Posted on 04/08/2005 4:20:50 AM PDT by Paul Ross
|
Meanwhile, Donald Rumsfeld needs to have a Come-to-Jesus talk with the Armed Forces committee. These deliberately-inefficient-and costly program limits are clearly arbitrary and not driven by defense needs. He seems to be missing the big picture...missing forest for the trees...and all this while he is in the swamp up to his ass in alligators.
"...in the swamp up to his ass in alligators."
Ouch, that's gonna leave a mark.
Ping
This article flies in the face of the fact that a congressional comittee just about a week ago gave the go ahead for full rate production.
I recall a story some time ago by some anti trade 'Conservatives' in the house trying to keep all parts of the aircraft built in America. I'm not sure if this bill passed or not, it was quite a stupid idea, cuz there were some companies that made specific parts that were the only companies in the world that did so (and they weren't american).
Translation: American fighters, despite their supposed superiority, will cost too much. Buy our French Rafale and Mirage planes instead!
Expensive stuff is expensive.
If you'll recall, the "strike capability" was added in order to protect the F-22 from the budget-cutter's axe the last time the project was seriously threatened... Now it can't be undone.
In point of fact, there is no "technology" in these aircraft that is not invented here. Inclusive of plane tires, one of the primary things no longer manufactured here at all. Manufacturing outside the country is merely a political sop to the foreign customer-prospects. The JSF is the worst offender, as it was explicitly intended to be a huge export, unlike the F-22.
Duncan Hunter is a patriot. The Cato organization isn't known for being terribly concerned about such. Too doctrinnaire.
These R&D programs are long term and very expensive. Not to say that our development programs don't contain a lot of fat, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater!
Failure to maintain a technological superiority will cost us in lives of our forces in future conflicts. Iran, North Korea and China are watching ... and waiting.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AFA is an independent, nonprofit organization promoting public understanding of air and space power. SEARCH | CONTACT US | MEMBERS | EVENTS | JOIN AFA | HOME |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Critics frequently imply that $200 million is the Raptor's "sticker price"-what it will cost to buy each new F-22 from this point forward. The chart shows that flyaway cost (excluding sunk costs and inflation) comes to $85 million per F-22-not much more than what would be spent for a new, but far less capable, F-15E.
This is a GAO report just released this week. Anyways, what are you claiming is "full rate" production nowadays? 180 planes total...(Rummy's farcical new number) or the original buy of 750?
If its U.S. forces on the ground it is under U.S. air cover... and if it isn't, it soon won't be on the ground! :-)
Who knows what is in the works? It is quite possible that work on a new unmanned fighter/attack plane is being developed that will make these aircraft obsolete, and the money could be used more effeciently elsewhere.
This is the same thing I have read with every fighter program this country has ever developed for over 40 years. Blah...blah...blah...and the next thing you know they are deployed to fighter wings, and they are considered the premier fighters by the world. In the end the military brass will get it figured out, and our fighting men and women will again have jets that will be dominant for decades.
I saw that article to. You are 100% correct.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.