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.

 

The Budget Games have begun, buckle up, it's gonna be a bumpy ride

page: 2
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 13 2020 @ 01:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: RadioRobert

You could hang Sidewinders under an otherwise off the shelf Gulfstream for that. And it'd save bundles. But it's probably going to be F-16's ($) with a handful of F-35's in Alaska and Washington eventually.



I hope you weren't serious with the Gulfstream comment.





posted on Feb, 13 2020 @ 01:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: RadioRobert

Everyone loves the Eagle, but it doesn't make sense to buy more-expensive, less-survivable fighter aircraft.


Less-survivable? That isn't the case. It is very survivable and unique in that area.



posted on Feb, 13 2020 @ 02:25 AM
link   
a reply to: glib2

Not sure where to begin with that, ... So I won't.



posted on Feb, 13 2020 @ 06:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: glib2

Less-survivable? That isn't the case. It is very survivable and unique in that area.


Oh come on, don't hold back, tell us why.



posted on Feb, 13 2020 @ 12:18 PM
link   
And aviation takes a hit again. The Pentagon wants to cut F-35s, MQ-9s, C-130s, P-8As and more to shift $3.8B to build the border wall.



posted on Feb, 13 2020 @ 12:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
And aviation takes a hit again. The Pentagon wants to cut F-35s, MQ-9s, C-130s, P-8As and more to shift $3.8B to build the border wall.


Eh, according to the article, it's 2 F-35B's, 2 MV-22's, one P-8A (which is a POS not currently mission -capable), and four J's. All for this funding year, which means the lines are still open to be funded next year. It's not a big deal to me. Probably saves money on the P-8 (the Navy lists as excess to requirements). The others will get picked up in next year's budget.

The MQ-9's are stickier. Everyone wants more ISR, but arguably the best way to help alleviate the demand would be minimizing the areas we have large scale deployments that are needing them. Judging by $1.6B cut from the Overseas Contingency funding, maybe that's (finally) the plan.

The pre-acq funding to the America -class line is going to end up being more expensive long-term. Probably a mistake. "Pay me now, or pay me later". Personal opinion is the Speahead cut is probably a mistake long-term, too, but like the others it's relatively easy to fund next year, no-harm, no-foul, and the Navy currently lists it as excess to requirements as well.

As a general rule, when Congress overfunds something requested, it's pork or corporate welfare.



new topics

top topics
 
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join