Big Al still couldn't afford one of these!

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Agree 100%, but the F-35 as a replacement for the F-16s and F-18s is the wrong place to look.

Sorry but it's as good a place as any. 92(hence the AH ref) MILLION dollars a piece and rife with overruns/waste etc makes this the perfect place to start. Cut the production to 500 till 2020, we still will have more than the world combined.

Those 8000 tanks could pretty easily get to India, S. Korea, or into the Middle East without much resistance from anyone. And yes, the anti-aircraft carrier missle is a major concern. However, complete air dominance would allow us to destroy any of those missle sites if necessary.

Given that the distance from China's border to Tehran is 3000 miles (or the distance from DC to SF approximately), I don't think we are going to see a vast tank column headed that way anytime soon. No those tanks are going to guard a border to their north where another military power just might be more of a concern to china. IF though an 8000 tank strong column approached Iran (through India who just happens to have nuclear bombs) I think they just might meet a little resistance before our military was called upon.

you actually fight them with a better fighter, like the F-35 and advanced missle tech.

again given that China won't have any fighters produced before 2020, and we will have 1100, I think we are ok.

The F-16 & F-18s were put into service in the late 70s early 80s, they are reaching the end of their lifecycle.

Just an FYI:
Aero-News Network: The Aviation and Aerospace World's Daily/Real-Time News and Information Service

You put the program on hold for 3-4 years, what happens to all the jobs this program creates? What costs will be associated with re-starting the program? Does there need to be better oversight of these large gov't procurment programs, absolutely. But again, there also needs to be better oversight of SS & Medicare. We need to look at fixing SS & Medicare and repealing Obamacare immeidately as the price tags and financial sustainment models of these programs are way out of whack and will be pushing the US far more quickly into insolvency than the F-35 program.

Here is the first (and only) argument for me which is semi valid. Unfortunately it has nothing to do with military necessity, or the value of the program, but simply a logistical question. Now if this is the rationale for keeping this program going, I am assuming you were in favor of the various auto maker bailouts through the years, and 0 unemployment policies that say it's in the States interest to make sure all it's citizens have high paying specialized jobs?

Budget realities should dictate, when our defense is not at stake. If we can't legitimately scale back this type of mammoth program when there is no real aggressor in the next few years than I would imagine we never will be able to.