Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 46

Thread: Pax Americana, Technological Readiness and broken weapons systems

  1. #1
    Council Member AdamG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hiding from the Dreaded Burrito Gang
    Posts
    3,096

    Default Pax Americana, Technological Readiness and broken weapons systems

    Or "How we self-sabotage our starting positions for the next conflict, through unacceptable QC and wasteful Defense Spending"

    A $2.7 billion attack submarine, the USS Minnesota, has been out of commission for more than a year because of a defective pipe joint near the ship’s nuclear-powered engine.

    The defective part, which is worth about $10,000, was installed near the ship’s nuclear power plant. Engineers discovered the poorly welded steam pipe in early 2015, and ongoing repairs have led to the ship being stuck in overhaul ever since, according to Navy Times.
    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/how...oNm?li=BBnbfcL
    A scrimmage in a Border Station
    A canter down some dark defile
    Two thousand pounds of education
    Drops to a ten-rupee jezail


    http://i.imgur.com/IPT1uLH.jpg

  2. #2
    Council Member AdamG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hiding from the Dreaded Burrito Gang
    Posts
    3,096

    Default

    See also
    On Service and the F-35
    by William Herbert
    http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/on-...e-and-the-f-35
    A scrimmage in a Border Station
    A canter down some dark defile
    Two thousand pounds of education
    Drops to a ten-rupee jezail


    http://i.imgur.com/IPT1uLH.jpg

  3. #3
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,366

    Default A problem we share

    AdamG,

    The UK has a history of defence projects having issues, both historically and today. Plus a number of reports which have recommended "solutions".

    Not to overlook the decisions made by politicians to end, even embark on major projects. The Nimrod maritime aircraft upgrade and the two new aircraft carriers (which will currently have no aircraft).
    davidbfpo

  4. #4
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    The Green Mountains
    Posts
    356

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidbfpo View Post
    AdamG,

    The UK has a history of defence projects having issues, both historically and today. Plus a number of reports which have recommended "solutions".

    Not to overlook the decisions made by politicians to end, even embark on major projects. The Nimrod maritime aircraft upgrade and the two new aircraft carriers (which will currently have no aircraft).
    CIMSEC did a podcast series on the Falklands War recently, the one with "Sharky" Ward has a good bit near the end with him savaging the UK's new carrier/F-35B foolishness.

  5. #5
    Council Member AdamG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hiding from the Dreaded Burrito Gang
    Posts
    3,096

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Granite_State View Post
    CIMSEC did a podcast series on the Falklands War recently, the one with "Sharky" Ward has a good bit near the end with him savaging the UK's new carrier/F-35B foolishness.
    Link?
    A scrimmage in a Border Station
    A canter down some dark defile
    Two thousand pounds of education
    Drops to a ten-rupee jezail


    http://i.imgur.com/IPT1uLH.jpg

  6. #6
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    The Green Mountains
    Posts
    356

    Default

    http://cimsec.org/sea-control-97-fal...key-ward/19236

    Their whole series on the Falklands is great, worth getting on iTunes.

  7. #7
    Council Member AdamG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hiding from the Dreaded Burrito Gang
    Posts
    3,096

    Default

    Good comparison-and-contrast on what sort of value we're getting for our defense dollar.


    America's new Zumwalt-class DDG-1000 destroyer is a marvel of engineering.

    Sixty percent bigger than the DDG-51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyers it was designed to replace, but just as fast as a DDG-51 and featuring a stealthier design, Zumwalt touts two 155-millimeter guns, can carry a combination of 80 Tomahawk, Sea Sparrow, and ASROC missiles, and is one of the few warships in the U.S. fleet capable of producing enough power to operate the new railgun and laser cannon weaponry just starting to come on line.

    But Zumwalt is not cheap.

    Although it was initially designed in 1998 with the intention of producing 32 warships for a total cost of $36.9 billion (including R&D costs), a combination of cost overruns and procurement cuts have sent per-ship costs skyrocketing. According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, each of the Zumwalt-class ships now under construction, expected to cost $1.2 billion to build, will instead cost $7.5 billion.

    That's more than half the cost of a Ford-class aircraft carrier, and a big price to swallow and get only a destroyer in return. So it's little wonder that, with costs spiraling out of control, the Pentagon pulled the plug on the Zumwalt program in 2009, ordering a halt to production after just three ships.

    But now there's a new threat on the horizon that could convince the Navy it can't afford not to build more Zumwalts.


    http://www.fool.com/investing/genera...satellite.aspx
    A scrimmage in a Border Station
    A canter down some dark defile
    Two thousand pounds of education
    Drops to a ten-rupee jezail


    http://i.imgur.com/IPT1uLH.jpg

  8. #8
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    175

    Default lightweight is fashionable but ...

    The term lightweight is a catalyst for all manner of projects intended to benefit military operations, for example the Combat Lightweight Automatic Weapon System (CLAWS) and the Lightweight Dismounted Automatic Machine Gun (LDAM).

    http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...r-machine-gun/
    recently highlighted a project – not apparently CLAWS but possibly LDAM - to develop a replacement .50cal MG for the classic .50cal M2 HB and as improved with QCB. Just possibly that project might be intended to also replace the derivative M3 with its higher maximum ROF.

    The item’s reporter was unimpressed for several reasons not explained with all details on weights, although he did quote it is hoped to “save 16-pounds off of a 26-pound barrel”. As a summary of some of his concerns, the M2 which covers only part of the overall requirement for support MGs is bulky and with heavyweight tripod weights 128 lb, reducing to 106 lb with lightweight tripod. Keeping the M2 supplied with ammunition is burdensome – at about 28 lb for a 100-round belt without packaging - so it is often employed as a vehicle weapon. And when offloaded or back-packed by infantry it routinely needs logistic support from vehicles.

    With the M2 in service as a reliable, well regarded and widely employed MG there is little point in spending development dollars on a new .50cal medium ROF MG or even just a lightweight barrel. A heavier barrel with less need for changing out on vehicles could be better value.

    In somewhat the same vein the US Army has an Extended Range Cannon Artillery project to replace 39 calibre barrels by 52 calibre barrels in all its 155mm howitzers.
    http://defense-update.com/20160329_m777er.html

    That is intended to increase their maximum reach of about 30,000 yd to about 50,000 yd. And it includes a 52 calibre barrel that will increase the 9,300 lb weight of the towed M777 howitzer by some 1,000 lb. The M777 was quite recently developed with a part titanium carriage to obtain lightweight heli-portable support fire. The concepts for deep battle may in addition to rocket and missile artillery and attack helicopters demand long range barrels on self-propelled howitzers. However, heavying up any of the M777s for intermittent and punishing high pressure use seems illogical.

    The US Army must already have procedures to ensure redundant and nugatory projects are shut out or down at an early gate. But the gate guardians could be trapped in a procedural bog or have in some other way gone missing. If either of those circumstances apply it could be appropriate to start and promptly implement a higher level weight reduction project.
    Last edited by Compost; 05-05-2016 at 11:25 AM. Reason: change phrasing

  9. #9
    Council Member AdamG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hiding from the Dreaded Burrito Gang
    Posts
    3,096

    Default

    "I Wore a $400,000 F-35 Helmet and It Blew My Mind"
    http://gizmodo.com/i-wore-a-400-000-...ind-1779125567
    A scrimmage in a Border Station
    A canter down some dark defile
    Two thousand pounds of education
    Drops to a ten-rupee jezail


    http://i.imgur.com/IPT1uLH.jpg

  10. #10
    Council Member AdamG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hiding from the Dreaded Burrito Gang
    Posts
    3,096

    Default

    Damage done by laser weapons is a function of power and time. The longer a laser can stay on a target, like a drone or an incoming missile, the more damage it can do. The more powerful that laser is, the less time it needs to spend burning its target. The U.S. Navy already has a 30-kilowatt laser mounted on a ship. Yesterday, at a summit on directed energy weapons in Washington, D.C., the Navy announced it plans to go bigger: 150 kilowatts.

    National Defense Magazine writes:
    The Office of Naval Research “will perform a shipboard test of a 150-killowatt laser weapon system in the near future,” said [vice chief of naval operations] Adm. Bill Moran during a speech at Booz Allen Hamilton’s Directed Energy Summit, which was held in Washington, D.C.
    http://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/o...oon/ar-AAhAvmZ
    Last edited by AdamG; 07-06-2016 at 01:58 PM. Reason: USN needs more sharks
    A scrimmage in a Border Station
    A canter down some dark defile
    Two thousand pounds of education
    Drops to a ten-rupee jezail


    http://i.imgur.com/IPT1uLH.jpg

  11. #11
    Council Member AdamG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hiding from the Dreaded Burrito Gang
    Posts
    3,096

    Default

    Reading music https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAMrFJB1o08
    Were it not for efforts by the U.S. military to develop a lightweight, unarmored, all-terrain vehicle for the battlefield there might not be a market for SUVs today. It all began 75 years ago last December when the United States military adopted the 'jeep', and while the iconic military vehicle was phased out and replaced by the Humvee – the High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV) in the early 1980s – the Army could go full circle and bring back the jeep.

    Last year the Army began gearing up its Ground Mobility Vehicle Program for fiscal 2017. It was part of the Army's Combat Vehicle Modernization Strategy that sought to procure lightweight combat vehicles for infantry brigade combat teams. The vehicles considered sound very much like what first entered service back in 1940.
    http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2016/07/...back-jeep.html

    Related trends - http://www.carolinacountry.com/index...bility-stamina
    A scrimmage in a Border Station
    A canter down some dark defile
    Two thousand pounds of education
    Drops to a ten-rupee jezail


    http://i.imgur.com/IPT1uLH.jpg

  12. #12
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidbfpo View Post
    AdamG,

    The UK has a history of defence projects having issues, both historically and today. Plus a number of reports which have recommended "solutions".

    Not to overlook the decisions made by politicians to end, even embark on major projects. The Nimrod maritime aircraft upgrade and the two new aircraft carriers (which will currently have no aircraft).
    The back and forth decision over catapults on the Queenie class was hilarious, if it wasn't so sad.

  13. #13
    Council Member AdamG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hiding from the Dreaded Burrito Gang
    Posts
    3,096

    Default

    The U.S. Air Force asked industry on Friday for proposals to replace the Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile and the nuclear cruise missile as the military moves ahead with a costly modernization of its aging atomic weapons systems.

    The Air Force said in a statement it expected to award up to two contracts for a new ICBM weapons system, or ground-based strategic deterrent, sometime next summer or fall. It also expected to award up to two contracts in the same time frame for a new nuclear cruise missile, or long-range standoff weapon.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...-idUSKCN1092MS
    A scrimmage in a Border Station
    A canter down some dark defile
    Two thousand pounds of education
    Drops to a ten-rupee jezail


    http://i.imgur.com/IPT1uLH.jpg

  14. #14
    Council Member AdamG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hiding from the Dreaded Burrito Gang
    Posts
    3,096

    Default

    Wasn't this in "Hammer's Slammers"?
    http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/01...-will.html?m=1
    A scrimmage in a Border Station
    A canter down some dark defile
    Two thousand pounds of education
    Drops to a ten-rupee jezail


    http://i.imgur.com/IPT1uLH.jpg

  15. #15
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamG View Post
    Wasn't this in "Hammer's Slammers"?
    http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/01...-will.html?m=1
    These are intended to be cheaper than CHAAMP and more mindful of damaging civilian infrastructure.

  16. #16
    Council Member AmericanPride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    "Turn left at Greenland." - Ringo Starr
    Posts
    965

    Default

    This is probably one of the underlying math problems that threatens U.S. military superiority. The rate of increase in cost (resulting in a reduction in the number of available physical assets) exceeds the rate of increase in capabilities. Therefore, even as the U.S. spends more money, it receives a declining amount of combat power per dollar. Related to this problem, the long development & implementation timelines for new generations of aircraft, submarines, etc exceeds the analytical capability to assess their utility by the time they enter service. The average in fighter aircraft development time was about one year in 1945 to over 20 years today. What is the security environment going to be like in 2037? Nobody knows. Ask an analyst in 1913 what the world would be like in 1933. We don't have the institutional flexibility to respond to paradigm shifts in security.
    Last edited by AmericanPride; 03-30-2017 at 04:19 PM.
    When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles. - Louis Veuillot

  17. #17
    Council Member AmericanPride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    "Turn left at Greenland." - Ringo Starr
    Posts
    965

    Default

    Not specifically military focused, but related nonetheless:

    Quote Originally Posted by How to Maintain America's Edge
    Yet despite the remarkable success of the U.S. innovation economy, many players in both government and industry have been pulling back from the types of bold long-term investments in fundamental science that could seed the great companies of the future. The entire innovation ecosystem is becoming more shortsighted and cautious. And by failing to invest sufficiently in basic research today, Washington risks creating an innovation deficit that may hobble the U.S. economy for decades to come. This concern has become acute since the White House released its budget blueprint, which proposes crippling cuts to science funding.
    How to Maintain America's Edge
    When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles. - Louis Veuillot

  18. #18
    Council Member AdamG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hiding from the Dreaded Burrito Gang
    Posts
    3,096

    Default

    Top generals have been insisting for years that if North Korea launched a missile at the United States, the U.S military would be able to shoot it down.
    But that is a highly questionable assertion, according to independent scientists and government investigators.
    In making it, the generals fail to acknowledge huge questions about the effectiveness of the $40 billion missile defense system they rely on to stop a potential nuclear-armed ballistic missile fired by North Korean or Iran, according to a series of outside reviews.
    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/us-...cid=spartandhp
    A scrimmage in a Border Station
    A canter down some dark defile
    Two thousand pounds of education
    Drops to a ten-rupee jezail


    http://i.imgur.com/IPT1uLH.jpg

  19. #19
    Council Member AdamG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hiding from the Dreaded Burrito Gang
    Posts
    3,096

    Default

    Fighter jets with laser weapons set to take to the skies in 2021 as Lockheed Martin wins $26 million 'Lance' high-energy laser contract

    'LANCE' contract will build on technology from the Athena and Aladin lasers $26.3m contract aims to design, develop, and produce system for fighter jets. An airborne platform is smaller, presenting more of a challenge, experts say
    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...aser-jets.html



    Anyone remember the last time the USAF traded up for shiny new weapons systems?


    “There was this strange idea in the Department of Defense that the gun was passé,” says military aviation historian Richard P. Hallion. “And the gun has never been passé.” Compared to the missiles of today, he says, the air-to-air missiles arming F-4s and F-8s during Vietnam were primitive and unreliable.
    A scrimmage in a Border Station
    A canter down some dark defile
    Two thousand pounds of education
    Drops to a ten-rupee jezail


    http://i.imgur.com/IPT1uLH.jpg

  20. #20
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    175

    Default AAR for the F-35A - reduced but salvageable

    There is potentially yet another problem with the F-35A CTOL variant of the JSF. For Air-Air Refuelling the F-35A has on its fuselage spine a standard US Air Force-style AAR receptacle designed to interface with the heavy flying boom of an aerial tanker. By contrast the maritime F-35B STOVL and F-35C CATOBAR variants for the US Marine Corps and US Navy are equipped with a retractable AAR elbow-probe designed to interface with a less heavy long hose-drogue towed by a tanker, or by a buddy fighter temporarily configured as an expedient tanker.

    The refuelling boom carried by specialised tankers is subject to damage and malfunction due to slapping and ramming, and it can also damage the AAR receptacle on a receiving aircraft. However those large tankers typically have a boom and two underwing hose-drogue pods .On that basis and the redundancy factor implicit in twin hoses it is apparent that many receiver aircraft would be better secured and more employable if dual equipped with an AAR receptacle and an AAR probe.

    There have been no reports of a version of the F-35A being either dual equipped or singly equipped with just an AAR probe. So those European and other forces which have traditionally employed buddy fighters and specialised hose-drogue - or boom and hose-drogue - tankers may be doing so knowing that acquisition of the F-35A CTOL will leave them with loose ends.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •