F-35 funding reduced

Boozebin

5-Year Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2010
Messages
640
Looks like the House has voted down $450 Million from funds on the F 35 See link below

CNN House votes down...

Defense Secretary Robert Gates told members of the House Armed Services Committee earlier Wednesday that he considers the program "an unnecessary and extravagant expense, particularly during a period of fiscal contraction."

Edit: I know it's jsut for the second engine they're cutting but is this a sign of more to come.
 
Last edited:
For those of us who have spent many years in the military, these measures go up and down. Maybe they keep the aircraft at 1 engine. then, possibly in 3 years, they get some with 2 engines. No different than any other aircraft such as the F-15 that had "A", "B", "C", "D", "E" models.

Yes, I see this cutback as "PART" of the bigger cutback. The DOD is one of the largest government expenditures out there. They have to do some cutbacks. Hopefully, Obama and congress won't try to get all of their cutbacks from the military; or use these savings so he can pay for more of his "Social Programs" where most of his voter base is. Hopefully, they do an across the board cut. I'd hate to see military cutbacks, while we're still paying for Illegal Immigrants to have access to social programs.
 
Well, the 2nd engine was largely seen as "corporate welfare" from Congress, rather than a military need. The SecDef and many others wanted it removed from the budget.
 
Raimius's response was spot on.

We've been trying to cut the F136 for a while now, only to have Congress keep forcing it back into the program budget. "Corporate Welfare" at it's worse. Granted, it would have been nice to have an alternative engine (works well for the F-16 fleet), but it was just too expensive to the overall program.

What has me amazed is the power of the Tea Party Republicans, who finally forced one example of fiscal repsonsibility on their party. Interesting to see what will happen now happen in the Senate.
 
First thanks to you three… you bring a lot of insight to how all this works and I really do enjoy reading you’re post on things…

Granted I don’t know a lot about these things but if they cut the F35 too deep (like what happened with the F22) shouldn’t we be worried about the aging F15s? Aren’t they coming up at the end of life? Don’t get me wrong I know we can keep those birds in the air long after their “expiration” date but with no real talk about new 5thGen Fighters in the pipe and we’re only starting to talk about 6th Gen fighters (which would be what 20 years out?) are we going to find ourselves in a bit of a whole in our ability to project air superiority?

Just a few question that came to mind from a guy that really has little to no clue on how this works. so please don't kill the me :biggrin:
 
Well, this was just killing the 2nd engine. It basically limits the F35 to its current engine. That is not a huge loss. Procurement numbers were not affected.

Next, we still have a general advantage, as very few nations posess even gen 4.5 fighters, and fewer still have the training and support the US military brings to the fight.
 
First thanks to you three… you bring a lot of insight to how all this works and I really do enjoy reading you’re post on things…

Granted I don’t know a lot about these things but if they cut the F35 too deep (like what happened with the F22) shouldn’t we be worried about the aging F15s? Aren’t they coming up at the end of life? Don’t get me wrong I know we can keep those birds in the air long after their “expiration” date but with no real talk about new 5thGen Fighters in the pipe and we’re only starting to talk about 6th Gen fighters (which would be what 20 years out?) are we going to find ourselves in a bit of a whole in our ability to project air superiority?

Just a few question that came to mind from a guy that really has little to no clue on how this works. so please don't kill the me :biggrin:

Read the CSAF's 2011 Posture Statement, which he presented today to the House Armed Service's Committee. You'll notice his words about preparing for the F-35 while also beginning efforts to extend the life of our legacy F-16s and F-15s to overcome delays in F-35 production and development.

Hhhmmmm... I wonder who wrote those words for him? :rolleyes:

(Oh, btw, your questions on 6th Gen and the need to analyze & protect the AF's Fighter Force Structure are valid as well, and being worked on one cubical over from mine, with some help from others :cool:)
 
Read the CSAF's 2011 Posture Statement, which he presented today to the House Armed Service's Committee. You'll notice his words about preparing for the F-35 while also beginning efforts to extend the life of our legacy F-16s and F-15s to overcome delays in F-35 production and development.

Hhhmmmm... I wonder who wrote those words for him? :rolleyes:

(Oh, btw, your questions on 6th Gen and the need to analyze & protect the AF's Fighter Force Structure are valid as well, and being worked on one cubical over from mine, with some help from others :cool:)

Glad they have guys like you working these programs :thumb: I was a bit surprised to see the A10 wing replacement mentioned in the 2011 Posture Statement but makes sense since the F35 was to play a roll in shutting down the A10s.
 
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2011/02/kerry_brown_uni.html

I think the very last sentence is key....

Senators John F. Kerry and Scott Brown want the U.S. Senate to restore funding for a second engine for the military's next generation of fighter jets despite a House vote last week clamping off money for the program.

Kerry, a Democrat, and Brown, a Republican, wrote to Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel K. Inouye and Vice Chairman Thad Cochran on Friday asking that any budget measure for the rest of this year keep funding in place for the F-35 backup engine, which General Electric is developing with Rolls-Royce.

"Allowing funding under the next continuing resolution to end before the Senate has spoken would be premature and shortsighted," they wrote. Four other Democratic senators also signed the letter; Brown was the only Republican.

The second engine for the F-35 Lightning II, which is also known as the Joint Strike Fighter, is one of several military projects that watchdog groups and budget hawks have criticized as being redundant and wasteful. Supporters say it will save taxpayers money in the long run, and would be needed should the primary engine, made by Pratt & Whitney, fails.

President Bush first urged an end to the program, and President Obama and the Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates both say the engine program should be scrapped.

Last week, the House moved to do that. In one of its first votes seeking to cut some $61 billion from the federal budget this year, the members passed an amendment 233 to 198 that cut $450 million in funds that would have paid for the engine through September.

The six senators voiced concern about the House vote, saying the engine is nearing completion and ending it would threaten national security and waste the $3 billion that has already been spent on the program.

The engine has powerful backers in the Senate, including Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat, but it also has prominent critics, such as John McCain, an Arizona Republican.

It's difficult to say whether Kerry and Brown's advocacy will matter, in light of the House vote. In a budget measure last year, the Senate did not include the funding but the House did, and the program remained intact in a compromise budget bill.

Many members of the Massachusetts congressional delegation have championed the alternate engine program, which would create some 400 jobs at GE Aviation's Lynn, Mass. factory.
 
Back
Top