Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Career Builder > Military
SECDEF 2010 budget proposal >

SECDEF 2010 budget proposal

Notices
Military Military Aviation

SECDEF 2010 budget proposal

Old 04-07-2009, 01:55 PM
  #1  
Line Holder
Thread Starter
 
Estee's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 59
Default SECDEF 2010 budget proposal

Tuesday, April 7, 2009
AFA members, Congressional staffers, civic leaders, and DOCA members, yesterday, Secretary Gates briefed the press corps on his budget proposal for 2010. </SPAN>[You can find his statement at: http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=1341]</SPAN>
In sum … for the Air Force, the following was recommended: </SPAN></SPAN>
  • Continued production of ISR systems</SPAN>
  • </SPAN></SPAN>Increased production of the F-35</SPAN>
  • Continue the process to select tanker replacement</SPAN>
  • Purchase of more SOF lift, mobility, and refueling aircraft</SPAN>
However, the following programs were terminated/delayed:</SPAN>
  • F-22 production – terminated</SPAN>
  • Follow-on Bomber – terminated ("until we have a better understanding of the need, requirement, and the technology")</SPAN>
  • </SPAN></SPAN>C-17 production – terminated</SPAN>
  • Combat Search and Rescue Helicopter –X – terminated</SPAN>
  • </SPAN></SPAN>Transformational Satellite (TSAT) – terminated – and instead purchase of two more AEHF satellites</SPAN>
  • </SPAN></SPAN>Missile Defense – radically cut</SPAN>
    • No increase of ground-based interceptors</SPAN>
    • </SPAN></SPAN>Airborne Laser (ABL) terminated</SPAN>
    • Multiple Kill Vehicle (MKV) – terminated</SPAN>
    • Missile Defense Agency budget reduced by $1.4B/year</SPAN>
One cut – which has but one line in the release – retires 250 aircraft. </SPAN>This means: </SPAN></SPAN>
  • We will have a defacto Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) – since 250 aircraft is the equivalent of 3.5 wings (and over 5 CVBGs) of fighter aircraft</SPAN>
  • F-15s, F-16s, and A-10s will all leave the force … with no replacements …</SPAN>
Let me make a few observations about this budget.</SPAN>
  • This budget guarantees that the oldest Air Force in the history of our nation will get even older. </SPAN></SPAN>
  • B-52s (built in the 1950s) will have to be kept on duty for a minimum of another 15-20 years … </SPAN>
  • At a time when the nation is spending literally trillions of dollars, we seem to not have enough money to fund an adequate defense</SPAN>
  • We are using tomorrow's dollars to solve today's problems.</SPAN>
  • The acquisition decisions recommended will lock in the range of national security options for decades into the future.</SPAN>
  • The decisions are not just programic nuance – but will impact core Air Force functions, to include Air Force ability to deter, to conduct an air campaign, and to rescue our downed Airmen.</SPAN>
  • The launch of an intercontinental missile by North Korea this weekend (and a similar launch by Iran 5 weeks ago) argues for a robust missile defense, not a reduced one – to include the ABL. </SPAN>The technology of ABL has the potential to revolutionize warfare in the future. </SPAN>
  • It is difficult to determine the strategy which this budget supports. </SPAN>This is especially important since a Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) is mandated by law … and will be conducted in the upcoming several months. </SPAN>It seems the budget (and hence the strategy) precedes the QDR.</SPAN>
  • This budget increases risk … in my view … beyond so-called "moderate."</SPAN>
AFA believes there are major impacts and consequences … for the full-up joint team. </SPAN>These budget recommendations may cost us lives and will reduce our strategic </SPAN>options in a very dangerous world.</SPAN>
For your consideration.</SPAN>
Mike</SPAN>
Michael M. Dunn
President/CEO
Estee is offline  
Old 04-08-2009, 05:39 AM
  #2  
Line Holder
 
SoPinesHeel's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Bunk Logging Other Time
Posts: 79
Default

Is </SPAN> the new STOP. This reads like a telegram. Hahahaha!

Get ready for tight budgets the next few years boys and girls...no more RMPs and mandays for all my friends to come rearrange the snack bar!!!!

Seriously, I have my opinions about cutting programs but we all know the DoD and the entire government are ripe with waste and excess. I got one. How bout we cut down on all the DV transport throughout the AOR. C-130s do not need to be routed on 8 hour flights empty to go pick up some no name 2 star who is on his retirement field trip so he can grip and grin and have a good time.
SoPinesHeel is offline  
Old 04-08-2009, 05:42 AM
  #3  
Line Holder
 
SoPinesHeel's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Bunk Logging Other Time
Posts: 79
Default

I do think however the F-22 will save money over the longterm. It is definitely a force multiplier and we need more of those. Too bad.

I have no opinion on a bomber.

Work smarter not harder...lets hope our leaders can manage to do the same.
SoPinesHeel is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Foxcow
Trans States Airlines
147
02-23-2009 09:08 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices