I linked to the numbers, adjusted to 1996 dollars. Including inflation, obviously.old salt wrote: ↑Sun Sep 12, 2021 9:24 pm% of GDP is a dodge. It was a time of inflation. Prices & pay were increasing while dollars available, year to year, were going down. Energy prices rose sharply.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 12, 2021 6:49 pmObviously spending was higher as a % of GDP during Vietnam at full speed, height of war..we weren't dropping nearly as many bombs, losing aircraft and men anymore...but then spending dropped (but still large) under Nixon/Ford...actually went up as % during Carter years.old salt wrote: ↑Sun Sep 12, 2021 6:23 pmLook at spending compared to the height of the Vietman war. D spending in the Carter years was down compared to before & after, at a time when things were worn out from Vietnam & becoming obsolete, & we were switching to an all volunteer force which cost more.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 12, 2021 5:52 pmUnderstood...my only point is that military spending was nevertheless a ton of $, but how it was prioritized to be spent evidently didn't meet the actual needs of the moment.old salt wrote: ↑Sun Sep 12, 2021 4:54 pm7 of 8. The one that had problems on the way in, turned around & made it back to the ship.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Sun Sep 12, 2021 10:58 am How many Helos did we leave in the desert in 1979?
https://photorecon.net/bluebeard-5/
Regarding spare parts, 2 of the 8 were not flown during workups & were cannibalized as hangar queens to keep the other 6 flying.
The lack of spare parts at that time made cannibalization widespread & degraded readiness & training throughout naval aviation.
This left an entire minesweeping squadron with no aircraft at a time when the Iranians were mining the Persian Gulf.
2 of the abandonded H-53's were not destroyed & were put into service by the Iranians who also operated the H-53.
http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/histo ... lspend.htm
Defense spending as a percentage of GDP actually went up during the Carter years versus late Nixon/Ford.
In 79 or 80, Carter's SecDef was booed when he came to address the squadrons & test center engineers & flight crews at Pax River.
The hangar's were filled with cannibalized hangar queens, In SD in '75-77 we were taking components off of up aircraft, driving them to LAX, shipping them comml air to our Dets in WPac, circumventing an empty supply chain. The military really was hollowed out.
I'm not debating that the prioritization of that spending was correctly apportioned, but let's not pretend that there weren't lots and lots of dollars to prioritize.
I'm also not surprised the Sec Def would have been unpopular with those crew, etc. I would think the same would be true of his predecessor under Ford. Or should have been given the "hollowing out" that occurred during those years.
I very much doubt that the decision not to spend adequately on spare parts was one made in the Oval Office, at least not explicitly. I'd be looking at the overall military industrial complex decision and prioritization processes to look for that.
Again, I'm not saying the $ were prioritized correctly, just that were still a lot of $.
High as a percentage of GDP except for hot war periods.
You can certainly argue that there wasn't enough for every priority the military had, but clearly there was enough to have a some helos that would work in that mission.
Again, you reserve your disdain for the Dems, won't apply the same critique to GOP...loss of credibility.