Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Did Obama Snub The F-22 At Elmendorf?  
User currently offlineAlberchico From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 2941 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 5760 times:

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/po...e_removed_from_obama_speech_venue#


This particular base would have a premiere fighter like the F-22 to be displayed behind the president as he talked, so why was an F-15 put there instead. Does this mean that Obama will always avoid photo ops with the F-22 ?


short summary of every jewish holiday: they tried to kill us ,we won , lets eat !
25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 5692 times:



Quoting Alberchico (Thread starter):
This particular base would have a premiere fighter like the F-22 to be displayed behind the president as he talked, so why was an F-15 put there instead. Does this mean that Obama will always avoid photo ops with the F-22 ?

Because Obama has always been against production of the F-22. The F-22 was to be used as the back drop but Obama had replaced with the F-15. Don't you just love that "hope and change".


User currently offlineAFHokie From United States of America, joined May 2004, 224 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 5679 times:



Quoting 474218 (Reply 1):
Because Obama has always been against production of the F-22. The F-22 was to be used as the back drop but Obama had replaced with the F-15. Don't you just love that "hope and change".

Hmm...you actually have any concrete facts to back up that statement? Or is this your opinion? I'm sure the President took time to say, "hey, I don't like the F-22, replace it with an F-15"


User currently offlineAlberchico From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 2941 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 5674 times:



Quoting AFHokie (Reply 2):
I'm sure the President took time to say, "hey, I don't like the F-22, replace it with an F-15"

No, but his staff menbers who are looking out for his image might have done it



short summary of every jewish holiday: they tried to kill us ,we won , lets eat !
User currently offlineEvomutant From United Kingdom, joined May 2006, 510 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 5649 times:

Christ alive, people need to grow some thicker skin.

"A slight to the people who operate it?" Give me a break.

He has been against the F-22. Whatever the rights and wrongs of that position, he'd look a bit of a tit if he then stood in front of a sparkling and spotlighted F-22.


User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 5632 times:

Google is your friend, I found hundreds of articles just like this:

http://militarytimes.com/blogs/flightlines/

[Edited 2009-12-07 16:24:44]

User currently onlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2969 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5528 times:

My question is: Who cares?


after all, why not spotlight a great vintage fighter like the F-15?



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlineCpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4880 posts, RR: 37
Reply 7, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 5513 times:



Quoting Alberchico (Reply 3):

No, but his staff menbers who are looking out for his image might have done it

In future, I suggest they put a computer graphic of a non-descript, non existant fighter plane in a neutral grey colour with no markings on it, and no identification as to the scene it is in, to avoid offending anyone.  Sad

I also suspect this is off-topic discussion. It is about politics, and not military aviation.


User currently offlinePar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7497 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 5290 times:

The initial thought of the article may be political, so I'll give a political then a military response.
Political: Makes you wonder why so many folks tend to talk about what the President will do or won't do, the folks around him are the ones we need to influence, they make all the decisions which we get us all hot and bothered..

Military: Is it possible that POTUS being pictured with an F-15 is tacitly expressing his support for those brave men and women who still fly this a/c inspite of the structural failures recently discovered, lets them know that even though there is a new more modern a/c in inventory with another right around the corner, they are still valued assets in the protection of the nation and will not be looked down upon because they are flying older a/c.
They have the full faith and support of the Commander in Chief whether they fly the F-15, the obsolete A-10 or the modern F-22, they are all one.


User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12856 posts, RR: 25
Reply 9, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 5246 times:



Quoting Evomutant (Reply 4):
He has been against the F-22.

Well, to be more specific, he was against adding funds for more F-22s to the budget beyond the 187 purchased, and was in favor of expedited funding of the F-35.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineDk1967 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 49 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 5183 times:

Maybe it means he's FOR the F-15SE!

User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 5112 times:

It's that same ignorant arrogance that caused the demise of the VH-71. Make no mistake about it, the VH-71 was left to die not because it couldn't perform the mission or even meet costs, it was a scape-goat for the Obama administration so he would at least have something tangible to take back to the People to try and show them that he's being fiscally responsible. Lord knows that $787B Democrat shopping spree a.k.a. the stimulus bill was anything but fiscally prudent.

User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12856 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 5032 times:



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 11):
Make no mistake about it, the VH-71 was left to die not because it couldn't perform the mission or even meet costs, it was a scape-goat for the Obama administration so he would at least have something tangible to take back to the People to try and show them that he's being fiscally responsible.

How many people in the US even know what a VH-71 is? I'd guess less than 0.01% of the population. Stop making an off-topic mountain out of a molehill.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinePlayloud From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 62 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4906 times:

Nothing says "change" like keeping the same fighter around forever.

User currently offlineRomeokc10fe From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 219 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4644 times:



Quoting 474218 (Reply 1):
Because Obama has always been against production of the F-22. The F-22 was to be used as the back drop but Obama had replaced with the F-15. Don't you just love that "hope and change".

He's been against the F-22 primarily because his SecDef has said from day one that he (Gates) doesn't want anymore than F-22s. And correct me I'm wrong but the current SecDef is a carry over from the last administration, he's just backing up is secDef like he should, but because he's Barrack Obama I guess that's wrong to.


User currently offlinePlayloud From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 62 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4622 times:



Quoting Romeokc10fe (Reply 14):
He's been against the F-22 primarily because his SecDef has said from day one that he (Gates) doesn't want anymore than F-22s. And correct me I'm wrong but the current SecDef is a carry over from the last administration, he's just backing up is secDef like he should, but because he's Barrack Obama I guess that's wrong to.

We weren't agreeing with Bush or Rumsfeld when the current cap was announced either. A bad decision is a bad decision, regardless of who is in office.


User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 4496 times:



Quoting Revelation (Reply 12):
How many people in the US even know what a VH-71 is? I'd guess less than 0.01% of the population. Stop making an off-topic mountain out of a molehill.

Obama has already cited numerous times how he called for what he says is "waste" to be terminated, he just refers to them as his "Presidential helicopters," something that everyone knows about. If the V-22 can save itself from the axe, I'm surprised the F-22 can't.

The dumbest thing LM and the USAF ever did was start the JSF project at least five years too early. The USAF/LM should have milked as many F-22's as possible, sold more upgraded F-16's and F-15's, and then five to ten years later than what they did go out and seek a JSF.



User currently offlinePar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7497 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 4443 times:



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 16):
The dumbest thing LM and the USAF ever did was start the JSF project at least five years too early. The USAF/LM should have milked as many F-22's as possible, sold more upgraded F-16's and F-15's, and then five to ten years later than what they did go out and seek a JSF.

Now you are saying that the F-15 and F-16 could have soldiered on for a few more years. Now I see why those folks look awestruck, they were around when the first thought of the F-22 being stopped was touted and this sentiment was no where around, where exactly did it come from  Smile


User currently offlineCurt22 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 335 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 4337 times:



Quoting Revelation (Reply 12):
How many people in the US even know what a VH-71 is? I'd guess less than 0.01% of the population. Stop making an off-topic mountain out of a molehill.

Be easy on AirRyan...his entire IRA appears to be tied to this dead program!


User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 4266 times:



Quoting Curt22 (Reply 18):

Be easy on AirRyan...his entire IRA appears to be tied to this dead program!

Insert the Jerry McGuire line here: "Show me the money!" Just show me how the VH-71 program was actually canceled due to fiscal related issues, that's all I ask. And every time the Pentagon was asked about this, they conveniently failed to also weigh into the equation the costs of extending the service life of the existing fleet of helicopters long enough so that they will last before their replacement can get online, not to mention the four billion already invested and the associated fees and penalties for terminating the contract.

Quote:
Carter said that in order to keep costs in check, the White House and Pentagon would prefer to use an existing helicopter platform instead of building a new helicopter from scratch.

http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbyi...ost-way-to-meet-helicopter-mission

Once again, those in the Government assuming that the People are idiots and just don't know what's going on. The VH-71 was spun-off of an existing helicopter platform that had been in service since the late 1990's and first flown in 1987! The VH-71 just wanted to add US components whenever possible, in addition to the customary gear required for use as a Presidential helicopter, so what Ashton Carter refers to as the goal of the next RFP is what they already had in the VH-71! Unfortunately for the taxpayer, HMX can't just take a VIP configured H-92 and fly the POTUS all around the world in it!

There is no way the next program comes in under what it would have costs to just finish VH-71 in Increment 1. That's all I argue - this program was not canceled because of cost over-runs. AW's CEO publicly said they could finish the Increment 1 buy for what would have equated to be around the price of the original bid, but it was almost as if four years and four billion taxpayer dollars down the road the Navy had actually changed their mind as to what they wanted, like a teenager at a new car lot with a blank check from their wealthy Uncle Sam, who in this case is actually in a retirement home, sucking on a respirator worried about the ponzi scheme he's used to build his family's fortune, from collapsing.

I've got the perfect Presidential helicopter for this current administration, and it might actually just come in under budget!



User currently onlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8709 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 4236 times:



Quoting Cpd (Reply 7):
It is about politics, and not military aviation.

Are they so different?  airplane 


User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12856 posts, RR: 25
Reply 21, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 4227 times:



Quoting Playloud (Reply 13):
Nothing says "change" like keeping the same fighter around forever.

Nothing says "change" like stopping production of the F-22 and accelerating production of the F-35 (or did you miss that part?).



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinePlayloud From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 62 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 4223 times:



Quoting Revelation (Reply 21):
Nothing says "change" like stopping production of the F-22 and accelerating production of the F-35 (or did you miss that part?).

My post was in regard to the swapping out an F-22 for an F-15.


User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12856 posts, RR: 25
Reply 23, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 4210 times:



Quoting Playloud (Reply 22):
My post was in regard to the swapping out an F-22 for an F-15.

Ahh, ok, I get it...



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineWvsuperhornet From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 517 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4074 times:



Quoting Alberchico (Thread starter):
This particular base would have a premiere fighter like the F-22 to be displayed behind the president as he talked, so why was an F-15 put there instead. Does this mean that Obama will always avoid photo ops with the F-22 ?

Very doubtfull, I doubt Obama really cares whats displayed behind him, he is too indulged in himself to worry about that. My guess is that none of the F-22's were avalible that day probably due to training elsewhere if being worked on. It also could be that the US doesn't really want a F-22 that is actually in service photo'd, it could mean alot of things but I wouldn't read anything into him not being photo'ed next to one. He is a big supporter of the F-35 and I haven't seen any pictures with those either.


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29813 posts, RR: 58
Reply 25, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4071 times:

It was a snub for political expedience.

Actually the fact the false president was up here breathing my air is in itself an insult.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Did Obama Snub The F-22 At Elmendorf?
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...
CV-22 Back In The Air At Edwards posted Thu Sep 12 2002 05:04:37 by Airforce1995
Obama Leaves The 747 Home And Use The Gulfstream To NYC posted Sun May 31 2009 23:48:50 by StasisLAX
New Variant Of The F-22? posted Mon Nov 26 2007 10:09:51 by EBJ1248650
The F-22 Is One Incredible Fighter posted Mon Jun 11 2007 10:51:26 by AndesSMF
Let's Talk About The F-22 With Pics ; posted Sat Apr 21 2007 04:00:18 by TedTAce
The F 22 And The US Navy posted Fri Mar 9 2007 01:50:11 by Beta
Congress To USAF-Plan To Keep The 144th At Fresno posted Sat Oct 7 2006 07:34:33 by FATFlyer
What Took The F-22 So Long To Enter Service? posted Sun Jul 23 2006 20:47:25 by Afrikaskyes
Showdown Brewing Over US Export The F-22 Sales... posted Sun Jul 23 2006 07:09:05 by AirRyan
Marine General On The V-22: How Do You Figure? posted Wed Jul 19 2006 21:53:03 by AirRyan

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format