US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

The_Zergling · Apr 7, 2009

Fully fund troop increases for Army/Marine Corps and stop reductions in Air Force/Navy
Increase medical R&D spending by $400 million
Increase military health care spending by $300 million
Increase family support funding by $200 million

This is absolutely crucial, good job.

In addition, I found one of Gates' remarks interesting:

First, this department must consistently demonstrate the commitment and leadership to stop programs that significantly exceed their budget or which spend limited tax dollars to buy more capability than the nation needs. Our conventional modernization goals should be tied to the actual and prospective capabilities of known future adversaries – not by what might be technologically feasible for a potential adversary given unlimited time and resources.

While I don't think the defense program industry will change significantly in the near future, it's good to see Gates accurately hit the problem. It seems that what has been going on is that those developing requirements have been consulting military labs to find out what is supposedly state-of-the-art, and then they write up the document to authorize the funding, rather than actually review intelligence assessments and develop requirements grounded in current and future combat scenarios.

Obviously, preparing for the future is essential, but the manner in which a nation does so must be scrutinized...

adeptitus · Apr 8, 2009

Jeff Head said:
Well, IMHO, not building at least 400 F-22s is a mistake

TerraN_EmpirE said:
F22 should have hit 300+

bd popeye said:
I agree with Jeff although I think 250 or so F-22 is enough..

XD You guys are under-cutting each other quicker than Gates!

Seriously, folks, no potential US adversary has anything close to the F/A-22, and the up-coming PAK-FA and J-XX will probably only match up to F-35 class. The US is planning to acquire 2,458 F-35's, which will likely out-number the next generation fighter acquisitions of Russia, China, and India COMBINED. The F-35 is pretty much ready for production while the PAK-FA hasn't made its maiden flight yet.

I know some people feel that closing the F-22 production after 183 planes is like breaking your own sword. But please consider the 2,400+ spears being ordered. Your men will still leave the castle well equipped.

Husar · Apr 8, 2009

adeptitus said:
The F-35 is pretty much ready for production

According to you I'm guessing because it's news to most analysts I've read.

But please consider the 2,400+ spears being ordered.

It's years away from entering service and already there's thousands of them

I'm willing to bet that this cut to defense is just the beginning.....

bd popeye · Apr 8, 2009

Increase medical R&D spending by $400 million
Increase military health care spending by $300 million
Increase family support funding by $200 million

Honnestly..this is nothing new. In the past when more funds are needed for health care they are usually pulled from other programs.

Jeff Head · Apr 8, 2009

adeptitus said:
XD You guys are under-cutting each other quicker than Gates!

Seriously, folks, no potential US adversary has anything close to the F/A-22, and the up-coming PAK-FA and J-XX will probably only match up to F-35 class. The US is planning to acquire 2,458 F-35's, which will likely out-number the next generation fighter acquisitions of Russia, China, and India COMBINED. The F-35 is pretty much ready for production while the PAK-FA hasn't made its maiden flight yet.

I know some people feel that closing the F-22 production after 183 planes is like breaking your own sword. But please consider the 2,400+ spears being ordered. Your men will still leave the castle well equipped.

The F-35 is a very good aircraft, but was not designed to be an air superiority aircraft. It is a multi-role aircraft that is stealthy and will allow for ground support in addition to its air to air capabilities. It also has much shorter legs.

Originally the F-22 was going to 800 aircraft or so and a lot of the cost increase in the aircraft is associated with the development cost now being meted out over 187 units.

I do not think we need 800 at this point, but we need a lot more than 187 to cover all of the needs faced by the US Air Force around the world (and I stand by the 400 number), and particularly in case a shooting war with a nation state possessing large numbers of 4th or 4.5 generation fighters ever breaks out. With 100 F-22 available in such a conflict...for the mid term at the very least, not only air superiority, but air dominance would be maintained, even with vastly larger numbers arrayed against the F-22s and its complimentary aircraft.

The same may not be the case for the F-35 IMHO...particularly against newer designs coupled with hundreds of SU-30 type aircraft.

Anyhow, that's just my opinion, and that technical defense issue is the primary focus...the economic side of it is an issue that would necessarily comes along with the primary concern if it were addressed.

TerraN_EmpirE · Apr 8, 2009

The F22 was supposed too replace the F15 now the USAF operates some where around 660 F15's ( all models) of that About 230 are F15Echo type Attackers leavening about 430 Air superiority versions. Now because of Costs of F22 Would prevent full replacement of all the air Superiority F15's but 300 would replace all the active duty leaving About 130 Air National Guard units in service until Americas next super fighter comes About sometime in the 2040's. and on the bottom of that Argument I place a pile of around 10000 American Pink slips from all Fifty states.

the F35 is a strike fighter It's capable of Air too air combat but it's still not a full match for the newer and now becoming more available versions of the Flanker series as well as other new threat aircraft besides as proven in the gulf war if you want true Success in modern combat You want a One Sided Domination not a equal Slug fest More and More Fourth Gen fighter are becoming the standard where third and second are fading as did the first.
Although A good concept and needed in numbers It's much like Removing the Aggressors form the USAF back in the 1990's a sign that American Air power is being groomed for bombing more then fighting. And We may not have as nice a cake walk in the future as we have had.

FCS is Not A conventional Military Tank Force, we already have that In Spades
FCS is a more mobile lighter wight force designed too engage based on a rapid deployment like, peace keeping operations or humanitarian needs where in a Force needs too be on the Ground sooner then latter. the weight of the current force impedes that it takes weeks too get American M1 Abrams Tanks from the US any where unless you Sacrifice numbers and load tow at a time in C5's and C17's

C17 Cutbacks are not some thing I will argue about after all with the next 15 were looking at about 205 of the movers. Although I Think the US should Really more actively Try too Sell them abroad and allow greater numbers for export. A number of nations have shown interest.

One foolish thing it the new Pres Chopper is only being held off on by one year. The chopper should IMO have it's Throat slashed. the Current force of Vh3's and Vh60's is doing fine in the job.

Finn McCool · Apr 8, 2009

Personally I don't cry too much for the F-22 program. IIRC they aren't closing the production line, they could probably up the numbers up to 200 when the economy improves or higher in the event of war. Furthermore, you can't have everything. The government has to prioritize. The days when we could spend any amount on anything are over.

I was surprised that the C-17s were cut. That, in my opinion, is a good program, and the heavy airlift capability is a crucial part of the lighter/more irregular warfare-capable force Gates seems to be trying to tool for here. I agree with Terran Empire, they should have kept them and opened them up for export.

The Presidential helicopters should be cut altogether, they are unecessary and they were going to build 28 of them. I thought that was a typo when I first read it.

Ultimately you have to prioritze and judge the likelihood that these weapons will ever be used. Yes, a war with China or Russia is a possibility, and its important to prepare for one, but it's not likely to the point where we need to slavishly devote massive sums to the military-industrial complex at a time when the government is deeply in debt.

PS: The communication and informational awareness parts of the FCS system were kept intact. That is IMO the most important part of the project and is most applicable to both large scale conventional and irregular warfare.

adeptitus · Apr 8, 2009

Husar said:
According to you I'm guessing because it's news to most analysts I've read.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

ORLANDO, Fla., Feb. 26 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- In a single calendar year, the Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT - News) F-35 Lighting II program will complete all remaining System Development and Demonstration aircraft, deliver the first production-model F-35s to the armed services and initiate full-scale flight test operations at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., and Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md.

SampanViking · Apr 9, 2009

Its still only an aspiration, Adeptitus no matter who confidently it is stated,

My own view on the Budget as posted in another place

You can read the details of what is being proposed and cut in the budget almost anywhere on the net, but I find very little real analysis, so here is a contribution from moi to even the score.

There can be little doubt that this budget is the beginning of a long slow and multi faceted process, that will probably last longer than a two term presidency. What we are looking at then is an initial response to a Military and its associated Industrial Complex that has too long been allowed to run out of control. If you use the analogy of a stampeding Cattle herd, then the first task is to bring it under control so you can see exactly which problems you need to deal with. This is what this budget does by turning the most obvious runaway projects and drawing all other strands closer together. This should explain why the budget is actually an increase in raw dollar terms but deals with limits and scrappings in its substance.

There are also the "Off Balance Sheet items" to deal with. The Announcement of the withdrawal from Iraq is no doubt budget driven and equally a precursor for Afghanistan in a few years time. Likewise the offer to Russia to reduce Nuclear warheads must also be seen in this light. Storing and Maintaining these Warheads is expensive and losing them will offer substantial savings. The warheads can also be used as Fuel for Nuclear Power stations and offer a secondary saving not to mention Carbon Offset.

Downsizing of the sort we are going to see during the next decade is a delicate process and much International diplomacy will be about managing the effects of the US retracting its presence in many areas. Washington also needs to be careful about the domestic impact of cuts and unemployment through cancellations and demob.

There is another element of control that Barak Obama seems to have carried out successfully, which is the asserting of his control over the DOD and some senior Commanders that seemed only to happy to play a reckless game of global brinkmanship in order to preserve the Gravy Train and Pork Barrel policies. The first sign was the annual report on the armed forces of the Peoples Republic of China, which was quickly followed by the Korean Missile Crisis. It appears that Obama has faced down these people and whatever they may have been prepared to carry through on (i.e. shooting down the Korean Missile and starting a new Korean War!).

If we are lucky Obama will be the Gorbachov of America and understand the underlying reality of his situation and help facilitate the smooth transition from the unipolar moment to multipolarity.

Scratch · Apr 9, 2009

If I'm not mistaken, this proposal would mean a 4 % growth of the budget. So there is actually more money. Even in real terms if I'm correct.
So if there are to be more F-22, ABL, GBI, pres. Helos, FCS vehicles, DDG-1000, CG(X) and so on, wich other defence programs should be terminated?
Because I don't think there's enough money to have it all together.

What hasn't been mentioned so far (I think), is that the navy will also get more SuperHornets to fill a supposed gap until the JSF comes into service.
As I unnderstand it the pres. Helo program will actually be completely terminated, and be restared new in a year. Meaning new competition. Again, if I got that point correct.
And lots of UAVs for a more and more "complete" coverage are very helpfull I think.

US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

The_Zergling

Junior Member

adeptitus

Captain

Husar

New Member

bd popeye

The Last Jedi

Jeff Head

General

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King

Finn McCool

Captain

adeptitus

Captain

SampanViking

The Capitalist

Scratch

Captain