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

Skip to comments.

F-35 restructuring saves $6.9 bln over 5 years
Reuters ^ | 1/25/2011 | Reuters

Posted on 01/26/2011 8:47:09 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld

The Pentagon's decision to delay buying 124 Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 fighters until after fiscal year 2016 saved $6.9 billion over the coming five years, a Defense Department spokesman said on Tuesday.

On Jan. 6, Defense Secretary Robert Gates overhauled the Pentagon's largest weapons program for the second time in a year, slowing a planned ramp-up in production and adding $4.6 billion to the program's development phase.

At the time, Gates said the move would result in net savings of about $4 billion over the next five years -- after subtracting the money needed to buy 41 additional Boeing Co F/A-18 warplanes to offset slower F-35 production.

The Pentagon's biggest arms program, the new fighter is being developed with eight international partner countries at a total cost of $382 billion, but the program has run into schedule delays and massive cost overruns in recent years.

Joe DellaVedova, the Pentagon's F-35 spokesman, provided additional details, including the $6.9 billion savings figure on Tuesday.

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


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aerospace; f35; jsf; pentagon

1 posted on 01/26/2011 8:47:11 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ErnstStavroBlofeld

Not buying them at all would save a lot more.


2 posted on 01/26/2011 8:50:47 PM PST by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ErnstStavroBlofeld

They will never buy these aircraft.


3 posted on 01/26/2011 8:51:06 PM PST by rbg81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rbg81

The deal seems to be done on the Pentagon side if they are pouring resources into the project.They are fully committed to the project. However, Congress has oversight and must approve the sale.


4 posted on 01/26/2011 8:53:14 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ErnstStavroBlofeld

Biggest anvil with wings ever.

By the time the bureaucrats finish with the F35 it wil be better suited as a submarine.


5 posted on 01/26/2011 8:58:18 PM PST by freedumb2003 (The TOTUS-reader is a Judas Goat, leading the American sheeple to the slaugherhouse /Parmy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ErnstStavroBlofeld
"development of the Air Force and Navy versions of the F-35 would be extended by 10 months until the first quarter of 2016, while 20 months would be added to the development of the Marine Corps variant."

Still do not have an aircraft ready for production? How many years late and how much over budget? But the deployed F22 is canceled? WTF! Think the Chicom are going to cancel their J20?

6 posted on 01/26/2011 9:01:25 PM PST by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rbg81
>>>They will never buy these aircraft.

<<< Have they ever make a decision on the new Air Force Tanker - Boeing or EADS/Northrup? It's gotta be due soon if it hasn't happened yet.

7 posted on 01/26/2011 9:02:54 PM PST by HardStarboard (I'm sure George and Dick had quiet smiles while watching the election results!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Private analysts say the whole F-35 program is becoming a money pit. “The incredibly unfortunate phrase ‘too big to fail’ applies to this aircraft more than any other defense program”,


8 posted on 01/26/2011 9:05:18 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003; ErnstStavroBlofeld
F-35?

Is this thing any good? What does this do that the F22 does not do? Do we need both?

9 posted on 01/26/2011 9:37:52 PM PST by Kenny Bunk (America might survive Obama. It cannot survive those who vote for him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunk; freedumb2003

The F-35 A and C are fine, but its the F-35B that is hanging everything up. I say go into production with the F and C models and leave the B model behind. I think that we should have the F-35 and F-22 in the USAF inventory.


10 posted on 01/26/2011 9:43:28 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jpsb
Think the Chicom are going to cancel their J20?

The Russian T-50 is more worrisome.

11 posted on 01/26/2011 9:47:21 PM PST by buccaneer81 (ECOMCON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
Not buying them at all would save a lot more.

Fine by me, but then we need to restart the F-22 line and design a carrier version of it to boot.

12 posted on 01/26/2011 9:48:58 PM PST by buccaneer81 (ECOMCON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunk
The F22 is a true fighter with a limited ability to provide ground support. The F35 is a multi role aircraft, fighter, ground support, bomber. The thing is with enough F22's almost any aircraft would provide gound support or do bombing runs, without enough F22's, against a first world military none can.

The F35 is a bean counters dream, one aircraft for all 3 service branches performing all roles (badly).

13 posted on 01/26/2011 9:50:29 PM PST by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

T-50 had to google that, nice aircraft. Maybe the Russians will sell us some?


14 posted on 01/26/2011 9:55:20 PM PST by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunk

>>Is this thing any good?

Not as being considered.

>>What does this do that the F22 does not do?

Nothing. The F22 could do the F35 mission and then shoot the F35 down. All while the F22 pilot is still in the shower.

>>Do we need both?

Not really. As usual, since the 70s when we created the fantastic F16, F14, F18 and the still ruling F15 (not to mention the SR71), military aircraft are not only subject to physics but the petty infighting of Congress.


15 posted on 01/26/2011 9:58:19 PM PST by freedumb2003 (The TOTUS-reader is a Judas Goat, leading the American sheeple to the slaugherhouse /Parmy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003; ErnstStavroBlofeld; jpsb
Thanks. You have answered my question. If I understand the answer, the smart move would be to build more F-22s and forget about the F-35, of which we can afford what, 5 planes? The CHICOM must be ROTFLTAO.

I do not understand these procurements. For one thing, the number of units always seems ridiculously low. We own what, 20 F-22s? WTF good is that going to do for us in a real war? It's obvious that the brunt of combat duties for the next 10 years will still fall upon upgraded F-16s, F-15s, F-18s, which thank God we have in large numbers.

E.G., we own 19 B-2 Bombers. With 19 bombers we're going to take out Iran? I doan theenk so.

16 posted on 01/26/2011 10:25:10 PM PST by Kenny Bunk (America might survive Obama. It cannot survive those who vote for him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunk

Actually there are 187 F-22s in the USAF inventory. You are underestimating the B-2 capability.The bomber has a crew of two and can drop up to 80 JDAM GPS-guided bombs, or 16 B83 nuclear bombs in a single pass through extremely dense anti-aircraft defenses. The B-2 is the only aircraft that can carry large air to surface standoff weapons in a stealth configuration


17 posted on 01/26/2011 10:37:01 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunk

Correction:There are 168 F-22 planes as of October 2010.The projected plan is 187 planes.


18 posted on 01/26/2011 10:41:39 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ErnstStavroBlofeld

We’re down to 184 Raptors now. Three have been destroyed in accidents since December, 2004.


19 posted on 01/26/2011 11:13:07 PM PST by buccaneer81 (ECOMCON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ErnstStavroBlofeld

I thought they had already reached the end of production. If not, I wonder if they’ll replace the three losses we have suffered.


20 posted on 01/26/2011 11:16:13 PM PST by buccaneer81 (ECOMCON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: jpsb

They look at lot more formidable than the J-20.


21 posted on 01/26/2011 11:17:08 PM PST by buccaneer81 (ECOMCON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ErnstStavroBlofeld
That will go a long way toward covering obama’s trillion and a half $/year budgeted deficits.
22 posted on 01/27/2011 12:47:51 AM PST by tdscpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ErnstStavroBlofeld
..... 168 F-22 planes as of October 2010. The projected plan is 187 planes....

Thanks for the reassuring info. I am not so reassured about the B-2 numbers.

I am old enough to always recall that thousands of crude T-34 tanks overwhelmed hundreds of super-high quality, high-performance, high firepower NAZI tanks. So I always fear an aerial version of same when going up against the CHICOM, or Russkis.

As far as close support aircraft are concerned, do we want 1 F-35 an hour away, or 25 A-10s on instant call ... or 50 helicopters?

23 posted on 01/27/2011 6:13:26 AM PST by Kenny Bunk (America might survive Obama. It cannot survive those who vote for him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
Nothing. The F22 could do the F35 mission and then shoot the F35 down. All while the F22 pilot is still in the shower.

I know there's a lot of talk about how the laws of physics don't apply to the F-22 (usually by the Aggressor pilots at Nellis), but I believe it's incapable of operating from CVNs and LHA/LHDs ... which the F-35C and F-35B (respectively) can do.

I also believe that the F-22 is incapable of carrying 2000lb class weapons internally. Nor does it have any sort of integrated IR/Laser sensor/targeting suite.
24 posted on 01/27/2011 6:38:30 AM PST by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunk

If you have at least three B-52s”cells” and filled to the brim with nuclear ALCM missiles you can wreak a lot of damage. That many B-2s can turn the entire nations of Russia and Iran into dust. The nuclear AGMs the B-2 carries over 300 kilotons per cruise missile


25 posted on 01/27/2011 10:52:24 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | 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