The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 25, 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: House panel presses Gates to buy existing fighter jets, not F-35s
Phaid    6/18/2009 11:39:24 AM
House defense authorizers are pressing Defense Secretary Robert Gates to consider buying existing fighter jets instead of the next-generation F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to curtail a severe fighter jet shortfall in the Air Force National Guard.

During a House Armed Services Committee markup of the 2010 defense authorization bill on Tuesday, lawmakers raised alarm that aircraft shortfalls could present significant challenges to the Air Force?s ability to protect domestic airspace.

At press time, lawmakers had included an amendment sponsored by Reps. Frank LoBiondo (R-N.J.) and Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) that would force Gates to consider buying F-15, F-16 and F-18 aircraft with Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar, high-capacity datalink, enhanced avionics and the ability to deploy advanced weapons.

In military parlance, this is a 4.5-generation fighter aircraft outfitted with advanced capabilities.

The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which the Pentagon wants to move toward instead of the 4.5-generation aircraft, would be a fifth-generation fighter aircraft ? the most advanced.

LoBiondo and Giffords?s amendment directs Gates to submit to Armed Services, within 90 days of the authorization bill becoming law, a report on the procurement of 4.5-generation fighter aircraft that must consider that the Air Force has a requirement to maintain no less than 2,200 tactical fighter aircraft from fiscal 2011 through 2035.

LoBiondo said the fighter shortfall would affect the Air National Guard earlier and more severely than it would the Air Force active-duty units.

The lack of aircraft and the advanced age of some of the fighter jets are ?devastating? to the Guard, he said. He criticized the Air Force for not producing any plan to fix the fighter shortfall problems, saying it had pegged its hopes on the arrival of the F-35 to solve the problem.

Under the LoBiondo-Giffords amendment, Pentagon officials must consider the procurement cost of those aircraft if they are bought on a yearly basis, and must also give cost estimates for aircraft bought as part of a multiyear contract. If Gates determines that a multiyear contract would yield significant savings and decides that the Pentagon should be buying those aircraft as part of such a contract, he would have to submit the necessary Pentagon certifications for the contract together with the fiscal 2011 budget request.

The amendment also asks the Pentagon to assess whether it would be possible to recapitalize the Air National Guard with F-35 Joint Strike Fighters from 2015 through 2025.

Full story here:

hxxp://thehill.com/index2.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=83398&pop=1&page=0&Itemid=32
 
Quote    Reply

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

Pages: 1 2 3   NEXT
mustang22       6/18/2009 12:05:54 PM
I said this once before I know it will stir controversy but Gates should be fired for mishandling our National Security. The studies were done, shortfalls confirmed and still he choose to not only ignore it but place a gag order on everyone. This is inexcusable for a Secretary of Defense and comes down to one thing, POLITICS. I know its coming Darth, so I'm prepared.
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY       6/18/2009 12:25:00 PM

I said this once before I know it will stir controversy but Gates should be fired for mishandling our National Security.
And who's going to FIRE Gates?  The guy who HIRED him?  The guy who's policies he's executing?  Where in the US Constitution is this "firing clause?"
The studies were done, shortfalls confirmed and still he choose to not only ignore it but place a gag order on everyone. This is inexcusable for a Secretary of Defense and comes down to one thing, POLITICS. I know its coming Darth, so I'm prepared.
Politics, you say?  In D.C.?   Noooooooooo, UNPOSSIBLE....politics.....Well now that IS shocking!
Really please, grow up.  A Political Appointee practicing politics....I understand your unhappiness, but this is childish.
And the Politicians protesting, there wouldn't be any politics, THERE, would there?  I mean aircraft manufacturers or Air National Guard units, which, of course, translates into jobs for their constituents?  No, of course not....
Two Congresscritters are arguing with Gates about money that, most likely, will affect them....Gates, in turn, is arguing from his political master's position concerning Defense Spending and the Budget, in short politics, too.
 
This is not some morality play, but a set of politicians arguing over the swag.
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY       6/18/2009 12:25:26 PM

I said this once before I know it will stir controversy but Gates should be fired for mishandling our National Security.
And who's going to FIRE Gates?  The guy who HIRED him?  The guy who's policies he's executing?  Where in the US Constitution is this "firing clause?"
The studies were done, shortfalls confirmed and still he choose to not only ignore it but place a gag order on everyone. This is inexcusable for a Secretary of Defense and comes down to one thing, POLITICS. I know its coming Darth, so I'm prepared.
Politics, you say?  In D.C.?   Noooooooooo, UNPOSSIBLE....politics.....Well now that IS shocking!
Really please, grow up.  A Political Appointee practicing politics....I understand your unhappiness, but this is childish.
And the Politicians protesting, there wouldn't be any politics, THERE, would there?  I mean aircraft manufacturers or Air National Guard units, which, of course, translates into jobs for their constituents?  No, of course not....
Two Congresscritters are arguing with Gates about money that, most likely, will affect them....Gates, in turn, is arguing from his political master's position concerning Defense Spending and the Budget, in short politics, too.
 
This is not some morality play, but a set of politicians arguing over the swag.
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY    I apologize for the double post...   6/18/2009 12:26:04 PM
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       6/18/2009 1:01:52 PM

I said this once before I know it will stir controversy but Gates should be fired for mishandling our National Security. The studies were done, shortfalls confirmed and still he choose to not only ignore it but place a gag order on everyone. This is inexcusable for a Secretary of Defense and comes down to one thing, POLITICS. I know its coming Darth, so I'm prepared.

Know what's coming? I'm not like some who flame people for having an opinion. I disagree with you, but thats okay too. This is simply about Congress people trying to keep jobs in their districts. Nothing more and politics as usual.

-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    Concession accepted.   6/18/2009 1:23:25 PM
Three incompetents arguing about an existing shortfall of platforms and mismanaged airpower,  all in the name of "jobs"..
 
That's what you just said, darth, though you did not understand it.
 
Herald 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       6/18/2009 1:26:15 PM

Three incompetents arguing about an existing shortfall of platforms and mismanaged airpower,  all in the name of "jobs".. 

That's what you just said, darth, though you did not understand it.

Herald 


Grow up Herald, I'm not interested in your foolishness.

-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

EvilFishy       6/18/2009 2:21:27 PM
JFKY,  President Obama, the man who either directly or indirectly FIRED Walpin CAN fire (read REPLACE) Gates.   That said, he will not do so.
 
A little education regarding the US Constitution goes a long way.   By the way, Obama himself, while in the Senate, actually passed a law that tweaked the firing procedure of some Exectutive cronies (the same law he himself violated).
 
Quote    Reply

FJV       6/18/2009 2:27:40 PM
In other words no new fighter designs.
 
Use it or lose it comes to mind.
 
 

 
 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       6/18/2009 2:36:45 PM

In other words no new fighter designs.

 

Use it or lose it comes to mind.

 
BLACK
 




 -DA

 


 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    A study in incompetence.   6/18/2009 2:44:26 PM




Three incompetents arguing about an existing shortfall of platforms and mismanaged airpower,  all in the name of "jobs".. 



That's what you just said, darth, though you did not understand it.




Herald 







Grow up Herald, I'm not interested in your foolishness.




-DA 


I don't take your advice.  By the way your reference to BLACK programs is an appeal to to your hidden knowledge of which you have none..
 
That is a logical fallacy. I have no idea when you are going to learn this, but on this point:
 
 
 
How long is it going to take for YOU to grow up?
 
Herald 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

EvilFishy       6/18/2009 2:48:08 PM

Cont... Hey JFKY, some me the AIR FORCE clause that allows the United States Military to operate flying machines. Show me the word AIRFORCE or AIR PLANE or JET PLANE in the US Constitution.

That-s right Mr. Mook, while the words never appear, the language and intent of the Document is such that an Air force is not only possible, it is Constitutionally LEGAL.

The same applies with the President-s ability to fire Executive officials. The fact that you would even use as silly an argument as --the word FIRE does not appear so it cannot be done-- demonstrates a level of ignorance I would not expect of a child.

Quote: ---Cabinet members can be fired by the President, or impeached by the Congress. Customarily, a few Cabinet members may resign before the beginning of a second Presidential term. Usually all Cabinet members resign shortly after the inauguration of a new President. Rarely, a popular or especially dedicated Cabinet member may be asked to stay, sometimes even serving under a new President of another party.---

h--p://www.indopedia.org/United_States_Cabinet.html

 

 
 
 
Quote    Reply

FJV       6/18/2009 2:54:38 PM
You guys need to decide if an engineer that has experience on designing five different fighters is better at designing fighters than an engineer that has just designe his/her first fighter.
 
I have already formed my opinon on this in that in my opinion for optimal results engineers need training and real life experience, just like fighter pilots do. That training comes in the form of developing and building new fighter planes.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

mustang22       6/18/2009 2:54:42 PM



I said this once before I know it will stir controversy but Gates should be fired for mishandling our National Security.

And who's going to FIRE Gates?  The guy who HIRED him?  The guy who's policies he's executing?  Where in the US Constitution is this "firing clause?"

The studies were done, shortfalls confirmed and still he choose to not only ignore it but place a gag order on everyone. This is inexcusable for a Secretary of Defense and comes down to one thing, POLITICS. I know its coming Darth, so I'm prepared.

Politics, you say?  In D.C.?   Noooooooooo, UNPOSSIBLE....politics.....Well now that IS shocking!

Really please, grow up.  A Political Appointee practicing politics....I understand your unhappiness, but this is childish.

And the Politicians protesting, there wouldn't be any politics, THERE, would there?  I mean aircraft manufacturers or Air National Guard units, which, of course, translates into jobs for their constituents?  No, of course not....

Two Congresscritters are arguing with Gates about money that, most likely, will affect them....Gates, in turn, is arguing from his political master's position concerning Defense Spending and the Budget, in short politics, too.

 

This is not some morality play, but a set of politicians arguing over the swag.



JFKY,
 
Do you remember a guy named Rumsfeld. His resignation was basically called for by the people of this country. Do not think that Gates is some sacred cow. I would say that protecting the countries national interest by making decisions based on reality and factual information instead of one man's political agenda would apply in this situation. But then again you seem to approve of your own agenda, because I have seen you disagree with everyone on every topic you have chimed in on. I commend Darth, at least when we disagree he is cordial enough to back it up with a reasonable explanation. Exactly what is your position on the state of our tactical requirements, I'm curious to hear this.
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY    Evil Fishy...   6/18/2009 2:55:33 PM
Why thank you, I never knew that SecDef cold be replaced by the POTUS...man I AM EVER so glad  you brought that little point to my attention...
 
MY POINT, was that Gates isn't going to be "fired" because he's doing what his boss wants...and to want Gates "fired" is silly, for that very reason.
 
Gates works FOR Obama, no one else...now this is where you start throwing out articles of the Constitution...all of which deal with the POTUS and try to make it seem as if Gates works for the People or some such rot.
 
Gates works for Obama...Orszag at OMB is not too keen on Defense spending, neither is Obama, so Gates is doing what his master wants....and as Obama got over 270 Electoral votes it's all good (please don't try the old that's not the only way you get to be POTUS, as the only time any alternative was used was over 200 years ago-thank you).
 
To recap: no one fires Gates because he's doing his job, and his job is determined by the POTUS and his/her 270 Electorals. It doesn't hurt that Obama's party has control of Congress, so there is even less of a threat to fire someone...though obviously Congress may disagree at, the margins, with defense spending.
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: 1 2 3   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