Posted on 04/06/2009 10:52:31 AM PDT by jazusamo
In a blow to Lockheed Martin, the Pentagon has decided to purchase to end funding of the F-22 fighter jet.
The decision by Defense Secretary Robert Gates will rouse widespread opposition in Congress and is likely to bog down the 2010 budget approval process, with F-22 supporters maneuvering to secure more money.
The Pentagon will fund four of the radar-evading stealth fighters in the upcoming 2009 emergency war-spending request, but those additional aircraft will do little to keep the production line in Marietta, Ga., open beyond 2011. Lockheed Martin is the main contractor for the F-22, each of which costs about $140 million.
Gates announced the decision at a press conference on the Defense budget on Monday afternoon.
No money will be requested in the fiscal 2010 budget, congressional and industry sources familiar with the budget briefings told The Hill. Gates has been making calls to the chairmen of the congressional defense committees.
The final F-22 of the 183 currently on order will be delivered at the end of 2011. Building another four would keep the line open for only a few months beyond that end date.
Lockheed Martin and its subcontractors, including Boeing, in recent weeks have stepped up their campaign to keep the production line open. They argue that 25,000 people work directly for the 1,000 suppliers of the F-22 in 44 states, and another 70,000 indirectly owe their jobs to this program.
“You missed my point.”
No zotted troll, everyone got your point quite clearly.
messaih in Chief or Military Industrial Complex?
Personally I would love it if the messiah was put on unemployment.
I agree with each point you made. I will say that McCain’s open ended support for reorientation of military spending made me furious when I read it just now.
You are right. It is early. We do need it for N.S. It’s a very small price to pay when you consider it will be paid for over a decade or two.
This is NOT negotiable IMO.
I don’t know what you saw or heard, but your brushing the AF with that broad brush is not doing you any favors.
That’s the same as me saying that all Marines are jarheads and do nothing but get drunk, start fights and pi$$ in public places. (TO ALL MARINES: IT’s AN ANALOGY!!) Ducking just in case.
I am not going to make any friends or get someone to see my side of a poorly argued position stating something like that even if did have definitive proof. Besides, some Marines may consider that a badge of honor. (JK Marines!).
SZ
I love the Navy, BUT, there are two aircraft I would rather see from the battlefield than anything the Navy has.
OH-58’s followed by A-10’s.
BTW, the Navy has it’s fair share of screw ups, too.
I know you seem to think the Navy can assume the AF’s missions, but, the reason why we have separate forces is because those missions are not mergeable to the degree needed in wartime. Unless, of course, the services were combined, which is what Les Aspin wanted to do.
No offense intended, but you haven’t seen a full “war”, only insurgency (which doesn’t lessen it’s danger or importance). Many of us have seen war, that is, one in which battles actually occur in the air, on land, and at sea.
And even further back in FR history: deep in the hurtgen forest.
Good to see the ‘professor’ got caught out there and tried to squirm out of it.
Hmm....$140 million a copy. If the PEOPLE demanded the bonuses for FANNIE and FREDIE execs were returned, like the AIG execs, that would more than cover the costs of 2 new F-22 Raptors.
Lockheed Martin is up a little over $4 currently at ~$71 a share
They have better things to do then do business with big gubamint, and have adapted well to other opportunities and ventures.
Aye, Gates wants to kill the VH-71. Poetic justice if you ask me, why spend $6.5 billion on a chopper just for the president, when that president wants to gut the military.
In any case, 5 years ago, any negative news about the F-22 would tank LMC, in fact it did once, causing the stock to drop from $70 to the low $40s as I recall, but these days it's all about the F-35. I surmise that the positive news about the F-35 is responsible for that gain.
I hope there are remote/AI air superiority systems in development, because we'll be needing them in the next ten years or so.
Oh, the “loosing jobs” argument smacks of pork barrel and socialism . . .
I have to wonder how well these UAVs will fare when they
come up against a 21st century jammer (my term for
something the enemy must be looking at) which prevents the
remote pilot from communicating with it?
Almost 1/3 of the cost of any millitary hardware system is production and warehousing of the estimated 25 years of spare parts that are produced concurrently with each unit. These costs, R&D and actual delivered unit price are bundled into the final tag.
The F-22 is a “game changer” that simply has no peer in the world of air superiority fighters. Some of the commentary I’ve read here today is quite ignorant of the strategic implications presented by that fact. Air superiority denotes the “high ground” of our time in tactical terms. Those who say that there is no use for such a weapon in an asymmetrical war with “terrorists”, failed states, and detached third-party proxies are simply wrong. Further, it is also foolish to assume that the days of direct confrontation with nation states is forever past. All of the other assets that a modern force might deploy: drones, infantry support helicopters and fixed wing gunships, transports, tankers, and reconaissance planes, all depend upon controlling the airspace. Lightly armed, rapidly deployed, special ops groups that work closely with indigenous groups all require top flight air support. Humanitarian missions and the logistical supply of aid form the air must have an air superiority umbrella. If one cedes the “high ground” it’s real expensive to “buy” it back. The F-22 is a winner worth saving!
Yes, I hate Obama, but 4 more will not make a real-world tactical difference.
Don't worry. Either DC or New York will likely get the first incoming nuke, whether Chinese, Russian, or terrorist.
Cheers!
Spring Break??
He wasn't hesitant at first to bash the Air Force but then realized he'd gone too far and tried to squirm out of it.
Exactly, if this stands we’ll have paid twice the price for half the planes.
Spring boot maybe... LOL
LOLOL, good one. Much quicker mind than mine :)
“So, anyone who’s concerned about the insanely escalating costs of hi-tech military gear is disloyal.
F*** you, colonel.”
No...my point was that on a simular topic...the general opinion ON FR is 180 concerning union made goods.
Tanks, ships, guns, bullets, uniforms, and planes are fine.
American made cars...are not.
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.