USA Armed Forces

News and discussion threads on defence in other parts of the world.
bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2704
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by bobp »

The Zumwalt has had quite a few problems since its commissioning. As well as the recent propulsion issue it scraped the side of the canal messing up the paintwork. In addition the ship currently has no ammunition for its guns because of its cost. Bet there are a few embarrassed faces at the Pentagon.

GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by GastonGlocker »

Interesting history:

“There I am, close to two million people stretched all along the DMZ and who knows how many tens of thousands within probably three miles of where we are at, nukes in the air (aboard B-52’s), who knows how much artillery from both sides concentrated on our location, crazy guys with mines on their chest yelling at the North Koreans to come on over, KPA [North Korean soldiers] less than 100 meters away with machineguns and AK-47’s trained on us, and me and my buddies are standing around with axe handles and .45’s. I’m looking north at all of the various North Korean bunkers I know about, the ones pointed out to me, and the ones I’ve watched being built during the last year, expecting at any moment I’ll see a puff of smoke and flame, the signal that their artillery has fired. It’s almost laughable, probably would be in a movie, but all I’m thinking now is that I hope I can take a couple (KPA) with me.”





http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-bu ... rean-18450

Dahedd
Member
Posts: 660
Joined: 06 May 2015, 11:18

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Dahedd »

Sea water leak into the propulsion motors ? same issue as HMS Duncan is rumoured to have then ?

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1626
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by xav »

Pictures: US Navy F/A-18C Hornet Fighters Crossing Decks with French Navy Aircraft Carrier CDG
Image
http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.ph ... r-cdg.html

Pictures: French Navy Rafale M Fighters Crossing Decks with US Navy Aircraft Carrier "Ike" CVN 69
Image
http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.ph ... vn-69.html

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1626
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by xav »

U.S. Navy Announces Need for 355-ship with More CVN, DDG, SSN, Amphibs & Auxiliary Vessels
The U.S. Secretary of the Navy announced the results of the 2016 Force Structure Assessment (FSA), a year-long effort which began in January that was conducted to evaluate long-term defense security requirements for future naval forces today at the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia.

The new fleet goal calls for 1 more aircraft carrier, 16 more large surface combatant, 18 more attack submarines, 4 more amphibious warfare ships, 3 more expeditionary support bases and 5 more support ships. The number of LCS (including the Frigate variant) and aircraft appears to remain unchanged (despite calls in the US Navy to reduce the number of LCS and procure more Super Hornet fighters).

The 2016 FSA recommends a 355-ship fleet including 12 carriers, 104 large surface combatants, 52 small surface combatants, 38 amphibious ships, and 66 submarines. The assessment will be one input to the Navy's FY-2018 30-year shipbuilding plan. The current proposed Navy budget is seen as a bridge to this larger Navy, with shipbuilding on an upward glide slope towards 308 ships.
http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.ph ... ssels.html

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

The time has come to boobt-trap all UAVs (and whatever they are called under water):
https://www.stratfor.com/snapshots/chin ... 650a903f03
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

The world is in a "frenzy of study," Henry Kissinger said in a recent interview. At home and abroad, strategists and pundits are trying to piece together a blueprint of American foreign policy under U.S. President-elect Donald Trump... a pingpong match already underway with Beijing.

STRATFOR's take on it " Highbrow intellectualism can be a handicap in this exercise."
- picking the creator of JSOC for NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR would point to manhunt (for the jihadists) coming to the fore even more
- the incoming DefSec has (in the past had) Iran specified as the prime stirrer of instability - OK, he has stepped into different boots now, so we will see
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by GastonGlocker »

The crackle of the old smoky turbojets from a flight of Phantoms with full afterburner on the deck is quite the show.

Phantom Pharewell

http://www.warbirdsnews.com/warbirds-ne ... antom.html

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

what a coincidence that the next thing the Navy developed was an air superiority fighter, a pure bred and for BVR?

I agree, fine flying and tactics, but an Israeli Major - in a Kfir (a budget model) - took on 9 Migs and shot down "half" of them
- "how did you do it?"
Well, only one of them can be on your tail, at a time

No wonder that 100% happiness has not been oozing out of the Navy when they were told to get the next Phantom - that can do everything
... ie, the F-35
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by GastonGlocker »

arfah wrote:
Possibly the F4's finest hour?

Good share sir. I wonder how much fuel he had left after that engagement!

At least lessons learned showed the need for an integral gun.

GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by GastonGlocker »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:what a coincidence that the next thing the Navy developed was an air superiority fighter, a pure bred and for BVR?

I agree, fine flying and tactics, but an Israeli Major - in a Kfir (a budget model) - took on 9 Migs and shot down "half" of them
- "how did you do it?"
Well, only one of them can be on your tail, at a time

No wonder that 100% happiness has not been oozing out of the Navy when they were told to get the next Phantom - that can do everything
... ie, the F-35
Great points. Jack of all trades, master of none. It seems the concept of strike packages with specialized AC may have been abandoned too soon?

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

12 Columbias to replace 14 Ohios, in the nick of time... if everything goes right

" a program that will be one of the Navy’s largest, with Kendall approving a total cost of $96 billion (in 2017 dollars). Specifically, the undersecretary approved 12 submarines at $8 billion each, which amortizes overhead equally over every boat in the class. That’s a marked change from normal Navy accounting, which bills all start-up costs to the first ship, a formula which would have priced the USS Columbia at (depending on the estimate) $10 to $14 billion. Spreading out the costs, as Kendall has, makes the first ship more digestible, both in the Navy budget and on Capitol Hill, and smooths out long-term spending."

The same pricing seems to apply as in consumer goods: The same price in dollars (4 x 8) becomes ££s here (for our boats)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by GastonGlocker »


arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by arfah »

GastonGlocker wrote:Nice to have 8 when 1 ejects:

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/eng ... force-base
R.I.P. TF33. :-(
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by dmereifield »

Good stuff. Shame most of the work is being carried out in the US, not the UK

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Russia gives up on airpower at sea, after losing two fighters (to no opposition).

USN reprocicates and pulls all carriers back to port: https://southfront.org/us-carrier-strik ... ry-6-2017/

The RN is left to rule the waves - and uses the opportunity for mothballing the second carrier.

Just practising for the 1st of April; Some readers, though, may recognise the above linked website?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1626
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by xav »

Our coverage from Surface Navy Association national symposium (SNA 2017)


Day 1:
- HII DDG 51 Flight III
- Kongsberg NSM Naval Strike Missile
- Raytheon SM-6 missile
- BAE Systems Electromagnetic Railgun


Day 2:
- Lockheed Martin LRASM
- Saab CEROS 200 FCR
- 901D Computer Aided Dead Reckoning Tracing (CADRT)
- General Atomics EMALS, AAG and Railgun


Day 3:
- L3 Technologies MK20 Mod1 EOSS
- Lockheed Martin / Navantia F110 Frigate
- General Dynamics Mission Systems Bluefin Sandshark AUV
- Raytheon Excalibur for DDG 1000

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Thanks xav, have to savour these clips (they are like a coffee break), but the first one I was compelled to watch as the LCS image looked so "fat"
- but the real surprise was the other LCS design: it has lost its "pop gun" to get something (like the other design) that the OpFor will actualle feel when hit with it (the NSMs in their canisters)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1626
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by xav »

our last SNA 2017 video



In this video, coverage of:
- Boeing Harpoon ER anti-ship missile
- Raytheon SeaRAM and RAM Block 2 missile
- Lockheed Martin export LCS / MMSC Multi Mission Surface Combatant
- Curtiss-Wright TRAPS sonar system
- Atlas North America SeaCAT AUV

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

TRAPS... just the thing for T31s?

Before that, the 4 Rota-based BMD ships are getting a beefed-up close defence system (SeaRAM)... that would point to the need to be, at times, operating close to shore - not just when passing Gib.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1626
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by xav »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:TRAPS... just the thing for T31s?
Jane's naval correspondant (from the UK) told me at this show that Type 31s would get a hull sonar... at best.

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by dmereifield »

xav wrote:
ArmChairCivvy wrote:TRAPS... just the thing for T31s?
Jane's naval correspondant (from the UK) told me at this show that Type 31s would get a hull sonar... at best.
That's consistent with everything in the public domain that we have seen....sadly. But surely the "at best" part isn't quite right, the RN would surely not accept a frigate without a hull mounted sonar(???). If they are that strapped for cash could they not reuse the hull sonars from the T23s?

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

From AerospaceDaily:

"The U.S. Air Force chief of staff endorses the idea of buying 300 low-cost, light-attack fighters for counterterrorism missions as a “great [idea?]"

If anyone can read that behind the paywall, how come they would be low cost compared to 300 of the A-10s already paid for?
- throw in a 100 for a maintenance reserve (considering their age) for good measure
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by GastonGlocker »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:From AerospaceDaily:

"The U.S. Air Force chief of staff endorses the idea of buying 300 low-cost, light-attack fighters for counterterrorism missions as a “great [idea?]"

If anyone can read that behind the paywall, how come they would be low cost compared to 300 of the A-10s already paid for?
- throw in a 100 for a maintenance reserve (considering their age) for good measure
Agreed.
:arrow:
The AC boneyard near Tucson is the only other agency that makes money aside from the IRS. Scavenging of parts has kept it profitable and warbirds flying.

I think that unless reaching structural fatigue, A10s should be kept going.

Perhaps a smaller batch of new CT/COIN A/C could be spun up with option to buy more for phased in replacement.

Then again, for pure CT, B-2s and Predators make an effective team:
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/01/19 ... libya.html

rhodes76
Member
Posts: 21
Joined: 07 May 2015, 22:37
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by rhodes76 »


Post Reply