Question: Why are we spending 300 billion on developing a new fighter jet program?

[Virginia Dare]

are we going to be dog fighting Al Qaeda anytime soon?

This includes $45.6 billion for military aircraft, including $6.7 billion to buy 16 more F-35 stealth planes. The F-35 is still in its early stages; the Pentagon has, to date, spent only about one-tenth of what it estimates to be a $300 billion program. It's not too late to ask if we need such a costly, sophisticated fighter jet, given that air-to-air combat is not likely to be a major element of future wars and, to the extent that it might be, we're way ahead—in numbers and technology—of any prospective foe. Or let's accept the proposition that China's air force is going to be a formidable rival by the year 2020: Do we need to tear full-speed ahead on the F-35 now? Could we slow the program down and see how things shape up?

http://www.deepjournal.com/p/7/a/en/1245.html

[acmavm]

1. Good question. The next war will likely be fought by intercontinental

ballistic missles loaded with nuclear warheads I imagine.

But you know that we gotta feel Lockheed and those guys.

[ladjf]

14. Or much worse, from multiple space based launch sites.

[LakeSamish706]

2. Cause George and the gang probably have stock/stock options in...

these defense companies...

[nightrider767]

3. Going down the wrong road again!

The next generation fighter will be pilot-less. Flown from the ground by some guy, or gal, in an air conditioned room.

Spending money on anything else will be funding another Spruce Goose!

[Ganja Ninja]

4. I think it's because all of our F-15's are literally falling apart.

They are going to have to scrap them due to structural flaws that are killing pilots.

[jmg257]

9. But we already have the F22...while a new fighter is interesting, the cost IS immense.

I don't like seeing ANY US mil personnel being killed on account of less-capapble equipment, but as the OP said we are so far ahead right now. However - technology such as this takes a while to implement - and we REALLY don't know what/how future wars will be.

The F35 MAY turn out to be a better value 'cause it is a Joint Strike Fighter - supposedly good for all the services = common equipmet; hard to know right now and at what expense?

[Virginia Dare]

16. I certainly don't want to see our AF pilots falling out of the sky..

but I guess I'm just cynical enough to think that our AF is already way overfunded. Hundreds of thousands if not millions of Americans could die for lack of medical coverage in the next few years, while money goes wasted on this kind of thing.

[Squatch]

19. F-22 is a stovepiped system while JSF is a joint program

the issues of interoperability, commonality, and joint capabilities are satisfied with the JSF.

[A HERETIC I AM]

28. Are you interested in relaying actual facts or just opinion and hyperbole?

because all of our F-15's are literally falling apart.

Bullshit. Cracks were found in 9 (That's NINE, not "all") out of over 400 "C" models built.

They are going to have to scrap them due to structural flaws that are killing pilots

More bullshit. There has been 1 (That's ONE) fatal accident that was directly attributed to a structural failure. Shortly after that accident that entire fleet was grounded but the majority of A thru D models were returned to service by early January.

200 "C" Model aircraft remain grounded but the F-15 E models are flying.

Grounded by USAF
All F-15 aircraft were grounded by the U.S. Air Force after an Missouri Air National Guard F-15C came apart in flight and crashed on 2 November 2007. The newer F-15E fleet was later cleared for continued operations. The U.S. Air Force reported on 28 November 2007 that a critical location in the upper longerons on the F-15C model was suspected of causing the failure, causing the fuselage forward of the air intakes, including the cockpit and radome, to separate from the airframe.

F-15A through D-model aircraft were ordered grounded until the location received more detailed inspections and repairs as needed. The grounding of F-15s received media attention as it began to place strains on the nation's air defense efforts. The grounding forced some states to rely on their neighbors' fighter jets for air defense protection, and Alaska to depend on the Canadian Forces support.

On January 8, 2008, the USAF Air Combat Command cleared a portion of its F-15A through D-model fleet for return to flying status. It also recommended a limited return to flight for units worldwide using the affected models. The accident review board report was released on January 10, 2008. The report stated that analysis of the F-15C wreckage determined that the longeron didn't meet drawing specifications which led to fatigue cracks and finally a catastrophic failure of the remaining support structures and breakup of the aircraft in flight. In a report released in January 10, 2008, nine other F-15s were identified to have similar problems in the longeron. As a result of these problems, General John D. W. Corley stated that "the long-term future of the F-15 is in question." As of February 2008 nearly 200 remained grounded from flight operations.

From Wikipedia

The sentence "the long-term future of the F-15 is in question." in no way equates to "They are going to have to scrap them".

[Ganja Ninja]

30. Well excuse me for using the word "all" instead of "some".

If you read what the op posted it's an order for 16 planes. But as your post states the long term future is in question. I didn't say they were all on the way to the scrap yard as we speak. Eventually they will be scraped and it will happen sooner than the AF planned.

[A HERETIC I AM]

33. You're excused. But here is what you said above;

"They are going to have to scrap them {"because all of our F-15's are literally falling apart"} due to structural flaws that are killing pilots."

That statement is demonstrably false. Changing "all" to "some" still does not alter how wrong your statement is.

And just for the record, It is my opinion that a $515 Billion dollar "Defense" budget is absurd, I'll give you that and buying a new aircraft that has a questionable mission or a non-existent foe is ridiculous. The Pentagon has had and continues to have a love affair with big-ticket, highly complex weapons systems that do little to help or protect the Grunt on the ground, the very member of the military whose needs are constantly ignored or under supplied. These items get high priority because they employ constituents and that helps Congresspersons get re-elected. It seems to me we have a bit of a disconnect here on DU and in this country in general when it comes to "Defense" spending (I put the word in quotes because most of the money is hardly for defense. It is offensive weaponry, for the most part) because you can't appear to be weak and at the same time you can't be for putting people out of work. Of course, candidates for high office that do call for a restricted military budget are marginalized and intentionally made to look ridiculous and unelectable.

The reasons I took issue with your characterization of the F-15 as "literally falling apart" are because it is unfair to the thousands of dedicated men and women who work every day to ensure they are safe to fly, and one in-flight breakup does not mean they are all falling apart. When a fatal accident occurred with one airframe, hundreds of them - the entire worldwide fleet - were grounded for inspections and flaws found in only nine others. Suggesting they are all headed for the scrap yard because of this isolated incident is simply untrue.

[blues90]

5. Because in america we are a war mongering terrorist country

Who allowed the military industrial complex to take over and run this country .

As far as I am concerned they can take all their hardware designed for mass murder and go to hell with it .

They will spend billions upon billions to kill people but not a cent to save society and create peace .

Yeah , Give peace a chance , they certainly tossed that to the dirt and stomped all over it . We will never see an end to it because it was our beginning .

[GliderGuider]

8. truth

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
Dwight D. Eisenhower

[TreasonousBastard]

6. Because we ignored Eisenhower and now every...

Congressional district has hundreds, some even thousands, of jobs depending on defense spending. Even stuff the Pentagon doesn't want has Congressional support and can't be stopped. Most, if not all, of the economic growth we've had has been military spending.

Every one of these big projects has subcontractors in every dogshit town around the country, and there's just no stopping it.

We're spending a trillion bucks a year, over a third of the Federal budget, on "security."

Security from what?

[rockymountaindem]

7. If we're going to have something for 2020, we need to start now

It takes forever for a program to develop, both in a technical and bureaucratic sense. If they want to plan a decade or more ahead, good for them. I'd rather spend the money now than find out later some other country has a better air force than we do.

[Virginia Dare]

20. Who are planning on dog fighting then?

Russia? China? Iran? North Korea? Are we really looking at the next big conflict being a military air combat type of scenario to that degree? That's highly unlikely IMO, but I'm not a military expert. I think that's sort of what they're counting on. It's kind of like when people who know nothing about cars count on the mechanic to be honest with them about what they really need.

[Squatch]

23. The answer to your question is here:

DoD QDR

This lays out military strategy for the next 20 years.

[Virginia Dare]

25. Like I said, I'm counting on the Pentagon to be honest with me..

and not just throw billions of money around to make their buds richer and wealthier. There is no bigger old boys club than the Pentagon. Talk about government waste. I know people who do contracts there, and even they talk about all of the grifting that goes on.

[SteelPenguin]

10. Because Our Government Doesn't Want a Fair Fight

Why would they?

The mindset of our defense budget is that we want to make the fight as unfair as possible to our opponents. We want to have our arms and technology so superior to the enemy that they might as well be throwing rocks at our stealth bombers and harsh language at our troops.

It's sort of a separate question from the political "how should we use our miliary?", to the planning "how will we need to use our military?", and one more of "what military do we want to have to use in the future?"

[Virginia Dare]

18. Funny how we think so far ahead and strategically on defense..

we certainly don't do that with our social programs and problems do we?

[SteelPenguin]

22. Nope we don't

but it's not because we're not capable, it's because the basic Republican tenets include the concept that poor people need to struggle and hurt, or they have no reason to make their lives better. Ie Why would anyone with health care, and a roof over their heads, and good education for their kids, care about getting a better job, or working harder?

Which of course is bullshit.

[Virginia Dare]

24. The rich always need an underclass to serve them..

some things never change.

[SteelPenguin]

27. True

But that doesn't mean the underclass needs to not have healthcare, to go bankrupt if they break their leg on the job, to not have reasonable and healthy maternity leave, etc. Just because someone scrubs Paris Hilton's toilet doesn't mean he shouldn't get at least basic protections of his life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.

I think it goes beyond that. The problem with the Republican mentality might have started with the rich, but the biggest problem is with the middle class republicans. Their problem is that they're greedy, selfish, self-centered, assholes who would rather keep 100 dollars in taxes over the course of a year, rather than protect someone they don't know from something like health related bankruptcy. They've been ingrained that government is bad and the struggle of the poor is good, which is easy, because their financial situation and overall ignorance, generally keeps them from understanding where their tax dollars actually go, as well as not experiencing the harshness of life that government protects them from.

Bah.

[Virginia Dare]

35. Agreed..

I think all of those people are about to get hit in the head with a two by four. They'll soon be on the outside looking in.

[hunter]

31. The United States is rotting away from the inside.

All our "opponents" have to do is sit back and wait. It doesn't cost them a dime.

[Fire Walk With Me]

11. Money from government development contracts, money from selling it to our "friends".

"Military/Industrial Complex"

That sort of money would put a lot of food on a lot of tables, and a lot of books into the hands of schoolkids. And better teacher's wages.

[ladjf]

12. The answer: Criminal greed and lunacy. NOTHING to do with

defense. NOTHING.

[fascisthunter]

13. profit

[Ezlivin]

15. We don't need new fighters

The U.S. does not need new fighter aircraft because, for the past 35 years, it has seldom used the ones it has for air combat. Since the end of the Vietnam airwar in January 1973, U.S. fighter pilots have shot down just 54 hostile aircraft. That's merely 1.5 per year. Therefore, how can we justify extremely expensive next-generation aircraft for which there appears to be no valid mission?

A closer analysis reveals that fighter-versus-fighter combat is increasingly rare. Of the total U.S. kills since 1973, six here helicopters, and four were trainers. That leaves only 44 potentially serious opponents downed in three-and-a-half decades.
...

However one defines the war on terrorism, it doesn't involve any aerial combat. Yet almost certainly, the current global conflict will prove multigenerational: the Crusades lasted 200 years, and if the terror war lasts only half as long, the great-grandchildren of today's soldiers will still fight jihadists in ground combat.

America, therefore, needs a .30-caliber service rifle far more than it needs any stealth fighter.

...

Current stealth technology is about 20 years old, and it cannot be added on to. Conversely, electronic countermeasures pods and dedicated jamming aircraft can be purchased relatively cheaply. The tradeoff is so obvious that we have to ask: is the acquisitions process really that broken?

The fighter pilot has had a great run: he was the most glamorous warrior of the 20th century, proving his worth from 1915 well into the 1980s. But he has been overtaken by events. So let's keep him flying in aircraft adequate to the mission, augmented by sensors and weapons that can kill enemy aircraft on the rare occasions that it's necessary.

Then, let's use some of the savings to buy what we need: body armor, bandages, radios—and .30-caliber rifles.

(Barrett Tillman, Flight Journal, April 2008, p. 89-90. Excerpted from the author's 2007 book "What We Need: Extravagance and Shortages in America's Military")

[Javaman]

17. Because the U.S. can, so therefore, all logic against it's development is defeated. nt

[B Calm]

21. It's the republican way of being fiscally liberal and socially conservative...

[hunter]

26. For the welfare of our military industrial complex.

Shit for the rest of humanity.

These things are like the balls on the back of the SUV that just ran over your grandma in the crosswalk.

[leftofthedial]

29. because Ike was right

[Vinca]

32. Because if we don't spend it there we might have to spend it on

health care . . . or education . . . or infrastructure . . . or food for the poor. War profiteers won't allow that.

[karlrschneider]

34. General Dynamics needs new shoes.

:shrug:

[Virginia Dare]

36. In this case, Lockheed...n/t

[RB TexLa]

37. I thought you were going to quote George Wallace

"Why are we building new $xx million bombers? Have the people we've been bombing complaining?"

[Johonny]

38. I imagine

you can't use you entire ready military force in a pointless war and not pay to replace it after it's spent. The cost of the Iraq war is just beginning.

[Virginia Dare]

39. There's not too much air combat going on in Iraq though..n/t

[Johonny]

41. but

They're flying a lot of missions though.

[WinkyDink]

40. So we don't have it to spend on health care? Just a thought.

[onethatcares]

42. to answer the question. to stimulate the economy. n/t

n/t