y-9 transport project.
sharrukin on October 16, 2010 at 5:17 PM
Don’t get too upset with this news, it’s not the first time the U.S. has sold C-130s to the Chinese. The Chinese bought three new Hercules H-Models back in the 1990s but didn’t have a lot of success operating them. They subsequently sold two of the aircraft to a South African cargo airline/aircraft leasing company that, in turn, sold one of the airplanes to an Alaska-based freight carrier.
potkas7 on October 16, 2010 at 6:30 PM
Brian1972 on October 16, 2010 at 1:07 PM
It would be nice to have everything but instead we have to go with what we really need. The potential adversaries of the F22 are not really coming together well and the effort to kill part of the procurement makes sense even at the Pentagon. Sure the F35 plays a different role but more because of range than because of mission profile. Look at the planes, the avonics, and you can see that critical technologies are present at a much lower cost. What in develoment do you see as being any kind of realistic challenge to 180 F22s. The horizon is pretty good for existing assets alone without adding the F22s and F35 in the pipeline. If the Pentagon was up in arms over this I would be more worried but they aren’t and I think Gates and others did a good thing for the country by championing limited procurement.
lexhamfox on October 17, 2010 at 12:42 AM
Cancel the stupid stimulus and health care bills and we can have 360 Raptors.
Every single active duty squadron flying F-15s should be getting Raptors within 6-7 years. Every damn one of them.
We have seen multiple examples of F-15s in flight breaking in half. Undetected stress fractures from their age.
They all need to be replaced with the most advanced aircraft possible. That is what we need.
To me, defense modernization is a priority. We can afford it if we would have a sensible budget in other areas.
Not to mention that this program represents many steady high paying skilled jobs all over America and made much more sense than anything this government has engaged in the last few years to stimulate employment.
Let me ask you this:
Are you absolutely sure that you are correct about the state of the possible future threat aircraft in development?
Given the track record of American Intelligence the last several years I am not so confidant your assertions are correct. Even so, the Su-37 Flanker in the hands of a skilled pilot is absolutely a match for the F-15 Eagle. The Russians have caught up to American aviation from 1970-1980. What a shock. It’s 2010. Time to move forward and let our pilots have the advantage once again.
Brian1972 on October 17, 2010 at 1:07 PM
Just Democrat “social justice” at a global level: “Let’s give the Commies a level playing field”. It’s SOP for our homegrown Reds when they reach high office. Remember Bill Clinton allowing sensitive satellite technology to be sold to China?
http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/globalst.htm
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/9/29/25139.shtml
http://www.answers.com/topic/clinton-scandals
Good little Commies gotta stick together and look out for their struggling brothers, you know. (Is there a word like “ummah” –meaning all Muslims worldwide as a unit– that refers to all-members-of-Commiedom?)
A_Nonny_Mouse on October 17, 2010 at 5:23 PM
The main adversary of the F-35 is not the 5th-gen fighter of Russia/China, it’s the S-400 air defense system. The F-22 outperforms the F-35 against every variant of the S-300 too, but the difference in performance is significant versus the S-400.
Basically, the recent F-35 versus F-22 decision is a decision to accept higher combat losses and a more difficult and protracted problem establishing air superiority, in any fight against an enemy with a modern S-300 variant or the S-400. I note that Russia’s 5th-gen air superiority fighter, although it has had problems, is not exactly a pushover. In no case will US fighters be facing only a few squadrons of 5th-gen fighters. They will be facing a whole counter-air package: old fighters, new fighters, centrally coordinated anti-air missiles, and an integrated electronic warfare effort.
Russia and China can shoot down our over-the-horizon missiles too. We would have to launch a whole lot more Tomahawks or ALCMS against China — just in one sector (e.g., across the channel from Taiwan) — to “take down” the air defense early warning network as we did in Iraq in ’91, Serbia in ’95, or Iraq in ’03. A whole lot more. I’m not sure the average American has come to grips with the reality that the advanced militaries can reliably shoot our Tomahawks down now, as well as any drones we try to use in the battlespace. That will mean we have to lose a lot more than anyone has seriously considered, to achieve an effect with one of them.
Arming China is lunacy. There can be no valid reason or excuse for it. The C-130 is too easy to adapt to combat applications.
J.E. Dyer on October 17, 2010 at 6:44 PM
china has a C-130 contemporary and they build it themselves. the Shaanxi Y-8 copy of the AN-12 CUB. why do they need C-130′s???
and for every raptor we get, they withdraw an A-10 from service….with nothing to replace it.
the f-35 is supposed to replace the warthog, but we’ve gone down that road before…trying to replace a-1 skyraiders with a-4 skyhawks. it didn’t work then, and it won’t work now.
we need to upgrade (and build more of) the A-10 or replace it with another heavy hitting damn-near-indestructible bomb truck.
the guys on the ground deserve better air support than a fighter jock who thinks ground support is a peasant’s task. first sign of enemy aircraft he’s thinking of a kill mark on the side of his fuselage and not the guys he’s abandoning.
warhorse_03826 on October 18, 2010 at 12:18 PM
You’ve got to be joking.
Dark-Star on October 18, 2010 at 1:40 PM
“You’ve got to be joking. Dark-Star on October 18, 2010 at 1:40 PM”
I wish I was.
the A-10 is one of the aircraft the F-35 is supposed to replace. they had to do it that way in order to free up enough funding.
the “fighter mafia” is in charge of the air force..ground support mission pilots need not apply. the army has probably complained, and that’s why we still have A-10′s at all. but those will only last so long. eventually fatigue will start tearing the wings off them..and that will be the excuse the air force needs to retire them altogether.
they never wanted the ground support mission, but in 1947 they knew they had to take ALL the combat planes away from the army to consolidate their power.
warhorse_03826 on October 18, 2010 at 3:43 PM
As has been stated, we need NUMBERS. We will not and even now, may not have the number of planes we need. We need many more F-22s and F35s.
We have the lead in air superiority becuase we didn’t settle for good enough or just a few. It seems some here have forgotten that.
Hard Right on October 19, 2010 at 2:52 AM
“As has been stated, we need NUMBERS.”
yes, numbers.
so…refurbish and upgrade existing f-15′s to “stealth eagle” standard. use cockpit systems from the f-22 to ease pilot transition.
keep the f-22 in low-rate production. upgrade in place as needed, and include the F-15′s in those system upgrades.
as f-22′s and f-35′s come on line, transition those f-15 stealth eagles to national guard units.
this gives us more aircraft and pilots. now. improves our abilities incrementally. and doesn’t break the bank.
we need a replacement for the A-10. either give it to the army, or require the air force to take the job seriously. the BAE SABA or the rutan ARES would be a good starting point.
warhorse_03826 on October 19, 2010 at 5:43 PM