The automatic sequester

[RED]

Almost nobody seems to understand what Obama and his “sequester,” did to the U.S. military and I have yet to see where anybody has even attempted to reconcile the Obama administration’s check book. Here is a starting place... from the WAPO back when everybody thought the sequester would cut the deficit.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/02/20/the-sequester-absolutely-everything-you-could-possibly-need-to-know-in-one-faq/?utm_term=.877694eea69d

Cutting through the BS is tough but it doesn’t take a genius to discern the military cuts were W-A-Y more than the domestic cuts. Then comes the kicker… despite all the crushing cuts in military spending, plus smaller cuts to domestic spending, the overall spending WENT UP every year. The bottom line is that the modern Robin Hood, BHO, was robbing from the military to give money to ne’er do wells and buy their votes.

Just today there were two more American heroes killed while operating a old, poorly maintained, Apache helicopter that was adopted in the late 1970’s, nearly 50 years ago,

Dwfinition:

ne'er-do-well
ˈnerdəˌwel/Submit
noun
plural noun: ne'er-do-wells
a person who is lazy and irresponsible.
synonyms: good-for-nothing, layabout, loafer, idler, shirker, sluggard, slugabed, drone; More

[Roadkingtrax]

Red. The AH64E is a new production helicopter.

Considering you dont know the circumstances of the accident, you may want to wait before parading around the coffins of the aviators that died to make your points.

[togor]

https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/defense_spending

Crushing cuts indeed.

[RED]

Red. The AH64E is a new production helicopter.

Considering you dont know the circumstances of the accident, you may want to wait before parading around the coffins of the aviators that died to make your points.

You still can't read:

The Apache originally started as the Model 77 developed by Hughes Helicopters for the United States Army's Advanced Attack Helicopter program to replace the AH-1 Cobra. The prototype YAH-64 was first flown on 30 September 1975. The U.S. Army selected the YAH-64 over the Bell YAH-63 in 1976, and later approved full production in 1982. After purchasing Hughes Helicopters in 1984, McDonnell Douglas continued AH-64 production and development. The helicopter was introduced to U.S. Army service in April 1986. The first production AH-64D Apache Longbow, an upgraded Apache variant, was delivered to the Army in March 1997. Production has been continued by Boeing Defense, Space & Security; over 2,000 AH-64s have been produced to date.[3]

I said the Apache was adopted 50 years ago. The design is old and since over 50% of them are grounded for lack of maintenance or parts I would say that is poorly maintained. BTW the accidental death numbers in military aviation doubled recently and by your account the B-52's the USAF is flying are "new production."

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/defense_spending

Crushing cuts indeed.

More lies from a liar. Here is what another source says:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/dec/14/politifact-sheet-our-guide-to-military-spending-/

[milboltnut]

why cry over spilled milk and especially over a corrupt gov't that is not accountable for anything they do wrong.

[RED]

why cry over spilled milk and especially over a corrupt gov't that is not accountable for anything they do wrong.

Who is crying over milk? Was it skim milk, 2%, or 5% milk? Was the milk spilt when the cow kicked the bucket or when the milker dropped it? And yes I cry when our military aviators die because of inadequate training and equipment. If you were really a Christian, you would too instead of thumping your bible, spouting your holier than thou hypocrisies and denigrating your country.

[togor]

Red, 'Trax is correct. You said old helicopter in your original post. Not old helicopter DESIGN. The helicopter in question was not a beat up, worn out 50-year-old POS as you implied. Even so, nothing wrong with an old design if the specimen in question is up to snuff. Think low miles CMP Garands. Old design, adopted in 1939. Totally reliable.

As for the incidents. I sure hope the commands themselves can do better than to just pin it on Congress.

[Roadkingtrax]

Red, you said "The Apache is old." The E model is new.
"Poorly Maintained" so you slander every greensuit that turns a wrench for your points?

Thanks Togor, we posted at the same time.

[m1ashooter]

We all know that military aviation is a dangerous business. Let the investigators report on the causes. Its been said for years that because of the war on terror a lot of gear is wore out and needs to be replaced as well as ships. Hell by sons USCG Cutter is 49 years old.

[RED]

The amount of training flight time has just been increased back to a level that will allow our aviators to remain somewhat proficient. The reason those hours were cut was lack of money. The USMC pulled 23 FA-18's out of the junk pile at Davis-Monthan and put them back into service. They were there because they had exceeded their service life. In some squadrons of the AF, Navy, and USMC 2/3rds of their aircraft are unflyable meaning the other 1/3 have to fly too much, too often. The down time has nothing to do with the quality of the of the "greensuits," it is all about lack of parts and money needed to train and equip those heroes so they can do their jobs.

Think low miles CMP Garands. Old design, adopted in 1939. Totally reliable.

Yeah, they are totally reliable but we don't use them anymore because they are antiquated junk that doesn't have a role in today's world. What current military in the world is still issuing Garands? Do you want our guys using biplanes in a world of supersonic stealthy jets?

Go ahead and keep on with the foolish notion that our military is just fine in it's present condition. Go ahead and tell me that the accident rate and numbers of aviators dying is just fine. You don't know why the latest and greatest and brand new helicopter crashed yesterday but it very well be that it needed maintenance or parts that were simply not available because of the lack of funds.

I was on the USS Saratoga in 1970. VF-31 and VF103 each had 15 of the latest and finest F-4J's that the Navy had. At one time, out of 30 F-4J's, there were only 3 Phantoms that were "combat ready." The other 27 were out of commission awaiting parts or maintenance. All of the parts available were going to the WESPAC. We were anchored down off Souda Bay Crete for 37 days. No flying, no operations by either the ship or the air wing because there was no money. During that six month cruise, CAG-3 lost 1 F-4J, 1 EA-6B, 2 A-7E's, and 1 C-1. Five aviators and 3 airmen died all primarily due to a lack of training or aircraft malfunctions.

Go ahead and tell me my roommate would be alive today if we had been flying in WWII airplanes.

[togor]

Red, no one argues against the idea that worn-out equipment needs to be replaced. It would help if the services themselves didn't have problems fielding some of these new weapons systems like the JSF, the LCS, and Zumwalt-class DD. As for the Garand analogy, the point of making it was to undercut your assertion that an old design is by itself a training hazard. Clearly this is not the case. Having said that, the M21 in use today in places like Iraq and Afghanistan is basically a scoped/improved M1. AP M2 at 400+ meters is still as good a combat round as you will find in .30 caliber.

You'd think Red would know better than to call Garands "antiquated junk" at a milsurp site, but apparently not.

[togor]

Here's a good example of the sort of vision problem the services can have with next-gen weapons, and how things can go wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Gun_System

And as Red says it can lead to less money for training and maintenance of existing systems. Still, they have to try to modernize, knowing that some ideas are going to miss the mark. But some of those misses can get extremely expensive when they try to write in cutting edge performance into every last corner of the specification.

[Clark Howard]

All the convoluted reasoning cannot change the fact that the dems have starved the military at every opportunity. Remember how they were devastated when Reagan smashed the Soviet Union? Regards, Clark

[RED]

Here's a good example of the sort of vision problem the services can have with next-gen weapons, and how things can go wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Gun_System

And as Red says it can lead to less money for training and maintenance of existing systems. Still, they have to try to modernize, knowing that some ideas are going to miss the mark. But some of those misses can get extremely expensive when they try to write in cutting edge performance into every last corner of the specification.

More BS. Many of those weapon systems were forced on the military by Washington lobbyists and corrupt lawmakers including both Dems and Republicans. Just like the M-16 and the F-111 were forced on the military by McNamara and the Dream Team. The F-111 was touted to be the one single airplane that would serve the USAF, the Navy,and the USMC. Anybody that knew even the basics about aircraft carriers and Naval Air and had ever climbed around on a F-111 could tell you it was too big, too heavy, and too complex to be used aboard carriers. Any USMC Gunny Sgt. that looked at the M-16 could tell you it wasn't gonna work out of the box in the mud, filth, and blood of So. Vietnam. Major Culver had opinions on the M-16 and they were not favorable.

The visions torot has is influenced by the weed and acid he smokes. And by the way there is one tiny mistake in the gist of his wonderful, but wrong, link.

[m1ashooter]

The same congress that funded an additional National Security Class Cutter for the USCG that was not requested by the USCG.