US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
Seawolf in Arctic filmed by a Russian Mi-8 !

1) I'm no submariner.
2) I don't know what happened to Seawolf. First I've ever heard of it.
3) I do not think the Russian helo found Seawolf by sub hunting or any other detection method.
4) I think the Russian helo was on patrol and captured Seawolf surfacing by chance.
5) I've no clue what happened to Seawolfs sail.
6) Since I'm no submariner I could be 100% WRONG.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
First. The US regularly conducts expeditions to the Ice pack, during which it breaks through the ice pack, This is done for a number of reasons, First it's a form of Freedom of Navigation, second they also conduct a number of Scientific work up there. The Russians of course want to spin that they forced the action. It seems more likely She was already surfaced.
That all said something about this one seems off.
The Russians are pointing to a anomaly in the sail. there appears to be a portion of the leading edge missing That section of the Sail houses the Radar.
Submarines take damage like this all the time really. a slightly denser than predicted sheet of ice can do that or far worse.
 
now I read but didn't understand much Disbrow: USAF Addressing Information War Shortfalls
The Air Force is trying to prioritize increasing its cybersecurity capability, which is proving to be quite a challenge.

Speaking to Air Force Magazine’s editorial board, Acting Undersecretary of the Air Force Lisa Disbrow said USAF has “shortfalls” in its ability to stand against
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. The need for readiness in the information war is “critical,” Disbrow said. “Are we challenged there? Yes.”

A microcosm of USAF’s hard path toward cyber readiness is its Air Operations Center - Weapon System (AOC-WS) upgrade, or lack thereof. Earlier this year, as
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, the service was forced to tell primary contractor Northrop Grumman to stop working on the project, which through its 2032 sustainment looks to cost roughly $3.5 billion.

Once the program ran past its timelines several times, USAF had to submit a Critical Change report to Congress, asking it to reprogram money from other places in the FY17 budget to keep the project above water. That didn’t happen, and the entire program was suspended through the current fiscal year. One of Northrop’s priorities in upgrading AOC-WS from the current 10.1 version to a 10.2 version was adding the very cybersecurity measures the Joint Requirements Oversight Council—and Disbrow—called critical.

“We’re looking at a pathfinder,” Disbrow said, meaning the service is working with Congress to find a new way to get cybersecurity into the existing AOC. She called it a “tiger team” approach by which outside eyes were allowed into the program to investigate its shortcomings.

Lt. Gen. Arnold Bunch, the Air Force’s top uniformed officer for acquisition, previously described the group as in-house experts and members of the AT&L’s Defense Digital Services. This is a small team that “talks to engineers, talks to decision makers” for about a week and comes back with recommendations based on best commercial practices and other technical wisdom. Other reviewers were an Air Force independent review team, the DOD’s Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation team, and an Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Command, Control, Communications, Cyber, Business Systems team.

This tiger team, among other things, gave USAF some ideas about the very nature of the upgrade.

“You have to rapidly test that code,” Disbrow said, describing the team’s findings. “If you don’t—if you take an incremental approach, which we tend to do in the acquisition system—you allow the code to fail while you’re building other code.” USAF won’t even know if that initial code is failing because it won’t test it until it has “a number of different systems together,” she said.

The lessons derived from the AOC debacle can be used in approaching other modernization programs within the service, as well.

“Almost all the weapons systems we’re modernizing are software-centric,” Disbrow said, adding that the service is also trying to “change the way we develop and the way we acquire these systems.”

Is there a timeline to move forward on these capabilities? “The urgency is there,” Disbrow said, “but the battle rhythm of the processes within the department drive us to certain timelines.” With AOC, for example, the program is suspended until at least Fiscal 2018, when funds will open up for it again.

Included in the Air Force’s Fiscal 2018 unfunded priority list, released on Friday, was $563 million for “cyberspace,” which is further denoted as a “national priority.” The list includes everything from skills training to cloud migrations, all items the service needs in developing an ever more resilient cyber infrastructure.

Another effort to curb the service’s informational gaps is the “cyber scorecard,” which lists “probably two dozen initiatives underneath it,” said Disbrow. “Knowing where USAF is on each of those—it drives us to get the funding in place and move forward.”

One gripping issue with the AOC and other software-driven projects isn’t just the lack of coders on hand to deal with said projects, “it’s also having the expertise in place to manage coders that are state-of-the-art,” Disbrow said. Among the options in dealing with this obstacle is “looking at what’s the right mix” of contract, civilian, or DOD entities. The service is still figuring that mix out.

“I really think it’s more that cyber and IT are areas that have rapidly progressed outside the department and we don’t have the workforce in place,” said Disbrow.

Tellingly, the very antiquated nature of some of USAF’s systems could be their saving grace.

“Some legacy systems, which, interestingly, just being as old as they are—not in the network—builds in some resilience,” Disbrow said. “We’ve got shortfalls out there we have to address. And I think we are—it’s a matter of how long you can get it all done.”
source is AirForceMag
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
1) I'm no submariner.
2) I don't know what happened to Seawolf. First I've ever heard of it.
3) I do not think the Russian helo found Seawolf by sub hunting or any other detection method.
4) I think the Russian helo was on patrol and captured Seawolf surfacing by chance.
5) I've no clue what happened to Seawolfs sail.
6) Since I'm no submariner I could be 100% WRONG.

First. The US regularly conducts expeditions to the Ice pack, during which it breaks through the ice pack, This is done for a number of reasons, First it's a form of Freedom of Navigation, second they also conduct a number of Scientific work up there. The Russians of course want to spin that they forced the action. It seems more likely She was already surfaced.
That all said something about this one seems off.
The Russians are pointing to a anomaly in the sail. there appears to be a portion of the leading edge missing That section of the Sail houses the Radar.
Submarines take damage like this all the time really. a slightly denser than predicted sheet of ice can do that or far worse.

Agree and btw Mi-8 is not able, exist also ASW Mi-14.

In relation with recent interest for Arctic, energy etc...

In more impossible to detect a sub through the compact ice, ships ofc and MPA are useless against a sub under compact ice only others submarines are a threat.
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Agree and btw Mi-8 is not able, exist also ASW Mi-14.

In relation with recent interest for Arctic, energy etc...

In more impossible to detect a sub through the compact ice, ships ofc and MPA are useless against a sub under compact ice only others submarines are a threat.
Except Typhoon SSBN submarines can surfaced only through a fin ice, little thick about 1 m max localised IIRC with sonar which measures the thickness approx. ofc.
Typhoon are able with especialy a sail reinforced to drill 2.5 m for comparison the more big Icebreakers broke 2 - 4 m.
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
Except Typhoon SSBN submarines can surfaced only through a fin ice, little thick about 1 m max localised IIRC with sonar which measures the thickness approx. ofc.
Typhoon are able with especialy a sail reinforced to drill 2.5 m for comparison the more big Icebreakers broke 2 - 4 m.

The sail is of course extremely strong and part of the subs superstructure, the radar antennae on the other hand is likely fiberglass or possibly carbon fiber or some other non-ferrous material, hence much weaker.... popping your sub up through the ice is no doubt fun, but boys having fun often break expensive stuff.

While everybody does it that can, if you watch the movie K-19, that will give you a little bit of the flavor of driving your boat up through the ice, the Seawolf is a very strong vessel designed to withstand the pressure of "going deep"! not for the feint of heart!

"Take her down", make your depth 900ft,,, all ahead one third!

sadly there are only 3 Seawolfs, one being the Carter, maybe we could do like the Russians and Change her name, to the "Trump"!
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
sadly there are only 3 Seawolfs, one being the Carter, maybe we could do like the Russians and Change her name, to the "Trump"!

I voted for Mr Trump..however..

I know you are kidding but why would the USN change the name of Jimmy Carter to Trump? That is up to the Sec. Navy to name ships. And the USN in the last 40 or so years the USN has changed only three names on a ship. CVN-75 was originally United States and was Changed to Harry S Truman. LHA-5 was originally named Khe Sanh then Da Nang. That was changed to Peleliu. The name changes were done while the ship was under construction.

As far as changing Jimmy Carter to Trump. Mr Carter was a very poor president but he is a shipmate because he served as an officer with the USN on active duty from 1946 to 1953. Pres. Trump has served zero days in any military.

Maybe a CVN will be named for Donald Trump after a successful presidency.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Except Typhoon SSBN submarines can surfaced only through a fin ice, little thick about 1 m max localised IIRC with sonar which measures the thickness approx. ofc.
Typhoon are able with especialy a sail reinforced to drill 2.5 m for comparison the more big Icebreakers broke 2 - 4 m.
Typhoon was built to be a Arctic missile base That's why. The Idea was that Typhoon class boats would in the event of war hover around the Ice pack then Surface pop the missile hatches and unload into Major US infrastructure, As such those boats were Unique. double hulled with 20 SLBM's But I digress.

This is what an ICEX looks like.
Once on the Surface the only natural enemy of a Submariner is a Polar bear looking for Seal Steaks
 
Top