US military news, discussions and history

[SvenSvensonov]

Steel Beach- When US Navy Ships Throw Giant Beach Picnic Parties

As almost half the country watches their thermometers drop well below freezing this week, we can all take a look at how the Navy gets some warm rays without having any land in sight. 'Steel Beach,' as these events are called, evolved from your great grandfather's swim-calls. Since then they have come a long way and now can include BBQs, Volleyball, kiddie pools, carnival games, 5k runs and even beer.

Taking place on everything from the flight decks of the Navy's massive nuclear aircraft carriers, to the surfaced backs of nuclear submarines, Steel Beach gives overworked crews a day to unwind, catch some sunlight and remember that there is a life outside of their posts.

For decades, Steel Beach events were more or less a big male only beach party. Now, with the integration of the sexes across the Navy's fleet, they are a coed and a more politically correct affair.

Seeing pictures of a super carrier during a Steel Beach day can be quite daunting, especially if the entire air wing is deployed. The carrier's 4.5 acre flight deck, which looks expansive even when 25 ton fighters are operating from it, looks much smaller when thousands of people mingle pour out onto it. It is just another reminder of just how big of a floating town the super carrier really is, with about 5,500 people embarked during cruise (that is equivalent to exactly five of my high schools!).

The 'Gator Navy's' collection of LSD, LHDs and LPDs, which have both a large flight deck and a giant semi-submersible well deck, have the advantage of being able to turn their sterns into massive indoor swimming pools or literally beaches made of steel (see also the top picture in this post).

It is definitely a change of scenery when you see gobs of people in civilian clothes mingling among some of the most advanced weaponry in the world. Nothing like eating some BBQ while sitting on top of a Tomahawk Cruise missile, an SM-2/3 surface-to-air missile, or below a Super Hornet armed with AMRAAMs and Sidewinders.

The Vertical Launch System "cell block" makes a great place to chill out during a Steel Beach picnic on this Ticonderoga Class cruiser.

Steel Beach cookouts usually go hand in hand with other smaller events and activities. Music is a staple, live or via DJ, and everything including 5k marathons, carnival-like activities, sunbathing, swim calls, basketball and volleyball games and even fishing can be a part of the day's events. Sometimes, unique activities such as boxing matches, concerts, or a fireworks displays are paired with Steel Beach events.

In the past, on seemingly rare occasions, 'Beer Day' can coincide with Steel Beach. For 100 years US Navy ships have been technically dry (unlike many other Navies), but after 45 days of continuous sailing, with at least five days till a port of call, a Beer Day can occur at the COs discretion and on approval from higher-ups.

Beer Days seem to be a very rare occurrence these days, but I am told they do happen. During which, each crewman of age that does not have near-term staffing commitments, will be allowed to have two beers. Usually they are of the crappy variety (see Natty Light), but they are very much well invited nonetheless.

In the end, Steel Beach is a day off for many of a ship's crew more than anything else, and it is an especially useful 'tactic' when Carrier Groups have been running cyclic operations during combat situations and coming in for a port visit is not in the cards. Considering that many jobs on US Navy surface combatants, and all jobs on submarines for that matter, can mean not seeing much daylight for weeks at a time, getting out and seeing the horizon while breathing some fresh air is a sweet reward in itself. Steel Beach is just form of resourceful icing on that metaphorical cake.

From Steel Beach- When US Navy Ships Throw Giant Beach Picnic Parties

*My comments

I spent three weeks on SSN-781, for electronic systems integration and certification, when we had a chance to swim off boat or along side other navy assets two men would always stand watch over us with either an M14 or M16, not to keep us in line, but to ward off any curious sharks in the area.

@Nihonjin1051 - You guys have anything like this in the JMSDF?
@AMDR - this is what you have to look forward too if you go into the navy... in the air force you get an air conditioned office and a golf course though. Tough choice!

 

[AMDR]

Steel Beach- When US Navy Ships Throw Giant Beach Picnic Parties

View attachment 152809

As almost half the country watches their thermometers drop well below freezing this week, we can all take a look at how the Navy gets some warm rays without having any land in sight. 'Steel Beach,' as these events are called, evolved from your great grandfather's swim-calls. Since then they have come a long way and now can include BBQs, Volleyball, kiddie pools, carnival games, 5k runs and even beer.

Taking place on everything from the flight decks of the Navy's massive nuclear aircraft carriers, to the surfaced backs of nuclear submarines, Steel Beach gives overworked crews a day to unwind, catch some sunlight and remember that there is a life outside of their posts.

For decades, Steel Beach events were more or less a big male only beach party. Now, with the integration of the sexes across the Navy's fleet, they are a coed and a more politically correct affair.

Seeing pictures of a super carrier during a Steel Beach day can be quite daunting, especially if the entire air wing is deployed. The carrier's 4.5 acre flight deck, which looks expansive even when 25 ton fighters are operating from it, looks much smaller when thousands of people mingle pour out onto it. It is just another reminder of just how big of a floating town the super carrier really is, with about 5,500 people embarked during cruise (that is equivalent to exactly five of my high schools!).

View attachment 152810

The 'Gator Navy's' collection of LSD, LHDs and LPDs, which have both a large flight deck and a giant semi-submersible well deck, have the advantage of being able to turn their sterns into massive indoor swimming pools or literally beaches made of steel (see also the top picture in this post).

View attachment 152811

It is definitely a change of scenery when you see gobs of people in civilian clothes mingling among some of the most advanced weaponry in the world. Nothing like eating some BBQ while sitting on top of a Tomahawk Cruise missile, an SM-2/3 surface-to-air missile, or below a Super Hornet armed with AMRAAMs and Sidewinders.

The Vertical Launch System "cell block" makes a great place to chill out during a Steel Beach picnic on this Ticonderoga Class cruiser.

View attachment 152812

Steel Beach cookouts usually go hand in hand with other smaller events and activities. Music is a staple, live or via DJ, and everything including 5k marathons, carnival-like activities, sunbathing, swim calls, basketball and volleyball games and even fishing can be a part of the day's events. Sometimes, unique activities such as boxing matches, concerts, or a fireworks displays are paired with Steel Beach events.

View attachment 152813

View attachment 152814

View attachment 152815

View attachment 152816

View attachment 152817

In the past, on seemingly rare occasions, 'Beer Day' can coincide with Steel Beach. For 100 years US Navy ships have been technically dry (unlike many other Navies), but after 45 days of continuous sailing, with at least five days till a port of call, a Beer Day can occur at the COs discretion and on approval from higher-ups.

Beer Days seem to be a very rare occurrence these days, but I am told they do happen. During which, each crewman of age that does not have near-term staffing commitments, will be allowed to have two beers. Usually they are of the crappy variety (see Natty Light), but they are very much well invited nonetheless.

In the end, Steel Beach is a day off for many of a ship's crew more than anything else, and it is an especially useful 'tactic' when Carrier Groups have been running cyclic operations during combat situations and coming in for a port visit is not in the cards. Considering that many jobs on US Navy surface combatants, and all jobs on submarines for that matter, can mean not seeing much daylight for weeks at a time, getting out and seeing the horizon while breathing some fresh air is a sweet reward in itself. Steel Beach is just form of resourceful icing on that metaphorical cake.

From Steel Beach- When US Navy Ships Throw Giant Beach Picnic Parties

*My comments

I spent three weeks on SSN-781, for electronic systems integration and certification, when we had a chance to swim off boat or along side other navy assets two men would always stand watch over us with either an M14 or M16, not to keep us in line, but to ward off any curious sharks in the area.

@Nihonjin1051 - You guys have anything like this in the JMSDF?
@AMDR - this is what you have to look forward too if you go into the navy... in the air force you get an air conditioned office and a golf course though. Tough choice!

Screw the air-conditioned office and the golf course!
Have a gigantic BBQ with 5,000 people on a $5 billion aircraft carrier in the middle of the Pacific? YES


Seriously tho, that is awesome

 

[gambit]

I know a couple submariners when I used to live/work in Boise, ID, and subs do have 'steel beach' parties as well.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

I know a couple submariners when I used to live/work in Boise, ID, and subs do have 'steel beach' parties as well.

You're absolutely right about that, the sub guys aren't left out!

Every time I watch this first video, I think the first guy jumping is going to smack his head and trigger a man-overboard situation!

This second video is a collection of pictures of submariners enjoying Steel Beach.

Steel Beach is great unless you get stuck on shark duty!!!

 

[AMDR]

Hagel lists key technologies for US Military; Launches "Offset" Strategy
Hagel Lists Key Technologies For US Military; Launches ‘Offset Strategy’ « Breaking Defense - Defense industry news, analysis and commentary

REAGAN LIBRARY: After months of build-up, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel formally launched the military’s quest for a combination of new technologies to maintain America’s military supremacy over the next 20 years in the face of Russian and Chinese challenges.

In a speech before the second Reagan National Defense Forum here, Hagel divulged some crucial details as to how America could preserve its endangered technological superiority. The next morning, the Pentagon released Hagel’s memo about the effort, below.

Inside the Pentagon, this effort is known as the “Offset Strategy,” a military-industrial term of art for a cluster of technological breakthroughs that can give the US its edge over potential enemies. Nuclear weapons and their delivery systems played this role in Eisenhower’s “New Look,” offsetting (hence the term) Soviet numbers; smart weapons, stealth, sensors, andcomputer networks were the heart of the 1970s “Offset Strategy.” also aimed at the Soviets. Other nations have followed our lead and now both nukes and, increasingly, smart weapons are proliferating around the world, dulling America’s edge. So what’s at the heart of the “Third Offset Strategy”?

There’s no exhaustive list, but after what must have been agonizing negotiation among Pentagon staffers over every word, the following technologies made it into Hagel’s speech tonight as priority areas for the Pentagon’s dwindling investment funds: “robotics,autonomous systems, miniaturization, big data, and advanced manufacturing, including 3-D printing.”

So what do these priorities mean?

• “Robotics” and “autonomous systems” are two parts of the same thing: War machines that are not only unmanned, but able to assess situations and make decisions on their own — without the constant human monitoring by remote control that’s required for current systems like the Predator drone or bomb-handling robots. Ultimately this means computers deciding whether or not to kill people, a tremendous ethical, legal, and programming challenge. But current remote-controlled systems require many human overseers, which the military can no longer afford as personnel costs rise, and constant uninterrupted communications, which the military can no longer guarantee as potential adversaries get better at jamming and hacking.
• Why miniaturization? If you can take the bulky human being out of a weapons system — and all the life-support equipment and armor protection a human requires — then you can make the rest of it really small and cheap. Making the most of that opportunity puts a premium on making every component smaller, from warheads to sensors to electronics. The ultimate goal is “swarms” of small, expendable autonomous weapons, perhaps a cross between a guided missile (or torpedo) and a drone.
• Big Data has become a big buzzword in recent years. But the military knows better than anyone that you can drown in data — NSA intercepts, Predator video, etc. — if you don’t have a smart way to analyze it. Currently, the military relies all too much on rooms full of young enlisted personnel staring at screens until their eyes glaze over. Commercial techniques for analyzing “big data” can, in theory, create algorithms that do at least the preliminary winnowing of all this intelligence data without human intervention (notice a theme here?), highlighting potential patterns or anomalies for the human analysts to spend their limited time on.
• Advanced manufacturing is a tremendously vague term — it’s widely used to mean, in essence, “manufacturing techniques I like” — but Hagel helps us out here by specifying 3-D printing in particular. Traditional manufacturing, and traditional defense contracting for that matter, are about designing something once and then mass-producing it for years. 3-D printing allows constant, quick changes to try out brand new technology or customize existing tech for a particular situation. That’s a perfect match for a military of miniaturized autonomous weapons, where you churn out, say, mini-drones on demand to meet a specific mission. In the best case, individual warships and ground units could carry 3-D printers with them to produce spare parts as needed, freeing themselves from long lines of supply.

Notably absent from tonight’s list are cyber warfare tools, the one growing area of the budget — perhaps Hagel thought it already got enough attention? — and electronic warfare, cyber’s less publicly sexy older sister, which after two decades of neglect has gotten some traction in recent speeches by top officials. Likewise missing were hypersonics, undersea warfare, and long-range strike, three other priorities that have often come up in these discussions. But while being name-checked by the SecDef is a big deal, it hardly means technologies not listed in this speech will be neglected.

After all, one of the keys for a successful strategy is that your opponents not know key details and be misled about others.

Hagel made clear he was casting a wide net to catch as many good ideas from as many sources as possible. He’s well aware that most innovation nowadays comes from outside “traditional defense contractors,” he said, “so we will actively seek proposals from the private sector, including from firms and academic institutions outside DoD’s traditional orbit.” It’s worth noting that the second-most-senior speaker at the conference, Vice-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. James Winnefeld, pointedly mentioned he’d come to the event straight from a morning of meetings in Silicon Valley. The head of Cyber Command, Adm. Michael Rogers, also emphasized at the conference that he’s been to Silicon Valley twice in his seven months at CYBERCOM.

But this kind of outreach is just the beginning. In the near future, Hagel said, the department “will invite some of the brightest minds from inside and outside government to start with a clean sheet of paper and assess what technologies and systems DoD ought to develop over the next 3 to 5 years.”

Coordinating all these investments will be a “Long-Range Research and Development Planning Program,” a name lifted straight from the offset efforts of the 1970s. The top level of oversight will be an “Advanced Capability and Deterrence Panel” bringing in “senior leadership” from OSD policy, intelligence, the armed services, the Joint Chiefs, and the research, development and acquisition world.

Who will lead the panel? Deputy Secretary of Defense Bob Work, a former Marine Corps artilleryman and a hard-driving, outspoken technophile whose former thinktank, the Center for a New American Security, has pushed hard for robotics and 3-D printing in particular. (He’s also worked at the influential Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, which has published its own vision of an “offset strategy”). Before running CNAS, Work was Undersecretary of the Navy, where he tended to overshadow the softer-spoken Secretary,Ray Mabus. Hagel has already put Work in charge of overhauling the ailing nuclear force. Now he’ll also helm Hagel’s “Defense Innovation Initiative.”

“Clearly Work enjoys the full confidence of Secretary Hagel,” said CNAS scholar Shawn Brimley, who collaborated with Work to write a disconcerting study on “War in the Robotic Age.” That said, Brimley warned me in an email, “the devil is in the details, however, and we’ll see in the next few months if this rhetoric translates into budgetary reality.”

Ben Fitzgerald, another of Work’s old CNAS colleagues, agreed. Having listened to Hagel’s remarks, he told me that “I thought it was a good speech, said all the right things, but it’s also an early statement of intent, not a final product. It will be interesting to see to what extent this initiative is talking point deep or a serious implementation. Will ‘prioritizing autonomous systems,’ for example, lead to unmanned platforms instead of a mannedsixth generation fighter or will it just mean a couple of extra Switchblade variants? I hope that Pentagon and Congressional bureaucracy allow for the development and serious implementation of the vision that Hagel and Bob Work are starting to articulate.”

Hagel himself said the initiative’s “impact on DoD’s budget” will “scale up” over time. In other words, don’t expect a big impact in the 2016 budget request due early next year. The question is whether Work can find the fiscal seed corn to fund research and development of the hoped-for “game-changing” technologies.

The Defense Innovation Initiative isn’t all about technology. It relies on Under SecretaryFrank Kendall‘s business practice and acquisition reform efforts to make the new tech affordable — and conversely Kendall has said the long-awaited third iteration of his Better Buying Power initiative, BBP 3.0, will focus on enabling innovation. It will also address “new operational concepts….new approaches to warfighting…. new approaches to war-gaming and professional military education…. [and even] opportunities to reimagine how we develop managers and leaders.” But those aspects remain very vague. The specifics we have so far, such as they are, are overwhelmingly about high technology, and Robert Work is unequivocally in charge.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[SvenSvensonov]

Navy Makes Destroyers Look Like Fishing Boats on Enemy Radars

The Navy’s USS Wayne E Meyer guided missile destroyer is preparing for a series of extensive upgrades to make the ship stealthier or less detectable to traditional enemy radar.

Having recently returned from a seven-month deployment to the Pacific theater, the Wayne E Meyer will go through what’s called a “maintenance availability” before entering a larger, longer upgrade period which examines the software, hardware and various designs on board the ship.

“We’ll get upgrades to multiple systems on board including everything from combat systems to engineering maintenance and management, electrical and thermal systems, ammunition upgrades, weapons systems upgrades and radar upgrades,” said Cmdr. Adam Flemming, executive officer, USS Wayne E Meyer.

Ship design and ship structure will also be a central focus of the upgrades in order to determine if there are ways to reduce the vessel’s radar signature and make the large vessel appear more like a small fishing boat to enemy radar, he said.

“We routinely review not only our own self noise but also how we look to other radar. We are constantly reviewing that process to see if we can reduce our radar-cross section and reduce the threat to the ship,” Flemming added.

These reviews include an examination of structures, shapes and contours of systems mounted to the top of the ship, he explained.

“Anything that is mounted to the top side of the ship effects our radar cross-section. The whole point is self-defense and making us a small target,” Flemming added.

Adjustments could include the use of radar absorbent material or changing the angle of poles mounted on the ship’s deck. For instance, changing angles on some of the ship’s items could impact how radar signals are bounced off and make the ship less recognizable or detectable.

“Changing the angles on the ship to reflect the radar energy that is coming in to detect us — and reflecting that off in a different direction makes us appear smaller,” he added.

The Wayne E Meyer’s Vertical Launch Systems, or VLS, are configured to fire Tomahawks, Standard Missile or SM-2s, SM-6s and Vertical Launched Anti-Submarine Rockets. The upgrades will assess potential software improvements for the VLS so that they can accommodate new weapons as they become available.

The upgrades will also improve how ship-based ammunition is handled and stored, Flemming added.

Upgrades will also examine the ship’s AN/SQQ-89 hull-mounted sonar with a mind to keeping the technology abreast of emerging and next-generation threats.

“We are constantly upgrading our data base. Electronic warfare is a constantly evolving mission area,” Flemming said.

Like other Flight IIA guided-missile destroyers, the USS Wayne E Meyer is configured for a range of missions to include surface warfare, missile defense, search and rescue and humanitarian missions.

“We have breadth of mission capability enabling us to do multiple things at once,” Flemming explained. “We’re the Swiss Army knife of the fleet.”

From Navy Makes Destroyers Look Like Fishing Boats on Enemy Radars | Defense Tech

 

[AMDR]

F-22s and F-35s Fly First Operational Integration Training Missions
F-22s and F-35s Fly First Operational Integration Training Missions | Defense Tech

This is what Air Force generals have envisioned for decades. Two sets of fifth generation fighters flew side-by-side earlier this month to practice offensive counter air, defensive counter air and interdiction missions together over Florida out of Eglin Air Force Base.

It as the first time the F-35 and F-22 flew operational training missions together, Air Force officials said.

Both fighters have had a turbulent development and the F-35 is far from complete, but this was the vision. The F-35 and F-22 teaming up to combat a first world air force like China or Russia.

Air Force officials didn’t release many details from the training missions, but the photos sort of speak for themselves. Even the largest cynics of the program have to pause and consider the history of the two controversial stealth fighters flying training missions together.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

Fascinating 50th Anniversary Behind the Scenes Video Brings You Aboard the C-2A Greyhound

Apparentlyhaving a mustache is a bona fide occupational requirement.

The Fleet Logistics Support Squadron 30 (VRC-30) “Providers” has prepared a cool video to celebrate the 50th Anniversary of the C-2A Greyhound, the workhorse of the U.S. Navy fleet.

On Nov. 18, 1964, the Grumman C-2 Greyhound twin-engine, high-wing cargo aircraft, designed perform the COD (Carrier Onboard Delivery) to carry equipment, supplies and mail to and from U.S. Navy aircraft carriers, made its first flight.

Since then, the aircraft and its crews have performed a vital role supplying the carrier fleet with over a million pounds of high priority logistics.

The video, produced by VRC-30, United States Navy Fleet Logistics Support squadron based at Naval Air Station North Island with detachments all around the world, provides some amazing insight into the mission of the COD as well as the challenge/thrill of flying the COD: take a look at the skills (and amount of inputs on the control yoke) required to perform an arrested landing on the flight deck of a nuclear aircraft carrier at sea.

From The Aviationist » Fascinating 50th Anniversary Behind the Scenes Video Brings You Aboard the C-2A Greyhound

 

[mike2000]

F-22s and F-35s Fly First Operational Integration Training Missions
F-22s and F-35s Fly First Operational Integration Training Missions | Defense Tech

View attachment 153487

This is what Air Force generals have envisioned for decades. Two sets of fifth generation fighters flew side-by-side earlier this month to practice offensive counter air, defensive counter air and interdiction missions together over Florida out of Eglin Air Force Base.

It as the first time the F-35 and F-22 flew operational training missions together, Air Force officials said.

Both fighters have had a turbulent development and the F-35 is far from complete, but this was the vision. The F-35 and F-22 teaming up to combat a first world air force like China or Russia.

Air Force officials didn’t release many details from the training missions, but the photos sort of speak for themselves. Even the largest cynics of the program have to pause and consider the history of the two controversial stealth fighters flying training missions together.

Please they should release the results of training mission. i want to know who won.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

Navy Plans for Fighter to Replace the F/A-18 Hornet in 2030s

The Navy is beginning to work on a a next-generation carrier-launched fighter jet to replace the existing F/A-18 Super Hornet and Growler aircraft by 2030 and supplement the F-35C the Pentagon is still developing, service officials said.

The Navy effort, called the F/A-XX program, includes early work on the desired technological capabilities for the new aircraft. The idea is to have a new aircraft ready and producible by the time existing F/A-18s reach their end-of-service dates.

The Navy is analyzing industry proposals on the F/A-XX it started collecting two years ago. Navy officials are trying to pick out what they like and eliminating the rest.

This effort is going on as the Navy considers various upgrades of the existing inventory of F/A-18s in order to extend its service life well into and beyond the 2030s. Nevertheless, unless more aircraft such as Growlers are purchased for future production, Boeing’s domestic production of the F/A-18 will come to an end in the next several years.

Meanwhile, these early F/A-XX efforts are going on while the service vigorously pursues ongoing developmental testing of its F-35C, slated to be ready by 2018.

The Navy did not comment regarding whether the new aircraft would be a fifth-generation fighter or something beyond that, nor did they elaborate on what early requirements discussions were considering. Navy officials emphasized that service experts were reluctant to talk about the new aircraft because so much has yet to be determined and the project was still in the very early stages.

Meanwhile, exactly how long the F/A-18 will fly remains somewhat of an open question. At a certain point the aircraft will eventually need to be replaced, however the Navy is still interested in acquiring more Growler electronic jamming aircraft and continues to upgrade the F/A-18 platform.

There are near term efforts such as the ongoing initiative to outfit 170 F/A-18E/F Block II fighter jets with a next-generation infrared sensor designed to locate air-to-air target in a high-threat electronic attack environment.

Infrared search and track, or IRST, system, is a long range sensor that searches for and detect infrared emissions, Navy officials said. Slated to be operational by 2017, the system can simultaneously track multiple targets and provide a highly effective air-to-air targeting capability.

While the Navy is making progress with existing modifications to the platform, the service is also looking into slightly longer-term surface-warfare upgrades to the aircraft such as improving the active electronically scanned array radar and forward looking infrared radar technologies such as IRST, Navy officials said.

Alongside upgrades to the platform that are already underway such as targeting improvements and experimentation with conformal fuel tanks and an external weapons pod, the Navy is investing research dollars into upgrading the plane’s sensors, radar and computer systems, Capt. Frank Morley, program manager for the F/A-18 and EA-18G Growler aircraft told Military.com in an interview last summer.

One analyst said if Navy F/A-XX developers seek to engineer a sixth-generation aircraft, they will likely explore a range of next-generation technologies such as maximum sensor connectivity, super cruise ability and an aircraft with electronically configured “smart skins.”

Maximum connectivity would mean massively increased communications and sensor technology such as having an ability to achieve real-time connectivity with satellites, other aircraft and anything that could provide relevant battlefield information, said Richard Aboulafia, vice-president of analysis at the Teal Group, a Va.-based consultancy.

Hypersonic Scramjets

The new aircraft might also seek to develop the ability to fire hypersonic weapons, however such a development would hinge upon successful progress with yet-to-be-proven technologies such as scramjets, Aboulafia added.

Super cruise technology would enable the new fighter jet to cruise at supersonic speeds without needing afterburner, he explained.

Smart aircraft skins would involve dispersing certain technologies or sensors across the fuselage and further integrating them into the aircraft itself, Aboulafia said.

‘Smart skins with distributed electronics means that instead of having systems mounted on the aircraft, you would have apertures integrated on the skin of the aircraft,” he said.

This could reduce drag, increase speed and maneuverability while increasing the technological ability of the sensors.

Finally, Aboulafia said the Navy may be interested in developing a super-capable air-dominance or air-to-air fighter capability as a new, next-generation aircraft to replace the F-14 Tomcat – an aircraft known for its air-to-air fighter capability.

Also, about 20 years ago the Navy was interested in acquiring a Navy variant of the F-22 through what was called the Naval Advanced Tactical Fighter program, Aboulafia explained. This effort never came to fruition, leaving the Navy without a fifth-generation air-dominance platform.

While the Navy’s F-35C is engineered for strike missions, next-generation sensor fusion, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance and air-to-air combat, experts maintain it does not have the fifth-generation air-to-air dominance and speed of the F-22.

From Navy Plans for Fighter to Replace the F/A-18 Hornet in 2030s | Defense Tech

My comments

I like to play drinking games with these types of articles. Every the "the Navy" comes up, take a drink.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

Pentagon Satellites to Persistently Stare at Targets in 10 Years

Over the next decade, the Pentagon plans to launch satellites that offer a revolutionary leap in surveillance technology by persistently staring at targets from space for long periods of time, an official said.

Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Michael Vickers gave the estimate at a defense conference this week in Washington, D.C.

The Defense Department is at a “pivotal moment for intelligence” due to the rapid technological and geopolitical change underway throughout the world, he said. Adapting to the environment requires requires both short– and long-term investments, he said.

“In each of these areas, we’re trying to make some fundamental leaps,” Vickers said. “So, for example, in the global coverage area, for the first time, we’re trying to create really persistent surveillance from space, rather than having episodic surveillance, actually be able to stare at areas for real long periods of time and improve the resiliency and the integration of our architecture.

“Those will be really, really big things when they’re realized,” he added. “It will be a leap in overhead reconnaissance commensurate to anything we’ve done in the last 50 years or so, but they’ll take a decade-plus to realize.”

Vickers didn’t specify any specific programs.

The Air Force’s current Space Base Infrared System, known as SBIRS, and legacy Defense Support Program, or DSP, satellites support the Overhead Persistent Infrared Technology mission in such areas as missile warning, missile defense, technical intelligence and battlespace awareness, according to a Government Accountability Office report from January.

The service has Commercially Hosted Infrared Payload, or CHIRP, demonstration sensor employed a wide field-of-view staring technology — which provided insight into the applicability for the mission area, the document states.

During the past decade of U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Pentagon was forced to turn to the private sector and rent bandwidth on commercial satellites because its own networks couldn’t meet the constant demand from commanders for video and other data captured by drones flying over the battlefield.

From Pentagon Satellites to Persistently Stare at Targets in 10 Years | Defense Tech

 

[SvenSvensonov]

What the Navy’s Next Generation Amphibious Ship Could Look Like

Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII) has revised its plan to use the hull form of the San Antonio-class amphibious warship (LPD-17) as a candidate for the Navy’s next generation amphibious warship— LX(R), company officials outlined to USNI News on Tuesday.

HII has pitched variants of the LPD-17 hull for at least two years to the Navy for everything from a ballistic missile defense (BMD) platform to a candidate for LX(R) as LPD Flight II.

HII’s new Flight IIA — mocked up by HII earlier this year — modifies the original LPD-17 original design by removing some of the higher end capabilities of the San Antonio and creating a so-called amphibious truck to replace the existing class of aging Whidbey Island and Harpers Ferry 16,000-ton landing ship docks (LSD-41/49).

Though the concept isn’t news, last month’s revelation that the San Antonio hull will be the basis for LX(R) — according to a memo from the Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus — and HII’s ongoing consultation with the service with the design work for the new ship gives greater credence to the company’s plan.

The largest improvement in capability will be to the ship’s communication and aviation ability.

The current LSDs have a minimal command and control (C2) capability – the ability to communicate with other U.S. military forces and coordinate different types of aircraft and smaller vessel — and no native ability to host and maintain the aircraft of the trio of ships that make up the Navy’s Amphibious Ready Groups (ARGs).

At their inception, the LSDs “was really just a truck to always be married up with ARG and never go away from it,” carrying vehicles and landing craft as a compliment for the ARG LPD and big deck amphibious warships, Marine Maj. Gen. Robert S. Walsh, Director Expeditionary Warfare Division (N95), told USNI News on Wednesday.

However, modern operations have required the ARGs to split up and undertake different missions — at times hundreds of miles away from the other ships in the group.

The LSDs are currently the weakest in C2 and aviation maintenance arena of the trio.

HII’s LPD Flight IIA features a hangar smaller than the one on the LPD-17 capable of stowing two MV-22 Ospreys and eliminates the composite masts of the current San Antonio-class design.

The LX(R) will be much bigger than the ships it will be replacing — displacing about 7,000 more than the current LSDs at 23,470 tons, HII officials told USNI News on Tuesday.

Instead of the four Colt-Pielstick diesel engines, HII’s model reduces the prime mover count to two unspecified main propulsion diesel engines (MPDE).

The Flight IIA retains about half of the medical spaces on the LPD. Company officials also said the current iteration would feature two spots for the Navy’s LCAC hovercraft or one utility landing craft (LCU) — which is in line with the Navy’s current thinking for requirements for the LX(R), USNI News understands.

Other changes include reducing the troop capacity from 800 to 500 with a crew of about 400 sailors.

Though HII is original designers and builders of the LPD-17 ships, they are not guaranteed the design and construction contract for the new LX(R) ship class. General Dynamics NASSCO in San Diego, Calif. has also helped the Navy in its current push to lower the cost at the start of the acquisition process and is considered likely to bid on the final work.

“Both HII and NASSCO were helping with ideas on how to drive cost down,” Walsh said.
“When I say competition, we’d look at anyone who could compete and plan it, but those would certainly be two shipyards that would have the ability to compete in this environment.”

The Navy’s frontend analysis of alternatives process for LX(R) has been described as, “the best ship design conversation we’ve had in a long time inside the government,” NAVSEA chief Vice Adm. William Hilarides said in May.

HII officials didn’t give USNI News a cost estimate for their version, but according to past information from the Navy a San Antonio LX(R) could cost about $1.64 billion for the lead ship with follow-ons costing about $1.4 billion for a total of 11 ships.

However, recently the service has been reluctant to put a cost figure on the LX(R) program.

From What the Navy’s Next Generation Amphibious Ship Could Look Like - USNI News

 

[Pak_Sher]

Love the diversity of the forum. Great to see an American perspective. Gentleman thanks for sharing.

 

[AMDR]

Pentagon awards US$4.1 Bn for 43 F-35s
Pentagon awards US$4.1 Bn for 43 F-35s | Defense Update:

The Pentagon claimed the cost of the current lot reflects a reduction of 3.6 percent over LRIP VII. More reductions will come into effect in the next batch of production, eventually bringing the aircraft cost to the level of current 4-4.5 generation fighters.

Lockheed Martin has been awarded additional a $4,123 million contract, as a modification to the F-35 program, for the production of 43 F-35s under the eighth Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP Lot VIII) lot of the F-35 Lightning II aircraft. The acquisition includes 29 F-35A models, 10 Short Take Off/Vertical Landing (STOVL) F-35Bs and four carrier based C models.

The contract combines purchases of 19 F-35A aircraft for the U.S. Air Force ($1.7 billion), 7 for the Marine Corps (F-35B and C for $557 million) and three F-35C for the Navy ($491 million). It also include funds of $788 for the manufacturing of four F-35A for Italy and Norway and four F-35B for the UK. The contract also allocates $557 million for the production of six specially configured F-35As for Japan and Israel.

These amounts are not covering $793 million allocated to the procurement of F135 propulsion systems for those fighters, included in a previous contract awarded to Pratt & Whitney last month. Additional spending were included in long lead contracts worth $333 million awarded to Lockheed Martin last year, which bring the total cost of this lot to about $5.25 billion.

The lowest cost per aircraft will be paid by the US Air Foce, receiving 19 F-35A models, which are the least costly of the series. Despite the effort to reduce the aircraft cost below $100 million, the Air Force is paying no less than $111 per plane (including engines but excluding R&D).

The actual costs of the B and C models are not clearly defined in the Pentagon announcements, due to the mix of the two models’ propulsion and long lead procurements, under the Navy’s share.

The Pentagon claim that the current procurement reflects a cost reduction of 3.6 percent over LRIP VII and that more reductions will come into effect in the next batch of production, eventually bringing the aircraft cost down to around $90 million, which is comparable to current 4.5 generation fighters.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MOAR COST REDUCTIONS

 

[SvenSvensonov]

@Hakan - I noticed that in the How do we make PDF better? | Page 18 you made mention of the need for a dedicated US Defense Forum... excellent suggestion and one that is beyond over due. If and when this gets done, I would request that this thread be merged into the US Defense Forum. Thanks (in advance)!!!

Opinion: Iran — America’s Old/New Ally

Today in Geneva, Iran and six world powers decided to extend their own deadline for a settlement on Iran’s nuclear program by seven months.

Secretary of State John Kerry captured the sentiment of all parties involved in the P5+1 (U.S., China, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and Iran) negotiations when he said, “given how far we have come over the past year, particularly in the last few days, this is certainly not the time to get up and walk away.”

During the delay, Iran will continue to receive partial sanctions relief and any work on its advanced nuclear program will remain frozen.

With an extension in the negotiations, the U.S. has time to explore a possible new national strategy goal regarding Iran.

The idea is based on the hypothesis: What if the U.S. set out to once again make Iran its primary strategic partner in the Persian Gulf region?

Thirty-four years of historic hindsight suggests that stability in the Persian Gulf region was thrown asunder when the U.S. lost Iran as an ally after the fall of Shah Pahlavi in 1979. In the ensuing years the U.S. sought to strengthen new alliances and has expended a great deal of blood and treasure to try and create a new balance of power in the region. While Iran has been boycotted, bottled up — and sometimes beaten back — the long lens of history reveals that we are pushing against forces of geography, history and 3,000 years of human culture that are far stronger than our idea of a new balance of power in the region.

At face value, the notion of this possibility may seem preposterous. But I offer a few lessons from history and geography that suggest that the idea may not be as outrageous as it seems.

First, Iran was a U.S. key strategic ally in the region from roughly the end of World War II until 1979’s Iranian Revolution. The fact is, Iran’s geography and culture made it the dominant power in the region for centuries. I would suggest that the past 34 years of turmoil are in many respects the exception to the longer view and this position of dominance Iran has is inherent in these geo-cultural realities.

A more recent glimpse back to the Shah’s reign may be easier for most to recall. Up to 1979 we find an Iran that was the preeminent military power in the region. That is — after all — why we followed the British after WW II and courted Iran as our key ally in the region. This is also why we provided them with some of the most advanced weapons in our inventory, like the F-4, F-14, HAWK and Harpoon missiles.

Our current popular American assumptions about Iran do not take into account the deeper cultural currents. The advantages of Iran’s geographic position, large population (65 million), and thriving ancient culture are what make this nation important. This was true in the time of Marco Polo and remains true today. It has little to do with oil.

Second — in three separate crises in the region — when the US really faced a threat, Iran did not interfere with U.S. operations.

The first of these conflicts was Operation Desert Storm. During this operation against Iran’s bitter enemy Iraq, the U.S. kept four Carrier Strike Groups (CSG) in the Persian Gulf without Iranian interference. Again, after Sept. 11, 2001, Iran cooperated with the U.S. in dismantling the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Finally, in the current operations against Islamic State of Iraq and Syria forces, Iran and the US once again find a shared interest.

The relationship between Iran and the US is thorny, and these examples are not meant to oversimplify the complexity of US-Iranian relations in the pre or post-Shah era. Rather, they simply stand as evidence that when a real threat against the US and Western interests was clear and present (1991, 2001, and 2014) not only did Iran not interfere with US operations, when it was in their national interest they actually assisted the US.

Third, consider the fact that the populations of U.S. current allies in the region have been the largest source of funding, manpower, and ideological support for the enemies we have confronted since 9-11. As often cited, of the nineteen 9-11 terrorist hijackers, 15 were from Saudi Arabia, two from the UAE, one each from Egypt and Lebanon. None were from Iran, or were funded by Iran.

Again today in the Third Iraq War against ISIS, the principle financial and manpower support for ISIS largely comes from our regional allies, not Iran.

Undeniably Iran has its own terrorist proxies, such as the Lebanese Hezbollah whom were responsible for the deadly 1983 bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon.

Proxies, such as Hezbollah and Iranian Quds forces remain a sticking point in the way forward with Iran. Perhaps a normalization of relations with Iran will dampen the need for such asymmetric threats. As noted previously, our allies in the region remain our allies, even when their native sons hijack aircraft and crash them into our symbols of power on US soil. Thus, there appears to be room for forgiveness when it is in our national interests.

What’s in it for Iran? In recent years Iran has indicated through its achievements in areas such as aerospace technology, and its gradual diplomatic opening up to the world that it may be seeking to end its semi-self-imposed isolation from the world. Iran has paid a great price economically and geopolitically for the type of threatening gestures practiced during the Ahmadinejad era. Iran now stands on the threshold of an opportunity to end the isolation and rebuild trust with the U.S. and Western powers.

With the current nuclear talks extended, the future of U.S.-Iranian relations is at this moment uncertain. To many this hypothesis may seem far-fetched based on the biases and perceptions we have formed in the context of our era.

Finally, I would offer that a past generation of Americans, would have never imagined that Japan and Germany would emerge as two of America’s most important allies. We fought a total war with those nations, and by comparison America’s conflict with Iran appears as a bitter feud between two stubborn former friends. With a careful consideration of history and geography I remain optimistic that normalized relations with Iran can and should be made a goal of the United States.

From Opinion: Iran — America’s Old/New Ally - USNI News