Just a recap and a wrap up of this weeks issues (at least as I see them)....
F-35 vs. Armor....
I made the suggestion that the Marine Corps needs to get out of the combat crouch regarding the F-35 and delay the program by 4 years in order to purchase an MPC to replace the AAV. I had a junior psychiatrist/economist/procurement manager try and explain that by removing 24 aircraft from the program and moving them to the out years that it would in essence kill the project. Quite honestly, if moving 24 airplanes kills the program then let me shoot it in the face....administer the drip...cut its throat.
I don't care. If it dies, it dies. The Marine Corps needs armor. If you've watched exercises you've seen AAVs being towed to shore on almost everyone of them.
One day, its going to be an issue where a tow isn't needed.
One of those almost 50 year old vehicles is going to sink to the bottom of the sea and Marine Moms will get gold stars 'cause their boys were sent out in ancient vehicles. Commanders will be relieved, some squid doctor will come up with a sillier immersion escape contraption and a unit will have a memorial service.
The reality? We should start replacing the vehicles today.
Specialized Marine Units...
For the little piss ants like Sferrin that like to shout to the roof tops that I know so little, it sure seems to me like the Commandant was out making statements that seemed to be direct rebuttals to some of the complaints on this blog. He had an interview where he talked about the 26th MEU being ready to respond to trouble in Egypt. That's a classic MEU mission, one that they train up on before deployment. Problem is that he formed a SPMAGTF/Crisis Response to do the same mission. We also have the SPMAGTF Africa that is also training to do the embassy reinforcement mission ......
Someone has no clue what the hell they are talking about when they say 24 JSF deferrals WOULD KILL THE PROJECT! I can't post the image but if you look for F35 LRIP image on Google, you will find the actual numbers compared to projections.
ReplyDelete2010 MOU:FY2013=70 JSF. Actual buy=29
2010 MOU:FY2014=156 JSF. Actual buy=29
2010 MOU:FY2015=177 JSF. Actual buy=44
2010 MOU:FY2016=230 JSF. Actual buy=61
Now,you really had to be from another planet to believe that 230 JSFs were going to be produced in one year, well, maybe a few idiots in Congress got a little something something on the side to turn off their brains but this is what reality for the rest of us looks like.
I really don't see how if USMC were to defer a few JSFs and push them to the right would kill the program when next year, 156 JSF were supposed to be produced and only 29 are on order.....
"Someone has no clue what the hell they are talking about when they say 24 JSF deferrals WOULD KILL THE PROJECT!"
DeleteLt General Bogdan is clueless?
http://defense-update.com/20130426_f35_death_spiral.html
http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=119876
all that tells me is that many are starting to ask the same question i am.
DeleteI LIKE THIS AIRPLANE BUT IS THE JUICE WORTH THE SQUEEZE ON OUR BUDGET?
that whole thing is about not wanting partners to bail on the program. i'm talking about delaying purchases. thats two different things. but you don't like the optics on that do you? the idea that the Marine Corps could actually talk about delaying the F-35 in favor of armor scares the living daylights out of you. why?
"all that tells me is that many are starting to ask the same question i am."
DeletePeople also ask if we need a Marine Corps.
"I LIKE THIS AIRPLANE BUT IS THE JUICE WORTH THE SQUEEZE ON OUR BUDGET?"
In a word, yes. If you want more info on that you can consult what you previously wrote about it, or my previous posts.
"that whole thing is about not wanting partners to bail on the program. i'm talking about delaying purchases."
Delaying purchases increases costs. increased costs, means a less affordable aircraft for us and partner nations. If the JSF is unaffordable to those partner nations, they will withdraw from the program. If they withdraw from the program JSF costs will then escalate even further. These costs will then have to be absorbed by the nations remaining in the program. The cost may be too much even for them and they will withdraw from the program as well, passing on increased cost yet again to those who remain. The program will collapse. and no more JSFs will be produced.
"the idea that the Marine Corps could actually talk about delaying the F-35 in favor of armor scares the living daylights out of you. why?"
"One of those almost 50 year old vehicles is going to sink to the bottom of the sea and Marine Moms will get gold stars 'cause their boys were sent out in ancient vehicles."
scared?
You can stop the emotional arguments and other emotional bullshit as well, Sol. I remember you slaying people that tried to bring that "Think of the children, give up your guns" emotional appeal after Newtown. now its "why are you so scared?/Marines will drown!" ??
I'm not scared at all. You seem to overestimate the power your blog has over real world events. I am only trying to get you to see a bigger picture. If you don't want to see a bigger picture thats fine, but I would suggest you research the smaller picture you are proposing in greater depth.
If I "lose" the argument. There is no effect. same with burying your head in the sand regarding important details.
The problem I see, even if airframe procurement was shifted around, is that its uncertain if funds would be reprogramed for the purpose you have in mind.
ReplyDeletethey would be and it wouldn't even be a heavy lift. Congress is concerned about the Marine Corps situation, the SecDef says he's concerned. the Commandant says he's concerned, and everyone wants new manufacturing jobs. the biggest headache will be explaining why the first dozen or so vehicles need to be produced overseas, but by the time you flash some jobs and cash before the Congressional district you're gonna be building the vehicles in and you'll have everyone saying what a good deal it is.
Deletewanna make everyone happier still. let the President open the new plant, brag about being strong on defense and protecting US workers....if the plant is in a Republican district then everyone will be singing and clapping but more importantly the USMC will start get a 50 year old vehicle replaced.
If its that easy, why do we need to cut any F-35s?
Deletethat's what everyone has jumping through there behinds about. they assume that i'm saying cut when i actually said delay.
Deletedelay the F-35 and prioritize armor instead has been my constant refrain.
only the delusional (sferrin) read into my words, instead of understanding what was actually said.
A "delay" is as good as "cut" in this case, You can call it a "blow job" if you want the result is the same.
Deleteseveral times the "delusional" have tried to explain that a delay is simply not possible, thus what you propose is not possible.
It would be like if a politician said he wasn't "cutting" your second amendment rights, just "delaying" the time you can own a firearm until after you are dead. see wasn't that easy?
So the big question is: Can you delay the JSF any further? The man in charge of the whole program is saying that it can not be done. Others disagree, but a death spiral is a real thing and even the people who think the program will survive with your proposed delay, agree that it will drive up the cost.
So we will pay more money, and get fewer aircraft in the long run, even if the program doesn't collapse. In the meantime, we have no idea exactly how many MPCs we would net from your proposal. just that we would flash some cash and everything would be OK. You gloss over these facts and many others and act as if a delay will have no negative short or long term effects. not only on the USMC's F-35s, but the MPC, Air wing, and USMC as a whole.
Well, just look at the numbers, if LtG Bogdan is clueless,it's not my fault. We are at a third to a quarter of production rate already, a couple of F35B pushed to right would kill the project how? WE ARE ALREADY THERE! In defense of Sols idea of deferral, Lot 8 and 9 are supposed to be the first lots with "major" foreign buys so a few less F35B buys by USMC shouldn't be a problem or suddenly all pro-F35 lovers don't trust the Brits, Italians or Danes,etc...anymore??? Anyways, there should be a few buys from Israel, Japan, SK or Australia around that time so what is the big deal about a few less F35Bs?
ReplyDeletei need to research this a bit. if this program is this frail then it needs to be shot in the face, given a lethal injection or have its throat cut.
Deletepeople like to pound on the EFV for being a failed program but at its cancellation it was supposedly turning the corner. the software on this still is giving fits and yet they're talking about IOC in 2015? i wouldn't drive a car with software issues, i want to meet the pilots that are going to fly an airplane with them.
i need to research this a bit. if this program is this frail then it needs to be shot in the face, given a lethal injection or have its throat cut.
DeleteAny project can go into a death spiral from cuts. It is not about "frailty" at all. If you don't trust me go to SMSGT Mac's blog, or ask him directly. He will fill you in.
"people like to pound on the EFV for being a failed program but at its cancellation it was supposedly turning the corner."
It must have been frail, and deserved to be killed. If it wasn't frail it wouldn't have been lethally injected right?
"the software on this still is giving fits and yet they're talking about IOC in 2015? i wouldn't drive a car with software issues, i want to meet the pilots that are going to fly an airplane with them."
The flight software is fine, the software in the future is what gives it the initial combat capabilities in 2015.
I might add to Sols position if possible, not sure he agrees but I will take it one step further than his USMC concern. US DoD is going to have to give some tough love to the services, just like when US Army Aviation was given a choice: you can have the Comanche or upgrade the fleet of Apaches,Chinooks and Hawks but NOT BOTH!
ReplyDeleteIf USMC wants F35B so bad, like Anon wants it so bad, so be it but as Sol mentions, if suddenly Anon is wrong, lots of Marines are going to be hitting the beaches with 50 year old gear and I also say that is wrong. I would far prefer that our military had a more balanced force than just some whiz bang fighter and everything else being decrepit fossil crap.
This will affect USAF also, they aren't going to be immune to F35A costs, what's going to happen with future tanker buys, future bomber, F15/16 upgrades, UAVs and replacement for AWACS and J-STARS? Is USAF going to pretend to be such a hot fighting force to sell/recruit to US kids when all the gear is 50 years old?
Anybody worry about that? I never really considered myself a F35 hater, more just a realist that's concerned about what this program is doing to the rest of the force......
"If USMC wants F35B so bad, like Anon wants it so bad, so be it but as Sol mentions, if suddenly Anon is wrong, lots of Marines are going to be hitting the beaches with 50 year old gear and I also say that is wrong."
ReplyDeleteMarines are going to be hitting the beaches with 50 year old gear anyway. That is my point, especially Seeing as the MPC is an LAV replacement, and not an AAV replacement. Am I happy about AAVs still being used? Hell No, not at all. Should we possibly destroy one program to try and rectify that with a knee jerk solution That doesn't solve the problem?
Sol sees delaying the F-35 to buy MPCs as something as simple as transferring money from your savings account to your checking account. I see it as a high interest predatory loan, that would quickly get us in debt up to our ass, at a time when money is about to become increasingly scarce, and we still wouldn't get what we want.
"I would far prefer that our military had a more balanced force than just some whiz bang fighter and everything else being decrepit fossil crap."
Me too, but we bet big on a Whiz-bang EFV, and lost. so now we have fossilized crap. That has ZERO to do with the JSF, and everything to do with EFV costs skyrocketing, and decades of trying to make it work and failing to do so. And before we say "but but the jsf!" well the JSF is different because we (USMC) are only paying a fraction of the program cost. Where as no one else wanted the EFV but us.
To use another analogy, the Marine Corps could get on a bus with everyone else and get to their dream destination with the JSF. with the EFV it was going to be like buying a custom Lamborghini by ourselves, building it by hand, and then having to drive it too. It failed and here we are. The EFV was an Osprey program without the death, and the Marine Corps just couldn't pull it off. long delays, huge costs, and technical issues yet to be worked out. I would have loved to have it, but it just became impossible, and Amo couldn't just punt it down the road for the next guy to worry about like other CMCs had done.
"This will affect USAF also, they aren't going to be immune to F35A costs, what's going to happen with future tanker buys, future bomber, F15/16 upgrades, UAVs and replacement for AWACS and J-STARS?"
Delays to pusrchasing JSFs would increase the cost to every customer, so yes it would also have a ripple effect across the services. I'm glad you mentioned that.