Where's the fiscal conservative outrage on this? (F35 costs 400 billion so far)

[simpletron]

My understanding, with the F-35, something is made for it in all 50 states. If that's the case, you really will have a plane that no one will say no to.

it's only 45 states; Alaska, Hawaii, Wyoming, Nebraska, and Louisiana have no part suppliers.
https://www.f35.com/about/economic-impact-map

 

[WackyDan]

Damn conservatives.... You will never find a democratic congressmen who forces the Air Force to buy way more c-17's than the Air Force needs having the Army buy more M1 Abrams than they can use.

This is a problem caused by all politicians.

To be fair, we have a shit ton of Abrams thanks to the cold war and the notion that we'd potentially fight a conventional war again on two fronts where armor would win the day.

To my knowledge they aren't building new Abrams because there are a bazillion of them in desert storage. All they do is rebuild them to new spec, so that has to come at a savings anyway versus building them from the ground up.

If you want to talk waste look at these.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alenia_C-27J_Spartan

These were ordered as straight up pork. Meant to be smaller and more nimble than the C-130's are. However, the costs of maintaining two platforms made having these more expensive than just operating C-130's for the same mission. These planes continued being produced and brand new off the line were delivered to Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson for long term storage once the Air Force and even the Army determined they didn't want them... But some congressman pushed for the production run to continue. http://www.dodbuzz.com/2013/05/16/c-27j-reemerges-despite-afs-boneyard-plans/

This is the kind of horse shit in our defense spending that needs to stop.

 

[Fern]

Where's the fiscal conservative outrage on this? (F35 costs 400 billion so far)

Well, I consider myself a conservative and I've been angry about tanks or whatever that the military doesn't want but Congress funds anyway.

But about this plane, haven't heard much nor do I know much about such military hardware. I've never been in the military and it isn't a hobby of mine.

From your article:

The Joint Strike Fighter is the Pentagon's most expensive acquisition program, estimated to cost nearly $400 billion for 2,443 aircraft.

Is that a lot of money for the planes? IDK what they should cost.

Also, I note this, again from your article:

Eight countries have committed to help develop the F-35, including the U.K., Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey, Canada, Australia, Denmark and Norway. Also, Israel, Japan and South Korea plan to buy production models of the aircraft.

Looks like a bunch of other countries approve of it. Personally, IDK, but in general I'm not opposed to upgraded tech for defense purposes.

Fern

 

[K1052]

Looks like a bunch of other countries approve of it. Personally, IDK, but in general I'm not opposed to upgraded tech for defense purposes.

Well they don't want to buy from the Russians or shoulder the cost of creating their own next generation aircraft. There are a few other options on offer from the Euro nations but nothing that matches the specs of the F-35 variants...on paper at least.

I think they recently determined that it would have been cheaper to just build individual next generation versions of the aircraft it is supposed to replace instead of trying to make F-35 variants do everything. I think they should probably have run independent acquisition programs for several new jets between Lockheed and Boeing instead of shoveling unending piles of money at Lockheed for a massively over promised family of aircraft that they really didn't know how to build.

 

[Brainonska511]

I think they recently determined that it would have been cheaper to just build individual next generation versions of the aircraft it is supposed to replace instead of trying to make F-35 variants do everything. I think they should probably have run independent acquisition programs for several new jets between Lockheed and Boeing instead of shoveling unending piles of money at Lockheed for a massively over promised family of aircraft that they really didn't know how to build.

They should have built more prototypes first to work out more bugs instead of this hybrid prototype/fix stuff on the line as issues crop up. That and mission creep are probably the biggest drivers of cost - new person gets put in charge, then wants to put his own mark on the program by changing the specs.

 

[MongGrel]

It's the same thing as the Osprey was, that thing overran big time.

Haven't seen a Harrier do much of anything at all in years really.

Keeps companies making em and money in pockets I guess.

 

[who?]

Can't an F35 with fewer than 200 rounds replace an A10 that carries almost 1300 rounds for it's Gatling gun?

 

[rommelrommel]

Can't an F35 with fewer than 200 rounds replace an A10 that carries almost 1300 rounds for it's Gatling gun?

F35 obviously can't replicate the CAS role that the a10 accomplishes. It will be far better at dropping precision munitions and will be more survivable vs some threats.

The A10 should have been upgraded years ago but the Air Force hates the thing.

 

[mirageracerx]

as long as baddies stay on the other side of the water im more lax about wasteful spending.

 

[werepossum]

Can't an F35 with fewer than 200 rounds replace an A10 that carries almost 1300 rounds for it's Gatling gun?

Probably, as A10s are usually restricted to 5,000 ft to 10,000 ft. They are incredible for what they do, but not usually allowed to do it well, as we protect the pilots at increased risk for the crunchies. They really should be an Army asset, but the Air Force is not allowing the Army to field fixed wing combat aircraft in these days of shrinking budgets.

Personally I think the A10 should be fully upgraded and either transitioned to the Army, or changed to a two-person aircraft better suited to high altitude attack. Then its slow speed would definitely be an asset. The more time your close air support has for targeting, the less likely it is to accidentally support your enemy. An A10 with modern electronics and first class optics for a WSO would be an awesome close air support asset, better than the F35.

 

[Newell Steamer]

That is military hardware.

Military hardware that will most likely be used to kill/harm brown people - so, conservatives are perfectly OK with it.

 

[Angry Irishman]

That is military hardware.

Military hardware that will most likely be used to kill/harm brown people - so, conservatives are perfectly OK with it.

Exactly the line of thinking that's shows just how brainwashed people are. It's incredibly ignorant to think military hardware is supported by only one party. Politicians are politicians and ignorant remains ignorant. Gee, I wonder what's wrong with this country and why it's so polarized?

 

[Newell Steamer]

Exactly the line of thinking that's shows just how brainwashed people are. It's incredibly ignorant to think military hardware is supported by only one party. Politicians are politicians and ignorant remains ignorant. Gee, I wonder what's wrong with this country and why it's so polarized?

Liberals are OK with weapons - I sure as hell am. I wish I could own a gun. But, conservatives cheer on the death, destruction and use of them,.. on certain people.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Liberals are OK with weapons - I sure as hell am. I wish I could own a gun. But, conservatives cheer on the death, destruction and use of them,.. on certain people.

Hmmmm you sound just like the Conservatives you posted about in your thread about Conservatives.

 

[Newell Steamer]

Hmmmm you sound just like the Conservatives you posted about in your thread about Conservatives.

Psst,... I am not the one posting; "Good Shoot" when a human being is gunned down.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Only a select few posters have done such in here and have been called out by other posters that tend to be conservative. However, don't let that prevent you from painting with a ultra wide brush or showing your irrational fear of conservatives and all things conservative.

 

[Newell Steamer]

Only a select few posters have done such in here and have been called out by other posters that tend to be conservative. However, don't let that prevent you from painting with a ultra wide brush or showing your irrational fear of conservatives and all things conservative.

You've made your view quite clear nonetheless; you are clearly a misanthropist.

You don't cheer on the murder of other people, but you still hate people who deviate from whatever you don't approve on.

Let me guess, your reply will be; you hate me for hating people, so you clearly are a misanthropist. Or, some similar table flipping bullshit.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

You've made your view quite clear nonetheless; you are clearly a misanthropist.

You don't cheer on the murder of other people, but you still hate people who deviate from whatever you don't approve on.

Let me guess, your reply will be; you hate me for hating people, so you clearly are a misanthropist. Or, some similar table flipping bullshit.

LMAO!!!!! Troll On!!!! Troll On!!!!

 

[Newell Steamer]

LMAO!!!!! Troll On!!!! Troll On!!!!

Look at that, caps AND exclamation marks; thanks for proving pretty much every point I've made about conservatives.

Now, go beat off to a news report of a cop getting shot or dead Palestinian children, you sicko.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Look at that, caps AND exclamation marks; thanks for proving pretty much every point I've made about conservatives.

Now, go beat off to a news report of a cop getting shot or dead Palestinian children, you sicko.

LMAO!!! I bet you're foaming at the mouth and slobbering all over yourself as you type these posts.

 

[Newell Steamer]

LMAO!!! I bet you're foaming at the mouth and slobbering all over yourself as you type these posts.

Is that a liberal defect? Mind linking a scientific study to it?

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Who needs a study when the liberal defect can be so plainly seen in forums such as this one?

The studies claim conservatives are driven by fear yet in real life you see that liberals are equally driven by fear and hysteria.

 

[Exterous]

Damn conservatives.... You will never find a democratic congressmen who forces the Air Force to buy way more c-17's than the Air Force needs having the Army buy more M1 Abrams than they can use.

This is a problem caused by all politicians.

:thumbsup: Someone should tell Silvestre Reyes and all the other Democrats that voted to build more Abrams tanks to sit unused in the desert that they are actually Republicans

Haven't seen a Harrier do much of anything at all in years really.

I remember reading somewhere that if they had taken the VSTOL requirement\variant out of the F-35 program that would have solved a lot of the issues

 

[squarecut1]

That is military hardware.

Military hardware that will most likely be used to kill/harm brown people - so, conservatives are perfectly OK with it.

There is what is called bipartisan consensus on it

 

[momeNt]

Would you rather we were conquered?

Air superiority is not a factor in national defense. IT IS NATIONAL DEFENSE! The F35 will deliver us air superiority for the next 20 years. 1 Trillion is a bargain.