US military, technology, arms, tactics

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

With C-UAS and FAC lasers being operated and/or fitted on ships, the focus in the R&D field is now towards extending that to Anti Ship Cruise Missile defense. There is already a 300 kW SSL Army program that the USN can leverage as well as the extensive laser scaling effort (500kW - MW class systems) that was launched by the Secretary of Defense (defense wide) so a few options available that are near-medium term options.

CNO visit reveals ODIN-HELCAP laser weapon transition plan
New information has emerged on the US Navy’s (USN’s) plans to demonstrate a high-energy laser weapon able to defeat anti-ship cruise missile (ASCM) threats.

Details of the engineering approach being pursued for the High Energy Laser Counter ASCM Project (HELCAP) beam director were revealed on a wallboard appearing in official photographs showing a visit by Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Admiral Michael Gilday to Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division (NSWCDD) on 17 November. Information on the board indicates that HELCAP will build on the AN/SEQ-4 Optical Dazzler Interdictor, Navy (ODIN) system already being fitted to selected DDG 51 Flight IIA guided-missile destroyers.

HELCAP is intended to evaluate, develop, experiment and demonstrate various laser technologies for a system that would offer a capability to effect ‘hard-kill’ defeat of ASCMs engaged on crossing trajectories. While the USN has previously demonstrated the efficacy of high-energy lasers to defeat unmanned air systems (UASs) and small boat threats, achieving a hard kill against an ASCM will demand a more powerful weapon with greater range.

The HELCAP initiative is intended to deliver a flexible prototype system for government experimentation and demonstration. Key elements of the system include the beam control testbed, a 300 kW+ laser source, a prototype control system, and auxiliary prime power and cooling.
Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Couple of new developments around the Extended Range - AARGM (Advanced Anti Radiation Guided Missile). First, the US Navy announced its intention to award the first 2 LRIP batch contracts in the current Fiscal Year (which will provide them enough rounds to declare IOC in 2023) which follows the RDT&E award that included 17 missiles which were to be used for development/operational testing prior to declaring IOC.

Now the USAF has awarded the integration contract to Lockheed Martin for integrating the weapon on the F-35A. The USAF won't be operating the baseline AARGM-ER but will add its own (new) warhead and use it as a high speed stand-in weapon for a broader anti-IADS threat. The ER-AARGM more than doubles the range from the existing AARGM (which has similar range to HARM) while keeping the flight time the same (so also 2+ x increase in average speed). The AARGM program (which takes in a USN HARM and adds the ARGM guidance fit) will continue and the new build AARGM-ER program will run in parallel. It is widely believed that the AARGM-ER is one of the first programs leveraging KTA and OATK's first generation highly loaded grain solid rocket motor designs.

Lockheed Martin Awarded Contract To Integrate AARGM-ER Missiles With USAF’ F-35A Jets
The US Air Force is moving closer to the integration of an advanced air-defense busting missile to its newest F-35A fighter jets.

On Monday, the Department of Defense awarded a $9.3-million contract to Lockheed Martin to integrate the long-awaited AARGM-ER missiles with the platform.
The US Air Force is moving closer to the integration of an advanced air-defense busting missile to its newest F-35A fighter jets.

On Monday, the Department of Defense awarded a $9.3-million contract to Lockheed Martin to integrate the long-awaited AARGM-ER missiles with the platform.

“Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Fort Worth, Texas, has been awarded a $9,326,062 cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for the Long Range Systems Division seeking to integrate the Navy Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile-Extended Range (AARGM-ER) into the F-35,” the Defense Department said in a statement.

The AARGM-ER (Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile-Extended Range) is a further development of the AGM-88 HARM anti-radiation missile, used to destroy enemy air defense network.he new missile would give those stealthy jets, as well as other aircraft in the future, an important tool for quickly knocking down anti-access and area denial threats, as well as destroying pop-up targets on short notice,” Tyler Rogoway wrote for TheDrive.

With Lockheed Martin bagging the contract, the weapon system would also find its way into the US Air Force’s F-35A CTOL (conventional take-off and landing) fleet. Lockheed Martin is the parent manufacturing company of the F-35 aircraft as well.
Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

The X band inferometric fire-control radars used in the successful demonstration by the USAF in using a US Army Howitzer to guide a Hypervelocity projectile to intercept a cruise missile. I think eventually they will extend this to short range ballistic targets as well but that may require a different gun (perhaps a smaller railgun)

Image

https://breakingdefense.com/2020/10/the ... able-data/

And though not confirmed, this would tend to line up nicely with the BQM-177A milestones as well which is now the latest surrogate target for the USN (PEO portfolio owner) as far as simulating subsonic cruise missiles is concerned. The target was declared IOC last year and received full-rate production clearance this october.

Image

Image

Image
arvin
BRFite
Posts: 672
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by arvin »

brar_w wrote:The X band inferometric fire-control radars used in the successful demonstration by the USAF in using a US Army Howitzer to guide a Hypervelocity projectile to intercept a cruise missile. I think eventually they will extend this to short range ballistic targets as well but that may require a different gun (perhaps a smaller railgun)

brar, is this the XBIR that you mentioned in Armenia thread for C-RAM purpose? Size wise looks hugh.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

arvin wrote:
brar_w wrote:The X band inferometric fire-control radars used in the successful demonstration by the USAF in using a US Army Howitzer to guide a Hypervelocity projectile to intercept a cruise missile. I think eventually they will extend this to short range ballistic targets as well but that may require a different gun (perhaps a smaller railgun)

brar, is this the XBIR that you mentioned in Armenia thread for C-RAM purpose? Size wise looks hugh.
This is a XBIR radar, made by the same OEM, but not the same type of interferometer mounted on the Stryker. That is seen in the pic below mounted on the front of the vehicle and is an adaptation of the CR&M tracking sensor. The precision required to guide a hit-to-kill (or near-hit-to-kill) system like the HVP to a high rate of fire RAM threat is not very different from providing the same precise tracking to allow for aim point selection and guidance of a high-energy-laser system to a similar rocket or mortar threat. Thus the choice of a similar type of RF sensor is not surprising.

The larger of the two radars posted in the picture you quoted is designed to handle both H2K against cruise missiles and tactical ballistic missiles. You can see that the cross range accuracy requirements are really influencing the size of the sensor. This is not a concern for a CRAM solution that is looking to track targets to hand off to a EO/IR sensor guiding a laser that is part of a SHORAD system.

Image
arvin
BRFite
Posts: 672
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by arvin »

brar_w wrote:
The larger of the two radars posted in the picture you quoted is designed to handle both H2K against cruise missiles and tactical ballistic missiles. You can see that the cross range accuracy requirements are really influencing the size of the sensor. This is not a concern for a CRAM solution that is looking to track targets to hand off to a EO/IR sensor guiding a laser that is part of a SHORAD system.
Got it. Difference in tracking RAM vs Cruise missiles. Amazing what one can do if a sensor is 'AESA-fied' in terms of scaling for different application.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

arvin wrote:
brar_w wrote:
The larger of the two radars posted in the picture you quoted is designed to handle both H2K against cruise missiles and tactical ballistic missiles. You can see that the cross range accuracy requirements are really influencing the size of the sensor. This is not a concern for a CRAM solution that is looking to track targets to hand off to a EO/IR sensor guiding a laser that is part of a SHORAD system.
Got it. Difference in tracking RAM vs Cruise missiles. Amazing what one can do if a sensor is 'AESA-fied' in terms of scaling for different application.
Yes the higher cross range accuracy required for BMD or CMD is going to require a greater distance between individual antennas as is seen in the larger of the two sensors shown side by side in the first image. These are not your traditional AESA radars but separated transmit and receive antennas that are essentially measuring the offset and angle of arrival of a signal. Individually, each antenna (T or R) is comprised of individual solid state transmit or receive elements. Antenna separation will increase accuracy against the longer ranged threats. As tracking sensors, they are even capable of tracking individual 30 caliber rounds. You can see that the stryker solution is very similar to the RAM tracking sensor that as a stand alone towable sensor has been used by the US Army at its test ranges for quite a while now (pictured below). It has one transmit antenna (in the middile) and 3 receive antennas equally spaced.

The reason why the cruise missile defense effort was important NOW was that they finally have a scalable command and control that can stitch fire-control level tracks and solve for things like track correlation and ghosts that can crop up one when is dealing with very long range track custody issues. This is not easy to do and technology is still maturing and will be fielded in the coming 3-5 years. With that in hand, even the larger sensors can contribute when coupled with gun based systems (like a US Army Howitzer leveraging the HVP) for things like air-base defense which is going to be important because no one is just going to launch a handful of cruise missiles at US bases..it will likely be in the dozens so requires a very large magazine and if they can get Howitzers to contribute then once they have an autoloader they basically have a very low cost weapon against this threat. And one they have plenty in stock. Think of what a CENTCOM air-base can expect in terms of a cruise and ballistic missile barrage if things were to escalate with Iran.

So sensors like these, with their precision tracking and highly accurate fire-control will allow for command guidance to be provided to things like HVP which get you that sub $100K intercept (with a $20K round) against a cruise missile which is extremely cost competitive (to the cost of the cruise missile itself) and a scalable solution that can hope to keep up with the growth in the threat. So you could see two versions of something like the Hypervelocity projectile. A more expensive US Navy round for its 5" guns and future EMRG that has a seeker, and a command guided lower cost USAF/US Army round for Cruise Missile Defense (or even TBM defense) that compensates for a seeker by leveraging the XBIR to obtain the necessary angular resolution required to complete the intercept. For smaller systems that use a High Energy Laser, you still need to precisely track a potentially large stream of mortar or rocket rounds and hand off these targets to the organic EO/IR sensor supporting the laser weapon. Hence a similar choice of sensor. When these vehicles will perform the Counter unmanned aerial system role, they will leverage the same S-band radars to provide 360 degree situational awareness that will help identify the threat so that the EO/IR sensors can be slewed accordingly. It isn't yet clear whether the 50 KW laser weapon (on a Stryker) will have two variants with one focusing on CR&M and the other C-UAS or combine both these into one vehicle capable of supporting both. If it is the latter then you will see the S-band radar mounted on the vehicle as they go through testing. If not we'll see a different vehicle configuration appear and hit testing sooner rather than later since they want to field the first unit in the next 2-3 or so years.

Image
Last edited by brar_w on 28 Nov 2020 22:10, edited 8 times in total.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

USAF’s C-130J uses ABFDS for hot-pit refuel of F-22 Raptors

The US Air Force (USAF) has announced that a C-130J Super Hercules aircraft has used an Aerial Bulk Fuel Delivery System (ABFDS) during a refuelling mission.

The system was used to carry out hot-pit refuelling of two F-22 Raptors at Koror Palau International Airport.

This is a part of the series of operations related to Westpac deployment of the 94th Expeditionary Fighter Squadron to the US Indo-Pacific Command’s area of responsibility.

As per the Air Expeditionary Force Fuels Management Pocket Guide, ABFDS system is designed to allow the aircraft to transport fuel quickly to different locations near or behind enemy lines.

It is normally equipped on the C-130s. However, it can also be used on the C-5 Galaxies and C-17 Globemaster IIIs.

Pacific Air Forces command fuels functional manager chief master sergeant Steve McClure said: “Hot-pit refuelling operations using ABFDS are relatively new.

“The primary design of the ABFDS system is to refuel or to take bulk fuel to bladders in a contingency location.

“It has the capability to refuel aircraft and always has, but we’ve stepped that up with agile combat employment.”

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

A recent update to one of the most important next generation programs in the USAF -

JUST IN: Air Force’s Advanced Battle Management System Takes New Step
In a move solidifying the importance of the Advanced Battle Management System program to the Air Force, officials are transferring parts of the high-profile effort to its Rapid Capabilities Office, the service’s acquisition chief said Nov. 24.

Will Roper, the Air Force’s assistant secretary for acquisition, technology and logistics, signed a directive Nov. 23 assigning the Advanced Battle Management System delivery phases to the Air Force’s Rapid Capabilities Office. The RCO will be responsible for the ABMS acquisition strategy and integrating all ABMS capabilities for delivery to operational users.

“ABMS is ready for a program executive office,” Roper said in a briefing. “I've taken a more delayed approach, which you know is unusual for me, I definitely like to go fast — as fast as we possibly can to compete — but when you tell the Pentagon and the world that you are finally going to build the internet [of things] for the military, it takes some real thought and diligence to back that up.”

The program is a top priority for the service and is envisioned as a network of interconnected platforms that will allow users to rapidly collect, analyze and share information.

This network — an “internet of things” for the military — will connect the Air Force and Space Force together, as well as the other services, through a concept called joint all-domain command and control, or JADC2. ABMS underpins the Air Force’s approach to the concept.

ABMS is intended to replace the capabilities of the Airborne Warning and Control System, or AWACS, and the Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System, or JSTARS.

The service has already held high-profile “on-ramp” exercises this year where it has worked alongside industry to test out numerous technologies.

Roper cited an inherited acquisition system, which does not “deal well with cross-cutting capabilities or with capabilities that continually update” as an issue prior to transferring ABMS to the RCO.

“This has been particularly challenging," he said. "You can't assign something this cross-cutting to one individual program team and hope they can go sit in isolation and birth a capability that in theory should touch every platform."

ABMS “on-ramps” will remain under the service’s Chief Architect Preston Dunlap.

"The team has done remarkable over the last year and a half,” he said. “I didn't want to water down what the architecture team is doing so well on, which is these rapid spirals and demonstrating internet like effects.”

As the architecture team remains in place, the RCO, which was designed to speed development and fielding of capabilities, will be responsible for the ABMS acquisition strategy and integrating all ABMS capabilities for delivery.

“They will also be responsible for providing the consolidated work breakdown structure, the consolidated baselines, and most importantly, making funding trades when there's not enough funding to do all,” Roper said.

The RCO is expected to ensure that the Air and Space Force deliver usable capabilities to the joint force and not partial capabilities that don’t add up operationally, Roper said.

“I would rather have 70 percent of ABMS completed at a 100 percent level and be ready to be used operationally, than a hundred percent of ABMS completed at a 70 percent level," he said. "The RCO will have that task to meet."

Additionally, another reason the RCO was chosen as the integrating program office is due to its experience working with cross-organizational and multi-classification issues, he said.
Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

A great thread (Twitter Thread) on the recent revelation of the existence of the HfyFly2 program in the US Navy. There were rumours over the last year that the US Navy was looking for or had a separate carrier borne hypersonic program that met its requirement for magazine size and transportation and this basically confirmed it.
Dr. Gillian Bussey reveals ongoing work on HyFly 2 airbreathing hypersonic weapon at IDGA Hypersonic Summit. Intended for use on carrier-based aircraft. Original HyFly program ended w/ unsuccessful flights in 2006, 2007. HyFly 2 completed Critical Design Review in the last year.

Image
Image
HyFly uses a Dual Combustion Ramjet, a hydrocarbon propulsion tech developed by JHU APL in 70s/80s and matured through HWT and ARRMD programs. Uses 2 sets of scoops & combustors for supersonic and subsonic combustion, allowing for performance over wider speed range up to Mach 6.

Image
Image
The Navy successfully tested a 50%-scale HyFly engine, FASTT, in 2005.

Image
Image
More slides on HyFly.

Image
Image
Image
Image
It also keeps Boeing in the hypersonic game after Lockheed and Raytheon pretty much scooped up all prior contracts. Hyfly was originally one of the two hypersonic efforts that Boeing was leading. The X-51 was the one that scooped up much of the media spotlight and ultimately led to the follow on HAWC program. But the sub-scale hyfly still was able to achieve scramjet activation and Mach 5.5 flight with scramjet run times close to 20 seconds so it probably did move the needle significantly which probably feeds into the HyFly 2.0.

Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

A great reference image to illustrate a change in technology, mission scope, and requirements etc

Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

A good write-up on the F-15 QA (and EX) testing and how the QA baseline (on which USAF's EX is based) differs from the Saudi Advanced Eagle :

What It's Like Test Flying The Most Advanced F-15 Eagle Ever Built


Posting some highlights :

* Boeing announced the first flight of the F-15QA on April 14, 2020, which took place at the manufacturer’s Lambert International Airport in St. Louis, Missouri. Three F-15QAs are currently in Boeing’s flight-test program, with two examples having been dispatched to Air Force Plant 42 at Palmdale, in California, for intensive trials in November.

* “The Advanced F-15 has new flight control computers, and a new digital architecture — so with the complete redesign we had to go out and verify numbers that had been in the tech orders since the 1970s.”..“We re-validated the envelope, and verified that the performance was as good as or better — in almost all cases better — than [earlier] F-15s. Some of that testing included flutter, where you shake the airplane at very high speeds and at varying altitudes, to determine if there’s going to be any vibrations that are objectionable or cause any structural damage. We did noise and vibration testing, and high angle-of-attack work..

* The aim of bringing fly-by-wire to the F-15 was threefold. Reliability, redundancy, and performance. “From a reliability perspective, you have two flight control computers, and each has two channels, plus quadruple inputs to each of the flight control surfaces. A quad-redundant flight control system from the flight control computers to the stabilators provides very high levels of reliability. The mean time between failures for flight control problems rose significantly higher. I can say personally, in the six-plus years of flight-test that I did on the new digital fly-by-wire flight control system, I had zero ground aborts for flight controls.”

* The F-15QA features the same digital FBW flight control system, as well as two significant developments over the F-15SA — the new cockpit and structural enhancements. The wings and the nose barrel were completed with Boeing’s Full-Size Determinant Assembly [FSDA] production techniques. F-15 FSDA uses a process to eliminate drilling and shimming from assembly by adding fastener holes at the supplier level.

* “The bedrock of the new cockpit layout is the new all-glass Large Area Display [LAD],” explains Giese. “The test program for the QA is designed to mature this product.” That testing consists of verifying the major mission systems on the aircraft: such as the Raytheon AN/APG-82(v)1 Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar, and how the the LAD interfaces with what Giese calls “the heartbeat of the jet” — the ADCP II (Advanced Display Core Processor II) mission computer.

* “We have taken a lot of lessons learned from other platforms and rolled them into this LAD technology. You can manipulate the display with a bare or gloved finger, or move individual windows around by tapping and moving them. One of the feedbacks we got from other platforms is that in turbulent environments or if you’re under G, it can be hard to manipulate the touchscreen, so we’ve made everything on the LAD to also be controllable via the Hands-On Throttle-And-Stick [HOTAS] controls — you can move cursors, change the display format — so you don't have to actually touch the display. Other feedback we got is that some pilots just like to push a button or rotate a knob, so underneath the new low-profile Head-Up Display [HUD] is what’s called the HRCCP [HUD Radio Communications Control Panel]. This features the same digital keypad as on the LAD, so if you want to go old fashioned and hit a button or change a radio channel, you can do that — including under G or in turbulent conditions — as opposed to using the large area touch display capability. It’s the exact same format as on the LAD, so it’s not something else you have to learn.”

* The main difference between the F-15QA and the F-15EX is that the new USAF Eagles will include the Eagle Passive Active Warning Survivability System (EPAWSS). In addition, the F-15QA runs a bespoke customer Operational Flight Program (OFP) software, whereas the F-15EX will run OFP Suite 9, which dovetails with the current F-15E Strike Eagle and F-15C standard.

* Boeing intends to wrap-up F-15QA verification work in time for deliveries next year. The flight-test team will then move over to F-15EX verification testing. The work that is already being completed with the Qatari jets is helping to expedite that process, meaning that the USAF’s new Advanced F-15s will be able to meet the objective of being ready and available on the flightline in very short order — complete with all the latest bells and whistles found on the world’s most impressive Eagles to date, and more.
Image

Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Sad end but logical given that it would have basically occupied a dry-dock for half a decade or more and come back with a questionable ROI. I can see the USMC looking at a higher utilization of joint US-UK QE Carrier patrols in the PACOM AOR to make up for the shortfall in projected deployments as they place an order for a new vessel to replace it -

US Navy Will Scrap USS Bonhomme Richard
The Navy decided to scrap the amphibious assault ship that burned for nearly five days earlier this year, concluding after months of investigations that trying to rebuild and restore the ship would take too much money and too much industrial base capacity.

The July 12 fire aboard USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD-6) began in the lower vehicle storage area but ravaged the island, the mast and the flight deck as it burned its way through the inside of the big-deck amphib. The ship remained watertight throughout the ordeal and hasn’t been moved from its spot on the pier at Naval Base San Diego, but between the fire itself and the days-long firefighting effort, about 60-percnet of the ship was ruined and would have had to be rebuilt or replaced, Rear Adm. Eric Ver Hage, the commander of Navy Regional Maintenance Center and the director of surface ship maintenance and modernization, told reporters today in a phone call.

After thorough consideration, the secretary of the Navy and the chief of naval operations have decided to decommission the Bonhomme Richard due to the extensive damage sustained during that July fire. In the weeks and months since that fire, the Navy conducted a comprehensive material assessment to determine the best path forward for that ship and our Navy,” he said.

Three main options were considered: rebuild and restore the ship to its original function of moving Marines and their gear around for amphibious warfare; rebuild the ship to a new configuration for a new mission, such as a submarine or surface ship tender or a hospital ship; or decommission and scrap the ship.

Ver Hage said restoring Bonhomme Richard to its original form would have cost between $2.5 billion and $3.2 billion and taken five to seven years. That work would have taken place in the Gulf Coast, he said.

Rebuilding the ship for a new purpose would have cost “in excess of a billion dollars” and also taken about five to seven years. Though cheaper than rebuilding to the original configuration, Ver Hage said it would be cheaper to just design and build a new tender or hospital ship from scratch.

Decommissioning the ship – and the inactivation, harvesting of parts, towing and scrapping the hull – will cost about $30 million and take just nine to 12 months.

“Examining those three courses of action, we reached the conclusion that we needed to decommission the platform,” he said.

The inactivation can’t start just yet, as four investigations into the fire are still ongoing. Bonhomme Richard is already being prepped for towing, though, and Ver Hage said harvesting of some systems has been happening since September and will continue. Once the investigations end, more substantive work can be done to take out larger systems that could be reused by other ships in the fleet, inactivate the ship, and either tow it to the Gulf Coast for scrapping or tow it to storage in the Pacific Northwest until a Gulf Coast yard is ready for it.

Four investigations are taking place in parallel: a Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) criminal investigation, which now includes the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF); a command investigation led by Vice Adm. Scott Conn, the commander of U.S. 3rd Fleet; a Naval Sea Systems Command failure review board, which will look at safety, structural and design issues related to the ship and how changes could be made to prevent a fire from moving through the hull the way it did on Bonhomme Richard; and a NAVSEA safety investigation board to examine the events that look place on the ship leading up to the fire compared to existing policies and procedures.

The Navy will now be down an amphibious assault ship – and one that had been recently upgraded to accommodate the F-35B Joint Strike Fighter – which will be a blow to operators. However, Ver Hage said the comprehensive assessments looked at what would happen to the industrial base and new ship construction for the fleet if the Navy opted to rebuild Bonhomme Richard, and the price – not in dollars, but in burden on the industrial base – was too great to justify.

“In the end, the decommissioning decision had a number of factors, and one of which was, what would be the impact of the dollars spent and the actual effort to rebuild, what would be the impact on the industrial base? The dollars definitely would disrupt our strategy for investment. And then from an industrial base perspective, we had concerns that it would impact new construction or other repair work, and we knew that Gulf Coast would be the spot to get the building or the restoration done because of the capacity and their capabilities – but in the end made the decision for multiple factors, as I mentioned, that decommissioning would be the way to go,” Ver Hage told USNI News during the call.

Bonhomme Richard was nearing the end of a maintenance period when the fire broke out, and among the work that had been done to the ship was a modernization of computer and other systems to support F-35B Joint Strike Fighter operations.

By September, the crew was already removing from the ship gear that hadn’t been damaged by fire or water, Rear Adm. Philip Sobeck, the commanding officer of Expeditionary Strike Group 3 in San Diego, told USNI News during a visit to the pier on Sept. 18.

“We’re not dismantling Bonhomme Richard at all, we’re just preserving what we can,” he clarified, saying the gear could be put back into the ship if it was going to be rebuilt or could be put into the supply system if the ship was inactivated.
“The things that you can plug and play, we’re using that for other class ships, other things, and keeping sort of the supply system going.”

Ver Hage told USNI News during the media call that the ship was extensively damaged, and part of assessing that damage was pulling out gear and looking at it more closely on the pier – everything from antennas on the mast to launching gear in the well deck.

“We knew that, whether we were going to repair or upgrade to a different configuration or decommission, that we needed that gear off the ship. So that allowed us to move out with confidence on getting the most sensitive equipment off the ship. And now that we have a decommissioning decision, we’re going to get after some equipment that might be a little heavier, maybe down in the engineering spaces or electrical components or things that we would have left in place if it was going to be reused, if the ship was going to be brought back to life,” the rear admiral said.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

So much for that absurd notion of an "unsinkable carrier" that gets thrown around without much thought put to it -

US Defense Dept advances Tinian projects
After decades of talk, the US Department of Defense is finally moving forward with several projects on the Northern Marianas island of Tinian.

The action is taking shape in a flurry of economic investments on the island, with Governor Ralph Torres saying CNMI companies were now expanding to Tinian as the US military was set to build a divert airfield there.

Among the investments, the Triple J Group of Companies is expanding its operations with the construction of a hotel and restaurant as well as a wholesale store and a beefed-up rental car concession.

The divert airfield on Tinian is being developed as an alternative landing site for US Air Force planes in case the Anderson Air Force Base in Guam is inaccessible .

Meanwhile Torres called on incoming lawmakers from the Democratic Party to work with his administration for the good of the CNMI.

Torres, who is the de facto leader of the local Republican Party, said he would need everyone in the CNMI to work together to improve the lives of its residents even as the islands have weathered two super typhoons the past several years and are battling a pandemic...

Image

Tinian North Field, Northern Marianas, the largest US air base during World War II. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Pretty sure "inaccessible" means something other than the WIFI on the island being down.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

We now have 4 contenders for the 100+ km 155mm cannon artillery round. Boeing and Norwegian Nammo are developing one, Raytheon and Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research are developing a round, and now Northrop (OATK) just showed progress in testing with its propulsion. This appears to be lining up as a competition to the Excalibur follow-on as opposed to just a longer ranged artillery round (which wouldn't have made all these OEM's interested). Conservatively, a 50% range increase over the Excalibur gets them that 100 km mark. It also lands them in between the 75 km G-MLRS and the 150 km ER-GMLRS and provides a second option for artillery strike in support of CAS or SEAD at those ranges. On guidance they have both M-CODE Excalibur, ALT-PNT (in the works), and now a SAL seeker integrated on the Excalibur. A fire and forget seeker is probably next to reduce the burden on third party targeting. The "all weather reference" in the news release likely suggests an RF assisted or a multi-mode seeker.

Projectile concept shows potential to extend munition range to more than 100km

Northrop Grumman Corporation successfully completed multiple rounds of tests on its Solid Fuel Ramjet (SFRJ) tactical engine configuration – a technology to enable long range precision fires, one of the U.S. Army’s key priorities.

Conducted as part of phase one of the U.S. Army’s XM1155 Extended-Range Artillery Projectile (ERAP) program, the SFRJ tests validated gun-launched survivability and performance predictions, and demonstrated the potential of extending projectile range to more than 100 kilometers, which is a significant increase compared to current fielded artillery projectiles.

The XM1155 ERAP program will provide an extended range, guided 155mm artillery round capable of defeating moving and stationary targets in all terrain and weather conditions. The munition system is being designed to provide multi-domain battlespace dominance against high level targets.

“Successful completion of the rigorous tests of the Solid Fuel Ramjet demonstrates maturation of the technology to survive the very challenging gun-launch environment and significantly extend the range of the U.S. military’s current field artillery with a high level of confidence,” said Pat Nolan, vice president, missile products, Northrop Grumman.
Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Boeing starts production of T-7 training jet simulators


Image
Boeing has begun production of the first T-7A ground-based training systems, preparing the way for the company to make its first deliveries in 2023.

Workers at Boeing’s plant in St. Louis, Missouri, are currently assembling the first two weapon systems trainers and one operational flight trainer, the company said in a news release Tuesday. Those assets will be among the first simulators the company expects to deliver to Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph, Texas, in 2023.

The high-fidelity simulators include 8K native projectors that supports imagery that is 16 times the clarity of high-definition video, and the crew stations are equipped with motion seats that simulate the sensation of flight, Boeing stated.

The ground-based trainers will be able to connect to a physical T-7A, meaning that pilots virtually training can team up with those performing live flights in the T-7 aircraft. Because the simulators were built with an open-architecture backbone, it can be easily modified with new software applications.

“The Red Hawk’s training system is arguably the most advanced in the world. It’s a game changer,” said Chuck Dabundo, Boeing’s vice president of the T-7 programs. “This system is 100% integrated with the pilot’s real-world experience, offering ‘real-as-it-gets’ simulation. We’re working closely with the U.S. Air Force and look forward to testing and fielding the devices.” In 2018, Boeing won the $9.2 billion contract for the T-X program after submitting a bid that shaved about $10 billion off the Air Force’s initial estimates. The indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contract allows the Air Force to buy up to 475 aircraft and 120 simulators, although the current plan is to buy 351 T-7 aircraft, 46 simulators and associated ground equipment.

Under the initial $813 million award, Boeing will deliver five T-7 aircraft and seven simulators.

Initial operating capability is planned by the end of fiscal 2024 when the first squadron of T-7A aircraft and its associated simulators are all available for training. Full operational capability is projected for 2034.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

The first USMC F-35C squadron is now operational -

Image

The U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) Marine Fighter Attack Squadron (VMFA) 314 declares their initial operational capability (IOC) for the F-35C Lightning II stealth fighter aircraft.

The IOC declaration marks a significant accomplishment for 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing (MAW), enabling VMFA-314 to deploy the F-35C onto aircraft carriers where they will be able to support combat operations anywhere in the world.

To receive this qualification, squadrons must meet the Headquarters Marine Corps standards, which define the minimum number of trained Marines, mission ready aircraft and trained pilots needed in order for a squadron to become IOC complete.

“The F-35 is an expeditionary platform that extends the reach of our Marines and machines, and increases our ability to support joint and allied partners at a moment’s notice,” said Maj. Gen. Christopher Mahoney, 3rd MAW commanding general. “By effectively employing the F-35, MAGTF [Marine Air-Ground Task Force] commanders have the potential to dominate our adversaries in a joint battlespace, in the air and out at sea.”

The F-35’s ability to combine advanced stealth capabilities, integrated avionics and the most powerful sensor package the Department of Defense has ever seen allows it to operate in contested areas, and gives the Marine Corps an unparalleled ability to maintain air superiority in dynamic, unpredictable and competitive environments.

The capability to employ the F-35 alongside 3rd MAW’s other capabilities further enables support of fleet Marines and joint and allied partners preserves 3rd MAW’s ability to dominate the battlespace for the MAGTF and joint commanders...

"The F-35C's unique capabilities, compared to the F-35B and legacy aircraft, provide the Marine Corps with a complementary increase in combat projection and the ability to operate from the U.S. Navy's aircraft carriers," said Lt. Col. Duncan French, VMFA-314 executive officer, in the release.

French credited the Marines' latest success to the consistent maintenance that kept the C-variant ready to fly.

"In addition to accepting and inspecting the multiple aircraft that arrived throughout the year, the Marines maintained a high level of aircraft readiness," he said. "Those mission-capable aircraft allowed the pilots to train in the appropriate missions required of IOC [and] contributed towards the readiness metrics of IOC."

VMFA-314 is also a squadron of historical firsts: It was the first squadron in the Navy Department to fly the F/A-18 Hornet jet in the 1980s.

Additionally, the squadron was the first to transition to the F-4B Phantom ground-attack aircraft in 1961; and the "Black Knights" were the first members of 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing to transition to jet aircraft in 1952 and fly the F-9F Panther.


LINK
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Rakesh »

Yes, Serbian Air Defenses Did Hit Another F-117 During Operation Allied Force In 1999
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3 ... ce-in-1999
01 Dec 2020
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

With scramjet HAWC flight tests mere weeks away, they seem to be expanding the overall scramjet R&D effort which has involved US-Australia partnership for quite a while now(HIFiRE etc). The USAF timelines for fielding a HAWC derivative is probably inside 5 years but if Australia can field something like this in the 2020's then that would be a major boost to their Super Hornet fleet that will need that stand-off attack capability.

Australia, US partner on air-launched hypersonic missile

Australia and the United States are partnering to develop and test an air-launched hypersonic cruise missile under the bilateral Southern Cross Integrated Flight Research Experiment program, or SCIFiRE, the two countries announced Monday.

From the U.S. perspective, the effort falls under the Allied Prototyping Initiative, which is managed by the Directorate of Advanced Capabilities within the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering.

The program will be executed by the U.S. Air Force under the auspices of the weapons program executive officer, and it will leverage more than 15 years of collaboration on research into scramjets, rocket motors, sensors and advanced manufacturing materials between the two countries.

The agreement follows discussions between former U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper and Australian Defence Minister Linda Reynolds during the bilateral Australia-US Ministerial Consultation talks held in Washington in July.

“SCIFiRE is a true testament to the enduring friendship and strong partnership between the United States and Australia,” Michael Kratsios, acting undersecretary of defense for research and engineering, said in a statement. “This initiative will be essential to the future of hypersonic research and development, ensuring the US and our allies lead the world in the advancement of this transformational warfighting capability. We thank the Australian Department of Defence for their shared commitment to this game-changing effort.”

The SCIFIRE program will leverage the collaborative work undertaken in partnership with the Royal Australian Air Force, the Australian Defence Science and Technology Group, and the University of Queensland on the Hypersonic International Flight Research Experimentation program.

The new weapon will be a Mach 5-class precision strike missile that is propulsion-launched and powered by an air-breathing scramjet engine. It’s expected to enter service within the next five to 10 years.


The head of Air Force capability at the RAAF Headquarters in Canberra, Air Vice Marshal Catherine Roberts, said the weapon will be capable of being carried by tactical fighter aircraft such as the F/A-18F Super Hornet, EA-18G Growler and F-35A Lightning II, as well as the P-8A Poseidon maritime surveillance aircraft.

Testing will take place in Australia, possibly at the Woomera Test Range in the remote outback of South Australia.

While no funding details have been released to date, Roberts said Australia’s recent Force Structure Plan 2020 included between AU$6.2 billion and AU$9.3 billion (U.S. $4.6 billion to U.S. $6.9 billion) for high-speed, long-range strike and missile defense capabilities, of which SCIFiRE is an example.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Interesting aspect of the Joint Light Tactical vehicle that is often ignored in the general coverage. The US Army purchased all the Technical baseline of the system design upfront and reserves the right to award a competitor (or a second production partner if both are maintained) (that will have full design access ) in 2022 once the current lot of 18,000 vehicles and supporting material are delivered.
The Army’s already shared Oshkosh’s Joint Light Tactical Vehicle design with rival companies, who hope to take over the program when a new competition is held in 2022. But, having announced a new $911 million order just yesterday, Oshkosh Defense is confident that it’ll fend off all challengers and keep building JLTVs for years to come, general manager George Mansfield told me this morning.

“This contract really shows how the Joint Program Office feels about Oshkosh,” Mansfield said. “They’re very confident we build a good quality product, [and] we are on time and under budget so far.”

In fact, Mansfield said, Oshkosh JLTVs were coming in so much under budget that the military was able to buy more vehicles in less time than the original contract anticipated. (And it did so despite cuts to the JLTV budget in recent years). That’s why the Army — which runs JLTV on behalf of all the US armed services and seven foreign customers from Belgium to Brazil — had to issue the new contract this fall.

You see, in 2015, when Oshkosh beat aerospace titan Lockheed Martin and Humvee manufacturer AM General, the Army issued a production contract with a maximum value of $6.7 billion and a maximum quantity of 16,901 vehicles. That contract was supposed to last eight years, through 2022. Before it ran out, the Army would hold a new competition, open to all comers, with the winner – perhaps Oshkosh, perhaps a rival – getting a new contract to build JLTVs after 2022.

But Oshkosh kept selling JLTVs more cheaply than the 2015 contract had assumed. That meant the military could buy more vehicles more quickly, even with a reduced budget for JLTV. That meant, in turn, that it ran up against the 2015 contract’s 16,901-vehicle maximum this fall, two years ahead of schedule.

So, to keep production going, the Army issued the new contract: an additional $911 million for 2,738 more JLTVs, plus 1,001 trailers and other kit. That brings the total on order to 18,073 JLTVs, of which over half – about 9,500 – have already been delivered.

What does a JLTV cost? That’s tricky. Oshkosh doesn’t divulge exact prices. The government’s estimated Average Procurement Unit Cost per JLTV is $395,000 (once adjusted for inflation; it’s $365,000 in 2015 dollars). If you just divide the dollar value of the new contract by the number of vehicles, the average cost per JLTV has fallen below $333,000. But the actual price per JLTV is actually a lot lower than that, because these contracts always include trailers, specialized mission equipment for different JLTV variants, spare parts and support.

The new contract allows the Army to order additional JLTVs through November 2023. That keeps production going through the re-competition, which is scheduled to award a contract in the second half of 2022.

Now, the re-compete is not about picking a new design. Instead, it’s about giving the Army the option to pick a new manufacturer for the existing design. Under the terms of the original 2015 contract, the government bought the Technical Data Package that shows you how to build a JLTV and can give that data to any company it likes. In fact, several potential competitors have not only gotten the data package, they’ve actually leased JLTVs so they can reverse-engineer them.

But while competitors now have the JLTV design, they don’t have Oshkosh’s facilities, workforce or their years of experience actually building it.

“We’ve been manufacturing this vehicle for five years,” Mansfield told me. “We know how it’s designed because we designed it, we know how to manufacture it, we’ve got a strong supply base. So I think we’re in a very good position.”

LINK
Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Space startup Aevum debuts world’s first fully autonomous orbital rocket launching drone

Image
Launching things to space doesn’t have to mean firing a large rocket vertically using massive amounts of rocket-fuel-powered thrust — startup Aevum breaks the mould in multiple ways, with an innovative launch vehicle design that combines uncrewed aircraft with horizontal take-off and landing capabilities, with a secondary stage that deploys at high altitude and can take small payloads the rest of the way to space.

Aevum’s model actually isn’t breaking much new ground in terms of its foundational technology, according to founder and CEO Jay Skylus, with whom I spoke prior to today’s official unveiling of the startup’s Ravn X launch vehicle. Skylus, who previously worked for a range of space industry household names and startups, including NASA, Boeing, Moon Express and Firefly, told me the startup has focused primarily on making the most of existing available technologies to create a mostly reusable, fully automated small payload orbital delivery system.

To his point, Ravn X doesn’t look too dissimilar from existing jet aircraft, and bears obvious resemblance to the Predator line of UAVs already in use for terrestrial uncrewed flight. The vehicle is 80 feet long, and has a 60-foot wingspan, with a total max weight of 55,000 lbs including payload. Seventy percent of the system is fully reusable today, and Skylus says the goal is to iterate on that to the point where 95% of the launch system will be reusable in the relatively near future.

Ravn X’s delivery system is designed for rapid response delivery, and is able to get small satellites to orbit in as little as 180 minutes — with the capability of having it ready to fly and deliver another again fairly shortly after that. It uses traditional jet fuel, the same kind used on commercial airliners, and it can take off and land in “virtually any weather,” according to Skylus. It also takes off and lands on any one-mile stretch of traditional aircraft runway, meaning it can theoretically use just about any active airport in the world as a launch and landing site.

One of they key defining differences of Aevum relative to other space launch startups is that what they’re presenting isn’t theoretical, or in development — the Ravn X already has paying customers, including over $1 billion in U.S. government contracts. Its first mission is with the U.S. Space Force, the ASLON-45 small satellite launch mission (set for late 2021), and it also has a contract for 20 missions spanning nine years with the U.S. Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center. Deliveries of Aevum’s production launch vehicles to its customers have already begun, in fact, Skylus says.

The U.S. Department of Defense has for quite some time now been actively pursuing space launch options that provide it with responsive, short turnaround launch capabilities. That’s the same goal of companies like Astra, which was originally looking to win the DARPA challenge for such systems (since expired) with its Rocket small launcher. Aevum’s system has the added advantage of being essentially fully compatible with existing airfield infrastructure — and also of not requiring that human pilots be involved or at risk at all, as they are with the superficially similar launch model espoused by Virgin Orbit.
Video presentation of the Concept and mock up -

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by NRao »

Indian American Aerospace Engineer Wins Patent on Invention to Help Reverse Global Warming

8) Yak crossing next 100 Kms
The United States has awarded a patent for the "Glitter Belt" invention to help reverse global warning by aerospace engineer and retired Georgia Tech professor Dr. Narayanan Menon Komerath.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

The Congressional conference has finally cleared the consolidated FY 2021 defense budget. Congress has funded 129 new fighter aircraft ( 60 x F-35As, 10 x F-35Bs, 23 x F-35Cs, 24 x F-18E/Fs, 12 x F-15EX) and the transferring of 6 Turkish F-35A's to USAF so in effect it will clear 135 new fighters for FY21. Trump administration, in its base budget, had asked for 120 fighters and hadn't asked for any funding for transferring the Turkish aircraft to the USAF. Congress also has fully funded the B-21 bomber program as it transitions from R&D to production phase. Munition programs have also been expanded, and 1 additional Virginia class submarine has been added relative to what the White House had asked for -

House, Senate Reach Bipartisan Agreement on Massive Defense Policy Bill
As the final days of 2020 count down, House and Senate negotiators have agreed on sweeping defense policy legislation that offers nearly $732 billion to the armed forces in fiscal 2021.

The compromise version of the National Defense Authorization Act includes a slew of notable aerospace provisions like $8.7 billion for 93 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters across the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps, keeping the A-10 attack plane in the inventory while supporting many other platforms, and opting not to make the Space Force use naval ranks.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

F-35 program update with production information from November 2020. October-November saw COVID-19 cases (new) spike in the DFW area as well as a few other supplier regions for the program. But they've seemed to carry on and done pretty OK. Overall, around 10-12 deliveries for the month of November. It would be interesting to see how many 2020 planned deliveries get deferred to 2021 due to COVID but pretty safe to assume that it will be in the 12-15 range at least. The Fleet added around 10,000 flight hours in that month as well.

Image

Also, with the "Sidekick" mods fully funded for the USAF and USN aircraft (and available for block 4 upgrade for others) Lockheed is put the configuration renders into its F-35 material that in the past used to just reference "future expanded capacity".

Image
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by NRao »

Dec 4, 2020 :: GA-ASI Demonstrates Government-Supplied Code Autonomy Engine
Autonomous Flight Uses Jet-Powered Avenger as Skyborg Surrogate
SAN DIEGO – 04 December 2020 – On October 28, 2020, General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI) conducted an autonomous flight using a government-supplied Collaborative Operations in Denied Environment (CODE) autonomy engine to support air-to-air targeting missions. The CODE autonomy engine was installed on a GA-ASI Avenger Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS).

The CODE autonomy engine was implemented to further understand cognitive Artificial Intelligence (AI) processing on larger UAS platforms, such as Avenger. Using a network- enabled Tactical Targeting Network Technology (TTNT) radio for mesh network mission communications, GA-ASI was able to show integration of emerging Advanced Tactical Data Links (ATDL) and separation between flight and mission critical systems.

“This represents a big step on the path to more sophisticated autonomous missions for unmanned aircraft where operator input can be minimized to support optimal manning of multiple products for complex air battles,” said GA-ASI President David R. Alexander. “For this initial flight, we used Avenger as the flight surrogate for the Skyborg capability set, which is a key focus for GA-ASI emerging air-to-air portfolio.”

As part of the autonomous flight, the CODE autonomy software controlled the maneuvering of the Avenger UAS for over two hours without traditional pilot input. GA-ASI furthered the development of the CODE software by adding behavioral functions for a coordinated air-to-air search with up to six aircraft (for the demonstration, five of the aircraft were virtual). The CODE operator, using a small form factor commercial computer running the government-provided software, set mission objectives for the flight in which the autonomy software was used to coordinate the six aircraft to accomplish the air-to-air search objective.

GA-ASI created ground and air adapter services that passed operator mission inputs to the flying constellation of aircraft using Link 16-formatted messages that followed Joint Range Extension Applications Protocol (JREAP). The open architecture of the CODE software enables communications between the aircraft, the CODE software and the autopilot.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

A program status update (Nov 2020) on the upcoming Flight III DDG-51 program. The US Navy has 14 Flight III DDG-51's currently on contract with the first expected to be commissioned in 2023.

DDG 51 Flight III Progressing on Schedule

The U.S. Navy recently achieved several important milestones for the DDG 51 Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer Flight III upgrade, representing significant progress toward delivering critical Integrated Air and Missile Defense capability to the fleet, Program Executive Office Ships Public Affairs said in a Nov. 20 release.

The DDG 51 Flight III upgrade is centered on the AMDR/SPY-6(V)1 Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) system that provides improved capability over earlier DDG 51 class ships by enabling Flight III ships to simultaneously perform anti-air warfare and ballistic missile defense. To support this upgrade the Navy is testing and integrating ship systems at existing land-based facilities.

“This has been an extremely exciting few weeks for the DDG 51 Aegis shipbuilding program,” said Capt. Seth Miller, DDG 51 program manager. “The program remains on track to deliver this tremendous capability to the fleet. Completion of these most recent milestones is a significant accomplishment and is a testament to the hard work and dedication of the Flight III team.”

At the Land-Based Engineering Site (LBES) at the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Philadelphia Division in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania efforts are focused on testing the Hull, Mechanical and Electrical (HM&E) equipment required to facilitate the increased power and cooling requirements for the radar. The Navy recently achieved “light-off” of the Flight III electrical plant at LBES, representing completion of the Flight III HM&E equipment installation and marking the beginning of land-based HM&E system integration testing of the Flight III power system.

Concurrent to these efforts the Navy also recently accepted and installed a new AMDR array for land-based testing of the Flight III combat system at the Combat Systems Engineering Development Site in Moorestown, New Jersey. This array, along with the rest of the power distribution equipment, will be used for integration testing with the Aegis Combat System.

With Flight III ships under construction at shipbuilders Huntington Ingalls – Ingalls Shipbuilding Division in Pascagoula, Mississippi and General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, Maine, completing the test programs at both engineering sites is critical to successfully integrating these complex systems. This is particularly true for the future USS Jack H. Lucas (DDG 125), the first Flight III under construction, as it moves towards its own activation and test programs. Just last week, the second of four AMDR radar arrays was installed by HII-Ingalls in the deckhouse of the Jack H. Lucas, a significant construction event.


Image
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by NRao »

Chuck Yeager, test pilot who broke sound barrier, dies at 97

Image
Charles E. “Chuck” Yeager, a military test pilot who was the first person to fly faster than the speed of sound and live to tell about it, died Dec. 7. He was 97.

His wife, Victoria, announced the death from Gen. Yeager's official Twitter account. Additional details were not immediately available.

.............................
Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10033
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Mort Walker »

^^^He was an uneducated racist who hated Indian people. Yeager never having a college degree could never become an astronaut like other younger test pilots such as Neil Armstrong or John Young. He ended up as a USAF liaison to the Pakis in the 1960s until 1972, teaching them how to use the old F-86 Sabre fighter jet, while his colleagues were blasting off into space and the moon.
Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Vips »

NRao wrote:Chuck Yeager, test pilot who broke sound barrier, dies at 97

Image
Charles E. “Chuck” Yeager, a military test pilot who was the first person to fly faster than the speed of sound and live to tell about it, died Dec. 7. He was 97.

His wife, Victoria, announced the death from Gen. Yeager's official Twitter account. Additional details were not immediately available.

.............................
Not a moment too soon, this asshole was a paki supporter and had abused our pilots during the Indo-Pak war.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Down to 3 airframe OEMs on the Skyborg effort -
Boeing, General Atomics and Kratos will create prototypes for the Air Force’s Skyborg program and have a mere five months to build the first test vehicles of the autonomous combat drone.

As part of the Skyborg program, the Air Force hopes to build a family of low-cost, attritable drones that can be reused, but are cheap enough that losses in combat can be financially and operationally tolerated. The project is meant to produce a family of uncrewed aerial systems that can move into contested spaces and conduct aerial missions that might be too dangerous for human pilots to perform.

The Air Force announced contract awards Dec. 7 for the three companies that will produce prototypes for the air vehicle portion of Skyborg and compete in a series of experiments in the hopes of winning a production contract.

Three companies are under contract for a two-year period of performance:

• Boeing, which received $25.7 million;
• General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, which received $14.3 million;
• Kratos Unmanned Aerial Systems Inc., which received $37.8 million.

Military officials expect the first prototypes to be delivered no later than May 2021 for initial flight tests. The prototypes will then proceed into flight experiments beginning in July 2021 that will test each drones’ ability to team with manned aircraft, the service stated in a news release.

“This award is a major step forward for our game-changing Skyborg capability — this award supporting our operational experimentation is truly where concepts become realities,” said Brig. Gen. Dale White, head of the Air Force’s program executive office for fighters and advanced aircraft, which manages the program alongside the Air Force Research Laboratory.

One key differentiator between Skyborg and past combat drone programs is the development of artificial intelligence that will allow the aircraft to operate autonomously and potentially learn from prior training missions.

Over the past several months, the program has focused on developing the technologies necessary for the “Autonomous Core System,” the hardware and software that will enable the Skyborg drone to operate semi-independently from a human operator, who will be able to issue commands but will not have to physically fly the system. The system is being designed by Leidos, using input from the Air Force and other Skyborg vendors.

After prototypes are delivered, the Air Force will outfit them with that autonomy module. The three prototype manufacturers must also prove their aircraft is capable of incorporating payloads and mission systems being supplied by the other 10 companies on contract to potentially supply capabilities for the Skyborg program.

In July and September, the Air Force awarded indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contract worth up to $400 million to establish a pool of 13 vendors that would compete to offer Skyborg hardware and software — everything from the drones themselves, to sensors, weapons and algorithms.

Those companies include: AeroVironment Inc., Autodyne LLC, BAE System Controls Inc., Blue Force Technologies Inc., Fregata Systems Inc., Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, NextGen Aeronautics Inc., Northrop Grumman, Sierra Technical Services, and Wichita State University, as well as the three companies tapped to build air vehicle prototypes.

“There will be competition throughout the entire period of performance of these awards. The effort will consist of multiple phases, meant to continue evaluation of the performance of the vendors,” the service stated.

LINK
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Important milestone on the MQ-25 -

Boeing’s Autonomous MQ-25 Completes First Test Flight with Aerial Refueling Store

Boeing [NYSE: BA] and the U.S. Navy have for the first time flown the MQ-25 T1 test asset with an aerial refueling store (ARS), a significant milestone informing development of the unmanned aerial refueler.

The successful 2.5-hour flight with the Cobham ARS – the same ARS currently used by F/A-18s for air-to-air refueling – was designed to test the aircraft’s aerodynamics with the ARS mounted under the wing. The flight was conducted by Boeing test pilots operating from a ground control station at MidAmerica St. Louis Airport in Mascoutah, Ill.

“Having a test asset flying with an ARS gets us one big step closer in our evaluation of how MQ-25 will fulfill its primary mission in the fleet – aerial refueling,” said Capt. Chad Reed, the U.S. Navy’s Unmanned Carrier Aviation program manager. “T1 will continue to yield valuable early insights as we begin flying with F/A-18s and conduct deck handling testing aboard a carrier.”

Future flights will continue to test the aerodynamics of the aircraft and the ARS at various points of the flight envelope, eventually progressing to extension and retraction of the hose and drogue used for refueling.

“To see T1 fly with the hardware and software that makes MQ-25 an aerial refueler this early in the program is a visible reminder of the capability we’re bringing to the carrier deck,” said Dave Bujold, Boeing’s MQ-25 program director. “We’re ensuring the ARS and the software operating it will be ready to help MQ-25 extend the range of the carrier air wing.”

The Boeing-owned T1 test asset is a predecessor to the engineering development model aircraft being produced under a 2018 contract award. T1 is being used for early learning and discovery, laying the foundation for moving rapidly into development and test of the MQ-25. Following its first flight last year, T1 accumulated approximately 30 hours in the air before the planned modification to install the ARS.

Earlier this year the Navy exercised an option for three additional MQ-25 air vehicles, bringing the total aircraft Boeing is initially producing to seven. The Navy intends to procure more than 70 aircraft, which will assume the tanking role currently performed by F/A-18s, allowing for better use of the combat strike fighters.
ImageImage
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by NRao »

Long way to go, but this has been a simmering topic. Do not think it will go anywhere.

However, the plan itself is more than a year over due.

White House Shipbuilding Plan Would Shrink Ford Carrier Class Over Navy Objections
The Trump administration is poised to unveil a 30-year shipbuilding blueprint calling for one less big-deck carrier but dozens more warships than previous fleet plans ......
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

^^

From the article:
The plan, which could be unveiled as soon as Thursday, is being prepared for early release by the lame-duck administration largely for political reasons, U.S. officials said.

Lame duck shipbuilding plans can be thrown in the trash and not paid much attention to. Especially one that was purposefully delayed by 10-months (and thus intentionally kept away from the rigorous academic and budgetary assessment that each plan goes through in the budget deliberations cycle) and is NOW being pushed by someone claimed to have future presidential ambitions.

Having said that, the WH (democrat or republican, it really doesn't matter) is known to pick programs that have good Congressional and service support, underfund those while funding less popular priorities, in the hope that once the Congress gets wind of the Unfunded Priorities List, these gaps will be added right back into the mix. This happened with the current FY21 budget request. The US Navy and the WH wanted to emphasize submarines yet surprisingly only funded 1 Virginia class SSN in its official request. Well, the NDAA that went through Conference and is headed to Trump's desk (with most likely a veto proof mandate) includes 2 Virgnia class SSNs which has been the standard annual request since second Obama term and into the only Trump term. To those familiar with the process this isn't Congress enforcing its will on the WH but rather the WH knowing what will be added as an extra and playing budget games. The DOD also does that with F-35, choosing to instead fund more elsewhere (like E-2's, KC-46's, C-130's etc that have less political support) knowing that Congress will step in and add to the number of F-35's included in the budget.

The US Navy kept the 30-year plan hidden for 100% of the FY21 budget cycle (Clearly because some in the Trump administration had grand fleet plans while the OMB had flat defense budgets after the initial peak in defense spending in the first couple of years of the Trump administration). This hasn't really happened in recent history. This damages their credibility with Congress immensely. So with the Biden administration, whosoever is the SecNav will have to rebuild that which isn't going to be easy. Ultimately though, the makeup of the Congress hasn't really changed significantly between 2018 and 2022 so not much is likely to change in terms of defense spending or defense prioritization. But the US Navy long term planning process has taken a severe beating beacuse they played along and did not have the sort of discussions with the Congress which are part of the relationship between the operator and those that control its purse strings. That will take time to repair. So while O'Brien might be having his Mahan moment, the influence that the US Constitution provides the Congress over the navy ensures that the Congress can't be treated as a kid unless the Navy is prepared for a tantrum which inadvertently can slow down or completely kill any grand ambition the US Navy leadership, or its civilian bosses (including those in the Biden administration) may have for it.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by NRao »

Next Generation Jammer Low Band Enters Next Phase of Development
The Next Generation Jammer Low Band (NGJ-LB) program received approval to enter the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) acquisition phase Dec. 8.

The Honorable James Geurts, Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and Acquisition, the NGJ-LB Milestone Decision Authority, assessed the NGJ-LB program is ready to proceed to the next acquisition phase.

“This is an outstanding milestone from the NGJ-LB program, and an unparalleled accomplishment for the extended PMA-234 team,” said U.S. Navy Capt. Michael Orr, Airborne Electronic Attack Systems (PMA-234) program manager. “They have executed the program flawlessly to date, completed a major shift in acquisition strategy this summer by transitioning from a Middle Tier of Acquisition program to an Acquisition Category (ACAT)-1B program of record, completed a Demonstration of Technologies effort, and conducted a major source selection – and they did it all during a worldwide pandemic. I cannot be prouder to be associated with such an excellent team. With Milestone B approval, we are that much closer to providing the Low Band capability to the fleet.”

During the EMD phase, NGJ-LB will be further developed and tested prior to the production phase to ensure the U.S. Navy and the Royal Australian Air Force receive the capability that meets the warfighter’s requirement. The U.S. Navy and Australia Ministry of Defence signed a Project Agreement July 2020, entering into a international cooperative development program agreement.

The ACAT-1B NGJ-LB capability is currently in source selection to choose an EMD prime contractor to develop the NGJ-LB operational prototypes. The contract award is slated for late 2020.

NGJ-LB is part of a larger NGJ weapon system that will augment, and ultimately replace the legacy ALQ-99 pods in the low frequency spectrum currently used on the EA-18G Growler. NGJ-LB is an external jamming pod that will address advanced and emerging threats using the latest digital, software-based array technologies and will provide enhanced AEA capabilities to disrupt, deny and degrade enemy air defense and ground communication systems.
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5352
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Cain Marko »

Aside from the fascinating elephant in the room, is it normal for pilots to carry iphones in their F18s?

https://nypost.com/2020/12/04/details-o ... fied-ufos/

https://thedebrief.org/leaked-photo-sur ... phenomena/
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Interesting that its a Vinson strike group vessel that's doing it. Next year's Vinson deployment is going to field the most networked, and capable air-wing the US Navy has ever put out but it seems some of the escort vessels may have some upgrades of their own. The current version that is going operational next year is the standard Block V with the upgrades to navigation, for GPS degraded environments, and other modernization of components (plus life extension). The Va which includes the multi-mode AESA seeker begins testing next year and will be operational in 2023 and then a new warhead drops to basically round out the TLAM program before it transitions into a next generation weapon.


USS Chafee Conducts First Operational Test Of Tomahawk Block V

U.S. Navy Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Chafee (DDG 90) made history being the first to launch and operationally test a Block V Tomahawk cruise missile.

The test took place on 1 December at the Pacific test range as the destroyer was assigned to Carrier Strike Group ONE with aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70).

The Pacific Missile Range Facility, Barking Sands is a U.S. naval facility and airport located near Kekaha, in Kauai County, Hawaii, United States.

All Tomahawk Block IVs are being upgraded to Block V with longer range and dynamic targeting with the capability to hit vessels at sea (maritime strike role). Raytheon is recertifying and modernizing the missile, extending its service life by 15 years, and resulting in the new Tomahawk Block V series:

Block V: A modernized TACTOM with upgraded navigation and communication
Block Va: Block V that can strike moving targets at sea
Block Vb:Block V, with a joint multi-effects warhead that can hit more diverse land targets
The Tomahawk IV – known in the Royal Navy as TLAM (Tomahawk Land Attack Cruise Missile) – allows submarines and surface vessels to strike at ground targets hundreds of miles inland with pinpoint accuracy. Tomahawk IV has a longer range than its predecessors (well in excess of 1,000 miles), can be directed at a new target in mid-flight, and can also beam back images of the battlefield to its mother submarine.

According to Raytheon, U.S. and allied militaries have flight-tested the GPS-enabled Tomahawk 550 times and used it in combat more than 2,300 times. Its most recent use came in 2018, when U.S. Navy warships and submarines launched 66 Tomahawk missiles at Syrian chemical weapon facilities.
This is the Block IV TLAM --> Block V ---> Next Gen. Land Attack Weapon roadmap they shared a while back. They've stuck to it in terms of schedule but it does appear that the next gen weapon won't really be one weapon but a family of weapons starting with the CPS which will be fielded by 2025 on submarines.

Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

JTull wrote:Jokes aside, Goshawk replacement is an opportunity for Boeing to think long-term after it missed out on the two series production 5th Gen aircrafts. It has a lot to gain in US market too, from a triple partnership for LCA-LIFT, TEDBF, SH/Growlers.
It did think long term. Long term thinking was why Boeing spent its own company money to get ahead of formal USAF requirements and build not one but two T-7A prototypes (on company dime) , one MQ-25 (T1) prototype (again ahead of formal USN requirements and source selection) and a host of other company funded programs. It combined that IR&D investment with aggressive bidding that undercut competition to a point where competitors were on record of saying that had they matched Boeing they would have made a loss on the program.

The T-7A is probably a 500-600 aircraft program that Boeing would likely want to extend to a 600-800 aircraft program (if not more) for them to get consistent future returns on it. A naval variant is a perfect way to extend that programs production. If the USN only wants partial T-45 syllabus offloaded in the 2028 timeframe then it is even further advantageous for Boeing. They offer the Navy aircraft from the existing USAF production lots while they can mature their navalized variant and fly it etc for a future need. No one can compete with that offer (if it works technically) when Boeing is piggy backing on a program that is already set up to produce, has a supply chain, has a DOD approved simulation training and LVC technical baseline, and is producing at a rate of 60-aircraft per year.

Boeing did the same with the Block III Super Hornet and the Block II Growler by getting ahead of some of USN's formal requirements and beginning work early on. You can bet that Boeing is doing exactly this on the Next Generation Fighter (Navy NGAD/FA-XX - SH replacement) and may in fact have some hardware in some form of design or construction at the moment. In fact the plan for the Pentagon, back in 2015, was to design and fly two X-plane demonstrators for 6GFA, one in support of the USAF NGAD and the other in support of the USN FA-XX. The former has already flown (Aug-September 2020 first flight) and it could well be that the latter is also getting ready to fly in the coming months or years.

As far as naval warfare and demand is concerned the USN wants to sunset the Block III Super Hornet program in the coming 3 or so years after the current orders (MYP) are delivered. This would also coincide with increased MQ-25 deliveries. In between the time Boeing delivers the last US Navy Block III Super Hornet, and when it could begin delivering LRIP FA-XX's, Boeing will be busy SLEP'ing Block II Super Hornets with upgrades to Block III, upgrading Block I Growlers to Block II and delivering MQ-25's while also delivering T-7As to the USAF (and F-15EX's). So St. Louis is going to be busy in the 2020s and into the 2030s . Early 2030s will be when things may begin to dry up, but that is when they could potentially be spooling up FA-XX production. So in between Boeing's need to keep its defense buisiness going well, and the USN need to ensure that its Go-To naval fighter supplier is healthy, it is quite likely that Boeing is pouring quite a lot of money into winning the FA-XX competition which will ensure that it will continue to produce fighters in the 2030-2050 timeframe and securing a couple of decades worth of work for the legacy McDonnell Douglas side of the company. So while they may have lost every 5GFA competition they competed in, they have done rather well in making sure that they remain in the game both with upgrades to their current portfolio and in investing in future technologies and capabilities (like digital design tools, OMS, and other areas of interest for future systems) that will keep them in the game well into the future. Despite Boeing's gazillion issues, the Douglas side of the house is actually pretty well run though they seldom get the sort of say in matters they deserve.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Some good close up shots -

B-52 Loading Hypersonic AGM-183A Air-launched Rapid Response Weapon

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

US Army's evaluators get their hands on the light tank prototypes -

Light tank prototypes arrive at Fort Bragg for soldier evaluation

Prototype candidates competing to be the new light tank for the U.S. infantry are being delivered to the 82nd Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, where soldiers will help decide which vehicle will prevail, the Army announced in a Dec. 11 statement.

“Soldiers of the 82nd Airborne will soon get the chance to do something no U.S. infantry soldier has done in 26 years — employ a dedicated mobile, direct fire vehicle platform against hardened positions, dismounted personnel and light armored vehicles,” the statement reads.

The soldier vehicle assessment of two different Mobile Protected Firepower (MPF) prototypes for infantry brigade combat teams will start on Jan. 4, 2021, and run through June 2021.

BAE Systems and General Dynamics Land Systems were chosen in December 2018 to each build 12 prototypes of the Army’s future MPF vehicle identified in the service’s ground combat vehicle strategy published in 2015. Infantry Brigade Combat Teams don’t have a combat vehicle that provides “mobile, protected, direct, offensive fire capability,” organic to those units and that is capable against near-peer and peer threats, according to the statement.

GDLS is building a vehicle that takes the United Kingdom’s AJAX chassis and combines it with an M1 Abrams tank turret. BAE Systems’ design is an updated M8 Buford armored gun system with new capabilities and components.


“We are incredibly excited to see the MPF platform entering into this phase,” Brig. Gen. Glenn Dean, the new program executive officer for Ground Combat Systems, said in the statement. “MPF represents an innovative and aggressive approach to system acquisition. The beginning of our SVA in January illustrates how hard the teams are working to keep the major events of this program on schedule.”

The MPF will be “an integration of existing mature technologies and components that avoids development which would lengthen the program schedule,” the statement notes. “The priority has always been to field this new critical capability soonest, but the MPF will also be capable of accommodating additional weight and spare electrical power to support future growth.”

The soldiers will put the MPF prototypes through a variety of operational paces and is not considered a formal test. The evaluation will “directly” inform tactics, techniques and procedures for MPF, according to the Army statement.

“Once they are able to begin interacting with these prototypes, I know that our soldiers are going to come up with the best ways to utilize MPF in our light formations,” Brig. Gen. Ross Coffman, who is in charge of Next-Generation Combat Vehicle modernization capability, said in the statement.

The Army is expected to choose a winner and transition to production “near the end of” fiscal 2022, the statement adds.

The first units will get MPF in fiscal 2025. The Army plans to initially build 26 vehicles, with an option to build 28 more and retrofit eight prototypes.

The two solutions are very different from one another. BAE’s offering is smaller — fitting in between the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle and a Stryker in terms of size — while GDLS’ vehicle is bigger, as it’s based on the M1 Abrams chassis.

BAE’s MPF prototype can be transported via a C-130 aircraft. Three can fit on a C-17 aircraft. The Army is requiring the vehicle be C-17 transportable.

General Dynamics proposed MPF -

Image

BAE proposed MPF -

Image
Post Reply