USA Armed Forces

News and discussion threads on defence in other parts of the world.
GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by GastonGlocker »

Red Flag assessment of SU-30, F-22, F-15 etc....very interesting analysis. Appears the Block 50 F-16, F-15 and F-22 can all hold their own. The Mig 21 Bison may be more of a threat? Conclusion, always have a gun:

User avatar
Halidon
Member
Posts: 539
Joined: 12 May 2015, 01:34
United States of America

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Halidon »

LRASM in black, very stylish.

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by arfah »

..................
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

~UNiOnJaCk~
Member
Posts: 780
Joined: 03 May 2015, 16:19
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ~UNiOnJaCk~ »

Fascinating video. Would love to have heard his comments on the Typhoon's/RAF's experiences at Redflag. From all that has been said, and it may just be our cousins being polite, but it would seem that the FGR4 is frequently the only plane that can keep up with, or hold any sort of a candle to, the Raptor and that the RAF has always come away from, certainly the most recent Redflags, with glowing reivews. Would be interesting to hear the real story behind that as he seemed pretty candid. He was quite harsh about our French friends after all haha.

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7944
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by SKB »

Since when have USAF pilots been called "Top Gun" pilots?! :roll: (Top Gun is a USN thing)

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by seaspear »

An interesting point was the use of only the best pilots by the I.A.F in these excercises, I can understand that there are some proud airforces who dont want to present badly ,but I thought the point of these excercises was to develop all pilots with the skillls to survive in actual combat ,allowing a gulf to develop between the best and the rest in skills and competence does nothing for any airforce .
Another point was the Indian airforce use of or not use of its own radar, in previous training with the Eurofighter the I.A.F required the fighters not to use their radars to the full extent as reported to give away information about its capabilities ,maybe the Russians had a say in this Im just speculating .

GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by GastonGlocker »

arfah wrote:
GastonGlocker wrote:The Mig21 is more of a threat due to Israeli Jammer, Israeli HMCS, Israeli agile SRAAM's and Soviet era cannon.

SU30MKI (India) Large RCS, Large heat signature, loads of drag when manoeuvring with vectored thrust and very sensitive to FOD.

I'd really like a Typhoon FGR4 pilot spokesperson from the RAF to add to that assessment, particularly in light of recent exercises with the IAF.

I would concur wholeheartedly. I would think the hotrod Typhoon equipped similar to the Mig 21 Bison would be a very relevant alternative.

Here is a bit dated but relevant info on an alternative:

Between the stealthish F18 and the F15 Silent Eagle, properly equipped to jam, perhaps the extreme cost of stealth in a short-legged platform dependent on tankers, could be mitigated.

Seems we spent so much on something that now has low cost counter-measures? Note how he evaded the F35 question...am not very confident it will be a positive answer.

This one gets to the point:

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by seaspear »

With respect to the Boeing spokesman there is another discussion on the same utube site where pilots who have actually flown the super hornet and f35 are able to give a better appreciation of the f35s capabilities, before a press conference answering questions ,certainly the U.S.M preferred the F35B to the super hornet .

User avatar
Halidon
Member
Posts: 539
Joined: 12 May 2015, 01:34
United States of America

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Halidon »

Keel Laid for the future USS John F Kennedy, second of the Ford-class carriers.
http://www.navytimes.com/story/military ... /32195351/
http://www.maritime-executive.com/artic ... ft-carrier

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1626
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by xav »

Lockheed Martin's LRASM Anti-Ship Missile Just Got its U.S. Navy Designation: AGM-158C
Contacted by Navy Recognition, a Lockheed Martin spokesperson said "we learned over the weekend that LRASM's official designation will be AGM-158C". AGM-158C is the designation for the air-launched LRASM missile only. There is no surface-launch LRASM program of record yet. The Department of the Navy, Naval Air Warfare Center, gave the official designation.
http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.ph ... ew&id=3034

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7944
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by SKB »

Wow, they've only just begun the second Ford class? :shock: :?:

User avatar
Halidon
Member
Posts: 539
Joined: 12 May 2015, 01:34
United States of America

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Halidon »

SKB wrote:Wow, they've only just begun the second Ford class? :shock: :?:
Well the keel was just laid, preliminary work goes all the way back to 2011 so she's already 13% complete when the ceremony occurs. Ideally they would have started her sooner after Ford was launched, that would have occurred earlier as well, but between Sequestration and cost overruns it ended up being this month. Originally she and Prince of Wales would both have been commissioned in 2020, but Kennedy got pushed back to 2022 by the budget.

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by arfah »

..................
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1626
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by xav »

Oshkosh L-ATV Tactical Vehicle Selected to Replace U.S. Army & Marine Corps HMMWV Fleet
Image
The U.S. Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command (TACOM) Life Cycle Management Command (LCMC) has awarded Oshkosh Defense, LLC, an Oshkosh Corporation company, a $6.7 billion firm fixed price production contract to manufacture the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV). The JLTV program fills a critical capability gap for the U.S. Army and Marine Corps by replacing a large portion of the legacy HMMWV fleet with a light tactical vehicle with far superior protection and off-road mobility. During the contract, which includes both Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) and Full Rate Production (FRP), Oshkosh expects to deliver approximately 17,000 vehicles and sustainment services.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/august_2 ... fleet.html

So HMMWV replacement is essetially a modified M-ATV MRAP.
Somehow, I really thouht Lockheed would clinch this one...

GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by GastonGlocker »

arfah wrote:HUMVEE successor = Oshkosh !

Oshkosh wins JLTV Contract.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /32278319/

Approximately 55,000 to be produced.

http://oshkoshdefense.com/jltv/
.

Should be promising. I wonder if they'll have a lighter weight version for utility work such as the troop transport version....something to scurry about doing the mundane tasks on FOBs for instance? maybe relegated to LMTVs? I know some current MTOEs still have troop carrier variants assigned...

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by arfah »

.....................
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

User avatar
Halidon
Member
Posts: 539
Joined: 12 May 2015, 01:34
United States of America

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Halidon »

Unarmored Humvees and other trucks are still going to be around for a good long while. Most likely the unarmored jerky-run role will end up totally the realm of COTS vehicles. So more CUCV/LSSV-style purchases when the unarmored Humvees need replacement. Hopefully they are competed better, current GM sole-sourcing rubs me the wrong way.

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by arfah »

..................
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

The beauty of gvmnt designs. If something better/ more urgent was designed, the higher capacity factory lines could be switched and the earlier piece still supported (replacement units, spares...) from the other (and their shared subcontractors)
- turning the US industrial machinery into a planned economy would have been fun to watch
- also the reason why we have Harley D today, not Indian that was the dominant brand pre-war. When the piece came, Indian was tooled up for a 2 million motorbikes order that got cancelled in one swoop, and could not afford to retool
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)

GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by GastonGlocker »

Super not-so-secret squirrel stuff: https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/kill ... ign=buffer

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by arfah »

..................
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by arfah »

.......................
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by GastonGlocker »

arfah wrote:New radio communication equipment contract awarded.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /71698546/

Hope you have better luck bringing it into service than us Brits had with BOWMAN.

"Better Off With Map And Notepad"
Interesting. Anything should be better than what we have, especially the mounts and connection cables. I like the concept of vehicle and man portable in one.

It was alarming at how much civvy sector commo equipment was used in preference. HETT units in particular stuck with BFT and Motorola, bypassing the worthless SINGARS.

I like the BOWMAN concept.

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by arfah »

...............................
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

User avatar
Halidon
Member
Posts: 539
Joined: 12 May 2015, 01:34
United States of America

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Halidon »

arfah wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34162336

West Point tradition fail.

Surely, if you put hard objects inside the pillow case then you are breaking the WP rules?
Yeah I'm a little concerned with how hard the spokesman was working to not mention punishment. The pillow fight should absolutely remain as a fun and mostly harmless tradition, but if some cadets have undermined that spirit by seeking to injure fellow cadets they need to be disciplined. And if this is a case of someone in a position of authority thinking the fight would be more "fun" with armor and hard objects in place of sift pillow stuffing, that person needs to go.

Post Reply