Barack Obama Commander in Chief

[Navy1960]

Now I will add this as a futher testament to my position, on what IMHO needs to be done at DoD. The US Air Force and Military in general is in desperate need of a replacement for the KC-135 and for those of you who don't know what that is, it refuels aircraft while inflight. These Kc-135's have been flying since 1955 and are getting very old. The following is an example of the complete stupidity involved in the process of purchasing it's repalcement.

Round 1, Lease Contract
The initial plan was to lease Boeing KC-767 tankers on a sole-source basis (Boeing being the only American company with the requisite industrial capability to manufacture large-body aircraft). As such, the KC-767 was initially selected in 2002[1] and in 2003 was awarded a US$20 billion contract to lease KC-767 tankers to replace the KC-135.

Led by Senator John McCain, several US government leaders protested the lease contract as wasteful and problematic. In response to the protests, the Air Force struck a compromise in November 2003, whereby it would purchase 80 KC-767 aircraft and lease 20 more.[2]

Yet only one month later in December 2003, the Pentagon announced the project was to be frozen while an investigation of allegations of corruption by one if its former procurement staffers, Darleen Druyun (who had moved to Boeing in January) was begun. Druyun pled guilty of criminal wrongdoing and was sentenced to nine months in jail for "negotiating a job with Boeing at the same time she was involved in contracts with the company".[3] Additional fallout included the termination of CFO Michael M. Sears (who was later sentenced to four months in prison in 2005)[4], the resignation of Boeing CEO Philip M. Condit, and Boeing paid a $615 million fine in recompense for their actions related to the contract.

In January 2006, the lease contract was formally cancelled.

[edit] Round 2, KC-X program
Main article: KC-X
The USAF then reopened the contract for competition under the title KC-X. Boeing bid on the contract, again proposing a variant of its KC-767 aircraft. The only other bidder was Northrop Grumman, another large American defense contractor. However, NG had never manufactured a tanker aircraft and its last venture into the large plane business was the billion-dollar B-2 Spirit. Thus, it announced a teaming arrangement with European aircraft manufacturer EADS, offering a variant of the Airbus A330 MRTT, used in several European countries. NG and EADS also announced plans to build two new aircraft manufacturing facilities, both at Brookley Field in Mobile, Alabama, whereby EADS would assemble the final unmodified tankers, then deliver them to NG for military customization. EADS also announced plans to move its A330 freighter assembly line to the Mobile plant as well.

On February 29, 2008, in a surprise move, the USAF awarded the new tanker contract to Northrop Grumman.
Boeing immediately protested the contract award to the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Meanwhile, several key supporters in Congress decried the decision, claiming numerous American jobs would be "outsourced", and announced plans to introduce legislation which would force the USAF to purchase the Boeing plane.

On June 18, 2008 the GAO decided the protest in favor of Boeing.[5] The GAO decision criticized the contract award, stating that that the USAF failed repeatedly to follow procedures designed to ensure a fair and open competition and good value for taxpayers. The GAO recommended that the Air Force should renew discussions with both teams and obtain revised proposals, and effectively stage a new competition.

Round 3, Reopened Bid
On July 9, 2008 Gates announced that the Pentagon would hold a new, "fast-tracked" competition for the tanker contract, limited to Boeing and Northrop Grumman/EADS and concentrating on the eight (out of nearly 110) areas where Boeing's protest was sustained. Gates said that he expected a new winner of the contract would be announced by the end of the year. Furthermore, given the USAF's poor track record in managing the competition, Gates announced that John Young (the DoD's Undersecretary for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics) would oversee the contract competition.[9]

United States Air Force KC-135 replacement effort - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The amount of time and energy wasted and the outright fraud involved in this process gives you some idea of why the DoD is basically short changing the warfighter. These vital systems need to be deployed but because of favoritisim, and infighting, and outright waste. These programs langisuh and cost billions in taxpayer money, *there's your highways RedDawn* My position is very clear, hold the DoD accountable and put in checks and balances in the purchasing process to avoid this mismanagement so not only are the taxpayers not shortchanged but the warfighter is not left without a critical part to the mission.

 

[Gunny]

What is needed is to eliminate no bid contracts and look at cutting waste from the DOD budget.

We need to get rid of all the civilian support functions taking over what used to be normal military support functions. The food was just fine when I was in and we had military cooks. We are spending far more with this type of civilian contractors and aren't getting any better service. Civilian drivers don't have to go into dangerous zones.

We pay more for the Haliburton's and other civilian support functions than if we used our own troops.

Among other things, my dad was a military cook in WW II and he was proud of it.

This privatizing everything only guarantees more money for friends of the privatizers.

I couldn't pass up making note of the fact that we actually agree on something. The privatization is ridiculous and it's a shell game based on the alleged downsizing of the military begun under Gramm-Rudman-Hollings.

They cut military jobs and hire civilians to replace them which is counted against DoD manpower, not the services, when it would be FAR more cost effective to maintain the military personnel.

 

[Gunny]

Without no bid contracts things will be a lot cheaper--we can have China making weapons for us !

You get rid of no-bid contracts and allow only US companies to bid on DoD contracts.

 

[Navy1960]

No one is arguing against hurricane hunter aircraft. No one is arguing that we need don't some form of nuclear detterent, as long as other countries have nukes. No on is arguing that we don't need a medium sized professional navy to protect our coasts and project power into shipping lanes.

Unless we willfully choose to be slaves to foreign oil, what we don't need however, is a network of global miltary bases in central asia, africa and the persian gulf which are intended to protect energy resources in despotic third world countries.

You know what, I have never been a proponent of a network of global Military bases, however, I do think that from a strategic standpoint until this nation is able to stand upon it's own two feet and that means in energy and it's own industrial base, such as commerce. Then the need to protect this nations interests will remain whereever that may be. I will agree that the Military is not a police force and should never be used as one. I have always been one that advocated the use of military power when all diplomatic resources have been exhausted and when it is applied, apply it with brutal force to the point where, the mission you seek to accomplish will be done in such a manner as to leave no doubt in the minds of the public.

 

[Gunny]

I submit the following, rather than cut the DoD, manage the DoD bid process in a professional manner and take the graft out of the system. When you do this and provide the war fighter with the proper tools to defend this country, such as cutting edge, aircraft, ships, and battlefield equipment then you will find that the DoD functioning as properly that the funds available for those schools that you say one bomber can finance will be available. One note here, the U.S. has not built a bomber since the last B-2 rolled off the line in 2000. The bulk of the US Air Force bomber mission is still carried out by the B-52 which by way is an airframe that is over 50 years old and due to it's age in order to secure parts the Air Force has to go to it's own junk yard if you will at AMARG to secure those parts.

My question to you is this: what is the actual benefit to this JSF? Sounds like another political, one-size fits all albatross like the AV-8.

Perhaps we should challenge our own companies to compete for bids by getting off their asses and producing something?

 

[dilloduck]

You get rid of no-bid contracts and allow only US companies to bid on DoD contracts.

You mean there still are American companies left ?

 

[Gunny]

You mean there still are American companies left ?

Barely. Continue on as we are and there won't be.

To go back to the beginning of the thread, it annoys me that liberals always target the military for their quick cash. Carter did it. Clinton did it.

IMO, let's cut some of those duplicated and/or pointless bureaucratic jobs being held by slugs and leeches. Let's examine all those perks Congresscritters get. Let's examine their income. Where does it say we have to pay them at the "wealthy" level?

How about making all those bureaucratic slugs working for State Wlfare agencies get off their asses and do their jobs and expose/identify the fraud waste and abuse of THAT system.

There's money out there. It's just being misspent by a bunch of idiots and it didn't start just 7 years ago either, so don't even try THAT one.

 

[Navy1960]

My question to you is this: what is the actual benefit to this JSF? Sounds like another political, one-size fits all albatross like the AV-8.

Perhaps we should challenge our own companies to compete for bids by getting off their asses and producing something?

The benefits of the F-35 are many, now the Marine Corps variant and the Royal Navy variant as you know doubt know are STVOL aricraft much like the AV-8 except they use lift fan technology unlike the AV-8. The Navy though as recently as last year has argued with DoD to force the Marine Corps into accepting the Navy variant. The biggest advantage with the F-35 is it's commonality across the service platforms. It will save the DoD billions in training and spares over the life of the program. It is in many ways similar in performance to the F-18E/F. It employs 5th generation stealth technology that the F-22 employs and does not emply super cruise or thrust vectoring. What it does give the services is a common strike aircraft, that has the same stealth signature as the F-22 and with the performance of an F-18E/F. IMHO it is not the best of the best in 5th generation technology as it does not employ thrust vectoring which would seem to me something one would want to do in this type of aircraft. The biggest complaint on it Gunny is delivery capability when compared to a F-16 or F-18 which it is to replace. The amount of ordinance it puts on target compared to latter is woefully small. I do believe the upside though is bigger on this platform, as it is an amazing aircraft and is a joy to fly and handles beautifully in all aspects. The bottom line on the F-35 though is stealth, performace and commonality made it a very attractive choice.

Despite public support by Pentagon and Navy leaders for the short-take-off/vertical-landing version of the Joint Strike Fighter, debates about the planned acquisition and operation of the F-35B continue behind the scenes — worrying Marine Corps officials and potential foreign customers who are counting on the versatile aircraft.

Navy officials have set no public deadline to settle JSF procurement plans, but a current Navy briefing document provides a rare window on the debate. It argues that the STOVL version should not fly as part of a carrier air wing.

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2007/04/defense_stovl_jsf_070430m/

 

[Navy1960]

Barely. Continue on as we are and there won't be.

To go back to the beginning of the thread, it annoys me that liberals always target the military for their quick cash. Carter did it. Clinton did it.

IMO, let's cut some of those duplicated and/or pointless bureaucratic jobs being held by slugs and leeches. Let's examine all those perks Congresscritters get. Let's examine their income. Where does it say we have to pay them at the "wealthy" level?

How about making all those bureaucratic slugs working for State Wlfare agencies get off their asses and do their jobs and expose/identify the fraud waste and abuse of THAT system.

There's money out there. It's just being misspent by a bunch of idiots and it didn't start just 7 years ago either, so don't even try THAT one.

I have something that might help illustrate the waste issue in the system very well.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Army has decided to pull the plug on the development of the RAH-66 Comanche helicopter and instead use the money to upgrade its current fleet and replace aging National Guard and Army Reserve helicopters, Pentagon officials said Monday.

The military has already spent $6.9 billion over the last two decades to develop the Comanche, conceived as a surveillance and attack aircraft with "stealth" capability to make it difficult for an enemy to detect. But only two prototypes have ever been built, and the high-tech chopper was still at least two years away from regular production.

"It's a big decision. We know it's a big decision, but it's the right decision," said Army Chief-of-Staff Gen. Peter Schoomaker, who said the program was scrapped after an internal study showed the money could be better used to improve other aspects of Army aviation.

CNN.com - Army cancels Comanche helicopter - Feb. 23, 2004

This is pretty typical of political decisions and waste at the DoD, when the winds blow in one direction or the other and the axe comes out regardless of how much taxpayer money has already been spent on the program, it's automatically axed even after a successful demonstration program. What the DoD is really famous for in the bidding process is , let's use the F-22 as an example, x number of aircraft to purcahse. The contractor responds with a bid based on a per unit cost. So again political winds come into play they reduce the production number and the cost increases and them people complain about how much the aircraft is.

 

[Gunny]

The benefits of the F-35 are many, now the Marine Corps variant and the Royal Navy variant as you know doubt know are STVOL aricraft much like the AV-8 except they use lift fan technology unlike the AV-8. The Navy though as recently as last year has argued with DoD to force the Marine Corps into accepting the Navy variant. The biggest advantage with the F-35 is it's commonality across the service platforms. It will save the DoD billions in training and spares over the life of the program. It is in many ways similar in performance to the F-18E/F. It employs 5th generation stealth technology that the F-22 employs and does not emply super cruise or thrust vectoring. What it does give the services is a common strike aircraft, that has the same stealth signature as the F-22 and with the performance of an F-18E/F. IMHO it is not the best of the best in 5th generation technology as it does not employ thrust vectoring which would seem to me something one would want to do in this type of aircraft. The biggest complaint on it Gunny is delivery capability when compared to a F-16 or F-18 which it is to replace. The amount of ordinance it puts on target compared to latter is woefully small. I do believe the upside though is bigger on this platform, as it is an amazing aircraft and is a joy to fly and handles beautifully in all aspects. The bottom line on the F-35 though is stealth, performace and commonality made it a very attractive choice.

Despite public support by Pentagon and Navy leaders for the short-take-off/vertical-landing version of the Joint Strike Fighter, debates about the planned acquisition and operation of the F-35B continue behind the scenes — worrying Marine Corps officials and potential foreign customers who are counting on the versatile aircraft.

Navy officials have set no public deadline to settle JSF procurement plans, but a current Navy briefing document provides a rare window on the debate. It argues that the STOVL version should not fly as part of a carrier air wing.

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2007/04/defense_stovl_jsf_070430m/

The obvious problem I see is VTOL is required to land on LHDs. Unless you just want to watch the plane fly right over the bow into the drink.

True, it probably is not a benefit to a carrier air wing, but the MEUs usually operate separately from them.

I'm curious as to why the Corps doesn't just go for both versions? Currently, they fly F-18s with the carrier air wings and AV-8s with the MEUs. Why not fly the Navy version with the Navy and the VTOL version with the gator freighters?

I'm also not real appreciative of ordnance delivery. A Supercobra can deliver more ordnance than a WWII B-17. I understand the more is better concept, but in today's climate, how often is that really necessary in lieu of precision targetting the ordnance they do carry?

 

[random3434]

Barely. Continue on as we are and there won't be.

To go back to the beginning of the thread, it annoys me that liberals always target the military for their quick cash. Carter did it. Clinton did it.

IMO, let's cut some of those duplicated and/or pointless bureaucratic jobs being held by slugs and leeches. Let's examine all those perks Congresscritters get. Let's examine their income. Where does it say we have to pay them at the "wealthy" level?

How about making all those bureaucratic slugs working for State Wlfare agencies get off their asses and do their jobs and expose/identify the fraud waste and abuse of THAT system.

There's money out there. It's just being misspent by a bunch of idiots and it didn't start just 7 years ago either, so don't even try THAT one.

Not to get off topic, but your words could also apply to education and the Top Heavy, Over Paid administrators.

Get rid of a LOT of them that does who knows what, and use that money for the students.

Sorry, back to the military spending now!

 

[Gunny]

I have something that might help illustrate the waste issue in the system very well.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Army has decided to pull the plug on the development of the RAH-66 Comanche helicopter and instead use the money to upgrade its current fleet and replace aging National Guard and Army Reserve helicopters, Pentagon officials said Monday.

The military has already spent $6.9 billion over the last two decades to develop the Comanche, conceived as a surveillance and attack aircraft with "stealth" capability to make it difficult for an enemy to detect. But only two prototypes have ever been built, and the high-tech chopper was still at least two years away from regular production.

"It's a big decision. We know it's a big decision, but it's the right decision," said Army Chief-of-Staff Gen. Peter Schoomaker, who said the program was scrapped after an internal study showed the money could be better used to improve other aspects of Army aviation.

CNN.com - Army cancels Comanche helicopter - Feb. 23, 2004

This is pretty typical of political decisions and waste at the DoD, when the winds blow in one direction or the other and the axe comes out regardless of how much taxpayer money has already been spent on the program, it's automatically axed even after a successful demonstration program. What the DoD is really famous for in the bidding process is , let's use the F-22 as an example, x number of aircraft to purcahse. The contractor responds with a bid based on a per unit cost. So again political winds come into play they reduce the production number and the cost increases and them people complain about how much the aircraft is.

When I came off the drill field my "reward" instead of being sent back to the Fleet was being incarcerated at HQMC. I've seen that crap first hand and having me in that stupid place was like having a bull in a china shop.

It's absurd really. I love the government shelling out x billions of dollars just for different companies to attempt to develop something. When they go bust, the money was for nothing.

 

[Navy1960]

The obvious problem I see is VTOL is required to land on LHDs. Unless you just want to watch the plane fly right over the bow into the drink.

True, it probably is not a benefit to a carrier air wing, but the MEUs usually operate separately from them.

I'm curious as to why the Corps doesn't just go for both versions? Currently, they fly F-18s with the carrier air wings and AV-8s with the MEUs. Why not fly the Navy version with the Navy and the VTOL version with the gator freighters?

I'm also not real appreciative of ordnance delivery. A Supercobra can deliver more ordnance than a WWII B-17. I understand the more is better concept, but in today's climate, how often is that really necessary in lieu of precision targetting the ordnance they do carry?

My own feelings are Gunny that the Navy will most likely win out on this argument as it boils down to a budget issue and generally when the bean counters at the Pentgon under the Sec. of the Navy look at it. they will most likely cut procurement of the STOVL variant. The other thing to consider here as well is, the life cycle of the super hornet E/F model is in full production so that might come into play as well. The Marine Corps F-35 though is a much more stable platform than the AV-8B . As for the ordnanace issue you hit the nail on the head, with precision guided munitions like JDAM, AIM 132 ,and Stormshadow cruise missile, big is not always better. Some of this ordanance as you know is complete with smart sub munitions these days so again, the strike power of one Missile is sometimes increased in volume.


I thought this might be of interest . The STOVL verision even though it is in the testing phase is no where near , as far along in the development phase as the Navy version or the Air Force Version.

Farnborough, UK – Engineers at BAE Systems, a major partner in the F35 Lightning II fighter programme, have successfully simulated the aircraft performing a shipborne rolling vertical landing manoeuvre (SRVL) to the deck of the Royal Navy’s new aircraft carrier (CVF) using the BAE Systems simulation facility at its Warton site in North West of England. This represents a world first with the integration of the F-35 and CVF synthetic models.

The Company, which pioneered short take off and vertical landing technology, a key capability of the F35 Lightning II, is working with the UK MoD to support integration of the aircraft with the carrier ahead of entry into service.

This work aims to develop the capability of the short take off and vertical landing (STOVL) variant of the F-35 Lightning II, the UK replacement aircraft for the Harrier, and has been identified as a significant step forward to enhancing the capabilities of the UK armed forces in the future.

The SRVL manoeuvre is a development of a land based technique used currently by the Harrier aircraft and involves the aircraft landing on the carrier with a low-speed approach instead of vertically. This enables STOVL aircraft to land with heavier a payload. BAE Systems has successfully tested this technique at its dedicated flight simulation facility at Warton.

FIRST SIMULATED LANDINGS ON NEW ROYAL NAVY CARRIERS

 

[Gunny]

Not to get off topic, but your words could also apply to education and the Top Heavy, Over Paid administrators.

Get rid of a LOT of them that does who knows what, and use that money for the students.

Sorry, back to the military spending now!

Any government agency that involves bureaucracy is going to be the same. Especially in today's climate and attitude where people are there to collect a check, not provide a service. Used to be the other way around. But they've figured out they can't get fired without an act of Congress.

No one really addresses this, but what do you think Monicagate was REALLY about? Clinton pissed off a career DC bureaucrat, Linda Tripp, and she went after his ass. He moved her to a lower-ranking, off in the corner job; which, is perfectly understandable. Even the President can't screw with the system without being attacked. It's pathetic, really.

 

[Gunny]

Not to get off topic, but your words could also apply to education and the Top Heavy, Over Paid administrators.

Get rid of a LOT of them that does who knows what, and use that money for the students.

Sorry, back to the military spending now!

Any government agency that involves bureaucracy is going to be the same. Especially in today's climate and attitude where people are there to collect a check, not provide a service. Used to be the other way around. But they've figured out they can't get fired without an act of Congress.

No one really addresses this, but what do you think Monicagate was REALLY about? Clinton pissed off a career DC bureaucrat, Linda Tripp, and she went after his ass. He moved her to a lower-ranking, off in the corner job; which, is perfectly understandable. Even the President can't screw with the system without being attacked. It's pathetic, really.

 

[Gunny]

Not to get off topic, but your words could also apply to education and the Top Heavy, Over Paid administrators.

Get rid of a LOT of them that does who knows what, and use that money for the students.

Sorry, back to the military spending now!

Any government agency that involves bureaucracy is going to be the same. Especially in today's climate and attitude where people are there to collect a check, not provide a service. Used to be the other way around. But they've figured out they can't get fired without an act of Congress.

No one really addresses this, but what do you think Monicagate was REALLY about? Clinton pissed off a career DC bureaucrat, Linda Tripp, and she went after his ass. He moved her to a lower-ranking, off in the corner job; which, is perfectly understandable. Even the President can't screw with the system without being attacked. It's pathetic, really.

 

[Luissa]

Any government agency that involves bureaucracy is going to be the same. Especially in today's climate and attitude where people are there to collect a check, not provide a service. Used to be the other way around. But they've figured out they can't get fired without an act of Congress.

No one really addresses this, but what do you think Monicagate was REALLY about? Clinton pissed off a career DC bureaucrat, Linda Tripp, and she went after his ass. He moved her to a lower-ranking, off in the corner job; which, is perfectly understandable. Even the President can't screw with the system without being attacked. It's pathetic, really.

My dad works for the city and about half the people he works with are worthless because they have been there long enough where it is almost impossible to get them fired.I worked for a city park a couple summers in maintenance and I couldn't handle the idiots. For one they talk about they are going to do for an hour before they even start the job!But hey you at least get plenty of breaks!

 

[Luissa]

Any government agency that involves bureaucracy is going to be the same. Especially in today's climate and attitude where people are there to collect a check, not provide a service. Used to be the other way around. But they've figured out they can't get fired without an act of Congress.

No one really addresses this, but what do you think Monicagate was REALLY about? Clinton pissed off a career DC bureaucrat, Linda Tripp, and she went after his ass. He moved her to a lower-ranking, off in the corner job; which, is perfectly understandable. Even the President can't screw with the system without being attacked. It's pathetic, really.

My dad works for the city and about half the people he works with are worthless because they have been there long enough where it is almost impossible to get them fired.I worked for a city park a couple summers in maintenance and I couldn't handle the idiots. For one they talk about what they are going to do for an hour before they even start the job!But hey you at least get plenty of breaks!

 

[xsited1]

My dad works for the city and about half the people he works with are worthless because they have been there long enough where it is almost impossible to get them fired.I worked for a city park a couple summers in maintenance and I couldn't handle the idiots. For one they talk about what they are going to do for an hour before they even start the job!But hey you at least get plenty of breaks!

That's why we need to reduce the size of government. Unfortunately, neither the Democrats or the Republicans want this so it's just going to get worse. Expect this country to be a welfare State soon.

 

[Luissa]

That's why we need to reduce the size of government. Unfortunately, neither the Democrats or the Republicans want this so it's just going to get worse. Expect this country to be a welfare State soon.

I think unions work for a factory not a government ran agency. When I was younger I worked at the city park and Kmart, the two were completly different. To do about the same job the city had three people at Kmart they had one.
Whoever is President needs to figure out a way to go through every department from top to bottom and clean house!