US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Jura said:

Jun 5, 2017now USS America ARG, 15th MEU Leaders Talk Ship’s First Operational Deployment

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

The recently completed first deployment of the new-class amphibious assault ship USS America required adjustments to adapt to the ship’s aviation-centric configuration, but the embarked Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) was able to accomplish its missions.

USS America (LHA 6), the lead ship of a new class, differs from previous LHAs by not having a well deck from which landing craft and amphibious assault vehicles could be launched. Instead, it has additional space devoted to aviation capabilities. America and forthcoming sister ship Tripoli will be the only two ships to lack a well deck. Subsequent LHAs will have them.

America and two other amphibious ships — the amphibious platform dock ship USS San Diego and dock landing ship USS Pearl Harbor — deployed as an amphibious ready group (ARG) on July 7 to the Western Pacific, Persian Gulf, Arabian Sea and Mediterranean Sea, returning home on Feb. 2. Embarked was the 15th MEU, its 2,500 Marines and Sailors commanded by Col. Joseph R. Clearfield, and Amphibious Squadron Three, led by Capt. Rome Ruiz, who was the commander of the America ARG. Both commanders briefed an audience on the deployment at the Potomac Institute March 13.

America embarked three more aircraft than would be embarked in an older LHA, including one UH-1Y Venom and one CH-53E Super Stallion helicopter, and one AV-8B Harrier attack aircraft. The ship has reduced medical facilities, no surface connectors, increased aviation fuel capacity, expanded hangar space and limited organic targeting capability.

Ruiz described America as “designed to be a command-and-control ship.”

Without a well deck, the ARG embarked only four utility landing craft instead of six and had to sling-load more cargo on helicopters and MV-22B Osprey tiltrotor aircraft than it would have otherwise. The number of the MEU’s vehicles embarked in the ARG’s three ships had to be reduced as well. To compensate, the 15th MEU left some vehicles at home base but in a “prepare to deploy” status in case a need for them emerged. Additionally, the Marines were able to draw on vehicles and other equipment available in Kuwait to operate in Iraq.

“We could do everything,” Clearfield said. “We just did it a little bit differently.”

During its operations in the U.S. Central Command area of operations, the America AG/MEU conducted 313 strikes against ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria) and killed 514 enemy fighters, including 67 in strikes by AV-8B Harrier IIs. The MV-22Bs flew 833.2 hours of assault support and 226.8 hours of casualty evacuation. The CH-53Es flew 459 hours of assault support.

Clearfield said 2,100 personnel of his force of 2,500 operated ashore at some point in the deployment.

The 15th MEU included a detachment of Marine UAV Squadron One, equipped with RQ-21A Blackjack unmanned aerial vehicles.

The RQ-21A “did everything it was advertised to do,” Clearfield said.

Ruiz said there is a lot of potential for adding MH-0R helicopters to the MH-60S helicopters already assigned to ARGs. He also said there was “enormous opportunity” for a littoral combat ship as a scout or a counter-scout for an ARG.

Click to expand...

Jura said:

I now skimmed over

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The catch, of course, is that the Army's tried to field all these things before -- and failed. Why would things go any better this time around? Brig. Gen. Christopher Donahue has an answer for that.
it's

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

That includes new weapons. The

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

already replaced some of their M249 Squad Automatic Weapons (SAW) with the much lighter M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR), going from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and improving accuracy, albeit at the price of halving the rate of fire.

Click to expand...

Currently, the Marines are replacing all their M16 rifles and M4 carbines with M27.

Click to expand...

The Army is set to follow suit, albeit not necessarily with the same weapon. The service’s Next Generation Squad Weapon, originally meant to replace the M249 alone, will now also evolve into a replacement for the M4 and M16.

Click to expand...

That second-stage weapon, the carbine replacement, will have to be significantly lighter than the M249 SAW replacement, Donahue said. (He consistently said “carbine” today, not “rifle,” which probably rules out the Marines’ M27 as too heavy). The technology to get all the desired capabilities in a lighter package is “not right there yet,” he said.

Click to expand...

But the Army’s not looking at a long development program.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

recently promised the Squad Automatic Weapon replacement by 2023. As for the carbine, Donahue said, “you’ll see it a

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

after the replacement of the SAW.”

Click to expand...

Jura said:

Thursday at 3:47 PM

... and Air Force solidifies options for B-52 engine replacement

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

The US Air Force is likely to issue a request for proposal for its Boeing B-52H Stratofortress bomber engine replacement programme close to the first quarter of 2019, according to an Air Force document released on 13 March.

The contract for re-engining the USAF’s 76 Boeing B-52H bombers would likely be granted some four to six months after final proposals are submitted, according to the document. The department is looking to acquire at least 608 new, commercially available turbofan engines to replace the eight Pratt & Whitney TF33s each bomber carries.

The USAF decided last June that the TF33, a jet engine first produced 60 years ago, is not sustainable beyond 2030, due to age, parts obsolescence and a shrinking supplier base. Pratt & Whitney, Rolls-Royce and GE Aviation are possible bidders for the engine replacement programme.

The effort to put new engines on the B-52H bomber, and thus extend its lifespan, comes as a result of the USAF’s plan to rely on the bomber for decades to come. The USAF plans to trim its bomber fleet by 2040 down to the B-52H and the forthcoming Northrop Grumman B-21 stealth bomber. The Northrop Grumman B-2 and the Rockwell B-1 are scheduled for retirement.

Click to expand...

Jura said:

Wednesday at 9:04 PM
related:
USS America ARG/MEU: Operations Adjust to Aviation-Centric Amphib

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Jeff Head said:

Her she is qualifying with a deck full of F-35Bs.

This is what her true role as an "aircraft centric" LHA will be. Acutally more of a CVH.

View attachment 45826

Click to expand...

Air Force Brat said:

Hi Jeff, glad to see you having a good day brother, and this is what we mean when we say "all decked out!"

Click to expand...

Jura said:

I guess people who follow US Military know an amphibious assault ship without a well deck is a controversial concept LOL

Click to expand...

Jeff Head said:

Well in the assault role...it becomes an air assault ship...meant to be able to assault beaches...or assist assault beaches with many hellos and Osprey.

So I would expect on LHD, on LHA, on LSD, and one LPD to provide an augmented assault on any beach...but with much better (between the LHA and the LHD) close air support and air superiority from three squadrons for F-35Bs...probably about 18 in all in that role..

Also, it is meant to be able to augment and act as a Escort carrier with 20+ F-35Bs at any time as well.

Either helping support and perhaps provide air cover over a CSG while the large carrier devotes its whole air wing against attacking the enemy...or providing air support(and with the right aircraft and helos) ASW support for any task force at all.

It actually provides the US Navy and Marines with a LOT more options.

They will have at least two of them (although I would like to see four) and have equal numbers working off of each coast...Pacific and Atlantic.

The other new America class ships will have the well deck...and fill out the full amphibious capability nicely.

I am excited as well about using the San Antonio hull for the new LSD,,, replacing the Whidbey Island and such. Great move that.

Click to expand...

Jura said:

inside
New Russia-Focused Nuclear Review Calls for More Sub, Ship-Launched Missiles

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

:
"Officials said the new submarine-launched ballistic missiles could be procured relatively quickly by using existing warheads and turning them into low-yield weapons, which would also help keep costs down. For the Navy, this would mean they could “just take that warhead and make sure they can qualify” on a submarine Robert Soofer, deputy assistant secretary of defense for nuclear and missile defense policy, told reporters."

wow

Click to expand...

The Pentagon expects to spend $48.5 million over the next five years developing a

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

for submarine-launched ballistic missiles.

That figure was included in written submissions to Congress, obtained by the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and shared with Defense News ahead of upcoming hearings about the defense budget. It represents only the defense department’s expected expenditure for the new warhead, and does not include funding from the Department of Energy.

Per the testimony, there is $22.6 million set aside to help develop the warheads in fiscal 2019 and $48.5 million spread over the life of the Future Years Defense Program, or FYDP, a series of projected numbers that cover through FY23.

That includes $19.6 million in FY20, $3.2 million in FY21, $1.5 million in FY22 and $1.6 million in FY23. Those numbers are just projections and could change depending on need or changes in technical difficulty — notable, as the National Nuclear Security Administration has yet to

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and is still working out the technical requirements.

But the fact the money is largely up-front is in line with what has been said publicly by government officials about the timeline for the W76-1, the existing SLBM warhead design currently going through a life extension program.

That extension production line is scheduled to shut down in FY19, but NNSA director

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

told senators at a March 14 hearing that the government is sorting through right now whether they would need to extend that production run to accommodate the lower-yield options.

The lower-yield option “shouldn’t have a significant” impact on the current W76-1 production, Gordon-Hagerty said, adding that she did not expect any special testing or simulations would be required for the low-yield option as opposed to their more destructive cousins.

However, she also noted that there is currently no money in place from NNSA’s budget to work on the W76 variant, signaling that the $48.5 million DoD expects to spend will not be the final cost of the weapon design. NNSA handles development and production on the warhead itself, while DoD handles the delivery systems.

Easy modification?

The

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

raised eyebrows with its call for a low-yield warhead for the submarine-launched ballistic missiles. The plan involves a “near-term” solution in which the NNSA would modify a small number of existing W76 SLBM warheads to turn them into low-yield weapons. Just how many warheads would be modified is classified.

The agency is already in the process of doing a life extension on the W76 warheads for those weapons, with Robert Soofer, deputy assistant secretary of defense for nuclear and missile defense policy, telling reporters ahead of the NPR’s publication that the plan is to set aside a few of those warheads and make them less powerful, instead of developing a brand-new system.

“All this would require us to reserve the last X number, tens of warheads, and instead of doing a full [life extension], do the primary only. It doesn’t require additional capacity,” Soofer said of developing the capability. On the Navy side, the service would “just take that warhead and make sure they can qualify” an SLBM on a sub.

The Pentagon has argued that developing low-yield nuclear weapons is needed to counter threats from China and

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, which has invested significantly in its own low-yield weapons in what U.S. officials believe is part of its

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. Under that concept, Russia would be willing to use a small nuclear weapon, assuming NATO allies — when faced with using a strategic nuclear weapon or not responding at all — will back down in a conflict.

However,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, such as Stephen Young, a senior analyst with the Union of Concerned Scientists, counter that a low-yield weapon will be destabilizing, particularly given the rhetoric from the Trump administration over nuclear weapons.

“Providing any president with new, more usable nuclear capabilities deserves serious contemplation at any time. The fact that it is this president, with his bellicose rhetoric and threats of ‘fire and fury,’ make it even more important,” Young said. “This is not something that should be rushed through in a little over a year, even if such speedy action is nominally possible.”

Click to expand...

The U.S. Army will demonstrate

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

technology from a precision-strike missile to hypersonics and ramjet capabilities within the next couple of years, according to the service’s LRPF modernization team lead.

The LRPF

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

— or CFT — was recently tasked to come up with ways to bring LRPF capability online as fast as possible. LRPF has been identified as the Army’s top modernization priority among six. Each priority was assigned a CFT to tackle modernization plans going forward and will be housed within the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

expected to

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

“There is a real need to modernize our surface-to-surface fires at echelon to be able to guarantee a clear overmatch against any potential adversary both on the modern and future battlefield,” Brig. Gen. Stephen Maranian, the LRPF team lead, told Defense News in a March 19 interview. “To that effort, we are looking at how do we increase our range, how do we increase our lethality and how do we increase our volume of fires, not just in the missile area, but at echelon.”

The CFT has three specifically outlined efforts to address the modernization needs for LRPF:

Long-range in the close fight

The Army is looking at how it will evolve its current

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

— into extended-range cannon artillery, Maranian said.

The CFT is looking at “how do we take that chassis that is hopefully going to be at full-rate production in the next couple of months and get ourselves to a better propellant, a better projectile and a longer barrel — extending from a 39-caliber to a 58-caliber — to be able to not only get on the current battlefield to the 70 kilometer range, but also provide the basis from which either a hypervelocity or a ramjet technology round could get us to very long ranges with cannon artillery,” he said.

The plan is to spiral in capabilities: “We are not going to wait and try to create the next Crusader Howitzer,” Maranian said.

Instead, the Army will build capability for extended-range cannon artillery in a “very methodical manner that accelerates those things that are ready for acceleration,” he added.

“First out of the barrel, pun intended,” Maranian said, “is going to be the ... XM1113. 1113 is the new rocket-assisted projectile.”

That projectile could end up in soldiers’ hands in approximately two to two-and-half years, according to Maranian. It is being demonstrated right now through experiments at Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona, which took place last month and is continuing into March.

The Army expects the projectile to reach out to 40 kilometers when fired from the current cannon tube, delivering a 33 percent increase in range capability from previous rockets, according to Maranian.

Then the service will extend the cannon tube from a 39-caliber to a 58-caliber, which will provide a number of benefits, Maranian said, including a new breach and new mounts within the turret of the cannon, and will provide “the ability to have a much greater explosive chain to be able to achieve the velocity out of the tube that hypersonics would require.”

Lastly, the Army will work on an autoloader, which will increase the cannon’s volume of fire. “If we can get six to 10 rounds out of a tube for a minute, sustained, as opposed to four rounds in the first minute and one sustained after that with a human crew loading all the ammunition, we are going to dramatically increase our effects on target to be able to have more impact at the same time,” he said.

The program formerly known as LRPF

The Army’s CFT will also assist the program of record already underway to replace the Army Tactical Missile System, or ATACMS, with a longer-range missile.

And to avoid confusion with the large amount of additional advanced technology efforts going on in the realm of LRPF, the Army has renamed the LRPF program to replace ATACMS to the Precision Strike Missile program, according to Maranian.

When the Army chief of staff is talking about LRPF, for instance, he’s referring to “really strategic ranges,” not the ATACMS replacement, he explained.

The ATACMS program germinated in 2007, and the Army has been doing service life extension to keep the weapon in the fight.

The service awarded contracts in the spring of 2017 to Raytheon and Lockheed Martin for a three-year period of performance to design and build missile prototypes in the technology-maturation and risk-reduction phase.

And while industry was hoping to find ways to speed up the program from a fielding timeline of 2027, a year ago, the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, according to fiscal 2018 budget documents.

But the Army has found a way to dramatically accelerate the program.

“There has been, within the program manager, a plan to accelerate from 2027 to an initial capability in the force by late 2022, early 2023 time frame,” Maranian said.

The Army plans to demonstrate Raytheon’s and Lockheed’s prototypes in 2019, he said.

The CFT is looking at how the Army might spiral in future capability, currently being developed within science and technology portfolios, once the initial Precision Strike Missile is built, Maranian added.

“The types of technologies we are looking at are those that can hone in on signals to be able to attack [the enemy’s] integrated air defense assets, the ability to hit moved or moving targets across multiple domains, so both land and maritime targets that are moving, and the ability to deliver loitering [intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance] to very deep ranges on the battlefield out to 500 kilometers,” Maranian detailed.

The Army also plans to use its science and technology efforts — developed to move the Precision Strike Missile forward — for other efforts.

“I’m also interested in how are we cutting technology into our future rockets that are currently in the 85-kilometer range and getting that almost doubled,” Maranian said.

Getting to strategic ranges

The third and final line of effort for the LRPF CFT is one that will bring capability of long-range strike to hit targets at “strategic ranges,” according to Maranian.

The one-star defined that as giving either cannons or trajectory missiles that are compliant with the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty the ability to have both offensive and defensive impact in any number of different areas of the world “where we could find ourselves facing an adversary who has very sophisticated integrated air defense, where we need to be able to break windows of opportunity into that IAD system by delivering long-range fires and enabling joint fires to exploit that window,” he said.

On the defensive side, that could give the Army the ability to position a capability on an island in the Pacific, for instance, creating “an anti-access, area-denial capability all of our own to make potential adversaries think twice and be deterred before making a decision of whether cost is worth the benefit of being provocative,” Maranian said.

Among the technologies being examined to achieve such capability are hypersonics.

“Hypersonic technology is absolutely something that we need to look at,” he said. But he added that there are a number things that can be done to give certain projectiles hypersonic-like capabilities.

“Hypersonics is really a speed band of how fast we are getting that projectile moving,” Maranian said.

Another way to get after fast speeds and longer ranges is through ramjet technology. When a projectile leaves the cannon and is flying through the air, the air is fed into the projectile itself and ignites an internal propellant, which causes further acceleration, according to Maranian.

The Pentagon’s Strategic Capabilities Office, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and Space and Missile Defense Command, outside of the Army, are looking at a number of classified programs, he said.

The SCO is particularly looking at the 58-caliber cannon tube because it is a base requirement for hypersonics.

The CFT is also taking a look at rail gun technology as well as directed energy, Maranian noted.

The Army sees the possibility of hypersonics and ramjet projectiles being demonstrated in the next couple of years “for certain,” he said, adding that demonstrations for both could potentially happen in 2019.

Click to expand...