More Obama Murder of America: The Pentagon Cuts

[grumbler]

Going to replace the A-10 with the F-35, a supersonic, uber expensive, leading edge tech aircraft? How will that save money, especially since the F-35 program is so expensive? I'd think that helos, drones and even unmanned helos being developed now will replace the A-10 in a close support role, not an uber expensive fighter.

No, the F-35 is not designed as a replacement for the A-10.  It is a multirole aircraft, and only one of its missions is close air support.

The cost of an aircraft comes not just from its purchase price, but also from its operations and maintenance costs.  Those have come down pretty dramatically from the days of the A-10's design, and both that design, and the age of the components, mean that the A-10 is more expensive to fly than the F-35 will be.

The A-10 is 40 years old.  Planes wear out.  The question isn't "should the USAF retire the A-10?" it is "when should the USAF retire the A-10?"  The argument that 2025 or so is a better answer than 2019 hasn't been made very effectively.

[CountDeMoney]

I love how the proponents of the Thud 2 argue that it is a unique aircraft in aviation history, completely ignoring all of the aircraft which were designed along the same lines for the same mission.  Maybe if the Chair Force had accurately named them the Sturmovik 2, people would realize that these types of planes, like all others, come and go.

The F-111 didnt need to be "retired", either.

Stop hating success.

[Brazen]

If you want to increase the chances of your project getting funded, make it secret.

The US government's spending on top secret defence projects is declining slower than the overall defence budget, according to a new study. A team at Washington-based consultancy Avascent says classified funding from 2011 to 2014 has shrunk by 3.5%, while the overall Department of Defense budget has gone down 5.3%.

In the Pentagon's 2015 budget, classified projects will account for over US$50 billion. For FY2015 the portion of the DoD budget which will go to funding classified work will be 8.9%. According to Avascent, during the previous budgetary year – FY2014 – the classified portion of the DoD budget was a larger 9.8%.

These figures do not include Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) accounts, which will add to the classified budget.

[KRonn]

Going to replace the A-10 with the F-35, a supersonic, uber expensive, leading edge tech aircraft? How will that save money, especially since the F-35 program is so expensive? I'd think that helos, drones and even unmanned helos being developed now will replace the A-10 in a close support role, not an uber expensive fighter.

No, the F-35 is not designed as a replacement for the A-10.  It is a multirole aircraft, and only one of its missions is close air support.

The cost of an aircraft comes not just from its purchase price, but also from its operations and maintenance costs.  Those have come down pretty dramatically from the days of the A-10's design, and both that design, and the age of the components, mean that the A-10 is more expensive to fly than the F-35 will be.

The A-10 is 40 years old.  Planes wear out.  The question isn't "should the USAF retire the A-10?" it is "when should the USAF retire the A-10?"  The argument that 2025 or so is a better answer than 2019 hasn't been made very effectively.

Good points about the costs. I figured the A-10 was still cheaper even though older, because of the simpler design. I understood that the F-35 was a multi-role fighter and while I can see that the A-10's time has come to be retired, I'd think that helos are better in a close support role that of the kinds the A-10 did. Fighters and bombers have been doing much of the job with guided munitions and that role isn't going away. But for the close to the ground support that A-10s often flew, I'd think that's still necessary and that helos perform some of that role along with A-10s, and will replace the A-10 as the aircraft is phased out.

[grumbler]

Good points about the costs. I figured the A-10 was still cheaper even though older, because of the simpler design. I understood that the F-35 was a multi-role fighter and while I can see that the A-10's time has come to be retired, I'd think that helos are better in a close support role that of the kinds the A-10 did. Fighters and bombers have been doing much of the job with guided munitions and that role isn't going away. But for the close to the ground support that A-10s often flew, I'd think that's still necessary and that helos perform some of that role along with A-10s, and will replace the A-10 as the aircraft is phased out.

CAS will actually be increasingly undertaken by upgraded MLRS batteries.  The Chair Force has long striven to gain control of MLRS, because they have understood how it undermines the rationales for spending on aircraft.  With drones for spotting MLRS for delivering quantities of explosives to the target, and helos for quick-reaction ops, the A-10 is increasingly limited the being the "'Hog of the Gaps."

[Darth Wagtaros]

Aren't the guided missile boats supposed to improve CAS as well?

[grumbler]

If you want to increase the chances of your project getting funded, make it secret.

The US government's spending on top secret defence projects is declining slower than the overall defence budget, according to a new study. A team at Washington-based consultancy Avascent says classified funding from 2011 to 2014 has shrunk by 3.5%, while the overall Department of Defense budget has gone down 5.3%.

In the Pentagon's 2015 budget, classified projects will account for over US$50 billion. For FY2015 the portion of the DoD budget which will go to funding classified work will be 8.9%. According to Avascent, during the previous budgetary year – FY2014 – the classified portion of the DoD budget was a larger 9.8%.

These figures do not include Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) accounts, which will add to the classified budget.

Maybe someone who is better at math than me can explain, but how can secret spending be declining slower than overall spending (3.5% as compared to 5.3%) but also consume a smaller percentage of total spending (8.9% of the total, as compared to 9.8%)?  If the one-year decline in percentage of spending is just an anomaly when looking at the 4-year percentage of decline, why wouldn't the author mention this?  The numbers seem contradictory.

[grumbler]

Aren't the guided missile boats supposed to improve CAS as well?

Only for the Inca.

[crazy canuck]

Okay, that was funny.  I 

[Darth Wagtaros]

Aren't the guided missile boats supposed to improve CAS as well?

Only for the Inca.

Thought they used torpedo boats?

[Valmy]

I love 12 year old jokes.  It is too bad that thread died with the old board.

[CountDeMoney]

I love 12 year old jokes.  It is too bad that thread died with the old board.

It didnt die, it was retired.  BOARDS COME AND GO

[derspiess]

I've forgotten the context on that one. I know it involved Crunchie but that's it.

[Valmy]

I've forgotten the context on that one. I know it involved Crunchie but that's it.

It was an argument about which was the best type of warship and Crunchie was claiming swarms of small torpedo boats were the best I think.  The Incans got in there someplace.  This was actually before I started posting on Languish.

[Neil]

I've forgotten the context on that one. I know it involved Crunchie but that's it.

It was an argument about which was the best type of warship and Crunchie was claiming swarms of small torpedo boats were the best I think.  The Incans got in there someplace.  This was actually before I started posting on Languish.

Crunch had a real attraction to the Incan people.  It was sort of like Spellus and every obscure ethnicity in the world.  You'd almost think they were the same guy, except Spellus doesn't go on about seizing the means of production and all that jazz.