B-21 (LRS-B) Thread

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

bayernfan

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 37
  • Joined: 20 Aug 2013, 20:30

Unread post12 Apr 2019, 23:32

f-16adf wrote:It was Obama and his DS Gates who did in the Raptor. Bush 43, Cheney, Rummy, Adelman, Bolton were the ones interested in making every Muslim dictatorship a Western style democracy. Which was a dumb mistake.

I'd bet my house and my shorts that if a dem is elected Pres in 2020 this fantasy bomber, PCA, and the like will be the first to go. And expect F-35 production to be cut somewhat. I highly doubt I'm wrong.


These kinds of replies are not of the quality in this forum......

B-21 program was awarded in 2014 and was on a fast-track every since, across (dramatically) different Admins. PCA was also seriously discussed as the future direction starting in Obama era. F-35 was re-organized during Obama Admin to propose the newer IOC/FOC dates and all of them have been fulfilled. No cut to ultimate procurement of F-35 (well, current Admin once threatened to buy F-18 instead of F-35). I see no evidence you brought up to support your anticipation, maybe it is only your anticipation based on nothing then.

To have a general impression that certain political side is supporting/opposing advanced weapon system is a bad idea, at least if you want to have high quality discussion on specific issues.
Offline

f-16adf

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 660
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2016, 17:46

Unread post12 Apr 2019, 23:45

So who made you the all encompassing infallible judge of content? If Bernie or Joe become President and they fund them, you can say: See I told you so. Until then, I will believe the contrary.

And since you, the apex of maturity, believe in such "quality" content; I suggest you correct your numerous spelling/grammatical errors and avoid the seemingly childish emojis in your past posts-
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3211
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 3

Unread post13 Apr 2019, 13:58

bayernfan wrote:
f-16adf wrote:It was Obama and his DS Gates who did in the Raptor. Bush 43, Cheney, Rummy, Adelman, Bolton were the ones interested in making every Muslim dictatorship a Western style democracy. Which was a dumb mistake.

I'd bet my house and my shorts that if a dem is elected Pres in 2020 this fantasy bomber, PCA, and the like will be the first to go. And expect F-35 production to be cut somewhat. I highly doubt I'm wrong.


These kinds of replies are not of the quality in this forum......

B-21 program was awarded in 2014 and was on a fast-track every since, across (dramatically) different Admins. PCA was also seriously discussed as the future direction starting in Obama era. F-35 was re-organized during Obama Admin to propose the newer IOC/FOC dates and all of them have been fulfilled. No cut to ultimate procurement of F-35 (well, current Admin once threatened to buy F-18 instead of F-35). I see no evidence you brought up to support your anticipation, maybe it is only your anticipation based on nothing then.

To have a general impression that certain political side is supporting/opposing advanced weapon system is a bad idea, at least if you want to have high quality discussion on specific issues.


Generally speaking though, he's right.

It seems every time a Democrat is in office the military gets gutted. Cutbacks, meager if any increases in pay and outright cancellation of programs are common, and they're weak on foreign policy too IMO. Carter and Reagan being the classic example, but they're far from the only ones. If Crazy Bernie gets in, expect to see massive reductions in defense spending and massive increases in social welfare programs. If Biden gets in, he might actually be worse. When the SEALS took down Bin Laden, they also took away a treasure trove of intelligence. Including a "hit" list of assassination targets. Every except... touchy/feelie Joe.

He was deemed to be an asset to their cause..
Offline

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1171
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post13 Apr 2019, 14:39

Ronald Reagan ? A Democrat ? Weak on defense ?! Did you mistype Clinton ?
Offline

bayernfan

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 37
  • Joined: 20 Aug 2013, 20:30

Unread post14 Apr 2019, 01:44

f-16adf wrote:So who made you the all encompassing infallible judge of content? If Bernie or Joe become President and they fund them, you can say: See I told you so. Until then, I will believe the contrary.

And since you, the apex of maturity, believe in such "quality" content; I suggest you correct your numerous spelling/grammatical errors and avoid the seemingly childish emojis in your past posts-


Thank you for investigating me with such dedication. I learnt my lesson and will keep my mouth shut. You experts, please go on.
Offline

crosshairs

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 103
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2018, 19:03
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post14 Apr 2019, 02:36

Bush cut the F-22 program, and is fact. The captain zero administration certainly put the nail in the coffin. Bush practically was a continuation of Clinton. Trump is the first republican since Reagan to try and build the military up. Bush could have bought more B-2s in the early 2000s for something like 600M a copy. Nope. Nadda. Gotta keep the decrepit buffs around for 100 years. Ignored a surging China and rode the armed forces hard and put it to bed wet.

Republicrats are not a guaranteed win for the military.

Bernie is a communist. The country hasn't moved that far left yet.
Offline

firebase99

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 67
  • Joined: 03 May 2017, 21:47

Unread post14 Apr 2019, 02:44

marsavian wrote:Ronald Reagan ? A Democrat ? Weak on defense ?! Did you mistype Clinton ?


I think he was illuminating the polarity of the two.
Online
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5261
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post14 Apr 2019, 07:00

bayernfan wrote:
f-16adf wrote:So who made you the all encompassing infallible judge of content? If Bernie or Joe become President and they fund them, you can say: See I told you so. Until then, I will believe the contrary.

And since you, the apex of maturity, believe in such "quality" content; I suggest you correct your numerous spelling/grammatical errors and avoid the seemingly childish emojis in your past posts-


Thank you for investigating me with such dedication. I learnt my lesson and will keep my mouth shut. You experts, please go on.


You sound almost intelligent enough to find the door on your own.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

knowan

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 220
  • Joined: 24 Jul 2018, 10:39

Unread post14 Apr 2019, 08:00

f-16adf wrote:It was Obama and his DS Gates who did in the Raptor.


The original order for 750 was reduced by a review started by SecDef Dick Cheney in 1990, reducing the order to 648, although that reduction wasn't finalised until 1996 when Clinton was President.
A year later it was reduced further to 339, and then under Bush Jr in 2003 it was reduced to 277, and then again to 183 in 2004.

Further opposition to the F-22 completing it's limited production run started under Rumsfeld. Gates continued this opposition, publicly stating as such, before Obama became President.

From what I can tell, reducing the F-22 production numbers was fairly bipartisan.
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2214
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post14 Apr 2019, 11:37

There's a lot more to reducing or increasing orders. The democrats controlled the purse when they drew down development of the Raptor and simply assured the program was unsustainable with poison pills.
Offline

f-16adf

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 660
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2016, 17:46

Unread post14 Apr 2019, 14:28

In retrospect, Bush did cut the F-22 program (I never said he didn't). Conversely, it was Obama who cancelled it.


Obama in his own words regarding the Raptor program: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFZvEHZd3Dw
***(please also note his said words concerning health care/deficits, they deserve a chuckle)




At that time F-22 per unit was approx ~140-150 million. The most recent CBO per unit for the PCA is projected at around 300 million, total plans call for over 400. I find it very arduous to digest a "potential President Sanders or President Biden" in favor of a jet with a price tag anywhere estimated from 200-300 million per copy. As I said, only time will tell.
Offline

knowan

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 220
  • Joined: 24 Jul 2018, 10:39

Unread post14 Apr 2019, 19:00

madrat wrote:There's a lot more to reducing or increasing orders. The democrats controlled the purse when they drew down development of the Raptor and simply assured the program was unsustainable with poison pills.


The Republicans controlled Congress in 1996 and 1997, when Clinton reduced the production order to 648 and 339.
The Republicans controlled Congress in 2003 and 2004, when Bush Jr reduced the production order to 277 and 183.

The Democrat controlled Congress in 2008 increased funding for the F-22 to allow for 187 to be completed, above the previous DoD order of 183 from 2004.


f-16adf wrote:In retrospect, Bush did cut the F-22 program (I never said he didn't). Conversely, it was Obama who cancelled it.


It's not entirely accurate to say Obama cancelled it; the plane completed the previously ordered and funded number of 187 planes.
Obama didn't allow for further planes to be ordered, which is genuinely a mistake, but the limited production of the F-22 is a mistake shared by both sides of US politics.

As for other military programs, it depends on how much threat from Russia and China the politicians feel. In a way, the media frenzy over Russia makes it harder for the Democrats to downplay Russia as a military threat.
Offline

f-16adf

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 660
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2016, 17:46

Unread post14 Apr 2019, 22:04

I agree with most of what you said. Republicans do share a little of the blame. As I previously mentioned, they were too interested in funding regime change/nation building during the mid 2000's.





However, Mr Obama must be judged ultimately by his words and actions.

https://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/22/busi ... fense.html
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... KN20090721
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/200 ... uture.html

Judging from the above articles, sounds like the USAF wanted more jets past the 187 number. Obama and his democratic controlled House and Senate said no. So the program died-




The next decade will be extremely interesting. If Mr. Trump is out by 2020 or 2024. His successor will have some arduous decisions to make concerning these very expense military programs: i.e. Fantasy bomber, PCA, and the like.
Online
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5261
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post14 Apr 2019, 23:24

f-16adf wrote:I agree with most of what you said. Republicans do share a little of the blame. As I previously mentioned, they were too interested in funding regime change/nation building during the mid 2000's.





However, Mr Obama must be judged ultimately by his words and actions.

https://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/22/busi ... fense.html
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... KN20090721
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/200 ... uture.html

Judging from the above articles, sounds like the USAF wanted more jets past the 187 number. Obama and his democratic controlled House and Senate said no. So the program died-




The next decade will be extremely interesting. If Mr. Trump is out by 2020 or 2024. His successor will have some arduous decisions to make concerning these very expense military programs: i.e. Fantasy bomber, PCA, and the like.


"Fantasy bomber"? Which one is that?
"There I was. . ."
Offline

f-16adf

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 660
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2016, 17:46

Unread post14 Apr 2019, 23:47

B-21. I call it that because I would like to see if President Sanders, Biden, or Harris build it to the proposed numbers.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests