Fate of the F-22 to be decided on Monday.. - DFWstangs Forums
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 19 (permalink) Old 04-04-2009, 08:35 PM Thread Starter
WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS!
 
Sgt Beavis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Lake Dallas, TX
Posts: 10,859
Fate of the F-22 to be decided on Monday..

http://www.ajc.com/services/content/...svc=7&cxcat=13

Quote:
The fate of the F-22 Raptor fighter jet, assembled in Cobb County by 2,000 workers, should be revealed Monday when Defense Secretary Robert Gates unveils “a fundamental shift” in U.S. military priorities.

The Pentagon is alerting key members of Congress this weekend about plans to shrink spending on expensive weapons systems, including the technologically superior F-22. Gates, no big fan of the stealth fighter, will lay out 2010 budget priorities at the Monday afternoon Pentagon press conference.

“These are not changes to the margins,” Defense Department spokesman Geoff Morrell told reporters Friday. “This is a fundamental shift.”

Morrell offered no details. But Gates has recently made clear that high-tech weapons better suited for Cold War battles aren’t top budgetary priorities while low-tech conflicts continue in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The Pentagon has contracted to buy 183 F-22s from the Lockheed Martin Corp. More than 140 have been built. Each plane costs a minimum of $150 million but adding in research and development expeses over 20 years can more than double the price. Current orders would keep the Marietta assembly line open until late 2011.

Rob Fuller, a Lockheed Martin spokesman for the F-22 program, said Saturday it was “premature” to speculate on what Gates will recommend.

But the recession, which has slashed five million payroll jobs, could prove the F-22’s savior. Roughly 25,000 workers in Georgia, California and Texas supply parts and assemble the jet fighter. President Barack Obama might be loath to endanger any more jobs.

“A lot of people find that argument persuasive,” said defense analyst John Pike. “And, as a practical matter, there’s only a finite number of things the Executive branch can change in a budget without Congress putting it back in.”

U.S. Sens. Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson and Rep. Phil Gingrey, all Republicans from Georgia, couldn’t be reached for comment Saturday.

“We’re cautiously optimistic that Monday will be a favorable day for the F-22,” said Chris Jackson, the spokesman for Gingrey whose district includes the Marietta aircraft plant.

We're Adopting. Contact us through our website.

http://www.theboyetts.com

You can also LIKE us on Facebook
Sgt Beavis is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 19 (permalink) Old 04-04-2009, 08:45 PM
Lifer
 
Trip McNeely's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 29,396
Slowly disarming ourselves while the rest of the world ramps up its arms.

CANADIANS = DOUCHERS

Trip McNeely is offline  
post #3 of 19 (permalink) Old 04-04-2009, 08:49 PM
DFWMUSTANGS.NET
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,635
Yea great, let's stop building the best fighter jet in the world. You know, the one that keeps our pilots and ours and our combat airspace safe. The one that makes our enemies tremble for the simple fact that they cannot see the damn thing coming, The one that costs millions to build for a damn good reason. TO KEEP OUR SUPERIORITY IN THE WORLD.

Yea, let's put all that money into more pork projects like gardens, pig fart research, and whatever the fuck pelosi wants to fly in that day, THAT COSTS TENS OF BILLIONS!


Yea, priorities are definately in the right place there guys.
sc281_99-0135 is offline  
 
post #4 of 19 (permalink) Old 04-04-2009, 08:51 PM
Lifer
 
Trip McNeely's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 29,396
Obama wants us to be one with the world now. Socialism for everyone. Like he was proclaiming we should apologize for being arrogant and mean in the past. He thinks Americans are too proud apparently.

CANADIANS = DOUCHERS

Trip McNeely is offline  
post #5 of 19 (permalink) Old 04-04-2009, 08:58 PM Thread Starter
WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS!
 
Sgt Beavis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Lake Dallas, TX
Posts: 10,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip McNeely View Post
Slowly disarming ourselves while the rest of the world ramps up its arms.
I'm not 100% on board with that statement.

For one, the F-22 WAS conceived for a Cold War mission. I believe it can be adapted for the missions we currently run but that costs even more money.

The F-35 seems to have full support, costs less, and is easily adaptable for all sorts of missions. It is also exportable, which helps keep costs down. One of the drawbacks to the F-22 is that Congress has forbidden the exportation of it. They wouldn't even allow them to go to Japan or Britain with a lot of the avionics stripped out.

But, as stated in the article, I think the F-22 is going to live on to fight another day. Those jobs/votes are pretty important to Obama. They'll most likely just cut the number of F-22s they are going to build...

Oh, one other factor that might go into consideration. The F-15 is a really old bird and MUST be replaced but Boeing just rolled out a prototype for the F-15 "Silent Eagle". It is an F-15 with 5th generation fighter avionics, internal weapons bays and radar absorbent coatings. Boeing says that the upgrades can be made to existing F-15s and a brand new one will cost $100million per copy. That's a lot cheaper than the F-22..

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...eneration.html

We're Adopting. Contact us through our website.

http://www.theboyetts.com

You can also LIKE us on Facebook
Sgt Beavis is offline  
post #6 of 19 (permalink) Old 04-04-2009, 10:16 PM
Out
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 41,952
Quote:
“a fundamental shift” in U.S. military priorities.
Hold on, Sarge. Don't take this statement too lightly.

I still think we need to be on the cutting edge as awlways. I'm not down with polishing up an old F-15. What are we? Iraq with regurgitated Migs? Fuck a bunch o that shit. Our forces ca benefit from these later model aircraft. This should not be the time to go to the clearence rack at Wal-Mart.

I'm afraid that our CiC might feel better with "good enough" though.

Last edited by Denny; 04-04-2009 at 10:21 PM.
Denny is offline  
post #7 of 19 (permalink) Old 04-04-2009, 10:36 PM Thread Starter
WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS!
 
Sgt Beavis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Lake Dallas, TX
Posts: 10,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denny View Post
Hold on, Sarge. Don't take this statement too lightly.

I still think we need to be on the cutting edge as awlways. I'm not down with polishing up an old F-15. What are we? Iraq with regurgitated Migs? Fuck a bunch o that shit. Our forces ca benefit from these later model aircraft. This should not be the time to go to the clearence rack at Wal-Mart.

I'm afraid that our CiC might feel better with "good enough" though.
I think that is more of a valid view. However, do remember that we already have over 140 F-22s in operation right now and that will eventually be 183 (those are a lock). The question is what do we do beyond that. An existing cap limits production to 277 but no contracts have been signed for those extra 94 fighters. Nothing is planned beyond those.

I think, actually I hope, that the administration decides to reduce the production rate so that the line is kept open. However, I'm not totally sure what options are open to the administration. I think there is also an outside chance that the administration will try to get Congressional approval for F-22 exports to Japan. IMO that would be a nice slap on NKorea and China.

We're Adopting. Contact us through our website.

http://www.theboyetts.com

You can also LIKE us on Facebook
Sgt Beavis is offline  
post #8 of 19 (permalink) Old 04-04-2009, 11:54 PM
Token Troll
 
GhostTX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sherman
Posts: 4,101
Quote:
But the recession, which has slashed five million payroll jobs, could prove the F-22’s savior. Roughly 25,000 workers in Georgia, California and Texas supply parts and assemble the jet fighter. President Barack Obama might be loath to endanger any more jobs.
I think that part of the article will make the whole announcement very interesting. Big chunk of that 25K is blue collar, union folk, too, I imagine.

'05 Redfire Mustang

"Self-government won't work without self-discipline." - Paul Harvey
GhostTX is offline  
post #9 of 19 (permalink) Old 04-05-2009, 06:17 AM
07 TBSS
 
636ryder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: FTW
Posts: 1,714
Those upgrades for the strike eagle are neat. The only problem is overtime the A/C frame itself will start to get stress fractures. So spend 100mil to cover say another 10yrs to save $ now? Wouldn't be the best decision, might as well go through with the new airframes and equipment and let it last for another 30yrs.

07 TBSS mods inc
636ryder is offline  
post #10 of 19 (permalink) Old 04-05-2009, 02:20 PM
NOT the Oldest Fart HERE
 
jyro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Midlothian, Tx
Posts: 4,427
the 100 mil was for new F-15's

Quote:
Originally Posted by 636ryder View Post
Those upgrades for the strike eagle are neat. The only problem is overtime the A/C frame itself will start to get stress fractures. So spend 100mil to cover say another 10yrs to save $ now? Wouldn't be the best decision, might as well go through with the new airframes and equipment and let it last for another 30yrs.
" Boeing says that the upgrades can be made to existing F-15s and a brand new one will cost $100million per copy."


they didn't give a price to upgrade the old ones, just said they could
jyro is offline  
post #11 of 19 (permalink) Old 04-05-2009, 02:30 PM
you stinky bitch
 
inline 6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: go fuck yourself
Posts: 3,728
The capability of the F-22 is outrageous. To scrap it would be a huge mistake.

Best something in Texas.... just don't know what it is yet....
inline 6 is offline  
post #12 of 19 (permalink) Old 04-06-2009, 06:28 AM
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 10,554
So... it's nearly tuesday...... wassup wit dat?
Saladbar is offline  
post #13 of 19 (permalink) Old 04-06-2009, 09:15 AM
Lifer
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,089
if they dont spend the money to upgrade the F-15, then they still have to spend the money to down grade the F-15. Even the outdated F-15 still has millions of dollars in classified systems, and they can not be left on the jets if they are replaced.

still the problem comes down to this: the money to build more F-22s is not in the current budget, so how are you going to pay for it? Obama will likely want to print a few more dollars and keep the program, while fiscal conservatives will probably oppose any new spending.

cannonball996 is offline  
post #14 of 19 (permalink) Old 04-06-2009, 09:28 AM
Worship me
 
AL P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 34,345
I think 180 of them is more than enough. It will be interesting to see if the situation with jobs changes how the Dems handle this.
AL P is offline  
post #15 of 19 (permalink) Old 04-06-2009, 12:02 PM
not exclude
 
exlude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 9,838
I think the AF has too gd much money anyway. Considering the current conflicts we are in, I think the money would be better spent on Land Warrior type projects. Making our boots on the ground deadlier would have a greater affect.
exlude is offline  
post #16 of 19 (permalink) Old 04-06-2009, 02:58 PM
Token Troll
 
GhostTX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sherman
Posts: 4,101
Quote:
Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Monday recommended a broad range of budgetary cuts to high-tech weapons programs, including production of the F-22 fighter jet.

In a move that won mixed reviews from lawmakers on Capitol Hill, 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.

He called for production of the F-22 jet to stop at 187 jets. The U.S. military has 183 jets in service now,
so just four more would be funded as part of the fiscal 2009 supplemental budget if President Obama approves the recommendations. The planes cost $140 million each.

Lockheed Martin has already warned that ending this production would result in the loss of more than 90,000 jobs.


Plans to build a new helicopter for the president and a helicopter to rescue downed pilots would also 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.

To fight new threats from insurgents, Gates is proposing more funding for special forces and other tools.

"In many ways, my recommendations represent a cumulative outcome of a lifetime spent in the national security arena -- but above all, questions asked, experience gained and lessons learned from over two years of leading this department, and in particular, from our experience in Iraq and Afghanistan," Gates said.

He said his recommendations would "profoundly reform" the way the Defense Department does business.

"We must re-balance this department's programs in order to institutionalize and finance our capabilities to fight the wars we are in today and the scenarios we are most likely to face in the years ahead, while at the same time providing a hedge against other risks and contingencies," he said.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the 2008 GOP presidential nominee, said in a written statement that Gates' plan was a "major step in the right direction."

"It has long been necessary to shift spending away from weapon systems plagued by scheduling and cost overruns to ones that strike the correct balance between the needs of our deployed forces and the requirements for meeting the emerging threats of tomorrow," he said.

But Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., in YouTube video posted on his Senate Web site, said he was "very disappointed" Obama was preparing to cut back the military budget in a time of war, while he's increasing spending everywhere else.

"I can't believe what we heard today," he said. "Right now we have our men and women in uniform, in harm's way, and we hear an announcement we're gutting ... our military."

Inhofe and five other senators sent a letter to Obama opposing what they called "deep cuts in U.S. missile defense programs that are critically important to protecting our homeland and our allies against the growing threat of ballistic missiles."

The promised emphasis on budget paring is a reversal from the Bush years, which included a doubling of the Pentagon's spending since 2001.

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.

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.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/firs...pons-programs/

I can kind of understand cutting back the F-22, since already our air force pretty much owns the skies. F-35 is good to go. But cutting back the missile shield and Obama declaring we'll be getting rid of our nukes. That's just inviting a 2-bit dictator to shoot nukes at us.

'05 Redfire Mustang

"Self-government won't work without self-discipline." - Paul Harvey
GhostTX is offline  
post #17 of 19 (permalink) Old 04-06-2009, 05:26 PM
Lifer
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,089
I got to think its the right move for right now...as for the missile shield, I was a proponent of this for years, but they have just not been able to get the results they wanted on this. Several companies have been charging the US government billions over the past 10 years to develop this system, yet the success rate has not been high.

cannonball996 is offline  
post #18 of 19 (permalink) Old 04-06-2009, 05:28 PM
CJ
User may be editing post.
 
CJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 12,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by cannonball996 View Post
I got to think its the right move for right now...as for the missile shield, I was a proponent of this for years, but they have just not been able to get the results they wanted on this. Several companies have been charging the US government billions over the past 10 years to develop this system, yet the success rate has not been high.
think about the consequences if the missile shield fails to intercept because of cutbacks.
CJ is offline  
post #19 of 19 (permalink) Old 04-06-2009, 06:35 PM Thread Starter
WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS!
 
Sgt Beavis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Lake Dallas, TX
Posts: 10,859
a few points.

1. All these proposals have to get through Congress. I'm betting they'll have a harder time killing the F-22 than they might think. Lockheed did a good job of spreading production out to a multitude of states. Georgia is just the final assembly point.
2. Speeding up the F-35 is a good thing. Especially for DFW where the plane is assembled.
3. can 187 F-22 fighters replace the 500+ F-15s? I know it is damn good but is it THAT damn good?
4. I'm totally onboard with more predators. It has proven itself to be extremely effective.
5. I didn't understand why the AF needed an new search and rescue helo. What is wrong with the H60?
6. Like Obama or not, the aircraft at HMX-1 are VERY OLD. A replacement is needed. Just not a $13BILLION one.
7. Lockheed Martin is bullshitting when they say killing the F-22 will cost 90,000 jobs.
8. Gates is right that Pentagon acquisitions needs a total fuckin' overhaul. Having that many projects that far over budget is pathetic.

We're Adopting. Contact us through our website.

http://www.theboyetts.com

You can also LIKE us on Facebook
Sgt Beavis is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Bookmarks

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the DFWstangs Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome