PDA

View Full Version : Geriatric Air Force


Cherub
February 19th, 2008, 1:51 am
Generals warn of 'geriatric Air Force'

Story Highlights
Jet fighters, bombers, cargo aircraft at the breaking point, Air Force officials say
Expensive, ultramodern replacements are needed fast, they say
Air Force's appetite for more money is far greater than other military branches
Yet the prospects for huge infusions of cash seem dim
Next Article in U.S. ยป (http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/02/18/severe.weather.ap/index.html?iref=nextin)
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Air Force officials are warning that unless their budget is increased dramatically, and soon, the military's high-flying branch won't dominate the skies as it has for decades.
http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/2008/US/02/18/airforce.wornout.ap/art.f16.ap.file.jpg An F-16 returns from a mission in this 2004 photo. F-16s are on average more than 20 years old.



http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/2.0/content/in_the_news/left_gray_btn.gif (http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/18/airforce.wornout.ap/index.html#)
1 of 2
http://www.cnn.com/.element/img/2.0/global/pic_changer/next.gif (http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/18/airforce.wornout.ap/index.html#)

http://www.cnn.com/.element/img/2.0/mosaic/base_skins/baseplate/corner_wire_BL.gif



After more than seven years of war in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Air Force's aging jet fighters, bombers, cargo aircraft and gunships are at the breaking point, they say, and expensive, ultramodern replacements are needed fast.
"What we've done is put the requirement on the table that says, 'If we're going to do the missions you're going to ask us to do, it will require this kind of investment,"' Maj. Gen. Paul Selva, the Air Force's director of strategic planning, said in an interview with The Associated Press.
"Failing that, we take what is already a geriatric Air Force," Selva said, "and we drive it for another 20 years into an area of uncertainty."
An extra $20 billion each year over the next five -- beginning with an Air Force budget of about $137 billion in 2009 instead of the $117 billion proposed by the Bush administration -- would solve that problem, according to Selva and other senior Air Force officers.
Yet the prospects for huge infusions of cash seem dim. Congress is expected to boost the 2009 budget, but not to the level urged by the Air Force. In the years that follow, a possible recession, a rising federal deficit and a distaste for higher taxes all portend a decline in defense spending regardless of which party wins the White House in November.
"The Air Force is going to be confronting a major procurement crisis because it can't buy all the things that it absolutely needs," said Dov Zakheim, a former Pentagon comptroller. "It's going to force us to rethink, yet again, what is the strategy we want? What can we give up?"
Expensive taste
The Air Force's distress is partly self-inflicted, says Steve Kosiak of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments in Washington. The F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning, the new jet fighters that will supplant the F-15 Eagle and F-16 Falcon, have drastically higher price tags than their predecessors and require a bigger chunk of the defense budget.
"One of the reasons their equipment has aged so much is because they continue to move ahead with the development and presumed acquisition of new weapon systems that cost two to three times as much as the systems they are replacing," Kosiak said. "It's like replacing a Toyota with a Mercedes."
It's not as if the Air Force (http://topics.cnn.com/topics/u_s_air_force) has gone without any new airplanes. The B-2 Spirit stealth bomber, the C-17 Globemaster airlifter and the CV-22 tilt-rotor, which flies like a helicopter or an airplane, have all been added since the mid-1990s.
The Air Force also is planning to spend between $30 billion and $40 billion over the next 15 years for new refueling tankers. A contract is expected to be awarded soon. Those new tankers, however, won't be flying until 2013.
The Air Force isn't alone in wanting more money, but its appetite is far greater than the other military branches. Shortly after President Bush submitted his defense plan for the 2009 budget year, which begins October 1, each service outlined for Congress what it felt was left out. The Air Force's "wish list" totaled $18.8 billion, almost twice as much as the other three services combined.
"There's no justification for it. Period. End of story," said Gordon Adams, a former Clinton administration budget official who specializes in defense issues. "Until someone constrains these budget requests, the hunger for more will charge ahead unchecked."
Excessive flying hours
Current F-15s and F-16s are on average more than 20 years old and have reached a point where spending more money on extensive repairs is a poor investment, Selva said. Originally designed to last 4,000 flying hours, both have been extended beyond 8,000.
An F-15 with a comparatively low 5,000 flying hours disintegrated during a routine training flight over Missouri in early November. For the Air Force, that crash has become a touchstone event that demonstrates the precarious state of a fleet collectively older than any in the service's 60-year history.
Following the Missouri accident, more than 400 F-15s were grounded as Air Force mechanics scoured them for defects that might cause a similar accident. The F-15, a twin-engine jet with a top speed of 1,875 miles per hour, is the anchor of the nation's air defense network.
As aircraft age, corrosion eats away at metal parts. Wiring and sealing begin to deteriorate. The fatigue, which can be hard to detect, is most acute in fighters that make turns while going at incredible speeds.
"An hour is not an hour" to an aircraft constantly under the strain of G-forces, Gen. John D.W. Corley, head of Air Combat Command at Langley Air Force Base, Va., said at a news conference last month. "It's like dog years."
The more an aircraft is flown, the more expensive and more extensive maintenance becomes, Corley and Gen. T. Michael Moseley, the Air Force chief of staff, told the House Appropriations defense subcommittee during a February 6 hearing.
The bottom line, the generals said, is older aircraft are in the shop more often and cost more to fly when they are available.
Patchwork of planes
It's not just the fighters that are elderly.
Selva, who graduated from the Air Force Academy in 1980, said he remembers hearing about the first flight of the mammoth C-5 transport when he was in first grade. B-52 bombers and KC-135 tankers, which refuel airplanes in flight, have been in the inventory for more than four decades.
And mechanics are finding it difficult to keep rust off the A-10 Thunderbolt, a tank-killing plane now a quarter-century old.
"If you want to accept that today we're doing an adequate job with this sort of patchwork of airplanes, when are we no longer able to do an adequate job?" Selva asked. "What's the next thing that's going to happen?"
Each F-22 Raptor costs about $160 million. The Air Force says it needs 381 of the radar-evading planes and is fighting to keep the production line from being shut down too soon.
"We have never rolled off of the requirement to field 381 F-22s," Selva said. "The real issue at play with the F-22 is when the line closes, it's closed. Restarting the line will be unreasonably expensive."
The price for a single F-35 Lightning is $77 million, and the Air Force wants close to 1,800 of these fighters. The F-35 won't be in use for several more years.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said only 183 Raptors are needed. The more Raptors the Air Force buys, Gates said during congressional testimony earlier this month, the less money it will have for the F-35 and other aircraft. About 100 F-22s have been fielded. That aircraft has not been used in Iraq and Afghanistan, Gates added.
The Air Force says the Raptors are needed for future threats, with China, Russia and Iran at the top of the list.
"Al Qaeda doesn't exactly have an advanced aerial defense system," said Maj. David Small, an Air Force spokesman.
The public push for more Raptors prompted Gates to rebuke a top Air Force officer, Gen. Bruce Carlson, who said last week that the service remained committed to buying 381 of the aircraft. In a Friday statement, Moseley and Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne said the general's remarks did not reflect the Air Force's position. But the statement did not say the service is backing away from its goal of 381 Raptors.
Aircraft on the front lines in the terror war are also facing challenges.
Officials at Air Force Special Operations Command say it will become increasingly hard to keep two key aircraft flying: The MC-130H Combat Talon II, used to drop commandos into hostile territory and then retrieve them, and the AC-130U, a hulking gunship that flies low to deliver firepower, are both in need of substantial overhauls.
"We are literally flying the wings off these two airplanes," said Brig. Gen. Brad Heithold, director of the command's plans, programs, requirements and assessments office at Hurlburt Field, Florida.
There are only 20 Combat Talons and 17 AC-130Us. This small fleet is in heavy demand by special operations forces around the globe. In 2001, the AC-130Us flew just over 5,200 hours. The gunships logged more than 9,000 hours in 2007. It's comparable, Heithold said, to putting 70,000 miles on a car in a single year instead of a more normal 12,000 miles.
At any given time, several of the Combat Talons or AC-130Us could be in the depot being fixed. That means there are fewer available to fly critical missions. Training flights are also curtailed.
Heithold called the situation a "manageable crisis," but said serious problems could emerge if more money isn't provided for extended improvements and new aircraft over the next few years.
"Any time you have a small number of airplanes that the appetite for continually increases, it's hard to meet the demand," Heithold said. "If we don't wrestle with this now, it's a looming problem out there."

EMUJeff
February 20th, 2008, 3:11 pm
This hopefully will provide the military industrial complex with a peace-time boondoggle so they can stay out of our foreign policy for a while.
EMUJeff

Harrison
February 20th, 2008, 3:13 pm
Years ago, when my kids' dad was in the Army, the Air Force ALWAYS had the nicest facilities---PX, Commissary, Barracks, Housing, you name it. That branch always put the rest of us to shame as far as the amenities went.

EMUJeff
February 20th, 2008, 3:15 pm
I just realized what I wrote in post#2 sounded like I was a Hippie from 1972. Geez. I need some sleep.
EMU(Who put that wildflower in my hair)Jeff

Harrison
February 20th, 2008, 3:33 pm
That is too funny.

:slider_victory:

Cherub
February 22nd, 2008, 7:26 pm
The Air Force Reaches for the Sky

By MARK THOMPSON/WASHINGTON 2 hours, 57 minutes ago

The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have worn down the nation's ground forces, stretching those serving in the Army and Marines and wearing out their gear at an unprecedented rate. So, it's no surprise that the nation's ground-pounders would be seeking the most from the ever-cooperative members of the House Armed Services Committee. For years, that Pentagon-pleasing panel has asked the services to send it a wish list - lawmakers prefer to call it an "unfunded requirements list" - of budget items they desire but which have not been approved by their penny-pinching civilian overseers, i.e. the Defense Secretary and the President.
ADVERTISEMENT
http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=BzTPH0WTVvqromigR73z8gCXGMAKIUe_WRwAAFNj&T=1c79o5pgm%2fX%3d1203722524%2fE%3d2022250433%2fR%3dnews%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d2929735492%2fH%3dY2FjaGVoaW50PSJuZXdzIiBjb250ZW50PSJJcmFxO2l0O0hvdXNlO2ludGVsO1JlcHVibGljYW47ZG9sbGFyO21pbGl0YXJ5O0JpbGwgQ2xpbnRvbjtXaGl0ZTtmdW5kO3ByaWNlO0VsdG9uIEpvaG47cmVmdXJsX3d3d195YWhvb19jb20iIHJlZnVybD0icmVmdXJsX3d3d195YWhvb19jb20iIHRvcGljcz0icmVmdXJsX3d3d195YWhvb19jb20i%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3dEC519345&U=127i3ulbe%2fN%3d88R4cNGDJHs-%2fC%3d-1%2fD%3dRMP%2fB%3d-1 http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=BzTPH0WTVvqromigR73z8gCXGMAKIUe_WRwAAFNj&T=1c7b9mqc3%2fX%3d1203722524%2fE%3d2022250433%2fR%3dnews%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d2815816035%2fH%3dY2FjaGVoaW50PSJuZXdzIiBjb250ZW50PSJJcmFxO2l0O0hvdXNlO2ludGVsO1JlcHVibGljYW47ZG9sbGFyO21pbGl0YXJ5O0JpbGwgQ2xpbnRvbjtXaGl0ZTtmdW5kO3ByaWNlO0VsdG9uIEpvaG47cmVmdXJsX3d3d195YWhvb19jb20iIHJlZnVybD0icmVmdXJsX3d3d195YWhvb19jb20iIHRvcGljcz0icmVmdXJsX3d3d195YWhvb19jb20i%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3dEC519345&U=128alkg8b%2fN%3d9MR4cNGDJHs-%2fC%3d-1%2fD%3dSIPR%2fB%3d-1http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=BzTPH0WTVvqromigR73z8gCXGMAKIUe_WRwAAFNj&T=1c6notfnn%2fX%3d1203722524%2fE%3d2022250433%2fR%3dnews%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d669412370%2fH%3dY2FjaGVoaW50PSJuZXdzIiBjb250ZW50PSJJcmFxO2l0O0hvdXNlO2ludGVsO1JlcHVibGljYW47ZG9sbGFyO21pbGl0YXJ5O0JpbGwgQ2xpbnRvbjtXaGl0ZTtmdW5kO3ByaWNlO0VsdG9uIEpvaG47cmVmdXJsX3d3d195YWhvb19jb20iIHJlZnVybD0icmVmdXJsX3d3d195YWhvb19jb20iIHRvcGljcz0icmVmdXJsX3d3d195YWhvb19jb20i%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3dEC519345&U=13b8qcln2%2fN%3d78R4cNGDJHs-%2fC%3d619213.12054930.12500284.1442997%2fD%3dLREC%2fB%3d4919452
Earlier this month, the Army stepped up to the plate and asked for $4 billion more than the $141 billion it is slated to receive in 2009. The Marines asked for $3 billion more than their proposed ration of $25 billion. The Navy asked for $5 billion to be added to its bottom line of $124 billion. But all those sums added together don't equal the - hold your breath, dear taxpayer - $19 billion that the Air Force wants over and above its $144 billion request.
A quick flip through the 11-page list turns up a $13 million "requirement" for dorm furniture - an item that may justify the other services dubbing it the "Chair Force" because so many of its people are behind desks. In response to questions from TIME on the list's contents and cost, the Air Force issued a statement Thursday saying the list contains only its "most critical needs." Lieutenant General Dave Deptula, the Air Force's top intel officer, says his service's needs "are severe and getting worse," and that the list reflects the gap "between where we are and where we need to be."
Highlighting the huge request is a proposal by the Air Force to trump its civilian leaders and buy twice as many F-22 jets as now planned, while hyping the threats to justify the buy. China and India are, in the Air Force's eyes, the 21st century equivalent of the Soviet Union, requiring billions in new aircraft that even a hawkish Republican President doesn't think are needed. More critically, every dollar spent on supersonic aircraft is a dollar that isn't spent on the kind of troops and materiel needed to wage the two irregular wars the nation is now fighting, and which many experts predict will be the kinds of wars fought for the next generation or two.
The military is hardly starving. The Pentagon's proposed 2009 Defense Budget is twice the size of the budget President Bush inherited from Bill Clinton. Even without the nearly $200 billion for the wars, the $515 billion tab is on par with the defense budgets of World War II. "Today, free-flowing funding has fundamentally undermined all budget discipline in the Pentagon," says Gordon Adams, who oversaw military spending from a senior post in the Clinton White House.
Take the fight over the F-22. The Pentagon has declared it wants to cap procurement at 183 planes, for $65 billion. But the Air Force wants 380 of them. "We think that [183] is the wrong number," General Bruce Carlson, the Air Force's top weapons buyer, told reporters at a Feb. 13 industry gathering. "We're committed to funding 380," he added. "We're building a program right now to do that." Defense Secretary Robert Gates called Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne after reading Carlson's comments in Aerospace Daily, a trade paper, and told him to remind Carlson who's the boss. (Wynne did, and issued a statement saying the Air Force "wholeheartedly supports" the Administration's proposal.)
Days earlier, Carlson said that today's U.S. Air Force "simply cannot fight and win against the fleet of airplanes that have been developed and are flying in India, China, and so forth," a claim questioned by many experts. But his view has been reinforced by the companies employing 25,000 workers in 44 states building the F-22 - the prime contractor is aerospace giant Lockheed Martin - and their allies in Congress. That is what is so insidious about these lists: once Congress gets a hold of them, they're used as pile drivers to pound extra billions into the Pentagon budget, generally by lawmakers seeking to fund jobs in their districts.
In addition to more F-22 fighters, the Air Force's wish list also seeks more F-35 fighters (needed for "the Required Force"), more C-130 and C-17 cargo planes ("Part of Required Force"), and more unmanned Global Hawk drones (these would merely "Support Required Force"). Unmanned aircraft are supposed to be cheaper, but the price tag on these runs more than $120 million apiece. More than $1 billion is being sought for 11 passenger planes, seven of them Gulfstream Vs favored by Apple's Steve Jobs and Sir Elton John (no mention of any Required Force justification here).
Then there's the line item seeking 100,600 handguns (there are 330,000 people in the Air Force) featuring "improved ergonomic design and higher caliber effectiveness" at $1,157 a pop. The service also wants 210,000 M-4 carbines at $1,747 a clip. For years, the Air Force has complained about the Army having its own air force. Now, at long last, the Army may be able to complain about the Air Force having its own army. View this article on Time.com (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1715482,00.html?xid=feed-yahoo-full-nation)