• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

US Army divesting 8% of Blackhawk Fleet

Why do they keep on making the same mistake over and over (F22 a classic example)? Decommissioning or stopping production of a system before its replacement is ready?

And if you say to free up budget for the newest greatest toy to be built, you are putting political budgetary/taxation games ahead of national security
 
I have the perfect CH-146 SLEP...

How's Ukraine doing for helicopters?

And are these "perfectly serviceable, lots more use on them" or "driven like they were stolen, wring the last iota of use out" rotorcraft?
 
Why do they keep on making the same mistake over and over (F22 a classic example)? Decommissioning or stopping production of a system before its replacement is ready?

And if you say to free up budget for the newest greatest toy to be built, you are putting political budgetary/taxation games ahead of national security
Your talking the same government that allowed a Red Chinese spy balloon drift around the continental US and hovering over sensitive bases collecting data for over a week. The one with the open southern border letting unvetted, undocumented terrorists in from around the world. That national security?
 
Why do they keep on making the same mistake over and over (F22 a classic example)? Decommissioning or stopping production of a system before its replacement is ready?

And if you say to free up budget for the newest greatest toy to be built, you are putting political budgetary/taxation games ahead of national security
Like we did with the Buffalo?
 
Why do they keep on making the same mistake over and over (F22 a classic example)? Decommissioning or stopping production of a system before its replacement is ready?

And if you say to free up budget for the newest greatest toy to be built, you are putting political budgetary/taxation games ahead of national security
Well these are generally older models, and unlike the A-10 or F-22, they aren’t really divesting the fleet. During GWOT we plus’d up the UH fleet way above establishment due to the support needed by other USG entities and the dispersed nature of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Digital upgrade of the Blackhawk is still continuing, and new birds are still being acquired as well. So while it is a reduction of fleet numbers, we are still going to be overboard on TO&E numbers for the UH fleet for sometime.

 
Well these are generally older models, and unlike the A-10 or F-22, they aren’t really divesting the fleet. During GWOT we plus’d up the UH fleet way above establishment due to the support needed by other USG entities and the dispersed nature of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Digital upgrade of the Blackhawk is still continuing, and new birds are still being acquired as well. So while it is a reduction of fleet numbers, we are still going to be overboard on TO&E numbers for the UH fleet for sometime.

As much as I question certain things about the American military industrial complex...wouldn't it be nice if we had this American problem?

"Damnit, we requested 16 new fighters on our unfunded priorities list, and Parliament bought us 20!!"
 
As much as I question certain things about the American military industrial complex...wouldn't it be nice if we had this American problem?

"Damnit, we requested 16 new fighters on our unfunded priorities list, and Parliament bought us 20!!"

The CAF already has too much infrastructure and too much equipment that it can't adequately maintain / sustain. More equipment without operating funds to maintain and operate is not a recipe for success.
 
The CAF already has too much infrastructure and too much equipment that it can't adequately maintain / sustain. More equipment without operating funds to maintain and operate is not a recipe for success.
Well a lot of your equipment maintenance issues are from having to use them without enough maintenance. Larger fleets could alleviate that issue.

WRT your infrastructure issues, that’s been decades of decaying.
 
Well a lot of your equipment maintenance issues are from having to use them without enough maintenance. Larger fleets could alleviate that issue.

WRT your infrastructure issues, that’s been decades of decaying.
Except for the fact there are plenty of parts on an aircraft that TX and/or need to be inspected on a regular basis regardless of whether they are flown. All you are doing is punting the problem down the road, until you have an even larger number to "fix" with the same number of people.

Unlike pro-athletes, we can't afford to use it once and then replace it.
 
How's Ukraine doing for helicopters?

And are these "perfectly serviceable, lots more use on them" or "driven like they were stolen, wring the last iota of use out" rotorcraft?
Mostly the remaining Alpha models with a lot of airframe time (many already surplused off and upgraded to Lima or Alpha+ standard in part 91 service (non pax carrying)
 
Dropping this in here, because there is reference to a further buy of Mikes, but the big news is the apparent cancellation of FARA.


Also commits to Chinook Blk 2, but delays the ITEP (GE T901). Really quite remarkable news.
 
Back
Top