Senators urge firm line on axing F-35 engine

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

A bipartisan coalition of 19 senators is keeping the heat on appropriators to withhold funding for the F-35’s second engine.

In a letter obtained by The Hill to Sens. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) and Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), the Appropriations Committee’s chairman and ranking member, the senators said they agree with Pentagon officials who say the second engine is too costly and unnecessary.

The senators urged Inouye and Cochran to stick with their decision to not fund the engine in a 2011 continuing resolution by doing the same in a defense spending bill for 2012.

They applauded Inouye and Cochran for not funding the program in the Senate’s 2011 CR, calling that move “the first step toward terminating the alternate engine program.”

The letter was signed by 11 Democrats, seven Republicans and one Independent. The group includes Senate Armed Services Committee Ranking Member John McCain (R-Ariz.), as well as Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-Ct.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), James Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)

The group included a statement made recently by Defense Secretary Robert Gates before the Senate Armed Services Committee, when he dubbed the alternate power plant, being built be GE and Rolls-Royce, “an unnecessary and extravagant expense, particularly during this period of fiscal contradiction.”

They also reminded the appropriations panel leaders that in July 2009, the full Senate “unanimously adopted an amendment to terminate the alternate engine after a vote of 59 to 38 rejecting a proposal to continue funding.”

If a similar vote happens this year, the senators predict “an even greater majority will join the president, secretary of defense and our military leadership in opposition of this wasteful program.”

The House last month voted to strip funding for the second engine from its version of a government-wide 2011 CR.

The Pentagon estimates that ending the development of the second engine will save $3 billion.

Pentagon officials — and two administrations — have for several years tried ending the alternate engine, but Congress has consistently kept it alive.

Gates has said it costs "$28 million a month" and completing it would "waste $3 billion." The nation's fiscal situation makes that unaffordable, DoD brass says. 


http://thehill.com/news-by-subject/defense-homeland-security/148963-senators-urge-firm-line-on-axing-f-35-engine

[Pooky 3,787]

As an alternative ...

Kill the whole F-35 program.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

As an alternative ...

Kill the whole F-35 program.

I would not mind seeing them stop building new ships for a while. Nobody spends defense dollars like the Navy.

On February 14, the Obama Administration released its proposed Fiscal Year 2012 budget for the federal government. As part of this budget, the Administration is seeking $553 billion in funding for the Department of Defense, not including funding for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan or the nuclear weapons related activities of the Department of Energy.

Shipbuilding – The request includes $14.9 billion for the Navy’s “Shipbuilding and Conversion” account, and $24.6 billion total for shipbuilding. The budget request funds procurement of 11 ships in FY 2012 and 56 ships over the FY 2012 – FY 2016 period. The Army will Purchase one Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV) in FY 2012 – the last of five Army JHSVs.

Aircraft – The request includes no funding for additional C-17 aircraft, the F-22 fighter or the alternative engine program for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The request includes almost $2 billion for 28 of the Navy’s F/A-18E/F “Super Hornet,” $3.0 billion for procurement of 36 V-22 “Osprey” tilt-rotor aircraft, and $9.7 billion for 32 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters. It also includes $877 million for the Air Force’s KC-X new aerial re-fueling tanker program.

FY 2012 FUNDING BY SERVICE

$144.9 billion – Army (up $8.1 billion, 5.9%)

$161.4 billion – Navy/Marine Corps (up $5.8 billion, 3.7%)

$150.0 billion -- Air Force (up $6.8 billion, 4.7%)

$94.9 billion -- Defense Wide (up $6.3 billion, 7.0%)

$553.1 billion -- TOTAL (051) (up $127.0 billion, 5.1% NOMINAL)

http://armscontrolcenter.org/policy/securityspending/articles/fy_2012_detailed_numbers/

[Pooky 3,787]

I would not mind seeing them stop building new ships for a while. Nobody spends defense dollars like the Navy.

The F-35 Thunderpig is the biggest defence program out there at the moment.

Problem is, they've just grounded the whole test fleet again, for a dual in-flight system failure. The whole program is massively over-budget, the aircraft itself is an overweight, under-powered, under-performing PoS, with nowhere near enough carrying capacity. As an air-to-air asset, it is out-matched by current European and Russian aircraft, and as an air-to-surface asset, it can't carry enough internally to remain stealthy, so it's no better than what is already out there.

But the US DoD has bet the house on it as the aircraft for the future and Lockheed-Martin is trying to sell it around the world as the best thing out there. Then again, Lockheed did this before when they sold the F-104 Starfighter to anyone who they could buy off, when anyone with sense could clearly see it was useless (it got the well-deserved reputation as "The Widowmaker"), so it's not the first time this has happened.

Best thing that can happened to this dog of a program is to cancel the whole thing. Now.