I don't know anything about helicopters, but doesn't $265M each sound like a lot?!?!

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/02/02/marine....e.ap/index.html

-Steve

Great. You know what that money would do if they were to put it out for the frigin kids that are starving in our own country?

Fleet? How many damn choppers does he need? That is our tax dollars paying for his little fleet of helicopters, so does that mean I can go take one for a little flight from time to time?

well lessee - the article says the fleet remains in service about 50 years, which is 46 longer than the current president's term.

$6,1B / 50 is $120M/yr - or about $.50 a year for each of us. hard to get much of a helicopter ride for 50 cents.

it's not like there's one helicopter that flies around the country chasing "Air Force One." they're staged at bases around the country. it's a big country - you need a few.

if you think $120M is a lot for a year (which it is) add up what it costs to put on a national election to fill a vacancy...

It's all to expensive, it's easy to get that way, when you aren't spending your own money.

Liability is the problem... it's all insane.

I get mad at the gas pump that it says 'all taxes included'..



M

DO WE REALY NEED NEW ONES, WE STILL USE THE B52

JM

QUOTE (ArtechnikA @ Feb 2 2005, 03:11 PM)

it's not like there's one helicopter that flies around the country chasing "Air Force One." they're staged at bases around the country. it's a big country - you need a few. i

Actually, they pre-stage them as needed, or they did when I was working around the 89th MAW doing my USAF photo duties back in the Nixon era. They don't just sit all over the country waiting a call. I wouldn't be surprised if they threw a couple on a C5 and hauled them along wherever the Prez goes .......................... As for "50 years", I didn't see that in the article. Not a whole lot of 50 year old airframes in the active inventory, other than the B52s, and most of those have undergone so much rebuilding they're hardly the same aircraft they were when they left the factory. The Cap'n

QUOTE (Cap'n Krusty @ Feb 2 2005, 08:53 PM)

Not a whole lot of 50 year old airframes in the active inventory, other than the B52s, and most of those have undergone so much rebuilding they're hardly the same aircraft they were when they left the factory. The Cap'n

The T-37, , is still in use today as a usaf pilots first jet and they were built pre 1950.

T-37s have killed more astronauts than the space program... I'll bet.


M

QUOTE (redshift @ Feb 2 2005, 09:11 PM)

T-37s have killed more astronauts than the space program... I'll bet. M

I don't think the T-37 killed any Astronauts. If they are in pilot training, they ain't astronauts yet!!!!

For a long while, the AF used the T-37 as a taxi, and I don't recall names, but I know a couple guys at least in the 60s were lost in separate accidents in FLA.

Lots of big named aces too.


Oops... T-38..

Charles Arthur Bassett II, Elliott E. See, Jr., Theodore Cordy Freeman, Iven Carl Kincheloe, Jr, Brian Joseph James... these are the ones on the first page I googled with T-38.

M

*^#* the president! They can charter an Alaska Air Econo jet, and rent a Hertz for the rest of the way! Hire some good makeup artists to conseal his identity, and make Bush and the rest of the *^#*ing government leaders REALLY know what its like to be an "average american"!!! If your too good to travel Alasken, then you don't need to fly! You can walk!

Oops, sorry guys, its the talking.

Just so you realize what we're talking about here. It is a BIG Son of a gun.

The thing is the Marines will be taking care of these birds. So they'll be around for a while. Y'all are forgeting about the CH-46's, the Hueys and Cobras, they've been around for around 40-50 years.
--Alex

Actually, the T 37 entered the inventory in 1955, making it just at 50 years. Didn't realize they still used them. Effective little close air support AC in Viet Nam. The airframes have been "kitted", much like the B52s, according to the official data. BTW, the Astronauts fly the T38, approaching 46 years old. Looks like The Cap'n spoke too soon. My apologies, Rich. The VH3D was phased in as Marine 1 from 1974 to 1976, a few years after I left the AF. Because of the low hours on each airframe, it is entirely possible they're still flying the original aircraft after 30 years. But not 50......... The Cap'n

But the real question that needs to be answered is... Do they NEED to have new ones? Want... sure, i woun't argue that. If he NEEDS a new set of helicopters, his party can buy them, cause I didn't see the box on the ballet with a discription: "President's new heli fleet" [ ] Yay [X] Nay

T-37s (tweety birds) are being phased out as we speak. I worked on 37b's At laughlin and A37's at Takhli. We had 38's at Laughlin too. Lost a lot of them, but no 37's in the three years I was there. I do remember seeing a T-37 with NASA painted on the tail.

I always get things mixed up.




M

I have crewed an H-3 (VH-1) in HMX-1 I was attached nthere for 6 months in the 90's as a Marine.

Thats the best damn Helo ever built.

They are making a HUGE mistake! I think we'll end up with another damn V-22 Osprey- a big piece of shit.

The V-22 is the only reason I got out of the Marine- After one flight on the bastard I saw my life flash in fron of my eyes and re-enlistment was out of the picture! The V-22 was the replacement for the CH-46 (that was what I primarily crewed and wrenched on in the Marines) and the 46 still beats it! The NEWEST 46 I worked on was a 1967!!!!!

That H-3 will still be flying when the new piece of shit is junk....

I'll post some pics of the inside of one if I get a chance and there are a couple of pics of them on my site under my bio page..

Everything on the VH-1 (Marine 1) is scheduled at 1/2 life. That means a 10 hour inspection done in the fleet would be a 5hr inspection on a VH-1... A part that has a 200 hour life in the fleet is tossed away at 100 hours, etc. etc.

I hated it at HMX because all we did was BS work and polish shit and take Helos apart and put them back together moving the aircraft.....

What you guys don't realize is that everytime the Pres. goes somewhere out of the country a C-5 Galaxy gets there a week before he does with a half squadron of Marines and 5 of those VH-1s all disassembled in the belly of the C-5. The planes are rolled out and assembled while inside a security perimeter. No pics are allowed to be taken and no one is allowed in the hangar without security clearance.

As for being "Staged" they are not just positioned throughout the country waiting to haul Bushy around.....

Makes you wonder how I got pics, Clinton's Coffee cup and a pair of Shot glasses etched with the Presidential Seal.....

What sucks is the crew may only fly the President 50 miles for all that damn work! Then tear everything down, pack it all back up on the C-5 and do it somewhere else a few days later.

It sucked ass, I was glad to be working on all the old aircraft with bullet holes in them from Nam after that! I think the worst part was having to "Play" like you are a Marine all the time. Unifom inspections twice a week got really old for an engine mechanic working 12 hour shifts. It was good for the resume though.... maybe some day it'll count for something.

Wow, thanks for the post Jake. I'll have to warn a few people that are trying to go to HMX..... Didn't realize ther ewas that much more BS than in a MALS.
--Alex

To keep this in perspective.
When Slick Willie went to China, my son was part of the support team. As I recall, there were something like 15 C5 loads of shittage that went with him. Cost (just for the AF) was something over $150M.

The cost of the choppers don't bother me. The fact that the airframes are gonna be made in Europe *really* pisses me off.

So the prez's own party should pay for the choppers? Did the democrates pay for Clintons or Carters fleet? I think not.

The choppers they have been using have been determined to be too old. I do not know all the facts, but suspect that security concerns with shoulder launched missles might be one factor, maybe the new chopper is safer, faster???

As far as putting a prez on a commercial flight, i believe it was done when i was a kid, I recall that Nixon once used a commercial flight, it was in the news, the reporters interviewed the peopele that flew with him, it was a big deal. The Secret Service however did NOT like the risk, so I think that they pretty much nix'd that idea (no pun intended)

Since we are talking political parties paying for expenses, was it not Clinton who held up Air Force One for a hair cut or something, that caused a big delay for all the other flights at a busy airport.

Whether Democrat or Republican, the President gets flown, and driven around at tax payer expense, and in the safest manner possible. It costs a bunch of money, but in the big budget it is only a drop.

As far as money to feed the starving children in this nation, I have yet in America seen a starving American child. Why can't the family feed its own kids?
Hell there are people on food stamps with newer cars, big screen TV's, cable subscriptions, and they have a four pack a day smoking habit. Guess they need food stamps to buy the kids food, except for lunch, and breakfast, which are now served at taxpayer expense in some schools, mainly in poorer areas.
Starvation in America, no it is not a problem. Besides, any government program to feed folks is so top heavy with buracracy, that much of the money never will put food in truely starving childrens bellies, that is if they could find them.

Go to the Sudan, or Ethiopia, and see real starvation (caused in the most part by there own governments attempt to kill or control the citizens)

Democrats ought to want a good safe aircraft for Bush, cause those aircraft will be there for likely the next half dozen presidential terms, and could well be flying a Democrat prez sometime. (god forbid!)

I also recall Clinton seemed to show up in person at just about every disaster, fire, hurricane, etc in order to show that he feels our pain. so much for conserving flight time for critical government bussiness, but hey, thats part of politics.

So it is a european airframe, i hope the engines are US built?????

We all are tax payers, and every one has a differnet idea of how the money should be spent, I really rather not have my tax money go to social insecurity, medicare, the senor drug program, large stadiums built at our local schools (which then complain they cannot pay teachers) I see no reason to subsidize Amtrack, or pay farmers not to produce crop. I want my money spent on defense, bombs, missles, tanks, ships, aircraft, so that no one dare attack us, and if they do, they will all be dead. I want the freeways widened to handle the traffic, that would be a good use of money, save many folk many hours of wasted time

So we reach a democratic medium, some believe in giving money to the poor with taxes, others do not

Our government does have a good defense, best in the world, and must stay that way, we also have lots of programs that I disagree with, but others do agree with. I like defense, others like farm subsidies, so we get both, and everyone is happy (or everyone is pissed off, depends on how you look at it)

What ever happened to "no politics" in the forums?

Just not going to go there

QUOTE (cmolina @ Feb 8 2005, 03:17 PM)

What ever happened to "no politics" in the forums?

a selected few prefer to ignore the "no politics" advice ...

maybe they can't read?
Andy