USA Armed Forces

News and discussion threads on defence in other parts of the world.
User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Well, the wheels on the bus... seem to be slipping quite a bit
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Lord Jim »

Just out of interest how do we deal with the mission types carried out by the USAF's PJs?

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Lord Jim »

An interesting view of the future of the F-22 in USAF service, the alternatives and reasons why it may retire far earlier than originally planned. The publisher is usually pretty good with his facts so please ignore the sock puppet.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Looks a bit like the T26/ T31 story (and everything that's coming in between, or even above, to complete the mix).

Well, 2040 is a long way off... and prgrms will need to keep their traction; rather than start spinning their wheels.

Stealth+ missile trucks; that's what the RAF will have out to 2040. And (again: no spinning of the wheels intervening), something else starting to enter service by then
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1758
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 0
Australia

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by seaspear »

This article provides some details of the U.S.A.F and U.S.N sixth-generation fighter program not slated to come in after the f35 and f22 but the Super Hornets so it may be likely that these aircraft are being produced at the same time as the f35,if though these new aircraft are able to perform the same functions as the f35 versions why keep building them, this article suggests much less drama in the building of these aircraft,certainly making it understandable for the U.K to cut its own f35 order and concentrate on the Tempest.
https://www.aero-mag.com/us-navy-f-a-xx ... -20042021/

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Lord Jim »

The impression I get is that the US Military sees the F-22 and F-35, though capable as too expensive to procure and operate and are looking to the next generation to address both of these. Therefore they have instituted accelerated development programmes of the next generation and will both retire the F-22 and curtail F-35 production if LM do not get both the price and more importantly the operating costs down significantly. With the information available it seems that the USAF for one will not purchase the number of F-35s originally stated, and the USN has already shifted F-35C on to the USMC, who only wanted F-35Bs, to maintain a reasonable size of fleet even though it will also not purchase all it initially intended, also wanting to introduce a next generation platform to replace the Rhinos and Growlers.

In the meantime it will operate a two tier fleet with the F-22 and F-35 up front and the F-15EX and the F-16V equivalents as bomb and missile trucks. They do have a problem with the A-10 though, as the only real replacement for the A10 maybe another A-10.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

As the Growlers will be flying for much longer (and have high parts commonality with the underlying SH), the above news does not deliver an immediate 'killer blow' to the two in those intl competitions where they are partaking.

However, may raise doubts as to for how long the SH will keep evolving and some may want to hedge their tech bets by buying a mix ;) of the two.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Lord Jim »

The Super Hornet/Growler combo is the USN's way of hedging its bets regarding the F-35C and its next generation platform. I can see the USN's Carriers operating three Squadrons of Super Hornets and only one Squadron of F-35Cs until the Next Generation platform either manned, unmanned or both arrives and gradually replaces the Rhinos. This would mean the USN including the USMC will order significantly less F-35Cs and it will only have replaced half the fleet of legacy Hornets with the Super Horner replacing the rest. The latest upgrade programme that has just got going gives the USN a reliable, effective platform for the majority of its missions, especially when supported by Growlers that have also gong through an ongoing upgrade programme.

The USN's next Generation programme maybe progressing at a slower pace to that of the USAF, but the results will be very similar, with a tow tier force that is able to carry out the mission required from both services.

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7231
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
Has liked: 4 times
Been liked: 9 times
England

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by SKB »


User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

A snippet from an end-of-April USNI panel:
"The Navy is expected to add two Aegis destroyers to the four already at Naval Station Rota in Spain in the future, partially in response to stepped-up Russian naval activity."

Naval activity includes the bombers in Syria, capable of carrying hypersonic AShMs.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

They must be serious as two have been bought outright
https://euro-sd.com/2021/05/news/indust ... 23005/srt/

CT models of Humvee could be facing new duties (a rebirth, on their way out?)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Defiance
Donator
Posts: 819
Joined: 07 Oct 2015, 20:52
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 25 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Defiance »

Janes is reporting the USN have revealed the home port for the first dozen Constellation class frigates will be US Naval Station Everett (up near Seattle). NS Everett lost their last frigate (FFG-60) in 2015. The author describes how this is another example of the US deploying brand new equipment in response to China.

What isn't mentioned in the article (but is probably related) is that it's about 30mi away across the sound from Naval Station Bangor which is the home port to the Pacific SSBN fleet.

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 0
Tuvalu

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Pseudo »

I'm guessing that this might be good news for the Voyager/A330 MRTT/KC-45.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4 ... ady-buying

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 37 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by SW1 »

Hahaha Boeing is in an even bigger financial and engineering mess than after September 11 when they were handed the p8 bailout, this will be the government bailout for them this time.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Lord Jim »

But they can't get theirs to work at the moment so are they going to use the Airbus designed Boom etc. I cannot see the USAF being allowed to buy the whole Airbus package including the plane itself, too much humble pie for the "Hill", to cope with there.

Defiance
Donator
Posts: 819
Joined: 07 Oct 2015, 20:52
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 25 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Defiance »

Lord Jim wrote:But they can't get theirs to work at the moment so are they going to use the Airbus designed Boom etc. I cannot see the USAF being allowed to buy the whole Airbus package including the plane itself, too much humble pie for the "Hill", to cope with there.
The problem is MRTT is the only functional OTS option that USAF can really buy* (and manufacture in CONUS) unless they want to start a brand new development program, but they aren't exactly flush with cash either at the moment

*assuming KC-390 is too small and Boeing told them to get stuffed anyway

Clive F
Member
Posts: 159
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 12:48
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Clive F »

It will be sold as the A330 is bigger than 767. So the will waffle something about different sizes for different roles.

Defiance
Donator
Posts: 819
Joined: 07 Oct 2015, 20:52
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 25 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Defiance »

Clive F wrote:It will be sold as the A330 is bigger than 767. So the will waffle something about different sizes for different roles.
Which may have some justification behind it, there's a case to be made that A330 means existing infrastructure will struggle to accommodate the aircraft (it is some 50ft longer and 70ft wider than a KC-135). I'm not sure how real of a case exists from my own ignorance, but it's probably not inconsequential.

But the USAF is actively trimming down their KC-10 fleet alongside KC-135 (14 KC-10 in FY22 budget).

Size may not be a viable justification anymore as the available numbers of KC-10 trends downwards and KC-46 can't meet that capacity. From Wiki, KC-10 carries some 365,000lbs of gas compared to the 200,000lbs of the KC-135 (or the 207,000lbs of KC-46). As KC-10 is removed from inventory - and KC-46 continues to underperform - then they are going to lose significant amounts of refuelling capacity.

The Pacific is pretty big so the demand is only likely to go up, but I expect if you spoke to a tanker guy (or someone who knows more than me) that whole rambling might be too simplistic.

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2362
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 3 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by bobp »

US Carrier gets shock tested ............

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1758
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 0
Australia

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by seaspear »

As previously discussed a question was would the R.N do similar tests on their carriers or stick to computer simulations

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3196
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Has liked: 5 times
Been liked: 25 times
France

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Tempest414 »

No I can't see it we only have 2 and we need to work them up however if it was to be done then just before the first refit would be the time

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 37 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by SW1 »

https://www.forbes.com/sites/craighoope ... ssion=true

The Navy’s new shipbuilding plan, released in mid-June, telegraphs enormous cuts to America’s large surface combatant fleet of cruisers and destroyers. The mild verbiage from the report, saying “that growing the small surface combatant force enables reductions in the quantity of large surface combatants while yielding a more distributed and lethal force,” masks a likely brutal downsizing.

The cuts are widespread, but one place the axe falls hardest is upon the Navy’s large surface combatant fleet. First, the Department of Defense will force the Navy to eliminate the entire 22-hull Ticonderoga Class cruiser fleet. But even that drastic cut is not enough for the Navy to get to the Department of Defense’s current projection of 63 to 65 ships. With 88 Arleigh Burkes in service, under construction or already authorized, Arleigh Burke destroyer procurement will likely cease and 27 older Flight I, Flight IA and Flight II Burkes will be ushered out of the fleet.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Lord Jim »

But what will replace them. The Navy got its finger burnt with the LCS, so until a viable replacement with a mature design starts to enter service I think the existing ships will soldier on. Regarding the ABs, they could end up being the biggest escort left followed by the planned Constitution class, but I think they will keep building latest version replacing the original ones with no helicopter facilities. Just my thoughts on this.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Lord Jim »

Reports seem to be surfacing that the USAF want to turn the B-1B into a Gunship with air to ground cannon in its weapons bays! These would be interchangeable with normal loads, but the Gunship proposals seem to be from the US Army who want better CAS that that provided by precision guided bombs from such platforms. A contract to study the feasibility is said to have been let so this could be something to keep any eye on or just a passing idea that has only a short shelf life.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3196
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Has liked: 5 times
Been liked: 25 times
France

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Tempest414 »

Lord Jim wrote:until a viable replacement with a mature design starts to enter service
Will this be the Constellation class ( FREMM) you are looking for don't they start building in the summer

Post Reply