U.S. Spending Billions on Planes Unfit for War

[realFedUp]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-planes24jul24,1,3249510.story

July 24, 2004

U.S. Spending Billions on Planes Unfit for War
Pentagon report says the Air Force keeps ordering the problem- plagued transports.

From Associated Press

WASHINGTON — The Air Force has spent $2.6 billion to buy 50 planes that do not meet the military's requirements and cannot be flown in combat zones, Pentagon investigators reported Friday.

The Air Force has continued to order more C-130J transport planes despite the fact that contractor Lockheed Martin Corp. hasn't delivered one that meets requirements in the eight years since the program began, the report said.

Problems with the propeller-driven cargo planes include faulty computer and diagnostic systems and inadequate defense measures, the Pentagon's Office of Inspector General concluded. So far, none of the planes has been cleared for their primary missions of dropping troops and cargo into war zones and flying in conditions requiring the crew to wear night-vision goggles.

The inspector general's report concluded that Air Force and Defense Department officials mismanaged the program, requiring millions of dollars in upgrades and thousands of hours of work to make the planes capable of performing as well as the aging models they're supposed to replace.

more-

[izzie]

1. Seems like old times. This has been done since we were a country.

It is not news just madding.

[mom cat]

4. Especially maddening since the funds were cut to improve

housing for the troops. The greedy bastards want every cheneying cent for themselves.

[lakeguy]

2. i didn't know about it

so it's news to me. i can bet that most of my friends don't know about it either.

[Ready4Change]

3. Neither did I.

Seems like odd things to be having problems with. I wonder if they are re-inventing pre-existing wheels there, rather than incorporating existing systems.

[Davis_X_Machina]

5. IIRC, the C130j...

is a little gift from Newt that keeps on giving.

[HawkerHurricane]

6. C-130 'Herky Bird'...

It's a cargo plane. It carries lots of stuff. Combat? What are you doing taking a flying truck into combat? Upgrading them for combat sounds like a program to give a different contractor money.

[MercutioATC]

7. Exactly. C-130's are cargo planes, not combat planes.

The military owns plenty of aircraft that aren't flown in combat zones.

[amandabeech]

8. They are also used as bombers these days.

Check this out.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/moab.htm

GBU-43/B "Mother Of All Bombs"
MOAB - Massive Ordnance Air Blast Bomb

Air Force Tests Massive Ordnance Air Blast (MOAB) 11 Mar 2003


The GBU-43/B is large, powerful and accurately delivered. The 21,700-pound bomb contains 18,700 pounds of high explosive. It is 30 feet long with a diameter of 40.5 inches. The warhead is a blast-type warhead. It was developed in only nine weeks to be available for the Iraq campaign, but it was not used.

The US Air Force has developed the 21,000-lb. <9,500 kilogram>, satellite-guided Massive Ordnance Air Blast Bombs (MOAB) as a successor to the the 15,000-lb. "Daisy Cutters" used in Vietnam and Afghanistan. The Air Force is said to call MOABs (pronounced MOE-ab) the mother of all bombs. As with the earlier Daisy Cutter, these huge bombs are dropped out of the rear of the C-130 cargo plane.

Unlike the Daisy Cutter, the MOAB is released without the use of a parachute. As a result, the aircraft releasing the bomb can fly at higher altitudes, thus making it safer for US pilots. This replacement for the BLU-82 bomb uses more of the slurry of ammonium nitrate and powdered aluminum used in the BLU-82. Other reports indicate that the MOAB might use tritonal explosive as opposed to the gelled slurry explosive of the BLU-82.


It sounds to me like Tora Bora was bombed by C-130's dropping the "Daisy Cutter." Do airmen/women just roll these things out the rear loading bay of the aircraft? Yankee ingenuity? Realy high tech. (sarc.off)

[HawkerHurricane]

10. There is also a ground support varient...

the AC-130. Carries machine guns, cannons, rockets, all designed to fire out of one side of the aircraft (the left, I believe)... and only usable where there are no enemy aircraft or anti aircraft, i.e. poor insurgents.

[0007]

12. What human will have the unfortunate fate to meet face to face with this?

[HawkerHurricane]

15. Big hairy deal.

What's the difference between dropping one 40,000 pound bomb and 40 1000lbs bombs?

Some brass hat, with too much time on his hands and a love of things that go boom has wasted too much money and effort on a big toy. And that's what it is to that brass hat; a toy. Bright Orange and big and SPECIAL.

During WW2, the British built some interesting bombs. They had bombs to destroy dams; big bombs (20,000lbs) they called blockbusters (the planes could only carry one), and a 40,000lbs bomb called a grand slam. The Grand Slam was designed to sink the battleship Tirpitz; since they were bombing at night, the only way they could hope to sink the battleship was either score lots of little hits with 1,000lbs bombs, or one big hit... it was easier to score the one big hit. The Grand Slam was a military gimmick for a special, one time, mission. This toy has no mission. They'll have to invent one for it.

[rawstory]

9. Non-registration LINK

hey, made this into a quick brief on http://rawstory.com (including the info about the new MOAB bombs. What's the fucking point of developing a superbomb when the planes don't work?

jeez.

[KeepItReal]

11. Sounds like a good plane...maybe too good to be true?

They are really trying to cram everything including the kitchen sink into this plane.

"The new C-130J has the familiar silhouette, but it is a brand new airplane with the performance to prove it. Compared to the earlier production C-130E, maximum speed is up 21%, climb time is down 50%. Cruising altitude is 40% higher, range 40% longer. With new engines and props, the J can reach 28,000 feet in just 14 minutes. And for tricky low altitude maneuvers, new avionics and dual head up displays make it easier and safer to operate. It also offers reduced manpower requirements, lower operating costs, support costs, and life-cycle costs. "

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/c-130j.htm

Better pics and spec here:

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/hercules/

[DemoTex]

13. The C-130J concept was the darling of the Farnborough/Paris Air Shows ...

... of the early 90s (Paris in odd years, Farnborough in even). It was a joke then, it is a joke now. New dress on an old, tired, tricked-out whore. Remember the name, folks, 'cause they run your life now: LOCKHEED (and Affiliates).

[Columbia]

14. Interesting...

"So far, none of the planes has been cleared for their primary missions of dropping troops and cargo into war zones..."

...considering I've flown multiple times into and out of a combat zone in a C-130...

[NickB79]

18. C130J-series

Different from the current series of C130's used over the past decade.

[Endangered Specie]

16. I suppose there gonna start making Shermans again

[struggle4progress]

17. kick

:kick: