New Air Force cargo planes fly straight into mothballs

[rangerrebew]

New Air Force cargo planes fly straight into mothballs

Posted on October 7, 2013   

But we were told there is no waste left in government.
 
Check it out:


 The Pentagon is sending $50 million cargo planes straight from the assembly line to mothballs because it has no use for them, yet it still hasn’t stopped ordering the aircraft, according to a report.

A dozen nearly new Italian-built C-27J Spartans have been shipped to an Air Force facility in Arizona dubbed “the boneyard,” and five more currently under construction are likely headed for the same fate, according to an investigation by the Dayton Daily News. The Air Force has spent $567 million on 21 of the planes since 2007, according to purchasing officials at Dayton’s Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. Of those, 16 have been delivered – with almost all sent directly to Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, where some 4,400 aircraft and 13 aerospace vehicles, with a total value of more than $35 billion, sit unused.
 
The C-27J has the unique capability of taking off and landing on crude runways, Ethan Rosenkranz, national security analyst at the Project on Government Oversight, told the newspaper. But with sequestration dictating Pentagon cuts, the planes were deemed a luxury it couldn’t afford.


Continue Reading on www.foxnews.com ...

Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2013/10/new-air-force-cargo-planes-fly-straight-mothballs/#A34QpaksT1kUCZdx.99

[happyg]

I don't get it at all, since they are Italian made. Is this a backdoor way to help Italy's economy?

[Ford289HiPo]

Pork barrel spending. That's all it was.

[rangerrebew]

" I just got a face full of obama."

I have a beauty in the toilet each morning.

[Ford289HiPo]

" I just got a face full of obama."

I have a beauty in the toilet each morning.

LOL!

[Liberal_Spy]

It's a touchy subject, and I might get burned at the stake for this one, but there really is a lot of excess and unnecessary spending in the military. Russia, China, Europe, nobody even comes CLOSE when it comes to military spending. Our military is decades more advanced and more dangerous than any military on the planet. There is not a single force on the planet Earth that would stand a snowball's chance in hell against the United States military. China is only just now starting to produce stealth fighters. Nobody will ever, EVER be close to us, even if we cut spending in half.

[Ford289HiPo]

It's a touchy subject, and I might get burned at the stake for this one, but there really is a lot of excess and unnecessary spending in the military. Russia, China, Europe, nobody even comes CLOSE when it comes to military spending. Our military is decades more advanced and more dangerous than any military on the planet. There is not a single force on the planet Earth that would stand a snowball's chance in hell against the United States military. China is only just now starting to produce stealth fighters. Nobody will ever, EVER be close to us, even if we cut spending in half.

I would daresay that if Russia and China ever came together against the US, we'd be in a world of hurt. We can only produce so much technology, and it's a slow process. They, OTOH, have millions of peasants that can be quickly armed with rifles for human wave attacks. We saw it in Korea where massed Chinese human wave attacks would devastate our armored forces.

[EC]

Damn. Do you know what we would have given last month for just ONE of those things? Massive cargo capacity for their size, they can land pretty much anywhere and are ridiculously easy to fly, they pretty much fly themselves.

Of course, the story doesn't tell the whole story. The US government bought up the entire production run for three years, in order to prevent any "rogue states" from buying them. Iran would love to have a couple. Make it far easier to shuffle things around since they can land literally anywhere there is a flat surface.

[Liberal_Spy]

I would daresay that if Russia and China ever came together against the US, we'd be in a world of hurt. We can only produce so much technology, and it's a slow process. They, OTOH, have millions of peasants that can be quickly armed with rifles for human wave attacks. We saw it in Korea where massed Chinese human wave attacks would devastate our armored forces.

In a legitimate war we would absolutely decimate any standing armies. The Middle East wars are so unending because the rebels live among and are not distinguishable from the locals. We'd shoot pretty much anything headed toward us out of the sky before it even got close. Not to mention we are on the verge of a mechanized military. We are already seeing it with the drones.

[rangerrebew]

I would daresay that if Russia and China ever came together against the US, we'd be in a world of hurt. We can only produce so much technology, and it's a slow process. They, OTOH, have millions of peasants that can be quickly armed with rifles for human wave attacks. We saw it in Korea where massed Chinese human wave attacks would devastate our armored forces.

In Korea, they didn't even necessarily arm them.  In war if two militaries are the same size, the one with the larger number of people will always win.  If you are going to be a smaller military, you had darn well have far superior technology if you hope to win.  With Obama its hard to tell if the technology research is moving ahead or whether he's killing that too.  My guess is the research is going south just like the numbers of people. :peeonobama:

[Liberal_Spy]

In Korea, they didn't even necessarily arm them.  In war if two militaries are the same size, the one with the larger number of people will always win.  If you are going to be a smaller military, you had darn well have far superior technology if you hope to win.  With Obama its hard to tell if the technology research is moving ahead or whether he's killing that too.  My guess is the research is going south just like the numbers of people. :peeonobama:

The one constant regardless of who is in the White House is that the military gets unbelievable amounts of funding. This has not changed since Obama took office.

[Ford289HiPo]

The one constant regardless of who is in the White House is that the military gets unbelievable amounts of funding. This has not changed since Obama took office.

I agree on that point. I will never agree with fewer troops or we will eventually end up with a "Task Force Smith", but on a much larger scale. The military can downsize their huge procurement programs, and stop screwing up existing ones (ACU's anyone?). The F-35 is soup sandwich and way over-budget. Aircraft carriers are sitting at docks while more are being built. There are still fights about rifles and sidearms.............geez, pick something that has worked and stick with it.

I'll also go so far as to say we need to cut quite a few flag officer slots. There are way to many redundant "commands".

[Liberal_Spy]

I agree on that point. I will never agree with fewer troops or we will eventually end up with a "Task Force Smith", but on a much larger scale. The military can downsize their huge procurement programs, and stop screwing up existing ones (ACU's anyone?). The F-35 is soup sandwich and way over-budget. Aircraft carriers are sitting at docks while more are being built. There are still fights about rifles and sidearms.............geez, pick something that has worked and stick with it.

I'll also go so far as to say we need to cut quite a few flag officer slots. There are way to many redundant "commands".

I was in the military, and I'll tell you another big way money gets wasted. Each company is given X amount of funding to use for the year. What happens is if it is way more money than you needed, they'll cut some of it out for the next budget. To avoid this happening they will OK ridiculous spending on things they don't need at all, just so they can eat up all of the budget and not get it cut for the next year.

[Rapunzel]

Well son of a gun, I agree with that statement - however your statement is an argument for less government.. not more which is why current liberal philosophy calls for (unlike the original premise of liberalism which was much more conservative - aka "classical" liberalism).

[Ford289HiPo]

I was in the military, and I'll tell you another big way money gets wasted. Each company is given X amount of funding to use for the year. What happens is if it is way more money than you needed, they'll cut some of it out for the next budget. To avoid this happening they will OK ridiculous spending on things they don't need at all, just so they can eat up all of the budget and not get it cut for the next year.

Yep. That has been happening since the 70's. One year, the unit I was in decided to buy mops, buckets, yellow pads, pens, etc., to spend the rest of the money. It didn't take a mind reader, you could tell what the following fiscal years training was going to be like.