Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!apple!rutgers!att!cbnews!military
From: military@cbnews.ATT.COM (William B. Thacker)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Military Cuts
Message-ID: <12770@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 4 Jan 90 04:25:15 GMT
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 18
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: att!utzoo!henry
>From: randy@ms.uky.edu (Randy Appleton)
>A second example is the SR-71.  The AF felt they could get similar
>intelligence from satelite, at much less cost.

Well, no, not really.  What happened is that the USAF is totally confused
about what kind of recon it needs and how to get it, the *only* obvious
element being the importance of satellites.  People in Congress and
elsewhere have been yelling at the AF for years to get its act together
and come up with an overall recon plan.  So far, no results.  The USAF
isn't sure whether it needs the SR-71s or not... and they are costly
to run, making them an attractive target in a time of tightening money
and lessening threats.  This year, their number came up.

                                     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
                                 uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu