[rbg81]

I should think the extant c-5s and c-130s should cover our needs....

---

Are you joking? Aircraft DO wear out you know. All through the
1990s, I read how our critical airlift capability was wearing out.
If that’s somehow changed, I must have missed it. I know a C-5 avionics
upgrade was scrapped some years ago.

Do you have any idea how long it takes to procure a new aircraft from scratch? Try
20 years (or more). So...when you actually field one, its important
to get it in the quantities you really need—cause the replacement
won’t be coming anytime soon (if ever).

[Vaquero]

NO I dont know the strategic reason for this particular piece of equipment. or if they can refit existing pieces to serve that purpose....I know we have been refurbishing and re-building B-52 since the early 50s. I love the BUFF.

I was po’d when fighter jets were cut by zer0, like the f-22. I know Reagan and Bush Sr. cut back on certain military uneccessities...even closed bases... We need to cut back things that are not necessary in a recessesion. I know the ‘messiah’ has a political agenda to destroy the military...but I do not necessarily agree that one MATS cargo plane design would be doing that.

[Notary Sojac]

I agree that aircraft need replacing. The question as I see it is, would we get more airlift for the buck by buying more C-130Js, or a smaller number of C-17s?