11bee Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Sec Gates announced significant cuts (subject to approval by congress) for the next few years. Army reduced by 27,000 troops USMC reduced by 20,000 troops USMC Amtrack replacement (EFV) canceled F-35B on "probation" for the next two years, maybe a prelude to it's ultimate cancellation? F-35 production delayed to save money. Also additional cuts in contractors, veterans health benefits and other un-named weapons systems. Given that the USMC only has ~ 190,000 troops, the loss of 20,000 is a pretty big hit. The cancellation of the EFV is also a pretty big hit for these guys. I think we are going to see only more of this, similar to what the British just went through. It will be interesting to see how all of these cuts fare in Congress. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/07/us/07mil...es&emc=tha2 Link to post Share on other sites
Sean Bratton Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 F-35B on "probation" for the next two years That's only one step away from double secret probation. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites
Wolfgun33 Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Look, I understand there's the MASSIVE deficit, but I don't think that butchering the military is the answer. On the other hand the JSF (in my opinion) is a financial joke. Cancel the thing. Get the Marines the Amtrack replacement and give them Super Hornets. How bout pay cuts for all of Congress and such (This means YOU Mr Gates!!). We're so set on getting so called "Stealth" fighters that can't carry 1/4 the load a Viper or Hornet can. There's your waste of money. Link to post Share on other sites
loftycomfort Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 If they're serious about saving money, they should just scrap the F-35B and buy a bunch of J-20's. HAR HAR! Terry Link to post Share on other sites
JasonW Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 As for the F-35B, the manufacturer has been screwing the pooch on it, and this is what it's come to. Either they can get everything back on schedule or back on budget or I say give it the heave-ho. Link to post Share on other sites
camaroz06 Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 (edited) That's only one step away from double secret probation. Cheers, Sean lol, it might already be under double secret probation. I wonder if JSF were to be canceled if there would be a few more F-22 purchases and many more Super Hornet purchases or an F-22 lite made for export? Edited January 7, 2011 by camaroz06 Link to post Share on other sites
Mark S. Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Gents: Think the decisions on the F-35 are good. It brings reality to the development and production process. You never in the auto world push the most complex version of a new car to the font of the line like what was done with the F-35B. You start with the easiest to build which is the F-35A. Learning curves, vendor quality problems and employee training all have to be dealt with at start-up. Good to see that they slowing intial production. As in cars you don't want to have a yard full of problem vehicles awaiting rework. Mark S. Link to post Share on other sites
camaroz06 Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 I actually have a question on how troop cuts work. Are troops "laid off" or recruiting quotas cut? Link to post Share on other sites
Wolfgun33 Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Gents:Think the decisions on the F-35 are good. It brings reality to the development and production process. You never in the auto world push the most complex version of a new car to the font of the line like what was done with the F-35B. You start with the easiest to build which is the F-35A. Learning curves, vendor quality problems and employee training all have to be dealt with at start-up. Good to see that they slowing intial production. As in cars you don't want to have a yard full of problem vehicles awaiting rework. Mark S. They should have cancelled the entire thing a long time ago. They have for other big projects that have gotten insanly expensive. It's a waste and has been. Link to post Share on other sites
JasonW Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 I have a great way to save money in the defense budget. Draw down all the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan within the next two months. Leave a small cadre of instructors behind. Everyone else out. Period. Kill the F-35. Start a new program to replace it and read the riot act to Lockheed/Boeing/other major defense contractors to keep within budget or else. Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted January 7, 2011 Author Share Posted January 7, 2011 I actually have a question on how troop cuts work. Are troops "laid off" or recruiting quotas cut? Good question. I assume this happens more on the back end by enforcing "up or out" and through tightened criteria for promotion. Maybe a small reduction in recruiting quotas but I would still think they need a pretty steady supply of privates. Not really sure though.... BTW, the article indicated that these manpower reductions would kick in by 2015, which in theory means that the majority of deployed troops in Afghanistan will be home by then. Link to post Share on other sites
camaroz06 Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 (edited) Kill the F-35. Start a new program to replace it and read the riot act to Lockheed/Boeing/other major defense contractors to keep within budget or else. Open a project up a new ATF^2 project and see if EADS wants in! Edited January 7, 2011 by camaroz06 Link to post Share on other sites
Wolfgun33 Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Open a project up a new ATF^2 project and see if EADS wants in! Or Saab and others. Just mandate that they have to be build here. Link to post Share on other sites
JasonW Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Good question. I assume this happens more on the back end by enforcing "up or out" and through tightened criteria for promotion. Maybe a small reduction in recruiting quotas but I would still think they need a pretty steady supply of privates. Not really sure though....BTW, the article indicated that these manpower reductions would kick in by 2015, which in theory means that the majority of deployed troops in Afghanistan will be home by then. Pretty much. Back in the 80's and early 90's they did similar cuts. A lot of officers were either sent packing or took early retirements that were offered. I think you'll probably see a lot of twelve year captains and staff sergeants go home. Probably some of low to mid-level guys at the Pentagon sent out too. Link to post Share on other sites
JasonW Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Open a project up a new ATF^2 project and see if EADS wants in! If they can keep the blasted thing on time and on budget, I'm all for it.Part of the biggest problem with US military defense projects is that the US Congress pulls too much protectionist crap when it comes to where the equipment is purchased from. They've gotten a little better in recent years. If US defense contractors knew there was a very real threat from other companies to get contracts, maybe they'd tighten up their shot group and come in on time and on budget instead of always asking for more money and pushing schedules out. As a soldier, I want the best quality equipment I can have, in the quickest time frame. To be frank I really couldn't give a crap if it was designed in the US or EU. Link to post Share on other sites
camaroz06 Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 (edited) Or Saab and others. Just mandate that they have to be build here. I totally forgot about Sabb and the like (Mikoyan, Sukohi), shame on me. Has there ever been a situation in which companies from different nations bid for another country's mainstay fighter. Not so much like like the Eurofighter, or companies bidding with export models built off of existing models. But each company producing a new model build from the ground up just for the competition. Edited January 7, 2011 by camaroz06 Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 (edited) If the F-35B goes, the whole program goes with it.... it has not exactly been embraced by the Navy and USAF has it? The USMC is the only service that is excited about it. They would probably just get F-35Cs but that's not what the USMC wants. And what the USMC wants, it gets. Look at the V-22. no development problems there... and how many times was that canceled? why isn't the Navy and USAF being cut again? do we have an ongoing Naval and air war I am not aware of since sept 11, 2001? The Army and Marines haven't been busy at all. None of these cuts are surprises though. Its all stuff that has been an "open secret" for months now. I do like the F-35 production delay-- wasn't that supposed to be the consolation prize for killing the F-22? What was the purpose of speeding up development just to delay production? Bang those swords into welfare checks boys!! how could we be out of money when we give so much of it away? Edited January 7, 2011 by TaiidanTomcat Link to post Share on other sites
GreyGhost Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 More Super Hornets are going to be ordered ... >>> DoD Article <<< Gregg Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Too bad General Motors doesn't make the F-35 Link to post Share on other sites
Camus272 Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 If the F-35B goes, the whole program goes with it.... it has not exactly been embraced by the Navy and USAF has it? The why isn't the Navy and USAF being cut again? do we have an ongoing Naval and air war I am not aware of since sept 11, 2001? The Army and Marines haven't been busy at all. None of these cuts are surprises though. Its all stuff that has been an "open secret" for months now. I do like the F-35 production delay-- wasn't that supposed to be the consolation prize for killing the F-22? What was the purpose of speeding up development just to delay production? Bang those swords into welfare checks boys!! how could we be out of money when we give so much of it away? The Air Force has already cut $34 billion and the Navy has cut $35 billion. They will both be lucky to have planes flying in ten years. The Army and Marines will still have troop strength higher than four years ago. If we could actually achieve troop withdrawals then we wouldn't have to worry about them being so busy. I'm not sure what the last sentence has to do with anything. Brian Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 The Air Force has already cut $34 billion and the Navy has cut $35 billion. They will both be lucky to have planes flying in ten years. The Army and Marines will still have troop strength higher than four years ago. If we could actually achieve troop withdrawals then we wouldn't have to worry about them being so busy. I'm not sure what the last sentence has to do with anything.Brian I thought it was a regression to pre-2006 surge levels. The last sentence is pure snark. Link to post Share on other sites
GRAIL007 Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Too bad General Motors doesn't make the F-35 Which means what? - Mark Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Which means what? - Mark Too big to fail. Link to post Share on other sites
fulcrum1 Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Wooohoooo! They can be buy me out anytime! Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Perhaps we should nationalize Boeing and Lockmart? It seemed to work well for GM and the financial industry... I'm just saying. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts