US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

no word about the cost hahaha
During his Senate confirmation hearing, Defense Secretary James Mattis expressed doubts over plans to buy the nuclea
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(LRSO).

“I need to look at that one.” Mattis said, “My going in position is that it makes sense, but I have to look at it in terms of its deterrence capability.”

While Mattis should take a careful
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, or any major weapons program, his initial instinct—that LRSO makes sense—is correct. Let me explain.

In an air environment that is becoming increasingly deadly because of Russian advances in integrated air defenses, it is growing increasingly difficult, even for the B-2 and B-21 stealth bombers, to directly strike hardened and deeply buried targets with the B-61 mod 12 nuclear gravity bomb. While these aircraft will be the most advanced bombers in the world over the next three decades, it will become increasingly difficult
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
hey are certain to face as they attempt to reach very specific types of targets.

With the US Air Force planning to field between 100 and 120
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
over the next three decades, the fleet may very well be too small to hold all required targets at risk. In other words, the notion that any nuclear delivery system is “redundant” is incorrect and fails to account for the fact that getting a weapon to its designated target is far harder than many often understand.

The fact is, stealth aircraft are neither invisible nor invincible. Both the B-2 and B-21 achieve survivability by producing a reduced radar cross section—directing radar returns in predictable directions away from the receiver. This predictability allows for mission planning against known IADS locations. However, against mobile threats, whose location are unknown, radar returns could give away the position of a stealth aircraft. This risk increases when the density of an IADS network increases, which is likely around the high value targets such aircraft may target.

Some will argue that any target a B-2 or B-21 cannot hit can be struck by an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) or Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile (SLBM). This is simply not true. Our adversaries have watched both ICBM and SLBM test shots for decades and have a firm understanding of the flight physics of our weapons, so they know how to position and build facilities that cannot be destroyed by ballistic missiles. The adage that nuclear weapons are like horse shoes and hand grenades — close is good enough —simply is not true for every target.

In short, some well-placed and defended targets are unavailable to stealth aircraft. This means a stealthy cruise missile, which is only a fraction of the size of a stealth bomber, has a much greater probability of arrival at the designated target. And given that there are targets which neither a SLBM nor (ICBM) can hit — largely because their reentry angle will not allow it — LRSO is critical.

Nuclear cruise missiles also have the strategic benefit of requiring far less logistical and planning support and can fly profiles against difficult targets that no bomber can fly. With standoff weapons, the planner’s main concern once the weapon is launched is reaching the target. If a bomber is required to drop a B-61 inside the target country, planning becomes significantly more complicated—along with the added risk to the aircraft and crew. This is because a great deal of additional planning and support (suppression of enemy air defense) is required to ensure the bomber has the greatest probability of reaching the target and then returning from the mission.

Should a cruise missile be lost to enemy IADS, the loss is considerably less than if our small bomber fleet is lost over enemy territory. It is worth noting that after a US nuclear strike on an enemy target, the United States will seek to reestablish deterrence, which will require American bombers regenerate and be ready to fly the next strike mission. If they are lost to enemy IADS, this cannot happen.

When it comes to replacing the ALCM with LRSO, the need is clear. A new stealthy nuclear cruise missile that has a much improved probability of striking and destroying a critical target will give any adversary ample reason to reconsider provocative actions that may lead the United States to use its nuclear weapons. Increasing an adversary’s perceived risk is a good thing. Too often our adversaries question American resolve and mistake our compassion for weakness. As former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld once said: “Weakness is provocative.”
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

no word about the cost hahaha

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
You joke or eventualy a bit ironic but sure since 11/2016 and effectively 3 days MOD have much less concerns for money/Budget normaly remains to break the Sequestration which a law enough special we will see it for severals weeks.
In fact it is very serious. Even me in Francefar very far i am concerned.

But with these changes and Chines military modernisation which have effetively bstart in 1992-94 Su-27, Kilos but now really effective and when you see it
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

a true Arms race has begun mainly for Navals constructions coz China have privilegied her Navy after Air Force and less Army.

As i have mentionned Chinese military modernisation which have effectively start in 1992-94 Su-27, Kilos in fact in 3 steps about this one with first Chinese DDGs after end' 1990s - 2005 about J-11, Su-30MKK-2 8 other Kilos DDG 956 Songs SSKs, tank Type 96- 99 etc... but clearly less than begin in 2010 with especialy the 2nd batch of 4 DDGs 052Cs in relation with delivery of Liaoning

And all these facts going with anow a US military up cos trump but not only decided since some years mainly more Virginias 2017 first year with 2 comm. , re start DDGs Burke this year 3 ! LCS now in full production 4/2016, normaly 5 this year , the Ford late ! a 11th CVN and Ass Amp fleet increase from 30 now 32 2020 34 and possible up to 38 big ships in additoins 11

Air Force mainly new weapons more capable but right now no increase for number which is good in addtion very big ramp up in China but have again about 40 -50 % of less capable J-7-first J-8 and Q-5.

For Army with Asia Pacific which is the main naval theater but with much waters and islands less priveligied.

i don' t forget but the main point for this Balance of forces/ Strategy is clearly since effictely 2010 in Asia especialy area Russia far east - NK - SK - Japan - Taiwan - east China and ofc SCS but not completely in the same area.

So long in a post and for me also i m not a native English speaker still in progress :) but with all these events and we are now completely In the heart of the matter now i I would approach military strategy, areas, services etc... in next posts In a way that is as neutral as possible, which is essential for get an objective opinion.

Necessary include in North east asia theater Guam base with USAFs Bombers important to the South up to Malacca strait SCS, area i suggest.

After Navies logic in first.

Asie.jpg
 
Last edited:
... the USAF's greatest threat is "CHICKIFICATION",,,,
:)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, is likely to get closer scrutiny under the presumptive Air Force Secretary, Heather Wilson, a disciplined former National Security Council staffer and member of Congress.

I interviewed Wilson a number of times while she was on the Hill and was always impressed with her command of the facts, her commitment to doing the best job she could on national security issues, and her calm demeanor.

Wilson, a Rhodes Scholar, is unlikely to have much time for policies that do not align with facts, physics and the realities of power.

She was chairman of the House Intelligence subcommittee on technical and tactical Intelligence (now known as the DoD intelligence and overhead architecture subcommittee) where she oversaw the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, and the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. Coming from her district in New Mexico, Wilson paid close attention to the nation’s nuclear weapons complexes and high technology from the national labs.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
it’s likely Wilson — presuming she doesn’t run into any Senatorial roadblocks — will serve as
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(PDSA) to help coordinate space policy for both black (classified) and white (unclassified) space. Formerly known as the executive agent for space — a position that grew tarnished by time and a legion of acquisition missteps during the late 1990s — she will chair the Defense Space Council of the four services and the Joint Staff.

As proof of her interest in space, she mentioned it in the White House statement about the nomination. “America and our vital national interests continue to be threatened,” she said in the White House announcement. “I will do my best, working with our men and women in the military, to strengthen American air and space power to keep the country safe.”

Expect Wilson to pour her heart and soul into those issues, as well as into the Big Three of the Force, as
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
are known. She’s canny enough to know what can be done to actually lower costs on the F-35 and to fight for a facts-based approach to
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

FYI — Trump met today with
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
CEO Marillyn Hewson,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
CEO Elon Musk, and a host of other American industry leaders to discuss technology and the economy. Sean Spicer, White House spokesman, said the group will meet quarterly.

“I was encouraged by the President’s commitment to reduce barriers to job creation, including targeted regulatory reform and long term budget planning,” Hewson said in a statement, which also indicated Trump discussed ending defense sequestration.

“We support the President’s efforts to
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, so that our military can invest in the equipment and technology they need to defend our nation and protect our interests. Ending these budget restrictions will allow industry to plan, invest and hire for the long term,” she said in the statement.
source: https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/us-military-news-reports-data-etc.t1547/page-654#post-430443
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Not easy as i have yet say to break sequestration necessay 60 Senators votes republicans have 52... less 2 recetly so Trump must do her job rallying voices, convincing.


Legislation to lift caps on defense spending will require 60 votes in the Senate, where Republicans only hold 52 seat
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Analyst: Republican Unity on Growing Defense; No Unity on Paying for It

WASHINGTON — A defense analyst predicted the new administration of President Donald J. Trump will not be able to produce a supplemental 2017 budget in its first 100 days because of the time competition from other policy priorities and the rift between the so-called “defense hawks” and “budget hawks” in the Republican party.

Speaking Jan. 23 in a seminar on the defense budget forecast sponsored by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a Washington think tank, Mackenzie Eaglen, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, said she expects the new administration to propose a 2017 supplemental budget in the $30 billion to $40 billion range that will not be passed before the current continuing resolution runs its course at the end of April.

She said she expects the administration to set its fiscal policy by July, but before then it will be using its political capital to address other issues, including the confirmation of the next Supreme Court justice, the Budget Control Act, tax reform, transportation infrastructure and the replacement of the Affordable Care Act.

“There is a great desire [among Republicans] to be bold and to do a lot and to get a lot done,” Eaglen said. “That will hit the unyielding tyranny of the calendar in the U.S. Senate.

“Defense becomes an important [priority] for members of the committees with jurisdiction,” she said. “It’s important, in theory, with Trump and his team, but [then] ideas hit reality, and floor time, and Senate calendar, and political capital, and how much to there is to expend, plus the whole fiscal policy question, which will probably be set by July.”

Key to the process is Rep. Mick Mulvaney, R-S.C., a “budget hawk” selected by Trump to be the chief of the Office of Management and Budget, who will set the budget topline, and who Eaglen said “is deeply opposed to defense increases. Never underestimate that.”

She said Mulvaney wants the funds used for base budget functions in the Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) budget to be folded into the base budget itself. She warned that this shift could be used as a mirage of increasing the defense budget topline that would not, in fact, increase the budget in real terms.

“Trump is going to explode the [federal] debt, way over the head of Mulvaney,” she said.

“This not a unified Republican party, this is coalition governing,” she said. “There are so many factions in the Republican party that have to be constantly cared, fed and managed, and they do not vote in unison.”

Eaglen praised as a starting point for discussion the recent defense proposals by Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., united with House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas., noting that their signal is $640 billion for the 2018 base budget.

“The plan to pay for that is complete fantasy, dead on arrival,” she said. “The way that they’re going to be proposing to pay for that will be dramatic cuts in federal non-defense discretionary spending. There are not nearly enough votes.

“There is unity in the party to grow defense,” Eaglen said. “There is no unity on how to pay for it.”

“There is going to be a determined effort to shut down the OCO mechanism,” said Andrew Hunter, a fellow in the CSIS International Security Program, who also spoke at the seminar. He also thinks OCO funding is not a good way to fund modernization of the military.

Hunter said that Navy shipbuilding — the Columbia-class ballistic-missile submarine, for example — could be accelerated a little, but that “building up the Navy is going to take a long time, but you can lay the ground work to get there.”

He stressed that the new administration has not yet promulgated a new defense strategy, which, when announced, will determine the direction and priorities of the future defense budgets.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:
Also i have this discussion but not in the good topic for China and USA
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/plan-type-052c-052d-class-destroyers.t6881/page-159#post-435093

Yet nobody likes to be the second... even in some families can be a problem... and i don' t see China for long term looking for only a 2nd place with all we see...
But quite sure according much experts, watchers US remains number one at less up to 2050.

Allow me for US guys which have Chinese origins i understand completely things as eventualy religions etc... but logicaly and i think same for French which have foreign origins your country is USA you live there, USA welcomed you must defend it.
Exist a diaspora in the world but different if they don' t have nationality of these countries.

China have always a very numerous Army it is a big country with the more numerous population since always at less since we have statistics but have in comparison few energy mainly oïl and gas.
Much coal but it is an energy less used and polluting with actuals concerns for environment...

A very numerous Army less than USSR about in 1980's 2000000 pers, 100 Divisions, about 10000 tanks, AF 3500 fighters-bombers, Navy numerous but very few MSC only DDGs Luda about 70 old or few capable submarines only coastal brown water Navy few capable.
Many armament big majority obsolete again in 1990 - 95.

Remains a thing as have pointed some members mainly politic since always China is a country very closed, no election, few freedoms personnals also, work with military and opacity as French i can' t understand impossible, in more not pleasant especialy for we very few infos ofc.

I absolutely agree Forbin, if you live here in the US, you have an obligation to defend the US, if you don't agree with that, go home, wherever that may be. Understandibly many have family back home, so mixed emotions, but if you are a US citizen, you have a responsibility to love and protect your new home!

Now, I want peace, and I can say without reservation that 95% of Americans long for and desire peace, but if somebody "hurts us", militarily, they get what they deserve! We have always been very measured in our responses, and IMHO fair, but 9/11 reminded us that their is evil in the world bent on US destruction.

I like the old saying from the 60-70s "America, Love it, or Leave it!"

Just because a person is a citizen of a country or loves their country doesn't mean they have to agree with everything their country, or more specifically a particular government or a particular political faction, does about anything including in foreign affairs.

A key supposed difference between the French and American democratic political systems with an authoritarian one such as China's is that citizens are supposed to have a say in how their country behaves. If things should be the way you say then there is no difference and citizens should just blindly support their government no matter what it does.

Also if as you say a person should always support their citizenship country's actions with regards to their heritage country then for example Jewish-Americans should always be supportive of any policy the US pursues regarding Israel, same with Irish-Americans regarding Ireland, Italian-Americans regarding Italy, Chinese-Americans regarding China, Japanese-Americans regarding Japan, etc. This is clearly not the case as groups which are politically active and expend sufficient resources for political influence do get to influence policies that would otherwise be different, sometimes people don't even have to be of a different heritage country to put another country's interests above their own as long as it is personally beneficial to them.

Ultimately intelligent upstanding conscientious people will decide for themselves whether anyone, including their own country and their country of heritage, is doing or about to do anything immoral or evil, or even just ineffective or wasteful, and behave appropriately. Man is born free and everywhere he is in chains.
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Not easy as i have yet say to break sequestration necessay 60 Senators votes republicans have 52... less 2 recently so Trump must do her job rallying voices, convincing.

Analyst: Republican Unity on Growing Defense; No Unity on Paying for It
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

In details enough complicated a law a bit unusual !
Budget Control Act, BCA also sequestration duration up to FY 2021

Réductions can be a bit modified each year
I search how cancelled this law i dont 't think only Senate vote, if one know ?

The legacy of the 2011 debt ceiling fight is the biggest issue the next president will face on day one
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The Budget Control Act of 2011
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
Just because a person is a citizen of a country or loves their country doesn't mean they have to agree with everything their country, or more specifically a particular government or a particular political faction, does about anything including in foreign affairs.

A key supposed difference between the French and American democratic political systems with an authoritarian one such as China's is that citizens are supposed to have a say in how their country behaves. If things should be the way you say then there is no difference and citizens should just blindly support their government no matter what it does.

Also if as you say a person should always support their citizenship country's actions with regards to their heritage country then for example Jewish-Americans should always be supportive of any policy the US pursues regarding Israel, same with Irish-Americans regarding Ireland, Italian-Americans regarding Italy, Chinese-Americans regarding China, Japanese-Americans regarding Japan, etc. This is clearly not the case as groups which are politically active and expend sufficient resources for political influence do get to influence policies that would otherwise be different, sometimes people don't even have to be of a different heritage country to put another country's interests above their own as long as it is personally beneficial to them.

Ultimately intelligent upstanding conscientious people will decide for themselves whether anyone, including their own country and their country of heritage, is doing or about to do anything immoral or evil, or even just ineffective or wasteful, and behave appropriately. Man is born free and everywhere he is in chains.

Depends on where you are born Bub, some countries with population controls force "terminations" on women, taking the lives of many un-born children. Very, Very, BAD! So in general I agree with you, but if you want to be a US citizen, Freedom comes with responsibility, time we made sure folks are aware of that, we don't want any more free-loaders who don't love our country, and don't respect our values!

and yes I'll be happy to contribute to "one way plane tickets" for folks who disagree with that! anywhere they want to go, and don't let the door hit you in the butt.
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
US to send twenty AH-64 Apache attack helicopters to Europe

A fleet of 20 AH-64 Apache aircraft from the 1st Battalion, 501st Aviation Regiment, 1st Armored Division in Fort Bliss, Texas landed at the Corpus Christi Army Depot last week to prepare for their February deployment to Europe.

...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Bernard

Junior Member
A cool little article just for fun reading. With a few surprises.
1. What is the need for a military like the United States to have two separate attack Helo's? Viper and Apache. If it was me I'd sell the Old Vipers and get all updated Apaches and with the money saved put into research for newer Apaches or keep them Updated. The article never gave and pros or cons to why Vipers other than expensive to upgrade (Con)
2. This "With the United States theoretically ending combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, the service will shrink to a total strength of 182,000 Marines by 2017. But even at that reduced manning level, it will be nearly as large as the entire active British military."
3. Why do they have 400 old Abrams?

While the Marine Corps prides itself on being a strategically mobile medium-weight force, there are times when it needs the brute force of heavy armor. That brute force is provided by the General Dynamics M1A1 Abrams. The Abrams, and four others, round out a key list of the Marines most deadly weapons of war.
The U.S. Marine Corps prides itself on being America’s 911 force—a fire brigade that the president can call upon to fight the nation’s battles in an emergency. Though the Marines have largely been treated as a de facto second land army over the past dozen years, the service is an integral component of the Department of the Navy and is primarily a maritime force. Therefore, the Marines—as a specialized amphibious force—argue that they need unique hardware to conduct their unique missions. While the service has many different types of weapons, here is a selection of their five key systems:


Marine Rifleman:

While not a “weapon system” in the traditional sense of the word, the Marine Corps warrior ethos and superb training make the service what it is. Every single Marine, from the lowest private to the Commandant himself is trained first and foremost as an infantryman.

Even the Marines’ naval aviators undergo nine months of infantry training as part of Officer Candidate School and the Basic School before they go off to flight school. The shared experience of fighting alongside Marines on the ground gives the service a level of cohesion that the other branches lack. Ultimately, it is the Marine Corps’ people that make it arguably the most effective branch of the armed forces.

With the United States theoretically ending combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, the service will shrink to a total strength of 182,000 Marines by 2017. But even at that reduced manning level, it will be nearly as large as the entire active British military.

M1A1 Abrams:

While the Marine Corps prides itself on being a strategically mobile medium-weight force, there are times when it needs the brute force of heavy armor. That brute force is provided by the General Dynamics
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

While not quite as advanced as the U.S. Army’s M1A2 SEPv2, the Marines’ M1A1 Firepower Enhancement Package suits the Marine’s purposes of supporting the service’s infantry. The Abrams is armed with a 120mm cannon and is protected with an armor matrix that incorporates depleted-uranium armor. With a 1,500hp Honeywell gas-turbine engine, it can move at more than 45 miles per hour.

The Marines are not a heavy, mechanized force in the mold of the Army’s heavy brigade combat teams. The entire Marine force has only three tank battalions—and the service has just shy of 400 tanks in total, most of which are stored in pre-positioned stocks.

AH-1Z Viper:

The
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
is the latest iteration of the Vietnam-era Cobra attack helicopter. While outwardly the AH-1Z looks like its predecessors, it is basically a completely new machine.

The AH-1Z is powered by a pair of 1,800shp General Electric T700 turboshaft engines that is coupled with a new four-bladed composite rotor system that gives the helicopter exceptional agility. It carries a suite of advanced sensors including a Lockheed Martin target sight system and can carry the Longbow radar system. Like the Army’s AH-64E Apache, it can carry sixteen Hellfire missiles, but also adds an air-to-air punch with its ability to fire AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles.

The AH-1Z also shares many common parts with the Marines’ Bell UH-1Y Venom version of the UH-1 Huey, which helps with the services logistics. However, on the downside, the Viper and Venom are unique platforms with the Defense Department, and have not been built in huge numbers like the Army’s Apache or UH-60 Blackhawk helicopters. That means the Marines have a more difficult time keeping their machines up-to-date with the latest advances—and it costs more.

Boeing AV-8B Harrier II:

The
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
jump-jet affords the Marines’ expeditionary units their own organic fixed-wing air support. For the Marines, who can’t always afford ready access to heavy artillery, aircraft act as mobile fire support.

While the Harrier is not the best fighter or strike aircraft—until the Lockheed Martin F-35B Joint Strike Fighter becomes operational—it is the only short-takeoff, vertical-landing aircraft that can operate from amphibious assault ships. The subsonic attack aircraft, though perhaps a compromise in many respects, is essential to the Marines’ unique concept of operations.

The Harrier will be replaced in favor of the Joint Strike Fighter over the coming years. The service hopes to retire the venerable jet by 2025, reversing an earlier plan to keep the AV-8B in service past 2030. Instead, the Marines will keep their Boeing F/A-18A/B/C/D aircraft until the F-35B replaces those jets also.

LAV:

As a highly mobile, medium-weight force, the Marines don’t want to be weighted down by heavy armored vehicles. However, some mechanized forces are necessary.

For the Marines, many of those needs are met by versions of the General Dynamics Light Armored Vehicle series (LAV). A Marine light-armored reconnaissance battalion includes many variants of the LAV, including the LAV-25 LAV-AT, LAV-L, LAV-M, LAV-Rs and LAV-C2s, which all have their individual functions, ranging from anti-tank and anti-air to command and control.

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