Originally Posted By ActionJack

Originally Posted By GDS_Starfury

Ive read a bunch about the US using retired Harriers as spare parts

Ive also seen a lot of articles about that F-18 program.

I can also see the Navy and Marines using older, lower hour airframes in service while the more modern stuff gets rebuilt.

Well it looks like the Navy will have that but from what I'm hearing, there's doubt the Marine Corps will get any new stuff.  They don't use E,F, or G model F/A-18; and it must be remembered that close air support is the hallmark of the Corps and an afterthought with the Air Force.  The Navy didn't buy into the 'LITENING Pod' which was so indepensible for the war efforts that maintenance status was updated and checked daily at the general staff level and that included deployed assets too.  The Marine Corps F35 version looks like it will be a victim of the budget axe.  We'll see, but there's reason for concern all around.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LITENING_targeting_pod

AJ, do you think the MC is going to have to eventually suck it up and accuire some E/F/G model superbugs or will the Harriers we just bought from the UK keep at least their birds in the air until a new aircraft can be developed???  I have heard many rumors of the Air Force considering purchaces of new F-15E and F-16 aircraft. I find it kind of sad that other nations use versions of the F-16 that are, from all outside observations, more capable then our own. I would love to see some Block 60 F-16Cs in USAF service, but the new budget doesn't seem to make room for anything new. I am from Maine, and we just had the keel laying ceremony for the new DDG-1000 Zumwalt class stealth destroyer. While I love the advance in tech, I think 9 more DDG-51 Flight IIAs would have been a better buy then 3 Zumwalts, and when thinking of taking on China, quality and quantity are a must. I remember in 05 I asked the CSM about his thought on China. He told me that we plain old just don't have enough bullets. Our C3 capability was much better, which is a force multiplier, but the sheer numbers would rule out a continental invasion.

Ive never read anything from anyone from any military about invading China.

its all about keeping them contained.

currently China is butting heads against Vietnam, India, Japan, the Phillipenes and the US.

India and China are currently playing one-up-manship along their border with troop deployments.

Vietnam is getting all gung ho about kicking the Chinese out of their fishing areas.

Japan is not to happy about where and what the PLAAN is doing in its backyard.

everyone is pissed at them over the Spratleys.

there may not be a unified force against the Chinese but everyone in the region is willing to nibble at the edges and

that thins out the Chinese ability to concentrate an overwhelming force.

^ GDS is spot on with that part of the analysis.  Believe me, the situation is not as rosy in China as some would believe... if it was, then go and invest $$$ there - good luck!

I also agree with AJ on the airframes getting old.  It is a problem up here in Canada as well (and we're pretty puny).

this is from today:

A picture taken from a South Korean helicopter shows Chinese boats banded together with ropes, chased by a coastguard helicopter and rubber boats pacted with commandoes, after alleged illegal fishing in South Korean waters in the Yellow Sea off the southwestern coast county of Buan. South Korea's coastguard mobilised 12 ships, four helicopters and commandoes for a special three-day crackdown on illegal fishing by Chinese boats this week.

A picture taken on November 16, 2011 from a South Korean helicopter shows Chinese fishermen wielding sticks to stop an attack by South Korean coastguard commandoes armed with clubs aboard rubber boats during a crackdown on alleged illegal fishing in South Korean waters in the Yellow Sea off the southwestern coast county of Buan. South Korea's coastguard mobilised 12 ships, four helicopters and commandoes for a special three-day crackdown on illegal fishing by Chinese boats this week.

Looks like they need Brian Tobin (see the Turbot Wars)

Originally Posted By Stryker07

Originally Posted By ActionJack

Originally Posted By GDS_Starfury

Ive read a bunch about the US using retired Harriers as spare parts

Ive also seen a lot of articles about that F-18 program.

I can also see the Navy and Marines using older, lower hour airframes in service while the more modern stuff gets rebuilt.

Well it looks like the Navy will have that but from what I'm hearing, there's doubt the Marine Corps will get any new stuff.  They don't use E,F, or G model F/A-18; and it must be remembered that close air support is the hallmark of the Corps and an afterthought with the Air Force.  The Navy didn't buy into the 'LITENING Pod' which was so indepensible for the war efforts that maintenance status was updated and checked daily at the general staff level and that included deployed assets too.  The Marine Corps F35 version looks like it will be a victim of the budget axe.  We'll see, but there's reason for concern all around.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LITENING_targeting_pod

 

AJ, do you think the MC is going to have to eventually suck it up and accuire some E/F/G model superbugs or will the Harriers we just bought from the UK keep at least their birds in the air until a new aircraft can be developed???  I have heard many rumors of the Air Force considering purchaces of new F-15E and F-16 aircraft. I find it kind of sad that other nations use versions of the F-16 that are, from all outside observations, more capable then our own. I would love to see some Block 60 F-16Cs in USAF service, but the new budget doesn't seem to make room for anything new. I am from Maine, and we just had the keel laying ceremony for the new DDG-1000 Zumwalt class stealth destroyer. While I love the advance in tech, I think 9 more DDG-51 Flight IIAs would have been a better buy then 3 Zumwalts, and when thinking of taking on China, quality and quantity are a must. I remember in 05 I asked the CSM about his thought on China. He told me that we plain old just don't have enough bullets. Our C3 capability was much better, which is a force multiplier, but the sheer numbers would rule out a continental invasion.

My understanding is that the E,F, and G models are not available for the Marine Corps; that boat has already sailed.  I had heard that EA-6B will be replaced with the F/A-18 variant.  The problem for the Harriers is that the airframes are too worn; the aircraft has been extended many times already.  They were really counting on the F35.  As bad as fixed wing aircraft community is suffering, replacement for the workhorse CH-53E has really been set back partly to avoid too much scrutiny of the Osprey.  Now that the Osprey is operational, the CH53x program will probably be derailed by the impending budget cuts.

I'm not very familiar at all with Air Force aircraft and am surprised to hear that there are superior versions of F-16s in foreign services.  The F-22 program cuts are going to bite us in the arse.  Mark my words!

Originally Posted By GDS_Starfury

Ive never read anything from anyone from any military about invading China.

its all about keeping them contained.

currently China is butting heads against Vietnam, India, Japan, the Phillipenes and the US.

India and China are currently playing one-up-manship along their border with troop deployments.

Vietnam is getting all gung ho about kicking the Chinese out of their fishing areas.

Japan is not to happy about where and what the PLAAN is doing in its backyard.

everyone is pissed at them over the Spratleys.

there may not be a unified force against the Chinese but everyone in the region is willing to nibble at the edges and

that thins out the Chinese ability to concentrate an overwhelming force.

Accurate observation but the U.S. is the lynchpin.  Any faltering of U.S. resolve and the whole thing unravels; they'll all be running over each other to cut a deal.  I have to admit that the Chinese have been very savvy in concentrating on countering U.S. dominance in their regional waters.  They are exhibiting a narrowly focused discipline in attaining a single simple goal.  We have had our concentration elsewhere.  One TV show had a line that said it best:  "All you have to be is just a little bit too slow; a little bit too late and how are you going to never be too slow or too late."

well its seems obama and the SecDef are at least on the same page and looking at whats going to be important after A-stan.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/17/us-usa-panetta-threats-idUSTRE7AG2H520111117

as an aside its interesting to note that as I was shopping for clothes last week the places of manufacture were Vietnam, Indonesia and other SW Pacific locations and none were Chinese.

Originally Posted By GDS_Starfury

as an aside its interesting to note that as I was shopping for clothes last week the places of manufacture were Vietnam, Indonesia and other SW Pacific locations and none were Chinese.

There's hope yet!

China has very good online store where some beautiful high heels can be purchased

The online store very big in the transsexual community because of the reasonable prices and quality shoes.

The store/site:

Yu Stin Ki Pu   .com

I knew, with absolute certainty, that if I posted something about clothes that you would chime in.

some women are sooo predictable.

though I did expect you to complain I wasnt buying Italian clothing

heres another story from the SW Pacific.  Austrailia basicly tells China to f*** off.

http://www.defencetalk.com/australia-tells-china-not-to-interfere-38378/

What can I say?

I am a chime.

Star say's, "clothes make the man!"

Originally Posted By GDS_Starfury

as an aside its interesting to note that as I was shopping for clothes last week the places of manufacture were Vietnam, Indonesia and other SW Pacific locations and none were Chinese.

As I've mentionned before.  A lot of the cheap stuff is heading south.  Manufacturing is just cheaper there (and there is more people willing to work the wages).  Clothes factories have closed in mainland china (the coast) because they have to pay higher wages and insurance.  Now I'm talking about clothes.  I know they still make Apple stuff on mainland.  

The govt in China knows this and is trying to move a lot of production into the interior (where the migrant workers come from).  I've heard they figure they will work there for lower wages because it's closer to home (who knows...). 

They'll be paying lots of taxes for their old soviet fleet.  I hope they work out the bugs in 30 years, and I'm sure every aging fleet has them.   That's what the support and lifecycle extension programs are for.  The thing is, the soviet carrier in particular has been around for how long?

Originally Posted By endfire79

Originally Posted By GDS_Starfury

as an aside its interesting to note that as I was shopping for clothes last week the places of manufacture were Vietnam, Indonesia and other SW Pacific locations and none were Chinese.

 

As I've mentionned before.  A lot of the cheap stuff is heading south.  Manufacturing is just cheaper there (and there is more people willing to work the wages).  Clothes factories have closed in mainland china (the coast) because they have to pay higher wages and insurance.  Now I'm talking about clothes.  I know they still make Apple stuff on mainland.  

The govt in China knows this and is trying to move a lot of production into the interior (where the migrant workers come from).  I've heard they figure they will work there for lower wages because it's closer to home (who knows...). 

 

They'll be paying lots of taxes for their old soviet fleet.  I hope they work out the bugs in 30 years, and I'm sure every aging fleet has them.   That's what the support and lifecycle extension programs are for.  The thing is, the soviet carrier in particular has been around for how long?

 

 

Yeah, the high-tech/expensive stuff is really taking a hit with the budget cuts. It seems a little dumb to be slashing our military while everyone who we could potentialy face in a conflict is arming thieirs at alarming rates of speed. None the less, any conflict in Asia would be reliant on Naval and  Air power, and these are two areas that aren't getting all that bad. The main problem we face is the protracted development of the F-35. The US and many of out allies have put all our eggs in the F-35 basket, and it's looking like that might have been a mistake. A carrier is just a floating hole in the ocean into which money is poured without the aircraft on her decks to make her a potent weapon. We have designed our naval doctrine around the Aircraft Carrier and the Nuclear Submarine. Our subs are top notch, and that is IMHO the area in which we are strongest and provides the most effective deterrent. Our naval Aviation capability is unmatched, but our aircraft are old and not of the newest generation. To say the Superbug is a 5th gen fighter is a real stretch, I would say a 4.5 gen at best. It is more capable in terms of systems used and weapons it can employ, and it's legs are longer then the C series bugs, but that still isn't a real compliment. If our ability to refuel by air were disabled by enemy air or AD, we would have to get much closer then comfortable to be effective. Enemy SAM systems are getting better every year, and they are a much less expensive option then fielding a whole fleet of 5th Gen fighters, so there will be a lot more of them to contend with. The US congress really needs a reality check, dispense with the partisan BS, and get things under control!!!!

The only way to pay your debts, never mind buy new toys, is to print money.

I was told that doing so would be illegal.

Originally Posted By KevlarSocks

The only way to pay your debts, never mind buy new toys, is to print money.

There's no difference between austerity now or the slow drip, drip bleeding of the poor, and retirees later by devaluing currency.  Even if they just robbed all the rich of their income, savings, and property everyone will pay the price with lost jobs, lost potential jobs, and all the production of goods, like life-saving medicines, and services that those, who spend their brief time in the upper income brackets, generate.  The bottom line is there's no free lunch; the bill will be paid.

The Debate over Defense Spending

... In letters sent to Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) last week, Panetta detailed the danger of further defense cuts if the super committee fails to meet its target. Panetta said that under the worst-case scenario, “the total cut will rise to about $1 trillion compared with the FY 2012 plan,” which in practical terms means “the smallest ground force since 1940, the smallest number of  ships since 1915, and the smallest Air Force in its history.”

What’s more, as Panetta explained, the Pentagon would face the prospect of terminating the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter; littoral combat ship; all ground combat vehicle and helicopter modernization programs; European missile defense; all unmanned intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance systems. It may also have to delay the next-generation ballistic missile submarine; terminate next-generation bomber efforts; and eliminate the entire intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) leg of America’s nuclear “triad.”

This is the less drama version. Why would he send a letter to just those two?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15814600

For all our concern about the possible abuse of the Chinese communist system for the desires of a few leaders they seem to suddenly be quite responsible. What am I talking about? They have just commited to a trillion $ of domestic investment. China and the oil rich gulf states are the only ones with the ready cash to support their economies in continued recession. China seems to be choosing spending their mountain of cash to keep their economy afloat. They had to be pretty wise to get themselves into this position. The G7 in comparison look like twits. 

Originally Posted By KevlarSocks

This is the less drama version. Why would he send a letter to just those two?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15814600

 

For all our concern about the possible abuse of the Chinese communist system for the desires of a few leaders they seem to suddenly be quite responsible. What am I talking about? They have just commited to a trillion $ of domestic investment. China and the oil rich gulf states are the only ones with the ready cash to support their economies in continued recession. China seems to be choosing spending their mountain of cash to keep their economy afloat. They had to be pretty wise to get themselves into this position. The G7 in comparison look like twits. 

I don't know how wise they are, but like all command style economies, they've wasted billions on useless projects.  One city has high-speed rail, two airports and a highway system but no traffic to speak of using these systems.  It's Solyndra but on a much grander scale.  Arguably, adopting market solutions with so undeveloped a nation, what choices did they have but it's a suckers bet to believe they will pull it all off.  Friedman will, in his lifetime, eat his words.

Originally Posted By GDS_Starfury

Ive never read anything from anyone from any military about invading China.

its all about keeping them contained.

currently China is butting heads against Vietnam, India, Japan, the Phillipenes and the US.

India and China are currently playing one-up-manship along their border with troop deployments.

Vietnam is getting all gung ho about kicking the Chinese out of their fishing areas.

Japan is not to happy about where and what the PLAAN is doing in its backyard.

everyone is pissed at them over the Spratleys.

there may not be a unified force against the Chinese but everyone in the region is willing to nibble at the edges and

that thins out the Chinese ability to concentrate an overwhelming force.

Big Deal... they'll make an example out of one of the nations and the rest will fall in line quick enough after that happens....

then they'll have the opportunity to concentrate

In Italy, they've decided that politics is too serious a business to be left to politicians and the technocrats have taken over, in a cabinet where the PM is an economist, an admiral is defence secretary and the country's top banker is in charge of development and transport.

Think of a legal coup d'etat replacing Congress with Paul Krugman, Mike Mullen and Vikram Pandit. 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15814600

Hoover was a technocrat too so I think there's little reason for applause and every reason to look for the exits.  The best solution for Europe I've read so far is for Germany to abandon the Euro, go back to their DMs, then France, Italy and the rest can go ahead and devalue their currency, and inflate away their debts without taking the German citizens to the poor house.

Originally Posted By KevlarSocks

This is the less drama version. Why would he send a letter to just those two?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15814600

 

For all our concern about the possible abuse of the Chinese communist system for the desires of a few leaders they seem to suddenly be quite responsible. What am I talking about? They have just commited to a trillion $ of domestic investment. China and the oil rich gulf states are the only ones with the ready cash to support their economies in continued recession. China seems to be choosing spending their mountain of cash to keep their economy afloat. They had to be pretty wise to get themselves into this position. The G7 in comparison look like twits. 

given that they;

a/. started this from back in the stoneage economicly,

b/. their average standard of living and quality of life still sucks 

c/. they have only now started to really feel the consequences of most of their decisions...

China will not fare as well as many think they will. If we enter global stagflation and protectionism rises they will wilt.