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 Airforce in trouble.

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 01:09 AM
link   
Confirmation from the US Airforce that the delay in modernising their fleet is going to cause real trouble. The need to fund the development and acquisition of 3 new systems has put so much pressure on the budget that they've now admitted that they can't afford to do everything that's needed.

www.defenseindustrydaily.com...

I can't help wondering if the cutting of the 5 F35s from next years budget is as a result of the delay in retiring the A10 and the need to have the supply line in place. Longer term the upgrades to it to keep it flying till 2020s are interesting. I wonder if this will take some of the strain off the F15 and F16s in a low threat environment. I do wonder however what impact pushing back its retirement date that far will have on the IOC date for the F35 especially given the Airforce has already said it can't maintain both types.

It'll also be interesting to see what impact this combined with the future enhancements and need to keep the teens series flying has on the airforce maintenance budget and staff retention. Could pushing everything futher back just build up the problems to a greater degree?

Finally, I know they run two planes at a time when the president is out and about but a cost of over 1/2 Billion dollars/year is a hell of a lot to be paying. Especially as this is down for R&D rather than the purchase of the new plane.

Interestingly it looks like there is no more work planned on the Dragon Lady after FY2019.




posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 01:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Donkey09

The A-10 debate is really the definition of irony. We need to retire it right now it's obsolete! Never mind let's upgrade it now. The airforce's narrative is crazy and I'm glad the GAO is in charge of LRSB and hopefully some other projects as well



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 01:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Donkey09

There was another horrible article about the F-35 program last week on Yahoo news.

I have just quit reading about the cost over runs and problems with the aircraft. The old fly before you buy seems to usually work ... Buy a promise on a piece of paper, well, buyer beware... Kinda like paper gold I suppose ?

That's alright, industry will be by soon to tell us how great the plane and the program is.

F-22 we got just about 35% of what was originally stated as needed due to cost over runs.. Have to wonder of the same figure will hold for the F-35 variants; while the potential enemies and future combatants seem to be rolling out flyable aircraft on a yearly basis. No problem the stuff we spend a fortune for can whoop any ten Ruskies or Chinese...or so the story goes.. I hope they are right or certainly more correct than they were when they decided guns were not needed on fighter aircraft; that lesson was learned the hard way with lives lost.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 04:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Donkey09

The 5 F-35s were cut to put money into the bomber and tanker, not the A-10. As for the U-2, they announced several years ago they were retiring it in 2019 and relying on the Global Hawk to do the mission.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 04:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bfirez
a reply to: Donkey09

The A-10 debate is really the definition of irony. We need to retire it right now it's obsolete! Never mind let's upgrade it now. The airforce's narrative is crazy and I'm glad the GAO is in charge of LRSB and hopefully some other projects as well




Obsolete or not, it still kills tanks, talleibunnies, ground pounders love it, as do the pilots, unless its actually blown apart, it will get the pilot home, what more do you want?



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 05:19 AM
link   
a reply to: pikestaff
Gau 8 , delivering peace @ 3900 rounds per minute . What more to be said ?





posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 07:30 AM
link   
a reply to: 727Sky

Probably why they gave the LRS_B to Northrup



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:02 AM
link   
a reply to: BigTrain

Which is amusing because they had higher average overruns on far fewer aircraft.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: pikestaff
Gau 8 , delivering peace @ 3900 rounds per minute . What more to be said ?


brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrt



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 10:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

They cut 5 F-35As, but added in more Bs & Cs, if I am not mistaken. For Lockheed, I think its a net gain, is it not?



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Overall Yes.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 10:45 AM
link   
a reply to: pikestaff

I agree, I don't think we have a dedicated CAS platform that perfectly fits as much as the A10. The debate over it has been ridiculous and I was just trying to point that out. I've known enough soldiers to know it is what they want under fire, the men and women on the ground deserve whatever air support they need.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 10:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Bfirez

here's my question. why spend all this money desiging a brand new CAS plane from the ground up. why not just start with the a10 platform and modernize it. give it newer engibes, a better sensor and data suite, a little more loiter and call it a day.

the a10 was one of those designs, that much like the crocodile or shark, are pretty damned good for what they're intended and don't need much change or evolution.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

You're right. The A10 is a awesomely designed plane from what I've read.



And while the aircraft is some 43 years old. We have a far older B-52 still flying and being upgraded.

Why not keep upgrading this craft to keep it current? There's gotta be a reason.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 12:07 PM
link   
a reply to: grey580

IIRC they claim it won't survive in a modern A2/AD environment. My question is which 4th Gen platform will? Unless you think the 35's and the B1's can handle it all you need 4th Gen CAS still imo.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 12:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: Zaphod58

They cut 5 F-35As, but added in more Bs & Cs, if I am not mistaken. For Lockheed, I think its a net gain, is it not?

The best yardstick to determine how much a new program will cost is the number of senior military officers hired by the manufacturer.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 12:26 PM
link   
The pressures on US budget won't be getting any better.They estimate that somewhere between 2030-2040, 100% of the federal budget will be spent paying off loan interest, social security and Medicare with nothing remaining to pay wages for federal employees much less the defence force. Clearly US defense forces of tomorrow need be much smaller and more efficient than yesteryears.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: grey580

The much older B-52 also doesn't get anywhere near anything resembling a modern defense system until it's been degraded, a lot.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 12:58 PM
link   
The USAF has a metric butt load of problems, starting with recently pushing the bulk of the Aircraft Maintainers out the door in the name of budget cuts..

They are so poorly manned in maintenance they are asking people to come back in for 3-5 years...

Add in the fighter mafia pissing away money for do it all platforms..

No soon to arrive new bombers, tankers, or cargo...

But by golly we have new fighters..

Schmucks cant see past the end of their own noses.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

So the Air Force is worried about survival issues?

2nd?



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join