Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

USAF to scrap AGM-129 stealth cruise missile
Seattlepi.com ^ | March 7, 2007 | ROBERT BURNS

Posted on 03/08/2007 8:30:44 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki

Wednesday, March 7, 2007 · Last updated 7:15 p.m. PT

Air Force scraps stealth missile fleet

By ROBERT BURNS AP MILITARY WRITER

WASHINGTON -- The Air Force said Wednesday it will retire the most modern cruise missile in the U.S. nuclear arsenal, a "stealth" weapon developed in the 1980s with the ability to evade detection by Soviet radars.

Known as the Advanced Cruise Missile, the weapon is carried by the B-52 bomber and was designed to attack heavily defended sites. It is the most capable among a variety of air-launched nuclear weapons built during the Cold War that remain in the U.S. inventory even as the Pentagon is reducing its overall nuclear arms stockpile.

The Air Force had said as recently as February 2006 that it expected to keep the missile active until 2030.

If the retirement is carried out as planned, the Advanced Cruise Missile will be the first group of U.S. nuclear weapons to be scrapped since the last of the Air Force's 50 MX Peacekeeper land-based missiles was retired in September 2005.

The decision to retire the Advanced Cruise Missile fleet has not been publicly announced. It was brought to light by Hans M. Kristensen, director of the nuclear information project at the Federation of American Scientists. He noticed that funds for the program were cut in the Air Force budget request for 2008, and that no money is budgeted for it beyond 2008; when he inquired, the Air Force acknowledged the retirement decision.

An Air Force spokeswoman, Maj. Morshe Araujo, confirmed it on Wednesday. She and other Air Force public affairs officials were unable to provide additional details, including the rationale for the decision.

Araujo indicated that the retirement was part of a "balanced force reduction" being carried out to reduce the number of U.S. strategic nuclear weapons to between 1,700 and 2,200 by Dec. 31, 2012, as required under a U.S.-Russia arms reduction deal signed in Moscow in May 2002.

The treaty does not require that any specific group of nuclear weapons be retired, only that the total number in the U.S. and Russian arsenals be cut to the prescribed range of 1,700-2,200. The Russians still have a nuclear-tipped cruise missile in active service, according to Robert S. Norris, an expert in American, Soviet and Chinese nuclear weapons.

The decision to get rid of the Advanced Cruise Missile comes amid U.S. efforts to modernize what remains of the nuclear arsenal, even as it presses Iran and North Korea to abandon their nuclear programs.

Last week the Bush administration took a major step toward building a new generation of nuclear warheads, selecting a design that is being touted as safer, more secure and more easily maintained than today's arsenal. A team of scientists from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory will proceed with the weapons design with an anticipation that the first warheads may be ready by 2012 as a replacement for Trident missiles on submarines.

As a matter of policy the Defense Department does not confirm the location of nuclear weapons, but Kristensen and other private nuclear experts said the fleet of more than 400 Advanced Cruise Missiles is located at the only two B-52 bomber bases: Minot Air Force Base, N.D., and Barksdale Air Force Base, La.

The Air Force originally planned to field 1,500 of the missiles, which were put on the drawing board in 1982 after U.S. officials determined that its predecessor, known as the AGM-86 air-launched cruise missile, which has no stealth capabilities, would soon be too easy to detect by air- and ground-based defenses.

Kristensen said there are about 1,300 of the older air-launched nuclear cruise missiles still in the Air Force inventory.

Norris, a nuclear weapons expert at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said it appears likely the Air Force will further shrink its inventory of air-launched nuclear weapons in the years ahead. He estimates that there are about 3,000 air-launched gravity bombs in the nuclear arsenal, based mostly in the United States.

The other main element of the U.S. nuclear arsenal is the Navy's fleet of nuclear-armed Trident submarines.

Norris estimates that the United States now has about 5,000 strategic nuclear weapons, including the Advance Cruise Missiles, so it will take further reductions to get down to the 1,700-2,200 level set by the 2002 treaty.


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: acm; aerospace; agm129; airforce; b52; cruisemissile; usaf
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-51 next last
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
1 posted on 03/08/2007 8:30:46 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Could we just use them and get our money's worth?


2 posted on 03/08/2007 8:33:06 AM PST by Redcitizen (Senator Palpatine for President in 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Araujo indicated that the retirement was part of a "balanced force reduction" being carried out to reduce the number of U.S. strategic nuclear weapons to between 1,700 and 2,200 by Dec. 31, 2012, as required under a U.S.-Russia arms reduction deal signed in Moscow in May 2002.
----
So now we are pandering to Ivan, who is aiding and abetting every enemy we have?? And we choose our "top stealth CM" to scrap?? Hello Washington?? Be advised Ivan is NOT OUR FRIEND.


3 posted on 03/08/2007 8:33:23 AM PST by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EagleUSA

Maybe the guy keeping them active fell out of a window.


4 posted on 03/08/2007 8:34:43 AM PST by Crazieman (The Democratic Party: Culture of Treason)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
He noticed that funds for the program were cut in the Air Force budget request for 2008, and that no money is budgeted for it beyond 2008; when he inquired, the Air Force acknowledged the retirement decision.

Sadly, the media which covers the military is probably the dumbest of all. They would suggest that you continue to pay for something after you have bought all you intend to buy.

Under their logic, I guess I should be paying for beer long ago flushed?

5 posted on 03/08/2007 8:35:36 AM PST by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Redcitizen
"Could we just use them and get our money's worth?"

Exactly! Stick a small tactical nuke warhead and send them into Iran.

6 posted on 03/08/2007 8:36:05 AM PST by TommyDale (What will Rudy do in the War on Terror? Implement gun control on insurgents and Al Qaeda?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Redcitizen

Let's just modify the "stealth" part so that they can be really sneaky until they get to within a mile of their target, at which super-Boze speakers open up with "Ride of the Valkeries"...


7 posted on 03/08/2007 8:37:10 AM PST by Kenton (All vices in moderation. I don't want to overdo any but I don't want to skip any either.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

I don't expect we'll see these available at the next government auction.


8 posted on 03/08/2007 8:37:59 AM PST by July 4th (A vacant lot cancelled out my vote for Bush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog

Can the be fitted with conventional explosives warheads and used up somewhere?

Where is an exercise left to the reader...


9 posted on 03/08/2007 8:38:22 AM PST by null and void ("If you have always done it that way, it is probably wrong." - Charles F. Kettering)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kenton

I like the way you think. (Although the Viking Kitties' theme song would work, too)....


10 posted on 03/08/2007 8:40:09 AM PST by null and void ("If you have always done it that way, it is probably wrong." - Charles F. Kettering)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Kenton

That is something I can whole heartedly agree with.

I would put a big happy face on one of them.


11 posted on 03/08/2007 8:40:12 AM PST by Redcitizen (Senator Palpatine for President in 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: EagleUSA

Russia builds up as we build down.


12 posted on 03/08/2007 8:41:40 AM PST by bmwcyle (It is time to stop the left at the wall.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

I hope they know what they're doing.....


13 posted on 03/08/2007 8:42:50 AM PST by expatpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Redcitizen
My guess is this is purely cost-driven. However, with the active consideration of lower-yield, penetrating nuclear weapons, something like the ACM might be somewhat obsolete.

Also, the only aircraft which can carry the ACM is the B-52, and there are serious considerations to finally retire the BUFF fleet.

14 posted on 03/08/2007 8:46:33 AM PST by magellan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bmwcyle

Someone will remember this madness when the Russians and Chinese blow our decadent nation out of its slumber.

But that will be too late.

Absolute insanity.

We need:

1. New, mobile, more powerful ICBM's
2. A whole new fleet of bombers. Some on 24 hour alert.
3. A couple of Looking Glass and TACAMO's on duty at all times.
4. A new fleet of Stealth SSBN's.
5. Hardened and survivable orbital satellites.
6. Several new types of nuclear warheads.
7. A testing program to make sure that they work.
8. 5000 MORE stealth cruise missles.
9. Layered ABM defences for the homeland.
10. About 200,000 prison cells to hold the treasonous Democrats/socialists/liberals who would protest 1-9 above until they are executed for treason.
11. Some leaders who love our country more than their future consulting/speaking/business fees/bribes/payola.

This is the begining of the final act of the United States.

Enjoy it!


15 posted on 03/08/2007 8:50:51 AM PST by Jonathan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Is this because a far cheaper JDAM or SLAM can do the same job?


16 posted on 03/08/2007 8:51:40 AM PST by The KG9 Kid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: null and void
I'm sorry, I should have just said the obvious, which is that we very likely have something else even better, and no longer need to invest in the older program.

Articles like this are how the media express their anger over not being kept in the loop on new weapons. They hope to get briefed on why this news is really no news at all.
17 posted on 03/08/2007 8:57:50 AM PST by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: July 4th
I don't expect we'll see these available at the next government auction.

Don't I have a second amendment right to own one if I can afford it?

18 posted on 03/08/2007 8:58:35 AM PST by zarf (Her hair was of a dank yellow, and fell over her temples like sauerkraut......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: The KG9 Kid

Probably because those weapons are cheaper & more versatile with launch from multiple platforms.


19 posted on 03/08/2007 9:03:29 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Jonathan

*sigh* Yeah. 100% right on!


20 posted on 03/08/2007 9:06:32 AM PST by null and void ("If you have always done it that way, it is probably wrong." - Charles F. Kettering)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-51 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson