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

Skip to comments.

Air Force Will Lose Hundreds of Planes in New Pentagon Plan
Njuice.com ^ | 1/4/12 | Wired

Posted on 01/04/2012 10:44:18 AM PST by Nachum

The Air Force is preparing to trim hundreds of aircraft from its aging fleet in order to meet an Obama administration austerity order. The move will strike many Air Force supporters as ironic. Because just as the fleet is set to shrink, Defense Secretary ...

(Excerpt) Read more at njuice.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: air; airforce; airforceplanes; force; lose; planes

1 posted on 01/04/2012 10:44:24 AM PST by Nachum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar; NorwegianViking; ExTexasRedhead; HollyB; FromLori; EricTheRed_VocalMinority; ...

The list, Ping

Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list

http://www.nachumlist.com/


2 posted on 01/04/2012 10:45:17 AM PST by Nachum (The complete Obama list at www.nachumlist.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

And?


3 posted on 01/04/2012 10:48:40 AM PST by verity (The Obama Administration is a Criminal Enterprise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

I hope they drag their heels on this until the Makers of America can overcome the Takers and get this SOB out of office.


4 posted on 01/04/2012 10:48:40 AM PST by grobdriver (Proud Member, Party Of No! No Socialism - No Fascism - Nobama - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

In his book “Augustine’s Laws”, former Lockheed-Martin CEO Norm Augustine predicted that by 2050, the US Military will have one fighter plane shared by all the Services. It was a tongue-in-cheek prediction back in the 80s, but its probably not too far off. Like Europe, we will slowly dismantle our military to pay for the Welfare state.


5 posted on 01/04/2012 10:49:14 AM PST by rbg81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Let’s start with AIR FARCE ONE and the 757 Pelousy used!

Should save a bundle.


6 posted on 01/04/2012 10:49:19 AM PST by Dick Bachert (Obozo deserves another term: IN LEAVENWORTH. 25 to life sounds about right!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

This should eventually work out good. If they get rid of aging aircraft, then as soon as we get a pro-military administration back in office, we can build new aircraft. I imagine this would create a lot of economic stimulus.


7 posted on 01/04/2012 10:52:10 AM PST by stuartcr ("In this election year of 12, how deep into their closets will we delve?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar

Ping.


8 posted on 01/04/2012 10:53:55 AM PST by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

I nominate Air Force One & Air Force Two as the first 2 planes eliminated.


9 posted on 01/04/2012 10:56:47 AM PST by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rbg81
by 2050, the US Military will have one fighter plane shared by all the Services.

And just like NASA, we'll probably have to lease that from the Russians.

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

10 posted on 01/04/2012 10:59:40 AM PST by newheart (When does policy become treason?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Let me get this straight - spending hundreds of billions on illegal wars that we don’t really try to win so that it drags out for years is legitimate spending, but updating our fleet of aircraft so that we can defend ourselves in case we are attacked is not worth it.


11 posted on 01/04/2012 11:07:48 AM PST by MichaelCorleone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MichaelCorleone

What illegal wars?


12 posted on 01/04/2012 11:11:20 AM PST by Old Sarge (RIP FReeper Skyraider (1930-2011) - You Are Missed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MichaelCorleone

“Let me get this straight - spending hundreds of billions on illegal wars that we don’t really try to win so that it drags out for years is legitimate spending, but updating our fleet of aircraft so that we can defend ourselves in case we are attacked is not worth it.”

Yes. Very Versailles, non? I swear, this period in America is like France, ca. 1788.


13 posted on 01/04/2012 11:12:43 AM PST by Psalm 144 (Voodoo Republicans: Don't read their lips - watch their hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MichaelCorleone

If we were trying to defend ourselves we would get rid of radical muslims in this country and close the borders. Instead we try to nation build over there giving the blood of our soldiers for people who not just want us dead but want to kill each other.
We do not need the oil in the middle east. We can drill here, support ourselves, build up our military and build a strong missile defense system and encourage American business to export and kick the butts of anyone who messes with us.
OK off my soapbox now.


14 posted on 01/04/2012 11:16:53 AM PST by formosa (Formosa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: rbg81

Thank you for the post. Very helpful.


15 posted on 01/04/2012 11:37:13 AM PST by forest153 ("There's a snake in my boot!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Thank you for your post; very helpful to a tired old watcher.


16 posted on 01/04/2012 11:39:13 AM PST by forest153 ("There's a snake in my boot!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

This is a listing of the aircraft the USAF currently flies
Attack A-10, AC-130
Bomber B-52H, B-1B, B-2
Electronic Warfare E-3, E-8, EC-130
Fighter F-15C, F-15E, F-16, F-22
Helicopter UH-1N, HH-60
Cargo helicopter CV-22
Reconnaissance U-2, RC-135, RQ/MQ-1, RQ-4, RQ-170
Trainer T-6, T-38, T-1, TG-10
Transport C-130, C-135, KC-135, C-5, C-9, KC-10, C-17, VC-25, C-32, C-37, C-21, C-12, C-40.

How many redundancies can you think of? Now, each aircraft has it’s own specialized components - very few parts are interchangeable between aircraft (as they are made by numerous manufacturers). For example, how many general purpose Jet Trainers do we really need to support? How many Cargo planes do we need to support?

How many transports do you think we need to service? How many of these are simply obsolete and time to scrap. Each one requires teams for logistics, maintenance, mechanics, repair depots, customized proceedures, custom test processes; it’s really amazing that the USAF can even begin to manage these programs efficiently.

Now, I’m no expert as to what should be cut - I’ll leave that to the leadership of the USAF to pick and chose; but there is no point in spending Bazillions flying museaum pieces. How about dumping the obsolete geezers, and using that money to upgrade and design new, better and more mission capable assets?


17 posted on 01/04/2012 11:39:47 AM PST by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: formosa

“OK off my soapbox now.”

Hey, now - don’t go putting it away where you can’t get to it.

Colonel, USAFR


18 posted on 01/04/2012 11:45:57 AM PST by jagusafr ("We hold these truths to be self-evident...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Far better idea would be to abolish and severely cut back numerous Federal agencies that do nothing useful but serve as jobs programs for eco-freaks, liberal Democrats, socialists and America haters. Start by getting rid of the EPA, Department of Education, EEOC, severely cut back Department of Energy.


19 posted on 01/04/2012 11:51:55 AM PST by dennisw (A nation of sheep breeds a government of Democrat wolves!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Correct me if I am wrong, but isnt this administration continuing to slash military budgets, significantly cut down the sizes or the Army, Navy, Coast Guard, Marines, National Guard and reduce amount of equipment they have ? Or am I mistaken ? I wonder about the extent the military supports this administration and to what extent the members of our military like Obama and his views


20 posted on 01/04/2012 12:00:25 PM PST by emax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: formosa

You’re right. We should bring the troops home and send them house to house to route out all the Muslims in our country and detain them. Then we can assign someone to determine which ones are radical and execute them.


21 posted on 01/04/2012 12:09:39 PM PST by stuartcr ("In this election year of 12, how deep into their closets will we delve?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Eliminate 500,000 civilian jobs in the federal government first.


22 posted on 01/04/2012 12:14:40 PM PST by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: emax

Not much.


23 posted on 01/04/2012 12:19:46 PM PST by Nachum (The complete Obama list at www.nachumlist.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: rbg81
the US Military will have one fighter plane shared by all the Services.

So how will the services share? Air Force on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. Navy on Tuesday and Thursday. Marines on weekends. Most on it's flight time will be ferrying it to next duty stations.

24 posted on 01/04/2012 12:31:21 PM PST by ASA Vet (Natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. De Vattel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr

Thats crazy talk.


25 posted on 01/04/2012 12:53:28 PM PST by RitchieAprile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Guns versus butter. It is the norm for empires in decline, especially ones that have a welfare state. The collapse of the welfare state forces government to choose between keeping the welfare state going a little longer and maintaining a strong military. Usually, the former wins because it has more constituents. When you borrow 40 cents of every dollar spent and you are spending $1.3 trillion more than you take in, then you to start cutting back eventually.


26 posted on 01/04/2012 1:04:03 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr

LOL. That’s a good one. You left off the sarcasm tag. Where the hell is the money going to come from to maintain what we have let alone have enough to build new aircraft? This country is bankrupt and going further into debt every day. In a decade, debt servicing costs alone will approach $1 trillion annually.


27 posted on 01/04/2012 1:08:43 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

Obsolete Geezer Airplanes ?? Ask WHY we still have truly ancient jets, like the B-52 and the KC-135, both of which are in excess of 50-year-old designs ?

Simple: the need for the capability has not gone away, but previous “savings” prevented their replacement. And since the Ear Leader isn’t going to build new jets. . .


28 posted on 01/04/2012 1:12:15 PM PST by Salgak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Hodar
Now, I’m no expert as to what should be cut - I’ll leave that to the leadership of the USAF to pick and chose; but there is no point in spending Bazillions flying museaum pieces. How about dumping the obsolete geezers, and using that money to upgrade and design new, better and more mission capable assets?

We are at a point where the military is going to be transitioning to UAVs for a lot of things, but we are not quite there yet. A buddy of mine is speculating that this maybe an attempt to drag the Air Force/military into the UAV age, but it's still an awkward moment since we are in a war that has no end. That war, however, has pushed UAV development rapidly forward.

It's like we are the major navies of the world in the 1920s - everybody knows carriers (UAVs in our case) are the wave of the future, but there are still some things that are not quite in place for us to fully make the switch, and some people want to hold on to their battleships and fight against the carriers being built no matter what.
29 posted on 01/04/2012 1:19:55 PM PST by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Salgak

The B-52 and the KC-135 are both great aircraft. The B-52 will be nearly 95 yrs old when we finally retire it. For long range, high altitude bombing - the B-52 has passed the test of time. For re-fueling, really there is no replacment for the KC-135 that I’m aware of (which I freely admit, isn’t saying a lot). As I indicated earlier, I make no claim of expertise in this area.

However, do we still need to maintain the U-2? How many different jet trainers do we need? C-5, C-10, KC-10 and C-32? That many Cargo aircraft? Seriously, how many different type of Cargo aircraft do we need to support? Simply stated, we don’t “NEED” every type of aircraft we have. There is plenty of over-lap and redundancy. A wise person would check the stats on how many of each do we have, their failure records (why fix lemons?) and if we scrap ‘x’ of one aircraft, can we buy more of a better upgrade?


30 posted on 01/04/2012 1:20:29 PM PST by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: RitchieAprile

Did you read the first line of #14? That’s my response to a crazy statement.


31 posted on 01/04/2012 1:25:50 PM PST by stuartcr ("In this election year of 12, how deep into their closets will we delve?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Can this Muslim Communist be impeached and tried for treason?


32 posted on 01/04/2012 2:42:48 PM PST by RoadTest (There is one god, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grobdriver

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but,I think that you are in for a long wait. The Republican Party shares the Democrat Party view that there is no crisis. Both political parties are content to continue printing paper and calling it money, increase taxes, and regulate businesses and industries out of existence. All either poitical party wants to do is increase their power and control and the Country be dammed.And the sheep say, “Just make me feel secure.”


33 posted on 01/04/2012 3:05:05 PM PST by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
The news I am hearing is the Air National Guard is poised to lose almost half their numbers over the next 5-10 years. You know, the branch of service responsible for most of the air defense of the US.
The Air Force is poised to be drawn down to it's lowest troop levels since it's inception in 1947. We had 305,000 people then. In 2009 we had 327,000. The Secretary of Defense is wanting the Air Force to go back to 1940 levels.
I cannot stress how hollow a 275,000 person Air Force personnel will make us to protect the sky and space over the US and our troops in the field. I speak only on my 20 years, but Many if not most people I believe are doing double and triple duty on tasks and now the ones who will be left are going to be asked to double up again. Automation has done wonders for a lot of things we do in the military today. However, the burden of ponderous regulations reports, requirements, and training needs has more than filled the gap and then some. I spend maybe 15% of my day actually doing the job I am trained to do. The rest of the time I have to fulfill requirements of the regulations that are constantly piled on us, all the training we need to accomplish, researching and ordering parts needed, meetings needing to attend. It's already too much for many and now it's only going to be that much more challenging.
34 posted on 01/04/2012 5:18:29 PM PST by McCloud-Strife ( USA 1776-2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

We have got to get this man out of the White House before he wrecks everything. In the next year, he can decimate the military, take away certain freedoms, provide for abortions, make a joke of our legal system, and much, much more. Simply put, he is wrecking America.


35 posted on 01/04/2012 5:21:06 PM PST by maxwellsmart_agent (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: McCloud-Strife
The news I am hearing is the Air National Guard is poised to lose almost half their numbers over the next 5-10 years

Do you have any source I can link to with that?

36 posted on 01/04/2012 5:22:23 PM PST by Nachum (The complete Obama list at www.nachumlist.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Army Air Corps

Bump


37 posted on 01/04/2012 6:27:07 PM PST by Jet Jaguar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
"Far better idea would be to abolish and severely cut back numerous Federal agencies that do nothing useful"

BUMP!

38 posted on 01/04/2012 6:45:25 PM PST by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

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