FY2020 DoD Budget

Program progress, politics, orders, and speculation
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8369
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post13 Mar 2019, 03:56

bring_it_on wrote:48 F-35A's is consistent with the last F-35 SAR

The issue is that the services have been constantly told that there was no extra money so they have been reducing their ramp aggressiveness. Suddenly, the DoD finds enough money for a whole new program and they think they are fooling anyone that it is not coming at the expense of the F-35?
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

bring_it_on

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 929
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2014, 14:32

Unread post13 Mar 2019, 04:04

SpudmanWP wrote:
bring_it_on wrote:48 F-35A's is consistent with the last F-35 SAR

The issue is that the services have been constantly told that there was no extra money so they have been reducing their ramp aggressiveness. Suddenly, the DoD finds enough money for a whole new program and they think they are fooling anyone that it is not coming at the expense of the F-35?


Getting more F-35As over the requested level has not been an issue for the AF though. They've made a case for more, if money was available :wink: :wink: , and they have been getting them quite routinely with a pretty good hit rate - to the tune of 23 F-35A's between FY-17-19. If I were the USAF or the DOD, knowing how well the program is supported in Congress I'd also begin gaming the system as Corsair1963 pointed.

The USAF probably needs 60-70 F-35A's just to buy the number it needs or has sanctioned in a reasonable way..otherwise you just keep punting the problem down the road. In an ideal world they need to get 70 F-35As with any F-15EX's on top of that but then there are likely other industrial base reasons why the OSD would prefer something else so this is something for the Congress to come in and correct..
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1581
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post13 Mar 2019, 04:12

As mentioned in the F-15 thread.

If USAF requests only higher numbers of F-35As, they are not going to get more F-35As.
If USAF requests lower no of F-35As + F-15X, they are more likely to get more F-35As with maybe F-15s. I think the folks on top have already gamed out that this is likely to result in the most number of new fighters for the USAF.

The F-15 is an industrial base decision. Nothing new and that's language that Congress understands.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5907
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post13 Mar 2019, 04:34

weasel1962 wrote:USAF is also up. Anti-F15 folks won't like it. It includes 8 F-15EX.
8 F-15EX.



Waste of money, but whatever. There's a new white elephant in town! Maybe get some cool models out of it.


weasel1962 wrote:
crosshairs wrote:stepping up F-35C production in place of B. 169 C to lot 17 which catches up to 219 Bs. That will slow down USMC recapitalisation (and shift the USMC F-35C sqns up front in terms of replacement).



makes sense as the Harrier and Hornet retirement timelines switched places.
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5907
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post13 Mar 2019, 04:40

Corsair1963 wrote:The services know the Defense Budget is likely to decline in coming years. Especially, if the Democrats beat Trump in 2020. Yet, I've never seen this level of politics from them directly ever.....(something I know a little about)



Nothing "declines" anymore here America just goes deeper in debt. the notion of "its this or that" is so 20th century...

Image

The budget will only be biggering. its already set to bigger next year
Choose Crews
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5491
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post13 Mar 2019, 04:46

Democrats want to beat Trump with a passion. Which, means they will be above board until the Election is over in November of 2020.

So, don't expect them to approve to much Corporate Welfare from Trump between now and then.... :wink:
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1581
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post13 Mar 2019, 07:19

Liked this page (extracted from slide 38 of the FY 2020 AF budget overview).

Image
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22990
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post13 Mar 2019, 08:58

:devil: Just because I DO NOT LIKE PHOTOBUCKET: https://www.saffm.hq.af.mil/Portals/84/ ... %20v2_.pdf
Attachments
USAF TAI TotalAircraftInventoryFY2020budgeOverview.gif
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

doge

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 215
  • Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 16:07

Unread post13 Mar 2019, 09:38

8)
https://www.journalinquirer.com/busines ... 9c68e.html
State’s delegation opposes F-35 cut
By Zachary F. Vasile Mar 12, 2019
The state’s congressional delegation is mounting a vigorous defense of the F-35 Lightning II following reports that the federal government plans to scale back its 2020 order for the famously expensive next-generation fighter jet.

In a joint message to Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan, the delegation called the Lockheed Martin aircraft “the only viable path forward” to equip the nation’s armed forces and pointed to the over 11,000 Connecticut jobs supported by the F-35 program.

“Cutting our only fifth-generation fighter jet for any military service would be a mistake, and we urge you to reconsider this decision or provide immediate justification for this potential cut,” the letter read.

East Hartford-based Pratt & Whitney, a division of United Technologies Corp., builds the F135 afterburning turbofan engine used by the F-35.

Citing defense officials, Bloomberg reported last week that the Pentagon will request 78 F-35 jets, six fewer than originally anticipated for fiscal year 2020.

The change is likely to raise concerns on Capitol Hill, the news service said, because the U.S. Air Force plans to seek funding for eight new upgraded F-15 tactical fighters, manufactured by Lockheed’s rival Boeing.

The sudden pivot toward the F-15, which the military has not purchased in almost two decades, raises the possibility of a conflict of interest for Shanahan, who spent over 30 years at Boeing serving in various roles, including as vice president of the company’s commercial aircraft unit and general manager of the Dreamliner program.

He has recused himself from all department matters involving Boeing.

Though the Defense Department has not presented a rationale for the reduction, the adjustment could be interpreted as the rare cost-saving measure in a record-sized $4.75 trillion presidential budget that largely boosted support for the military at the expense of various social programs.

The F-35 initiative is the most expensive aircraft development project in American military history and has drawn criticism from some analysts, members of Congress, and President Donald Trump, who famously labeled the program “out of control” in a 2016 Twitter posting that briefly drove down the price of Lockheed’s stock.

Still, the fighter jet has received positive reviews from the Air Force, Marine Corps, and Navy, and from foreign military partners such as the United Kingdom, who have placed orders of their own and are in various stages of testing the new aircraft.

Specific details of the Pentagon’s budget, including money allotted for F-35 orders, are expected to be made public this week.

Regardless of the new figures, however, Congress, which has the final say on most federal spending, will likely restore or boost the F-35 request, with an eye toward expanding military capability and protecting jobs.

The state delegation’s letter to the Defense Department arrived on the heels of a similar statement to the president from the leaders of Congress’s F-35 Caucus, co-chaired by U.S. Rep. John B. Larson, D-1st District, whose hometown of East Hartford has Pratt & Whitney’s headquarters.

That message slammed defense officials for appearing to backtrack on F-35 procurement efforts and inexplicably reverting back to the F-15, which the Air Force has not ordered since 2001.

“This procurement appears to have been dropped into the budget without a validated DoD Joint Requirements Oversight Council requirement, without verification of the technology readiness assessment, and without a fair and open competition and with the analytic rigor to merit a directed buy,” the co-chairs wrote.

“The fact that we are even discussing buying F-15 aircraft that the services have not procured for some 18 years is troubling in and of itself, but to think that the DoD would consider buying these aircraft with no regard to the acquisition process is even more troubling.”

The military ultimately plans to acquire 2,456 F-35s.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5491
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post13 Mar 2019, 10:19

This is another one that clearly spells out what is really going on.........

No Sign of “The Air Force We Need” in USAF Budget; 80-Plus New-Old F-15s Coming

Although Air Force leaders have pushed a case for 72 new fighters a year as essential in meeting the requirements of the National Defense Strategy, there was no evidence of a move toward a larger force structure in the service’s fiscal 2020 budget request.


In fact, the USAF budget request includes just 48 Lockheed Martin-built F-35A fighters, eight aircraft less than what was in the fiscal 2019 enacted budget, and eight new Boeing F-15EX fighters—16 airplanes short of what Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein has said is the minimum needed to prevent the fighter force from shrinking and growing older than its current average age of 28 years. The Air Force is asking $5.7 billion to buy the 48 F-35s and $1.05 billion for the eight F-15EXs.


Long-term, the budget will call for far more F-15s than USAF officials have hinted at in recent months. USAF officials have only suggested a dozen such airplanes that might be in the budget, but according to budget documents the F-15EX buy “initiates the refresh” of the F-15 fleet. Air Force Maj. Gen. John Pletcher, briefing the press on the USAF budget on Tuesday, acknowledged there are 80 F-15EXs in the five-year Future Years Defense Plan. A service official reported the ultimate buy could be 144, completed after the FYDP. The plan, if approved by Congress, would represent more than $14 billion worth of Air Force fighter work for Boeing that would otherwise have gone to Lockheed Martin.



http://www.airforcemag.com/Features/Pag ... oming.aspx
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22990
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post13 Mar 2019, 10:45

TURN DOWN SOUND BEFORE HITTING THIS LINK: https://www.defensenews.com/smr/federal-budget/FedBudgie2020
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22990
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post13 Mar 2019, 13:18

Attachments
asd_03_13_2019_cht1.pdf
(526.59 KiB) Downloaded 39 times
DoDaircraftBuyFy2020budget.gif
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3273
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 3

Unread post13 Mar 2019, 13:27

Well, it looks like the USAF is hell bent on no small number of F-15X. I've read they'll cost 80 million/apiece, and upwards of 125 million/copy when everything is priced in..

https://combataircraft.keypublishing.co ... new-f-15s/

That's insane $ for a more expensive, less capable fighter vs. the F-35, and I fail to see how it's "not taking away" from the F-35 buy. I LOVE the F-15, but this was disappointing. Is the USAF so out of touch that it can't see the error of their ways? The 144 F-15's are going to be good for little more than air defense of the CONUS. Perhaps 2nd or 3rd day of war duties maintaining air superiority, but that's it.

I'll be interested to see whether or not Boeing increases the F-15X's internal fuel. That would make sense to me, as their selling point without stealth is going to have to be persistence and total AAM loadout. One thing you won't see is an attempt to turn it into an SU-35. No thrust vectoring. The emphasis instead being on weapons, sensors and improved SA.

I'd bet anything that in the end, they'll be more than 125 million/copy too...
Offline
User avatar

lamoey

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1061
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2004, 17:44
  • Location: 77550

Unread post13 Mar 2019, 17:38

mixelflick wrote:That's insane $ for a more expensive, less capable fighter vs. the F-35, and I fail to see how it's "not taking away" from the F-35 buy. I LOVE the F-15, but this was disappointing. Is the USAF so out of touch that it can't see the error of their ways? The 144 F-15's are going to be good for little more than air defense of the CONUS. Perhaps 2nd or 3rd day of war duties maintaining air superiority, but that's it.


Keep in mind that the acting SecDef is a former Boeing executive...
Former Flight Control Technican - We keep'em flying
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 716
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post13 Mar 2019, 17:52

weasel1962 wrote:As mentioned in the F-15 thread.

If USAF requests only higher numbers of F-35As, they are not going to get more F-35As.


Demonstrably untrue as demonstrated by the fact that the AF has asked for more
via unfunded priorities and has gotten more as a consequence.

This was an OSD diktat; the AF did not have the F-15 in its budget submission.
The was stated by the Air Force secretary who is now resigning.
PreviousNext

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests