You have commented 375 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
QDR Likely Kills Two Carriers, EFV
2009-12-10
UPDATED: JSF Cut About 100 Planes, One Year Added to Schedule

Word on Capitol Hill is that the Quadrennial Defense Review should result in the demise of two Navy car­rier groups and the Marines’ Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle. On top of that, the Joint Strike Fighter pro­gram is likely to lose a so-​​far uncer­tain num­ber of planes and the Air Force looks to lose two air wings.

Folks on the Hill are watch­ing the car­rier cuts par­tic­u­larly closely. They were will­ing to accept the tem­po­rary loss of one car­rier but two groups may just be too much for law­mak­ers to swal­low though it would con­ve­niently answer the hot debate about whether the Navy faces a fighter gap.

“Even if they cut two car­rier strike groups (which will be an uphill bat­tle for DOD), they still face a sig­nif­i­cant USN fighter gap,” said a con­gres­sional aide fol­low­ing this. “The Navy seems to rec­og­nize this, but every­thing we’ve heard thus far from OSD seems to indi­cate that they’d rather try funny math then address a clear gap.”

The 2010 defense autho­riza­tion report noted care­fully that Congress was will­ing to accept the “tem­po­rary reduc­tion in min­i­mum num­ber of oper­a­tional air­craft car­ri­ers” from 11 to 10 until CVN 78 is com­mis­sioned in 2015. The report also noted that “the Navy has made a long-​​term com­mit­ment to field 11 air­craft car­ri­ers out­fit­ted with 10 car­rier air wings com­posed of 44 strike-​​fighters in each wing.” Congress, the report’s authors said, is “very con­cerned” about “cur­rent and fore­casted short­falls in the strike-​​fighter inven­tory.” Given the totemic nature of car­ri­ers for the Navy and the num­bers of jobs and the money at stake for mem­bers of Congress, a bat­tle royal over plans to per­ma­nently reduce the fleet by two car­rier groups seems assured.

On the Joint Strike Fighter, one con­gres­sional aide said a cut to the F-35’s over­all num­bers would not be sur­pris­ing given the program’s ris­ing costs and the tight­ened bud­get sit­u­a­tion the coun­try faces for 2011. And now we have some detail about just how big those cuts may be, Our col­leagues at Inside Defense are report­ing that a draft Pentagon direc­tive would result in extend­ing, “devel­op­ment by at least a year, reduce pro­duc­tion by approx­i­mately 100 air­craft and require the addi­tion of bil­lions of dol­lars to the effort through 2015.”

The Marines are unlikely to sit still for the EFV kill. Reports are that Marine Commandant Gen. James Conway will come out swing­ing to pre­serve the abil­ity to kick down the door and ensure forcible entry from the sea. Jones made his basic posi­tion on the problem-​​plagued EFV dur­ing a May speech at CSIS.
Posted by:Hupereth Glack5732

#12  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Pappy   2009-12-10 22:29  

#11  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2009-12-10 20:38  

#10  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: tipover   2009-12-10 18:24  

#9  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2009-12-10 14:27  

#8  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut   2009-12-10 14:13  

#7  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: gromky   2009-12-10 14:05  

#6  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2009-12-10 13:41  

#5  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Besoeker   2009-12-10 13:41  

#4  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Steve White   2009-12-10 13:37  

#3  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Steve White   2009-12-10 13:36  

#2  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Mitch H.   2009-12-10 12:20  

#1  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Willy   2009-12-10 11:51  

00:00