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

mustang22       4/15/2009 3:21:22 PM
Your views have been shot down by everybody that matters with the exception of your small local fan club on this forum. 
-DA
     I believe this statement is untrue and time will inevitably prove you wrong. The F-22 has a lot of support in Congress so don't be surprised if more are on the way.
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       4/15/2009 3:29:23 PM
Mustang,

Granted, I already acknowledged many post back Congress may get involved. So with that minor quibble, I agree with you.


-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

Softwar    You Funny Man DA   4/15/2009 3:32:07 PM



You aren't qualified to negate anything I say. You don't have the skill sets, the experience or the professionalism to survive any kind of military related debate with me. Don't confuse my lack on interest in your cyber chest beating and ego trippin' for lack of capability. Note that I didn't mention anything about air dominance, a concept you don't even understand obviously. 

When you are up to my standard of debate and level of experience and understanding, we can have much more fruitful discussion and perhaps then you might have something useful to contribute. Until such time you are just blowing more hot air. But I know you need to have the last word on everything so go right ahead. I've got everything for the SecDef, Top USAF brass and even simple cursory analysis of capabilities of threats, real threats and not your contrived fake PRC-Bandit obsession, to back up what I said.

Your views have been shot down by everybody that matters with the exception of your small local fan club on this forum. 

-DA


Now this is a hoot - Darth the beast of SP - the one guy who whips out his TS clearance every time he gets into trouble and the only guy to argue successfully against himself.
 
We have already cleared the F-22 part - you would rather not buy it - Gates wants to cancel it.  A whole bunch of folks who hold the purse strings disagree.  I say its needed - you say its not.  My way is opinion (in your opinion) while yours is fact (in your opinion). 
 
You suggest that its role in air combat can be replaced by a Predator and I counter that you are so full of stuffed blueberries as to become a muffin by showing that such things are not possible.  Then you claim that there is a jam proof two way link - backing it up with (and the drum roll please)....  It's so secret that you can't post anything about it and if you did you would have to kill me.
 
Yawn...  You are really getting full of yourself.  So far you are an expert on Iraq, China, Iran, Somalia, Afghanistan, radar, UAVs, communications, stealth, air combat, ground combat, nuclear combat, missiles, satellite, guns, butter, blood, sweat and tears.  Have I forgotton anything?
 
Yet - you don't seem to know enough - like SPASM.  Completely lost on you ... but if you were as you claim you'd be able to recite SPASM back to me.  Why is that... perhaps your expertise is a bit more limited?
 
In fact - your claims to be such a super expert are so outstanding that I am surprised you are not in the five sided building - that is unless your expertise comes in trash postings of weapons grade baloneyium. 
 
Now Darth - I do know you have an ego the size of the Death Star (and a proclivity to post things in lots of places here on the net about yourself including the faces of your comrades in arms) but really...  If you wish to insult someone - then do so - don't beat around the bush.
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       4/15/2009 3:40:36 PM


Now Darth - I do know you have an ego the size of the Death Star (and a proclivity to post things in lots of places here on the net about yourself including the faces of your comrades in arms) but really...  If you wish to insult someone - then do so - don't beat around the bush.

Strawman. As others have already pointed out, I didn't say or make the claims you are making up in your post. Therefore I wont entertain this latest nonsense any further. You want to be taken seriously yet in the same breath you accuse me of saying a Predator is replacing the F-22. Can you back that up? NO. Did you even understand the context of why I brought up UAS? NO. Heck you could not even correctly define the terms...lol. Spare me.

-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

Softwar       4/15/2009 3:49:35 PM


 

Strawman. As others have already pointed out, I didn't say or make the claims you are making up in your post. Therefore I wont entertain this latest nonsense any further. You want to be taken seriously yet in the same breath you accuse me of saying a Predator is replacing the F-22. Can you back that up? NO. Did you even understand the context of why I brought up UAS? NO. Heck you could not even correctly define the terms...lol. Spare me.




-DA 


So - take note here newbies - the answer to dealing with a question or problem about your logic skill-set is to increase your volume and shout down to your fellow SP poster - using larger Fonts and highlighted colors.
 
Yes Darth - you lost that round - and still don't know what SPASM is.  What - couldn't get into the SCIF this weekend because it was closed for bunny day?  Or perhaps your clearance is not high enough?  You might as well take that mythical non-jammable - perfect communications system and go peddle it to someone who buys into fantasy warriors.
 
And do keep up the good work - posting about your personal life on other sites and stuff - real interesting.  But I do still wonder if you are using a government (mil) IP - which brings into question are your stealing from the taxpayer to post here on SP?
 
Quote    Reply

maruben    Gates' explanation   4/15/2009 4:49:55 PM

MAXWELL AIR FORCE BASE, Ala. (AP) — Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Wednesday the high-seas pirate drama shows why the Pentagon should buy more affordable ships, planes and weapons even if they are not perfect.

"As we saw last week, you don't necessarily need a billion-dollar ship to chase down a bunch of teenage pirates," Gates said.

Although he has praised the precision training of Navy SEAL snipers who killed three pirate hostage-takers Sunday, the secretary was referring to the imbalance of massive U.S. warships and dazzling weaponry corralling the pirates' tiny lifeboat. The Somali pirates were armed with automatic weapons and pistols and holding an American cargo ship captain for ransom.

Gates is touring war colleges this week, selling his plan to reorder the Pentagon budget. He wants to cancel some big programs and scale back others.

It was at this same Air Force War College that Gates a year ago accused the service of dragging its feet on sending relatively low-tech surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft to Iraq and Afghanistan. Gates said Wednesday that those wars should drive the design and purchase of realistic weapons.

The goal should be larger quantities of well-priced and versatile systems, instead of exquisite machines "so costly and complex that they take forever to build and then only in very limited quantities."

Gates' proposed $534 billion defense budget for the coming year would end production of the Air Force's marquee fighter plane, the F-22 Raptor, a sleek $400 million beauty that has not seen a day of combat in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Gates wants to build more workhorse planes called Joint Strike Fighters, at about $80 million apiece. That program could end up costing $1 trillion to manufacture and maintain 2,443 planes.

The F-22 is a "niche, silver-bullet solution" to a narrow problem, and 187 of them will be plenty, Gates said.

He got no complaint about the F-22 from his audience of students and instructors, and the Air Force leadership has signaled it will support the phase-out. Manufacture of the plane creates jobs in more than 40 states, however, and it is not clear whether Congress will try to keep the program going.

Gates told the group he opposes a congressional push to buy new Air Force refueling planes from two different defense contractors. The Pentagon has been trying for nearly a decade to build a badly needed replacement for the 50-year-old fleet of refueling planes called tankers.

Gates joked that he is "laying my body down across the tracks" by insisting on a leaner tanker buying plan. He plans to try again this summer to pick a manufacturer.

Congress has not begun work on Gates' budget plan, released earlier this month after weeks of secret strategy sessions. Gates made even top military officers swear in writing that they would not discuss the budget lineup before its release.

The ambitious plan is the product of Gates' frustration with what he has called narrow thinking by military services and defense contractors too accustomed to ever-swelling defense budgets since the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

The defense chief, a holdover from the Cabinet of Republican President George W. Bush, has asked members of Congress to look beyond parochial interests in their home districts, and told the Air Force audience he has been pleasantly surprised by a muted response so far. Congress is on a break, and will return next week.

Defense analysts say most of Gates recommendations will probably stick, especially with the endorsement this week of President Barack Obama.

 
Quote    Reply

FJV       4/15/2009 4:58:56 PM
Did you stand your orals or was it all written?
 
Basically what I had to graduate from the polytech (I believe this is the correct term) do was:
- Do a graduation project
- Write a report.
- Do a presentation of that report in front of an audience.
- Defend what I've written against one teacher who was assigned to guide me and one knowledgeable person form
  outside of the polytech. Right after the presentation.

For me the thing that makes it "brutal"  was doing the presentation. If you are not used to doing presentations the stage fright is enough to make a lot of people vomit from nervousness, which I did the day before. That's what makes it "though" IMHO.
 
The defense of your report really depends on how good you did your project. Also you can have the teacher that is assigned to you read a draft prior to doing this and he will point out the strengths and weaknesses of your report. This will enable you to fix flaws you may have overlooked.
 
Over all this does not come across to me as being unfair or overly harsh
 
Now what is really a brutal experience is when you have designed something that does not work, because of a stupid mistake you made. Every engineer has I know has made such mistakes. I know I have.
 
Just imagine how you feel that exact moment when you find out that the machine you designed the piping for is in reality ±1 meter shorter than the reference drawings of the machine you used. Whether I was informed that there was a short version of that machine was not remembered by the parties involved (me and the guy I made the drawings for).
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

maruben    Gates' explanation   4/15/2009 4:59:06 PM

MAXWELL AIR FORCE BASE, Ala. (AP) — Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Wednesday the high-seas pirate drama shows why the Pentagon should buy more affordable ships, planes and weapons even if they are not perfect.

"As we saw last week, you don't necessarily need a billion-dollar ship to chase down a bunch of teenage pirates," Gates said.

Although he has praised the precision training of Navy SEAL snipers who killed three pirate hostage-takers Sunday, the secretary was referring to the imbalance of massive U.S. warships and dazzling weaponry corralling the pirates' tiny lifeboat. The Somali pirates were armed with automatic weapons and pistols and holding an American cargo ship captain for ransom.

Gates is touring war colleges this week, selling his plan to reorder the Pentagon budget. He wants to cancel some big programs and scale back others.

It was at this same Air Force War College that Gates a year ago accused the service of dragging its feet on sending relatively low-tech surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft to Iraq and Afghanistan. Gates said Wednesday that those wars should drive the design and purchase of realistic weapons.

The goal should be larger quantities of well-priced and versatile systems, instead of exquisite machines "so costly and complex that they take forever to build and then only in very limited quantities."

Gates' proposed $534 billion defense budget for the coming year would end production of the Air Force's marquee fighter plane, the F-22 Raptor, a sleek $400 million beauty that has not seen a day of combat in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Gates wants to build more workhorse planes called Joint Strike Fighters, at about $80 million apiece. That program could end up costing $1 trillion to manufacture and maintain 2,443 planes.

The F-22 is a "niche, silver-bullet solution" to a narrow problem, and 187 of them will be plenty, Gates said.

He got no complaint about the F-22 from his audience of students and instructors, and the Air Force leadership has signaled it will support the phase-out. Manufacture of the plane creates jobs in more than 40 states, however, and it is not clear whether Congress will try to keep the program going.

Gates told the group he opposes a congressional push to buy new Air Force refueling planes from two different defense contractors. The Pentagon has been trying for nearly a decade to build a badly needed replacement for the 50-year-old fleet of refueling planes called tankers.

Gates joked that he is "laying my body down across the tracks" by insisting on a leaner tanker buying plan. He plans to try again this summer to pick a manufacturer.

Congress has not begun work on Gates' budget plan, released earlier this month after weeks of secret strategy sessions. Gates made even top military officers swear in writing that they would not discuss the budget lineup before its release.

The ambitious plan is the product of Gates' frustration with what he has called narrow thinking by military services and defense contractors too accustomed to ever-swelling defense budgets since the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

The defense chief, a holdover from the Cabinet of Republican President George W. Bush, has asked members of Congress to look beyond parochial interests in their home districts, and told the Air Force audience he has been pleasantly surprised by a muted response so far. Congress is on a break, and will return next week.

Defense analysts say most of Gates recommendations will probably stick, especially with the endorsement this week of President Barack Obama.

 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       4/15/2009 5:11:53 PM
Awesome. Gates, gets it.

-DA 


 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica    More from SecDef Gates on F-22   4/15/2009 6:15:32 PM
 When examining the issue of air supremacy, we had to ask, what is the right mix of weapons to deal with the span of threats? What are the things that the F-22, and only the F-22, can do ? and where would it be required? There is no doubt that the F-22 has unique capabilities that we need ? the penetration and defeat of an advanced enemy air defense and fighter fleet. But, the F-22 is, in effect, a niche, silver-bullet solution required for a limited number of scenarios ? to overcome advanced enemy fighters and air defense systems. In assessing the F-22 requirement, we also considered the advanced stealth and superior air-to-ground capabilities provided by the fifth-generation F-35s now being accelerated in this budget, the growing capability and range of unmanned platforms like the Reaper, and other systems in the Air Force and in other services. I also considered the fact that Russia is probably 6 years away from Initial Operating Capability of a fifth-generation fighter and the Chinese are 10 to 12 years away. By then we will have more than 1,000 fifth-generation fighters in our inventory. In light of all these factors, and on the recommendation of the Air Force secretary and chief of staff, I concluded that 183 ? the program of record since 2005 ? plus four would be a sufficient number to meet requirements. To be clear, the F-22 program of record as codified in the FY 2005 budget (and all budgets since) will be completed, and not cut as many have said and reported.
 
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