US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Look F15EX was a program designed around the issue of F15C and D’s aging out. A maxed order of F15EX of over 144 would have been Okay. The main mission being that of Air National Guard. An 80 unit order may seem tiny and it is small yet then again when you consider that F15E will take most of the modifications and the USAF will have about 224 of them. You get about 300 F15 with services life. That’s the main point by the way. That the F15C and D were flown to the end of their structural lives. They were designed at a time where they were supposed to survive to a set span before being retired for F22. But as no one foresaw in the “end of history era” F22 got curtailed.
Then you factor in the F16 fleet F22, F35. Basically still the world’s largest Air Force and most capable Air Force for the foreseeable future. That’s reality.

Anyway before I give up on this so called intelligent conversation.

Cowabunga it is.
Or rather Wedgetail.


No surprise.

Nobaru said:

Yea. It also "may" help them to beam the f put of those invading aliens in next "battleship 2"movie.

In other news

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Another mega version of super weapon is going to bone yard.
Imported & stolen euro tech ain't gonna help them. I don't trust a single word coming out of that primary math failed nation.
And as I say always, Rest in pieces, Fat-15s

Click to expand...

When you're fighting middle eastern armies or insurgents, an F-22 or F-35 doesn't give you an advantage over an F-16 or F-15.

With the war on terror over (or at least downgraded) and the new cold war America needs to be fielding the best it has.

Maikeru said:

Spruance class marked the start of the "steel is cheap, air is free" concept for surface escorts in USN. Before that you had Charles F Adams class of DDG and Knox class FFG.

Click to expand...

The paradigms have certainly changed over time. In any case, this is what I have:

Isn't F-15EX also about keeping Boeing afloat? If F-15EX order is cancelled early would it cause further issue for Boeing's viability?

Temstar said:

Isn't F-15EX also about keeping Boeing afloat? If F-15EX order is cancelled early would it cause further issue for Boeing's viability?

Click to expand...

First, the USAF hadn’t ordered a new F15 in decades. The EX was based off export models which are still selling. Second F15EX is only one of dozens of military programs. They still have KC46, P8, E7 and FA18 plus Air Force one.
On the civil side 737 is still strong and back orders of 747 are still going. 767 is still selling in freighters although 787 is on pause for production deliveries resumed. So it’s not dead yet. Troubled yes. Absolutely destroyed? No.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

First, the USAF hadn’t ordered a new F15 in decades. The EX was based off export models which are still selling. Second F15EX is only one of dozens of military programs. They still have KC46, P8, E7 and FA18 plus Air Force one.
On the civil side 737 is still strong and back orders of 747 are still going. 767 is still selling in freighters although 787 is on pause for production deliveries resumed. So it’s not dead yet. Troubled yes. Absolutely destroyed? No.

Click to expand...

F/A18E/F will end soon and P8 production relatively soon unless there are more export orders.

Overbom said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

That makes sense for USN. They can't build anything without running completely out of budget, so might as well try to get AB3 at a fixed rate. Makes planning a lot easier. The continued cost escalation at US naval shipyard is a real national security risk for America.

I do see the reason for shipyard themselves hesitating to sign on to such a deal. Inflation is so out of control here that they don't want to lock in on loss making deals.

Nobaru said:

In other news

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Another mega version of super weapon is going to bone yard.
Imported & stolen euro tech ain't gonna help them. I don't trust a single word coming out of that primary math failed nation.
And as I say always, Rest in pieces, Fat-15s

Click to expand...

I'm actually surprised by this. 80 is too small of a sub fleet for USAF. I doubt the congress will allow this to go through. I still see 144 being ordered eventually.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

No surprise.

Click to expand...

It's actually funny to read the USAF comment about E7. They are so not excited about it. It's almost like taking the ugly girl out to the prom because you can't get anyone else to go with you.

tphuang said:

That makes sense for USN. They can't build anything without running completely out of budget, so might as well try to get AB3 at a fixed rate. Makes planning a lot easier. The continued cost escalation at US naval shipyard is a real national security risk for America.

I do see the reason for shipyard themselves hesitating to sign on to such a deal. Inflation is so out of control here that they don't want to lock in on loss making deals.

I'm actually surprised by this. 80 is too small of a sub fleet for USAF. I doubt the congress will allow this to go through. I still see 144 being ordered eventually.

It's actually funny to read the USAF comment about E7. They are so not excited about it. It's almost like taking the ugly girl out to the prom because you can't get anyone else to go with you.

Click to expand...

There is a bit of budget battle play going on. Some of these stories are just that. Stories being leaked to set Congress on fire to “make corrections”. Inflation is a big deal but that’s not unique to the US.

In the case of E7 being frank the optimal time for an E7 buy was 2009. A decade and a half. ago.
What I call the “Asymmetric era” when all priorities went to Iraq and Afghanistan with conventional warfare system taking a major cut. That would have been about the same time as the cancellation of the E10 which was a larger 767 with the same radar set in Awacs configuration. The second that program was axed E7 should have been ordered.
The DOD is basically in a transition from Asymmetrical to peer v peer. But a lot of the leadership is still asymmetric in mindset. E7 is the only choice now the asymmetric generation though look at AWACS and argue it’s obsolete well others are trying to rebuild E10 or just try and keep E3 in forgetting that it’s old enough to be a grandfather.
E7’s availability much like the F15EX came as the result of previous miscalculation of the readiness of legacy platforms made during the “asymmetric era” and “End of History eras”. When F15 literally flew apart in 2007.

Report on the Columbia class submarine

The Navy’s FY2023 budget submission estimates the procurement cost of the first Columbia-class boat at $15,179.1 million (i.e., about $15.2 billion) in then-year dollars, including $6,557.6 million (i.e., about $6.6 billion) in costs for plans, meaning (essentially) the detail design/nonrecurring engineering (DD/NRE) costs for the Columbia class. (It is a long-standing Navy budgetary practice to incorporate the DD/NRE costs for a new class of ship into the total procurement costs procurement cost of the first ship in the class.)

Click to expand...

Excluding costs for plans, the estimated hands-on construction cost of the first ship is $8,621.5 million (i.e., about $8.6 billion). The Navy’s FY2023 budget submission estimates the total procurement cost of a 12-ship class at $112.7 billion in then-year dollars.

Click to expand...

Current US naval construction in graphic form