| Submit your comments on this article |
| Afghanistan |
| Taxpayers Owe Half A Billion Dollars For DESTROYED Aircraft |
| 2014-10-11 |
| [Daily Caller] U.S. taxpayers have to foot the bill $486 million dollars worth of aircraft the Defense Department decided to destroy, according to interim research conducted by the inspector general. While all 20 of the G222 military transport planes purchased from Italy were supposed to see combat in Afghanistan, 16 of them are now being sold for scrap to an Afghan construction company for the total sum of $32,000, amounting to six cents per pound. The other four planes are sitting dormant at the Ramstein Air Base in Germany. The program to purchase planes for the Afghan Air Force ended in 2013 after it was determined that the planes had serious performance and maintenance problems. Same with Eyetalian sports cars, who'd buy one ? Inspector general John Sopko for reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan expressed frustration at the sudden decision to destroy the planes, writing in a letter to Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel that the Secretary must inform him first before similar plans are made to scrap the remaining four planes. We don't listen to sour grapes IG reporting. Don't you have something better to do ? Sopko’s investigation is ongoing, but sent the interim letters to try and prevent knee-jerk decisions from being made. He additionally requested the Air Force Secretary Deborah James to turn over documentation relevant to the decision-making process involved in scrapping the 16 planes and also asked for proof of whether any alternative plans were considered for the planes, such as pursuing refunds under warranty. The dog “We value the oversight provided by inspectors general and audit agencies, and incorporate their findings and recommendations into subsequent efforts,” Pentagon spokesman Maj. Brad Avots said in response to the concerns Sopko highlighted. “Working in a wartime environment such as Afghanistan brings with it many challenges, and we continually seek to improve our processes. The point of the destroying the planes, Maj. Avots added, was to minimize impact on drawdown of U.S. forces in Afghanistan.” Process improvement? That Maj. Avots, top man indeed. Definite general officer material. BOEING officials smile approvingly. |
| Posted by:Besoeker |
| #6 This also shows what is going on: http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120227/DEFREG02/302270007/Alenia-Warns-U-S-Over-C-27J-Sales |
| Posted by: Lionel Thoth9784 2014-10-11 16:08 |
| #5 The reason is that USAF hates anything that is tactical and not gold plated. This is the same crap that hapeneed with C23 Sherpas that were bought due to army pression for the same mission of small transport cargo in the 80's i think, but the Air force mafia hates that kind of missions, like it hates the A-10 so it sabotaged the Sherpas anytime it could. |
| Posted by: Lionel Thoth9784 2014-10-11 16:03 |
| #4 "Odierno told lawmakers that the C-27J “impacted very positively” on 82nd Airborne Division’s ability to accomplish its mission by delivering supplies to remote locations.Portman reenforced his point by asking Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno to describe the C-27J’s performance in Afghanistan. “It’s important for us to sustain air assets dedicated to ground forces,” Odierno said. “The Air Force made the decision; they think they can do this with C-130s. If we get that same support — that is what we need. I would say that this has been supplied very successfully by the C-27.” Portman seized on Odierno’s statements to criticize the Air Force for failing to consider the money C-27s save when compared to older aircraft. “The C-27 does it for $2,100 per hour, the CH-47 does it for about $11,000 per hour, the C-130 does for between $5,100 to $7,100 an hour — so from a taxpayer perspective, the C-27 not only allows you to land on smaller air strips, it’s saving the taxpayer money,” Portman said. He wants to make sure the Pentagon isn’t pulling a capability out of theater that meets a requirement. “I have never seen the military do this before.” Mississippi Republican Sen. Roger Wicker also made a point of asking Army officials about their involvement in the Air Force’s C-27 decision. He expressed concern when Odierno said he learned about the C-27’s demise at a joint meeting between the two services." http://www.dodbuzz.com/2012/03/09/csa-praises-doomed-c-27js-role-in-afghanistan/ |
| Posted by: Lionel Thoth9784 2014-10-11 15:58 |
| #3 You could stop being an idiot "Same with Eyetalian sports cars, who'd buy one ?" There are no problems with G222-C27 several AFs have them including US air force and special airfores command. |
| Posted by: Lionel Thoth9784 2014-10-11 15:42 |
| #2 But not 1 whisper over the buying the services of a company to scrap the Forrestal for a penny and let them keep the proceeds...... |
| Posted by: USN, Ret. 2014-10-11 14:22 |
| #1 $486M. How many A-10s would that keep operational? For Obama admin, and the DC crowd, its all about putting money in the right pockets, not combat effectiveness. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2014-10-11 13:23 |