US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Jan 5, 2017
even more strange to me than an engine falling off is this:

"In 2015, Lt. Gen. Mike Holmes, deputy chief of staff for Strategic Plans and Requirements, said the service was especially interested in a public-private partnership, which would keep it from having to funnel procurement dollars into a new engine program.

"The idea is in a public-private partnership, somebody funds the engine and then we pay them back over time out of the fuel savings, which are generated out of the new engines," he said then."

why wouldn't the Pentagon fund the new engine program?? (I know it's explained above :) I'm saying it sounds strange to me)
related:
US Air Force glides toward B-52 engine replacement plan

common: "But despite the support of high-ranking officials such as Global Strike Command chief Rand, the service cannot afford a traditional engine procurement program, which clocks in at an estimated cost of at least $5 billion to $7 billion.

Thus, the Air Force’s acquisition organization (SAF/AQ) and its Office of Transformational Innovation have led a separate charge on alternative financing options. Leaders have floated ideas such as leasing or creating private-public partnerships, and the service in 2016 issued another RFI seeking information from financial institutions about options, Noetzel said."

the Pentagon thinking of leasing bomber engines ... does Trump know?
After years of deliberation over whether to buy new engines for the decades-old B-52 bombers, Air Force officials say they are closer than ever to making a decision.

For the past two years, Air Force Global Strike Command has worked with engine manufacturers and financial institutions to put together a business case assessment for replacing the Boeing B-52 Stratofortress’s eight Pratt & Whitney TF33 engines. That assessment shows that an initial investment in new propulsion systems can save maintenance and fuel costs in the long run, but the Air Force’s acquisition wing is still working on the best way to finance the effort, said James Noetzel, deputy chief of the B-52 weapon system team.

“I think we’re farther along than we’ve ever been in any other re-engine effort. I believe it shows a positive business case,” Noetzel said in a January interview. “The devil is in the details in getting all of these tribes lined up and agreeing to do it,” he added, referring to the Air Force, engine makers and financial institutions.

The time might be ripe, both politically and financially. Earlier this year, debate over whether to replace the TF33 reignited after a B-52 from Minot Air Force Base lost an engine during training. Former Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James characterized the mishap as a “catastrophic engine failure,” and although she and AFGSC commander Gen. Robin Rand maintained that it was not indicative of a systemic problem with the TF33, the incident was a source of embarrassment.

The service’s latest unfunded requirements list for fiscal year 2016 reveals the re-engining effort has become a bigger priority, with $10 million added for a B-52 risk-reduction study.

“I think this year will be the point of some decisions on how or if the program would go forward,” said Scot Oathout, Boeing’s director of bomber programs. “I think it all hinges on, in these fiscally challenging times, can we afford a program like this or can you come up with different ways of financing or paying for the program? So I think those discussions are going to be coming to a head during this year.”

The Air Force’s current thinking is to replace the TF33 with eight modern regional jet engines that hew closely to the size, weight and thrust of the original, thus minimizing any structural redesign to the B-52’s wings, Noetzel said. The service has issued two requests for information (RFI) to engine manufacturers, gleaning performance and technical information about potential options, which it then fed into its assessment.

"We're estimating it's roughly at least 30 percent more efficient on the fuel, which gives us huge operational benefits,” he said. New engines would allow the Stratofortress to fly longer distances without needing to be refueled by a tanker, and the new propulsion systems would be more reliable, leading to more operational availability and lower maintenance costs.

Noetzel declined to quantify the cost savings expected from a re-engining, noting that the Air Force plans to initiate several third-party reviews of its business case. It’s safe to say that the savings would number in the billions over the lifetime of the engines, he said.

But despite the support of high-ranking officials such as Global Strike Command chief Rand, the service cannot afford a traditional engine procurement program, which clocks in at an estimated cost of at least $5 billion to $7 billion.

Thus, the Air Force’s acquisition organization (SAF/AQ) and its Office of Transformational Innovation have led a separate charge on alternative financing options. Leaders have floated ideas such as leasing or creating private-public partnerships, and the service in 2016 issued another RFI seeking information from financial institutions about options, Noetzel said.

“We’re not there yet. We’re still doing some exploration in that area … and we are largely leaving that component of this up to SAF/AQ and this OTI office,” said James Hunsicker, Global Strike Command’s deputy chief of bomber requirements.

“We’re handling the side of it that’s more on the traditional side with the early financing and the study and the requirements generation, but we’re relying on them to break loose some of this creativity and to be able to move forward that way.”

That may necessitate some legislative changes to allow the service to move outside the traditional acquisition process, he said.

B-52 manufacturer Boeing has separately conducted its own business case analysis, which — like the Air Force’s study — evaluated data from several off-the-shelf regional jet engines, said James Kroening, the company’s B-52 program manager.

Boeing believes new engines could yield 30 percent fuel savings and a cost avoidance of at least $10 billion if the B-52 continues in service beyond 2050. It also anticipates a 95 percent reduction of maintenance activity and associated costs once new propulsion systems are installed.

“There are significant operational benefits as well,” Kroening said. As a result of increased fuel efficiency, a new engine could extend the unrefueled range of the aircraft by 40 percent. “That opens up a lot of different possibilities for B-52 missions on an unrefueled basis, and also reduces its dependency on tankers.”

Both Boeing and the Air Force declined to disclose what specific engines it had analyzed, although officials noted that the major engine companies each had at least one potential offering.

Rolls Royce could put forward a system from its BR700 family of engines, which power the Gulfstream 550, Gulfstream 650 and Boeing 717. Pratt & Whitney have promoted a modernization of the TF-33 engines, but could offer the PW 800 or PW1000G.

But General Electric’s TF34 could come out ahead of other options because of its history of military use on the A-10 and other aircraft, said Richard Aboulafia, an analyst with the Teal Group.
source is DefenseNews
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
hawkish Cotton
Calls for a $26B Uptick in Planned Defense Supplemental

A member of the Senate Armed Services and Intelligence Committee is calling for a $26 billion addition to this year’s emergency defense spending bill to rebuild readiness — starting with increased flying and training times and increasing the end-strength of the Army and Marine Corps.

“Most [of the immediate spending agenda] comes from the service chiefs’ unfunded priority lists,” Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.),
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

“We need more of just about everything,” including modernized nuclear forces. “Nuclear strategy can no longer be bilateral” [between Washington and Moscow] because China and North Korea, both potential adversaries, are nuclear powers.

He added he also was backing a 15 percent increase in defense spending for the upcoming fiscal year.

“Our defense budget is not responsible for our national debt,” he said in answer to an audience question.

“I think we can find the money” for the supplemental increase and for the upcoming fiscal year and not upset the “Freedom Caucus” deficit hawks. In part, Cotton said this would come from having a new administration and a majority in Congress both saying that each dollar increase in defense spending does not have to be matched on domestic programs.

Cotton also warned allies and partners that “no alliance should be a one-way street,” and they need to spend two percent of their gross domestic product on their own security, not military pensions.

“Right now we have to strengthen the bilateral” alliances the United States has with Japan and South Korea and work for better ties with India and countries, such as Myanmar [Burma] “that don’t want to be vassal states” of China. “We have to give them … more incentives to stay with us” and that includes the Philippines and Thailand, two allies who have been distancing themselves from the United States in recent months.

The United States itself and all its partners need to understand they “are engaged in global geo-political competition,” particularly with Russia in Eastern Europe and China in the East and South China seas.

“The Big Stick is important,” Cotton said, not only recalling President Theodore Roosevelt, who first used the term in 1901 as a corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, but also President Ronald Reagan’s position on rebuilding the military and meeting the challenge from the Soviet Union when he took office in 1981.

In dealing with Moscow and Beijing, “we have to negotiate with them in a position of strength.”

Cotton said President Donald Trump’s policy to the Russia is yet to be determined and should not be judged on a few comments he made. He cited Ambassador to the United Nations Nicki Haley’s recent remarks condemning Russia on renewed fighting in eastern Ukraine as showing what the administration’s policy will be.

In answer to a question, he said, “We should not recognize a single inch of soil where Russian troops stand” in Ukraine as belonging to Moscow. He added he doubted that Russia would have seized Crimea and backed separatists in eastern Ukraine if Kiev retained the nuclear arsenal on its soil when the Soviet Union collapsed.

As for the president of Russia, “Vladimir Putin is KGB, always will be.” Cotton was “skeptical” about working with Moscow in Syria, a country where the United States now find its “allies fighting each other” [Kurds fighting Turks]. He said other partners in the region are leery of involvement in the Syrian civil war. “They are not going to install a [Muslim] Brotherhood or Quds Force government” in Damascus to replace President Bashar al-Assad.

The Muslim Brotherhood briefly governed Egypt following the Arab Spring. The Quds Force is a special forces unit of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard and is operating in Syria in support of Assad

In his remarks, Cotton said Trump’s “America First” rhetoric resonates with most of the public. He termed it “plain spoken nationalism” in the manner of President Andrew Jackson.
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
now I read
Military chiefs warn of force-readiness struggles
wondering if these issues are real, or the Pentagon is just whining for the press to get more money?
The US military’s uniformed No. 2’s on Tuesday warned that readiness accounts, starved by years of budget instability, are in urgent need of relief.

The vice chiefs of America’s armed forces said their personnel and aging equipment are stretched thin amid years of war, statutory budget caps and temporary workarounds, end-strength cuts, and Congress passing nine consecutive continuing resolutions.

Senior House Armed Services Committee members joined the brass in lamenting the unpredictability, but none offered a plan navigate the Capitol Hill deadlock over budget caps, commonly called sequestration, that threatens to stymie the Trump administration’s military buildup plans. Congress punted on 2017 appropriations, and the federal government is on a stopgap continuing resolution that expires April 28.

“I continue to be concerned – and sometimes even disturbed – by evidence that is accumulating on the damage inflicted upon our military in recent years and the stresses on the force," HASC Chairman Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, said.

“That damage comes from a variety of factors including budget cuts of over 20 percent, continuing resolutions, the failure to recognize – or at least admit – and then address mounting readiness problems, as well as shrinking the size of the force while keeping a high tempo of operations. There is plenty of blame to go around between both parties and both the executive and legislative branches for what has been done.

“But now with a new administration and a new Congress, we have the opportunity to begin the repairs.”

If Congress were to call off 2017 appropriations altogether and pass a stop-gap continuing resolution that leaves funding flat for the rest of the year, officials said the services would be forced to further raid readiness accounts. Marine Corps training flights would stop in July, the Army would face a large, but unready, hollow force and the Air Force would decommission air wings, officials said.

Speaking with reporters after the hearing, Thornberry said House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said last night the appropriations committee "has a green light to go ahead on the defense appropriations bill." It's unclear when the Trump administration will offer its supplemental defense spending plan, Thornberry said, "but on the House side, it's let's get this done ... You've heard here some of the consequences of not doing it."

While the amount of a supplemental has not been made public, senior Pentagon officials are circulating in Congress informal plans for increasing the defense budget by more than $30 billion to acquire new jet fighters, armored vehicles, improved training and more.

At Tuesday's hearing, Vice Chief of Naval Operations Adm. William Moran said the Navy is the smallest and least ready it's been in years due to high demand of naval forces, funding cuts and consistent uncertainty about when Congress would fund the military. The service satisfies 40 percent of demand from regional combatant commanders.

Wear and tear on ships and aircraft and maintenance crews has created a “downward readiness spiral,” with equipment failures and the removal of ships and aircraft from service, he said. For the aging Hornets, for example, it takes twice as much time to service as the platform was designed to take, stressing diminished depot capacity, he said.

“If the slow pace of readiness recovery continues, unnecessary equipment damage, poorly trained operators at sea, and a force improperly trained and equipped to sustain itself will result,” Moran said. “Absent sufficient funding for readiness, modernization and force structure, the Navy cannot return to full health, where it can continue to meet its mission on a sustainable basis.”

The comments come after Defense News broke the story that nearly two-thirds of the Navy’s strike fighters can’t fly because they’re either undergoing maintenance or simply waiting for parts or their turn in line on the aviation depot backlog. Overall, more than half the Navy’s aircraft are grounded, most because there isn’t enough money to fix them.

Army Vice Chief Gen. Daniel Allyn said one-third of Army brigade combat teams, one-fourth of combat aviation brigades and half of division headquarters are ready. Only three of 58 ready BCTs are considered ready to “fight tonight.”

“What it comes down to … we will be too late to need, our soldiers will arrive too late, our soldiers will require too much time to close the manning, training and equipping gap,” he said, adding: “The end result is excessive casualties to civilians and to our forces who are already forward stationed.”

Allyn called on lawmakers to repeal existing budget caps. Without that, all fiscal workarounds, “though nice in the short term, will prove unsustainable, rendering all your hard work for naught,” he said.

Work is ongoing at the Pentagon to determine how many more troops the service needs, and Allyn lauded authorizations from the committee to rebuilding Army end strength. “It’s not all doom and gloom,” Allyn said.

Air Force Vice Chief Gen. Stephen W. Wilson said the Air Force is the smallest it has ever been.

Aircraft numbers have fallen from 8,600 in 1991 to 5,500, and their average age is 27 years. There are 55 fighter squadrons, down from 134. Fewer than 50 percent of the Air Force’s combat forces are “sufficiently ready for a highly contested fight against peer adversaries — creating unacceptable risk for our airmen, our joint partners, and our nation.”

“At the very bottom of what we call the hollow force in the 1970s, pilots were flying 15 sorties a month, about 20 hours,” Wilson said. “Today we’re flying less hours and less sorties than the 1970s.”

Assistant Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Glenn Walters said 80 percent of his aviation units lack the minimum number of ready basic aircraft for training, and the service is “significantly short ready aircraft for wartime requirements.”

“We simply do not have the available aircraft to meet our squadrons’ requirements,” Walters said. “This means that flight hour averages per crew per month are below the minimum standards required to achieve and maintain adequate flight time and training and readiness levels.”

Senior HASC Democrat Rep. Jim Cooper, of Tennessee, bemoaned the succession of continuing resolutions passed by Congress and addressed the newer members of the committee.

“This is the chance for a new day, and a new approach, to have a stronger military that is ready for any threat we can face,” Cooper said. “The worst enemy we face is ourselves. Our BCA of 2011 probably poses a greater threat to our military than any foreign adversary. So why do we hurt ourselves? There is probably no good reason for this.”
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
now I read
Lawmakers ask for Hypothetical Budgets to Build a 355 Ship Navy
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

but it's vague; I've read (but forgot where; like one month ago) the USN budget would need 25b hike to get to that 355 ships "dream", which would then "come true" only after several decades (plus what if they filled the numbers with LCSs??)

time will tell
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
now I read
Military chiefs warn of force-readiness struggles
wondering if these issues are real, or the Pentagon is just whining for the press to get more money?

source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

all true my friend, Barack Hussein Obama damn near destroyed the USA we all love, physically and spiritually, theres no doubt in my mind that it was intentional, stemming from his idealogical construct.

I believe that Secretary Mattis will encourage the services to bring maintenance and readiness up to speed, possibly leading acquisitions, although acquisitions may be the best way to bring our force back to readiness and sustainability.
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
now I read
Lawmakers ask for Hypothetical Budgets to Build a 355 Ship Navy
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

but it's vague; I've read (but forgot where; like one month ago) the USN budget would need 25b hike to get to that 355 ships "dream", which would then "come true" only after several decades (plus what if they filled the numbers with LCSs??)

time will tell

355 ships is a very long term goal, our priority is to get our existing Navy back into "combat ready" status, capital investments will then begin to bring that number back into the real world we live in. Barack Obama got rid of the folks who told him the truth, and when it became obvious that he didn't care, went to congress and the people.

Lots of the top brass are GONE! replaced by Obama sycophants of all colors and sexual persuasions, as long as they weren't male! There has been a declared war in the services on "MEN", the Trumpster has changed that overnight, he will include qualified women, and no doubt minorities as well who are qualified, but being a conservative male will no longer be disqualifying.
 
Sep 20, 2016
I've been following A-10 "saga" ... the last one Aug 5, 2016

now U.S. Air Force Secretary: Service May Delay A-10 Retirement

source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and here's an update:
The famed 'Warthog' will stick around until at least 2021
A-10 Warthog fans can breathe a sigh of relief: The Air Force won’t start retiring the famed close-air support plane until 2021, at the very earliest.

The decision delays initial retirement of the aircraft by three years, as the Air Force had planned to begin mothballing the A-10 as early as 2018. However, the service is still deliberating the future of the platform, including whether it still needs to start a new program to replace it, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein said Tuesday.

“We’re going to keep them until 2021, and then as a discussion that we’ll have with [Defense] Secretary [Jim] Mattis and the department and the review over all of our budgets, that is what will determine the way ahead,” he told reporters.

Over the next couple of years, Goldfein said he’d like to see the dialogue about the close-air support mission (CAS) move from a “platform-centric” discussion about whether to sustain the A-10 to a “family of systems” approach that recognizes that many aircraft support ground forces.

“That starts with an understanding of how we do the business today of close-air support, because the reality is it’s changed significantly, and it will change significantly in the future if we get this right, because this is something we’ve got to continue to think about,” he said.

As Central Command’s air component commander in 2011, Goldfein said he employed a number of different aircraft for the CAS mission in Afghanistan depending on the region.

In the mountainous terrain of eastern Afghanistan, unmanned MQ-9 Reapers were often dispatched, he said. The open fields of southern Afghanistan were optimized for A-10s, while B-1 bombers — with their endurance and large munitions suite — were a good fit for northern Afghanistan. F-16s played a larger role in the western portion of the country.

“If I had gone to those ground force commanders and said, ‘Hey, I’ve swapped out B-1s for A-10s or F-16s,' he would have rightly looked at me and said, ‘Why? They can’t get there fast enough and they don’t have enough gas,’” he said.

Although the service has not decided whether it will eventually pursue a new, purpose-built CAS plane — an A-X2, as it has been called inside the Pentagon — Goldfein reiterated his intent to conduct a demonstration of off-the-shelf light attack aircraft.

The Air Force first floated the idea of buying these “OA-X” light attack aircraft last year, which would help supplement the A-10 and other assets conducting low-end missions in the Middle East. The newest unfunded priorities list submitted by the service includes $8 million to support an experiment that would allow aircraft manufacturers to show off potential offerings, but the effort has not been funded yet.

Goldfein said the experiment would give the Air Force a glimpse into what is available on the market, possibly paving the way for a program of record.

"Show me what you got that's off the shelf, that's shovel-ready, that can contribute right now without research-and-development dollars, that we can get into the fight right now,” he said.

Arizona Republican John McCain, who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, has supported a purchase of 300 OA-X aircraft.
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
all true my friend, Barack Hussein Obama damn near destroyed the USA we all love, physically and spiritually, theres no doubt in my mind that it was intentional, stemming from his idealogical construct.

I believe that Secretary Mattis will encourage the services to bring maintenance and readiness up to speed, possibly leading acquisitions, although acquisitions may be the best way to bring our force back to readiness and sustainability.
check this bro:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

More than 60 percent of Navy and Marine Corps strike fighters are out of service, the Navy confirmed today. While 62 percent of fighters are effectively grounded, the overall figure for all naval aircraft is 53 percent. [UPDATE: With some of the oldest fighter jets in service, Marine Corps figures are even worse: In December, 74 percent of Marine F-18 Hornets were not ready for combat — 208 of 280 aircraft; see below for details.] Such striking numbers underline why
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, and
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
have prioritized fixing readiness for the force we already have, an immediate crisis, over the long-term build-up of a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
that President Trump promised in his campaign.

Pro-defense lawmakers still want the build-up, but they acknowledge it’s going to take years, if not decades. For example, legislators have asked the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
to study alternative spending plans to build a 355-ship Navy over
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, the new House seapower subcommittee chairman said today.

“It’s important that we build ships but it’s also equally as important that we maintain the ships that we have,” said
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, who’s taking over the Seapower & Projection Forces panel from fellow Virginian Randy Forbes. “Our commitment there will be equally as fervent as for building new ships.”

What’s striking is less what Wittman said — he used to chair the readiness subcommittee — but where he said it: to a group of shipbuilders. The
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(AWIBC) is largely the creation of Huntington-Ingalls Industries, which owns Ingalls Shipbuilding in Mississippi and Newport News in Virginia, and its
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
is all about accelerating construction of new ships. It can’t have been too cheering to hear one of their chief cheerleaders on Capitol Hill is considering a 30-year timeline to build the 355-ship fleet.

Marine Corps Commandant
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, speaking to the shipbuilders just after Wittman, was even more emphatic about readiness. “Secretary Mattis is — for those of us who’ve worked for him before — he’s always very clear, he’s always given good guidance,” Neller said. “Right now restoring readiness is the priority,” though the Pentagon team will try to fill “holes in programs” where possible.

Issues with insufficient flight hours for pilot training, insufficient spare parts to keep planes flying, and so on are at the top of the readiness priorities, Neller added. These problems tie directly into the low readiness figures for naval aviation, which were first reported by
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
last night, acknowledged by Vice-Chief of Naval Operations Adm. William Moran at a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
this morning, and clarified for Breaking Defense by a Navy spokesperson this afternoon. It’s likely Marine Corps Hornets are worse off than the reported figures indicate, since they’re some of the oldest fighters in the military.

[UPDATED:] Marine Corps figures provided Breaking Defense confirm this guess. Of 280 Marine Corps F-18s, 109 are in long-term maintenance — heading to or from depots, in depots, or simply “out of reporting.” The other 171 assigned to squadrons, but 58 percent of these 171 aircraft are in shorter-term maintenance, leaving 71 to 72 aircraft, on average, ready to fight. That’s 42 percent of the Hornets assigned to squadrons but only 26 percent of the total inventory.

[UPDATED:] It’s also worth noting that the services don’t report their readiness rates this way: They simply look at aircraft “in reporting” — in this case, the 171 assigned to squadrons — and figure how many of them are ready to go — in this case, 42 percent. The aircraft in long-term maintenance are “out of reporting” and not included in the calculation. But the figures from the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
story and confirmed by the Navy were calculated as percentages of the entire aircraft fleet, and we’re trying to give an apples-to-apples comparison.

“We’re hopeful that all the discussion and all the talk is going to provide the resources that we think we need,” Neller said, “(but) none of this is going to happen overnight… even if you had the funding to increase the acquisition of airplanes or even if you had the money to increase the throughput through fleet readiness centers.”
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Top