What does Inhofe Have Against Cannon Fodder?

[guido911]

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=20090406_298_0_WASHIN63389

[RecycleMichael]

Cannons aren't used much in this century. Inhofe just lives in the past.

[joiei]

We better look out, someone is messing with Inhofe's Pork Barrel.  It doesn't matter that no one wants it except him. 

[cannon_fodder]

"Cannons" were of course technically howitzers.   I don't know enough about the project or the needs of the army to speak intelligently about it.  But $500,000,000 for 10 guns seems like a lot to employ 100 people. 

If it is a need of the army and it is being cut, I'm upset.  If it is being cut to save $500,000,000 and I'm supposed to be mad at the 100 jobs, I'm not.  Hell, just doll out $4mil a year to pay them each $40K to do something else and we'd still save $450,000,000 over 10 years.

[sgrizzle]

The canceling of the F-22 (and loss off some 25,000 direct, up to 95,000 indirect jobs) was the dumbest part of the plan.

Maybe part of the "save the auto industry" plan is to crap on the defense industry, so the auto industry suddenly looks like a good investment.

[Cats Cats Cats]

The question is how many of these do we need?  I bet we would be ok with delaying 20 this year.

[swake]

The canceling of the F-22 (and loss off some 25,000 direct, up to 95,000 indirect jobs) was the dumbest part of the plan.

Maybe part of the "save the auto industry" plan is to crap on the defense industry, so the auto industry suddenly looks like a good investment.

So spending $150 million per plane for fighter jets that were designed to fight the cold war is a good idea?

You do know that F-22 has flown exactly zero missions in Iraq and Afghanistan, right? Despite there already being almost 200 of the planes in use.

[Renaissance]

There will still be 187 F-22s in the service.  I don't know why we need 350 of the most expensive fighter in the fleet when it's not been used in any of the wars we've been fighting for the last 10 yrs.

And if we ever have that imaginary World War III with Russia and China, we can always build more.  Again--there will be almost 190 of them aloft at the moment that war happens.

[swake]

There will still be 187 F-22s in the service.  I don't know why we need 350 of the most expensive fighter in the fleet when it's not been used in any of the wars we've been fighting for the last 10 yrs.

And if we ever have that imaginary World War III with Russia and China, we can always build more.  Again--there will be almost 190 of them aloft at the moment that war happens.

Considering that such a war would be over faster than Lens Crafters can make a pair of glasses they wouldn't really be used in that kind of war either.

[Chicken Little]

The canceling of the F-22 (and loss off some 25,000 direct, up to 95,000 indirect jobs) was the dumbest part of the plan.

Maybe part of the "save the auto industry" plan is to crap on the defense industry, so the auto industry suddenly looks like a good investment.

Heard a story on NPR this morning that they are going to step up production on the F-35, another Lockheed Martin aircraft, which the White House claims will more than offset the jobs lost to the F-22, production to be phased out by FY2011.

F-35 Lightning II

The F-35 is being designed to be the world's premier strike aircraft through 2040. It is intended that its close and long-range air-to-air capability will be second only to that of the F-22 Raptor. Specifically the F-35's requirements are that it be: four times more effective than legacy fighters in air-to-air combat, eight times more effective in air-to-ground battle combat, and three times more effective in reconnaissance and suppression of air defenses. These capabilities are to be achieved while still having significantly better range and require less logistics support than legacy aircraft.

_____________

The F-35 is cheaper, with a unit cost of US$83 million vs the F-22's US$137.5 million.  And we'll be selling the crud out of the F-35.  Sales are the F-22 are banned. 

The Lightning II will be the second best fighter in the world and the ground attack role makes it far better suited to the threats of the future.   And if some purchaser goes koo-koo, we'll still have 187 Raptors around if we need to make confetti out of their F-35s.  All in all, this sounds like a pretty smart move, but I do get your point about canceling the program in the middle of a recession.

[nathanm]

The canceling of the F-22 (and loss off some 25,000 direct, up to 95,000 indirect jobs) was the dumbest part of the plan.

I love fighter jets more than the next guy (I'd have been jazzed if we had built many of the crazy airborne weapons systems people thought of in the 60s), but the F-22 seems to be something of a boondoggle, price-wise.

I think part of the issue is that there are those that think we really do need to outspend the entire rest of the world combined in military expenditures or somehow we'll fall behind. Personally, I think matching the next highest spender ought to be plenty. Perhaps if we'd stop trying to build and operate bases the world over we might be able to build more advanced weapons systems within the same or a smaller budget.

Or maybe if we began running them with military personnel instead of private contractors again..