Jet Fighter Costs to Hit $1 Trillion - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Gurkha · #1 03-14-2008, 11:30 AM

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/03/11/national/w154215D32.DTL

The cost of buying and operating a new fleet of jet fighters for the U.S. military is nearing $1 trillion, according to a congressional audit that found the program dogged by delays, manufacturing inefficiencies and price increases.

TheDon · #2 03-14-2008, 11:33 AM

waste of money

Bill Wood · #3 03-14-2008, 12:11 PM

The design specs of the F-35 are pretty staggering...

The F-35A is the conventional version for the Air Force that will replace the F-16

The F-35B is the STOVL version that will replace the AV-8 Harrier for the Marines

The F-35C is the carrier version that will replace the F-18 for the Navy.

In addition, it has to be stealthy and be almost as good as the Raptor in air to air combat. Oh, and it has to replace the A-10 warthog for close air support.

That's a lot to ask for in one basic aircraft design!

LUVMBDiesels · #4 03-14-2008, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDon

waste of money

I say why do we NEED an Air Force anyway? If we gave up our Imperialistic Capitalistic ways we would not enrage anybody enough to want to attack us!

Hatterasguy · #5 03-14-2008, 12:52 PM

Its actualy money very well spent. All our currant aircraft are 30 year old Cold War stuff, so to keep our edge we need to upgrade. They are going to replace a bunch of planes with two, the F22 and F35. This will be cheaper to operate, and during a time of war its much simpler to supply, maintain, and build only two.

$1T is a lot but considering that these aircraft should keep the airforce in the number 1 spot for the next 20 years, its pretty cheap. $50B a year, which IMHO is reasonable.

Hatterasguy · #6 03-14-2008, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LUVMBDiesels

I say why do we NEED an Air Force anyway? If we gave up our Imperialistic Capitalistic ways we would not enrage anybody enough to want to attack us!

You would be singing a different tune of you had to wait 6 hours in line to buy 10 gallons of gas at $20 each, because China decided to divert all middle eastern oil to their country...and our airforce was unable to break the blockade...because it was old.

He who rules the sky controls all.

What happend to American pride? Can't we just be proud that our country has the number one airforce in the world; and be willing to pay a bit to keep it that way? Do we hate ourselves that much?

LUVMBDiesels · #7 03-14-2008, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

You would be singing a different tune of you had to wait 6 hours in line to buy 10 gallons of gas at $20 each, because China decided to divert all middle eastern oil to their country...and our airforce was unable to break the blockade...because it was old.

He who rules the sky controls all.

What happend to American pride? Can't we just be proud that our country has the number one airforce in the world; and be willing to pay a bit to keep it that way? Do we hate ourselves that much?

Oooh I got a bite!

If you read any of my other posts, you would know I was just fishin'...

Actually I was hoping to lure out some real lefties on this topic

Hatterasguy · #8 03-14-2008, 01:21 PM

Sorry hit a nerve, the lefties wear on you after awhile.

WVOtoGO · #9 03-14-2008, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LUVMBDiesels

Actually I was hoping to lure out some real lefties on this topic

Call me a “Leftie” if you want. Or anything you want, for that matter.

But I’m 100% on keeping the military up to speed.

Hatt hit it right on the head with: “He who rules the sky controls all.” Especially when it comes to an actual conflict.

I will say this - I have owned enough aircraft, from Piper Cubs to a Citation X. And sometimes I must admit that I can’t help but wonder how they justify the price on some of these things. Yep – They are tops in Hi-Tech goodies. But wow, sometimes I can’t see that kind of money in any aircraft. I guess it’s the R&D costs.

If that’s the cost of freedom - I’ll pay my share.

dynalow · #10 03-14-2008, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WVOtoGO

I’m 100% on keeping the military up to speed.
If that’s the cost of freedom - I’ll pay my share.

X2

From this ....

To this....

btw...powered by Rolls Royce!!!

LaRondo · #11 03-14-2008, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gurkha

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/03/11/national/w154215D32.DTL

The cost of buying and operating a new fleet of jet fighters for the U.S. military is nearing $1 trillion, according to a congressional audit that found the program dogged by delays, manufacturing inefficiencies and price increases.

The Minuteman

A few days ago I got this book "The Minuteman" by former US Senator and presidential candidate Gary Hart.

I haven't really read much yet, but it mentions the military of the contemporary United States as "Eisenhower's Nightmare".

It exposes the many cons for maintaining a "Standing Army" over the effectiveness of a "People's Army" or Civil Defense. The Minuteman.

Like Switzerland where every citizen is also trained to be a soldier, should the situation arise.

I have to read more, so far every page has been an eye opener.

Currently, we're basically feeding a monster.
The Military-Industrial Complex, which will always find a reason to sustain and grow itself.

Hatterasguy · #12 03-14-2008, 03:50 PM

Our standing military is realitivly small, as it has always been. We have what 300k soliders. China has what 2M++++++.

Do you prefer someone with no training, and an AK47, or a lot of training and an M16? I'll take the later.

Back during the 18th century military technoligy was limited, and it was possible for farmers to build a convential military strong enough to fight toe to toe with the big boys on the block at that time, the Brit's. These days that is not possible. You are reduced to partisan warefare which has marginal affect.

It gets much more complicated with an airforce and navy. With the army you can build it up very quickly, as the Germans proved in months you can crank out able and well equiped divisions. As long as you have good officers to lead them, and can make small arms. However an air force and more so a Navy takes decades. Armor divisions are considerable more expensive and slower to create.

Ruduce these at your own risk, you can't build them back up in 6 months, once they are gone they are gone.

bob_98sr5 · #13 03-14-2008, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LUVMBDiesels

I say why do we NEED an Air Force anyway? If we gave up our Imperialistic Capitalistic ways we would not enrage anybody enough to want to attack us!

you are a beneficiary of a capitalistic society, no?

if you really believe in, say, socialism, please drop off your bourgeois mercedes in my driveway. i need a 4th car

you assume moral relativism, that all people are inherently good. kim il sung killed nearly all of my mother's side of the family preceding and during the korean war b/c they were christians and/or had land or businesses. the korean war wouldve never started if htere was a good deterrent to the north. just one of many examples of tyrants whose evil ways destroyed nations, people etc b/c there was not a strong military *and* government to keep them in check

raymr · #14 03-14-2008, 04:07 PM

Security may be the end of us. Security is very expensive and pervasive. It has a nebulous quality that sneaks into every mundane corner of everyday life. Security is different from defense. Defense is a reactive measure against an agressive act. Security presumes the worst case scenarios of breeched borders, attacks from within, and lots of other far-reaching and secretive stuff. Security presumes that an attack is always imminent, and pre-emptive measures must be taken to mitigate as many of those threats as possible. Security by nature becomes an offensive tactic when it's misused and taken too far.

Think about that when our leaders talk about national security instead of national defense. We attacked Iraq in the name of security, not defense.

aklim · #15 03-14-2008, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

Our standing military is realitivly small, as it has always been. We have what 300k soliders. China has what 2M++++++.

Do you prefer someone with no training, and an AK47, or a lot of training and an M16? I'll take the later.

Question is who has the stones to use what they got?

Sometimes, though, numbers mean a lot. This might be one of those times