Comments on: Gates Cuts Leading to ‘Strategic Drawdown:’ Wynne

By: nonito antonio cabato

nonito antonio cabato — Wed, 27 May 2009 03:24:25 +0000

i read about the comment, it make me madder, continue the production of the F-22, the job of the dept. of defense is to give best equptment to the military. you dont sell your top of the line fighterjet to other country, YOU KEEP IT FOR YOURSELF WHEN THE TIME COME to fight

By: khc

khc — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 08:20:47 +0000

When are military leaders and politicians actually learn from history. If we focus all of our efforts on a certain conflict then we are left vulnerable. After WWII the Air Force was focused on Strategic Nuclear warfare. Then Vietnam kicked off and we didn’t know how to fight. After that we focused on Tactical Nuclear warfare and killing Russian Tanks in the Fulda Gap. Then Desert Storm kicked off. We didn’t know how to fight there and had to quickly learn how to fly medium altitude tactics instead of tactical single ship nuclear bombing missions. The problem is that war was not as lethal during Vietnam and the Iraqis gave us time to train and get caught up. War is too fast and too lethal to try to play catch up against 5th generation fighters with DRFM jammers and SA-10/20 SAM systems. All the predators and reapers we buy are useless in a high threat conflict unless we are just going to use them as expensive decoys. If we continue to focus only on the current conflict then we might as well plan on massive loss of American lives if we ever have to defend US interests against a formidable foe. We need a defense secretary who actually has some foresight and will not just let history repeat itself.

By: Bill R.

Bill R. — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 00:12:34 +0000

Just one more comment about this subject: A lot of people ask why the F-22 Raptor is not over in iraq fighting and the answer is that Mr . Gates would not let the AirForce deploy it . The AirForce wanted to, but were told they were not aloud to deploy it. It’s all part of Mr. Gates plan to end the production of the Raptor. His reason was that the Iranians might not like it. ( because they fear the Raptor’s capability) Who gives a … what the Iranians think!! That excuse is a bunch of BS!

By: Bill R.

Bill R. — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 23:50:25 +0000

did you folks read the article in air-attack.com the the F-35 program had been breached most lilly from china , and that terabites of tech. info had been copied. Why spend billions of dollars on R&D when you can just steal it. You would have thought that we would have learned that lesson back in the 1940s with the Russians and the A-Bomb program . WE NEED TO TIGHTEN UP!!

By: Hellfire

Hellfire — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 23:23:36 +0000

after I mean..

and any money that goes to the F-15SE doesn’t go to the F-35, the it would delay the F-35.

By: Hellfire

Hellfire — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 23:18:53 +0000

The F-15SE is a waste.. probably not very stealthy ( ~1 sqm RCS probably ), its LO CFTs don’t carry much, and the a/g CFTs are not stealthy.

The only real solution is a mass production of F-35.

And even if the F-15SE is “good”, it is still not developped, it would take years to finish it and flight test it. That would completly mess up the F-35 program.

The F-35 will reach IOC in 2013, possibly even 2012 with an accelerated plan, so it won’t necessarily be available before the F-15SE.

By: Bill R.

Bill R. — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 14:38:15 +0000

Why in the hell would we buy the F-15SE for 100 million ( Boeing’s sugested price) when we can get the Raptor for 140 million . the Raptor is so far beyond the F-15 in any configuration . As for the person who stated that the raptor ” doesn’t even have any targeting pods to deliver bombs .With the raptors radar it does not need targeting pods , the raptor can localize , fix , and target anything on the ground , it’s radar is that good!! As for Gates ‘s decision to end production of the F-22 the concentrate on F-35 ( bomb truck) , just look at Vietnam when we used a bomb truck ( f-4) for air to air we struggled and if we would have had a more capable fighter it would have saved a lot of lives and who knows the outcome might have been different. Mr. Gates must have forgotten the lessons of Vietnam .

By: Rhyno327

Rhyno327 — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 16:08:05 +0000

I was surprised to read about Boeing’s new F-15SE. It has been kept kind of quiet. Could this be a “stop gap” until the JSF is ready? Why isn’t the Raptor being sold to Japan? We are all concerned with the Chinese, so why not equip the Japanese with the F-22? The ROK airforce is said to be on the list to recieve the new F-15SE, has anyone read about this?

By: Mark

Mark — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 13:50:29 +0000

Dear MUDSHARK,
I don’t know what planet you were on during the Carter years, but I was on active duty flying F4s in the AF…not much flying because Carter reduced O&M money to the point that most of the AF was not combat ready…our accident rates were horrible and it was a tough time to be in the military. There is no partisanship in these facts.…the Carter years were dangerous, his policies allowed US military readiness and capability to sink to unthinkable levels.
You and most supporters of Gates’ defense notions on air combat wouldn’t know an F-pole, from a MAXcl turn to a high yo-yo from the constipating cheese in an MRE. Try an WVR engagement a Su30 armed with an AA11 and a HMS with an F18 and see how that comes out…but you wouldn’t know about that??

By: Cole

Cole — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 06:27:34 +0000

pfcem,

Who cares if the F-15 is old. We required 750 F-15s for air superiority in the Cold War. No comparable Soviet threat of yesteryear exists today or in the future that will drive the need for anywhere near as many air supremacy fighters. Modern fighters and air defense systems numbered in the teens to a few hundred are no threat to the U.S.

For all the crying and nashing of teeth over claimed future threats, one trend remains clear. The U.S. has raised the bar SO HIGH on air supremacy that no other nation (to include the U.S.) can afford to field the fighter numbers that used to be fielded. So why should foes even bother to try to fight us in the air? They know they will lose and their airfields and planes on the ground will be gone in under a week. What a futile waste of money and prestige. That is why the trend has shifted to mobile tactical ballistic missiles…the poor country’s air force.

Look at the defense budgets of the world and see the U.S. far and away the highest at $651 billion…yet even we have trouble fielding and supporting the procurement and O&S costs of our high tech stealth fleet.

Now look at China with just a $70 billion defense budget, about 1/10th of ours. How could they possibly field a fighter as good as ours in any substantial numbers? Same for Russia’s meager $50 billion defense budget. Even if they had the technology, they wouldn’t have the money.

Now look at the MANY MANY allies next highest on the list of substantial defense budgets. These friends will buy F-35s and their own air superiority fighters. These are all good guys who would be on our side in many scenarios against China and Russia. Why are we worried?

After China and Russia, you must get all the way down to Pakistan at number 23 in defense budget spending, with just a $7.8 billion budget…much of which is supplied by the U.S., before you start to run into a potential foe we might face. Number 27 Iran: $6.3 billion. Number 30 North Korea: $5.5 billion and starving. Number 33 Algeria: $5.0 billion. Please tell me how you expect such nations to field a large effective fighter and air defense threats on such meager annual defense budgets?

Ten high tech $100 million stealth fighters would be one billion dollars or roughly 1/5th to 1/6th of most second tier foe’s ENTIRE ANNUAL DEFENSE BUDGET before they train pilots, maintain, and operate those 10 aircraft. It is ridiculous to believe any of those foes could afford a high tech fleet like ours.

Yet many of these smaller threat nations CAN field large standing armies with low paid conscripts on a relatively moderate to small defense budget. These potential foes can afford to practice guerilla and hybrid warfare in threatening their neighbors and attempting to kill us if we should intervene. They can hug civilians and hide in complex terrain to thwart our best airpower efforts.

Quantity once had a quality all its own…before quality made itself invisible to enemy radar and could fire beyond visual range at targets seen from the moment of their take-off. Even quantity in mediocre or outdated form requires billions of dollars our potential foes simply do not have.

By: pfcem

pfcem — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 04:38:24 +0000

Harry Horse,

Quite the opposite, It is VERY clear the F-22 IS needed. The F-15 fleet is already older than it should have ever been allowed to get & air superiority fighters superior the our F-15s are being (& will continue to be) procured by potential adversaries.

CUAV cabable of air-to-air combat are MANY DECADES away

***

PrahaPartizan,

The budget numbers make it so.

Nobody lied about how much the war in Iraq would cost. IF the war had gone according to plan it would not have cost so much. The problem is the Bush administration misjudged the aftermath. The “surge” SHOULD have occured in 2003/2004 rather than 2007 but we wanted to be seen a liberators rather than conquerors.

By: PrahaPartizan

PrahaPartizan — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 03:53:17 +0000

Pfcem, you can go into hysterics and claim that the defense budget is being cut, but that doesn’t make it so. Besides, why did those who supported the war in Iraq lie so much about how little it was going to cost. We had good economists predict that the cost for that war would be at least in the $2 trillion range. Surely those who supported the Iraq war must hate America to have plunged into the war with such forecasts available. They surely didn’t care what would happen to the nation, as we have clearly seen. With that crowd, it’s all politics and the nation be damned. They got their wish.

By: Harry Horse

Harry Horse — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 21:09:25 +0000

It isn’t clear that the F-22 is really needed. We can understand the notional idea of air-to-air combat against other 4th generation aircraft, but our adversaries may have an equivalent number of those aircraft. After all, they are expensive birds. On the other hand, there is no reason why we couldn’t field a UAV with air-to-air capability that certainly could outperform the F-22. The UAV ability to outmaneuver any manned aircraft is a positive factor. UAV control would remain an issue, but can be managed. I haven’t seen the trades involved but a fighter UAV seems possible.

By: pfcem

pfcem — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 19:57:01 +0000

PolicyWonk & MVCO,

Get your facts straight. The defense budget IS being cut.

You are either intellectually dishonest or are being fooled by the ploy of adding what was previously war supplimental spending to the baseline defense budget. So while the final number of the baseline budget is a bit higher than the last the amount being spent on baseline budget items has SIGNIFICANTLY decreased.

By: Walter Martens

Walter Martens — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 18:24:03 +0000

“Jack April 13th, 2009 at 3:33 pm

Ok. If the F22 is that needed why isn’t it fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
”

Because Gates has continually refused to use the aircraft in combat! He’s been against upgrading the fleet all along and doesn’t want to let the aircraft be used in combat thus justifying more purchases.

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/06/30/gates-opposed-af-plans-to-deploy-f-22-to-iraq/

Do a search on the history of the aircraft and when the AF tried to operationally deploy.

We’re heading to a military capability designed around current operations rather than a service than will be able to respond to unknown threats. A Paper Tiger, soon to be challenged.

By: Bill R

Bill R — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 13:03:27 +0000

–to respond tithe person who responded to my comment , I relize that the procurement process needs to be revamped. These large corperation’s CEOs need to stop being so greedy
and put America first & not their bank account. ( maybe sit in on a history lesson subject : Mr Roy Grumman)
As for the F-22 , just spend the extra 50 billion and get 300 more Raptors and in 30 years as in the case of the F-15 we will be saying that was money well spent. I know that 50 billion seems like a lot but in the context of a 986 billion dollar stimlus package what’s another 50 billion going to hurt ., and at least your putting Americans on 48 states to work. They spend 30 billion or more a month in Iraq an we get exactly squat out of that money. (except for body bags filled with great Americans that should not be in them)

By: PLL

PLL — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 04:59:17 +0000

Unfortunately, the Air Force has been asleep for the last decade…but worse of all, it forgot how to dream! Gone are the days of von Karman, Arnold, Doolittle, Lemay, and Schriever. Innovation and technology were focused on faster, higher flying, smarter airplanes. Consider this: today’s fighter and bomber aircraft along with their employment are modern, updated versions of what was fielded 90 years ago in World War I at the birth of aerial combat. Don’t get me wrong, the F-22 is the most capable, exotic airwar machine ever built. But it represents an evolution along a line of air vehicles that represents a continuum without discontinuity. We need to begin growing leaders in the Air Force who are not afraid to think creatively and be willing to exploit the best technology this country has to offer in new and different ways. Very few senior leaders I know or served with have what it takes to risk their careers or reputations the way in the spirit of Mitchell, Spaatz, or Doolittle. The majority are limited by status quo accountability and winning funding to continue programs. It then requires an external force or leadership to say “that’s enough…we need to go a different direction.” Until new leadership appears, you’ll have guys arguing why this or that program is vital to the AF’s future. Carl Builder had it right…the Icarus Syndrome prevails.

All that said…No one does it better!

By: rbrenzelsr

rbrenzelsr — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 02:56:38 +0000

We need not worry about China as a threat. Ya sure. As Hitler marched into Soviet territory in 1941, Russia was transshipping rubber from Indo China to Germany. How could Hitler have cut his own econnomic throat that way???? China has many land ambitions and contro ambitions in its own back yard…Taiwan, Siberia, for ex. With American power projection enfeebled these ambitions may overcome desire for favorable balance of trade with America.
Much earlier, China’s neighbors will reach accomodations, to our detriment.

By: Bernard Miller

Bernard Miller — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 00:02:44 +0000

Why should we expect a foreigner/transplant; socalled self proclaimed ex-muslim make sure this country and our interests are safeguarded?
Consider this why would we make policy to not assassination of government heads when we have always known that it is better to cancel out an oppressor of mankind instead of putting this country in a huge debt by waging massive troop obligations to a country that isn’t doing anything to take back their country themselves. We helped the Aphgans take back their country from the Russians because they were doing everything in their capabilities to do the work. We made major mistakes waging these wars by involving our young men and women (our best of the best next generation) to die in a waste land that values fresh drinking water more than the oil that we made sure we didin’t square the debt by giving the liberating country cheap fuel. We made every mistake that could have been made because we were afraid of looking bad; we had no way out of that problem; we should have made the best of a bad situation and be damned what the others in the world think of us,Soooo we now must give what is left of our assets to the white collar crooks thinking the American public is ignorant when they are among the smartest people on the planet.

To not continue with procuring the latest weapons that the research and development have already been paid for Billions of dollars just to learn what we could add to our defenses only to have the Democrats strip our abilities to defend ourselves and look weak to the rest of the planet; getting our boots peed on by a chihuahua and taking it again. Has it bee so long we forget what Carter did to us; what Clinton did; why should we expect Obama to be different?

The problem with not staying the course when it comes to defense makes it necesasary for us to spend massive amounts of our wealth on defense. We know if we don’t get right and do it now we will see again our children murdered in the back allies of some third world country because the Democrats again raped our ability to defend our children who have always paid the price for this.

How Obama got the money (record breaking dollars obtained) for the campaign and how he swept the election when everyone I spoke to about the election said they were voting Republican, I’ll never know. I think its time to take the lections out of the ballet box and give us the e-adressed pin backup voting capability and stop the ballets sent in by dead folks; and the hanging chads to be scrutinized by those with an agenda counting the ballets. Our current system is suspect.

We need to stay the course; it took years to get us set up to be strong again, don’t stop the machine and finish what we start.

By: armamentsoldier

armamentsoldier — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 22:42:30 +0000

I forget how much money we lost in cost over runs on so called projects that did not work but I think it was well over 100 billion, thats a lot of money. Calling it cost over runs is putting it mildly, I call it thievery. From what I understand those were the projects that were cut and I say good riddance. There is no doubt in my mind that the money will be put in areas that will benefit the troops directly. The
President and the SECDEF made the right decision. The President and the SECDEF have a plan to increase the size of the Army, cutting the budget while increaseing the Military would be.….well, Bushlike, now theres a new word for you, Bushlike!! Heeehehehe Hahahaaaaa!!! any way this President is much smarter than that.