F22/f35
 

Well, the writings on the wall:

http://news.aol.com/article/defense-chief-proposes-weapons-cuts/416028?cid=12[/font]

And the US101 too...

You might want to correct your title... the F-35 is getting more money, not less.

Indeed, VH-71A to bite the dust on the basis of this.

The real question is whether the US will kill F-35B, and focus only on the USAF F-35A and the USN F-35C - this could save some serious cash. It would also force the UK to convert the QEII class of CV to CTOL, so that it can be more useful if it ever enters service.

Pls, pls, pls kill the F-35B - and buy off the Brits with funding the GE/RR F-136
engine programme.

S41

Not a chance of killing F-35B!

Cancel the primary variant for the only level 1 partner (UK)?

The variant Italy is planning to make half of its buy... and just built a ship specifically for?

And the variant Spain just built a ship with the capability for?

Not to mention the ONLY variant the USMC wants... and the USMC has a very great influence in Congress?

There are scheduled to be more B variants built altogether (and for at least 4 nations) than C variants (for only 1 nation).

The F-35C has a far greater chance of being canceled than the F-35B!

Some people like to stick to their fantasies regardless of reality, it seems.

Just after the N Korea launch?
That might be a tough sell

Fox News are reporting the US Defence Secretary Gates has cancelled the F-22 program after the next four aircraft are completed. Also cancelled is a lightweight tank for the Army.

He should have called for canceling the V22 as well.

F-22 is the best combat aircraft ever and to cancel it is insane. The F-35 is pretty crap and is nothing compared with the Raptor. However I would consider the B could be killed off! After all the UK is only going to get 66 which is a waste of time! So much for the 150 odd we were 'supposed' to get!
It would be a shame to lose USMC fixed wing when the Harrier is retired but what else could we do!? We cannot afford to lose the US Navy and its real carriers!
I guess this goes to show what a useless fool Obama is. A man with totally no experience being put in the job! Now he seems to want to get rid of nukes! Assuming the whole world did ditch nukes and one day we face an asteroid impact or even the fact that someone like Russia or China had hung onto a dozen warheads or so it could make things interesting! If only McCain had won! God forbid but I think even President Sarah Palin would have been better than this!

It is the seventh of April isn't it, and not the first?

Obama has sold us out! The asteriods are waiting for us to drop our guard. But I've got my gun under my bed, and if they come knocking they'd better be waving white flags.

You're right Ronald. Fancy you yanks putting someone in the Whitehouse with NO experience at all of nuking asteroids.

Obviously you should have elected Bruce Willis

Asteroid/comet impact is a real threat! A threat which unlike the terrorist issue could actually wipe us all out and possibly even all life on the whole planet! Nuclear weapons are one of a few methods we could use to destroy/alter the course of an approaching object with. There are other methods but many of these would take years or decades to work. If we were to discover an obect at short notice then the nuke option would possibly be our best and only option available. Or we could sit back and let it hit!

This should be fun!

6% of GDP is a lot of money Ronald. Especially when you're facing the current economic problems.

Indeed it is a lot of money. But I would imagine a 10 to 20 year war in Afghanistan which we probably will not ever win is going to be even more costly! How long can we stay there? I guess until someone runs for office who will remove our troops! Please don't get me wrong I fully support our troops and detest the enemy. While we are there the troops deserve every bit of kit we can afford. Though probably best to leave asap! But in this capitalist world where only money matters can we really win? Also how do we define winning? Our leaders also assume we are not going to face any other coflicts other than Afghanistan! Now going by the track record of how crap our government has been in almost every respect and the same can be said of current and past American administrations please forgive me if I don't trust their judgement or word on any issue!

Killing Dave-B
 

GK121

As has been rehashed around here ad infinitum, the issue is that F-35B carries two-thirds the bombload half the range of the F-35C, or alternatively half the bombload two-thirds the range of F-35C. Dave-B can't carry the largest bombs internally, and it has bring back "issues", hence the UK interest in RVLs to meet key user requirements.

So, if you're in the Administration, then you need to make difficult choices - and though I appreciate that the Marine Expeditionary Unit concept currently relies on organic AV-8Bs - I would ask when an MEU went ashore in a combat role without fast air off a CVN. And when would you do it in future?

Personally, I don't see the case for it, and would give the USMC F-35Cs off CVNs as they currently fly F-18C/D. IMHO, the UK would jump at a deal swapping the long-term funding of the F-136 engine for Dave-B, and I can't imagine that the US will determine its procurement decisions on possible future purchases of small numbers of Dave-B by Spain and Italy (you may also add Thailand and Israel, too).

But then it's not my decision. The Dave-B is a nice idea, but it's not as useful as Dave-C; with the economy, it's time to bin it. I would continue with F-22 procurement, however.

S41

Perhaps Flap62, but I don't think I have the energy

Shirley,

The F-35 B is a lot more versatile, though an advanced Harrier ( as now with Sniper ) would seem quite up to the job ?

If the UK can suddenly come up with £400 Billion to save bankers - a rhyming slang if ever I heard one - what's the snag with £ 4 Billion for a couple of carriers, + the F-35B could use assault ships ?

As for shooting asteroids a la Hollywood, isn't that asking a bit much of any aircraft including the supposedly banned F-15 ASAT, while there are other systems which could ( hopefully ) do the job !

Would a nuke detonated in space have less of an effect though? In a vacuum I'm assuming you wouldn't get the overpressure/vacuum and air rushing back in as there is no air anyway?