070409-N-6247M-038 WHIDBEY ISLAND, Wash. (April 9, 2007) - EA-18G Growler is parked on the airfield next to an EA-6B Prowler. The EA-18G Growler landed at the Naval Air Station Whidbey Ishland for the first time. The EA-18 Growler is being developed to replace the fleet's current carrier-based EA-6B Prowler. The next-generation electronic attack aircraft, for the U.S. Navy, combines the combat-proven F/A-18 Super Hornet with a state-of-the-art electronic warfare avionics. The EA-18G is expected to enter initial operational capability in 2009. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Bruce McVicar (RELEASED)
070409-N-6247M-027 WHIDBEY ISLAND, Wash. (April 9, 2007) - An EA-18G Growler lands at Naval Air Station Whidbey Island for the first time. The Growler is being developed to replace the fleet's current carrier-based EA-6B Prowler. The next-generation electronic attack aircraft for the U.S. Navy, combines the combat-proven F/A-18 Super Hornet with state-of-the-art electronic warfare avionics. The EA-18G is expected to enter initial operational capability in 2009. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Bruce McVicar (RELEASED)
To: A.A. Cunningham
“Until Monday, the Navy had planned to purchase and operate only 88 EA-18G Growlers to replace the aging EA-6B Prowlers.”
So, had the Navy wanted more, or is this “unexpected” ?
2 posted on
02/08/2010 2:57:37 AM PST by
PLMerite
(Ride to the sound of the Guns - I'll probably need help.)
To: A.A. Cunningham
I despise hearing these b@!#ards talk about supporting local jobs when it comes to doing what is right with our national defense. We need qualified workers to be able to build our high tech defenses, but jobs should be secondary to our nations defense and should never be mentioned by a congress critter.
4 posted on
02/08/2010 3:34:16 AM PST by
FreeAtlanta
(Don't settle for less than fresh roasted coffee!)
To: A.A. Cunningham
0’s priorities seems screwed up. Surely the keeping the F-22 line running would have been a better use of the money than *26* additional electronic warfare aircraft?!?
I thought the argument used for axing the F-22 was that we’re not fighting a high-tech enemy... (Not that it held water, but let’s be consistent.) What’s the justification for these white elephants, exactly?
0 lives up to his name, again.
7 posted on
02/08/2010 5:16:53 AM PST by
PreciousLiberty
(In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they're not.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson