Moving Beyond the F22

Gee, that almost sounds like the unbiased views of two guys who serve at the pleasure of someone who wants to emasculate the DoD budget.

As another blogger noted today, the tagline on the column is incomplete. It should read, Michael Donley is secretary of the Air Force. Gen. Norton Schwartz is chief of staff of the Air Force. Both gentlemen owe their jobs to the fact that Secretary Gates fired their predecessors for advocating additional F-22's.

Here's an interesting take on the F22:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/Hugh-Hewitt/Trillions-for-pork-but-nothing-for-the-Raptors-42891817.html

Somehow I feel I've been transported back to 1936.

We the Combat Pilots of the USAF and our Combat requirement for equipment were sold out last Monday in exchange for keeping their jobs with Gates. Justified by actual lies and exaggeration about how facts changed and new things came to light. My response to "Judas" Schwartz and "Brutus" Donley: Thanks for abandoning your men and women.

183 versus the Peoples Air Force?? I don't think so. We need an effective fighter that is cost effective (a concept the Pentagon can not grasp) like Swedens Gripen(not saying we need it only as an example). The JSF has limited A2A capability unlike the F-16 and F/A-18s it will replace.

Our defense industry has made a mockery of of our avaiation resources we once had. Its down to three choices. GD, LM, and Boeing (who is bascially out of the fighter business).

Maybe UCAVs are our only future option. In the end its sad that I can build a football stadium cheaper than we can build fighters.