USAF considers new anti-ship weapon.

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 10:02:07 -0700, (Harry
Andreas) wrote:

In article .com,
wrote:

The USAF is considering building a new weapon to go after heavily-
defended ships. See:


http://aviationnow.ecnext.com/free-s...icle=DEMO09135

Shouldn't the Navy be taking the lead on a project like this?

I detect the distinctive smell of marketing-types ghost writing that article.
While JASSM is a joint AF-Navy project, I was under the impression that
the Navy was considering pulling out of JASSM in favor of SLAM-ER, which
itself is a derivative of Harpoon.

IIRC the USN *has* pulled out of JASSM.

--
Peter Kemp

"Life is short...drink faster"

Peter Kemp wrote:
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 10:02:07 -0700, (Harry
Andreas) wrote:

I was under the impression that
the Navy was considering pulling out of JASSM in favor of SLAM-ER,
which itself is a derivative of Harpoon.

IIRC the USN *has* pulled out of JASSM.

Yes. JASSM was zero-funded in the Navy's FY 06 budget request, and I don't
think anyone put it back in the markup.

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"Our country, right or wrong. When right, to be kept right, when
wrong to be put right." - Senator Carl Schurz, 1872

Thomas Schoene wrote:

Yes. JASSM was zero-funded in the Navy's FY 06 budget request, and I don't
think anyone put it back in the markup.

Could be pay back for JSOW...

Michael Kelly
BUFF Flight Test Engineer

Michael Kelly wrote:

:Thomas Schoene wrote:
:
: Yes. JASSM was zero-funded in the Navy's FY 06 budget request, and I don't
: think anyone put it back in the markup.
:
:Could be pay back for JSOW...

Or could be they just don't need it. Already have SLAM-ER in
inventory for the JASSM mission and it's known to work.

Why commit the money for a paper weapon that the Navy doesn't need?

Hint: USN tried to withdraw from JASSM long before USAF zeroed JSOW
and were told they couldn't, so throw more money in the pot. After
USAF and JSOW and the continually rising cost for JASSM, it was harder
for Congress to tell the Navy 'No' the second time around.

--
"Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute."
-- Charles Pinckney