US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Feb 13, 2018
"...
Perhaps most distressing of all is that even with the Navy’s current plan to continue buying two Virginia-class attack boats per year — even during years when they buy the Columbia-class ballistic missile subs — the fleet of attack boats will still see a precipitous decline in numbers to 42 boats, down from a projected 52 in 2019.
The fleet’s requirement is 66 attack boats, a number the shipbuilding plan doesn’t hit until 2048."
etc.:
US Navy to add 46 ships in five years, but 355 ships won’t come for a long time
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
now inside
Navy, Lawmakers Debate How to Best Leverage, Protect Shipbuilding Industry
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

:

Attack Submarines

Courtney, whose district includes the General Dynamics Electric Boat yard that builds submarines, said in his opening statement that, among the missed opportunities to take advantage of industrial base capacity to help reach 355 ships faster, “one glaring example of this opportunity is in the undersea fleet. While the budget reflects a sustained two-a-year construction rate for Virginia-class submarines, at this rate the force would not achieve the 66-boat [requirement] until 2048 – 30 years from now. The 30-year shipbuilding plan identifies specific opportunities in 2022 and 2023 where there is industrial base capacity for a third submarine in each of those years, within the next five-year block contract being negotiated between the Navy and industry.”

The Navy made a massive request for 2019 spending on the Virginia-class program, but much of the funding was to help kick off the new block contract. The request buys two SSNs for $4.373 billion, as well as allots $1.8 billion for advance procurement and $985 million for economic order quantity spending to help achieve cost savings throughout the entirety of this new block contract, the Navy told USNI News. The Navy could not discuss per-hull cost estimates for the Block V contract, which will introduce the Virginia Payload Module to the SSN design, due to ongoing contract negotiations with the submarine builders. However, the service said the $4.373 billion figure represents “an educated cost assessment based on the [Virginia-class submarine] Block IV costs currently, and all estimates provided by the shipbuilders to add the [Virginia Payload Module] section into the boat. The actual cost will be close to the estimated cost, however contract negotiations are required to firmly define the cost of both FY19-1 and FY19-2 hulls,” according to a statement provided to USNI News.

The Navy originally planned for the Block V contract to cover 10 ships, like the five-year 10-boat Block IV contract, but lawmakers put into the FY 2018 National Defense Authorization Act that the contract allows the purchase of up to 13 boats.

Courtney said during the hearing that “Congress has already demonstrated it strong support for expanding the attack submarine production line. Specifically, we provided the authority needed to go beyond two submarines a year in the next five-year block contract. I urge the Navy to take advantage of this opportunity and others like it that provide finite opportunity in the years ahead to add to the plan presented to us here today.
 
Thursday at 7:09 AM
The Pentagon Just Revealed How Much It Spends Helping Foreign Militaries
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

the topic is interesting, just they need to edit

"... the 2019 budget devotes just $6 million – or less than 0.002 percent of the $3.4 billion budgeted for security cooperation – toward ..."

as LOL! it's about 0.2 percent (not "0.002 percent")

now told them below that article, let's see what happens
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
they fixed this (now there's "0.2 percent" in that article) and didn't delete my comment
LOL!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Monday at 7:36 AM
Feb 19, 2018
saw that footage from the go camera of an SF member now, didn't watch it all, it's like in a movie except it isn't :-(
now
Probe Finds Deadly Niger Mission Lacked Proper Approval
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

A military investigation
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
that killed four American service members concludes the team didn't get required senior command approval for their risky mission to capture a high-level Islamic State militant, several U.S. officials familiar with the report said. It doesn't point to that failure as a cause of the deadly ambush.

Initial information suggested the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Special Forces team set out on its October mission to meet local Nigerien leaders, only to be redirected to assist a second unit hunting for Doundou Chefou, a militant suspected of involvement in the kidnapping of an American aid worker.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Officials say it now appears the team went after Chefou from the onset, without outlining that intent to higher-level commanders.

As a result, commanders couldn't accurately assess the mission's risk, according to the officials who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the results of the investigation before they're publicly released.

The finding will likely increase scrutiny on U.S. military activity in Africa, particularly the role of
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
forces who've been advising and working with local troops on the continent for years.

Four U.S. soldiers and four Nigerien troops were killed Oct. 4 about 120 miles (200 kilometers) north of Niamey, Niger's capital,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
by as many as 100 Islamic State-linked militants traveling by vehicle and carrying small arms and rocket-propelled grenade launchers. Two other American soldiers and eight Nigerien forces were wounded.

The investigation finds no single point of failure leading to the attack, which occurred after the soldiers learned Chefou had left the area, checked his last known location and started for home.

It also draws no conclusion about whether villagers in Tongo Tongo, where the team stopped for water and supplies, alerted ISIS militants to American forces in the area.

Still, questions remain about whether higher-level commanders -- if given the chance -- would have approved or adjusted the mission, or provided additional resources that could have helped repel the ambush.

Army Col. Rob Manning, a Pentagon spokesman, wouldn't comment on the investigation, beyond saying it's now complete and being reviewed by Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and other senior leaders.

The other U.S. officials said the final report could have consequences for U.S. military operations in Africa.

Gen. Thomas Waldhauser, Africa Command leader, is expected to recommend greater oversight to ensure proper mission approval and risk assessment, they said. Waldhauser isn't expected to scale back missions in Africa or remove commanders' authorities to make decisions. He is slated to testify before a House committee Tuesday.

The incident is likely to trigger discussions about improved security measures, too, including heavier armored vehicles, better communications and improved individual trackers to make it easier to find missing troops.

Top Africa Command officials, led by its chief of staff, Maj. Gen. Roger Cloutier Jr., have spent months trying to unravel the complex incident, conducting dozens of interviews across the U.S., Europe and Africa.

U.S. and Nigerien officials say the troops received intelligence about Chefou's location and acted on what was likely considered a fleeting chance to get him, or at least gather valuable intelligence on the American hostage.

It's unclear where Chefou was believed to be. But before arriving at that location, the U.S.-Nigerien team learned he had left. The troops traveled on to the site to collect any remaining information there. A second U.S. commando team assigned to the mission was unable to go because of weather problems.

One Nigerien official said the troops that reached the destination found food and a motorcycle. They destroyed the motorcycle. The team then headed home, the official said, but stopped in Tongo Tongo to get supplies.

The U.S. investigation notes the team stayed at Tongo Tongo longer than normal, but says there is no compelling evidence to conclude a villager or anyone else deliberately delayed their departure or betrayed them by alerting militants.

The Nigerien official said Abou Walid Sahraoui, an ISIS leader in the region, heard the team had visited the site of Chefou's last known location. He then dispatched about 20 fighters to pursue the U.S. and Nigerien troops.

A larger group of militants followed later, said the official, who also would only discuss the matter on condition of anonymity. U.S. officials couldn't corroborate that information.

Shortly after leaving Tongo Tongo, U.S. and Nigerien forces were attacked and eventually overrun by the ISIS ambush.

Army Sgt. La David T. Johnson, 25, of Miami Gardens, Florida, became separated from the others as he fought and ran for cover in the brush. He was gunned down, but his body wasn't found until two days later.

The other three Americans killed were Staff Sgt. Bryan C. Black, 35, of Puyallup, Washington; Staff Sgt. Jeremiah W. Johnson, 39, of Springboro, Ohio; and Staff Sgt. Dustin M. Wright, 29, of Lyons, Georgia. Black and Wright were Army Special Forces. Johnson and Johnson weren't
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
; the others were.

The U.S. troops called for help using the code "Broken Arrow," which signals they were in imminent danger, officials said. They then followed procedures and shut down their radios to prevent the enemies from using them. As a result, they couldn't communicate quickly with French aircraft sent in to rescue them. Some footage of the gruesome battle, taken off one of the U.S. soldier's helmet cameras, surfaced in recent days in an IS propaganda video posted online.

Officials said the procedural breakdown meant the overall mission lacked the higher-level command approval necessary to go after a senior militant. Such missions require approval by senior Special Operations Command officers who would've been in Chad or at Africa Command's headquarters in Germany.

The reporting failure meant those commanders lacked a complete picture of what the unit was doing, so concluded the mission was unlikely to encounter enemy forces.

Had the unit gotten proper oversight and approvals, officials said, it might have been better equipped or included additional personnel more capable of sustaining a fight.
 
PCIKWYF4HZGV3LH3MI7TRE7CUI.jpg

the link is Fewer planes are ready to fly: Air Force mission-capable rates decline amid pilot crisis
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Dizasta1

Senior Member
Fewer planes are ready to fly: Air Force mission-capable rates decline

The largest single drop in mission capable rates of USAF is the F-22 Raptor. Going double negative at -11.17% in a year. Second largest drop in mission capable rates of USAF is the F-35 Lightning-ll with -9.90% in one year. And the third largest drop for USAF is the C-5 Galaxy, with -7.64% in a year. Judging by current trends, it seems unlikely that the negative trajectory would change for a couple of years at least. Two of three aircraft types are essential to America's ability to project power and win wars.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
C5 Galaxy as a whole is a less critical element due to the C17 with it's extensive numbers.
however All elements of the US DOD have suffered due to continuing resolutions and lack of a actual budget.
 

timepass

Brigadier
Lockheed to support construction of MMSC ships for Saudi Arabia...

Lockheed-to-support-construction-of-MMSC-ships-for-Saudi-Arabia.jpg



"Lockheed Martin has been awarded a contract for services in support of the construction of four Multi-Mission Surface Combatant ships for Saudi Arabia.

The deal, announced Monday by the Department of Defense, is valued at more than $481.1 million under an undefinitized contract action for long-lead-time material."

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Jan 26, 2018
Dec 3, 2017

Dec 8, 2017and
The Air Force’s KC-46 tanker is almost ready for prime time
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
now Another KC-46 delivery slip puts pressure on Boeing to meet contract obligations
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Boeing won’t be able to deliver the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
to the U.S. Air Force until the end of 2018, the service found during its latest schedule review.

That could make it very difficult for the company to meet a contractual obligation to deliver 18 certified KC-46s and nine refueling pods by October 2018. Should Boeing miss that “required assets available” deadline, also known as RAA, it would be subject to additional financial penalties.

The Air Force based its new estimate of the first KC-46 delivery date on a recently completed schedule risk assessment completed by it and Boeing, the service said in a statement Tuesday. While the program will continue to execute to Boeing’s plans, which calls for first delivery sometime this summer, the service believes that schedule is overly optimistic.

“The Air Force assesses first aircraft delivery is more likely to occur in late calendar year 2018. This assessment is based on known risks and predicted impacts associated with airworthiness certifications and slower than expected flight test execution. The Air Force will continue to work with Boeing to develop schedule mitigations, where appropriate, to expedite the program.”

Boeing spokesman Chick Ramey told Defense News that it is still the company’s intention to deliver 18 KC-46 tankers by the end of 2018.

“We worked closely with the U.S. Air Force on the updated KC-46 schedule risk assessment and discussed a range of delivery dates,” he said in a statement. “While there is always risk on any development program, we’re relying on our partnership with the Air Force to help mitigate those risks, complete KC-46 testing and deliver 18 game-changing tankers to them as quickly as possible.”

The Air Force noted that “these potential delays will not result in additional program cost to the taxpayer” because Boeing agreed to a firm, fixed-price contract where the company is responsible for any costs over $4.9 billion.

Boeing has already had to pay
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, due to schedule delays and cost overruns on the program — including missing its original August 2017 RAA date.

The Air Force’s statement marks the second time the service has publicly rebuked Boeing’s proposed KC-46 delivery schedule for being overly rosy.

Last spring, the service announced that it no longer believed the company would be able to deliver the first KC-46 tanker by the end of the year. Boeing maintained that it would be able to do so until December, when Leanne Caret, the top executive for the company’s defense sector, told Defense News that it would miss the 2017 goal.

Even as early as late last year, there were signs that the delivery schedule was slipping even further.

In December, Lt .Gen. Arnold Bunch, the service’s top uniformed acquisition official, told Defense News that the Air Force had expected to accept the first KC-46 in March 2018, but now “we think it may be a little later than that.”

The Air Force plans to buy 179 KC-46s over its program of record. Boeing finalized its
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, to Japan, last year.
 
Navy Working New Fleet Size Study Following Latest Strategic Reviews
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

since I read it, I post:
Following the release of new national security and defense strategies, the Navy is undertaking a new Fleet Structure Assessment that could alter its stated goal of a 355-ship fleet, senior service officials told Congress this week.

A new FSA would take a look at the mix of surface ships and submarine in the service and could change assumptions on the look and size of the future fleet, Vice Adm. Bill Merz, deputy chief of naval operations for warfare systems (OPNAV N9), told the House Armed Services seapower and projection forces subcommittee on Tuesday.

“We intend to do another FSA with the new National Defense Strategy. There’s a series of events that have to happen before we do the FSA, starting with the combatant commanders all the way down to the defense planning guidance that leads us to the scenarios we need to plan for,” Merz said.

The last FSA, issued in the last days of the Obama administration by Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus, set the goal for active
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
from the previous 2014 FSA.

The 2016 FSA expressed a desire for higher-end ships like attack submarine and guided-missile destroyers and cruisers to the total. It added 16 large surface combatants, 18 attack submarines and an additional carrier over the 2014 plan.

Following the 2016 FSA, the Navy also
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
the Navy to commission to study what a future fleet would look like.

“We have done multiple studies on the architecture of the Navy and the size of the Navy. Every single one of them says we have to grow, and we have to grow in these fundamental types of ships,” Merz said.
“So we don’t expect much of that to change with the next FSA; maybe it changes on the margins, maybe another number we’re shooting for, but it’s going to be bigger than we are today, so we have to move out and we have to move out aggressively as we go forward.”

As of Wednesday, the Navy has a total of 282 battle force ships.

Chief of Naval Operations Adm. John Richardson told USNI News the effort would be part of a new naval strategy document related to the recently released
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
that focuses on China and Russia as likely adversaries in a new age of great power competition.

“We have a new National Security Strategy, a new National Defense Strategy and we’ll be putting out a naval component to that National Defense Strategy out here shortly. And [with] the rise of this great power dynamic, or the acknowledgment of it, it seems to make sense to take a look at that Force Structure Assessment,” Richardson said.
“We’ll get to it. Hard to say. The force structure assessment did account for a resurgent Russia and it accounts for a rising China. So it wasn’t completely uninformed with the current dynamic and so we’ll have to take look at.”
 
Today at 8:45 PM
Jan 26, 2018
now Another KC-46 delivery slip puts pressure on Boeing to meet contract obligations
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
related:
Boeing’s KC-46 Tanker Delayed Again
Mar 6, 2018
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The U.S. Air Force is predicting that
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
won’t deliver the first
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
tanker until late 2018, casting doubt on the defense firm’s ability to meet a contractual deadline that, if missed, likely would result in significant penalties.

Boeing’s master schedule currently pegs first aircraft delivery to the fleet in the second quarter of calendar year 2018—already months behind schedule. But after a joint schedule risk assessment, the Air Force now believes delivery is more likely to occur in late 2018, according to spokeswoman Capt. Emily Grabowski.

“The Air Force will continue to work with Boeing to develop schedule mitigations, where appropriate, to expedite the program,” Grabowski said. “These potential delays will not result in additional program cost to the taxpayer.”

Boeing is on tap to deliver 18 full-up tankers to the Air Force by October, a longstanding contractual deadline. Boeing likely will suffer significant penalties if it misses the deadline, adding to the $2.9 billion in pretax fees, or about $1.9 billion after tax, the firm has already racked up on the program.

The way the fixed-price contract is structured, responsibility for cost growth rests squarely on Boeing’s shoulders. This means that the firm, not the government, will absorb 100% of the overall cost overrun.

The top issues slowing progress are the same as they have been for the past year—achieving airworthiness certifications and getting through flight tests, Grabowski said.

Although the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
late last year granted Boeing an amended type certification for the tanker derivative of the 767-2C, the company still has not obtained a crucial supplemental type certification for all the military and aerial refueling appendages that turn that 767-2C into a KC-46.

And Boeing has yet to correct a major problem: a tendency of the tanker’s rigid refueling boom to scrape the surface of receiving aircraft. This is of particular concern for stealth aircraft, such as the B-2 bomber,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
or
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
fighters, if the boom causes damage to low-observable stealth coatings.

The industry-government team currently is collecting flight test data to determine how the rate and severity of these incidents compare with international norms, Grabowski previously told Aviation Week. This data will inform a decision on whether changes to the remote camera used for aerial refueling are needed, expected this month.

That fault is the only open “Category I deficiency”—the most severe kind—on the KC-46, Grabowski said.

Two other open deficiencies have been downgraded to Category II, Grabowski noted. One is related to the KC-46’s high-frequency (HF) radios, which use the skin of the aircraft as an antenna and sometimes cause electrical sparks and arcs.

The Air Force wants to make sure those radios are fail-safe and can never transmit during the refueling process, for fear of any sparks causing fires.

Risk on this front was found to be “acceptable,” but the system still does not meet specification requirements, Grabowski said. The Air Force expects Boeing to come up with a long-term fix to completely eliminate risk.

The Air Force also expects Boeing to implement a minor software update this spring to address the last open deficiency, uncommanded boom extensions when disconnecting from a receiver aircraft with fuel flowing, Grabowski said.

“We worked closely with the U.S. Air Force on the updated KC-46 Schedule Risk Assessment and discussed a range of delivery dates,” Boeing spokesman Chick Ramey said. “While there is always risk on any development program, we’re relying on our partnership with the Air Force to help mitigate those risks, complete KC-46 testing and deliver 18 game-changing tankers to them as quickly as possible.”
 
Top