Originally Posted by
Entropy
Van,
We are talking about how to bridge a temporary gap in the number of available airframes, nothing more. If you think we don't need so many aircraft/squadrons, then that is a different argument to make. The number of flying squadrons is already being, and has already been, reduced, as has the number of F-22's.
That cut in F-22's is going to be "made-up-for" with F-35's - IOW, the we are going to buy more of those instead of F-22's. The fighter requirements did not change, only the platform to meet those requirements. The problem is that the F-35 isn't in production yet, while the F-22 is about to go out of production and that is really what's creating the gap - Aircraft (f-22's) that were going to be built from 2010-2014 are being replaced with F-35's that won't be built until after 2014 (my dates are estimates, I don't have the precise figures), hence creating a gap as older aircraft are retired.
Think of it this way: The Army is going to replace it's main battle tank. Because of whatever reason, many old tanks will reach the end of their service lives before a replacement becomes available. This obviously leads to a temporary shortage of tanks for armor units. So, what do you do? Do you refurbish some of the old tanks to keep them running for longer until production of the new tank catches up? Do you just live with fewer tanks for a few years? Or what? You probably wouldn't consolidate the tanks into fewer units, disestablish those units without tanks, and then reestablish them when production of the new tank catches up.
It's simple math...
Bookmarks