US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

kwaigonegin

Colonel
Well the F-22s are very capable, and the F-35s will be very soon, the F-15C/D remains the most dangerous aircraft among all the 4 and 4.5 gens?? Want to argue that fine, but although some of the Flankers have a kinematic advantage, and the Typhoons et al have HMS and good radars as well, the F-15 will have superior high powered radar and and a tremendous weapons load to get it done with its new Fire Control System, and working in tandem with our own 5 gens, theres little doubt that the F-15 is packing serious heat, and well able to put those weapons on target from a very significant range.

IMHO F15 2040Cs with F22 combo using the tactics outlined, would be peerless in any A2A matchup against any current and future aircraft currently in development.

Against a very competent adversary a couple of f15s will be lost however the air battle would be won.

The closest matchup would be j15/j20 combo but I would still give the edge to the eagles/raptor simply because of slightly better avionics and more AAMs to put on target.

A flight of 6 eagles and 2 raptors would have at their disposal 40 fox 3s and 16 fox 2s. Assuming 1:1, 1 out of 7 missiles could theoretically miss their targets and the battle would still be won although with a much higher casualty.
 

Brumby

Major
IMHO F15 2040Cs with F22 combo using the tactics outlined, would be peerless in any A2A matchup against any current and future aircraft currently in development.

Against a very competent adversary a couple of f15s will be lost however the air battle would be won.

The closest matchup would be j15/j20 combo but I would still give the edge to the eagles/raptor simply because of slightly better avionics and more AAMs to put on target.

A flight of 6 eagles and 2 raptors would have at their disposal 40 fox 3s and 16 fox 2s. Assuming 1:1, 1 out of 7 missiles could theoretically miss their targets and the battle would still be won although with a much higher casualty.

We are probably going off track but the F-15/F-22 combo are land based assets and in the scenario that you envisioned, the disadvantage to the US is not the platform but distance. The J-20 as I understand it will be tasked to go after the mid air refuellers.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Guys, we have threads for the F-22 and the F-15.

This is getting down into the weeds for those platforms now and going beyond "News."

Take any further discussions into these details to one of those threads.

Thanks.
 
translated to English LOL SM-3 missed and THAAD saved the day?
Ballistic Missile Defense System Demonstrates Layered Defense While Conducting Multiple Engagements in Operational Test
November 1, 2015
The U.S. Missile Defense Agency (MDA), Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) Operational Test Agency, Joint Functional Component Command for Integrated Missile Defense, U.S. European Command, and U.S. Pacific Command conducted a complex operational flight test of the BMDS demonstrating a layered defense architecture.

The test, designated Flight Test Operational-02 Event 2a, was conducted in the vicinity of Wake Island and surrounding areas of the western Pacific Ocean. The test stressed the ability of Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) weapon systems to negate two ballistic missile threats while Aegis BMD simultaneously conducted an anti-air warfare operation.

This was a highly complex operational test of the BMDS which required all elements to work together in an integrated layered defense design to detect, track, discriminate, engage, and negate the ballistic missile threats.

BMDS assets included: a THAAD battery consisting of a THAAD Fire Control and Communications (TFCC) unit, THAAD launcher, and an Army Navy/Transportable Radar Surveillance and Control Model 2 (AN/TPY-2) radar in terminal mode; a second AN/TPY-2 radar in forward-based mode; Command, Control, Battle Management and Communications (C2BMC); and the USS JOHN PAUL JONES (DDG-53) Aegis BMD-configured ship with its onboard AN/SPY-1 radar.

At approximately 11:05 pm EDT (October 31), a Short Range Air Launch Target (SRALT) was launched by a U.S. Air Force C-17 aircraft southeast of Wake Island. The THAAD AN/TPY-2 radar in terminal mode detected the target and relayed track information to the TFCC to develop a fire control solution and provide track information for use by other defending BMDS assets. The THAAD weapon system developed a fire control solution, launched a THAAD interceptor missile, and successfully intercepted the SRALT target.

While THAAD was engaging the SRALT, an extended Medium Range Ballistic Missile (eMRBM) was air-launched by another Air Force C-17. The eMRBM target was detected and tracked by multiple BMDS assets including the AN/TPY-2 in forward-based mode, and the USS JOHN PAUL JONES with its AN/SPY-1 radar. Shortly after eMRBM launch, a BQM-74E air-breathing target was also launched and tracked by the USS JOHN PAUL JONES.

As a demonstration of layered defense capabilities, both Aegis BMD and THAAD launched interceptors to engage the eMRBM. The USS JOHN PAUL JONES successfully launched a Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) Block IB Threat Upgrade guided missile, but an anomaly early in its flight prevented a midcourse intercept. However, the THAAD interceptor, in its terminal defense role, acquired and successfully intercepted the target. Concurrently, Aegis BMD successfully engaged the BQM-74E air-breathing target with a Standard Missile-2 Block IIIA guided missile. A failure review is currently underway to investigate the SM-3 anomaly.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
translated to English LOL SM-3 missed and THAAD saved the day?
Ballistic Missile Defense System Demonstrates Layered Defense While Conducting Multiple Engagements in Operational Test

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Nothing wrong with that. At the same time the SM-3 engaged and hit the aircraft/non-missile target. This is why defenses are layered and why there are these tests to verify performance and make improvements.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Navy’s Expeditionary Fast Transport Brunswick Completes Acceptance Trials
By:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

November 3, 2015 10:01 AM
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Expeditionary Fast Transport Brunswick (EPF-6) launched from the Austal USA shipyard in May 2015. US Navy Photo

The Navy’s 6th Expeditionary Fast Transport (EPF) has completed its last set of trials ahead of delivery to Military Sealift Command, Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) annouced on Monday.

Now the Austal USA-built Brunswick (EPF-6) — of the class formerly known as the Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV) — is expected to deliver to the service later this year.

“Conducting acceptance trials is a major milestone for the shipyard and the program office,” said Capt. Henry Stevens, Strategic and Theater Sealift Program Manager, Program Executive Office, Ships.
“We are very proud of our contractor and government team’s commitment to delivering affordable, quality ships and look forward to the delivery of EPF 6 later this year.”

The trials in the Gulf of Mexico, “included dockside testing to clear the ship for sea and rigorous at-sea trials during which the Navy’s Board of Inspection and Survey (INSURV) evaluated and observed the performance of EPF 6’s major systems,” read the statement from NAVSEA.

The class was designed to conduct intratheater lift and humanitarian assistance/disaster relief (HADR) support but has also been tapped to fill gaps in U.S. Southern Command’s counter-trafficking operations.

The Navy has created an
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
l looking at ships like the EPFs to optimize the service’s logistics platforms for new uses.

Last week Austal USA was awarded a $53.4 million contract for long lead items for an 11thEPF further extending the original class of ten ships.

The following is the complete Nov. 2, 2015 release form NAVSEA on Brunswick acceptance trials.

Future USNS Brunswick (EPF 6) Completes Acceptance Trials

By Team Ships Public Affairs

MOBILE, Ala. – Expeditionary Fast Transport (EPF) 6, the future USNS Brunswick completed Acceptance Trials Oct. 23 the Navy reported today.

The ship, which was constructed by Austal USA, is the sixth ship of the EPF class. The EPF class ships were formerly known as Joint High Speed Vessels, or JHSVs.

“Conducting Acceptance Trials is a major milestone for the shipyard and the program office,” said Capt. Henry Stevens, Strategic and Theater Sealift Program Manager, Program Executive Office, Ships. “We are very proud of our contractor and government team’s commitment to delivering affordable, quality ships and look forward to the delivery of EPF 6 later this year.”

The ship’s trials included dockside testing to clear the ship for sea and rigorous at-sea trials during which the Navy’s Board of Inspection and Survey (INSURV) evaluated and observed the performance of EPF 6’s major systems. Completion of Brunswick’s Acceptance Trials signifies that the ship is ready for delivery to the fleet in the near future.

EPFs are versatile, non-combatant, transport ships that will be used for fast intra-theater transportation of troops, military vehicles, and equipment. EPF is designed to commercial standards, with limited modifications for military use. The vessel is capable of transporting 600 short tons 1,200 nautical miles at an average speed of 35 knots, and can operate in shallow-draft ports and waterways, interfacing with roll-on/roll-off discharge facilities, and on/off-loading vehicles such as a combat-loaded Abrams Main Battle Tank. Other joint requirements include an aviation flight deck to support day and night aircraft launch and recovery operations. EPF 6 will have airline style seating for 312 embarked forces, with fixed berthing for 104.

As one of the Defense Department’s largest acquisition organizations, PEO Ships is responsible for executing the development and procurement of all destroyers, amphibious ships, special mission and support ships, and special warfare craft.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Brumby

Major
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Raytheon to upgrade communications cyber security for Air Force B-2 bomber SATCOM

The ARC-234 is a piece of highly specialized equipment, requiring extensive National Security Agency (NSA) Type 1 certification processes for the device and the facility in which it is produced, Air Force officials say.

A Type 1 product is a device or system that has been certified by the NSA for use in cryptographically securing classified US Government information.

Type 1 is the highest level of NSA information assurance certification possible. It includes testing and formal analysis of cryptographic security, functional security, tamper resistance, emissions security, and security of the product development and manufacturing processes.

On this contract Raytheon will do the work in Largo, Fla., and should be finished by October 2020.
Presumably will be a standard issue for the LRS-B given that the product will be available by 2020.
 
Budget Deal Trims Bomber, Destroyer, Missile and Drone Programs
"The full list of the programs, sorted by rank of biggest reduction, is below:

LINE ITEM AMOUNT
Fuel rate adjustments –1,082,000
FY16 Share of Planned DOD Headquarters Streamling/Attrition –453,000
Overestimation Of Army Civilian Full Time Equivalent Targets –262,500
Army Readiness increase –250,000
Counterterrorism Partnership Fund –250,000
Long Range Strike Bomber change to align with contract award delay –230,000
ANG Readiness increase –192,600
Adds National Guard & Reserve Equipment Account ‐ adjustment to House increase (remains $250M above PB) –170,000
Adds Unexecutable increase in Air Force End Strength –150,200
DDG‐51 –150,000
Syria Train & Equip program change –125,000
Afghan Security Forces Fund ‐ fuel savings –110,000
Classified Program Adjustment –102,600
Technology Offset Initiative (New Program) –100,000
PAC‐3 Missile Segment Enhancement –100,000
Coalition Support Funds –100,000
Unjustified program growth for Defense Information System Network (DISN) activities –90,800
MQ‐9 Quantity increase –80,000
Airlift Readiness Account (from OMAF Mobility Operations) –77,000
Unexecutable Navy Civilian Full Time Equivalent Growth for management functions –66,281
Reduce THAAD purchase –50,000
Joint Enabling Capabilities Command ‐ efficiency –41,000
Reduce SM3 1B purchase –30,000
Ship Outfitting –28,907
Basic research program increase ‐ Navy –27,500
Counterfire Radars –25,000
Basic research program increase ‐ Air Force –22,500
Long Range Standoff Weapon contract delay –20,500
Basic research program increase ‐ Army –20,000
Common Avionics Changes –20,000
Excess Air Force carryover ‐ Spares and Repair Parts –20,000
Restructure AF Integrated Personnel and Pay System –19,000
HARM Improvement –18,544
Logistics Operations –17,000
CARB Combating Antibiot Resistant Bacteria –16,540
Increases to NDAA Reductions Air Force unjustified contract increase –16,100
Logistics Support Activities –16,000
C‐5 Airlift Squadrons (IF) Communications Equipment/Radar Mods –15,000
Mentor Protégé Program –15,000
Common Ground Equipment –15,000
Unexecutable USAF Full Time Equivalent Increase in Combat Enhancement Forces –14,000
Joint Capability Technology Demostration –13,000
Delayed deployment of Defense Enterprise Accounting and Management System –12,700
DCMA Information Technology Development –12,500
Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) contract delay –12,358
Surface Combatant Combat System Engineering –12,300
Logistics Information Technology –12,176
Automated Data Processing Equip –12,000
SHARKSEER –11,000
JIEDDO Attack The Network –10,536
STARBASE –10,000
Family Of Beyond Line‐Of‐Sight Terminals –10,000
Distributed Common Ground System‐Army –10,000
F–18 Modifications –10,000
Joint Air‐Surface Standoff Missile unit cost efficiencies –10,000
Reduce AF Acquisition Training ‐ duplication of effort –10,000
Trident II MODS program growth –10,000
Tactical Wheeled Vehicle Modifications –10,000
Maneuver Control System –10,000
Excess Navy carryover ‐ Spares and Repair Parts –10,000
F‐15 Modiciations –10,000
HC‐130J unit cost growth –9,500
Defense University Research Instrumentation Program increase –9,000
Increase in Public Affairs at Local Installations –8,500
USMC Ground Combat/Supporting Arms project delay –8,100
Joint Air‐to‐Ground Missile (JAGM) contract delays –8,088
Advanced Hawkeye Development –8,000
Next Gen Jammer Development contract delay –8,000
Common Computer Resources –7,000
MC‐130J program efficiencies –6,700
Joint Electronic Advanced Technology –6,500
Advanced EHF program growth –6,000
Fleet satellite comm follow‐on: excess storage costs –5,700
DLA Uniform Research new start –5,360
Quick Reaction Special Projects –5,000
Weather System Follow On –5,000
Transportable Tactical Command Communications –5,000
Navy Fleet Band National Tours –5,000
H–1 Upgrades –5,000
Excess carryover ‐ Spacelift Range System Space –5,000
Unexecutable USAF Full Time Equivalent Increase in Security Programs –4,900
E‐4 Modification program delay –4,000
Increase in Space and Missile Center (SMC) Civilian Workforce –3,578
Unexecutable USAF Full Time Equivalent Increase in Tactical Intel and Other Special Activities –3,200
Advanced Civil Schooling ‐ Civilian Graduate School –3,000
National Guard State Partnership Program –2,700
Joint Warfighting Program –2,126
Unexecutable USAF Full Time Equivalent Increase in Primary Combat Forces –2,100
Global Positioning (Space) program growth –2,000
Air Force Satellite Control Network system engineering –2,000
AMRAAM unit cost variance –1,700
Global Combat Support System ‐ AF Family of Systems –1,500
Civil Air Patrol –1,150
Air Force Civilian Graduate Education Program –930
Mid‐Tier Networking Vehicular Radio (MNVR) –894
Eliminate National Guard Heritage Paintings initiative –510
Naval Sea Cadet Corps –500
C‐130 Modifications –51
TOTAL –4,991,42"
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

strehl

Junior Member
Registered Member
Video of the recent layered missile defense test. Most interesting are the air launched targets. The THAAD missile intercepted both targets after an SM3 had a malfunction during its' flight. Both THAAD hits appear to be exoatmospheric. I'm not sure how low a THAAD can operate although it is capable of endoatmospheric intercepts. I assume there is some level of overlap with PAC3. MDA blanked out the nosecone sections of both targets. I'm guessing there may be some warhead/decoy features that would have been visible.

 
I put three parts in boldface:
Congress Considers the Carrier 'Gap'
There is no US carrier operating today in the Middle East, a situation that is the product of several years of high-tempo operations and the need to catch up on major maintenance put off to sustain that pace. Carriers have been absent from Central Command's operating area before — the last time was in 2007 — but this particular gap has caught a lot of people's attention, even more so as the Navy has warned that another gap will occur in 2016 in the Pacific operating area.

The US Navy is also unable to meet its commitment to field two carrier strike groups, with another three able to surge and deploy should the need arise. Even if sequestration cuts are reversed and full funding is restored, service leaders have said it would be at least 2018 before the Navy would be able to regain those operational readiness levels.

"Gaps in carrier coverage threaten to undermine both the US ability to deter conflict and respond to crises," Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Virginia and chairman of the House Seapower and Projection Forces subcommittee, said Tuesday during a hearing on the carrier situation. Members of the House Subcommittee on Readiness joined with Seapower members in the hearing.

And even as Sean Stackley, the Navy's top acquisition official, acknowledged that the carrier "is at the very core of our maritime strategy," he and a panel of admirals provided detailed testimony why shortages will continue, and why the fleet will remain at 10 ships for the time being, rather than the 11-ship fleet mandated by Congress.

"We require 11, today we have 10," Stackley said. "We have more in depot maintenance today than we would normally have under a stable operational cycle. So we have a shortfall in our ability to generate the forces we need."

Exacerbating the effort to restore the 11-ship fleet are delays in getting the new carrier Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) to sea. The ship, which will be delivered and commissioned in 2016 as the first of a new carrier design, was to have made its first deployment in 2019 after extensive tests and training. But the Pentagon decided in early August to acquiesce to the urging of Michael Gilmore, director of the Office of Test and Evaluation, and carry out shock tests on the Ford rather than wait, as the Navy had planned, to perform the tests on a later ship in the class.

Now, said Rear Adm. Thomas Moore, the Navy's program executive officer for carriers, "because of the shock trial it will be 2021" before the Ford deploys.

The ship the Ford will replace, the Enterprise, was inactivated in late 2012, reducing the fleet to 10 ships.

There also will be delays in completing the next carrier, John F. Kennedy (CVN 79), which is to replace the Nimitz. Stackley explained the Navy's strategy to complete hull, machinery and equipment work on the ship in one phase, then bring the Kennedy back in the shipyard at a later time to finish work on the combat and electronic systems.

"CVN 79 is the numerical relief for the Nimitz which retires in 2025," Stackley told the lawmakers. "The Navy was looking at the construction plan for the 79 to support a heel-to-toe replacement of the Nimitz. That is not an optimal situation for the shipbuilder," he said, noting it was a unique situation at Newport News Shipbuilding.

"Separately we're looking at how to reduce cost," Stackley continued. "There is work better suited for being accomplished outside the construction yard where third parties could bid on it competitively."

Also, he added, "systems that could be subject to obsolescence by the time the ship is complete, we looked for an opportunity to install those systems as late as possible."

He also noted that a new Enterprise Air Surveillance Radar is being developed for the Kennedy, a system that "would not be available to install on the Kennedy during the first [construction] phase, but would be available on the second phase."

The split completion approach, he said, "seems to be the right balance. It is unique to 79, we will not have this opportunity with CVN 80," a new Enterprise.

Forbes, in his opening statement, declared he is "pleased that this administration has recognized the harm that the high OPTEMPO has been doing to the ships and sailors that make up our overextended fleet. But while we seek to stabilize the demand for carriers, we should also seek to maximize their supply."

Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Connecticut and ranking member of the Seapower subcommittee, joined with Chairman Forbes in supporting the carrier fleet.

"The Navy and Congress must continue to work together productively to ensure that we deliver our new carriers in a timely, cost-effective way to get back to the 11 carrier force as soon as possible," Courtney said.

After the hearing, Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Texas, whose land-locked district lies in the heart of the state, introduced a bill to mandate an increase in the number of operational carriers from 11 to 12.

The bill, which has virtually no chance in the present economic environment, makes no mention of the 60 or so aircraft that would be needed to fly from an extra ship, nor the 4,000-plus sailors and airmen needed to crew the ship and aircraft, nor of the escorts to protect another carrier.

It is generally accepted that the cost of the aircraft and crew of a carrier are roughly equal to the ship's purchase price.
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Top