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     Newest to Oldest

sentinel28a       4/12/2009 5:10:47 AM
Great.  We save $9 billion off of a weapons system we desperately need, to fund Obama's universal health care plan--which will not work and make things even worse in an already broken health care system.
 
They can put my tax dollars towards the F-22, thank you.  I know it works.  I also like the idea of funding something to defend my country, rather than funding some multibillion dollar boondoggle where Barney Frank gets to choose which operation I can and cannot have.
 
Maybe DA has a point: China isn't our enemy.  Why should they be? At the rate we're going, we're going to wreck our own country long before the PRC has a chance to.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    Before you can talk about a situation you have to understand ome concepts.   4/12/2009 6:11:22 AM
These are:
1. First Island Ring
2. String of Pearls.
3. Oil dependency.
4. Mackinder continental strategy and the World Island
5. Mahanic seapower.
6. Interior as opposed to exterior logistics advantages   
7. Interior domination of tactical and strategic position as posed to the perimeter attack..
8. Finance as a weapon.
 

Maps (Or why the PRC bandits still call themselves the Middle Kingdom)
 
Several views:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Now the poster keeps claiming that he sees the big picture.. 
 
This is the BIG PICTURE from Beijing's perspective..
 
 
 
Africa, Central Asia, and Siberia are resource basins to be pillaged and looted. Only one nation really stands in their way and is in a position to stop them.
 
The United States is the only nation that can shatter the String of Pearls from Shanghai to the Persian Gulf, thwart the PRC bandits inside the First Island Ring and bring those bastards to heel. India is not strong enough to do it. If we have to fight economically or militarily in the Indian Ocean to do it, after we've lost the PACRIM  then we've LOST period.
 
As a refresher on Mackinder:
 
 
As a refresher on Mahan:
 
 
 
The point is that there is no isolated {active area of operations). Right now we are in a cold war with the PRC bandits for resources, commerce, and communications dominance, We are in a HOT electronic warfare condition with both sides doing everything short of actual weapon launches at each other to degrade and destroy each other's information systems (Ghost Net attack and the logic bombs the PRC bandits strew in our power networks, commercial communications, and public utilities systems are known public examples of that warfare in progress.) They persistently attempt to electronically attack our satellites by all means short of shooting war.) As for shooting they fired a warning shot at us designed  to show that they could at least hit our LEO communications and reconnaissance nodes. Our return shot was to demonstrate to them that we could reach inside their Second Artillery Coverage and thwart them.
 
Its not hard to figure this stuff out. DATA guides a clear mind unbiased and unclouded by phoney baloney self indulgent ego tripping arrogance and opinion mongering.
 
When I say that that poster doesn't know what he is talking about, its because he doesn't know what he is talking about, period.  
 
He doesn't know for example why international financiers like George Soros and Jim Rogers staged that Georgia fiasco in the Caucausus a year ago to trigger an oil market and natural gas futures collapse or who financed and sourced the September 23 attack on the US commercial financial and housing markets after the oil speculators ran wild and inflated the price of thast resource beyond all reason. (Who financed that trillion dollar attack has never been explained.)
 
Money as well as ballistic missiles is a weapon. All means short of war. 
      &n
 
Quote    Reply

gevaudan       4/12/2009 2:29:20 PM

I can't say I am surprised. The Bush admin already didn't knew what to do with the F-22, so I wouldn't be surprised if the Obama admin culled the program.

It is a cold war relic (just a glimpse in the pit is a flashback from the eighties), overspecialised and overpriced. In these times of financial crisis, choices have to be made.

 
Quote    Reply

mustang22       4/12/2009 3:18:13 PM

I can't say I am surprised. The Bush admin already didn't knew what to do with the F-22, so I wouldn't be surprised if the Obama admin culled the program.


It is a cold war relic (just a glimpse in the pit is a flashback from the eighties), overspecialised and overpriced. In these times of financial crisis, choices have to be made.



Tell that to all the F-teen pilots' families that get blown out of the sky over the Formosa Strait. Im pretty sure that my 13 year old son could read through these posts and comprehend that there is a need for the F-22 no matter what the final number is. "Cold War relic" are you for real?  If anything it is simply the next generation of air superiority fighter to replace Cold War aircraft and move forward with technology. Please tell us less informed posters how you would maintain the Airforce without it, I'm very curious to hear this.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       4/12/2009 5:32:12 PM
I argued on Mackinder principals on the china thread a few years back and the locals went ballistic. :)

although if they'd been a little smarter they would have realised that mackinder's "axis of military and socio-political energy" was slightly west of china.... :)
 
Quote    Reply

Phaid       4/12/2009 7:16:11 PM

I can't say I am surprised. The Bush admin already didn't knew what to do with the F-22, so I wouldn't be surprised if the Obama admin culled the program.

It is a cold war relic (just a glimpse in the pit is a flashback from the eighties), overspecialised and overpriced. In these times of financial crisis, choices have to be made.

Tell that to all the F-teen pilots' families that get blown out of the sky over the Formosa Strait. Im pretty sure that my 13 year old son could read through these posts and comprehend that there is a need for the F-22 no matter what the final number is. "Cold War relic" are you for real?  If anything it is simply the next generation of air superiority fighter to replace Cold War aircraft and move forward with technology. Please tell us less informed posters how you would maintain the Airforce without it, I'm very curious to hear this.


La bête is just another French troll, he wouldn't have the first clue how to maintain an Air Force and I'm sure he would be the first to cheer as F-teen pilots got blown out of the sky over the Formosa Strait.  I'm frankly surprised it took them this long to come troll this thread.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    Follow up comments.   4/12/2009 9:33:53 PM
I had a good Easter so I'm feeling generous.........
 
I am still chuckling over the comments, such as if the if the environment is benign for tankers then the enviornment ois benoign enough for Reapers. Of course the environment would be benign enough. I suppose that putting a drone there would do any good? Oh I forgot, in order for the dfrone to be of any use it has to be inside enemy airspace to use its A2G sensors since the maximum slant at 17,000 meters? Optical H2 would be 430,000 meters and radar H2 would be 530,000 meters.
 
Anyrate, the survival life of such a radar billboard would be minimal.
 
One more thing, airpower wise with regards to robots. You use the same self defense technoques for those UAS systems that you use for low observable aircraft.
 
Proper use of a UCAS     
 
Softwar speculated about the use of an AESA weapon or even some kinds of SAR as weapon systems and suggested manned aircraft. I'n more interested in the use of the autonomous robot as a carrier for that purpose. You want some way to blind radars and blank communications nodes. Why not firehose them with microwave propagator and burn out antennas and switching centers?
 
Even a simple  autopilot driven aircraft can perform such a task. The MECHANICAL logics are to close a radio source turn on the propagator, burn out the enemy electronics and then RTB.
 
Herald
       
 
Quote    Reply

warpig       4/12/2009 10:15:32 PM


Softwar speculated about the use of an AESA weapon or even some kinds of SAR as weapon systems and suggested manned aircraft. I'n more interested in the use of the autonomous robot as a carrier for that purpose. You want some way to blind radars and blank communications nodes. Why not firehose them with microwave propagator and burn out antennas and switching centers?

Even a simple  autopilot driven aircraft can perform such a task. The MECHANICAL logics are to close a radio source turn on the propagator, burn out the enemy electronics and then RTB.

Herald



Sounds pretty much like the MALD-J stand-in jammer to me--although I'm not so sure it will be AESA-equipped.  Maybe a follow-on will be.

 
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    You wouldn't use an AESA per say.   4/12/2009 10:20:28 PM





Softwar speculated about the use of an AESA weapon or even some kinds of SAR as weapon systems and suggested manned aircraft. I'n more interested in the use of the autonomous robot as a carrier for that purpose. You want some way to blind radars and blank communications nodes. Why not firehose them with microwave propagator and burn out antennas and switching centers?



Even a simple  autopilot driven aircraft can perform such a task. The MECHANICAL logics are to close a radio source turn on the propagator, burn out the enemy electronics and then RTB.



Herald









Sounds pretty much like the MALD-J stand-in jammer to me--although I'm not so sure it will be AESA-equipped.  Maybe a follow-on will be.



 


You'd use a PARM, a type of MASER.
 
Herald
 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       4/13/2009 12:52:41 AM

You'd use a PARM, a type of MASER.

 
must be a big arse MASER.  The ones I''ve had to look at would require gobs of power to do that....  :)
can you email me some citations??

 
 

 
Quote    Reply



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.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