U.S. Lawmakers Nix Light-Attack Aircraft Proposal – Defense News


U.S. lawmakers continue to reject the Pentagon’s attempts to deploy light-attack aircraft to Afghanistan as part of a combat experiment.

The House Appropriations and Armed Services committees and Senate Armed Services Committee rejected a $17 million U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) request for the Combat Dragon II program, according to a Pentagon reprogramming document.

via U.S. Lawmakers Nix Light-Attack Aircraft Proposal – Defense News. The HASC and SASC are digging around in a $17 million program? Really?

Would one of you smart guys (or gals) out there look up who sits on the committees? See how many members are from Kansas?

About these ads

7 Comments

Filed under ARMY TRAINING

7 responses to “U.S. Lawmakers Nix Light-Attack Aircraft Proposal – Defense News

  1. Just one, Kevin Yoder, (R), House Appropriations Committee

    Like

  2. Byron

    You’d think that a) 17 mil is peanuts and b) Afghanistan is the perfect place for the test to validate the concept. This would lead one to believe that someones ox got gored and is wanting their rice bowl to get filled.

    Like

  3. Grumpy

    OK, from what Department of Defense budget, are they supposed to get this money from? We would like to think everything is important, but as a Nation, we know, everything can’t be important.

    Like

  4. Dave

    Light Attack went out years ago. If it involves little jets or propellers neither the USAF nor the USN are interested. Of course the Army is interested but they can’t sell it because it is a fixed wing attack airplane that should be owned by the other services. They want big, multi-purpose (read force multiplier) fighters.

    Like

    • Byron

      Which is all the more reason to tell the AF to piss off and say good by to Key West. Oh, by the way, transfer the Warthog wings and personnel to us and we will appreciate the hell out of them.

      Like

    • “Us?”

      Heh. For a guy that owes his living to the Navy, that’s a mighty Army centric view!

      Like