Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Obama - Cut FY10 DoD Budget Over 10%  
User currently offlineTropicBird From United States of America, joined May 2005, 502 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 11135 times:

Now the real fun starts. What gets cut?

Defense Official: Obama Calling for Defense Budget Cuts

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...obama-calling-defense-budget-cuts/

74 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAlien From Romania, joined Oct 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 11052 times:



Quoting TropicBird (Thread starter):
Now the real fun starts. What gets cut?

I'm not so sure. Obama want's to draw down operations in Iraq. There's your 10% and then some.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24325 posts, RR: 47
Reply 2, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 11045 times:

Most Iraq and Afghanistan ops are funded thru supplemental appropriation bills, not the core DoD budget.

A 10% whack would be huge cut for many procurement projects especially at a time when more and more monies are going towards salaries and support services combined with a commitment to grow the Army by some 70,000 more troops over the next few years.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 11030 times:

The Marines can begin saving money in the Air Wing: reduce the MV-22 and F-35B buy! I mean come on, what would be so wrong with CH-71's, EA-18G's, and F/A-18F's? haha

http://64.34.169.161/ifolio_files/file_gallery/Screenshot_Gallery/Development_Screenshots/chUSMC1.jpg


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12061 posts, RR: 52
Reply 4, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 11024 times:



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 4):
The Marines can begin saving money in the Air Wing: reduce the MV-22 and F-35B buy! I mean come on, what would be so wrong with CH-71's, EA-18G's, and F/A-18F's? haha

The MV/CV-22 and F-35 programs will, most likely not get cut, those are the future jobs he is "promising". Don't look to hard for the CH-71, in any US military colors, it, along with the USAF CSAR-X (and KC-X) programs will be eliminated. The Marines won't buy and StupidBug F/A-18E/Fs. They may be forced to swallow some EA-18Gs, but there won't be to many of them, maybe only 2 squadrons.


User currently onlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16694 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 10981 times:



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5):
The MV/CV-22 and F-35 programs will, most likely not get cut, those are the future jobs he is "promising". Don't look to hard for the CH-71, in any US military colors, it, along with the USAF CSAR-X (and KC-X) programs will be eliminated. The Marines won't buy and StupidBug F/A-18E/Fs. They may be forced to swallow some EA-18Gs, but there won't be to many of them, maybe only 2 squadrons.

You guys are going way overboard, I think something like the Future Combat system is where they may be looking.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineAlien From Romania, joined Oct 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 10976 times:



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 2):
Most Iraq and Afghanistan ops are funded thru supplemental appropriation bills, not the core DoD budget.

Not really. About 175 billion is for operations and maintenance. A huge portion of that is due to operations in Iraq. That will wind down. I am not saying that programs won;t get cut but it's not the armageddon that some think. Axe KC-X, CSAR-X FCS, and DDG-1000 and you are almost there without losing a bit of capability. Obviously you would need substitutes for these programs (well maybe not FCS) such as KC-135 re-engine but you still will save big.

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 4):
The Marines can begin saving money in the Air Wing: reduce the MV-22 and F-35B buy! I mean come on, what would be so wrong with CH-71's, EA-18G's, and F/A-18F's? haha

I really have to scratch my head when I read this. Why would you want to replace the Osprey with a helicopter. That is a huge step back in payload, range and speed. It looks like all the teething problems have been worked out and other then the trouble they still have with the Rolls Royce engines maintenance issues(which I am sure will get ironed out) the Marines seem to be well pleased with them. Other than that scratch all the F-35Bs for the Marines and use attack helicopters or armed versions of Ospreys.


User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 10969 times:



Quoting Alien (Reply 7):
Why would you want to replace the Osprey with a helicopter. That is a huge step back in payload, range and speed.

The V-22 is replacing the CH-46E and instead of buying all 450+ V-22's, the can cut that in half and buy H-71's to fill the other half. The Merlins have greater payload and range than a V-22, but then again with a refueling boom range is more a factor of endurance of the crew.

Quoting Alien (Reply 7):
he Marines seem to be well pleased with them.

The V-22's are still maintenance queens; the aircraft have even more moving parts than a helicopter so it's not like that should come to surprise anyone.

Quoting Alien (Reply 7):
Other than that scratch all the F-35Bs for the Marines and use attack helicopters or armed versions of Ospreys.

Less F-35B's that would otherwise replace F/A-18's and buy less expensive F/A-18F's and EA-18G's - they can get the job done and save a lot of money by doing so; some Marines just have to stop being so stubborn (or is it ignorant?)


User currently onlineThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 1556 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 10962 times:



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 8):
Less F-35B's that would otherwise replace F/A-18's and buy less expensive F/A-18F's and EA-18G's - they can get the job done and save a lot of money by doing so; some Marines just have to stop being so stubborn (or is it ignorant?)

The Marines still need to replace the Harriers... and don't forget if you guys bail on F-35B, the Brits will be mightly angry about that.


User currently offlineAlien From Romania, joined Oct 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 10930 times:



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 8):
The Merlins have greater payload and range than a V-22,

I think it's the other way around. Remember, Merlin's range is usually given in km whilst MV-22 is nmi. Nope, I think they ned to go all MV-22 and CH-56 for transport. If they need a utility copter they can always go with an S-76 variant. Mv-22s have speed and getting troops ashore fast is good.

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 9):
The Marines still need to replace the Harriers

Says who? What did the Marines do before the Harrier came along? No one has yet made an argument that Marine CAS cannot be effectively performed with attack helicopters, the occasional JDAM launched from Air Force or Navy assets and perhaps an armed version of the MV-22.

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 9):
and don't forget if you guys bail on F-35B, the Brits will be mightly angry about that.

There is an awful lot of serious talk in the UK about dropping the F-35B. It seems they have to buy Typhoons and they have no money left over. I suspect Israel, Italy, Spain and India will wind up being F-35B users as well so there will be a viable run of F-35Bs without the Marines buying any.


User currently offlineUH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 10893 times:



Quoting Alien (Reply 10):
and CH-56 for transport.

Yeah I think they called it simply the S-56, never had the "CH" identifier.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Reinhardt Rolf



You really think the Marines could use that? Interesting.


User currently offlineAlien From Romania, joined Oct 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 10800 times:



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 10):
Yeah I think they called it simply the S-56, never had the "CH" identifier.

Well that looks good and maybe they could drive a jeep through the front door but what I really meant (I suspect you knew it but just wanted to share the love) was CH-53. Oooops!


User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2864 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 10776 times:



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 10):

Yeah I think they called it simply the S-56, never had the "CH" identifier.

CH-37 "Mojave", USMC used them in Vietnam.

Man I'd love to have seen/heard that thing fly!



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 10707 times:



Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 8):
The Marines still need to replace the Harriers... and don't forget if you guys bail on F-35B, the Brits will be mightly angry about that.

The Royal Navy's new carriers will be able to field F-35C's and quite frankly that's what they should just do from the onset.

Quoting Alien (Reply 9):
There is an awful lot of serious talk in the UK about dropping the F-35B. It seems they have to buy Typhoons and they have no money left over. I suspect Israel, Italy, Spain and India will wind up being F-35B users as well so there will be a viable run of F-35Bs without the Marines buying any.

I would agree in the sense that the AV-8B never even earned it's useful wings in the USMC and thereby doesn't really even rate a replacement. When we went into Macedonia for Kosovo ops the Marine Harriers in our MEU were told "thanks, but no thanks" and subsequently went to Israel where they sat around for a month in a safety recall for their RR engines; something about a newb in the production line and a missing cotter pin.


User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 14, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 10674 times:

Senator Levin appears to favor "reset" (i.e., refurbishment) over "modernization" (i.e., new procurement). Granted he doesn't call all the shots, but he gets a vote--a very powerful one at that.
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/01/30/re...wins-over-modernization-sen-levin/

Quote:
In a policy declaration that will reverberate through the Pentagon and defense industry, the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee made clear today that when he has to pick whether to approve funding for a new program or for one that needs rebuilding he’ll pick the existing program.

“I think there is a tension there and the reset will have to prevail,” Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) said in response to my question about the choices he will have to make as authorizers look for sustainable cuts to the defense budget.

Perhaps some new thinking WRT the real threat would help?
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...0In%20Upcoming%20Pentagon%20Budget

Quote:
“While the DOD is still committed to two nearly simultaneous major regional conflicts, [the] evolving force structure construct anticipates that only one of those conflicts will be a platform-intensive major combat operation while the other conflict will be a long-duration-irregular-warfare-campaign,” McAleese said.

Trying to retain the major-combat fighting capability while keeping up the capacity to provide a rotational forward presence needed to battle insurgents is going to put the services at odds with their own internal needs, McAleese said.

The Army will still have to make sure it has enough money to pay operational bills while trying to fund procurement, he said.

The Navy will likely favor its Littoral Combat Ships, DDG-51s/CG-47s and Virginia-class submarines, he said, at the expense of its top shelf surface ships.

The Air Force will have to invest more to fulfill airlift and aerial refueling requirements, he said — probably at the expense of some of its tactical air needs.

The services will have to focus much more on the affordable, McAleese said, which will likely constrain recapitalization.




"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineCloudy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 10625 times:



Quoting Alien (Reply 1):
I'm not so sure. Obama want's to draw down operations in Iraq. There's your 10% and then some.

More accurately, he wants to continue the reductions Bush and the Iraqis already agreed to
months before the election. The military has won the war just in time for Obama to get the credit. The financial crises and the presidential election relegated our progress in Iraq to the
back pages. Iraq may have been an election issue, but there is little to argue about now. We were going to leave no matter who won the election, and at about the same timetable.


User currently offlineAlien From Romania, joined Oct 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 10615 times:



Quoting Cloudy (Reply 15):
More accurately, he wants to continue the reductions Bush and the Iraqis already agreed to
months before the election.

Agreed, but you risk taking this thread off topic considering there are some who cannot seem to grasp this reality.


User currently offlineMCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 10571 times:

I just hope Raptor production extends past 2012.  Wink


Airliners.net Moderator Team
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8045 posts, RR: 8
Reply 18, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 10515 times:

It's been years since I've had to worry about budgeting, but I clearly remember the end of year spending to avoid budget cuts the next year.

If you had unspent funds at the end of the year then your budget for the following year would be cut as "you didn't need the money"

An intelligent review of end of year spending would probably find a good chunk of that 10%.

There also needs to be some hard looks at capital investments. The DDG-1000? From what I understand it's too delicate to go into harm's way. KC-X will be the poster boy for a suddenly unnecessary project.

And after the CEO's of the Big 3 auto makers caught hell for flying in on their corporate jets the DoD needs to review VIP travel expenses for guys & gals wearing stars.


User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 10484 times:



Quoting Ken777 (Reply 18):
KC-X will be the poster boy for a suddenly unnecessary project.

I've heard this argument before and I just can't find the logic? Now, if they wanted to cancel CSAR-X because the Army would be better off with the mission using HH-47's, I could buy that but how can we prolong our aerial refueling fleet any longer - the USAF set out back in '02 to get those replaced; their entire force is predicated around aerial refueling?!


User currently onlineThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 1556 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 10438 times:



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 13):
The Royal Navy's new carriers will be able to field F-35C's and quite frankly that's what they should just do from the onset.

It's not just the RN, it's the RAF as well that needs F-35B. Don't forget the Spanish, the Italians also need replacements for their Harriers otherwise their carriers won't have any strike capability.

Quoting Alien (Reply 9):
Says who? What did the Marines do before the Harrier came along? No one has yet made an argument that Marine CAS cannot be effectively performed with attack helicopters, the occasional JDAM launched from Air Force or Navy assets and perhaps an armed version of the MV-22.

The USMC is pushing the over the horizon concept; the next and current USMC assets, the new America class amphibious assault ships, the V-22 Osprey, the LCAC's, and the EFV all push this concept of an over-the-horizon attack. With the distances involved, I don't think attack helicopters have the speed nor range to carry a useful load, and I also doubt the Navy will risk one of their carriers so close to shore. Also, the Air Force cannot be counted at times if the area is far enough away from the nearest airbase for support.

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 13):
I would agree in the sense that the AV-8B never even earned it's useful wings in the USMC and thereby doesn't really even rate a replacement. When we went into Macedonia for Kosovo ops the Marine Harriers in our MEU were told "thanks, but no thanks" and subsequently went to Israel where they sat around for a month in a safety recall for their RR engines; something about a newb in the production line and a missing cotter pin.

Desert Storm is the counter argument; the Harriers were the first Marine tactical strike platform to arrive in theatre. During the ground war, Harriers were based as close as 35 nautical miles from the Kuwait border, making them the most forward deployed tactical strike aircraft in theatre. It was one of the Marine's premiere aircraft against Iraqi armour and artillery, effectively helping to neutralize Iraqi artillery from being a force. The Marines accumulated 4,083 flight hours while maintaining a mission capable rate in excess of 90%.


User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 10379 times:

Why would a new tanker program be cut when it's long been established that new tankers are needed to replace the KC-135E?


Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 22, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 10364 times:



Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 21):
Why would a new tanker program be cut when it's long been established that new tankers are needed to replace the KC-135E?

There are those (and some of "those" are in the Congress) who feel that the 135Es could be refurbished and re-engined with JT8Ds or brought up to KC-135R standard. Although its not the USAF's preferred option, it remains an option nonetheless.

Also, the number of tankers is driven to a large extent by the services roles and missions. Reduce the latter and the numbers of tankers required in a support role should (theoretically) decrease.

Much has changed since the tanker RFP. Very difficult choices need to be made.



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2864 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 10343 times:



Quoting Lumberton (Reply 22):
There are those (and some of "those" are in the Congress) who feel that the 135Es could be refurbished and re-engined with JT8Ds or brought up to KC-135R standard.

Bingo!

People really should be paying closer attention to the E-8 reengine project, as the main problem with the KC-135E is corrosion in the ex civvie 707 pylons that were robbed for the -E conversion. Someone will argue for a new low low price the -Es can be brought out of the boneyard and into service for another 30 years, and make the need of the KC-45 vanish. Look for Pratt to lobby this hard.



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlineBennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7210 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 10330 times:

http://wikimapia.org/#lat=32.1549234&lon=-110.8157015&z=17&l=0&m=a&v=2

It seems that there are roughly 100 KC135 and 23 B707 at DMA which presumably will enable the present fleet to operate for some years to come.

I was surprised to see so many B707 as I had assumed that they would have been parted by now.

Another surprise was that some areas did not allow High Res photos, particularly where slightly Lower Res indicated any empty space or an old B707, which hardly seemed to merit secrecy at all.


25 Revelation : Yep, my boss's mindset is underspending is just as bad as overspending: in either case, it shows you can't project costs well. Someone should tell Mu
26 AirRyan : You know it's rather pathetic and very telling of this Barrack Huesein Obama administration - liberals like to say they are behind the troops but they
27 Deskflier : I recall reading an article i Air International magazine back in 2007, which boiled down to the fact that at the current rate (2007 that is) it would
28 Cloudy : The pentagon typically does not replace aircraft one for one, because the replacement nearly always is too expensive for that. When they can get away
29 Spacepope : I disagree with a lot of that. The weapons we went to war with in the first gulf war were for the most part developed in Vietnam or before (Smart bom
30 Post contains links Tak : Just one thing to note about this 10% cut in the pentagon budget: http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=news-000003022493 It's actually $14 bill
31 Zkpilot : The US is in deep trouble with a mountain of debt and deficits. Even with a 10% cut to the DoD budget the US will spend more on defense than the next
32 Rwessel : To be a bit more precise, the $527B being proposed for 2010 is $40B more than the $487B allocated for 2009 (although there seems to be a consensus th
33 STT757 : Yeah I think this is just playing with the numbers a bit to throw a bone to some liberal supporters, I really don't see this as some kind of agenda to
34 Revelation : Spin indeed. It's sad so many on both sides react to the first piece of red meat tossed into the cage.
35 LMP737 : Congressmen wanting to keep a base open in their district is not really corruption. It's more of a case of congressmen wanting to stay in office. Esp
36 Zkpilot : It is when they get given campaign money to do so (although there is a legal loophole of course). The BRAC is interesting of course. Does the US real
37 PPVRA : Any old equipment the DoD could just retire or sell? Ships, Helos, fighters. .?
38 Dragon6172 : OK, lets think about this. Carrier itself has somewhere around 5000, add in the rest of the ships of the strike group and you are probably talking ab
39 LMP737 : Who exactly is giving money to keep a base open? These are federal instalations, not private. Most people on those bases are military personel who wi
40 Post contains links Curt22 : Transferring the mission to the Army accomplishes nothing.,..you still have to BUY the acft to do the mission. The only army helo's capable of accomp
41 Alessandro : New A330 or B767 tankers are definitly not afforded by the US, perhaps get hold of the remaining RAF Tristar tankers which is supposed to get out of s
42 Zkpilot : Actually carriers these days are closer to 6000 but point taken about flying crews out. Thats not to say it couldn't be done in place like Guam or Pe
43 Tugger : Nice rebuttal, clear, concise, informed. Well, that is with the internal tanks, and I don't know how much room they take up or how much they reduce t
44 Bennett123 : Alessandro Firstly, there are only 9 RAF Tristar tankers which will leave service closer to 2016. Secondly, there are not that many MD-11s available f
45 Dragon6172 : Swapping out ships like that is not good for unit cohesiveness. To use a sports analogy, the teams that do the best are ones that keep the same playe
46 Alessandro : Sure, so you reckon it´s harder to convert a cargo MD-11 to a tanker than a passenger one? I admit, got the 2011 from Wiki, whats your source?
47 Knid : Don't forget that for the US the military acts as a from of work for the dole, however excessive modernisation reduces the effectiveness of this. Als
48 Dragon6172 : Do all at once or split it up three different ways, you still have to move the same number of people. You can't really reduce the force though. What
49 Post contains links Bennett123 : Alessandro http://www.airtanker.co.uk/ Seems that you were correct about EIS date. However, my understanding is that Airtanker have still got to raise
50 Post contains links Bennett123 : Hi Alessandro, I think that this what I had in mind. http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...uk-to-prolong-vc10-operations.html Admittedly it is somewh
51 Par13del : Interesting convo about the carriers and crews, I'll approach it from this point, how much maintenance is required on carriers when they return from a
52 Alessandro : I don´t share your optimism in the recovery of the world economy. Personally I would rather see that USAF used Globalhawk technology on the DC10/MD1
53 LMP737 : Marines don't fly Apaches, they fly the Cobra. The Falklands War is a unique case. The RN had in it's favor some of the best fighter pilots in the wo
54 Zkpilot : But he/she would be deployed for a shorter period of time... Each month away from home gets harder than the last, so 4 months away rather than 6 mont
55 LMP737 : You said they would deploy twice in a year. If that means two months carrying over into the next year thats stil six months deployed in a year.
56 Post contains links KingairTA : The crew swap is already under study and has been performed a few times on a smaller scale. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/sea-swap.htm In
57 Dragon6172 : There are currently 11 active carriers. Carl Vinson is currently in midlife refuel and modernization. (3 year event, will be complete 2010) George Was
58 Post contains links Lumberton : Admittedly the report is from a blog, but it certainly sounds reasonable. I could see Obama making the symbolic gesture of cutting back "his" helicopt
59 LMP737 : Big difference between swapping out the crew of a destroyer and the crew and air wing on a carrier.
60 Post contains links Lumberton : Looks like Obama is being "called out" on the presidential helicopter. http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/02/16/america/16chopper.php Never heard this o
61 Ken777 : When I was in the Navy in the late 60's I had two 8 month deployments and one 6 month deployment. I was not married for the first two 8 month deploym
62 DeltaGuy : So, any word on this yet? With over a trillion spent on 'reinvestment' pork projects and ear marks, it seems like a mere 10% from the DOD could be spa
63 MCIGuy : I hope I'm wrong but I fully expect the Obama administration to be the new Carter administration when it comes to defense spending. Cruise missiles ar
64 Post contains links STT757 : I don't know MCIGuy, there are some things I'm hearing that I really like. First of all they support the Grow the Army and Marine Corps plans, that's
65 Bennett123 : What is the role of these Brigade Combat Teams. I would have thought that Germany/Italy have sufficient to deal with local issues.
66 TexL1649 : The truth is we need to pull all forces out of Europe. It makes for nice assignments but the use of logistics and medical facilities there can be acco
67 STT757 : They are the combat arms of the Army, being in Germany and Italy means they are closer to the Middle East and Africa. The new African command has jus
68 Bennett123 : Perhaps the 2 additional BCT's are not needed?.
69 STT757 : They are already there, the plan is to keep them.
70 Lumberton : Depends on who you talk to. Most Army officers have fond memories of their German assignments and are loathe to see diminished prospects for future a
71 Trex8 : Rummy left his job 2 years ago, theres no one else around who thinks the next war will be won by UAVs and other gee whiz gadgets.
72 Post contains links MCIGuy : No mention of the F-22 or F-35 in a section titled "Preserve Global Reach in the Air"? BarackObama.com/defense
73 Trex8 : I don't see how that paragraph can be interpreted as saying they are going to rely only on revoluntionary UAVs or only essential systems like C17s an
74 MCIGuy : Well, we'll know a lot more about his compass by the end of March when we should have a decision one way or another on a further Raptor buy. Personall
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Obama - Cut FY10 DoD Budget Over 10%
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
RAF VC-10: Function Of Probe Over Radome? posted Thu Oct 23 2008 13:15:37 by BOACVC10
DOD Awards Bell/Boeing $10.4B V-22 Contract posted Fri Mar 28 2008 20:59:20 by AirRyan
Budget Cut To Slow JSF Lrip posted Wed Sep 6 2006 01:49:18 by DEVILFISH
Pennsylvania Sues DoD Over Possible Closing posted Tue Jul 12 2005 03:10:05 by Cadet985
KC-10's Over SFO posted Wed Mar 17 2004 23:22:59 by Rg828
The President's Travel Budget posted Tue Nov 25 2008 12:36:06 by Decoder
Nasa Under President Obama posted Thu Nov 6 2008 15:36:56 by Thorny
Norway: Socialist Parties Go For JSF Over Grippen posted Tue Nov 4 2008 03:28:36 by Keesje
FA18s Over Downtown LA posted Mon Oct 6 2008 13:20:58 by PRFLYER
Training Jets Over LAS Today posted Sun Sep 28 2008 21:49:05 by Crownvic

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format