Bloomfield Hills, Mi (PressExposure) October 01, 2009 -- Among several items discussed in the Administration's 2010 Budget overview released this past Friday was Boeing's C-17 Globemaster III Strategic/Tactical airlifter, and yet again it has voiced a desire to shut down production of this critical aircraft citing "DoD analyses".
In clear indication of a last minute ramping up of efforts to terminate C-17 production, an amendment was issued on September 29 by those in opposition to the aircraft's continued existence.
"We were in full expectation of this move," says Myron D. Stokes, Managing Member of Global HeavyLift Holdings, LLC, a Florida incorporated, Bloomfield Hills, MI based DLA-listed firm (www.ccr.gov) , "And it is precisely why we restated our position via the 9/28 release.
"Since those opposed to C-17 continue to cite "internal DoD analyses" we ask, respectfully, that they produce same. We are, of course, cognizant of the fact that a certain mythological place of intense heat would be altered by cryogenic intervention before such data were produced. Short story: It does not exist."
An "Intellectual" Assault "What many who support C-17 don't really understand," says Stokes, "Is that an intellectual assault was launched against this aircraft beginning with the GAO and Congressionally debunked 2005/2006 Mobility Capabilities Studies (MCS) and the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) which repeated MCS assertions of there were 'enough' C-17s, coupled with ancient and notoriuously unreliable C-5 Galaxys. The GAO found the study analytics were profoundly flawed, and based on unsustainable, unrealistic conflict assumptions post 9/11.
"We must re-emphasize this is the only data to which opposition parties can be possibly referring.
"The brilliance of this type of assault," Stokes continued," is that it's is resistant, if not invulnerable, to typical responses. It must be understood that the only effective response is a response in kind. Meaning, it was most appropriate to craft and use the still officially unreleased Department of Commerce C-17 Industrial Base Impacts Study; it was approriate to present 'Transformational Recapitalization' architecture as a means to forever eliminate traditional budgetary wrangling; it was appropriate to highlight the findings of the McCaffrey Report. All of these documents resoundly neutralize the arguments of the SECDEF, the SECAF, the good Senator, and all those who are in support of this ill-advised activity againt C-17.
"We say again, these efforts are designed to make the world safe for retro-fitted C-5s and yet-to-fly Airbus/EADS A-400M, the latter of which EADS desperately hopes will be acquired by the USAF. Unfortunately, the only way that Lockheed-Martin and EADS will get their wish is if Boeing C-17, and perhaps Boeing itself (a very real possibility if the Tanker deal is given to the Europeans) is killed.
"An 'inconvenient truth', if you will."
The McCaffrey Report 2007 "As we noted in our May 28, 2009 release, C-17 is not only absolutely essential to current and anticipated force projection requirements in a world wherein conventional and asymmetric conflict potential exists concomitantly," said Stokes, "but to our plans implementing a US/NATO controlled Heavy and Outsized (HOM) industry utilizing modestly modified variants of this superlative airlifter.
"I daresay that data from several and quite significant resources, inclusive of the limited availability 2005/2006 Department of Commerce C-17 Industrial Base Impacts Study, strongly, if not overwhelmingly, suggests the direction and viewpoints articulated by our Washington colleagues relative to C-17's continued existence is at best flawed, and at worst, not reflective of the great responsibilities conferred upon them by the office in which they serve.
"It should be noted that while we have the greatest respect for the offices of the SECDEF, SECAF and those to whom they report, we feel it necessary to again invoke the wisdom, past and present, of DoD personnel such as the late VADM Arthur K. Cebrowski, whose vast experience and knowledge cannot be ignored. In this instance, we feel it appropriate to highlight the conclusions of decorated U.S. Army 4-Star General (Ret'd) Barry R. McCaffrey, Adjunct Professor of International Affairs, United States Military Academy (USMA) West Point, as outlined in an "After Action" Report following visits to Nellis and Scott Air Force Bases 14-17 August, 2007."
The report was designed to summarize assessments of USAF capabilities and resources in the face of current, emergent and projected threats to national security. General McCaffrey's comments on C-17 are as follows:
2nd -- The C-17 Globemaster III. â¢ We must create the strategic national military airlift and air-to-air refuel capability (600+ C-17 aircraft) to project national military and humanitarian power in the global environment. We currently have an inadequate capability with 150 aircraft supported by an aging refueling fleet. The C-5 aircraft must be retiredâthese planes are shot. The Army must back off the dubious proposition that they will size their ground combat force around the volume and lift metrics of the C-130 --- and instead use the C-17 as the sizing template.
â¢ The Rumsfeld doctrine postulated bringing home deployed Army and Air Force capabilities from Europe, Okinawa, and Korea. This seismic strategic shift was unexamined and not debated by Congress or the American people. We are bringing home ground and air strike assets thousands of miles--- from basing infrastructure paid for by allies--- to unprepared US launch platforms. If we are to pose a serious deterrent capability in the dangerous world arena--- then we must credibly be able to project power back into future combat areas to sustain allies at risk.
â¢ The C-17 represents the capacity to carry out this strategic power projection mission ---as well as providing intra-theater logistics and humanitarian lift for pin point distribution of thousands of truck load equivalents of supply per day.
â¢ The C-17 is a global national transportation asset--- not merely a military or Air Force system.
The whole of the report is accessible via the link [http://www.mccaffreyassociates.com/pages/documents..]. and should be considered a "must read" by all concerned.
Knowledge is Power
"I will respond preemptively to those who are quick to dismiss the views and analytics crafted by retired DoD personnel as 'irrelevant and inapplicable', by saying that such assertions are sophomoric, unsustainable, without merit and wholly dismissive of the Dr. W. Edwards Deming advocated pursuit of profound knowledge," says Stokes. "To be sure, we benefit from applying accumulated knowledge, as has been evident since humankind first saw the need to record and preserve what was learned. The Library of Alexandria is an ancient and extraordinary example of this premise."
Further commenting on the recent re-release of USAF Tanker competitive requirements after Boeing's successful protest to the GAO against EADS/Airbus, Stokes conveys the viewpoints of several academic, government and industrial associates that the need to preserve C-17 is as critically important as the necessity of having the tanker requirement fulfilled by a true US firm. "It must be designed, developed, engineered, manufactured and sustained in the United States. This is not jingoism, this is not nationalism, this is not representative of a disturbing naivete as concerns the so-called "new globality", but rather, a recognition that the country's industrial base must be maintained. Moreover, it must be OWNED and controlled by American firms with a strongly supportive role by the US government as is common practice by other industrialized nations.
"This is to say, even if the A330-based Tanker were indeed designed, engineered and manufactured here, the question at the end of the day is 'Where does the money go?' Answer: To overseas bank accounts. Also, 'Would there be any guarantees that manufacturing and design would remain on these shores in the event of a global economic schism (again) thereby resulting in calls by company stakeholders to shrink the company's global footprint in the interests of 'fiduciary responsibility?'
Based on the recorded activities of international corporations, the answer is no.
"The idea that obvious illegalities in the form of WTO disallowed EU subsidies designed to give EADS/Airbus ( Northrop-Grumman, with its extraordinary history of aircraft development, is nothing more than, sadly, a front to give the illusion of "Americaness" to their overtures) a competitive advantage in price is dismissed by DoD procurement officers as irrelevant or "having no bearing in the ultimate decision" (paraphrased) is suggesting a departure from logic, reason, conventional wisdom and a complete lack of of understanding that the US defense and industrial bases are one and the same."
Stokes suggests a much needed expansion of the DoD's paraphrased assertion that "we are in pursuit of the best value for the warfighter" would include '...,the American worker and taxpayer."
"To be sure," Stokes further states, "No other country on earth, neither Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, Spain, Japan, South Korea, China... no one would give away a core element of its critical industrial base which this Tanker, as built by Boeing with its clearly superior aircraft build skillsets, represents."