The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 23, 2009




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: SecDef Gates recommends halting F-22 and POTUS Helo production
DarthAmerica    4/6/2009 3:53:07 PM
h*tp://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D97D4QTO1&show_article=1

Apr 6 02:44 PM US/Eastern
By ANNE GEARAN
AP Military Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Monday recommended halting production of the F-22 fighter jet and scrapping a new helicopter for the president as he outlined deep cuts to many of the military's biggest weapons programs.
Gates said his $534 billion budget proposal represents a "fundamental overhaul" in defense acquisition and reflects a shift in priorities from fighting conventional wars to the newer threats U.S. forces face from insurgents in places such as Afghanistan.

The department must ensure it has the right programs and money to "fight the wars we are in today and the scenarios we are most likely to face in the years to come, while at the same time providing a hedge against other risks," Gates said as he revealed details of his budget for the next fiscal year.

The promised emphasis on budget paring is a reversal from the Bush years, which included a doubling of the Pentagon's spending since 2001. Spending on tanks, fighter planes, ships, missiles and other weapons accounted for about a third of all defense spending last year. But Gates noted more money will be needed in areas such as personnel as the Army and Marines expand the size of their forces.

Gates will likely face stiff resistance in Congress, where lawmakers are wary of losing defense contractor jobs with an economy in crisis. Some defense contractors such as Lockheed Martin Corp. have warned of huge layoffs if programs are cut.

Production of the F-22 fighter jet, which cost $140 million apiece, would be halted at 187. Plans to build a new helicopter for the president and a helicopter to rescue downed pilots would be canceled. A new communications satellite would be scrapped and the program for a new Air Force transport plane would be ended.

Some of the Pentagon's most expensive programs would also be scaled back. The Army's $160 billion Future Combat Systems modernization program would lose its armored vehicles. Plans to build a shield to defend against missile attacks by rogue states would also be scaled back.

Yet some programs would grow. Gates proposed speeding up production of the F-35 fighter jet, which could end up costing $1 trillion to manufacture and maintain 2,443 planes. The military would buy more speedy ships that can operate close in to land. And more money would be spent outfitting special forces troops that can hunt down insurgents.

"It is important to remember that every defense dollar spent to over-ensure against a remote or diminishing risk?or in effect to run up the score in a capability where the United States is already dominant?is a dollar not available to take care of our people, reset the force, win the wars we are in and improve capabilities in areas where we are underinvested and potentially vulnerable," Gates said.

The Government Accountability Office reported last week that 96 of the Pentagon's biggest weapons contracts were over budget by a "staggering" figure of $296 billion.

A bill in Congress would require the Pentagon to do a better job of making sure proposed weapons are affordable and perform the way they should before the military spends big sums on them. The Defense Department has already adjusted its acquisitions policy to achieve some of those goals.

------------------------------------------------------------------


I'm already bracing myself for the comments to follow...

-DA
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62   NEXT
DarthAmerica       4/14/2009 7:28:24 PM

Last year I supported my boys from Bragg at a SOCOM combined arms exercise out in Nevada.  It was huge, with a lot of high speed low drag guys from the US, UK ans OZ running around the desert running scenarios and developing techniques specifically with regards to getting the best out of the latest developing technologies.  Interestingly this exercise was on the huge range complex attached to Creech AFB which is where the US and UK control the "Various" UAV missions underway around the world.  The interesting thing is that we were not required for all the scenarious being played out and at a certain time each evening every single one of us had to be verified as being off the range.  As we all discussed why this might be required the Captain in command of the battery turned to me and said "Arty (Obviously he said my name), theres things in them thar hills that we cant even imagine at this moment in time"   So I totally agree with Darth that there are Aircraft etc in the Black World right now that we probably wont know about for 10 or 15 years!!!!!

Regards

Arty




I love to speculate on some of the possibilities. I remember when I'd be at Balad, sometimes I'd see a strange turbo prop with bulges in conspicuous places or the occasional weird looking UAV. Of course there is always the sightings of civilian contractors from various defense contractors there to service new equipment as well. You just never know whats going on unless you need to. You meet all kinds of strange and interesting people in places like that. I'm in awe at the things I do know about so I can imagine the stuff I don't know being pretty incredible.

-DA 

 
Quote    Reply

ArtyEngineer       4/14/2009 7:43:00 PM
 
I love to speculate on some of the possibilities. I remember when I'd be at Balad, sometimes I'd see a strange turbo prop with bulges in conspicuous places or the occasional weird looking UAV. Of course there is always the sightings of civilian contractors from various defense contractors there to service new equipment as well. You just never know whats going on unless you need to. You meet all kinds of strange and interesting people in places like that. I'm in awe at the things I do know about so I can imagine the stuff I don't know being pretty incredible.



-DA 



Absolutely!!!  I have been very lucky over teh last few years with the regards to "Where I have worked" and "Who I have worked with" ;)   Strange and Interesting people is understatement of the the year!!!!!  Heck, at the end of the Nevada Ex we hit Vegas with a few of the High Speed Low Drag folks....thats an awesome bunch of folks to hang out with :)
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica    LB Reply   4/14/2009 7:47:44 PM

It's worth pointing out that according to this article the decision to only buy 187 is entirely budget driven with no analysis to back up the numbers.  Point one is that the USAF is taking another look at some scenarios which is simply a statement that additional analysis is going to be done.  Point two is that 60 more would cost 13 billion and that is a lot of money.


LB, they have already looked at the scenarios. Thats why they are making the decision. They would not do this if it could be shown that U.S. Air Superiority would be in danger by 60 less Raptors. That's why I often ask people to take looks at the threat air forces. Exclude the PRC vs Taiwan scenarios. Who's got an airforce capable of standing against the USAF or even USN for that matter? Now look at the PRC. Just be sure to research the logistics as well as total numbers of threat air craft so you can get a rough idea of how many planes they can support and coordinate in a given battlespace. It becomes clear that while they are making improvements in their capabilities. It's still well short of what it would take to deny the USAF air superiority. That's why they are seeking asymmetric means to negate the Raptors all together if it comes to that in the near term. As it stands now and for the next decade or so, they would take horrific losses in the air that would be a show stopper. I'm looking at their ability to "complete" any operation they start against us. By complete I mean hold on to any initial gains and consolidate thereby forcing us to concede. They can't. Nor can anyone else in a conventional war in the air.

If our national security hinged on those 60 air frames we would have a lot bigger issues. 

-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica    LB Reply   4/14/2009 8:06:12 PM


 

I love to speculate on some of the possibilities. I remember when I'd be at Balad, sometimes I'd see a strange turbo prop with bulges in conspicuous places or the occasional weird looking UAV. Of course there is always the sightings of civilian contractors from various defense contractors there to service new equipment as well. You just never know whats going on unless you need to. You meet all kinds of strange and interesting people in places like that. I'm in awe at the things I do know about so I can imagine the stuff I don't know being pretty incredible.



Absolutely!!!  I have been very lucky over teh last few years with the regards to "Where I have worked" and "Who I have worked with" ;)   Strange and Interesting people is understatement of the the year!!!!!  Heck, at the end of the Nevada Ex we hit Vegas with a few of the High Speed Low Drag folks....thats an awesome bunch of folks to hang out with :)

 

I'm lucky because of the nature of my last mission we weren't really fixed to specific locations in country(s). I got to travel around quite a bit and because of that I was fortunate to see the vastness of the operation and deal with many different types of unit and other services. Also, on one occasion I was the unit LNO which facilitated even more movement and meetings. 

Another thing, when you are part of the main effort, as I'm sure you know when assigning priority of fires, the resources you get are near limitless! I casually asked for a G-Hawk sortie just to see how higher would react to it. We got it...eventually;)! Not to mention almost constant dealings with people and NET teams because of that. Don't get me wrong, I don't mean to sound as though we were some hi speed low drag SOF group. But it sure beat getting stuck on some FOB as base security!

-DA 


 


 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345       4/14/2009 10:15:57 PM

The peer  review process is rather brutal and not for the timid to enter into unless they have the stomach for it. There is no room for mere unsubstantiations, evidenceless assertions, or for incompetent presentations of fact. The case must be tight.

 

The report I had to write with a presentation that was reviewed for graduation did not give me an impression of being brutal. It's not like they bite your head off. As a matter of fact being judged by your facts is rather refreshing in a world where you are constantly judged on political reasons.


 

Did you stand your orals or was it all written?
 
Herald
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    Is that so?   4/14/2009 10:18:33 PM




The peer  review process is rather brutal and not for the timid to enter into unless they have the stomach for it. There is no room for mere unsubstantiations, evidenceless assertions, or for incompetent presentations of fact. The case must be tight.



 



The report I had to write with a presentation that was reviewed for graduation did not give me an impression of being brutal. It's not like they bite your head off. As a matter of fact being judged by your facts is rather refreshing in a world where you are constantly judged on political reasons.






 




 

Agreed. It's not brutal. Its designed to help not hinder. I've been involved in two within the last 6 weeks. If someone sees something that doesn't seem correct, the issue is raised, discussed in detail with the various subject matter experts, action items and responsibilities are delegated and then the issues get resolved per the revised program schedule. At no time does it digress into anything "personal".  I'm managing 4 programs now and this is a uniform experience.




-DA 






I seriously doubt you've ever stood one.
 
Herald
 
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345       4/14/2009 10:25:55 PM
Last year I supported my boys from Bragg at a SOCOM combined arms exercise out in Nevada.  It was huge, with a lot of high speed low drag guys from the US, UK ans OZ running around the desert running scenarios and developing techniques specifically with regards to getting the best out of the latest developing technologies.  Interestingly this exercise was on the huge range complex attached to Creech AFB which is where the US and UK control the "Various" UAV missions underway around the world.  The interesting thing is that we were not required for all the scenarious being played out and at a certain time each evening every single one of us had to be verified as being off the range.  As we all discussed why this might be required the Captain in command of the battery turned to me and said "Arty (Obviously he said my name), theres things in them thar hills that we cant even imagine at this moment in time"   So I totally agree with Darth that there are Aircraft etc in the Black World right now that we probably wont know about for 10 or 15 years!!!!!
 
Regards
 
Arty
 
Secrets held, or range safety? Computers are stupid. Let me say that again, computers are stupid:.a live weapon proof with a prototype bombing robot is extremely dangerous. 
 
Herald 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       4/14/2009 10:41:15 PM
It was huge, with a lot of high speed low drag guys from the US, UK ans OZ running around the desert running scenarios and developing techniques specifically with regards to getting the best out of the latest developing technologies. 

if you still make that tour to oz we should catch up and have a quiet one.  there are some interesting technology timelines that are in play. 2014-15 will be interesting. :)

 
 
Quote    Reply

ArtyEngineer    GF   4/14/2009 10:46:25 PM


It was huge, with a lot of high speed low drag guys from the US, UK ans OZ running around the desert running scenarios and developing techniques specifically with regards to getting the best out of the latest developing technologies. 




if you still make that tour to oz we should catch up and have a quiet one.  there are some interesting technology timelines that are in play. 2014-15 will be interesting. :)




 



Its still on, has slid to the right a little, looking like October at the minute.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       4/14/2009 11:18:36 PM

It's still on, has slid to the right a little, looking like October at the minute.
 
email me at work when it gets closer and I'll sort something out



 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    GF    4/14/2009 11:36:04 PM
Expect an e-mail in a couple of hours.
 
Herald
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       4/14/2009 11:56:54 PM

Expect an e-mail in a couple of hours.

 

Herald


send private if urgent as offsite
 
Quote    Reply

LB    Your Article of April 13   4/15/2009 1:29:31 AM
I'm merely commenting on your article dated two days ago that states the USAF is "revisiting the scenarios on which the Air Force based it's assessment."  If you want to state they have made any analysis this is not the case based on your citation.  If you or anyone has any citation of any analysis done I would love to see it.
 
In fact there are other citations on this thread that state Sec Def ordered USAF senior personnel to not comment on the issue.  There has been no evidence presented showing the USAF or Defense Dept has any analysis or study showing 187 is enough or the risks of relying on F-15C for 20 more years and a ton of evidence available in the public domain that casts serious doubt on that airframe making it that long.
 
OSD ordered the F-22 cut entirely to budget considerations.  It was certainly not done after a comprehensive risk analysis as there is no evidence of the existence of this study.  The article you cited supports the cut was budget driven.
 
There will be hearings on this matter and you can be sure if there is any analysis on minimum numbers of F-22s, risks of relying on F-15Cs 20 more years, and risks of having no air superiority fighter production line up and running and available if needed that they will be cited by the Administration.  If you or anyone else can cite them now great please do so and if not please stop assuming or stating they have been done.
 
Exactly what happens if the F-15C fleet can't last 20 years needs to be known now.  Are we going to keep the F-15 line up?  What other airframe might we purchase?  I'm not interested in speculation but rather the official USAF and OSD position on what happens if so many F-15s fall apart in mid air in say 10 years that a replacement is required immediately.
 
This in fact was the number one concern of the former head of the USAF in public testimony to Congress a few years ago.
 
This leaves aside little notions of having zero reserve even given 187 is just enough.  Were one to stipulate that 187 is just enough it's worth pointing out that having no reserve, and no production line, means little things like mother nature, sabotage, attrition, etc. can reduce your number far enough below 187 to be a serious problem.  In fact if 187 is just enough one might inquire as to why a reserve is not required given there will be no production line for any air superiority fighter whatsoever and thus no reserve means many years of possible vulnerability.  This further leaves aside the F-22 being found essential in other mission areas and little things like potential conflicts or other factors significantly increasing projected flight hours.  No reserve indeed.
 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       4/15/2009 1:40:40 AM
LB,

 you say you don't want speculation, but you're speculating yourself. There is no evidence that suggests the F-15 fleet will fall apart. In fact the United States Air Force stated that the fleet is liable to 2025 at least I will conduct phased retirement of older airframes. Let's not forget the joint strike fighter will be in full production, is multimission capable and is more than a match for any other aircraft besides the F-22 in production today or are likely to enter production prior to 2025.

-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    Is that so?   4/15/2009 2:22:13 AM

LB,




 you say you don't want speculation, but you're speculating yourself. There is no evidence that suggests the F-15 fleet will fall apart. In fact the United States Air Force stated that the fleet is liable to 2025 at least I will conduct phased retirement of older airframes. Let's not forget the joint strike fighter will be in full production, is multimission capable and is more than a match for any other aircraft besides the F-22 in production today or are likely to enter production prior to 2025.




-DA 
Didn't read any of the open source evidence posted?

Shrug, and some ask why I don't take them seriously at all.
 
Herald
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62   NEXT



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy