US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
You guys?? You mean us Americans of course!!!!

This story just made me bust. Because ..well I just knew that the USN was working on something. That's why I said in the past that I have no doubt the USN will find a way to track desiel boats..A couple of months ago the USN announced that it had been tracking the Gotland sucessfully. I feel there are new sensors on surface ships also.

The Swedish Gotland class being used for training has served the US an all allied forces well.
 

Sea Dog

Junior Member
VIP Professional
Nethappy said:
Sorry mate.. but he's not the only one around.
You guys crack me up. Plus some of you guys never learn to listen to the mods. If you ignore the mods, you won't last long around here, Nethappy. Tphuang is a mod. He said to stop the topic. I suggest you heed his warning.
 

Nethappy

NO WAR PLS
VIP Professional
Yeah I wrote the post while ignore the mods. But, I dun think people should me calling another person anything, just cos they think there country can defend them self. I gotta said sorry to the mods.

But, there is no need for u to rub it in.. when u where the one who started said.. the US can nude everything.
 

tphuang

Brigadier
VIP Professional
Registered Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #14
look, I want this thread to be strictly on US related stuff, so the discussion should be based around the latest American military news. Frankly, there have been too many threads on this forum that turned into I nuke you and you nuke me kind of discussion. It gets tiring after a while to look after that.

Anyhow, more JSF news:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Australia and UK deliver technology transfer ultimatum

Lockheed Martin remains optimistic that all eight international partners will sign on for the next phase of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) programme, despite Australian and UK defence officials telling US Congress last week that they will not do so unless they are guaranteed access to the technology required to operate and sustain their aircraft.
Technology transfer has emerged as a major hurdle for some nations as they negotiate a single multilateral memorandum of understanding (MoU) for the production, sustainment and follow-on development phase of the JSF programme. The US government hopes to sign the MoU by December.
Testifying before Congress on 14 March, UK defence procurement minister Lord Drayson said “operational sovereignty” over the JSF is of “paramount importance”. The ability to “integrate, upgrade, operate and sustain the aircraft as we see fit and without recourse to others” is required for the UK to decide the aircraft is “fit to fight”, he said, adding: “If we do not have the information and technology needed to make that decision, then I shall not be able to sign the MoU.”
Rear Adm Raydon Gates, head of the Australian defence staff in Washington, concurred, telling Congress: “Guaranteed access to necessary data and technology to allow Australia to operate and support the JSF will be required before we can join the next phase.”
After being briefed by Lockheed following the hearings, Drayson requested that the US government provide a written assurance by June, when the draft MoU is to be released, that the UK will have access to the technology necessary to operate, maintain and sustain the aircraft. Testifying before Congress a day later, US defence undersecretary Ken Kreig indicated the government planned to respond by June.
The UK will not receive aircraft until 2014, and “the USA does not release things that far in advance”, says Lockheed JSF programme general manager Tom Burbage, so the issue is whether the USA can provide assurances it will release technology when required. Technology has so far been released in phases.
Describing the issue as more emotional than factual, Burbage says: “Ask any of the partners if any of their companies have had difficulty performing their assigned tasks because of technology transfer and the answer will be no.” But he admits “the licensing process is cumbersome”.
Drayson says: “We have no reason to believe that our discussions with the [US] administration will not be successful, but without the technology transfer...we will not be able to buy these aircraft.”
I can understand how the Brits are asking for the source code on this, but what are the Australians and Norwegians doing?

Some objections to the F-22 export possibility?
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

F-22A Raptor Export Plans come under Scrutiny
Project On Government Oversight
Thu, 30 Mar 2006, 00:01

Letter from Project On Government Oversight to Sen. John McCain

Dear Senator McCain,

POGO appreciates that you are holding hearings on the F-22. We find it distressing that the U.S. appears to be at, or rapidly approaching, a point at which the only way we can afford tactical air superiority is to eventually undermine it by selling it abroad. It strikes us, that if we as a nation are going to continue to develop and upgrade F-15 and F-16 technology not just for our own forces but also for export, we must retain the F-22 exclusively for U.S. use; or, if the F-22 is cancelled, we must limit the upgrade technology available for foreign export.

As you may be aware, a handful of trade publications began to report last month that Lockheed Martin has asked the Air Force to back it in an effort to obtain permission to sell the F-22 to select overseas allies. According to a February 17 Inside the Air Force report, this proposal is “gaining strength and working its way through the Air Force bureaucracy.”

These reports, as well as POGO’s own sources, reveal that due to the exorbitantly high cost of the F-22, the most likely (if not only) buyer would be the Japan Air Self-Defense Force (JASDF). On February 21, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld tacitly confirmed this process was underway: he explain that while no proposal had yet reached him and that he was “not up to speed,” it was “a process that the entire government’s involved in,” with the Departments of State, Commerce, Treasury, Defense and White House all considering the advantages and disadvantages. Despite these reports, the issue of any foreign military sale of the F-22 has not been raised in recent Senate and House hearings that have touched on the F-22.

One of POGO’s primary concerns about this deal is security. As the 2000 National Counterintelligence Executive Annual Report to Congress on Foreign Economic Collection and Industrial Espionage noted, the second-most sought after military aircraft technology secret by foreign governments is the F-22. While we acknowledge it is likely that Japan would honor U.S. secrecy arrangements regarding the technology, and do everything possible to protect the F-22 and its systems, we also see the presence of F-22s in Japan as a new opportunity for others interested in acquiring the F-22's secrets to steal them.

There is a significant risk that, once the F-22s are delivered to Japan, agents from nearby China (the F-22's oft-cited potential adversary) or other foreign governments could steal F-22 information, allowing China (or anyone else) to build its own version.

Though news reporting on the possible deal with Japan has been limited, some recent articles have been rife with trial-balloon arguments from F-22 advocates in favor of the deal. According to sale proponents, in selling F-22s to Japan:

--“The US would get world-class air superiority over the Pacific” in a “location where the planes are needed” against China, “the Asian giant ... viewed by many Pentagon officials and military scholars as the most likely nation that could take on the US military in a 20th century-style conventional war.”

--The U.S. would not need to worry about our most highly-classified, technologically-advanced weapons systems falling into the wrong hands because “Japan is completely trustworthy.”

--Concerns about security and compromising U.S. air superiority could easily be dealt with by selling Japan a “stripped-down, air to air version of the plane,” which would “differ from the tasks that have been prescribed for US F-22A fighters.”


We frankly find these arguments at best dubious, if not contradictory. The Air Force continues to justify the F-22's necessity by casting its “prescribed” tasks as increasingly amorphous in nature – everything from air-to-air combat to conventional bombing runs to potentially neutralizing ground-based improvised explosive devices.

Because the aircraft is primarily designed for air-to-air combat, we are intrigued by the notion that selling a highly-advanced plane for its original, central purpose would be considered “stripped down.” (Indeed, at least one press report included a candid comment from an unnamed Lockheed official who stated that what Lockheed wants to sell to Japan is “‘not that different’ from the war planes that will fly with US markings.”)

We are also intrigued by the notion that a “stripped down” air-to-air fighter bereft of the full range of combat capabilities – in the service of a nation whose constitution allows the military an exclusively “self-defense” role – can really be considered a contribution to “US world-class air superiority over the Pacific.” Given the array of U.S. air assets deployed throughout the Pacific, including in Japan, we believe the United States already has, and will maintain, that superiority.

Thank you for your ongoing oversight activities in these very important national security matters.
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
Looks like some US "allies" want their cake with ice cream and candles...It's a form of blackmail. They know the DoD is strapped for cash..so..maybe they figure they can squeeze the US for all the cake ice crean, clown ballons etc..

Those folks from Project On Government Oversight(POGO) seem to me to be nothing but alarmist.

One of their concerns is the PRC stealing techno info about the F-22 if it is indeed sold to Japan. say they do steal it. How long would it take for the PRC to duplicate some sort of F-22 clone??? 10-15 years??? By then the US will be using new UAV's. Just my opinion.
 

Nethappy

NO WAR PLS
VIP Professional
One of their concerns is the PRC stealing techno info about the F-22 if it is indeed sold to Japan. say they do steal it. How long would it take for the PRC to duplicate some sort of F-22 clone??? 10-15 years??? By then the US will be using new UAV's. Just my opinion.
Well for a matter of fact I agree with u on the duplicate issue, but that not the main point, if China did manage to steal any of the F-22 techno info, it could help chinese improve their current or future aircraft design.

But I dun think UAV's will ever fully replace manned figther, there a just some thing which are better done buy a human.

Well i can see the reason why the US keep source code from the Aussie and Norwegians. But why the hell the Brits, how can u be expect someone to be your closest ally if u and said to them that u can't trust them. The US really have the best way to make friend. You support and trust me when I need you, but it doesn't I trust u or will support the same way bak to u. Oh great.
IMO
 

FreeAsia2000

Junior Member
Nethappy said:
Well for a matter of fact I agree with u on the duplicate issue, but that not the main point, if China did manage to steal any of the F-22 techno info, it could help chinese improve their current or future aircraft design.

But I dun think UAV's will ever fully replace manned figther, there a just some thing which are better done buy a human.

Well i can see the reason why the US keep source code from the Aussie and Norwegians. But why the hell the Brits, how can u be expect someone to be your closest ally if u and said to them that u can't trust them. The US really have the best way to make friend. You support and trust me when I need you, but it doesn't I trust u or will support the same way bak to u. Oh great.
IMO
The Yanks haven't really trusted us since the whole sordid USSR spy thingy
of course they've forgotten the Rosenberg and Pollard thing...

The thing that amazes me though is how fast the gap between the have-nots
(China) and the haves (USA) has decreased. I mean the F-22 is totally new and may now have to be supplied to allies like Japan to counter China
 

walter

Junior Member
some interesting news: AESA in space:

The U.S. Air Force plans
Aviation Week & Space Technology
03/27/2006, page 20



The U.S. Air Force plans to launch a 5-ton, football-field-size demonstrator radar into low Earth orbit in 2010. The active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar is expected to serve as the forerunner to a new family of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platforms in space. The program is run by the Air Force Research Laboratory's space vehicles directorate at Kirtland AFB, N.M. The plan is eventually to have 300-yd.-long AESA arrays flying at an altitude of 5,700 mi. that can provide tracking of surface targets around the clock in all weather. USAF officials note the array could be used to gather intel from other satellites because it also will be designed to function as a passive, electronic intelligence-gathering device. Two contractor teams--Boeing/Raytheon and Lockheed Martin/Harris--are competing to build the 100-yd. experimental array. The antenna is to be sent up by an evolved expendable launch vehicle that is expected to push the folding array into an orbit at 620-mi. altitude. The one-year mission will focus on development of "tactical-grade, ground-moving target indication capability [with] precise resolution and scanning in multiple areas of interest," says program manager Steven A. Lane.
 

Nethappy

NO WAR PLS
VIP Professional
The thing that amazes me though is how fast the gap between the have-nots
(China) and the haves (USA) has decreased. I mean the F-22 is totally new and may now have to be supplied to allies like Japan to counter China
IMO is always easier to catch up with technology then to resreach new one, cos you know what you are looking for, and it almost always possible to gain some kind of techo, spec or info about it (ever legally or illegally, one way or another).

IMO the Chinese a smart people, if the chinese leader can use the rite people and give them the rite funding, I think they can go a long way. By the way as far as I know there a load of Chinese working in US Lab.
 

walter

Junior Member
Nethappy said:
By the way as far as I know there a load of Chinese working in US Lab.
To work on sensitive defense R&D researchers have to go through extensive background checks--you won't find a PRC citizen working on US defense labs. Universities and corporations not working on such sensitive things is obviously another story--lots of intelligent foreigners from all over the globe come to where the money is (oh yeah, and top notch research opportunities, too ;) ).
 
Last edited:
Top