$26 Billion Spent Developing The F/A-22 And We're Going To The Moon On 12?

[jayfish]

What a joke. Sorry, but not going anywhere. For all of the folks who don't know what an F/A-22 is let me explain. The F/A-22 the US's, next generation, multi-role (land attack/air defense)aircraft. Here is the kicker, they have not even gone into production yet. The total, planned, cost for the program is $69 billion. That’s for a machine that will never leave (or re-enter) the atmosphere and before cost overruns are added to the mix. How in the hell are we going to get to the moon on $10 billion? We're not. Here are some other points of reference. Airbus plans to spend $10.5 billion developing their new jumbo jet. The B2 bomber costs $1.29(est.) to 3.5(est.) billion per copy and 30 billion(est.) to develop. This sham is a diversion and I can't imagine why everyone is so gleeful about these announcements. Hey, I'm all for the exploration of space, but only if it is real.


F/A-22

Airbus A380

B-2

B-2

Jay

[RobertSeattle]

1. Agreed

I think the initial Space Station estimate was 8 Billion and that was for a humongous space station. 15 years later, we have a 100 Billion dollar space station that's like 1/4 of the original plan.

But we have a President with a (R) next to his name so it's not pandering, a boondoggle, or a job program - No Sir!

The Deficit and Spend GOP Congress will slurp this up, especially if the $$$ is going to their districts. (Say, is Johnson Space Center in Delay's district?)

[mouse7]

2. Agreed... space is a better program under honest Dems

We should just be happy something distracted Chimpy from shock and awe-ing something for a full business day yesterday.

[opihimoimoi]

3. Hey, those Bradleys weren't cheap either. Cost 17 Billion to DEVELOPE

The Military Ind Complex/Space guys are the same, prone to Bleed whenever they can.

[PATRICK]

4. Can it achieve

any SDI goals or other defense related tomfoolery should they say- fall short of the moon? In all their prior speeches about space- and they were honestly enthusiastic then- it was all about wars in space, knocking down rivals' satellites, SDI etc. They even fantasized about space wars and the next frontier or war in space! They don't give a hoot what the pork contracts for hard science produce for other stuff.

Yet no reporter, and worse, no Democrat is recalling those crazy space gun priorities(Cheney and others), and instead is taking the guff seriously and replaying the money vs. ideals arguments.

There are NO ideals, it is all war pork and political puff. Bush's new conversion to champion of exploration and destiny is shallower than a Texas river in summer. I understand it is not polite or politic to call him on it, but from what I hear the simpletons of the investigative press and Congress really don't suspect a thing despite all the consistent record.

They fall for it every time. It isn't God protecting him, it's our foolishness.

[recidivist]

5. Actually, going to the moon is easier.

This is only half tongue-in-cheek, and I'm not going to get into an argument about development cost estimates because those numbers aren't worth the paper they're printed on.

But as a practical matter, we should recognize that going to the moon is a much easier technical assignment than building the F-22. For one thing, we've been to the moon before, and the nature of the enterprise hasn't changed. Space launches are now routine. Once you get out of the atmosphere, you are floating through the big empty, and getting to the moon and back is primarily a fairly trivial endurance problem. In short, there are no big technological hurdles to overcome, and no one is shooting at you.

What makes military R&D so tricky is that you are trying to build equipment to dominate in combat against possible enemies who themselves are experimenting with new countermeasures. Further, since technology changes so rapidly, any major weapons system is going to be redesigned several times over before it even reaches the testing phase. Then it gets redesigned some more.

One can make a serious argument for larger numbers of less sophisticated weapons. We could also reduce the technical challenges by pushing things into production faster, provided we were willing to retire and replace them faster as well. But that implies larger force structures, higher operating and training costs, a willingness to accept higher casualties in the event of war, and a standing commitment to much more rapid fleet replacement schedules for ships, planes, and combat vehicles. All of that is expensive.

Instead, we have tended to push the technological envelope as far as we can, develop weapons that are decades ahead of the rest of the world, and then use them for ridiculously long periods of time. We are now flying 50 year old combat aircraft (B-52s), for Pete's sake!

Either way, it costs money. IMO, we probably overpay on R&D because we tend to underfund fleet modernization and force size.

[cthrumatrix]

6. see how you can analyze and ask ???'s -- but the media WILL NOT

[Monte Carlo]

7. $12 TRILLION is a more realistic number.

... and I am not even joking. If the moon was 1 inch away, Mars would be 17 feet away. Getting manned missions to Mars is going to take the development of whole new technologies - propulsion, life support, shielding, the works. I'd feel hopeful about it if I wasn't so convinced Bush was mentioning Mars just to control the headlines, divert money to his campaign contributors and other friends, or militarize space.

[KG]

8. it's all BS.

just like every other announcement from the chimp its all talk and no funding. it's just a PR stunt.

watch, this space program will go nowhere.

[Selwynn]

9. I'm not for our exorbitant defense spending.... but......

The F/A-22 sure is an amazing an gorgeous plane. :D

[zbdent]

10. What, you've never heard of outsourcing?

We'll have the rockets made by Chinese prisoners, using the steelmaking machinery bought by the Chinese (from the US failed steel companies) shipped over to the mainland.

The software running the computers will be developed in India.

Ships registered in the Bahamas will be used to transport the rocket parts from China to Mexican ports.

Mexican trucks will ship all the parts to the southern states.

Ameritemps will provide the warm bodies used to make sure the screensavers don't kick in too often in the presence of the TV cameras recording the events.

[Superfly]

11. $26 Billion spent on the most technologically advanced fighter

ever, but they had to go to home depot for the Air Conditioning?

[Snivi Yllom]

12. Maybe when they land on the Moon..

they will find the WMDs!