Air Force News, news from Iraq - Air Force Times

Panel funds B-52s but not more airmen

The Senate Armed Services Committee’s version of the fiscal 2009 defense spending bill appears to be a mixed bag for the Air Force.

The bill — approved unanimously May 1 — includes funding for more B-52s and seeks to overcome delays in the next-generation communications satellite program, but sets the service’s end-strength at 316,771 rather than the desired 330,000. The bill also defers a decision on whether to buy more F-22s and directs the Air Force to improve nuclear-weapons security and long-term aviation planning.

Senate committee members also approved start-up funding for the new tanker program, despite threats from some House members to withhold funding because of the controversial decision to award the $40 billion deal to a coalition of Northrop and European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co. rather than to Boeing.

The bill — which weighs in at $612.5 billion for the entire Defense Department — also includes an across-the-board pay raise of 3.9 percent.

But the measures are still far from becoming law. The House Armed Services Committee is expected to announce its version of the bill later this week, and then both the full Senate and House must pass the bills. The differences in the bills will then be worked out in conference.

While fiscal 2009 begins Oct. 1, Congress usually is unable to finalize the spending bill until fall or winter.

Money for aircraft, not people

The Air Force got snubbed on its unfunded request for $385 million to allow it to maintain an active-duty force of around 330,000 airmen rather than draw down to 316,771. That means the drawdown will proceed on schedule in 2009 unless the House acts to add funding.

Senators added $96.9 million to the Air Force budget to fund B-52 flying hours and modernization for a fleet of 76 aircraft rather than the current fleet of 56 common-configuration aircraft.

The additional B-52s are needed because of the Air Force’s decision to segregate its nuclear and non-nuclear bomber missions and add an additional squadron, as well as to meet a requirement in the fiscal 2008 National Defense Authorization Act that it modernize the aircraft.

The Air Force requested $183.1 million in its unfunded priorities list to upgrade and operate the additional 20 aircraft, but the Senate committee added only a little more than half that.

The bill also adds $350 million to the Air Force’s $843 million budget request for the transformational communications satellite program, or TSAT. The addition will address program delays caused by reduction in the budget request, according to a committee press release.

Senators provided $497 million to either buy more F-22s or to begin shutting down the production line, but the decision on which route to take will be up to the next president. The Air Force has committed to buying 183 F-22s — the final 20 of which are to be bought in 2009 — but service leaders say they need 381.

The bill also adds $465 million to develop and buy an alternate engine for the F-35. Many lawmakers feel developing an alternate engine is necessary to reduce risk in the nearly $1 trillion program, which includes the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps and eight foreign nations.

On the policy side, senators took aim at the way the Air Force handles nuclear weapons. In August, six nuclear-armed cruise missiles were accidentally flown aboard a B-52 aircraft, which led to the sacking of a wing commander and a blue ribbon commission investigation. And in March it came to light that nuclear warhead fuses had mistakenly been sent from the U.S. to Taiwan in 2006.

The Senate bill directs the Air Force to come up with a plan to improve nuclear security and says nuclear weapons management needs greater attention.

The bill also would amend Title 10 of the U.S. Code — which governs the armed forces — to require a long-range aviation plan for the nation that would address future inventory issues before they become a crisis like the one the Air Force currently faces because of aging aircraft.