This is breaking news. No one has ever thought that this could possibly happen.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
F-35B/C Lightning II (Joint Strike Fighter)
- Thread starter jai5w4
- Start date
Au Contraire, it's been a subject of debate and contention almost from the start. Then RADM Nathman (as N88) proposed to DC Air (LTGEN McCorkle) that the USMC squadrons commited to operating aboard aircraft carriers be equipped with F-35C and the Navy expeditionary squadrons that deploy to Okinawa be equipped with F-35B. At that time, USMC wanted 100% F-35B. Later, GEN Newland (as ACMC) revived the discussion as part of the epic Navy/Marine Corps TACAIR Integration Study led by WBB and briefed out to SECNAV, which ultimately impacted the 2004 Budget.
slug
Member
It is amazing to me that the budget for the development program of the F-35 is greater than the entire budget for the USCG.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/27/opinion/27korb.html?th&emc=th
This is not an "anti F-35" post. I think it is a sweet a/c and desperately needed to replace at least the aging USMC Harriers. But it shocks me that the Obama administration has increased the budgets for all military services except the USCG, being reduced by 3%. Personally I think our govt. could save much more money by cutting programs in the AF and Navy than by cutting the measly $10 billion USCG budget. Oh well, back to doing more with less, saving lives with a shoestring.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/27/opinion/27korb.html?th&emc=th
This is not an "anti F-35" post. I think it is a sweet a/c and desperately needed to replace at least the aging USMC Harriers. But it shocks me that the Obama administration has increased the budgets for all military services except the USCG, being reduced by 3%. Personally I think our govt. could save much more money by cutting programs in the AF and Navy than by cutting the measly $10 billion USCG budget. Oh well, back to doing more with less, saving lives with a shoestring.
While on the subject of JSF's "restructure," the Pentagon's Comptroller says we may buy fewer jets if the costs keep skyrocketing. Talk about a chicken and egg scenario. We buy fewer jets, unit flyaway costs continue through the roof, Allied buyers (with infinitesimal budgets) get skittish, and then what???
http://www.navytimes.com/news/2010/03/defense_jsf_costs_030310w/
http://www.navytimes.com/news/2010/03/defense_jsf_costs_030310w/
So subtle we all missed it? Now that's graduate level sarcasm!
Do expeditionary Navy squadrons exist already? Or would that have been some kind of restructuring?
Do expeditionary Navy squadrons exist already? Or would that have been some kind of restructuring?
The Navy & Naval Air (and Marines) are expeditionary and always have been. That's why we are the Sea Services and not the f%&king Army & Air Force!
The Navy & Naval Air (and Marines) are expeditionary and always have been. That's why we are the Sea Services and not the f%&king Army & Air Force!
Just watch, everyone: the F-35 development program is going to become a big Charlie Foxtrot w/in a year or so. The costs of the program are going to balloon hugely & the per unit cost of the a/c will move to $100MM - as opposed to the $60MM per a/c now advertised. The AF, Marines & Navy will get about half the original, planned numbers & foreign sales will shrink by half as well. With the latest announcement, it'll be 2017 before the Navy starts getting C models. A 2-yr slip overnight is a big slip in a program that was supposed to be on-schedule & slightly over-budget. I think there's a lot of bad news here that the Pentagon & LM are keeping from the public. Only good thing in all this is that it will get the Navy another 100 or more Super Hornets. Hopefully, it'll get the AF 100+ Block 60 F-16s to make up the difference in numbers. JMHO, as I'm not an insider.
So, the typical deal where the price is so high that everyone cuts their buy, so the per unit price goes up even more, and we cut the buy again. So eventually we'll have spent many years and billions of dollars to get a hundred or so of these things, just like the F-22.
We need to either fish or cut bait, shit or get off the pot, screw or take off the condom, or whatever hackneyed phrase you prefer. Either buy the whole lot or just admit that it was a waste, cancel it entirely and fill this generation of fighter development with upgrades of current aircraft while we await the coming of our robot overlords....uh, I mean better UCAVs.
We need to either fish or cut bait, shit or get off the pot, screw or take off the condom, or whatever hackneyed phrase you prefer. Either buy the whole lot or just admit that it was a waste, cancel it entirely and fill this generation of fighter development with upgrades of current aircraft while we await the coming of our robot overlords....uh, I mean better UCAVs.
