quote:

Originally posted by L0A1:
Gates said no, he makes those decisions, not Murtha. Though I commend Murtha's attempt at being positive towards the Military instead of caling us murderers before a trial.

quote:

WASHINGTON — A key House Democrat on Tuesday criticized so-called fiscal conservatives for approving millions of dollars for an outdated weapon system, while complaining about ballooning deficits.

“I am of course struck that so many of my colleagues who are so worried about the deficit apparently think the Pentagon is funded with Monopoly money that somehow doesn’t count,” Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., said on a conference call hosted by the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning think tank.

quote:

Originally posted by FlankerFlyer:
Of course, ELmer Fudd Franks tried with all his might to kill this needed weapons program.

quote:

WASHINGTON — A key House Democrat on Tuesday criticized so-called fiscal conservatives for approving millions of dollars for an outdated weapon system, while complaining about ballooning deficits.

“I am of course struck that so many of my colleagues who are so worried about the deficit apparently think the Pentagon is funded with Monopoly money that somehow doesn’t count,” Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., said on a conference call hosted by the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning think tank.

<<http://www.ajc.com/pets/content/business/stories/2009/06/24/f22_congress.html

This is the same limp wrist who fought tooth and nail to allow suspicious mortgage loans to continue and said in 2006 that "Nothing is wrong with Fannie and Freddie". Outdated??? still looking across the globe to find its technological equal being offered for sale somewhere. The F-22 wont be "outdated" for at least another 15-20 years.

But go ahead Barney Fudd, fight for those food stamps and unemployement benefits and then tell me in 6 mo9nths whether you have anything tangible to show for that program's extra monopoly money expenditures.

quote:

Originally posted by rayevinsonsr:
The V-22 Osprey was cancelled a dozen times, found unsafe, over budget, took to much time and last SecDef Rumsfeld blue penciled it, but Congress has never met a system they didn't like.

Seems the Defense is leaning heavily on unmanned Predators, with the X-45 (USAF) X-47B (Navy)being road tested, who's to say Mr. Gates is wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by Duster6:
Scratch the F-22. It is already out of date. Hail the F-35. Our future against Muslim radicals and liberals.

quote:

Cool

quote:

Originally posted by sw614:
If the cap holds, the USAF will never see another new-built F-22.

R&D does not matter a whit. It is parts availability, tooling, and the production line that count. All that goes away as soon as the last one is built. The SecDef is putting all future tactical acft needs into one F-35 basket. I sure hope he is right.

quote:

Originally posted by Thud357L:

quote:

Originally posted by sw614:
If the cap holds, the USAF will never see another new-built F-22.

R&D does not matter a whit. It is parts availability, tooling, and the production line that count. All that goes away as soon as the last one is built. The SecDef is putting all future tactical acft needs into one F-35 basket. I sure hope he is right.

So you're saying there is absolutely no way to make more if we stop making them now? That the current lot of 22's won't have spare parts? I've worked on a lot of assembly lines in my day but we were just making cars and and starting up a dormant assembly line or making a whole new one didn't require any magic. What is the difference regarding an ultra-expensive, hi-tech airplane? When we were doing R&D it still required an assembly mechanism which means we didn't dismantle a given line. It just ran when we needed it.

I guess I'd be more worried if we were trying to achieve air superiority but we already have it and are at least a couple of decades ahead of anyone else. The powers that be say the F-35 can do. I hope they're right also. In fact, I believe they are.

quote:

Originally posted by sw614:

quote:

Originally posted by Thud357L:

quote:

Originally posted by sw614:
If the cap holds, the USAF will never see another new-built F-22.

R&D does not matter a whit. It is parts availability, tooling, and the production line that count. All that goes away as soon as the last one is built. The SecDef is putting all future tactical acft needs into one F-35 basket. I sure hope he is right.

So you're saying there is absolutely no way to make more if we stop making them now? That the current lot of 22's won't have spare parts? I've worked on a lot of assembly lines in my day but we were just making cars and and starting up a dormant assembly line or making a whole new one didn't require any magic. What is the difference regarding an ultra-expensive, hi-tech airplane? When we were doing R&D it still required an assembly mechanism which means we didn't dismantle a given line. It just ran when we needed it.

I guess I'd be more worried if we were trying to achieve air superiority but we already have it and are at least a couple of decades ahead of anyone else. The powers that be say the F-35 can do. I hope they're right also. In fact, I believe they are.

No it can be done. However, the time it would take to regenerate production would probably take longer that any conflict in which the airframes are needed.

The spares for acft in the fleet are just that, spares. You use them for new production then you buy more if the company who produced them is still in business and still has capability. A lot of parts called 'spares' are usually repaired and placed back into supply system. Basic hardware, panels, etc are new but engines, landing gear, brakes, wheels, avionic components, electrical components, seats, etc are all repaired and not normally replaced with new. I do not believe that has changes a whole lot since I retired, but ya never know.

What will happen when F-22 production ends will be the line will sit as is for a few months or more until Lockheed is sure there are no more orders or that none will be allowed through FMS. Then the line will be dismantled. Jigs and tooling may go into storage for a few years, but after that, it will probably be scrapped since it costs money to store that much equipment. Once that happens it will take a significant amount of time to rebuild, retool, and get subcontractors on board. During this time the experienced workforce that built them originally is now scattered to the winds.

The R&D taking place is for improvements to existing airframes and does not keep the production line warm. Existing airframes will be used and modifications done at depot or at manufacturer, but usually not on production line.

Most aircraft I worked were older ones that had been in the fleet for some time and I can say for certain that the production equipment for them (B-52s, KC-135, C-141s, C-5s after the 'B' models were built, etc.) was long gone. There was discussion not too long ago about buying more B-2s. Once the cost of restarting the production line was factored in, it was decided to press ahead with the NGB, which Secretary Gates has put on hold. You never know what future political decisions will be.

As I have said elsewhere, I am sure the F-35 will be a good acft, but it will not be in the same league as the F-22 when it enters the fleet. And the production run is going to be spread over a 25+ year period during which the USAF is projecting a shortfall of 500-800 sirframes as legacy fighters age out. What we have left during that time had better be Sierra Hotel if they bare needed somewhere. Too many are equating the F-22 to only current ongoing operations. That is wrong. The F-22 is being procured for requirements 20-30 years down the road.

Any acft can be reproduced. The question is how much time and money do you have to do it.

quote:

Originally posted by L0A1:
Gates said no, he makes those decisions, not Murtha. Though I commend Murtha's attempt at being positive towards the Military instead of caling us murderers before a trial.