Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (288318)	1/20/2009 10:47:56 AM
From: ManyMoose	1 Recommendation Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793966

Finally, Patty Murray says something I agree with, "Continued F-22 production is critical to both the national security and economic interests of our country," Murray said in a statement. but for the wrong reasons. "At a time when we are looking to create jobs and stimulate the economy, eliminating the $12 billion in economic activity and thousands of American jobs tied to F-22 production simply doesn't make sense."

To: LindyBill who wrote (288318)	1/23/2009 8:59:01 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 793966

My opinions on those ideas. Stopping F-22 production. - If we could retroactively cancel the program years ago, maybe I'd support that action, but after paying the R&D and production start up costs I'd like to get something from it. Reducing the number of aircraft carriers from 11 to 10. Maybe. It would increase stress from long deployments of the carriers we have left, but it still might make sense. Eliminating the Air Force's next-generation tanker (KC-X) and spending part of that money on modifying 50-year-old KC-135s and KC-10s that date from the 1980s. I think I'd say no here. In particular the KC135s are really old. And they are the majority of our refueling fleet. United States Air Force operated 505 KC-135 aircraft as of September 2007 (199 active duty, 80 reserve, and 226 guard). en.wikipedia.org United States Air Force operated 59 KC-10 aircraft as of September 2007. en.wikipedia.org Limiting Marine Corps purchases of JSF to the number needed to replace the AV-8B Harrier Haven't really thought about that one. I'm not sure even what the currently planned number for the Marines is, and what the reduced number would be. But it would be a reduction in the number of marine aircraft, not an example of keeping the numbers the same. Since the Marines current operate both the AV-8B and over 200 F/A-18s Cutting the Air Force JSF buy in half. AND eliminating the F-22 at the same time?? Delay acquisition of the Navy's next-generation cruiser (CG-X) for a decade. It wouldn't surprise me if something like this happens. It might not even be planned but rather just the result of delays. Of course the big savings will come from pulling out of Iraq, but that will take a few years, and also it won't cut the military budget as such (at least not by much) but rather the supplementals (which are defense spending, but the issue of the article you posted was the official defense budget)