Forum: Program and politics

"The top Democrat and Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee on Monday blasted the Pentagon's decision to lift a 'probation' imposed on the Marine Corps variant of the Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 fighter a year earlier than planned, saying the decision appeared premature and was not vetted with Congress."

http://www.lse.co.uk/FinanceNews.asp?Ar ... _premature

"Levin, D-Mich., and McCain, R-Ariz., wrote that the program “has enjoyed some success over the last few months, after several years of having fallen short.” But they said “more problems with the F-35B’s structure and propulsion, potentially as serious as those that were originally identified a year ago, have been found. This is salient where the F-35B has completed only 20 percent of its developmental test plan to date. Your decision, therefore, appears at least premature.”

http://www.navytimes.com/news/2012/02/a ... 5b-020612/

"Along with the letter to Panetta, the senators are calling on the comptroller general [Government Accountability Office] to review the extent to which the program has resolved the issues that former Defense Secretary Robert Gates had flagged when he placed the program on probation, and to describe the extent to which any additional structural or propulsion issues have cropped up since that time."

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... el=defense

"They noted that Lockheed's contract with the Pentagon to build a fourth batch of F-35 fighter jets was only half complete, but was expected to exceed the contract's target cost of $3.46 billion by $245 million and that concurrency charges would add $237 million more to the program's cost. Concurrency costs refer to the cost of retrofitting already produced aircraft if problems occur during developmental testing."

http://whtc.com/news/articles/2012/feb/ ... premature/

F-16.net Sponsor

News Flash: The "probation" was completely unofficial in nature and was up to the Pentagon to apply and remove at it sees fit. Considering that the items that got it put on probation have for the most part been resolved, its lifting was appropriate.

Exit question: Why is the SASC throwing more of a hissy about them not being "consulted" about the removal rather than them not being "consulted" about its probation in the first place?

Links to the letters by Senators McCain and Levin to SecDef Panetta and GAO Comptroller General Dodaro:

http://images.politico.com/global/2012/ ... netta.html

http://images.politico.com/global/2012/ ... 5_gao.html

Pretty pathetic that former war vet would use the military as his whipping boy in a vain effort to stay relevant.

sferrin wrote:

Pretty pathetic that former war vet would use the military as his whipping boy in a vain effort to stay relevant.

Yeah, he owes the public a credible alternative but doesn't seem to have one.. to me he was being intellectually dishonest and doing a disservice by not putting the 'trillion dollar jet' issue in the proper context.

Of course it's pathetic. It couldn't possibly involve concern over scarce defense dollars. Sen McCain has been on the SASC for almost twenty years and he's been staying "relevant" in the same manner the whole time. Calling a US Senator's concerns over the F-35 "pathetic" the day after the head of DOD procurement called the program "acquisition malpractice" does of course contain some rather delicious irony.

In any case calling Sen McCain a "former war vet" seems to downplay that he volunteered to fly fighters in combat and was shot down and held as a prisoner of war for 5 1/2 years under appalling conditions, including torture, and turned down an NVA offer to be released early. The man earned his right to be critical over any US Government program and paid with his service, body, and honor.

Whether he has a point or not is another matter. Based on actually reading the letter to dismiss the points raised by the Democratic Chairman and Republican Co Chair of SASC is the only thing here apparently "pathetic".

HASC Chairman thinks different:

HASC Chairman McKeon supports DoD’s decision to take the F-35B off probation
Posted By McQ • [February 13, 2012]

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2012/02/h ... ACKFIVE%29

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon:
"“I know Senator McCain has some problems with it. We had a big discussion on it when we were going through our conference on our bill. But I have a lot of confidence in Gen. Amos and I think that if they took it off probation, they deserved it, the plane deserved it, it’s functioning and it’s doing the job.”"

Fair minded comment: That's great and why it's a democratic process with two legislatures with differing views.

Cynical comment: McKeon's largest contributor in the last election was LM.

lb wrote:

Fair minded comment: That's great and why it's a democratic process with two legislatures with differing views.

Cynical comment: McKeon's largest contributor in the last election was LM.

Shocking!

I'm fed up with this crap about 'paid positive comments only' for the F-35. If a criminal offence has been committed - such as bribery [for support of F-35] - then why are not these 'paid politicians' (some are of course) in jail? I don't really care because the US Guvmnt is not my business; but for fsake if anyone makes such claims - how about providing some evidence. Thanks.

spazsinbad wrote:

I'm fed up with this crap about 'paid positive comments only' for the F-35. If a criminal offence has been committed - such as bribery [for support of F-35] - then why are not these 'paid politicians' (some are of course) in jail? I don't really care because the US Guvmnt is not my business; but for fsake if anyone makes such claims - how about providing some evidence. Thanks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaSFuZgqjps Wink

We don't do bribery anymore with rare exceptions. Exactly how much is McKeon influenced by his largest contributor? Who can say? That said the notion that LM has purchased zero influence with their contributions is beyond absurd. So it's perfectly reasonable to at least consider his comments within the context of his contributors.

As far as evidence goes when I search "McKeon Lockmart contributions" I get 500,000 hits. Here's two:

http://www.usnews.com/congress/mckeon-howard-p-buck

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/ ... =N00006882

So then what about McCain and all the others. It is absurd that only the so called positive commenters are singled out for aspersion casting. How about the F-35 haters. Who finances them? The tooth fairy?

The Representative from the Palmdale area recieves contributions (10K a piece which is pocket change in a campaign) from defense contractors based in the area. Alert the Media!

Levin has recieved plenty of contributions from Boeing, who is the biggest benifactor of F-35 cuts. And McCain gets major (million) contributions from the Retirement industry, which is strange for a Senator from Arizona.

(I appologize for the sarcasm, but I'm with spazsinbad, it's getting old that every positive comment is paid for, but every negative comment is above reproach)

I think the F-35 is just a political tool no matter the comment, good or bad. McCain and Levin, get to say, "I fought against an over budget, behind schedule program." While McKeon gets to say, "I saved jobs, and helped secure our defense into the future."

I think McCain and Levin were ticked they weren't consulted, which is funny because when it was put on probabtion in a non-election year, neither one said a word about being left out of the decision.

Additionally, Why did the Senate need to be consulted on a fake probation? When I say fake I mean; to my knowledge Gates never documented why the program was being placed on probation, nor did he document requirments to lift the probation, nor did he document the consequences of not preforming the requirements to lift the probation. If there is documentation please show me, I haven't found it. In general, if it isn't in writing, it doesn't exsist because it is only verbal which is basically worthless in court.

(Sorry for the rant)

Sufa Viper

For purposes of fairness, I'd like to see who has made contributions to F-35 critics.

Forum: Program and politics

SASC: Pentagon move on F-35B model premature