Obama has a decision to make on March 1st regarding the F-22 Raptor

[WilliamPitt]

(...ever seen the movie 'Firefox?'...)



Obama's F 22 Decision
By Matthew Cooper - February 18, 2009, 2:07PM

(snip)

Some background: Over decades, weapons systems have taken on a life of their own and proven hard to halt even when the Pentagon is ambivalent about having them. My former TIME colleague, Mark Thompson, a veteran defense correspondent, has, for instance, written at length about the problems bedeviling the V-22 Osprey aircraft and why, despite its woes, billions have been pumped into the project.

When it comes to the F 22 Raptor, the administration is facing a March 1 deadline to decide how many more F22s to order. Lockheed is supposed to deliver the last of the current batch of 181 on order in 2011. The argument against ordering still more F22s is that the Pentagon already has a similar aircraft, the F 35 Joint Strike fighter online and, besides, the more pressing issue for the U.S. is not air superiority in a conventional war but rooting out terrorists in the Khyber Pass. The Air Force has indicated that it would like a total of 381 but several senior Pentagon officials, including Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, have hinted that they'd like far fewer if not to put the kabosh on the program entirely. The Pentagon "has not demonstrated the need or value for making further investments" in the plane, the Government Accountability Office found.

So not surprisingly there's a lot of lobbying going on to keep the F 22 rolling. Northrop and Lockheed Martin are lobbying heavily to keep the plane in production and there's a large press availability this week where reporters can sit in simulators and learn all about the 95,000 jobs the plane's advocates say are at state. Any state where there's work related to the Raptor is lobbying for it. "With rising unemployment, we need to make sure that we're not making a knee-jerk reaction and we keep this program going strong," Keith Scott, president of the Baltimore County Chamber of Commerce told the Baltimore Sun. Our point is, No. 1, this preserves jobs, and No. 2, it is immediate. You don't have to develop anything," Lawson said. "This is 'shovel ready.' "

According to the Los Angeles Times, the F-22 program is directly responsible for 25,000 jobs at Bethesda, Md.-based Lockheed Martin and its major suppliers. But Lockheed officials say when jobs from sub-suppliers are added in, the F-22 program maintains 95,000 jobs in 44 states. Among the firms helping Lockheed in Washington is Public Strategies, home to George W. Bush media adviser Mark McKinnon. In Congress, prominent senators from Ted Kennedy to Judd Gregg to Dianne Feinstein signed a letter back in January urging then President Elect Obama to keep the F22 going. Not surprisingly there's a website, www.preserveraptorjobs.com that's just part of the lobbying campaign being waged by the Lockheed, Boeing and other suppliers of the jet fighter. We'll know soon whether their efforts have been successful.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/02/obamas-f-22-decision.php

[jody]

1. The F-35 is not an acceptable substitute for the F-22. Obama should either approve the number

requested by USAF or downgrade the USAF mission including bringing most planes home particularly from Iraq and Afghanistan where the F-15 has already exceeded its safe life.

[Captain Hilts]

2. Resume construction of A-6s for the Iraq Mission. Cheaper. Ideal for the job.

[jody]

3. IMO the A-6 is not a suitable substitute for the F-15 or its replacement the F-22. n/t

[NNN0LHI]

4. What is the Iraq Mission?

I thought we were leaving.

Don

[4lbs]

5. Well, Iraq doesn't have an air force anymore. Guess who will be patrolling Iraqi airspace?

n/t

[ProgressiveProfessor]

12. More like bring them out of the boneyard

Not sure we could or would want to make anymore A-6s

[Bjorn Against]

6. He should not order any of them, let's spend money on health care and education not war.

For far too long our government has been spending money on tools of death while our health care and infrastructure here at home has been neglected. It is time to stop this madness and invest in what really matters, we don't need any more tools of destruction we are already way overstocked in that area.

I protest outside the Minnesota Lockheed Martin offices every week, and as long as our government continues to send them money to produce these weapons I will keep protesting.

[tkmorris]

7. I despise that "jobs" argument

If saving the jobs of those involved in the manufacturing of the F-22 and other related industries is the stated purpose than those people could just as easily be manufacturing covered wagons or 50 foot tall singing garden gnomes. If we don't need the F-22 than we don't need it, and that's all that really matters here. There are a ton of other things we DO need so wouldn't we be better off spending an equivalent sum on those? Infrastructure repair, alternative energy research and development, NASA, and so on would all be more useful expenditures of public funds.

Any serious look at wasteful government spending has to begin and end at the Pentagon. I know it is politically risky to do so but it must be done. We just can't afford it anymore.

[WilliamPitt]

8. LOL seagulls

Nice. :)

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

9. There are so many more valid projects workers could build.

There's the B-1 bomber. Every bit as important as the F-22.



There's the stealth boat.



Guns that shoot out nuclear bombs.



Supersonic helicopters



Stealth blimps



B-wing starfighters



Sea king? Fuck yeah.

[Raven]

10. I know, I'm just a shithead...but why do you have all these hearts and

not one has been given to YOUR MOTHER!?????

[derby378]

11. Wouldn't it simply be replaced with the Aurora in a few years, anyway?

That's the name being floated for the new hyperjet reportedly being tested at Area 51 in Nevada.

[bigtree]

13. It's 'shovel-ready'

"This is shovel-ready," said Larry Lawson, executive vice president and general manager of the F/A-22 Raptor program. "Our point is, this preserves jobs, and it is immediate. You don't have to develop anything."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/18/future-weapons-development-help-stimulate-ailing-economy/

_____

Weapons and defense equipment should be produced in response to actual defense needs, not in response to some economic need. Of course, if it's found that the fighters are actually needed, it makes sense that legislators would want production based in their states.

Unfortunately, many appropriations are steered to states with influential legislators, many times to states whose senator or representative has a determining seat on the committees which approve the money.

I'm interested in the support from Kennedy, in particular, for Lockheed's F-22 production in his state. Raytheon has also had the benefit of his support for components critical to 'missile defense'. My own state has a F-22 simulator at a Northrup-Grumman plant which has brought quite a few jobs to an ailing community.

The decision Obama has to make, I think, is whether to order more Raptors after the 180 or so already in production are finished. There may be a counter-effort by those states which produce lower cost cruise missiles and unmanned drones which can be operated with less cost and risk than the fighters.

I hear the Air Force wants a new $6 Billion Destroyer ...

[bigtree]

14. Air Force Decides to Cut Funding For F-22 from 381 Raptors to 243

18 minutes ago

The F-22 Raptor, the new pride of the Air Force made in part by Lockheed-Martin in Fort Worth, is already facing the end of the line.

The sleek, stealthy war bird was pegged to replace the aging fighter fleet, but the top Air Force brass at the Pentagon has decided to pull the plug on the production line beyond 2010. The decision comes before the March 1 Congressional deadline for President Barack Obama's 2010 budget. The Air Force said it wants to divert that money to more futuristic programs.

The Fort Worth Lockheed plant employs about 2,000 people on the F-22 project, most are working on the mid-fuselage of the aircraft with others on classified systems.

General Norton Schwartz, Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force, told the DOD Buzz the Pentagon has now decided to significantly cut the original Air Force request for 381 Raptors to 243.

With 138 fewer of the fighters than the Air Force originally said it wanted now being built, the jobs of 2,000 people at the Lockheed-Martin plant in west Fort Worth are now in question. Adding to the potential pain for Lockheed workers is that the F-22 is facing big roadblocks to being sold to U.S. allies, like Japan and Australia.

Obama still must sign off on the Air Force's budget plan by March 1.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29265927/

[unhappycamper]

15. At $355,000,000 a pop, the F-22 is a tad expensive.

Yes, that's a correct number - three hundred fifty five million each.

The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter currently costs $239,000,000 but it still has a few problems.

1) It's underpowered.
2) It still hasn't flown above 40,000 feet.
3) It has 11 million line of computer code compared to the 4 million lines in the F-22.