Visit FOUR PERCENT and join The Heritage Foundation's petition to the White House to stop the precipitous drop in real defense spending.
(continued)
Likewise, in Senate floor comments earlier today (7/21/2009), even Christopher Dodd (D-CT) rose to defend the Raptor, explaining that early termination of the weapon system procurement could cost anywhere from 20 thousand to 90 thousand jobs. The senator has a large constituency of his own, an estimated 4000, dependent on the health of the program. From an AP story, NPR.com reported today (7/21/2009) on the vote on Senate Bill S.1390 which effectively stripped funding for the F-22 beyond 187 units. As they reported:
Way to stand up and be counted, Senator McCain! If you ever needed proof that prior military experience was not a prerequisite for sensible civilian governance over military issues, here you go. McCain, Levin, and a total of 58 senators sided with Obama in terminating the program. And, how about the good senator Carl Levin of Michigan? Just because his state is a monumental disaster of unemployment and stagnation, he believes other states should share his state's fate. Still, I do not necessarily want to cast this debate primarily as a 'jobs in a bad economy' issue. The fact that F-22 production provides thousands of high-quality, good paying jobs to workers is a secondary benefit to the real issue at hand.
The F-22 Raptor stands on its own merits, regardless its cost. A resurgent Russia, with its highly capable aerospace industry base, and the Peoples Republic of China, which is awash in American dollars, are not sitting still in their attempts to catch and surpass American military might. There are ample reports of future Russian and Chinese fighter designs with performance characteristics similar to the Raptor. Granted, fielding those designs is another matter altogether. Optimistic projections for highly advanced Chinese fighters in the Raptor class put them in squadron service as early as 2015. While the complexion of other countries' new fighter designs and anticipated introduction time frames are speculative at best, does it not make sense to field what we know to be the absolute best aircraft for our own warfighters, and do it now? McCain, Levin, and Gates are lulled into a mentality that United States military power is a constant -- that our technological advantages are so immense that we can rely on legacy systems indefinitely. They could not be anymore wrong. Speaking strictly in terms of Air Force platforms, as powerful as it is, the entire fleet is aging. In early 2007, F-15 Eagle squadrons worldwide were grounded after the in-air disintegration of one of the planes on a routine flight. Through training and combat sorties over three decades of service, F-15 and F-16 fighters are being pushed well beyond the design-life parameters they were given. The Eagles and Fighting Falcons ('Vipers' as they are known to their proud pilots) have long provided the masterful high-low mix of highly capable air combat aircraft that have served our defense needs so well. But, they are long in the tooth. And, what ten or more years ago had represented unquestioned technological supremacy has now been eroded to parity at best. The British/German/Spanish Eurofighter, the French Rafale, and a spate of thoroughly lethal Russian fighters (Su-27, Su-35, MiG-31) are beginning to challenge American air dominance. While the Eurofighter and Rafale are fielded ostensibly by friendly nations, they are also exported to any nation with the money and inclination to buy, as are the Russian types. The PRC is beginning to field a capable indigenous fighter as well, with the Chengdu J-10 and Jian 11-B, as shown below.
Imagine, for a moment, a potential scenario from the not to distant future. After decades of imagined humiliation over the recalcitrance of Taiwan, the Peoples Liberation Army is unleashed on the island of Formosa in 2018 to reassimilate the island into the Mainland. The American president, in a time-honored pledge to defend democratic Taiwan from PRC aggression, sends the U.S. 7th Fleet, Marine units, and mobilizes the USAF's fighter squadrons worldwide. As wave after wave of Chinese J-10s and J-11s pound Taiwanese troops and facilities, American F-22s race to join the fight. The Raptors, armed with a maximum warload of eight missiles, begin to drop PLA Air Force fighters like so many flies. The Raptors execute their missions flawlessly and suffer zero losses. But, there's a problem. There are not enough Raptors to go around. The Raptors streak for home bases to rearm and refuel, but the onslaught of veritable hundreds and hundreds of PLA Air Force fighters and attack bombers are too numerous to overcome. The PLA combined amphibious and air assault on Formosa is badly bloodied, but successful nonetheless.
The obvious moral of this story is, what good is the best aircraft in the world if it is fielded in numbers too few to enact security goals? Is a major armed engagement against the Peoples Liberation Army inevitable? No. Is it possible? Certainly. A 'White Paper' published by the command general staff of the PLA in 2004 has stated as much. This brings to question other, larger issues. However, it does illustrate the glaring reality that the United States and our allies still live in a dangerous world. Just because there are asymmetric threats through radical Islamic factions and various terrorist organizations, it does not mean that we are safe from good old fashioned nation-state enemies as well. Whether we like it or not, America is the last stop for freedom and world order. Whether we accept the mantle is another matter. For a plethora of reasons, the United States of America has emerged from
the post-World War II era as the only nation capable of fostering freedom in the world. We are hated for our freedoms, our values, and our strength. Nations and nationless coalitions alike continuously seek our diminution -- even our destruction. Obama, the Senate and other players in our own government have taken steps to facilitate the goals of our enemies. Acerbic in my assessment? Yes. But, no amount of fund shuffling, doctrine nuancing, or Beltway spin will alter the fact that those policy makers who participated in the cancellation of the F-22 Raptor program have directly weakened the defense preparedness of the Republic.
Lee A. Heilig
1. Dorr, Robert. "Black Monday -- Analyzing the Huge U.S. Defense Cuts", Combat Aircraft, Vol. 10, No. 3, p. 6.
2. Gates, Dominic. "Aerospace Giant 'Hit Harder' Than Peers", Seattle Times, 7 April 2009, p. 1.
3. Marsh, Bill. "The F-22: Able to Dodge Enemy Radar and the Budget Ax (So Far)." New York Times, 12 April 2009. Retrieved: 13 April 2009.
4. Drew, Christopher, "Air Force Officials Agree On An Obama Cutback". New York Times, 14 April 2009, p. B3.
5. Wolf, Jim. "Top general warns against ending F-22 fighter". Reuters, 18 June 2009.
6. AP news -- http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=105877544
it was just too good (posted 7/21/09)
It was bound to happen. On April 6th, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates "courageously" announced the end to production of the most lethal air combat fighter the world has ever seen. Manufacture of the F-22 'Raptor' air supremacy fighter will cease in 2011 after only 187 airframes, far less than half what the USAF originally needed. The cancellation of the program coincides with slashes in other highly touted programs in the Defense Department.
The Raptor, a product of the Lockheed Martin Corporation, literally transcends the capabilities of any other fighter in production today or on tomorrow's drawing boards of other countries. The list of features and accomplishments for this new fighter exceed the scope of this article. Stand-outs include thrust vectoring for enhanced air combat maneuvering (ACM); 1.7 Mach super-cruise (the ability to fly faster than the speed of sound economically without afterburners); full fly-by-wire; all digital link for secure communications and multi-ship networking; the most advanced suite of radar and avionics available; and, perhaps most importantly, extreme low observables, or stealth.
Why, you may ask, pay such attention to the cancellation of just another weapons program? Quite simply, the Raptor, if funded to its logical conclusion, gives the United States Air Force the most advanced and lethal air combat platform to ensure American air dominance for decades to come. Now, we realize that statement is anathema to many on the Left, who view American military dominance as a major source of evil in the modern world. Herein we see the motivation behind the removal of funding for such a magnificent aircraft. The rest of us should not marvel that the Raptor has been targeted for cancellation.
The duplicity of the Democrat-controlled federal government is as transparent as glass. While Obama and his congressional sycophants delight in stimulus programs, industry-stifling cap & trade initiatives, and health care socialization designed to fleece us of untold trillions of dollars, they seek pretensions of fiscal responsibility at the expense of our nation's security. I expected more from Gates. As Deputy
Director of the Central Intelligence Agency for President Reagan, and as Director of the agency under President George H. W. Bush, Gates was positioned with administrations that understood the need for possessing superior military capabilities. Unless I am judging his current performance on inadequate information, it appears that Mr. Gates has forgotten the lessons of the Cold War. Let us remember, though, that he has been retained by the Obama Administration as Secretary of Defense. That fact alone casts doubt on his ability to champion whatever systems are necessary to maintain American military hegemony. However, Gates is not alone amongst the ranks of men who should know better. According to a report in the June-July issue of Combat Aircraft:
Furthermore, Gates chose to utter non sequitur statements about the non-existent combat experience of the Raptor in defense of his decision. As experience clearly demonstrates, current platforms are completely adequate for conducting the types of missions required in the Iraqi and Afghanistan theaters of operation. Introduction of the Raptor, at this time, would be a gross waste of capability.
In all fairness, Senator Chambliss can be described as a lawmaker looking out for an important constituent employer in the form of Lockheed Martin, who assembles F-22s in their Atlanta facility. It is also fair to describe Mr. Chambliss as a legislator who understands American defense requirements and wants the best for our armed forces. That is much more credit than I can afford to a majority of U.S. senators after today's floor vote.
At first, many in Washington expected a battle between the administration and F-22 supporters in Congress, with industry lobbying hard for more of the fighters. Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) and retired Lt. General Michael Dunn of the Air Force Association both issued strong statements arguing the need for more F-22s.
Others, however, rolled over. Air Force Secretary Michael Donley and Chief of Staff General Norton Schwartz, who had been expected to argue for more Raptors, instead published a piece in the Washington Post, 'Moving Beyond the F-22', which amounted to a surrender to Gates. A Lockheed Martin official said the F-22 prime contractor 'accepts' Gates' decisions. [1]
On the 6th of April 2009, as part of the 2010 Pentagon budget announcement, Gates noted that although the US was currently engaged in two wars, the Raptor had yet to fly a single mission supporting either one. Said Gates, "It was not a close call. There is no military requirement for numbers beyond 187."[2][3] In an editorial in the Washington Post on April 13, 2009 USAF Secretary Michael Donley and his Chief of Staff Norton Schwartz stated that they supported Gates' decision, saying "The F-22 is a vital tool in the military's arsenal and will remain in our inventory for decades to come. But the time has come to move on."[4][5]
At what price American security? With a flyaway cost of $137 million per aircraft, the F-22 Raptor's price is eye watering. The eyes dry quickly when the aspects of maintainability, longevity, and total air dominance are factored. Be assured, America's enemies and potential enemies do not want to see us produce this magnificent aircraft in numbers. Additional F-35s, Gates' idea of a consolation prize, are not the answer, either.
The 58 to 40 vote reflected an all-out lobbying campaign by the administration, which had to overcome resistance from lawmakers confronted with the potential losses of defense-related jobs if the F-22 program was terminated.
"The president really needed to win this vote," Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., said. Levin said it was important not only on the merits of the planes but "in terms of changing the way we do business in Washington."
The top Republican on the committee, John McCain of Arizona, agreed that it was "a signal that we are not going to continue to build weapons systems with cost overruns which outlive their requirements for defending this nation."
Supporters of the program cited both the importance of the F-22 to U.S. security interests — pointing out that China and Russia are developing planes that can compete with it — and a need to protect aerospace jobs in a bad economy. [6]
The J-10 is based on an abandoned Israeli design, the Lavi, that failed to garner export orders in the 1980s and 1990s. The J-11 is a verbatim copy of the dangerous Russian Su-27. Both are being built in large numbers, with more advanced indigenous designs in the works.
Does it not make fundamental sense, if the technology is available, that we should equip our warfighhters with the absolute best weapons our expertise can offer? General Douglas MacArthur once said that the ultimate goal of any war is victory. This statement may seem painfully obvious to Raptor Republic readers, but sadly, it is an unfathomable concept for too many of our military policy makers.
By definition, a RAPTOR is a bird of prey, as typified by hawks, owls, and eagles. There is perhaps no more distinctive and inspiring raptor than the American Bald Eagle. Because it is a soaring bird of prey, and a symbol of America's freedom and grandeur, we have chosen the bald eagle, the Raptor, as the symbol for our website. How fitting, too, that the F-22 has been named the RAPTOR. Its name perfectly fits its mission. Just as feathered raptors in flight inspire awe, so does the world's greatest jet fighter for those who can recognize its potential.
