It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US Navy + USMC Budget means more Growlers, Rhinos and Lightnings

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 03:32 PM
link   

The House and Senate appropriations committees released a final Fiscal Year 2016 spending plan that meets the new requirements of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 and funds the Defense Department at $572.8 billion in base and Overseas Contingency Operation (OCO) funding.

This total is $5.1 billion less than the president requested for the fiscal year but $18.7 billion more than was appropriated in FY 2015.

The Defense Department portion of the spending bill includes $111 billion for new equipment and upgrades, including several items beyond what the Navy and Marine Corps asked for in their budget request. The bill proposes adding $660 million for seven E/A-18G Growlers and $350 million for five F/A-18 Super Hornets, creating more work for Boeing’s production line that the company said earlier this year would stay open despite uncertainties surrounding additional American buys.

The bill would also add $780 million for six additional F-35B Joint Strike Fighters for the Marine Corps and $255 million for two additional F-35C JSFs for the Navy; bringing the total to 15 F-35Bs and six F-35Cs in FY 2016.


link.




posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 03:42 PM
link   
If I'm reading and understanding this correctly, the budget went over by about $18 billion.

Remember, folks - when it comes to silly things like education, healthcare, infrastructure - silly, non-essential parts of everyday life in America - well, there's just no funding/money available!

(But you'd better believe we got an extra $18 billion for more war machines!)

Also - with the asinine budgets of our military, why have we not been able to take out a ragtag group of radical extremists who have Twitter and Facebook accounts?



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 03:49 PM
link   
Don't see Lightnings mentioned?



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 03:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: RomeByFire
If I'm reading and understanding this correctly, the budget went over by about $18 billion.

Remember, folks - when it comes to silly things like education, healthcare, infrastructure - silly, non-essential parts of everyday life in America - well, there's just no funding/money available!

(But you'd better believe we got an extra $18 billion for more war machines!)

Also - with the asinine budgets of our military, why have we not been able to take out a ragtag group of radical extremists who have Twitter and Facebook accounts?


Because helping the American people doesn't get the rich even richer. Boeing is on welfare and I don't hear anyone complaining about that except good ol Bernie Sanders. But God forbid a hungry kid get a free meal. I honestly don't know how these people sleep at night.



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 03:56 PM
link   
a reply to: amicktd

But hey man, corporate welfare isn't welfare, those guys are the job creators!

They sure have made a lot of jobs in their off-shore accounts to avoid the IRS and other legal jurisdictions the U.S. imposes (they still get multi-million and even billion dollar tax breaks, though).

But yeah.

It's about selling wars, "look at the new shiny and expensive toys we have!"

And don't get me wrong - I'm not saying there's no necessity for a military, just not one that is as excessive to the point of spending more in one year than the next ten or so countries do combined.

Who are we defending ourselves from... an army of Supermen?

"They got money for war, but can't feed the poor."



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Cohen the Barbarian

Six F-35Bs and two Cs.



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 05:13 PM
link   
a reply to: RomeByFire

Have you ever looked beyond the spending, and types and truly looked at the status of some of our forces? You should some day. It's eye opening.



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 05:21 PM
link   
a reply to: RomeByFire

No THOSE guys are being made underground...I think it's secret too.



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 05:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Others are saying there's another 2 A's as well.



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

They may have. Everyone has been paying attention to the Navy that it would be easy to miss those.

Any bets on if that 8th Pegasus is buried in there?
edit on 12/16/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 05:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I sure hope it is. If not the lot falls through right?



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 05:41 PM
link   
a reply to: RomeByFire

Well you have to be SAFE before you can worry about education and healthcare! I mean, the people on the other side of the world who claim they want to hurt us need to be pounded out of existence first -- then we can worry about ourselves at home!

Oh something something about defense contractors lobbying for contracts too


EDIT: I would add though that a lot of spending goes into maintaining stuff we have...Ever had to take your car in for the 60k check up? That's a spendy bit of cash...
edit on 16-12-2015 by MystikMushroom because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 05:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Bfirez

If they don't add another aircraft to LRIP 1 they lose the fixed price and it goes to cost plus.



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 06:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: RomeByFire
If I'm reading and understanding this correctly, the budget went over by about $18 billion.

Remember, folks - when it comes to silly things like education, healthcare, infrastructure - silly, non-essential parts of everyday life in America - well, there's just no funding/money available!

(But you'd better believe we got an extra $18 billion for more war machines!)

Also - with the asinine budgets of our military, why have we not been able to take out a ragtag group of radical extremists who have Twitter and Facebook accounts?


Those are important and no one is disputing that.
However:

Education needs a comprehensive overhaul. We already spend, relatively, a very significant amount per child with a poor return. Throwing money into a fire isn't useful, and there doesn't seem to be a linear correlation between funding and education scores in the U.S.

Healthcare also needs a comprehensive overhaul. Obamacare or not, there needs to be some kind of federal agency, such as the Europeans do, which fight and litigate to control healthcare costs. Throwing another few billion into the pot when a box of Kleenex can cost $500 or a single HIV medication jumps from a few dollars a year to 5000%+ more (If I recall the Daraprim debacle correctly) is useless.

Infrastructure is a bit easier to correlate, but is nonetheless complicated. Unionization has grossly inflated the costs of main projects, the federal government doesn't directly fund infrastructure in many instances, and this too will require extensive studies of current conditions, alternatives, and etc. to figure out. Money is a solution here, but nonetheless problematic.

Meanwhile defense is very straightforward, particularly for the Navy. We have a resurgent Russia, a vastly rising China who is already seeking to challenge our forces at sea and recently practiced an attack on the USS Reagan while at sea with a submarine, to say nothing of the South China Sea.
Money correlates very well to increased capabilities, or more importantly, maintaining capabilities. We need more equipment, we need to replace and repair equipment, and we need to do it quickly. As expensive as Healthcare, Infrastructure, and Education is, it is nowhere near as expensive as losing control of the $5.3T worth of trade that goes through that sea, to say nothing of regional stability. We would be remiss to leave our allies unsecured and force them to arm themselves independently rather than largely relying on the U.S. military umbrella.

As to your last part, that has much more to do with how warfare is waged. How do you kill an enemy that isn't static? If I tell a hundred people in the state of Washington want to kill you, how are you going to manage that? Even when they reveal themselves for an attack, can you get there fast enough? Are they embedded with civilians? Russia couldn't do it. Syria and Iraq and Afghanistan and just about every country with a radical Muslim insurgency can't do it. It's not a matter of money or skill or equipment. Apples and Oranges.

Not sure what the Twitter and Facebook jab is about. Most of the time you want it up to gather intelligence, such as the infamous "Geo-Tag my selfie at our ISIS headquarters" picture.



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 07:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

This is going to get exciting!

Carter just told the Navy to cut back the LCS buy (from 52 to 40) and to downselect to one class in FY19 to pay for more Rhinos, Growlers and Lightnings.

I'm not a fan of the LCS, but sorta like the Indies because I can see some serious potential for upgrading them (holy crap they have a huge space and volume inside).



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 07:59 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Hallelujah! That whole program is a joke.



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 08:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

They should either just kill it or do a MAJOR upgrade. The current ships are...underwhelming.

I have to admit, I like the idea of dropping a railgun on the deck of an Independence. It has the space for the pulsed power generation equipment and would make an amusing gun boat.

It actually has a lot of volume for upgrades. Sadly, they'd never happen.



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 08:52 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

They'll screw it up and select Freedom. That one is a total POS, which guarantees selection.



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 09:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Will the F-35's be able to launch from the Gerald F. Ford class carrier? I was under the assumption that these new class of carriers would accommodate the newest naval and marine aircraft. I'm sure this question is off topic, but if the budget allows for the F-35 to take advantage of the Ford Class carriers, I don't see a problem.



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 09:17 PM
link   
a reply to: EternalSolace

The B and C model can launch from almost any carrier. The B is optimized for the smaller LHA/LHD class ships, and the C for the Nimitz and Ford class. The B can use the larger ones as well, but the C can only use them.
edit on 12/16/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join