Betraying Our Troops

[Laxman]

Nice for a ground pounders perspective. But he doesnt know anything about an airwar. I cant speak for the Navy and their pursuit of a new destroyer. But the airforce does need to upgrade to a new generation of aircraft. Its sad when I step to a fighter thats older than the crew chief working on it. You can only do so much with a tired jet. Marines against the China threat would still require airsupport from the AF and the Navy. And no, we are not 2 generations ahead of most countries in terms of fighters. KMart - Have you ever had the opportunity to see a -22 in action? It'd water your eyes but then again you dont seem to care about tomorrows pilots going to war anyways

 

[K-Mart]

But the airforce does need to upgrade to a new generation of aircraft.

I agree. Let's buy one that is cheaper and buy more.

Marines against the China threat would still require airsupport from the AF and the Navy.

I really don't know what our doctrine calls for but with Chinas size it probably involves a big bomb. Plus remember who is always deploying out to Guam for practice. B-52's, B-2'2 etc.....

KMart - Have you ever had the opportunity to see a -22 in action? It'd water your eyes but then again you dont seem to care about tomorrows pilots going to war anyways

I do, I am one of them. Just want to spend the money wisely. Our doctrine on how we fight wars is slowing changing to keep pace with a new world threat. I don't see why an F-22 is all that important. Seriously, do really think we are going to need to fly that thing into China???? or how about Russia??? Where then?? Iran...??? Oh well, it would be a good thesis analyzing this aircraft at that place down in Montgomery. Then again, there probably is several who already have.



.......

 

[RVSM]

IMHO the pentagon is trying to reach its recruiting goals by simpling getting rid of the billets they have been unable to fill anyway. Viola, instant 100% manning with the stroke of a pen!

ck130

Exactly. They did the same thing in the late 90's when they couldn't fill billets in the reserves. A battalion used to comprised of A,B, C and D companies. One day D company goes away and "shazaam" full manning across the board.

I think Rummy is F'ing the troops. I don't trust or believe the old SOB as far as I could throw him.
Everything from that Deathtrap, P. O. S., "stryker" to using "contract NGO" troops.
Contractor profit tools.

 

[scoreboard]

No argument. Let's just buy the stuff the grunts need to survive...first. Then IF there's money left to burn, we can upgrade to the fancy new widget.

So your saying screw the guy in the cockpit? I understand your concern, but like many others have said, it's not a zero sum game, we need this thing just as bad. The F-22 isn't a thing you buy with money to burn. You cannot say to a defense contractor, shut down for the next few years while we buy xyz, insane at best.

And yes, lets buy more body armor and stuff...

 

[malterf15]

K-Mart
Isn't it ironic, dontcha think?

The point is not whether we're planning on fighting China. The point is we need an Air Force that can provide Air Superiority in any conceivable situation. Our current fighters won't last forever. Should we build new ones with 70s technology? Would that even be cheaper? No, you use the technology you have. Don't be a cheap >>>>>>>.

 

[Birdstrike]

So your saying screw the guy in the cockpit?

You talkin to me? Are you talking to Me?? Did I say screw the guy in the cockpit? Is going to war in an F-117, an F-18, or even an F-16 "screwing the guy in cockpit?" I don't think you can sell that anywhere except to the Air Force Chief of Staff. DOD won't buy it.

For years, the ground forces have taken a back seat to the air force in the only terms Washington understands - money. That's finally beginning to change. This year, the Army's % share of the DOD budget is increasing. The USAF still has the biggest slice, but the gap is narrowing. The Army's missions are expanding; their resources need to expand as well.

Give the ground puke what he needs, when he needs it, and as much as he needs. The Army isn't asking for the "F-22 equivalent" in modernization; we'll take the F-18 equivalent; we're that far behind, especially the Guard and Reserve. So you only get 183 F-22s instead of 300+. Somehow, I think the air force can still get it done while the Army plays catch up. And yes, it is a zero-sum game; the budget is what, a little under $450B and that's no open checkbook.

 

[GCD]

Maybe some money could be spent on the Army's FCA to get the beans and bullets to the troops.

 

[K-Mart]

K-Mart

Isn't it ironic, dontcha think?

Yeah.:laugh:

The point is we need an Air Force that can provide Air Superiority in any conceivable situation.

I agree but that is impossible in todays age, in this country. Not with baby boomers retiring (Huge loss of tax revenue) and this stupid war in Iraq.

Our current fighters won't last forever. Should we build new ones with 70s technology?[/QUOTE]
I agree with you. However, F-15/16's are nothing like they were technology wise from the 70's.

Dude, I wish I had a complete answer. It's all a matter of where to spend the dollars to manage the threat, whether it's happening now or covering any situation. Cost versus risk. The AF balked at buying terrain avoidance software on an unamed fighter. Why, becasue it was cheaper to lose a pilot than update every aircraft with this system. Sad but true. The same can be said about weapons systems, however throw in politics as the driving decision maker. Any thoughts??