Dun dun dunnnn, more bad news for the USAF....

[Jumpshot724]

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/ ... 27-012612/

DoD proposes to cut 7 squadrons, cancel C-27
Cancellation of Global Hawk Block 30, retiring other aircraft also proposed in spending reductions
By Jeff Schogol - Staff writer
Posted : Thursday Jan 26, 2012 14:15:15 EST

Proposed reductions in defense spending would cut seven squadrons, cancel the C-27 and the Global Hawk Block 30, and retire numerous transport aircraft, according to documents obtained from sources by Air Force Times.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and other officials were expected to announce formally the cuts later on Thursday. The move is part of an effort to cut close to $500 billion from the Defense Department’s budget over the next decade.

However, the department could face up to $600 billion more in spending cuts if Congress fails to reach a deal on how to trim the national debt by the end of the year.

The proposed cuts are guided by the philosophy that after a decade of waging counterinsurgency campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. military has to prepare for a wider spectrum of missions.

“In developing the President’s budget request for FY 2013-2017, we first turned to where DoD could reduce excess overhead, operations expenses, and personnel costs across the defense enterprise, and achieve better buying power in our acquisition of systems and services,” according to a presentation Panetta was expected to give of the proposed cuts.

Toward that end, the proposed budget cuts including standing down a minimum of six tactical-air fighter squadrons and one training squadron, according to the presentation.

“As we reduce air force structure, we are protecting aircraft with multi-role capabilities versus niche capabilities,” the presentation says. “The resultant force will be capable of handling our most demanding contingency plans including homeland defense.”

The presentation does not outline which squadrons would be cut.

The proposed cuts would also include terminating the C-27 project, a joint Army-Air Force aircraft.

“The new strategic guidance emphasizes flexibility and adaptability. The C-27J was developed and procured to provide a niche capability to directly support Army urgent needs in difficult environments such as Afghanistan where we thought the C-130 might not be able to operate effectively,” the presentation says. “However, in practice, we did not experience the anticipated airfield constraints for C-130 operations in Afghanistan and expect these constraints to be marginal in future scenarios. Since we have ample inventory of C-130s and the current cost to own and operate them is lower, we no longer need — nor can we afford — a niche capability like the C-27J aircraft.”

Also on the chopping block would be the Global Hawk Block 30 unmanned aircraft.

“When we initially invested in the Global Hawk Block 30 program, it held the promise of providing essentially the same capability as the U-2 manned aircraft for significantly less money to both buy and operate,” the presentation says. “As the program has matured, these cost savings have not materialized and, at best, we project the future cost of Global Hawk Block 30 operations to be comparable with the U-2. In this five-year budget, the cost of the Global Hawk program would significantly exceed the cost of the U-2 so we cancelled Global Hawk Block 30 and extended the U-2 program.

“Although this is a significant disappointment, our experience with Global Hawk Block 30 will help other Global Hawk programs like the Air Force Global Hawk Block 40, NATO’s Alliance Ground Surveillance (AGS), and the Navy’s Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS).”

Northrop released a statement later Thursday:

“Northrop Grumman is disappointed with the Pentagon's decision, and plans to work with the Pentagon to assess alternatives to program termination.

“The Global Hawk program has demonstrated its utility in U.S. military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, as well as its utility in humanitarian operations in Japan and Haiti. Just a few months ago, the Pentagon published an acquisition decision memorandum regarding Global Hawk Block 30 that stated: ‘The continuation of the program is essential to the national security ... there are no alternatives to the program which will provide acceptable capability to meet the joint military requirement at less cost.’”

The U-2 program, according to the statement, “places pilots in danger, has limited flight duration, and provides limited sensor capacity. Extending the U-2’s service life also represents additional investment requirements for that program.”

The proposed cuts also call for retiring 27 aging C-5As and 65 of the oldest C-130s, leaving Air Mobility Command with 52 C-5Ms, 318 C-130s and 222 C-17s

[phantomfreak]

And it really sucks to be caught in the middle of it.

[Victory103]

Just hope the Army gets the C-27J back, at least to replace the C-23's. Most of the old C-130E's are out of service, but even the "H's" are getting up there in airframe hours.

[reconmercs]

The Air Force had no business taking the C-27J from the Army in the first place...the Army has needed something to replace the Sherpa's for awhile..the Air Force seemed more interested in protecting "turf" instead of fufilling an actual need. Heaven forbid Army Aviators are allowed to actually fly modern fixed wing aircraft ...

[phantomfreak]

The last that I had read is that the Army and Air Force would do away with the C-27J.

[Jumpshot724]

The Air Force had no business taking the C-27J from the Army in the first place...the Army has needed something to replace the Sherpa's for awhile..the Air Force seemed more interested in protecting "turf" instead of fufilling an actual need. Heaven forbid Army Aviators are allowed to actually fly modern fixed wing aircraft ...

IMHO the Army shouldn't have any fixed wing aircraft. They should be relying on the AF for aerial transport. To me, the Army having cargo planes is like the Air Force having Abrams Tanks....

Spreading out common platforms between services only increases costs.

[Victory103]

The fixed wing issue is about supporting the guy on the ground, at times the AF can't do that, so the Army wanted something organic for light tactical airlift duties, for both regular Joes and "special" guys. The Army should take over the MC-12W program since they already do the ISR/ELINT mission with RC-12's and TF ODIN (and other various config's of "spook" King Airs). The AF vs. Army fixed wing support/CAS fight goes back prior to Vietnam.

This one hits home for me as I was hoping for a chance to fly the C-27 after I transition to the C-12. The Spartan has proven it can do the mission and without the costs of a C-130.

[reconmercs]

The Air Force had no business taking the C-27J from the Army in the first place...the Army has needed something to replace the Sherpa's for awhile..the Air Force seemed more interested in protecting "turf" instead of fufilling an actual need. Heaven forbid Army Aviators are allowed to actually fly modern fixed wing aircraft ...

IMHO the Army shouldn't have any fixed wing aircraft. They should be relying on the AF for aerial transport. To me, the Army having cargo planes is like the Air Force having Abrams Tanks....

Spreading out common platforms between services only increases costs.

Well, if that's the case the Air Force shouldn't have any helicopters then The Army uses fixed wing for a heck of alot more than just transport...battlefield SIGINT, cargo movement to forward locations, etc.. and the Air Force is unable to fulfill all of the needs of an Army ground commander, that's why the Army has always had their own fleet of fixed wing aircraft, C-23s, C-26s, RC-12s, UC-35s..as well as contracting with civilian companies.

[reconmercs]

yeah, what "Victory" said looks like we were typing and click submit at the same time

[MIKE JG]

Does make more sense though to give the C-27J's to the Army to replace the Sherpas.

[maverick69]

An update:
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/ ... 8.facebook

[reconmercs]

An update:
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/ ... 8.facebook

.... and the hits just keep on going ....way to go Air Force

[Jumpshot724]

.... and the hits just keep on going ....way to go Air Force

It's not their fault they're not gtting the money they need. Blame the jerks in office....

[MIKE JG]

I plan on firing all the jerks in Congress come November, at least the ones up for re-election. I hope my fellow Americans will join me.

[viper810]

USAF cuts 5 A-10 squadrons

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/ ... um=twitter

MOD Input: Already mentioned in the link above.

[btaylo24]

Just hope the SP A-10's dont go. Will be a very sad day.

More info here

http://warthognews.blogspot.com.au/sear ... -10%20Cuts

[viper810]

Someone said

81st FS (USAFE) (Spangdahlem)
47th FS (AFRC) (Barksdale)
107th FS (ANG) (Selfridge, Michigan)
163rd FS (ANG) (Fort Wayne, Indiana)
184st FS (ANG) (Fort Smith, Arkansan)

but its not officialy yet.

[jetmax]

So after years of the Air Force saying the Air National Guard was so important we are going to gut them like a pig. Nice. Time for this USAF Retiree to start writing letters...

[maddog65]

This won't be over for a long time. There is going to be a lot of fighting from the different Senators and Congressmen trying to save there bases etc.. in there state. Already everyone is ready to put up a fight on a proposed BRAC.

[MIKE JG]

Would be stupid to get rid of Ft. Wayne and Selfridge A-10s....... THEY JUST GOT THEM!