Article

2005-11-04 Home Front: WoT

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fleger Sneretch6943 2005-11-04 17:33|| || Front Page|| [11135 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 I think this is a bad move, but if the DoD is the only place government spending is going to drop, it's better to kill whole programs than to let inventories of ordnance and spares drop, or to cut training.

Still better, why not kill the Highway ~~Robbery~~ Bill? Or the Drugs-for-old-people program?

Posted by Jackal">Jackal 2005-11-04 19:49|| home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html]">[home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html] 2005-11-04 19:49|| Front Page Top

#2 I suspect that Rumsfeld is being an honest cop when raiding the whorehouse. Many of these programs are scams, and while well-intentioned in their inception, have just become another "big dig", that produces only growing budgets, not results.

And that is the zinger. If you grow your budget, but you produce a quality product, it is one thing, but if it costs a fortune and is still crapola, then an honest man will call a halt to the nonsense.

Right now, we need a defense that works. It is not time for peacetime pork games, and we no longer have the luxury of waiting 20 years from drafting table to prototype.

The Pentagon is obsessed with the idea that if a weapons system is expensive enough, it must be good. However, much can be made of the contrarian position: that enough numbers can overwhelm even the best technology.

(Ironically, there is a Chinese proverb to that effect, entitled "the rat and the dragon".)

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-11-04 20:03|| 2005-11-04 20:03|| Front Page Top

#3 Ditto Moose, well spoken.

Posted by Besoeker 2005-11-04 20:05|| 2005-11-04 20:05|| Front Page Top

#4 I'm glad to see the DD(X) and the C-17 on the cutting block. They fill no need and are for a fight with a superpower (ie soviet union). What we have now is excellent against China, even for the next 15 years. The JSF has a lot of potential and can cut a lot of operating costs if every service uses them, such as one spare part made instead of 15 spare parts for 15 different planes.

Posted by mmurray821 2005-11-04 20:42|| 2005-11-04 20:42|| Front Page Top

#5 iirc it was the C-17 that permitted the deployment of heavy armor into Northern Iraq on a quickly cleared unimproved airfield during the opening phase of the operation against Saddam. So anything else in the inventory capable of doing the same job under the same conditions?

Posted by Ulomolet Slitch1727 2005-11-04 21:02|| 2005-11-04 21:02|| Front Page Top

#6 Considering there are already 120 in service, we don't need anymore. And the heavy armor came in from the south, since turkey was kind enough to hamper our invasion plans.
What I want to see is powered armor suites for infantry, gauss rifles (mass drivers), Partical Projection Cannons and orbital combat drops. Enough of this 20th century thinking and planning!
Dropping the 24th Mechanized division on top of Beijing in 24hours after the start of a war would be great.
(I know, wishful thinking, but still....)

Posted by mmurray821 2005-11-04 22:52|| 2005-11-04 22:52|| Front Page Top

#7 Isn't this news from many months ago???

Posted by JosephMendiola 2005-11-04 23:32|| 2005-11-04 23:32|| Front Page Top

00:00 Old Patriot
23:57 Baba Tutu
23:50 Sock Puppet OÂ´ Doom
23:32 JosephMendiola
23:24 JosephMendiola
23:17 mojo
23:13 mojo
23:04 2b
23:03 Zenster
22:53 Zenster
22:52 mmurray821
22:50 Brett
22:45 mmurray821
22:42 DMFD
22:31 Frank G
22:15 Frank G
22:14 Frank G
22:13 Sock Puppet OÂ´ Doom
22:12 Regnad Kcin
22:09 Regnad Kcin
22:00 JosephMendiola
21:59 Sock Puppet OÂ´ Doom
21:53 11A5S
21:51 JosephMendiola