Military News & Discussion

Yeah, Humvee's May Get Definetly Replaced By:
6X6 RG-33
6X6 MaxxPro
6X6 Caiman
6X6 Cougar
6X6 Buffalo

Personally I Like The Humvees A Lot More , I Won't Accept This! I Lost My F-117, I Won't Approve The Loss Of The Humvee

I want a seawater-moved humvee (it would be the perfect solution to lower the seawater level ).

Britain Moves Forward on Harrier Support Agreements:

“Future Contracting for Availability,” involves the removal of traditional “parts and hours” maintenance contracts in favor of fixed-price long-term support for vehicles throughout their service lives, plus performance awards based on number of vehicles available. It has become a fixture in the British defense industry, and a pillar of British procurement policy going forward. As our in-depth coverage of the ATTAC Tornado support contract shows, however, it isn’t a “big bang” process. Smaller contracts are signed for sub-components, trust and knowledge are built up, and the contracts become more comprehensive over time.

BAE Systems has won a number of these contracts, and back in January 2006, DID reported that they were on their way to adding Britain’s vertical/short takeoff and landing Harrier GR7/GR9A fleet to the list. In the UK, Harriers are based at RAF Cottesmore in Rutland and RAF Wittering in Cambridgeshire, as well as operating as required from Royal Navy aircraft carriers. Some Harrier GR9A aircraft with uprated engines also operate from Kandahar airfield, Afghanistan.

The UK MoD continues to expand these contracts, including the latest through-life engine contract. In the background, however, a simmering dispute could disband the British Harrier fleet, and end these contracts, within the next 5 years…

Feb 4/09: Britain’s Telegraph reports that Chief of the Air Staff, Sir Glenn Torpy has suggested that the UK Ministry of Defence could save GBP 1 billion in support costs if the Harrier was phased out of service within the next 5 years, closing Joint Force Harrier, removing fighters from Britain’s remaining aircraft carriers, and possibly retiring the carriers themselves.

The proposal would also end the Royal Navy Fleet Air Arm’s career with fixed-wing aircraft. When the new carriers enter service, RAF pilots would fly their F-35Bs.

The UK MoD’s Director of Development, Concepts and Doctrine, Maj. Gen. Paul Newton, has been selected to resolve the dispute. As things currently stand, it seems very possible that depending on his decision, a resignation will follow: either Chief of the Air Staff Sir Glenn Torpy, or of First Sea Lord Sir Jonathon Band.

Jan 28/09: The UK MoD signs a new GBP 198 million support contract with Rolls-Royce to support the Harrier fleet’s Pegasus engines over the next 10 years, which means for the expected remaining life of the Harrier fleet. Rolls-Royce Defence Aerospace will be managing the new contract from its site at Bristol, with some work being carried out at RAF Wittering and the main repair and overhaul being carried out at the Rolls-Royce site at Ansty in Leicestershire.

Defence Equipment and Support Harrier Project Team Leader, Group Captain Andy Ebdon:

“Awarding this contract to Rolls-Royce for complete through-life support of Pegasus is a very significant achievement. It not only assures affordable engine availability, but also incentivises both industry and the MOD to actively work together to improve efficiency. The end effect is better value for money and improved support performance for the front line.”

Rolls Royce already operates performance-based maintenance contracts for the RAF’s RB199 Tornado engines and EJ2000 Eurofighter engines.

June 24/08: The UK’s Harrier Integrated Project Team (IPT) awards QinetiQ a contract worth almost GBP 24 million over the next 10-years by for Harrier through-life support, through to the Harrier II’s planned Out-of-Service Date in 2018.

Under this contract QinetiQ will provide Independent Technical Services. Three key capability delivery and support areas are included: Independent testing, evaluation and flight test services, capability assurance and technical capability support. QinetiQ release.

March 11/08: Parliament’s “Tenth Report of Session 2007-08, Defence Equipment 2008, HC 295” states that the Royal Navy no longer believes that they will have a carrier’s worth of 36 fully equipped and operational F-35Bs in 2014, when the first 65,000t CVF Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft carrier is expected to be ready.

In response, it says that the UK MoD plans to keep the Harrier GR9 in service until around 2018, 2 years after the second ship of class HMS Prince of Wales is expected to enter service.

Gene Taylor sets out Navy shipbuilding plan

Feb 5, 2009

Rep. Gene Taylor (D-MS), Chairman of the Seapower and Expeditionary Forces Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee released the following statement on the future of Navy shipbuilding.

"For far too many years I have watched as the size of the Navy fleet has decreased. Each year the Navy changes its plan on how many ships will be built and delays the procurement of ships to future years. The Bush administration's failed strategy of trying to build 'transformational' ships, such as the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) and the DDG 1000 destroyer, has crippled the Navy shipbuilding budget and forced years of delays in providing needed capability to the Fleet.

"In particular, the failure of the LCS program to deliver on the promise of an affordable, capable, and reconfigurable warship only puts the exclamation point on a Bush administration's strategy that was neither well envisioned nor properly executed. As for the DDG 1000, we will not know the true cost of that program for a number of years but significant cost growth on that vessel will require diverting funding from other new construction projects to pay the over-run.

"Lacking the expectation of increased funding available for ship procurement, it is more important than ever to set the Navy on an affordable strategy for ship procurement. Continuing resistance from outgoing Bush administration officials to the common sense strategy of restarting the DDG 51 destroyer class is not helpful to the Navy and the nation. The shipbuilding plan needs less meddling, not more. In my opinion there is absolutely no value in spending even more precious shipbuilding funds to re-design the DDG 1000 as a ballistic missile capable platform when the affordable vessel already exists in the DDG 51 destroyer.

"I hope that the new officials within the Obama administration will reach out to the Congress for ideas and suggestions on shipbuilding programs before creating even more imbalance and uncertainty in the shipbuilding master plan. To achieve an affordable, stable shipbuilding plan I recommend the following to the new administration:

* Restructure the LCS program with common combat and propulsion systems between the two variants of ships. Divorce from the use of the defense firms as Lead Systems Integrators and bid a fixed price contract directly on a "build to print" basis with any shipyard that possesses the industrial capability to build the vessels.

* Truncate the DDG 1000 program. The ship is unaffordable.

* Restart the DDG 51 program. Not only is it the finest destroyer in the world but it possesses the capability for strategic missile defense, area air defense, and highly capable anti-submarine defense. Build these ships in quantity. If it improves efficiency to computerize the ship's design into a 3-D modern ship design tool, then Navy should request that non-recurring engineering funding.

* Build combatant amphibious assault vessels, vice the non-combatant versions of the proposed Maritime Pre-Positioning Force (Future) or MPF(F). Use the basic LPD or LHD hull form for any other future large ship, including the next generation cruiser, instead of designing a new hull.

* Build a frigate on the common hull of the Coast Guard National Security Cutter. This is an affordable ship (without Navy making wholesale changes in the design) which is exactly the type of vessel necessary for 80% of the Navy's core missions, including anti-piracy and homeland defense.

"I look forward to working with the administration and the Department of the Navy in discussing these issues and implementing the ones that provide the best capability for the Navy. In my opinion, the worst thing that the Department can do is continue the policy of the previous administration and not seek any guidance from the Congress prior to submitting shipbuilding plans that were unacceptable in cost and quantity."

Source - Marine Log
http://www.marinelog.com/DOCS/NEWSMMIX/2009feb00051.html

I'm gonna confess that between the Arleigh Burke and Zumwalt Classes we had some serious thinking to do .

The Zumwalt was chosen but the Arleigh Burke would be a perfect counterpart in TAOW's universe as well (the Arleigh Burke is a top of the line destroyer in every sense).

US Military Commander Issues Warning to North Korea

By VOA News
04 February 2009

The top U.S. military commander in South Korea is urging North Korea to lower tensions on the divided peninsula, in the wake of reports that Pyongyang is preparing to test a long-range ballistic missile.

General Walter Sharp says the United States and South Korea are keeping a close eye on the communist regime, and are prepared for what he called "any contingency."

Media reports in South Korea say intelligence officials in both nations have recently observed a train carrying what is believed to be Taepodong-Two missile.

Sharp is calling on North Korea to stop its recent "provocations," such as ending all previous military and political accords with Seoul.

Observers believe Pyongyang is raising tensions on the peninsula to attract the attention of new U.S. President Barack Obama.

A U.S. State Department spokesman told reporters in Washington Tuesday that any North Korean ballistic missile test would be a provocation.

North Korea successfully tested a Taepodong-One missile in over Japan in 1998. A test of its Taepodong-Two missile failed in 2006.

Washington and Seoul are engaged in six-nation negotiations along with Russia, China and Japan, as well as North Korea aimed at ending North Korea's nuclear programs. The talks are in a stalemate over ways to verify North Korea's declared nuclear activities.

Relations between North and South Korea have worsened since conservative President Lee Myung-bak took office last year, vowing to take a harder stance against the North over the nuclear disarmament issue.

Some information for this report was provided by AFP and Bloomberg.

Source - Global Security:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/dprk/2009/dprk-090204-voa01.htm

Btw By 2010 , If Things Go Smoothly , Iran May Get A Satellite ...

Just like the man said:
"Never a Dull Moment."

Anymore I think ballistic missles are pretty much obsolete, atleast on the N. American continent anyways. I don't know about everybody else though. They could shoot 10 a day for the next year and probably wouldn't get one in.

Intercepting a ballistic missile is a true case of a real life "randomizing" situation lol.

It all depends on many factors (early missile launch detection, long range defense and, as a last resort measure, short range anti ballistic defense, etc.). Factors like the Anti Ballistic Missile (ABM) accuracy are also taken into account and there's always a chance it'll hit or miss the adversary ballistic missile.

Many nations like the US are urged to intercept possible incoming missiles as soon as possible. You see, the earlier an incoming missile is engaged, the better the probability to launch more countermeasures (like extra ABM's in case the first ones misses).

Primary nuclear weapons would most likely use MIRVs (Multiple Independently Targetable Reentry Vehicles) as primary "delivery vehicles" (a single strike from one of those can basically cripple most nations), scary stuff.

Basically a MIRV is a bunch of warheads included on a single ICBM.
While a single warhead missile can only attack a single target at once, a MIRV can basically annihilate a whole nation with several nuclear warheads which are distributed among the specific targets (warheads can go be up to a dozen, including nuclear, biological, chemical, etc.). When a MIRV is almost on it's last "phase", basically when it is close to release the warheads, the probability of interception dramatically decreases and most standard anti missile defenses couldn't face such a threat.

Check this wikipedia image and you can better understand how a MIRV works.

Minuteman III MIRV launch sequence:
- 1. The missile launches out of its silo by firing its first stage boost motor (A).
- 2. About 60 seconds after launch, the 1st stage drops off and the second stage motor (B) ignites. The missile shroud is ejected.
- 3. About 120 seconds after launch, the third stage motor (C) ignites and separates from the 2nd stage.
- 4. About 180 seconds after launch, third stage thrust terminates and the Post-Boost Vehicle (D) separates from the rocket.
- 5. The Post-Boost Vehicle maneuvers itself and prepares for re-entry vehicle (RV) deployment.
- 6. While the Post-Boost Vehicle backs away, decoys and chaff are deployed (unlike the figure suggests this may be during ascent).
- 7. The RVs and chaff re-enter the atmosphere at high speeds and are armed in flight.
- 8. The nuclear warheads detonate, either as air bursts or ground bursts.

It's all a matter of probability


Speaking if MIRV's, in a response to the intended American missile shield (in Poland), the Russians recently publicly announced the development of the RS-24 MIRV which was developed to be launched from Topol M mobile launchers. Such MIRV's were announced to be the new standard Topol M missile and will be the "standard issue" nuclear weapon for Russian Forces in the next decades (front line ICBM's I mean).

Russian state to order naval fighters to support MiG company:

MOSCOW, February 11 (RIA Novosti) - The Russian government will order a number of MiG-29 KUB Fulcrum-D carrier-based fighters as part of the state support for the ailing MiG aircraft maker, a deputy prime minister said on Wednesday.

"The state will support in every possible way, including financially, this one of Russia's largest companies. A draft weapons procurement program envisions the purchase of MiG-29 KUB naval fighters for deployment on future aircraft carriers," Sergei Ivanov told a meeting of aircraft industry officials in Moscow.

The MiG corporation sustained losses of some 11 billion rubles in 2008, with its debt running at 44.8 billion rubles ($1.25 billion).

Apart from the ongoing financial crisis, the MiG corporation has been hit by Algeria's decision to tear up a $1.28 billion contract to buy 34 MiG-29s, signed in 2006, over the airplanes' "inferior quality." The 15 planes delivered were sent back to Russia.

Ivanov said that Russia's Defense Ministry would pay 25 billion rubles ($690 million) for 24 MiG fighters produced under the Algerian contract. ...'

Full story at the Russian News and Information Agency, Novosti:
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20090211/120095365.html

Small Diameter Bomb - GBU-39

Posted by Andrew On February - 13 - 2009

'The GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb - the future of ultra-surgical air strikes.

Since the days of the first Gulf War, when it became clear to the world that precision air strikes would be the “go to” option for the opening rounds of nearly any theater scale operations, the technology of precision guided munitions has increased rapidly. We have witnessed bombs being guided into their targets by lasers, GPS, and even a human watching through a camera on the nose of the weapon. Once the concept of precision guidance was no longer a novelty, the virtuous auspices of limiting collateral damage and economic efficiency have led military planners and weapons designers to push the envelope of precision weapon technology even further.

During the Desert Storm era, the smallest precision bombs available packed 500 lb high-explosive warheads, and the 500 pounder was typically used on only the smallest of targets. They certainly were precise enough on surgical targeting, but the massive explosion and pressure wave still causes widespread devastation to buildings and well, people, that are in the vicinity of the blast. ...'

'... The GBU-39 is the first 250 lb class precision guided munition, and is not only intended to allow the pilot to strike more targets per sortie, but also to -you guessed it- limit collateral damage. A full rack of GBU-39s, 4 bombs total, can easily take the place of one 2000 lb GBU 109 “bunker buster” guided bomb on typical strike platforms such as the F-15C or F-22 Raptor. While the 2000 lb GBU-109 penetrator definitely retains its place as a select weapon of choice for large and hardended targets, the GBU-39 surpasses the GBU-39 in many different realms of performance. For starters, the GBU-39 also has significant stand-off capabilities. With it’s guidance wings, the bomb can coast into targets from far greater ranges than the GBU-109, from more than 40 nautical miles out. Likewise, the design of the warhead also allows the Small Diameter Bomb to achieve the same penetration capabilities of it’s much larger 2000 lb counterpart. All in all, the SMB GBU-39 allows for a great amount of flexibility for whomever is designing strike missions for an urban environment. ...'

Full story at Future Weapon Technology:
http://www.futurefirepower.com/small-diameter-bomb-gbu-39