US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Navy Can Afford to Save Its Cruisers, Lawmaker Says

With the scheduled retirement of the first of the Navy’s
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
guided missile cruisers only years away and no direct replacement set to come online, some fear the Navy is set to lose critical defensive capabilities just as it works to build up the fleet.

But an influential Congressman says the Navy could begin to
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
for a five-year service-life extension program for the ships with existing maintenance dollars, and argues the move will help the service move effectively toward its goal of a 355-ship fleet.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
first reported this month that Rep. Rob Wittman, chairman of the House Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee, supported a plan to extend the service life of its cruiser fleet. In an interview with Military.com this week, the Virginia Republican explained how exactly the Navy could do it.

To remain effective in the fleet, the aging Ticonderoga class, which entered service in the early 1980s, would need both a hull, mechanical, and electrical, or HM&E, refurbishment, and systems upgrades to Baseline 9, the latest iteration of the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Ballistic Missile Defense system.

The oldest of the vertical launch system variant of the Ticonderoga class, the Bunker Hill, is already in the process of receiving Aegis Baseline 9, Wittman said.

“All the ships can have that put on board, so they can either do the BMD mission or they can do the carrier strike force mission,” he said. “So they’re a dual-purpose ship; they can do what’s necessary.”

Estimates of the per-ship cost to complete service-life extension for the cruisers ranges from $280 to $300 million, said Jerry Hendrix, director of the Defense Strategies and Assessments Program at the Center for a New American Security, and a retired Navy captain.

The
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
can start in with that work by leveraging existing maintenance funds, Wittman said.

“We put a total of a billion dollars into maintenance accounts this year, which is a significant increase. So we believe the dollars are in the maintenance accounts for them to do the service life extensions for these ships,” he said.

The president’s budget request for fiscal 2018 included $51.3 billion for Navy operations and Maintenance, compared with $48.2 billion enacted for fiscal 2017 and $46.9 billion the previous year.

Thanks to a “2-4-6” maintenance plan devised by Congress intended to limit the number of cruisers not operationally available due to modernization, some of the money required for maintenance has already been allocated, Wittman said.

“What we’ll have to do is look at some additional monies in the out years … if there are new upgrades, and there always will be with the next baseline for Aegis, to look at the dollars that are there for that,” Wittman said. “Staying on track with these ships, and then if we want to, moving things to the left, but putting more money into it.”

Why Save the Cruisers

The decommissioning of the cruisers is set to begin in 2019 with the Bunker Hill, which will then be 33.

While Ticonderoga-class cruisers and
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
destroyers are similar sizes and operate in concert while
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, they do fill different missions. The destroyers are heavily armed and equipped to support multiple missions, while the cruisers are geared toward air and ballistic missile defenses.

“Is there a role for what is essentially an air defense, ballistic defense ship in the Navy? … I think the answer is yes,” Hendrix said.

A piece of that specialization can be found in the number of vertical launch system, or VLS, cells mounted on each ship — the Navy’s system for holding and firing missiles. While destroyers are equipped with 96 VLS tubes, cruisers have 122 each. Fewer VLS cells means fewer shipboard missiles deployed, all in a global environment that has seen 64 Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from Navy ships in two separate strikes within the last year.

“If you retire cruisers and replace them with Burkes, you’re accepting a 25 percent decrease on each platform,” Hendrix said.

State of the Ships

For the Navy’s oldest cruisers facing retirement in the next few years, there’s the question of how many could feasibly benefit from a service-life extension program, Hendrix said. He noted that ballast added to come of the oldest of the class to combat instability during sea trials had led to cracking and deformation of ships’ keels. The Navy will need to complete a survey of all its cruisers, he said, to determine the condition of each ship.

“On 22 [cruisers], I think we’re lucky if we can get half of them to be extended,” he said.

Another five cruisers, the first in the class to be built, were designed with a Mark-26 twin-arm missile launcher instead of VLS cells. All were decommissioned in the mid-2000s; two, the Ticonderoga and the Yorktown, are mothballed and waiting to be scrapped.

“Those hulls have five to 10 years less [wear] in them than all the ships we have now,” Hendrix said. “You could go back to those and gut them down to the keel and build them up with VLS and an updated SPY [radar] system.”

The additional five years of service life would buy the Navy more time to develop a follow-on large surface combatant, which is expected to come after the frigate now being designed.

Wittman said he believes there’s sufficient support in Congress to keep the still-capable Ticonderogas around.

“Looking at where people are and understanding how critical a 355[-ship Navy] is, we’re looking for every way to get there as quickly as we can,” he said. “And with the industrial capacity we have, we can only build so many ships.”

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
355-Ship Navy Could Take More Than Three Decades to Build, Acting Navy Under Secretary Says
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

actually they're at risk of filling up the numbers with LCS PORK! Jul 10, 2017
Jul 1, 2017

... details emerging:

"On May 23, the U.S. Navy rolled out its 2018 budget request that included one littoral combat ship, or LCS. The logic was that since Congress had given the Navy three in fiscal year 2017, an additional one would keep both builders — Wisconsin-based Marinette Marine and Alabama-based Austal USA — afloat.

But inside the White House, alarm bells went off in some sectors. Peter Navarro, the head of U.S. President Donald Trump’s trade and industrial policy office, was looking at information indicating one ship could trigger layoffs at both shipyards. Those concerns were shared by senior Trump aides Rick Dearborn and Stephen Miller — both old hands of long-time Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions — and together they lobbied and prevailed upon Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney to add a second ship to the request."

Life support: The Navy's struggle to define a LCS bare minimum
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

goes on below due to size limit
Chances are the Navy’s leaders of a proposed 355-ship fleet have not even finished high school yet, according to Pentagon estimates.

“It’s going to take a long time and it’s going to take a lot of money,” said Thomas Dee, acting Under Secretary of the Navy.
“We can be on the mark by mid-century.”

Some estimates made by think tanks and the Congressional Budget Office have suggested a 355-ship Navy could be achieved faster, but Dee sounded skeptical the goal could be reached in less than three decades. Speaking Wednesday at the NDIA Expeditionary Warfare Conference in Annapolis, Dee said even if Congress added billions of dollars to the Navy’s annual budgets, perhaps a 355-ship fleet would be built by the mid to late 2040s.

Based on the Pentagon’s understanding of the industrial base’s ability to increase production, Dee said perhaps the benchmark could be reached by the mid-2040s.

“We may want it, very, very soon, perhaps we’ll be able to get there, but we’re going to have to work with our partners over on The Hill,” Dee said.

Money is the biggest constraint. A decade of operating with continuing resolutions and several years of having spending restrained by the Budget Control Act, has limited the Navy’s ability to increase fleet size, Dee said. Awarding overseas contingency operations (OCO) funding is how Dee said Congress has gotten around the Budget Control Act restraints.

“Problem with OCO is your ability to plan,” Dee said. This money is not guaranteed and can change year-to-year.

During the summer, the Congressional Budget Office released a study suggesting fleet size could be increased much quicker than what Dee says is realistic. But these estimates are not cheap and require Navy leadership to rethink how missions are accomplished.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
a 355-fleet could be achieved by the early 2030s, but would require the Navy to rethink what the fleet would look like and an astronomical funding increase to $3.1 trillion to build and maintain the fleet for the next 30 years.

Suggested CBO options to hasten the pace of fleet growth include extending the service life of some ships, relying on unmanned vehicles, and curtailing other programs such as not meeting a stated goal of having 66 attack submarines in 15 years.

Dee said he was not familiar with the CBO study, but increasing annual budgets alone will not quicken the pace of shipbuilding. Recruiting and retaining sailors is a constraint. Then there’s the Pentagon’s belief industrial doesn’t have the capacity to ramp up production faster, Dee said. The problem isn’t just building dry docks, but also hiring and retaining skilled shipyard workers.

There’s also the question of political will to continue funding a 355-ship Navy. Work would span multiple administrations, which generally means a near-complete turnover of civilian leadership inside the Pentagon. Planning can be put on hold while incoming civilian leaders assemble their teams. Dee, on the job for five months, is still working as an acting under-secretary.

“I’m actually willing to give up my big office and the head for (Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis) to be able to build up his team,” he said.

So, what do we do, Dee asked. The answer, he said involves technological advances, used to gain leverage in a multi-domain warfare environment. Sub-sea, surface, space, and cyber domains. Doing so, Dee said, is not just about saving money, but also using the Department of Defense’s technological advantage over competitors.

“We will not be able to buy our way out of the challenges being faced today,” Dee said. “When all else fails, we’re going to have to think our way out of this.”
 
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

now just one thing: 355 is the USN idea, even bigger than Trump's bravado (350)!
links are Feb 25, 2017
Yesterday at 10:57 PM
related:
Navy’s 355-Ship Fleet Goal Would Cost $25 Billion Per Year

source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and Nov 20, 2016
Nov 10, 2016

but Analysts: Growing Fleet to 350 Ships Will Be Challenging

source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
plus also Bernard (how are you? LOL)
#6782 Bernard, Jan 25, 2017
Question for anyone. So President Trump requests a Naval build up of 350 ships, the Navy says they'll need 355. Ships are long-term builds, everyone knows this so...

Here is my question,

Are there mothballed ships that can be taken out of storage and modernized to speed up the journey to 350+ Ships? And be relevant, and no I'm not talking battleships.:p
anyway here's the article:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, Congress and
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
now all want the fleet to grow from the current
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
to 355, but that will probably take until the 2050s, the Navy’s No. 2 civilian said Wednesday.

“To quote the Rolling Stones, you can’t always get what you want,” said
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, who has served for eight months as Navy Undersecretary in the absence of a Trump nominee. “So we may want a 355-ship navy. We may want it very, very soon, and perhaps we’ll be able to get there, but we’re going to have to work with our partners over on the Hill.”

Don’t get your hopes up. Dee noted that, while the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
have endorsed the 355-ship goal in law, Congress as a whole has been unable to lift the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
caps on spending or even
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
for nine years running.

“It’s going to take
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and it’s going to take
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(to reach 355 ships),” Dee told the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
here. “We can get on mark by mid-century to be approaching 350 ships, with significant additional dollars in our shipbuilding accounts. So that’s possible,” he said. “Is that realistic? We don’t know if it’s realistic. I’d like to think that people would see the value of a larger Navy and Marine Corps.”

“The more you get, the quicker you can accelerate,” Dee added. “With additional billions of dollars into the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, we can accelerate into the 2040s.”

Alternative Timelines

Dee’s “mid-century” window is significantly slower than earlier estimates
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. Back in April, respected CBO analyst Eric Labs studied several alternative timelines based on different funding profiles, all presuming major spending increases
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. The fastest possible crash program made it in a mere 18 years, by 2032. CBO’s slowest — but still expensive — scenario reached 355 ships in 2047.

I asked Dee, why the big difference? “I don’t know about 2032. That might be a little sporty,” he said. He’s not offering exact figures, he emphasized: “I don’t know if it’s 2050. It’s in that range. But more billions of dollars would be able to accelerate.”

It’s not just about the money, though. No matter how much we pour into shipbuilding programs, Dee said, America’s
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
need time to ramp up production. Industry would need to invest not only in new facilities but in a larger workforce, which would require years of recruiting people and training them in highly specialized skills. The Trump administration is currently conducting an
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, he noted.

“What do you do in the interim?” Dee asked. “You have to look at how do you get that capacity, that capability in some other way.” The Navy might supplement its large, manned warships with
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, he suggested. (An
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and the thinktank
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
both proposed different forms of this mixed fleet in studies commissioned by Congress). It could exploit cyberspace and the new
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
concepts of operation now in develop to better coordinate the services. Above all, he said, it must remain flexible, because by 2050, the world will have changed and what we now consider cutting edge may become obsolete.

With such a drawn-out timeline, I asked, is 355 ships really a policy goal anymore or just an article of faith?

“Is that more than just a dream down the road?” Dee mused. “Well, any capability that we’re talking about goes through multiple administrations” —
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
— “but you need to have the strategy, you need to have the vision, or we’ll never get there.”

We might not get there. Across a distance of three decades, we can’t be sure. But, as Dee points out, we can be sure we won’t get there if we don’t try.
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
according to AirForceMag White House Confuses Pilots, USAF with Friday Executive Order
10/23/2017
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The Air Force Monday clarified it won't force pilots back into Active Duty service after President Donald Trump waived certain restrictions on recalling airmen from retirement via executive order.

Concerned pilots contacted the service following the order’s release, thinking “initial media reports meant we were going to involuntarily recall retired pilots,” service spokeswoman Ann Stefanek told Air Force Magazine on Sunday.

But according to the Air Force, that will not happen.

Brig. Gen. Mike Koscheski, director of the service’s
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, told reporters on Monday the order’s "big thing" is letting USAF bring back more pilots and for a longer period of time.

"We are an all volunteer force, that is the focus,” he said, adding the service is “not going to force” pilots to come back.

Specifically, What Trump’s order did was up the limit of retirees allowed to serve in Active Duty. As it stood, that limit meant no more than 25 retired pilots would be able to return. That number factored into a program the service stood up months ago. Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
that the Air Force would be going after retired pilots for voluntary return to staff positions. The service soon after
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, limiting itself to 25 pilots with tour lengths limited to 12 months, which was the legal limit at the time. Now, that cap is undone and the tour length increases to three years.

Koscheski said the extra time for which the service can now hire back retirees does change the “decision calculus.” Returning pilots may now be considered to teach as flying instructor pilots, which, if this were to happen, Koscheski said efforts would focus on undergraduate pilot training at bases like Vance AFB, Okla., and Sheppard Air Force Base and Laughlin Air Force Base, both in Texas. Out of 15 pilots who’ve shown interest in the program thus far, three are on contract.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
specifically invoked the national emergency waivers of two sections in Title 10 of the United States Code, which outlines the legal framework for US military activities. In invoking these waivers, Trump relied on the national emergency in effect because of and since the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

The first waiver “made available” to the military, according to the order, is
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, allowing a service Secretary to order retired service members back into Active Duty. However, Wilson’s authority would be limited in some ways. First, she could only order back airmen for up to a year every two years. Further, she wouldn’t be able to order back certain officers who retired early. These limitations are now waived.

The second waiver is part of
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, which limits to 15 the number of retired general officers allowed to serve on Active Duty and limits to 25 the number of retired officers of any one armed force who may have been recalled using section 688, outlined above. These limitations are now waived.

The service is also expanding its
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
to include those who aren’t under a service contract and those whose contracts may have expired. In the July issue’s
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, Air Force Magazine takes a deep dive into how the Air Force plans to increase its end strength.
 
now presumably good news:
U.S. Air Force JASSM-ER Rolling Out To New Fighters, Bombers
Oct 23, 2017
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

As technologies for long-range air defense improve and proliferate, the U.S. military has long sought a counter—missile that can strike land-based targets from hundreds of miles away. In the mid-1990s, the U.S. Air Force and Navy partnered to develop the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM), but it was not deployed until 2009 and had limited range due to its Teledyne J402 turbojet engine.

Now the Pentagon believes it has a more effective weapon in the JASSM extended-range version (JASSM-ER), powered by the Williams International F107 turbofan and with a range exceeding 500 nm (926 km). It is being integrated on Air Force fighters and bombers, including the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and B-52 and
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
B-2.

These aircraft can already carry the legacy version of JASSM but require additional integration to take full advantage of the AGM-158B’s superior range and performance. Once equipped, they will be capable of destroying high-value targets over an area of 785,398 nm².

Despite partnering with the Air Force in the early stages of the program, the Navy has no immediate plans to adopt the land-attack cruise missile for its strike fighters. The service has instead developed a ship-killing variant for its
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
/F Super Hornet called the AGM-158C Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM).

Operators of Lockheed’s F-35A and carrier-based F-35C will also be watching the early performance of the JASSM-ER. The weapon did not make the cut for the F-35’s Block 4 follow-on modernization program, and it will instead be considered for the next iteration, Block 5, in the mid/late-2020s.

Alan Jackson, director of strike systems at Lockheed’s missiles and fire control division, confirms that the JASSM-ER has been integrated with U.S. Air Combat Command’s fleet of F-15E Strike Eagles. Coming up next will be integration with the F-16 and B-52H, including external and internal carriage.

“We’re already on the F-15E, and that was using the Universal Armament Interface,” Jackson tells Aviation Week. “F-16 integration is going on right now.”

Air Force budget documents state that the missile will be integrated with the F-16C/D Block 40/42/50/52-series fighters and a contract for nonrecurring (one-off) engineering was awarded in March. There is also some work left for the Strike Eagle, specifically integrating the F-15E’s Northrop Litening Advanced Targeting Pod.

For bombers, the B-52 can carry up to 12 JASSM-ERs on its wings and with the new 1760 Internal Weapons Bay Upgrade, another eight internally. The only other aircraft that can carry more JASSM cruise missiles than the B-52H is the B-1B, which accommodates 24 missiles inside its internal weapons bays.

Brig. Gen. Michael Schmidt, the Air Force’s program executive officer for fighters and bombers, confirmed during a recent interview that the B-2 Spirit bombers of Whiteman AFB, Missouri, are also slated to receive JASSM-ER. The B-2’s primary mission is nuclear deterrence, but the JASSM-ER provides a long-range, conventional option for striking high-value targets from outside the range of counterstealth radars and interceptors. The B-2 will require some changes, and development should start by mid-2018, Air Force documents state.

In terms of capability upgrades for the missile, the service highlights some plans in its fiscal 2018 budget proposal. It includes funding for studies of an anti-radiation homing system for targeting radio frequency emitters such as radars and communications sites. The service wants a weapons data link for passing updated targeting information to the missile midflight, enabling JASSM-ER to hit relocatable or roaming land and maritime targets. Under a recent government contract, Lockheed is developing an improved wing that will add greater range and performance.

The missile is accurate to within 3 m (10 ft.) of a target using the onboard imaging infrared seeker, or within 13 m when only guided by GPS-aided inertial navigation.

The continued rollout of the JASSM-ER comes as flight testing of the anti-ship derivative begins on the B-1B for fielding in 2018 and the F/A-18E/F in 2019.

Jackson says LRASM retains all the features, targeting capabilities and low-observable characteristics of the JASSM-ER but adds another passive sensor produced by
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. He would not say what type of sensor it is or what part of the electromagnetic spectrum it operates in, but it is probably a semi-active radar homing device. Once LRASM is introduced, the B-1B and the Navy’s Super Hornet will be capable of destroying land targets as well as moving vessels at sea from significant standoff ranges.

Jackson says the Navy has no plans to adopt the less expensive JASSM-ER for striking land targets, even though it would be quicker, cheaper and easier to integrate LRASM and JASSM-ER at the same time rather than separately.

“That would be an attractive option, but for now the Navy wants to remain focused on just getting LRASM out the door,” Jackson says. “It’s a low-risk, low-cost and relatively easy way to do the integration if you piggyback the two at the same, but nevertheless, if or when that happens, that will be a separate integration effort.”

JASSM and LRASM are produced by Lockheed in Troy, Alabama. The Air Force intends to procure JASSM cruise missiles at a rate of 360 per year.

The missile is a major international sales opportunity for Lockheed, as it has already been adopted by Australia, Poland and Finland. Other foreign sales could materialize, particularly for trusted operators of the F-16, once integrated. Australia’s Super Hornets would be obvious candidates for the JASSM-ER and potentially LRASM.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
The people saying that the 355 ship Navy has to take until 2050 are blowing smoke and do not know what they are talking about.

Politically, they may force it to take that long...but not because it has to. It would because that is what they want...or probably more accurately, they have no ntention of building it that large ever.

But the US has the capability and the money, if it wanted to, to get to the 355 number in five to 10 years max if it really wanted to.

The shipywards could turn them out if we would fund them and really gear up to do so.

They could finish that frigate design and then have two yards gear up to put two of them out a years if they wanted.

They could put one Burke out per year at two places if they wanted to. They can do the same with the SSNs as well.

If they geared up in those next five years to do that, then five years of that temp would add 20 FFGs, another 10 DDGs, and then 10 more SSNs in that second set of five years.

If you add those 40 ships to what they would also build during the first five years, you end up with an additional 60+ ships added to the fleet in the next ten years...and that does not even include the planned two new LHAs, two new Ccariers, and 2-3 new LSX vessels also planned over the next ten years.

So, it could be done...what is lacking is the political will to do it.
 
The people saying that the 355 ship Navy has to take until 2050 are blowing smoke and do not know what they are talking about.
Jeff did you perhaps miss

“It’s going to take a long time and it’s going to take a lot of money,” said Thomas Dee, acting Under Secretary of the Navy.
“We can be on the mark by mid-century.”

quote inside the USNI News linked Yesterday at 1:50 PM
?


Politically, they may force it to take that long...but not because it has to. It would because that is what they want...or probably more accurately, they have no ntention of building it that large ever.

But the US has the capability and the money, if it wanted to, to get to the 355 number in five to 10 years max if it really wanted to.

The shipywards could turn them out if we would fund them and really gear up to do so.

They could finish that frigate design and then have two yards gear up to put two of them out a years if they wanted.

They could put one Burke out per year at two places if they wanted to. They can do the same with the SSNs as well.

If they geared up in those next five years to do that, then five years of that temp would add 20 FFGs, another 10 DDGs, and then 10 more SSNs in that second set of five years.

If you add those 40 ships to what they would also build during the first five years, you end up with an additional 60+ ships added to the fleet in the next ten years...and that does not even include the planned two new LHAs, two new Ccariers, and 2-3 new LSX vessels also planned over the next ten years.

So, it could be done...what is lacking is the political will to do it.
if such a possibility had been real, they would have had to start hiring additional crews already, while in reality (dated February 5)
"Navy officials are asking roughly 6,000 first-term sailors to extend their enlistments at sea in an effort to stave off a looming manpower shortage that will begin to hit the fleet this year."
Sea duty shortages: Why the Navy is offering rare extensions for thousands of first-term sailors
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
The people saying that the 355 ship Navy has to take until 2050 are blowing smoke and do not know what they are talking about.

Politically, they may force it to take that long...but not because it has to. It would because that is what they want...or probably more accurately, they have no ntention of building it that large ever.

But the US has the capability and the money, if it wanted to, to get to the 355 number in five to 10 years max if it really wanted to.

The shipywards could turn them out if we would fund them and really gear up to do so.

They could finish that frigate design and then have two yards gear up to put two of them out a years if they wanted.

They could put one Burke out per year at two places if they wanted to. They can do the same with the SSNs as well.

If they geared up in those next five years to do that, then five years of that temp would add 20 FFGs, another 10 DDGs, and then 10 more SSNs in that second set of five years.

If you add those 40 ships to what they would also build during the first five years, you end up with an additional 60+ ships added to the fleet in the next ten years...and that does not even include the planned two new LHAs, two new Ccariers, and 2-3 new LSX vessels also planned over the next ten years.

So, it could be done...what is lacking is the political will to do it.

This guy is a big pessimistic :rolleyes: if the need is there as you i am quite sure USN can get the number or close sufficient according some évolutions ...

IIRC the Fleet is to 280 ships yet more than a year 273 ships with MSC Repl Ships, Combat Logistic Force

Only for new sure or almost
+ 45 minimum with 52 LCS/FFG possible + 54, possible some LCS especialy Independence in aluminium... retired after about 20 years ?
So 325 - 334 ships ... see below

After with more big budget :
a 3th Burke, 3 Virginia by year, a CVN, 4 AA Ships ( Fleet 34 to 38 as want USN/USMC), 2 Supply
but Burke retired normaly start in 2026 + Ticos so saying + 0.5 MSC by year

So close of 355...

MSC + 11

- Burke next year 3 Burke finaly the Jonhson comm. in march others years planned 2 with more money 3
- Zumwalt 2 other 2018 and 2020
So for end 2019 + 6 ships 87 + 6 : 93 MSC
- But Ticonderoga 11 retired start in 2020 about 1.5/year buth with new i have mentionned
+ 0.5 MSC by year so saying + 5 for 10 years

CVN a 12th possible

LCS/FFG sure at less 40 normaly 52, 9 in service so + 31 - 40
Sure 29 for 2022 - 23
But replace Minesweepers 11 and also MH-53E
So + 20 - 29

Amphibious ships, + 3

+1 America no Wasp retired
+ 2 SA the 11 and 12nd

SSNs
No changes 2 Virginia by year replace 2 LA with more big budget 3 by year so + 1
The LA do fine job remains 36 - 37 years in service ! impossible more long time but actualy
USN win in power with LA Fl I replaced less silencious and have 26 weapons vs 38 for Virginia a difference !

Repl Ships
Same number Kaiser replaced one by one

And easy and for me indispensable ships big but mainly fast the 2 Supply must be back in service

I see also Tico with MK-26 seems difficult... and Perry with Mk-13 retired not really interesting in more old

Also the Fleet now i precise for Jonhson i have mentionned possible the 2nd Virginia also for march finaly surprising do good trials but don't change number only staggered + 1 in service next year
And at less a LCS the 10th so only 3 this year planned 4/year butt he shipyards are full of new
The SA also staggered

USN 2017.jpg
 
Last edited:

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Sikorsky conducts Combat Rescue Helicopter (CRH) training systems critical design review

Lockheed Martin announced the successful conduct of the Combat Rescue Helicopter (CRH) Program Training Systems Critical Design Review (CDR). This event prepares the CRH program to proceed to assembly, test, and evaluation of the HH-60W helicopter’s training systems.

This marks an important step in developing maintenance and aircrew training devices, courseware products and the training required to support the initial CRH maintenance and aircrew cadre. This progress is critical to the smooth entry of the HH-60W aircraft into the U.S. Air Force (USAF) fleet.

The joint Sikorsky and Air Force teams met over four days in September with key program participants from government and industry for an in-depth review.

Those attending included leaders from the USAF and key suppliers who took part in technical presentations. Operational combat rescue community representatives from USAF Air Education and Training Command and Air Combat Command also played an important role in the CDR.

The USAF program of record calls for 112 helicopters to replace the USAF’s aging HH-60G Pave Hawk helicopters, which perform critical combat search and rescue operations as well as personnel recovery for all U.S. military services.

“I am really excited about achieving yet another program milestone in support of a six-month accelerated schedule. This capability is badly needed by the USAF rescue warriors that have continually engaged in combat operations since 1991. Sikorsky is absolutely committed to them and the accelerated schedule,” said Tim Healy, Sikorsky CRH program director. “The aircraft production is well under way, and with our training system design well understood by all parties, we can now begin assembly of the training devices and courseware as well.”

The $1.5 billion Engineering Manufacturing & Development (EMD) contract includes development and integration of the next generation combat rescue helicopter and mission systems. This includes delivery of nine HH-60W helicopters as well as six aircrew and maintenance training devices and instructional courseware designed specifically for the HH-60W aircraft. The training devices run the spectrum from full motion simulators, full aircraft maintenance trainers, and discrete “part task training devices” for aircraft systems such as avionics, rescue hoist and landing gear.

The flight simulators will conform to the highest FAA standards and include the capability to link with other simulators on the Combat Air Forces Distributed Mission Operations network. The flight simulators will be used to train the full aircrew allowing pilots and special mission aviators to train together. Avionics desk-top trainers will have an array of touch screens mimicking the “glass cockpit” and include the ability to learn aircraft systems troubleshooting while in a classroom or squadron environment.

The part task training devices are designed to train maintenance personnel and to provide hands-on training in operations, servicing, inspection, and component removal and installation.

The instructional courseware will provide interactive instruction and computer-based training for HH-60W maintainers and operators.

“This is an important step forward for the CRH program. The CRH team is working hard to provide our warfighters the capability they require to continue to conduct the critical personnel recovery mission far into the future. Having highly capable training devices and courseware that mirror aircraft capability absolutely underpins our ability to perform rescue operations,” said Dave Schairbaum, USAF CRH program manager. “This CRH training system will provide well-trained aircrew and aircraft maintainers to conduct this demanding mission.”

First flight of the HH-60W aircraft is expected in late 2018. Training devices and courseware are expected to be ready for training in early 2020.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Top