U.S. Air Force considering early retirement of B-1 bomber

[bobdina]

U.S. Air Force considering early retirement of B-1 bomber
June 29, 5:57 PMDallas Military Headlines ExaminerMark Olinger

The B-1 is the backbone of America's long-range bomber force providing massive and rapid delivery of precision and non-precision weapons against any potential adversary anywhere around the globe on short notice.

To hit budget targets set by U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates the U.S. Air Force senior leaders are thinking of retiring its B-1 fleet . Top Air Force officials met behind closed doors late last week to determine if permanently grounding the B-1 fleet makes sense.

"I am hopeful that the B-1 early retirement rumors are false, especially with the arrival of a next-generation bomber several years away," U.S. Senator John Cornyn, R-Texas, said in a statement.

While no decision has yet been announced, but the fact that the topic is even up for discussion is significant for three reasons. First of all, the idea that the B-1's future is in doubt highlights just how tight senior U.S. Air Force leaders believe military budgets are going to get. Second, the Air Force seems to be trying to take the initiative in resetting budget priorities, instead of having them imposed from above by Gates or the White House. Finally, the notion that the B-1's fate is in play suggests just how quickly air warfare is changing.

The B-1B active force numbers 66, with 36 planes based at Dyess Air Force Base, Texas. Of the approximately 6,000 Dyess personnel, nearly 70 percent fall under the 7th Bomb Wing, which serves as the host unit at Dyess and also includes the only formal training unit for B-1B personnel.

The current restrictions on bombing in Afghanistan show how bombing missions have evolved since precision-guided munitions first went mainstream in the Gulf War nearly 20 years ago. Further unmanned aerial vehicles are now capable of dropping bombs without jeopardizing pilots' lives.

Even if the U.S. Air Force decides to retire the fleet, Congress may get the last word and indications are the political pushback could be strong.

"The B-1B has a rich history in Abilene and at Dyess Air Force Base, and I understand the importance of the B-1B to the community," U.S. Representative Randy Neugebauer, R-Lubbock, said in a statement. "As this process continues, I will be monitoring the actions of the Air Force Council closely. Any final decision would have to be approved by Congress."

The possibility of sending the B-1 to an early grave didn't sit well with other Texas lawmakers.

"The bombers are aging, and we need to focus on updating the fleet so it remains capable," said U.S. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas.

U.S. Representative Mac Thornberry, R-Clarendon, said the military can't retire B-1s because there's nothing to replace them.

In 2001, the U.S. Air Force announced it was reducing the size of the B-1B fleet, and the number of active duty planes shrank from 93 to 67, with the planes consolidated to Dyess and Ellsworth Air Force Base in South Dakota.

http://www.examiner.com/x-45248-Dallas-Military-Headlines-Examiner~y2010m6d29-US-Air-Force-considering-early-retirement-of-B1-bomber

For more cuts and a link to the full report you will find it here http://www.apacheclips.com/boards/showthread.php?9118-List-of-cuts-U.S.-lawmakers-wants-to-make-in-defense-including-2-Carriers&p=33812#post33812

[Spieler]

Intersting.... I just read about first flight of modernized B-1 FIDL (Fully Integrated Data Link) wich was on the 4th of June. It shows that there is some other plans for B-1s instead of retirement.
May be both of them: some of the B-1s will be retired and some modernized so as to appear deeper cuts in the budgets can not avoid.

[bobdina]

Here's just a small part of what they want cut, this does not include the manning cut's putting the Army at 350,00 and the Marine Corps at 135,000 if kept at all. Including in the shipbuilding is cutting 2 carriers. When I can find an article that condeses all the cuts into one I will post it. They also want to cut the Boomer fleet in half.
Dems Planning $1 TRILLION in Defense Cuts

By Bob Ellis on June 11th, 2010

F-35 (Photo credit: Senior Airman Julius Delos Reyes)

If you lived in a dangerous neighborhood, would you more concerned about buying luxury items or about buying the things necessary to keep your property and your family safe?

The United States Constitution authorizes a few specific powers to the federal government. Those enumerated powers are found in Article 1 Section 8.

While you will not find authorization there for the unconstitutional social programs which consume about 50% of our annual budget, you will find authorization for national defense.

It only makes sense that a national government would have the authority to defend its citizens from hostile attack. While the founders of the United States understood very well the need for personal responsibility and that an overly-powerful government is a threat to the freedom of its own people, they also understood that there are many nations in the world who from time to time will want to take what we have, or at the very least will want to prevent us from protecting our interests worldwide.

The world in which we live is one where the United States has interests across the globe. We are dependent on oil from other countries (especially since environmental extremists here hinder our ability to produce our own energy), and we are dependent on goods and natural resources from other countries (because liberals here have diminished our ability to produce our own goods and utilize our own natural resources). In maintaining stable access to the things we need, it is also in our interest to cultivate and maintain allies worldwide. Some of the people that hate us also hate our allies, and when you have allies, you have to be prepared to go to the mat to defend them as well.

Understanding all these things, it is very disturbing when we see our government hell-bent on spending trillions of dollars on things our Constitution does not authorize, and seek to spend even more trillions than we already are. Beyond that, it is downright frightening to see on the other hand our leaders hell-bent on diminishing our already overstretched military capabilities.

We can’t claim we weren’t warned about the current crop of rogues we’ve elected, though. For decades the Democrat Party has been friendly with America’s enemies and has been hostile to U.S. national security. And our current Commander in Chief made it clear during the 2008 campaign that he planned to gut our military.

What’s done is done, electorally speaking, but we the American people are left to deal with the dangers we face today, and we find ourselves fighting our own leaders to keep our nation safe. Liberals in congress want to cut missile defense even as the threat of missile attack grows, they want to cut development of the next generation of heavy bomber, and the decision has already been made to cut production of the most advanced fighter in the world…one the communist Chinese hope to rival in about eight years.

USS Ronald Reagan (Photo credit: PH3 Aaron Burden, USN)

Now The Hill reports the Sustainable Defense Task Force headed by Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) wants to cut defense spending by $1 TRILLION over the next 10 years. These cuts would include reductions in the new F-35 fighter force (an already pale imitation of the F-22), reducing the Navy from the 313-ship force the Navy desires to a 230-ship one, cutting our nuclear missile arsenal, our bomber force, the new air refueling project, and other defense options.

If Democrats truly care about cutting a trillion dollars to protect the interests of the American taxpayer, they could cut out all the unconstitutional social spending in the federal budget and save not $1 trillion in 10 years, but more than $1 trillion in ONE YEAR. But it isn’t really about saving money.

This proposal is like the parents of several small children who live in a bad neighborhood who decide to get rid of the bars on the windows, the home security system, and leave the doors unlocked…while they plan to spend more money on booze and crack. Our leaders want to leave us more vulnerable in a dangerous world, while they spend the taxpayer’s money on illegitimate items that only make the American people more dependent.

I can’t say this often enough: America, we have to change the balance of power drastically in Congress in November so that we can not only avoid national bankruptcy, but keep our nation safe from the multiple threats around the world. Let’s get busy supporting good candidates, patriots!

[Spieler]

I'll follow this. What is EFV?

[bobdina]

The Marine corps new Expeditionary fighting vehicle .I have posted the rest in the general military forum (why, I have no Idea) it also gives a link to the full report.

[Reactor-Axe-Man]

I remember reading about one of Michael Yon's embeds with the Brits in A-stan. He was talking to a Brit FAC and asked him what his favorite air support platform was to call on in the event they needed help. The Brit's response: The BONE (B-1B). It had a huge bombload that could carry a variety of weapons so they could tailor their strike to meet the needs of the guys on the ground, they had a long loiter time, and their supersonic speed allowed them to get on station from clear across the country within minutes of being tasked.

Yeah, let's bury the Bone. Thank you, you stupid useless incompetent cocksuckers in our government.

The worst of this is, even if we vote these scrubber-loads out of office, it will take years to undo the damage they plan on doing to our national defense.