The presidents new helicopter

Pat H

Moderator
Said by some to cost $270 million each, others put the cost much higher.

Obscene at any time, doubly so during a depression.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VH-71

Ozymandias Airlines
Posted by Werther on February 02, 2008

Does one American in a thousand know that the Federal government is buying 23 VIP helicopters, each one of which will cost more than the extravagantly expensive F-22 fighter aircraft? A half-billion dollar helicopter—a half billion dollars each! — to ferry political hacks to their campaign events?

If the reader was unaware of that fact, we welcome him to Washington. The helicopter in question, the VH-71, is the government’s planned replacement for its current allegedly deficient presidential helicopter fleet. [1]

The requirement [2] and go-ahead decision for the VH-71 were established in 2003, coincidentally the year the United States invaded Iraq along with its coalition of the willing. Oddly enough, the procurement authorities decided that a modification of the European EH-101 helicopter would suit the requirement just fine. By pure coincidence, this decision would benefit the British firm Westland and the Italian company Augusta. If any glory accrued to Tony Blair and Silvio Berlusconi, that surely would have been fortuitous. The idea that the White House paid off these worthies for assisting the administration in the invasion of Iraq has not been proved by transcripts of phone conversations or secret memoranda of understanding that have come to light; we will leave to the reader the onus of the obvious interpretation of events.

Naturally, Congress got involved, because anything involving aerospace contracts means a rich harvest of PAC checks. Forthwith, the cry rang out from Capitol Hill that domestic content was needed. Riding to the rescue was Lockheed Martin, an aerospace mega-corporation with no known experience in helicopters since the abortive Cheyenne in the 1960s. They selflessly volunteered to be prime contractor. Bell, an outfit that ought to know something about rotorcraft, came in as a junior partner to Lock-Mart. Together with Augusta and Westland, the consortium marched bravely into the future of politically-guaranteed profits.

Of course, an off-the-shelf EH-101, reputedly a reasonably usable rotorcraft, was unsuitable either for the imperial pretensions of the presidency, or the needs of domestic porkbarrelling. Thus arose the metamorphosis of the EH-101 into the star-spangled US-101, the public-relations prototype that would ultimately become the military type designation VH-71.

This helicopter fit for a walking divinity (and/or his retinue) required nearly 2,000 requirements changes. Given the usual incompetence of the government procurement system, the cost increased apace with the change orders. The Pentagon’s Selected Acquisition Report (its most recent edition) from September 2007 lists the total program cost of VH-71 at $6.5 billion. [3] But the latest cost increases and schedule slips suggest that the total program cost may rise to $11 billion: nearly $500 million per aircraft. The cost overruns have become so egregious that the program has been frozen pending examination of alternatives. [4]

One may safely assume that, consonant with virtually every U.S. aerospace program ever heard of, the VH-71 will not be cancelled, but "restructured," or perhaps stretched out. Anything but cancelled. No other "platform," as the military argot would have it, will quite fill the bill. No doubt there are many necessarily expensive add-ons to the original EH-101 required to keep our elected Ozymandias out of harm as he soars above the rabble. But an unawed American might ask: aren’t there better, cheaper alternatives?

Let us stipulate that the shooting down of a U.S. president would be a bad thing. One might ask whether a distinctively appearing, distinctively marked leviathan flying about would create more risk than a standard, common helicopter that could be mistaken for any other rotorcraft in the military or civilian inventory. The UH-60 Blackhawk is as common a sight above metropolitan Washington as a Lexus on the Capitol Beltway: it is inconspicuous. The UH-60 is also in the current presidential fleet.

But the UH-60, or any other helicopter, would inevitably have an Achilles heel if presidential security were the paramount criterion. Unfortunately for the taxpayer, presidential vanity has long since trumped the need for pure physical survival at least cost. Hence presidential chariots must be gaudily decorated in the imperial livery of Marine One, making them unnecessarily conspicuous. Hence the perceived need to equip the new presidential fleet with every conceivable spoofer, jammer, and communications link that sole source IT contractors can push on the VH-71 program manager.

The army and navy have announced their intention to buy a large quantity of Blackhawks over the next 5 years. The price would come to around $14 million each. Fourteen million as opposed to half a billion. Wouldn’t a UH-60 — as we have said, a rotorcraft already in the current presidential fleet — be far more cost effective than a VH-71, as well as safer, particularly if it were painted in inconspicuous colors mimicking a standard military paint scheme? One could put every conceivable bell and whistle on a Special Operations UH-60, as well as an Aga Khan-level interior, and there is no way it could remotely approach the unit cost of the VH-71 boondoggle.

The alert reader might object that the Blackhawk is smaller and more cramped than the VH-71. But what is the typical mission of the presidential helicopter fleet? Generally, it hauls our anointed thunder god from the White House grounds to Andrews Air Force Base, or to his Berghof in the nearby Catoctin Mountains of Maryland, or, in extremis, to Site R on the Maryland-Pennsylvania border: none of them journeys of much more than half an hour. If the trip is longer, generally the helicopter portion is just the first, brief leg to the Lucullan comfort of Air Force One. Surely a Man of the People, as even George W. Bush affects to be (bred to the bone oligarch though he is), could tolerate a cabin no more confining than the interior space of a Bugatti Veyron. [5]

There is more. The Blackhawk is a thoroughly tested and reliable standard aircraft produced by the thousand, like an airborne Honda Civic. The VH-71, by contrast, will be a kluged-together modification of which only 23 copies will be built. Given the inevitable vagaries of engineering and testing, guess which helicopter is more likely to experience catastrophic mechanical failure while in flight?

The VH-71 is an example of the Potlatch syndrome, the tendency of overweening rulers to be extravagant for the sake of being extravagant. Potlatch was the practice of certain Indian tribes to demonstrate the wealth and power of their chief by piling up food, trade goods, and the like, and destroying them in a fire. Such a society, it goes without saying, are doomed. In less wantonly spectacular ways, many ancient states essentially practiced the same custom.

The American anthropologist Joseph Tainter wrote an intriguing work titled The Collapse of Complex Societies, wherein he posited that as a society matures and becomes more complex, its rulers (and beneficiaries) tend to evolve ritual behavior that does not benefit the survival of survival of the society as a whole. On the contrary, they become so dedicated to defending an ever more ostentatious and extravagant status quo that their behavior actually contributes to the collapse of the society over which they reign.

The Mayan big men exhausted so much of their subjects’ resources on ceremonial pyramids celebrating the greatness of the big men that the society could not sustain the expense. Pyramids, after all, cannot provide habitation, or defense.

Peasants toiling on a Latifundia at the borders of the late Roman Empire, should they have been overrun by the "barbarians," actually found the tribute exacted by the wild barbarian tribes lower than that mulcted by their erstwhile Roman imperial masters. The sustainment costs of the empire, its sybaritic court, and its hideously expensive military, were simply too high by that point. When enough peasants caught on, the Roman Empire was doomed, not by military invasion, but by the fact that its subjects no longer believed the whole imperial contraption benefited them.

When will the subjects of the American monarch catch on that projects like the VH-71 are simply expressions of a superfluous and ruinously expensive ruling class’s contempt for them?

Werther is the pen name of a Northern Virginia-based defense analyst.

[1] One might well ask why even an elected monarch like the U.S. president needs twenty-three helicopters. At most, he might require one helicopter, a backup or two, a couple of training machines, and a pair to act as operational decoys. Rational math cannot count beyond 6 or 7, but the president’s vast retinue of hangers-on, coat holders, and post-pubescent appointees (the U.S. attorney scandal revealed what a sorry lot of inferior religious seminary graduates they typically are) is always raptured, so to speak, by the experience of getting VIP treatment several cuts above that experienced by the common herd of U.S. taxpayers on a Carnival cruise. Thus we are stuck with 23 flying palaces to transport the courtiers of the American emperor.

[2] "Requirement" is a government euphemism for "this is a really neat idea that will help my post-government career with a contractor."

[3] http://www.acq.osd.mil/ara/am/sar/2007-SEP-SARSUMTAB.pdf

[4] "VH-71 Presidential Helicopter on Hold," Defense News, 3 December 2007.

[5] Priced at a mere 1.1 million Euro per automobile (or "platform"), the Bugatti is a veritable bargain by U.S. government contracting standards. Attribution
 
Yawn.... More crying, feet stomping, and screaming "I hate Bush".

You can call it that if you like, but take a look at the state of our economy. Our trade defecit is through the roof. China owns at least a third of our debt. When it comes to MY tax dollars, I want to see them being spent wisely on things that will have a positive impact on our country and economy, not "pissed" away on expensive and unnecessary things. Think about how far $11,500,000,000.00 would go towards useful programs such as education or more affordable health care. Even if they loaded an extra $6 million onto the $14 million Blackhawk, it would only come out to $460,000,000 for the whole fleet... or less than one VH-71. It looks like the economy is still sliding and the fed will probably have to keep reducing the interest rate. How secure is our economy when such a large percentage of our debt is owned by foreign countries?

How is that for Bush stomping?
 
Last edited:
Of course, an off-the-shelf EH-101, reputedly a reasonably usable rotorcraft, was unsuitable either for the imperial pretensions of the presidency, or the needs of domestic porkbarrelling. Thus arose the metamorphosis of the EH-101 into the star-spangled US-101, the public-relations prototype that would ultimately become the military type designation VH-71.

That, along with the whole tone of the article, betrays the obvious prejudice.

Do you really feel that we should be using stock, off the shelf aircraft, for transporting the National Command Authority? I assume you investigated and found a stock aircraft with electronics protected against EMP? I would wager they also add some features with regards to Nuclear and Biological warfare... Then there is the protection against other forms of nastiness such as SAMs. I would wager their is a fare share of communications gear which go far beyond what is needed for normal traffic reporting. These things also need to be ready wherever the President goes should an immediate evacuation be needed. I guess that means several of them must be maintained. Then there are the other key members of government who may need one of these things in a hurry.

There is plenty of waste in the government and I am certain some of it is here, like it is anywhere the government spends money. That does not mean this is not something we should have though.

Then there is the amazing observations on our economy...

Our trade defecit is through the roof. China owns at least a third of our debt.
...
How secure is our economy when such a large percentage of our debt is owned by foreign countries?

You may find this shocking but China most certainly does NOT want a weak US economy. Who do you think buys from them? What happens to them when our buying drops due to a weak economy?

Why do so many foreign nations own "US Debt"? You are talking about Treasury Bills and the rest of the world goes to them because they are one of the most stable investments out there. If anything they are more concerned about our economy at present than we are! If you hold $400,000,000.00 of US Debt and the U.S. Dollar loosed 25% of its value what just happened to you? Trust me, those who hold US Debt are far more concerned about US spending than the US is!
 
You may find this shocking but China most certainly does NOT want a weak US economy. Who do you think buys from them? What happens to them when our buying drops due to a weak economy?

Why do so many foreign nations own "US Debt"? You are talking about Treasury Bills and the rest of the world goes to them because they are one of the most stable investments out there. If anything they are more concerned about our economy at present than we are! If you hold $400,000,000.00 of US Debt and the U.S. Dollar loosed 25% of its value what just happened to you? Trust me, those who hold US Debt are far more concerned about US spending than the US is!

China sells to pretty much everyone and anyone. While the US still the largest consumer, less developed contries are becoming developed countries. Their demand for consumer goods are increasing all the time. If push came to shove and China really wanted to assume the role of the former USSR, it could easily do so. For instance what if China really decided to take back Taiwan? Do you think the US would go to war over Taiwan or just stomp its feet and write nasty letters? We assume that their interest is to maintain economic growth and keep the peace. I only wich people were always so logical.
 
Do you really feel that we should be using stock, off the shelf aircraft, for transporting the National Command Authority?
If it were up to me, they'd travel exclusively by car, no aircraft of any kind, much less a $270 million(or more) dollar helicopter.

Why do we want a president to travel?

Why does anyone approve of the imperial trappings of the presidency?

"National Command authority" indeed.
 
If it were up to me, they'd travel exclusively by car, no aircraft of any kind, much less a $270 million(or more) dollar helicopter.

Why do we want a president to travel?

Why does anyone approve of the imperial trappings of the presidency?

"National Command authority" indeed.


Well, fortunately it's not up to you. Imperial trappings:confused: It's a helicopter and it offers much safer travel than by road. Is the price inflated, yep, things always are when sold to the govt, how about you boycott Sikorsky and Eurocopter?
 
Despite the snarkiness of the article, the author has it right in all major points. The program is in at least as much trouble as he cites, and this administration will likely kick the can down the road to the next. Think Hillary will cancel it? :rolleyes:

TC
 
Why do we want a president to travel?

Why does anyone approve of the imperial trappings of the presidency?

While you may hate to admit it the President is the FACE of America to most of the world. He is the Commander and Chief of our armed forces and has huge impact on our foreign, and not insignificant impact on our domestic policy. Feel free to vote for Ron Paul, I like him to, but what I have just stated is fact.

The bottom line is we do not live in a vacuum. Even Paul is not an isolationist, although some of the fanatics following him are and some of his opposition claims he is. Like it or not the world is not as large as it used to be. If anything it is even more critical that we have open discussions with other nations now than during most of our history. Part of that is having the President go places.

Then there is the emotional connection with the President within our own borders. While we all know the POTUS is not going to be building levees to hold back a flood people do take heart when he shows up at a disaster. His presences says "We know you are in trouble and we are not abandoning you." You may not like that but most of the nation wants a president who puts his feet on the ground where trouble is.
 
Were it up to me, the president would travel by bus within the continental US.

Yes, because the President has so much extra time on his hands to be traveling by bus everywhere. If you have been anywhere near a presidential visit then you know how much congestation and traffic it causes. Can you imagine how much worse it would be with a crap load or buses.

Of course then people would be complaining how much the bomb proofing and such costs for the buses.

And wouldn't that just impress the heck out of forign heads of state, forget Air Force One we are taking Greyhound 1.
 
If you have been anywhere near a presidential visit then you know how much congestation and traffic it causes.

Clinton visted my hometown in the 90's, so yes, I'm familar with it. No airport nearby, so he traveled the last 50miles by limo. He got there on time, without a problem.

And wouldn't that just impress the heck out of forign heads of state, forget Air Force One we are taking Greyhound 1.

I couldnt care less if it impressed foreign leaders. They arent paying our taxes.

There would still be need for AirForce 1. Overseas travel, emergency travel, etc. But barring traffic accidents, You can be anywhere in the lower 48 by bus in about 4 days. Plan acordingly!

I think the average American would be better served by our politicans if they themselves had to live like average americans. 30K a year salary. Same health care plan given to average govt. employees. 2 weeks of vacation, and a mandatory 40 hours a week. (campaigning doesnt count towards that 40 either, as your employer will not pay you to write resume's and go to job interviews) Congress critters get coach seats on all flights.

But thats just my .02.
 
Some think the President shouldn't travel at all. Others want the President to travel by bus.

To quote Jim Morrison (approximately)....

"Share some with the singer, man!"

:p
 

Hmmm...cost of 96 Hours of CAP, plus support aircraft (AWACS and others).

Thumbs up on your brilliant cost saving idea!

Why do we want a president to travel?

Same reason I make my employees travel. You learn more, plan better, and accomplish more where things actually happen than in an office.
 
Do you really feel that we should be using stock, off the shelf aircraft, for transporting the National Command Authority?
No, I'd strap a chute onto the Chimp-in-Chief, load him into a large circus cannon, test the wind with a wet finger, fire, and hope for the best. Oh, almost forgot, he'll need a helmet with the words "Special Ed" printed on the side.

While you may hate to admit it the President is the FACE of America to most of the world.
An embarassing face, makes Americans look pretty foolish.
 
Think I missed the topic of this thread? Is this relevant at all other than griping about excess government spending?

The idea that the White House paid off these worthies for assisting the administration in the invasion of Iraq has not been proved by transcripts of phone conversations or secret memoranda of understanding that have come to light; we will leave to the reader the onus of the obvious interpretation of events.

More conspiracies...surprise surprise...

If it were up to me, they'd travel exclusively by car, no aircraft of any kind, much less a $270 million(or more) dollar helicopter.

Why do we want a president to travel?

Hmmm...surprise surprise.
 
I couldnt care less if it impressed foreign leaders. They arent paying our taxes.

There would still be need for AirForce 1. Overseas travel, emergency travel, etc. But barring traffic accidents, You can be anywhere in the lower 48 by bus in about 4 days. Plan acordingly!

I think the average American would be better served by our politicans if they themselves had to live like average americans. 30K a year salary. Same health care plan given to average govt. employees. 2 weeks of vacation, and a mandatory 40 hours a week. (campaigning doesnt count towards that 40 either, as your employer will not pay you to write resume's and go to job interviews) Congress critters get coach seats on all flights.

But thats just my .02.



Uhhh................nevermind it's been addressed above
 
Back
Top