Posted on 03/24/2011 5:18:40 PM PDT by Blogger
The U.S. Defense Department ordered GE and Rolls-Royce to stop production on a second engine for the F-35 joint strike fighter Thursday.
The government said they want them to wait until the fiscal 2012 budget is complete and there is a better direction of how the project will look.
Hundreds of employees in Indiana are directly tied to the project. Rolls-Royce is the city`s second largest manufacturer behind Eli Lilly.
In a statement from the fighter engine team they said they are "disappointed with the U.S. Department of Defense decision which goes against the precedent to continue funding for this important competitive program under prior short-term continuing resolutions."
Not a waste of money and GE is an awfully big company. I would ask you to consider that the sum is greater than its parts. Whatever you don’t like about GE, it is still an American institution and lots of American jobs are supported by its existence.
I also agree. (another ex-GE employee)
That’s kinda Congresses way of doing business. There are so many bigger fish to fry. Congressional spending has been out of control for a long time. Removing this engine is not only fool hardy but meaningless in terms of addressing the real issues. It’s a diversion - and a dangerous one if we end up with engine problems with the F-135. Again, I would take that stance of the F-136 were the primary engine and the F-135 were in GE’s spot. Just not a good move.
I know, I know. I’m just reporting what I heard on the radio. I had the same eye roll as you must have. But also, I’m sure their military tech guys are doing remarkable things and I respect that. Immelt be damned.
I don’t like the idea of a President being able to circumvent Congressional intent though
—
Ovbasiomoooo does not circumvent Congressional intent, like the Constitution, he ignores it.
CONgress also uses the DoD budget to fund lots of non-DoD things. They step out of their Constitutional role very often also.
The only reason that was acceptable in WWII was the the horrendous casualties that were being suffered by U.S. troops made it seem not so bad. Today, no one would allow that kind of mortality rate.
Also the aircraft were relatively cheaper and they made lots of prototypes. Lose one today and it may be the only one or maybe one of two.
They shouldn’t do that either. No argument here.
It doesn't matter. Fiscal Year Budgets are law. Law is different than CRs, which are votes (outside what the law states and really a budgetary gimmick) which only allow funding at current levels.
Congressional spending has been out of control for a long time.
Yes, but that is another issue. We can go back to the subject of the creation of the Federal Reserve, or the decision to talk the dollar off of the gold standard under Nixon. Or, we can discuss the mating habits of Canadian geese. The problems I pointed out in my previous post are still valid.
Unless the FY11 budget gets approved (and the supplemental gets approved that is going to be needed to pay for Libya, plus Overseas Contingency Operating (OCO) budgets that have been used for years to fund Iraq and Afghanistan - all procurement will eventually come to a screeching halt in terms of DoD spending.
Removing this engine is not only fool hardy but meaningless in terms of addressing the real issues. It’s a diversion - and a dangerous one if we end up with engine problems with the F-135. Again, I would take that stance of the F-136 were the primary engine and the F-135 were in GE’s spot. Just not a good move.
Perhaps, but now you are arguing something completely different. Hey, maybe. I am all for air power too. I am an aerospace engineer and a retired Air Force pilot.
But the argument for the extra engine is window dressing and moot if the FY11 budget never comes into existence (which some analysts have said might even be a possibility).
Congress' "stance" on the CR is gum flapping from members who get in front of the cameras. Again, CRs only allow funding at the previous FY rate. Moreover, I dislike Sec Gates. I think he is a horrible SECDEF, but his hands are tied at this point. He isn't out there rouge. If they don't approve the lawful budget, it isn't his fault what plants shut down. Period.
Exactly......
If you truly believe GE isn’t burying this cost I have some oceanfront property in Detroit to sell you.
I bet it’s warm and sunny too.
Certain folks are willing to hang it out on the line even without a terrible hot war going on. It's a mind-set. We had 'true grit' back then. Apparently, we don't now.
Frm. Sect. McNamara is pleased.
/johnny
He’s the one who pushed for the order. He’s the one who has pushed for the cancellation for several years now. Sorry, he doesn’t get off the hook because of the current fiscal crisis.
The company reported worldwide profits of $14.2 billion, and said $5.1 billion of the total came from its operations in the United States.
Its American tax bill? None. In fact, G.E. claimed a tax benefit of $3.2 billion.
That may be hard to fathom for the millions of American business owners and households now preparing their own returns, but low taxes are nothing new for G.E. The company has been cutting the percentage of its American profits paid to the Internal Revenue Service for years, resulting in a far lower rate than at most multinational companies.
Its extraordinary success is based on an aggressive strategy that mixes fierce lobbying for tax breaks and innovative accounting that enables it to concentrate its profits offshore. G.E.’s giant tax department, led by a bespectacled, bow-tied former Treasury official named John Samuels, is often referred to as the world’s best tax law firm. Indeed, the company’s slogan “Imagination at Work” fits this department well. The team includes former officials not just from the Treasury, but also from the I.R.S. and virtually all the tax-writing committees in Congress.
Again, it isn’t a GE issue. Try to get beyond corporate envy/angst and see the bigger picture. There is a manufacturing base. There is military readiness. There is overall cost over the life of the program. GE is here, like it or not. That has nothing to do with whether or not the engine is something we should fund.
Boy, you really don't want to let this go, do you? I can tell you are bitter about this decision, but seriously - get a stress ball or something.
Gates never pushed for this second engine. Google "gates, engine, f35"
Now, Congress puts stuff back into the budget all the time that they want. Gates said a few years back to "kill the C-17." Congress said "yeah, right."
As I said, he's a terrible SECDEF (Don't Ask Don't Tell crap, supports pay freezes, kisses Obama's butt, etc) - but he was been 100% consistent on this engine.
Sorry, I’d rather see a plane get busted on a computer before we put a highly trained pilot’s life at risk. We might need those guys to fight a war or something.
A whole lot of the problems that need to be solved can’t be solved in the air anyhow. You can’t fly then fix a fly-by-wire system because you can’t fly it in the first place.
But when I look at what Kelly Johnson and the Skunk Works did with the YF-12, I have to question our current procurement process. They INVENTED the materials and processes to build it. It still holds world records.
/johnny
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.