War Developing and Upcoming Military Technology - Something new at least 3 times a week.

BONE_Buddy · Jul 29, 2020

Oh hey speaking of Japan:

https://defpost.com/u-s-air-force-b-1b-bomber-conducts-bilateral-training-with-jasdf-near-japan/

U.S. Air Force B-1B Bomber Conducts Bilateral Training with JASDF Near Japan

A U.S. Air Force B-1B Lancer bomber flew from Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, to the vicinity of Japan to conduct integration training with the Koku-Jieitai, or Japanese Air Self-Defense Force (JASDF), on July 27, 2020.

B-1s are deployed to Guam from Ellsworth AFB, S.D., to conduct long-range, long-duration Bomber Task Force missions, which give aircrews opportunities to train alongside Allies and Partners in a joint environment and build interoperability to bolster their ability to support a free and open Indo-Pacific.

“The value these sorties have on our team’s confidence and readiness is immense,” said Lt. Col. Lincoln Coleman, Commander of the 37th Expeditionary Bomb Squadron. “We know these missions make us more prepared, more agile and most importantly, more lethal.”

During the mission, Koku-Jietai F-2s integrated with the bomber in the vicinity of Japan to enhance bilateral interoperability and mutual readiness between the U.S. and Japan.

“To maintain and strengthen a free and open Indo-Pacific, we, Koku-Jieitai, continue to seek out every opportunity to enhance our capabilities and operations with our Allied teams,” said Koku-Jieitai Lt Col. SHIROTA Takamichi, 204th Fighter Squadron commander. “Regular bi-lateral exercises further enhance each teams’ capabilities and interoperability.”

In line with the National Defense Strategy’s objectives of strategic predictability and operational unpredictability, the U.S. Air Force transitioned its force employment model to enable strategic bombers to operate forward in the Indo-Pacific region from a broader array of overseas and continental U.S. locations with greater operational resilience.

The flexibility and dependability of the multi-mission B-1 help make it the backbone of America’s long-range bomber force. It can rapidly deliver massive quantities of precision and non-precision weapons against any adversary, anywhere in the world, at any time.

________________________
Just one of many such exercises.

last bit for now:

https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/07/28/army-still-mulling-different-paths-to-build-long-range-assault-helo-prototypes/

US Army sets timeline for long-range assault helo prototypes

{The Bell V-280 Valor completes final key performance parameters within the Army's Joint Multi-Role technology demonstration program, proving it can conduct high-level, low-speed agility maneuver. Bell is competing against Sikorsky to design and develop a future long-range assault aircraft for the U.S. Army. (Courtesy of Bell)}

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army is still considering two different paths to build prototypes for its future long-range assault aircraft following an industry day earlier this month, but is pushing toward a contract award in fiscal 2022, according to the service’s FLRAA program manager.

While the Army continues to sift through industry feedback to help it choose a route, the service remains on track to publish a draft request for proposals by the end of the year, followed by a finalized RFP in FY21, Col. David Phillips told reporters July 24.

The Army chose Bell and Lockheed Martin’s Sikorsky to enter into a competitive demonstration and risk reduction effort ahead of the start of the FLRAA program of record. The service is on a tight timeline to field a brand-new, long-range assault aircraft by 2030. The CDRR effort will consist of two phases that will last roughly one year each.

Bell and a Sikorsky-Boeing team respectively designed, built and flew technology demonstrator aircraft as part a Joint Multi-Role Technology Demonstration phase prior to entering the CDRR effort. The companies will deliver initial conceptual designs, an assessment of the feasibility of requirements and trade studies using model-based systems engineering.

“Due to the success of phase one (awarded on 16 March) the Army is looking at the scope of a second phase which would refine the digital designs from the system to subsystem level and further burn down risk as FLRAA enters into the [program of record,” Phillips said in a written statement to Defense News on July 27.

The Army provided two schedules to get through the design and prototyping phase in an RFI in May to gain industry feedback.

The first schedule lasts 52 months, putting the end of the prototyping period somewhere in the ballpark of early summer 2026. The schedule allows for a preliminary design review for just the air vehicle from the winning team — picked in the second quarter of FY22 — eight months after the contract award.

The team would then have another preliminary design review for the weapon systems 17 months past contract award, which roughly falls around August 2023.

The Army would hit the engineering and manufacturing development phase around October 2023, followed by a critical design review in early 2025. The first prototype would be delivered in the summer of 2025, with five more prototypes delivered through the summer of 2026.

The alternative schedule would allow for a preliminary design review for both the air vehicle and the weapon systems at the same time at roughly 10 months following a contract award. This approach aims to get to an engineering and manufacturing development decision around March 2023. A critical design review would follow at the start of 2024, with a first prototype delivery expected around February 2025. All six prototypes should be delivered to the Army by roughly March 2026.

The total time frame for the second option is 48 months post contract award.

{ Sikorsky's and Boeing's Defiant sits on a tarmac in West Palm Beach, Fla. (Jeff Martin/Staff) }

While the difference in schedules is just roughly four months, every week counts as the Army works to field new capabilities as fast as possible. Army leaders have often said that schedule is king when it comes to fielding the service’s top modernization priorities. FVL is the third-highest priority, preceded only by a Next-Generation Combat Vehicle and Long-Range Precision Fires.

The Army is driving toward entering a production and deployment phase in 2028 ahead of the first unit receiving the aircraft in 2030.

“We believe FLRAA’s design and requirements approach is inverting the defense procurement paradigm. Our approach gives the Army multiple opportunities to optimize requirements through digital engineering prior to entering the design, build, and test of the weapons system,” Phillips told Defense News. “Making informed decisions on requirements through design optimization will enable the Army to ensure FLRAA capabilities are affordable; meet [Multi-Domain Operations] requirements; and deliver on an aggressive schedule that does not sacrifice rigor for speed.”

Multi-Domain Operations is the Army’s war-fighting doctrine designed to operate and fight against anticipated future adversaries across land, sea, air and cyberspace.

Bell and Lockheed are also competing head-to-head to design and build the Army’s future attack reconnaissance aircraft, which will follow a nearly simultaneous schedule as the FLRAA competition.

Stoneheart · Jul 29, 2020

BONE_Buddy said:
Fight China? get ready to clear out building which are not build for the convenience of the invading force. Fight Russia? Same problem. Fight North Korea? The Urban combat problem remains.

why should you fight the chinese house to house? you use bigger guns or bomber to take out hard points...

BONE_Buddy said:
Yeah, motherfucker. That is why being able to rapidly disembark is a key capability. You know, so that the soldier inside the APC can get out and fight before the convoy is "made of dust." I guess that the enemy infantry carrying ATGMs and RPGs aren't vulnerable to small arms infantry fire either.

they will bring enough firepower that there is no time to disembark. we dont talk about sandnigger with old rpgs...

BONE_Buddy said:
I agree, Guns that aren't full sized battle rifles do so much better. But if you want to make your APC taller and wider, go ahead.

the design flaws of the bradley are well known---

Snekposter · Jul 29, 2020

You'd think a German would want to avoid bigger guns and bigger bombs being used in urban combat after Dresden went up like a California wildfire. You also have issues of accurately targeting said hardpoints, non-permissive airspace thanks to fighters or SAMs, and the fact that dug in infantry are still a royal bitch and a half to eliminate even with all of the modern tools we've invented to do so. In addition, there's the issue of needing to replace the functions of whatever you've blown up, which can be anything from providing clean water to the town and your own soldiers, to something as basic as a warm roof for people to sleep under, both your men and the civilians, assuming you don't feel like displacing them into hostile territory at bayonet point.

Swiss46 · Jul 30, 2020

Stoneheart said:
why should you fight the chinese house to house? you use bigger guns or bomber to take out hard points...

The problem with city fighting, to my understanding, is that any building can be a hard point.

Stoneheart · Jul 30, 2020

Swiss46 said:
The problem with city fighting, to my understanding, is that any building can be a hard point.

thats not a problem...

The Dude · Jul 30, 2020

BONE_Buddy said:
last bit for now:

https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/07/28/army-still-mulling-different-paths-to-build-long-range-assault-helo-prototypes/
US Army sets timeline for long-range assault helo prototypes
View attachment 1482224
{The Bell V-280 Valor completes final key performance parameters within the Army's Joint Multi-Role technology demonstration program, proving it can conduct high-level, low-speed agility maneuver. Bell is competing against Sikorsky to design and develop a future long-range assault aircraft for the U.S. Army. (Courtesy of Bell)}

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army is still considering two different paths to build prototypes for its future long-range assault aircraft following an industry day earlier this month, but is pushing toward a contract award in fiscal 2022, according to the service’s FLRAA program manager.

While the Army continues to sift through industry feedback to help it choose a route, the service remains on track to publish a draft request for proposals by the end of the year, followed by a finalized RFP in FY21, Col. David Phillips told reporters July 24.

The Army chose Bell and Lockheed Martin’s Sikorsky to enter into a competitive demonstration and risk reduction effort ahead of the start of the FLRAA program of record. The service is on a tight timeline to field a brand-new, long-range assault aircraft by 2030. The CDRR effort will consist of two phases that will last roughly one year each.

Bell and a Sikorsky-Boeing team respectively designed, built and flew technology demonstrator aircraft as part a Joint Multi-Role Technology Demonstration phase prior to entering the CDRR effort. The companies will deliver initial conceptual designs, an assessment of the feasibility of requirements and trade studies using model-based systems engineering.

“Due to the success of phase one (awarded on 16 March) the Army is looking at the scope of a second phase which would refine the digital designs from the system to subsystem level and further burn down risk as FLRAA enters into the [program of record,” Phillips said in a written statement to Defense News on July 27.

The Army provided two schedules to get through the design and prototyping phase in an RFI in May to gain industry feedback.

The first schedule lasts 52 months, putting the end of the prototyping period somewhere in the ballpark of early summer 2026. The schedule allows for a preliminary design review for just the air vehicle from the winning team — picked in the second quarter of FY22 — eight months after the contract award.

The team would then have another preliminary design review for the weapon systems 17 months past contract award, which roughly falls around August 2023.

The Army would hit the engineering and manufacturing development phase around October 2023, followed by a critical design review in early 2025. The first prototype would be delivered in the summer of 2025, with five more prototypes delivered through the summer of 2026.

The alternative schedule would allow for a preliminary design review for both the air vehicle and the weapon systems at the same time at roughly 10 months following a contract award. This approach aims to get to an engineering and manufacturing development decision around March 2023. A critical design review would follow at the start of 2024, with a first prototype delivery expected around February 2025. All six prototypes should be delivered to the Army by roughly March 2026.

The total time frame for the second option is 48 months post contract award.
View attachment 1482226
{ Sikorsky's and Boeing's Defiant sits on a tarmac in West Palm Beach, Fla. (Jeff Martin/Staff) }

While the difference in schedules is just roughly four months, every week counts as the Army works to field new capabilities as fast as possible. Army leaders have often said that schedule is king when it comes to fielding the service’s top modernization priorities. FVL is the third-highest priority, preceded only by a Next-Generation Combat Vehicle and Long-Range Precision Fires.

The Army is driving toward entering a production and deployment phase in 2028 ahead of the first unit receiving the aircraft in 2030.

“We believe FLRAA’s design and requirements approach is inverting the defense procurement paradigm. Our approach gives the Army multiple opportunities to optimize requirements through digital engineering prior to entering the design, build, and test of the weapons system,” Phillips told Defense News. “Making informed decisions on requirements through design optimization will enable the Army to ensure FLRAA capabilities are affordable; meet [Multi-Domain Operations] requirements; and deliver on an aggressive schedule that does not sacrifice rigor for speed.”

Multi-Domain Operations is the Army’s war-fighting doctrine designed to operate and fight against anticipated future adversaries across land, sea, air and cyberspace.

Bell and Lockheed are also competing head-to-head to design and build the Army’s future attack reconnaissance aircraft, which will follow a nearly simultaneous schedule as the FLRAA competition.

This is another development that I'm keenly looking forward to seeing how it shapes out. Both designs look solid, but I admit that I'm leaning more towards hoping the Bell entry wins out now that tilt-rotor technology is more seasoned and mature. Of course, the Sikorsky entry may be the better choice for air cav since it's more like "normal" helos in form factor and function and seems like it would be more survivable if it were to be hit during combat or a turbine went out while in the air, since it can still auto-rotate like a regular helo.

Either way, it does my black, shriveled little imperialist warmonger heart good to see our military getting equipped for the future.

BONE_Buddy · Jul 30, 2020

Stoneheart said:
why should you fight the chinese house to house? you use bigger guns or bomber to take out hard points...

Why didn't the Germans do this in Stalingrad? Oh wait, they did? How about the Russians at Grozny? They did too? How about the Americans at Fallujah. etc.

Yeah, it turns out that Tanks, Artillery, and Airstrikes alone don't allow you to take and hold a city. You see, even if you level a big building, it just turns into rubble, which is a hardpoint opportunity that is just as good for enemy infantry as their former building was. Fire support can definitely help the infantry, but you do have send the poor fuckers in.

Stoneheart said:
they will bring enough firepower that there is no time to disembark.

Yeah, I am going to have to challenge your claim.

What you are saying is extremely unlikely, and to have it be your argument for what would happen in every near-peer convoy ambush is insane.

I would use reductio ad absurdum to prove my point, but you have already done it for me.

What you are saying is that every convoy ambush will be significantly more synchronized than the French GIGN snipers, while using far heavier weapons. Assuming everything else is perfect, which it won't even be close to, that position alone is radically stupid.

Stoneheart said:
we dont talk about sandnigger with old rpgs...

What about Russians/Chinese with new RPGs?

Stoneheart said:
the design flaws of the bradley are well known---

I know English isn't your first language, so I will cut you some slack.

I didn't say anything about the Bradley specifically, I was talking about every single make and model of IFVs and APCs. Fighting out of Puma, or a Fuchs, or a Boxer is worse with a longer rifle, than a shorter rifle.

As for the Bradley, the ones you saw feature predominately in "Pentagon Wars" is not the one we ended up with. Just watch until the end of the movie, and you see some of the many changes made before most any of the Bradley units were delivered. I certainly compares favorable to a Marder, a BTR-80, or a BMP variant especially when it come to the size and ergonomics of the exit. Core to the argument we are having: yes, the capability of a soldier to fight out of a Bradley is worse with a long gun, than it is a shorter gun, like with every other APC and IFV.

-
So I put this question to you, are you actually retarded or are you merely pretending?

BONE_Buddy · Jul 30, 2020

https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2291637/eglin-afb-prepared-ready-for-f-15ex/

Eglin AFB prepared, ready for F-15EX
EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, Fla. (AFNS) -- In less than a year, Eglin Air Force Base takes possession of the Air Force’s newest fighter, the F-15EX. Big plans and procedures are underway so developmental and operational testing can begin as soon as possible when EX1 and EX2 arrive in 2021.

The Operational Flight Program Combined Test Force will manage the DT and OT planning and provisioning for the aircraft. The 40th Flight Test Squadron will take possession of EX1 and the 85th Test and Evaluation Squadron will own EX2. Squadron aircrews and testers will work together to complete the combined DT and OT simultaneously.

“The time has come to upgrade the aging F-15C/D fleet and that presents itself in the form of F-15EX, the most advanced F-15 ever created,” said Maj. Brett Hughes, 40th FLTS lead F-15EX DT pilot. “This represents years of iterative design and battle proven technologies. The 40th FLTS, a squadron full of developmental testers, is ready to meet the challenge of testing America’s newest fighter.”

The F-15 has been a dominant and proven fighter since it entered service in 1976. Currently, there are late 70s F-15 models on Eglin AFB’s ramp testing new aircraft capabilities with each flight. This is a testament to the airframe design, avionics and maintenance working on the aircraft. The F-15EX will continue to ensure that air superiority for decades ahead, according to Maj. Aaron Eshkenazi, 85th TES F-15EX OT lead pilot.

Both pilots agreed the EX design has the future in mind. Although the new aircraft looks like an F-15, its digital flight controls, advanced cockpit touch displays, new sensors and advanced computer technology take this Eagle well beyond its older brethren.

These upgrades make the F-15EX extremely capable and rapidly adaptable to new weapons and technologies. The F-15EX also has the ability to carry over three times the weapons payload of an F-35, which will make its presence critical on the battlefield, according to Eshkenazi.

To maintain these fighter advancements, select Airmen from the 96th Maintenance Group will undergo familiarization classroom academics and transfer to hands-on training upon the aircraft’s arrival here. These newly qualified technicians will become the trainers for the maintenance group.

Coordination between the 96th MXG and multiple F-15EX affiliated agencies is ongoing to resolve any issues and ensure the unit is ready to support the new F-15 variant, according to Senior Master Sgt. Craig Krebsbach, 96th MXG F-15EX lead.

The aircrew will also receive Boeing training as well as an F-15EX simulator, expected to arrive this year. This will provide many of the pilots with their first hands-on experience with the new aircraft’s design.

The transition for aircrew and maintenance is much simpler since certain elements of the F-15 remain the same with the biggest differences being engines, flight controls and displays. The intent is for all of the squadrons’ aircrew to be F-15EX trained.

This is only the practical side of the preparations for the new aircraft. Engineering and program-management personnel coordinated for the past year and a half to be ready.

“The combined Eglin (AFB) team participated in hundreds of preparatory events in order to help guide the F-15EX program’s success,” said Lt. Col. Christopher Wee, OFP CTF director of operations.

The EXs will roll off the assembly line with ET and OT emblazoned on their tail flash. Then, the aircraft undergo functional flight checks before military aircrews are allowed to strap in and finally bring them to Eglin AFB.

Upon arrival, the EX’s initial missions will be aircrew familiarization and local airspace flights. After that, aircrews begin test and evaluation of the aircraft’s Air Force-specific hardware, software and weapons. The EX build comes from F-15 models previously manufactured under foreign military sales contracts with other countries.

Initial testing will focus on ensuring the software and avionics systems integrate well with the aircraft’s features like the advanced cockpit and controls.

The goal of the integrated DT and OT is to ensure the EX meets the needs of the warfighter in its intended operational environment. This enables Eglin AFB’s testers to highlight any system issues early, so they can be fixed before the F-15EX’s increased production and ultimate delivery to the squadrons. The initial phase of tests will take approximately a year and a half.

“This program is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to test a new aircraft from the ground up and be a part of America’s future air dominance,” Hughes said.

The F-15 EX marks the third new Air Force aircraft assigned to Eglin AFB in just two years. The HH-60W Jolly Green and the MH-139A Grey Wolf are also in developmental testing at the installation.

https://defpost.com/u-s-to-remove-11900-troops-from-germany/

U.S. to Remove 11,900 Troops from Germany

The United States is planning to remove 11,900 troops from Germany, Defense Secretary Dr. Mark T. Esper said during a news conference today at the Pentagon.

The move will reduce the number of U.S. military personnel in Germany from about 36,000 to 24,000. Repositioning could begin in weeks, he said, adding that with 24,000 American service members, Germany would still host the highest number of U.S. troops of any nation in NATO.

About 5,600 service members being moved out of Germany will stay within Europe. They will be moved to other NATO nations, Esper said. An additional 6,400 personnel will return to the United States, though Esper said this will not mean less support of NATO allies, because instead of having permanently stationed forces in Germany, other military units will begin rotational deployments farther east on the continent in more strategic locations, such as near the Black Sea region.

“Our aim is to implement these moves as expeditiously as possible consistent with the principles I set forth from the beginning, particularly being fair to, and taking care of our service members and their families,” the secretary said. “We could see some moves begin within weeks. Others will take longer. As anyone can see, the repositioning of our forces in Europe constitutes a major strategic and positive shift, wholly in line with the NDS and consistent with other adjustments the United States has made within NATO in previous times.”

Air Force Gen. Tod D. Wolters, commander of U.S. European Command and NATO’s supreme allied commander for Europe, spelled out some of the specific movements planned for forces in Europe.

The EUCOM headquarters and the associated U.S. Special Operations Command-Europe headquarters, for example, would move from Germany to Mons, Belgium, where they would be located with Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe.

“This will improve the speed and clarity of our decision-making and promote greater operational alignment,” Wolters said, adding that a similar relocation could happen for U.S. Africa Command headquarters and the associated U.S. Special Operations Command-Africa, though no new location has been determined.

Wolters also said EUCOM intends to reposition three brigade-sized headquarters, an air defense artillery battalion, and an engineering battalion to Belgium from Germany, as well as move two smaller support and contracting organizations to Italy. He said the 52nd Civil Engineering Squadron, an Air Force unit, could be one of the first to move. The plan is to put that unit in Italy.

EUCOM also proposes relocating an F-16 fighter squadron and elements of a fighter wing to Italy. Esper said the move will put those units closer to the Black Sea region, better enabling them to support NATO in the southeast.

“The proposal to reposition forces back to [the United States], … with respect to the 2nd Cavalry Regiment, will allow those units to regain maximum U.S. at-home-station readiness and more effectively support global contingencies while still maintaining a keen focus on Europe,” Wolters said.

There are also plans to rotate forward the lead element of the Army’s 5th Corps headquarters to Poland, Esper said, contingent on Warsaw signing a defense cooperation agreement. There may also be other opportunities to move additional forces into Poland and the Baltics, the general said.

“This rebalance, consistent with the NDS, will align NATO and Eucom capabilities, better distribute forces across Europe and increase the use of rotational forces, thus bolstering our commitment to Europe,” said Air Force Gen. John E. Hyten, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “It enhances deterrence and improves operational flexibility. Repositioning our forces and making consolidations will provide General Wolters, as the commander, increased ability to dynamically employ his force. This effort will increase opportunities to partner with and strengthen our bond with allies and partners in the region. It will also require additional planning and consultation with our allies.”

This is a headline I wasn't expecting:

https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/07/29/greece-orders-50-turkish-drones/

Greece orders 50 Turkish drones

ANKARA, Turkey — A Turkish private drone manufacturer has won a contract to sell a batch of 50 miniature tactical drones to the Greek Ministry of Defence, the company announced July 28.

The company Assuva Savunma Sanayi said two Proton Elic RB-128 drones sent to Greece successfully passed acceptance tests. Remzi Basbug, president of Assuva, said this is the company’s first export deal to a country that is both a NATO and a European Union member.

“We have obtained all necessary export licenses for the export to Greece,” Basbug said, adding that the company has previously sold the same drone systems to Turkish, Chinese and Sri Lankan armed forces.

The Assuva miniature tactical drone can be used for search and rescue missions. It can also detect underground bunkers, explosives, land mines and chemical material. Featuring a thermal camera, it can capture imagery from a distance of up to 1 kilometer, and 50 meters underground.

The company says its drone is the product of domestic engineering and software.
_
That's all the article says, still interesting due to the political tensions.

Stoneheart · Jul 30, 2020

BONE_Buddy said:
Why didn't the Germans do this in Stalingrad? Oh wait, they did?

they wanted to, but they didnt had the means to do so anymore. the Problem in Stalingrad was the collapse of the flanks.

BONE_Buddy said:
How about the Russians at Grozny?

The Bombardment won in the end, its not the magical bullet to win instantly.

BONE_Buddy said:
They did too? How about the Americans at Fallujah. etc.

another shitshow. also they just used some bombs.

BONE_Buddy said:
Yeah, it turns out that Tanks, Artillery, and Airstrikes alone don't allow you to take and hold a city. You see, even if you level a big building, it just turns into rubble, which is a hardpoint opportunity that is just as good for enemy infantry as their former building was. Fire support can definitely help the infantry, but you do have send the poor fuckers in.

Tanks are very useless in that case.
and rubble is a much weaker hardpoint, there are also alot of ways to deal with a rubble field, like napalm, or just blasting it again.
yes you have to send in Infantry at some point, but you can use more firepower in rubble field than in a house.
If you have to storm a building just use the equipment designed for that task, aka a Flamethrower.

BONE_Buddy said:
What you are saying is that every convoy ambush will be significantly more synchronized than the French GIGN snipers, while using far heavier weapons. Assuming everything else is perfect, which it won't even be close to, that position alone is radically stupid.

The Russians are pretty good at it. they have been doing it in Georgia, Ukraine, Syria and Russian mercs are doing it in libya right now.

BONE_Buddy said:
Core to the argument we are having: yes, the capability of a soldier to fight out of a Bradley is worse with a long gun, than it is a shorter gun, like with every other APC and IFV.

If the Bradley isnt as shit as i said, why does an inch or 2 make so much difference?

1Tonka_Truck · Aug 2, 2020

Snekposter said:
I've always hated how people have loved to try shoving a big fat bullet like a .458 or a .50 into something designed for 5.56mm rounds.

You put a big fat bullet in front of a small case to make a high energy subsonic round. .458 SOCOM and 9x39 are subsonic and hit like freight train, but have approximately the external ballistics as a .45 ACP. Using a VSS on guards must have been nerve-racking to say the least.

BONE_Buddy said:
On Monday, the Commander, U.S. 2nd Fleet press release said that the U.S. Navy Expeditionary Sea Base, USS Hershel “Woody” Williams (ESB 4), departed Naval Station Norfolk, Va. Jul. 27, on the ship’s inaugural deployment following its commissioning in March.

I'm almost disappointed they changed the ESBs from USNS to USS. I was going to have a lot of fun posting MGS memes when somebody finally started bitching about a non-commissioned ship conducting offensive operations.

BONE_Buddy said:
Why didn't the Germans do this in Stalingrad? Oh wait, they did? How about the Russians at Grozny? They did too? How about the Americans at Fallujah. etc.

Yeah, it turns out that Tanks, Artillery, and Airstrikes alone don't allow you to take and hold a city. You see, even if you level a big building, it just turns into rubble, which is a hardpoint opportunity that is just as good for enemy infantry as their former building was. Fire support can definitely help the infantry, but you do have send the poor fuckers in.

He's German. He can't help but masturbate to Leopard 2s and rant about how armor is the answer to everything until it's not and then it's 'bomb zem into oblivion.'

The Dude said:
I'm not sure which 6.8mm round the Army settled on. I don’t think it was the telescoped round. It's either the polymer cased round (True Velocity, I think?) or the SIG round that uses a two-piece metal case with the base being made of steel and the rest made of brass. SIG is already bringing their new case design to the civilian market with a new proprietary cartridge along with .308 Win, 6.5 Creedmoor, and others using their new two-piece case. It's supposed to offer lighter weight with higher velocities/energy over the same calibers using traditional one-piece brass cases. That gives me hope that we will see civilian offerings for this new 6.8mm cartridge/rifle, even if Big Green doesn't adopt it.

It's currently a 3 way completion between SIG's bimetal case, General Dynamics' polymer case, and Textron's telescoped case.

https://www.guns.com/news/2020/07/13/which-weapon-could-be-the-armys-new-rifle-light-machine-gun

WHICH WEAPON COULD BE THE ARMY'S NEW RIFLE & LIGHT MACHINE GUN?
07/13/2020 02:03 AM | by Chris Eger
Share

XM8 Carbine and XM320 attached, the other has the XM8 sharpshooter OCIW

Despite past programs such as SPIW, ACR, and OCIW that left the U.S. Army still fielding successive generations of Eugene Stoner’s AR platform at the end of the day, today’s NGSW program could be different. The above shows the XM-8 prototype, an OCIW program hopeful, in 2004. (All Photos: U.S. Army Program Executive Office Soldier)
The U.S. Army’s new Next Generation Squad Weapon program is moving right along and its competitors read like a who’s who of modern rifle, ammo and optics makers. Names like Beretta, Heckler & Koch, Leupold, Sig Sauer, Vortex, and Olin-Winchester are enumerated among the current vendors of what could end up as the most revolutionary small arms award of the 21st Century thus far.
The NGSW search goes back to at least 2016 and heated up two years ago when the Army launched a program seeking companies to develop a suppressed light machine gun– deemed an automatic rifle– along with a companion suppressed rifle sharing a common 6.8mm cartridge. At the time, Chief of Staff of the Army Gen. Mark A. Milley said the new round would penetrate any existing body armor or body armor expected to exist over the next 25 years.

Next Generation Squad Weapons NGSW Projectiles

The 6.8mm common cartridge for the NGSW program uses an Army-developed bullet and competitors have forward-looking solutions to supply hybrid rounds that are lighter up to 20 percent lighter in weight than today’s, offering bi-metallic, telescoping and polymer-cased options.
The idea behind the 6.8 caliber is to step up the effective range and energy currently delivered by the Army’s current 5.56mm loads past 300 meters, and replace the M4 Carbine and M249 Squad Automatic Weapon in front line units with the new platform family. Likewise, the program would select a Fire Control optic system or the catchy NGSW-FC in Army-speak, that would be used on both the rifle and automatic rifle variant.
Last September, three competitors were greenlighted to supply rifle and automatic rifle platforms for initial testing. These included New Hampshire-based Sig Sauer, which has developed an in-house solution for each; Maryland-based AAI Corporation/Textron Systems; and Vermont-based General Dynamics-Ordnance & Tactical Systems. The limited buy was for a small batch of prototypes the Army would subject this year to a “diagnostic test to inform the weapon and ammunition vendors on their current performance and feed another design iteration.”
THE TEAMS:

Next Generation Squad Weapons NGSW Sig Sauer

Sig Sauer’s belt-fed MG 6.8mm machine gun, which is submitted as the NGSW-AR, is billed as being 40 percent lighter than the M249 but with “dramatically reduced felt recoil.” It has ambidextrous AR-style ergonomics, quick detach magazines, increased M1913 rail space, and a quick-detach Sig-developed suppressor. Meanwhile, Sig’s MCX Spear rifle, submitted as the NGSW-R rifle, has a fully collapsible and folding stock, rear and side charging handle, free-floating reinforced M-LOK handguard, fully ambi controls, and a quick-detach suppressor. The cartridge is a bi-metallic hybrid.

General Dynamics-OTS has been working with Maryland-based firearms icon Beretta, to produce their RM277 NGSW platform which uses True Velocity’s 6.8mm composite-cased cartridge. The only bullpup design in the program, it uses 20-round polymer mags.

AAI/Textron has subcontracted with ammo maker Winchester-Olin and firearms maker Heckler & Koch, to design their own unique NGSW contender. Notably, it uses a telescoped-cased cartridge.
OPTICS
When it comes to the NGSW-FC, two competitors are being evaluated through an Other Transaction Authority (OTA) agreement, an award type traditionally used to fund innovative prototype procurement and development of forward-looking technology. The systems tapped are developed by a team on one side consisting of defense contractor L3Harris Technologies and optics-maker Leupold & Stevens versus a fire control unit submitted by Wisconsin-based Vortex Optics.

Vortex has made public its NSGW-FC is a 1-8x first focal plane optic with an integrated rangefinder and overlaid display while L3/Leupold has been quieter about the specifics of their submission.
While testing is currently being done at Fort Drum through August by the PEO’s Product Manager Next Generation Weapons, a second prototype test is set to begin 2QFY21. The Army hopes to field the first selected NGSW platforms to field units in FY2022, a potentially huge award in which the winner could stand to deliver 250,000 NGSWs and 150 million rounds of ammo plus options for further contracts.
DON’T COUNT THE M4 OUT JUST YET
Past ultra-modern small arms programs run by the Army such as SPIW, ACR, and OICW spanned decades and, while interesting, left the service with nothing more than updated AR platforms to fall back on, a standard the military has maintained since the 1960s. With that being said, it should be noted that, while the Army is developing the NGSW, they are also hedging their bets when it comes to M4s as numerous multiyear contracts are still current with established U.S.-based carbine makes such as Colt and FN. Additionally, Picatinny Arsenal is still conducting steady R&D on potential updates to the existing platform including patenting an innovative new helically fluted M4 heavy barrel, designed to better endure extended cyclical fires. Meanwhile, the Marines, who are also looking to the NGSW program while stocking up on their own new M27 IAR system, are refurbishing their legacy supplies of ACOG optics.

Snekposter · Aug 3, 2020

1Tonka_Truck said:
He's German. He can't help but masturbate to Leopard 2s and rant about how armor is the answer to everything until it's not and then it's 'bomb zem into oblivion.'

I thought that was the US's whole schtick, just replace the Leo 2 with the Abrams. Although we have "Bomb them into oblivion" be Step 1 of our attack plans instead of the last resort, so maybe that's where the difference is? As to the subsonic ammo part of the discussion, according to this lazy chart that was the first search result on Bing, .458 SOCOM really isn't subsonic, not unless you use one of the super-heavy rounds for it that exit the barrel below 350 m/sec. As far as I know it, like all those other big-ass rounds, were there so specialists could get massive stopping power out of the AR-15 platform, which they do incredibly well at, but the necessary compromises have tended to outweigh the benefits, with a 20 round mag of 7.62x51 being far more versatile while still delivering the necessary punch in the form of a double-tap than a 9 round mag of .458 or similar.

1Tonka_Truck · Aug 3, 2020

Snekposter said:
As to the subsonic ammo part of the discussion, according to this lazy chart that was the first search result on Bing, .458 SOCOM really isn't subsonic, not unless you use one of the super-heavy rounds for it that exit the barrel below 350 m/sec.

Well fuck, you are very correct. I'll blame posting past my bedtime on that one. I'm not even sure what round I was thinking of at this point.

BONE_Buddy · Aug 4, 2020

https://news.usni.org/2020/07/29/chinese-type-075-big-deck-amphib-preparing-for-sea-trials

Chinese Type 075 Big Deck Amphib Preparing for Sea Trials

{The lead Chinese Type-075 preparing for sea trials. Note the smoke stains near the stern. Photo via Twitter }

The Chinese Navy’s newest amphibious warfare asset, the Type 075 LHD (Landing Helicopter Dock) is setting sail for the first time, according to ship spotter reports.

The vessel, which was built in Shanghai, has been fitting out since it was floated on September 26, 2019. Candid photos surfacing on the Chinese language internet show it being fueled, and tugs readied.

The Type-075 represents a step-change in the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) amphibious warfare capabilities. It will enable better over-the-horizon landing capabilities and improve air cover. And there are already rumors of the follow-on Type-076 LHD which is expected to include EMALS (Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System) for unmanned combat aerial vehicles or crewed aircraft. At this stage, these rumors should be treated with caution. But they do give an indication of the direction PLAN amphibious capabilities are going.

In addition to the well-deck for Type 726 hovercraft (generally equivalent to the U.S. Navy’s Landing Craft Air Cushion), the LHD will have a large rotor-wing component. This will include the Z-8 transport helicopter which is based on the French SA 321 Super Frelon. More modern types seen aboard, in mock-up form, include the naval variant of the Harbin Z-20 — an apparent copy of the Sikorsky S-70 Black Hawk-Sea Hawk family.

There are also small rotor-wing UAVss including a Ka-27/28 HELIX anti-submarine warfare helicopter model aboard for deck tests.

{ Comparison of similar sized big deck amphibious ships. }

Images in the public domain show a range of rotor-craft models aboard the Type 075. This is a common practice aboard Chinese warships and is a strong leading indicator of the operational air wing.

The ship suffered a fire on April 11, 2020. Although the fire was quickly put out and damage appeared minimal, smoke stains are still visible in the aft port-side near to the ramp.

The Hudong-Zhonghua yard in Shanghai where the lead Type 075 has been built has already launched a second ship. And analysis of commercial satellite imagery suggests that module for a third may be on its way. At the moment the yard is building the Type 054A frigate for the Pakistan Navy and, it appears, a Type 071 LPD for Thailand.

The PLAN began development of the Type 075 in 2011 as a helicopter carrier that would displace about 35,000 tons — smaller than the U.S. 45,000-ton Wasp and America-class big decks. The unnamed ship launched last year.

A version of this post originally appeared on Naval News. It’s been republished here with permission.

_____________________________
If the LHD lives up to Chinese claims, it might very well be a potent amphibious warfare asset. However, in the realm of LHDs it is still a quite small fish. It can only carry helicopters which means that it cannot hope to operate independent of air-support from a Carrier or from land bases. This does mean that China is still moving ever closer to having some semblance of a real amphibious assault force.

I just hope Taiwan continues to come back to the reality of having to defend themselves from the PRC, for their sake.

In other news the Gerald R. Ford continues to hit milestones in preparation for full service:

https://www.dvidshub.net/news/375093/fords-conducts-first-air-intercept-control-event

Ford’s Conducts First Air Intercept Control Event

{ Photo By Seaman Riley McDowell | Operations Specialist 1st Class David Geary, an air intercept controller, assigned to USS Gerald R. Ford's (CVN 7

operations department, stands watch at his console inside the ships Combat Direction Center (CDC) July 30, 2020. Ford is conducting carrier qualifications in the Atlantic Ocean. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Riley McDowell) }

USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 7

completed an Air Intercept Control (AIC) event on July 30. A first for the crew, this accomplishment was another milestone of Ford’s operational progress as she passes the half-way point of her 18-month Post-Delivery Test and Trials (PDT&T).

AIC missions are required to increase the Combat Direction Center’s proficiency through training. AIC missions are also an opportunity to demonstrate integration with Carrier Strike Group (CSG) 12 as part of the air defense mission to defend Ford and the rest of the force.

Lt. Shane Welsh, the air defense officer for the Ticonderoga-class cruiser USS Leyte Gulf (CG 55) training with Ford’s operations team, said the mission was a collaborative effort between Ford and Carrier Air Wing (CVW) 7 and CVW-8.

“The Ford is considered an air defense unit (ADU),” said Welsh. “The Air and Missile Defense Commander (AMDC) assigned Ford the mission to control defensive counter air assets. If we had other ADUs in the area, the AMDC would coordinate with them and would report information to the battle watch in the Tactical Flag Command Center.”

Ford’s Air Intercept Controller, Operations Specialist 1st Class David Geary, from Davenport, Iowa, controlled two separate AIC events. Both were Defensive Counter Air missions designed to protect a high value asset against several waves of "red air" threats. First were two F/A-18E Super Hornets, attached to the “Jolly Rogers” of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 103, followed by four F/A-18F Super Hornets from the VFA-213 Black Lions. Despite being outnumbered by the threat, the Jolly Rogers and Black Lions integrated with Ford’s AIC and employed TOPGUN recommendations to successfully defend Ford.

“We were simulating an air defense scenario,” said Geary. “We were controlling the fighter to intercept, escort and if necessary kill the inbound threat aircraft.”

The AIC is the third wingman in the fighter community. The AIC’s job is to paint a mental picture for the pilots in the air via voice and data link communication.

“I am in voice communication with all the fighters,” said Geary. “As the fighters and threats close, I must put together a specific timeline to ensure they have best situational awareness possible to enhance lethality and increase survivability.”

“It was an excellent event,” said Welsh. “It’s a new ship, new crew, new strike group. Getting that continuity together where it’s all second nature, that’s what’s important.”

Gerald R. Ford is a first-in-class aircraft carrier and the first new aircraft carrier designed in more than 40 years. Ford is underway in the Atlantic Ocean conducting carrier qualifications during an independent steaming event.
__________________________
A ship so nice, we are building it twice.... still, progress is being made. The working up and post delivery problems should be nowhere near as debilitating in the follow-up ships in the class.

BONE_Buddy · Aug 4, 2020

Speaking of Taiwan:

Air Defense: Taiwan Gets A Refresh

Taiwan recently ordered $620 million worth of missiles and upgrades for its seven US built Patriot SAM (Surface to Air) Missile batteries Much of this upgrade is for refurbishing older PAC-3 missiles that are reaching the end of their shelf-life Most

www.strategypage.com

Air Defense: Taiwan Gets A Refresh

August 2, 2020: Taiwan recently ordered $620 million worth of missiles and upgrades for its seven U.S. built Patriot SAM (Surface to Air) Missile batteries. Much of this upgrade is for refurbishing older PAC-3 missiles that are reaching the end of their shelf-life. Most military missiles are never fired and are built to retain their effectiveness for a decade or more. This is called shelf-life. Missiles are monitored electronically, and some are built to have a few components (batteries and some electronics) replaced regularly. But after 10-20 years the missiles require replacement or major refurbishments to “like-new” condition. Taiwan has the facilities and skilled personnel to do most of this work in Taiwan, using components and some technical services purchased from the United States.

Taiwan obtained its first Patriot three Patriot PAC-2 batteries in 1997 and these batteries were upgraded to add anti-missile capabilities using the PAC-2 missile. The more effective PAC-3 anti-missile missile entered service in 2003 and Taiwan eventually added that capability to its Patriot batteries. In 2009 Taiwan purchased four more Patriot batteries and hundreds of additional PAC-3 missiles. Taiwan uses Patriot mainly as an anti-missile system. Anti-aircraft duties are performed by a combination of recent Taiwan developed SAMs and upgrades of older American Hawk SAM batteries.

The Patriot has been in service since 1984 but did not shoot down its first manned aircraft until 2014, when an Israeli Patriot shot down a Russian made Su-24. Patriot didn’t get its first combat use until 1990, when it was used against Iraqi ballistic missiles. There the success rate was 70 percent against missiles fired at Saudi Arabia and 40 percent against those fired at Israel. The relatively low success rate here had to do with the crude modifications Iraq made to its SCUD missiles to give them more range. This caused them to come apart while making their descent to the target. This showed up as multiple incoming warheads. Another problem was that when a missile was intercepted over an urban area, the large bits of missile debris caused casualties. Do you count that as a successful intercept? Even against aircraft, if you destroy it the debris are going to come down in fatal velocities in dangerously large fragments. This is an issue that does not get much media attention even though it has been the reality since ground based antiaircraft weapons were first used to defend urban areas during World War I (1914-1

.

Israeli Patriot batteries have had more combat experience than anyone else but have shot down more ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and UAVs than manned aircraft. Israel has six Patriot batteries, enough to cover all 1,280 kilometers of land and coastal borders. Patriot is not infallible but it is effective enough to be regularly used to intercept short-range ballistic missiles. Since 2015 Saudi Arabia has used its Patriot batteries to intercept over a hundred Iranian ballistic missiles fired from Yemen.

Each Patriot battery is manned by about a hundred troops, and each contains a radar and four launchers. A battery can fire two types of Patriot missile. The $7 million PAC 3 missile is smaller than the anti-aircraft version (PAC 2), thus a Patriot launcher can hold sixteen PAC 3 missiles, versus four PAC 2s. The less expensive PAC 2 missile weighs about a ton, about three times more than a PAC 3. A major difference with the PAC 2 is range. PAC 3 has a shorter range (about 30 kilometers) versus 160 kilometers for the PAC 2 anti-aircraft version, which is also used against UAVs.

The Patriot system was in development since the early 1960s and is expected to remain in service until the 2040s. Over 10,000 Patriot missiles (about 25 percent of them PAC-3) and over 1,500 launchers have been produced so far. Most of those missiles served for decades and then were refurbished or retired and scrapped unused. PAC-3 missiles are more likely to be refurbished. Many PAC-3 missiles are now approaching the end of their shelf-lives and most owners want them refurbished.

The island nation of Taiwan, which China has claimed as a rebellious province since the late 1940s, has been able to avoid Chinese conquest with its own well-armed military and a military alliance with the United States. Taiwan has one of the most advanced technology economies on the planet, despite having a relatively small (24 million) population compared to 1.4 billion in China. Despite enormous economic growth by China since the 1980s, per-capital GDP in Taiwan is still 2.5 times that of China. However. China has much larger armed forces and the second highest defense budget in the world. On paper China ought to be capable of quickly conquering Taiwan. The reality is different. Chinese military analysts often discuss openly the problems and risks of such an attack. The current Chinese strategy towards Taiwan is more threat than reality but that threat is backed by a lot of ballistic missiles, more than Taiwan can intercept.

Since the 1990s Taiwanese defense analysts and military planners have noted the growing number of Chinese ballistic and cruise missiles deployed in nearby China for use against Taiwan. China currently has over 2,700 of these missiles and about half are within range of Taiwan. The basic Chinese strategy appears to be the immediate use of over a thousand ballistic and cruise missiles against Taiwanese military targets. Most of these missiles are based on the coast opposite Taiwan (180 kilometers away across the Taiwan Straits). The Chinese missiles carry one ton or half ton conventional (high explosive or cluster bomb) warheads and are expected to be used to cripple Taiwanese air force and navy, as well as attacking headquarters and communications targets. Almost simultaneously, China would try to invade with airborne and amphibious forces. Without those missiles, Taiwan's air and naval forces would make it very difficult, if not impossible, for the invasion force to cross the straits. Military analysts have examined various targeting strategies, and defensive moves the Taiwanese could take. In most cases, the Chinese succeed. The barrage of missiles can do serious damage to Taiwanese air and naval forces, giving Chinese air and naval forces an opportunity to get ground forces ashore. If Taiwan keeps improving its defenses, China remains unenthusiastic about attempting an invasion.
______________________
Nothing too earth-shattering here, just "re-manufacturing" old PAC-3 Patriot Missiles, into new PAC-3 Patriot Missiles.

Though this did come with some RoC weirdness. You see, what we are being told happened is some "lower ranking" military personnel put in a request for approval for a possible sale of the new missiles with the US Defense Security Cooperation Agency (The guys that handle a lot of Foreign Military Sales paperwork). This "apparently" happened with no knowledge of this purchase request making its way to the upper echelons of the Taiwanese government until the request was approved and publicly displayed by the US Government.

So the upper leadership of the RoC said that they would totally look into punishing those responsible for this, but in the mean time they have an "obligation" to follow through with the deal.

Is this a ploy to keep the CCPs feathers unruffled? Probably, but I though I would pass on what I heard through the grape vine.

https://news.usni.org/2020/08/02/8-missing-after-aav-sinking-presumed-dead-as-search-off-california-ends

8 Missing After AAV Sinking Presumed Dead as Search Off California Ends

{Marines with Bravo Company, Battalion Landing Team 1/4, 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit, operate AAV-P7/A1 assault amphibious vehicles onto the well deck of the amphibious landing dock USS Somerset (LPD-25) on July 27, 2020. US Marine Corps Photo }

The seven Marines and sailor missing after their amphibious assault vehicle sank off the California coast are presumed dead as search and rescue operation ended, I Marine Expeditionary Force said in a late Saturday statement.

“The 15th [Marine Expeditionary Unit and the [Makin Island Amphibious Ready Group] leadership determined that there was little probability of a successful rescue given the circumstances of the incident,” the statement reads.
“All eight service members are presumed deceased.”

Fifteen Marines and the sailor were aboard the AAV were returning to amphibious warship USS Somerset (LPD-25) after operating on San Clemente Island when the AAV began to take on water, Marine officials told reporters on Friday.

Eight Marines were rescued. One Marine later died from his injuries. As of Friday, two more Marines were in critical condition at Scripps Memorial Hospital in La Jolla, Calif. The other five have returned to their unit.

IMEF is withholding the names of the Marines and sailor until 24 hours after next of kin notification.

Now the Marines and the Navy are working to recover the bodies of the missing service members and find the AAV that sank in hundreds of feet of water off San Clemente Island.

_______________
Damn.

BONE_Buddy · Aug 4, 2020

Last couple of things, and that is all for tonight:

U.S. Army wants new 155mm artillery system

The U.S. Army this week took another step toward replacing the current fleet of towed howitzers, releasing a request for proposals for more mobile, lethal, and survivable 155mm artillery systems. The

defence-blog.com

U.S. Army wants new 155mm artillery system

The U.S. Army this week took another step toward replacing the current fleet of towed howitzers, releasing a request for proposals for more mobile, lethal, and survivable 155mm artillery systems.

The Pentagon is looking for industry solutions that are able to meet U.S. Army future requirements of the 155mm mobile howitzer program.

On Jul. 30, the Army posted a solicitation on the U.S. government’s main contracting website, for vendors to participate in a Shoot-Off Evaluation concerning the future of the Army’s mobile howitzer effort at Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona in FY2021.

Also added that the United States Government recognizes the risk of US ammunition compatibility with foreign cannon systems, so the USG will provide a M776 Cannon Assembly, currently used on M777 Towed Howitzer and qualified with all US ammunition, to vendors who wish to utilize it in their Shoot-off Evaluation system. Providing the M776 Cannon as Government Furnished Equipment is contingent upon the contractor having a viable integration concept for its use.

At the same time, a collaborative team from AM General and The Mandus Group developing new 155mm forward recoiling howitzer mounted on an FMTV ( Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles), called the Brutus.

Howitzer is capable of using a wide range of ammunition for deployment against protected and unprotected targets, to create counter-mobility obstacles to block the manoeuvres of enemy armoured forces and to obscure or illuminate an area.

No further details on the howitzer have been released but noted that the U.S. Army interested in new, more mobile, lightweight artillery pieces.

_
Don't make too much of this, we are still in the middle of the Extended Range Cannon Artillery program after all. This is just a feeler being put out to the industry to survey capabilities. Unless something truly spectacular pops up, don't expect much.
____________________________________________

Army takes next step toward buying more M72 light rocket launchers

The U.S. Army has finalized its requirements for M72-series light rocket launchers. The solicitation, released Jul 31 on Federal Business Opportunities, states that the U.S. Army Contracting Command i

defence-blog.com

The U.S. Army has finalized its requirements for M72-series light rocket launchers.

The solicitation, released Jul 31 on Federal Business Opportunities, states that the U.S. Army Contracting Command issues the subject solicitation for the manufacturing, testing and delivery of the M72 Light Assault Weapon (LAW) variants and components for Shoulder Launched Munitions (SLM) training systems.

In 2019, the Army Contracting Command announced it is conducting market research to fund information from industry for production program supporting Army and Marine Corps ammunition stockpile requirements for M72 LAW and its variants, the M72AS Sub-caliber Trainer Launcher, the M72AS Sub-caliber Trainer Rocket, and the Components for Shoulder Launched Munitions Training Systems (SLM).

According to notice, the Army Contracting Command requires:

M72A7 LAW with Graze Fuze Function and Night Vision Device (NVD) Mount. The M72A7 LAW utilizes a shaped charge warhead, is used against light armored targets and can only be fired in the open field environment.
M72E8 LAW Fire from Enclosure and NVD Mount. The M72E8 LAW utilizes a shaped charge warhead with base detonating fuze, is used against light armored targets and can be fired from within an enclosure.
M72A9 LAW Anti-Structure Munition and NVD Mount. The M72A9 LAW has the capability to penetrate brick, adobe, concrete block, and urban terrain walls, doors and windows in most common Military Operations and can only be fired in the open field environment.
M72E10 LAW Fire from Enclosure Anti-Structure Munition and NVD Mount. The M72E10 LAW contains an enhanced explosives warhead with base detonating fuze, has the capability to penetrate brick, adobe, concrete block, and urban terrain walls and can be fired from within an enclosure.
M72AS Trainer Launchers. The M72AS trainer launcher is the training system for the M72 weapon system.
M72AS 21mm Subcaliber Training Rockets. The 21mm Training rocket is the ammunition for the M72AS training system
M72AS 21mm Subcaliber Inert Trainer. The Inert Training rocket is a classroom tool for the M72AS training system.
Components for Shoulder Launched Munitions Training Systems (various)

The M72 LAW is a portable one-shot 66-mm unguided anti-tank weapon that is issued as a round of ammunition.
_
You know, they have been trying to kill the LAW for decades.

Replacements have come and gone home in shame.

The LAW never dies...

Stoneheart · Aug 4, 2020

BONE_Buddy said:
The U.S. Army this week took another step toward replacing the current fleet of towed howitzers, releasing a request for proposals for more mobile, lethal, and survivable 155mm artillery systems.

what does that even mean? sounds alot like how you would describe the M109...

BONE_Buddy said:
Howitzer is capable of using a wide range of ammunition for deployment against protected and unprotected targets, to create counter-mobility obstacles to block the manoeuvres of enemy armoured forces and to obscure or illuminate an area.

ohh yes, going back to WW1... We all know that this kind of tactic doesnt work because the enemy will just shift forces to one point and break through there...

the French couldnt hold a super defensive line with superior numbers and superior material. the only good thing about this is that the CCP outlawed the word ghost, so we will see no chinese ghost division---

Snekposter · Aug 5, 2020

I don't even know where to begin with your idiocy, Stoneheart. The Maginot was set up explicitly to force the Germans to go around it, ideally to a pre-established defensive line on Belgium's river border with German, and alternately through the Ardennes forest. If it wasn't for a few cockups by the ever-incompetent French general staff the Blitzkrieg never would have happened thanks to that traffic jam you guys had in there.

As to the actual quality posting, first, with the new landing ships China might be capable of forcing a landing against the island fortress otherwise known as Taiwan... in twenty years of training and upgrades, assuming the Taiwanese never upgrade their own capabilities. From my admittedly limited understanding of the situation that whole strait is one giant navigational hazard, and Taiwan's got enough layered defenses set up on all those tiny islands to make Omaha Beach look like the early days of Barbarossa.

And the LAW... it works. Its as idiot-proof as a steel tube with a rocket inside will ever be, and its light weight, cheap, and is possibly the most versatile thing in a squad's toolbox of fun when it comes to urban combat, aside from the blocks of Composition C-4 they all have.

BONE_Buddy · Aug 5, 2020

So, I have an F-16 Triple Threat here:

https://www.robins.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2297989/eglin-four-ship-conducts-advanced-radar-test/

Eglin four-ship conducts advanced radar test

{ Lt. Col. Benjamin Wysack, Lt. Col. Stephen Graham, Jack Harman, and Maj. Justing Eagan evaluate the first-ever formation of F-16 Fighting Falcons equipped with Active Electronically Scanned Array radars over Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., July 2. This mission included F-16s and F-15s with fighter pilots representing civilian, contractor, Reservist, Guard, and Active Duty components conducting combined developmental and operational testing. (U.S. Air Force photo by Jack Harman) }

{ Four F-16 Fighting Falcons from the 96th Test Wing and the 53rd Wing stand ready for takeoff at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., July 2, 2020. This mission tested the new APG-83 Active Electronically Scanned Array radar before fielding this capability to the Air Force’s F-16 fleet. (U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Tristan McIntire) }

{ Maintainers from the 96th Test Wing prepare an F-16 Fighting Falcon for a flight test at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, July 2, 2020. This mission tested the new APG-83 Active Electronically Scanned Array radar before fielding this capability to the Air Force’s F-16 fleet. (U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Tristan McIntire) }

{ Four F-16 Fighting Falcons from the 96th Test Wing and the 53rd Wing stand ready for takeoff at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., July 2, 2020. This mission tested the new APG-83 Active Electronically Scanned Array radar before fielding this capability to the Air Force’s F-16 fleet. (U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Tristan McIntire) }

{ Four F-16 Fighting Falcons from the 96th Test Wing and the 53rd Wing stand ready for takeoff at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., July 2, 2020. This mission tested the new APG-83 Active Electronically Scanned Array radar before fielding this capability to the Air Force’s F-16 fleet. (U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Tristan McIntire) }

EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, Fla. --
A combined developmental and operational test team successfully tested a new F-16 radar capability during a four-ship formation of F-16s here July 2.

The mission was the first of its kind to test the APG-83 Active Electronically Scanned Array radar on four fighter aircraft at the same time. The Operational Flight Program Combined Test Force, 40th Flight Test Squadron and the 85th Test and Evaluation Squadron were responsible for fielding the radar for the Air Force’s F-16 fleet.

The radar equips F-16s with 5th generation radar capabilities similar to F-22s and F-35s. The system is used in the suppression or destruction of enemy air defenses, to include targeting radars and surface-air-missiles. It also improves existing air-to-air capabilities and enhances air-to-ground mapping.

“This capability allows us to target the northwest corner of a small building or the cockpit of an aircraft from several miles away, beyond line-of-sight,” said Jack Harman, 40th FLTS F-16 fighter test pilot. “[The radar] improves our ability to identify the threat prior to us being targeted – we no longer have to be inside a threat envelope in order to detect it.”

By testing four AESA radars at the same time, the team assessed whether the aircraft experience interference and evaluated if the signal improved or degraded while operating together. The four-ship is the basic fighting formation of fighter aircraft, allowing testers to see how the radar responds in a combat scenario.

“From an F-16 standpoint, we haven’t received significant hardware in years,” said Harman. “We’re undergoing at least 13 new programs for the aircraft and it’s happening almost simultaneously.”

The OFP CTF specializes in managing the integration of developmental and operational tests allowing for combined test teams to fully field requirements under one commander.

“Not only do we go out and fly the hardware and test it – we’re responsible for making sure it’s suitable and meets the needs and requirements of operators,” said Lt. Col. Ben Wysack, F-16 Test division director. “We’re always updating the software, making it better, fixing bugs and adding new capabilities.”

As the lead subject matter expert for the F-16 AESA radar, Wysack teaches other pilots across the Air Force how to use the radar and works on the curriculum for the next software version.

This radar test included F-16 and F-15 personnel representing civilian, contractor, Reserve, National Guard and active duty components. Additionally, the 309th Software Maintenance Wing out of Hill AFB, Utah, produced the code for the test software.

“From a program manager’s perspective, this has been a rewarding journey – from managing the program at Wright-Patterson to test and fielding here at Eglin,” said Lt. Col. Alec Spencer, 40th FLTS director of operations.”

While the radar will continue to be tested here for the foreseeable future, the system is expected to be operational across the F-16 fleet later this year.

“Accomplishing this, especially under COVID-19 conditions, was a herculean effort. We’re seeing flexibility from different organizations in order to make it happen,” said Harman. “This test alone is a huge win for the F-16 community.”

___________________________________

https://elbitsystems.com/pr-new/joint-helmet-mounted-cueing-system-jhmcs-ii-undergoes-flight-testing-aboard-f-16v/?pageid=PR%20-20%20News

03.08.2020
Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS) II Undergoes Flight Testing Aboard F-16V

FORT WORTH, TEXAS – AUGUST 3, 2020 – JHMCS II, the newest member of the Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System family of products, is being flight tested aboard the Lockheed Martin F-16V aircraft in the United States. This follows the completion of JHMCS II safety qualification testing, including windblast, tower and sled tests.

These flight tests are part of the U.S. Air Force’s Military Flight Release (MFR) for the F-16V launch customer, a critical milestone that signifies the aircraft and its subsystems have met specification performance, safety, reliability, and maintainability criteria. The JHMCS II is the only Helmet Mounted Display (HMD) integrated and tested on the F-16V.

JHMCS II incorporates key new technological advancements while drawing on the strong legacy of the JHMCS family of HMDs. It features visor-projected symbology, an optical/inertial tracker and up-look reticles that fully exploit high off-boresight visual cueing and targeting for advanced weaponry, avionics and sensors. A day display module and a night module enabling modified -4949 Aviator Night Vision Goggles provide symbology in all flight conditions with one-handed in-flight switching capability.

“JHMCS II is designed to increase lethality, mission effectiveness and pilot safety,” said Raanan Horowitz, President and CEO of Elbit Systems of America. “The helmet mounted display’s improved center of gravity reduces neck strain which increases pilot safety and comfort.”

WP_Joint-Helmet-Mounted-Cueing-System-II-Undergoes-Flight-TestingAboard-F-16V.jpg

As the formal baseline Helmet Mounted Display (HMD) of F-16V and F-16 block 70/72 aircraft, the JHMCS II already has been selected by several international customers. In addition, variants of JHMCS II were selected by other air forces worldwide to equip a wide range of fighter aircraft. More than 6,000 JHMCS HMDs have been supplied to military pilots in dozens of countries.

“Flight testing is the next milestone as we partner with Collins Elbit Vision Systems on the JHMCS II, and we look forward to continued collaboration,” says Danya Trent, Vice President, F-16 for Lockheed Martin. “We are incredibly proud to support F-16 pilots with this cutting-edge technology, enabling their critical missions around the world.”

The JHMCS II is manufactured and delivered through Collins Elbit Vision Systems (CEVS), a joint venture between Collins Aerospace and Elbit Systems of America.

~cut out legalese~
--------------------------------------------------------

U.S. Air Force F-16 flew its first-ever operational flight carrying new Legion Pod

A U.S. Air Force F-16 Fighting Falcon fighter aircraft flew its first-ever operational flight carrying a new multi-function sensor system, according to Eglin Air Force Base Public Affairs 1st Lt. Sava

defence-blog.com

U.S. Air Force F-16 flew its first-ever operational flight carrying new Legion Pod

A U.S. Air Force F-16 Fighting Falcon fighter aircraft flew its first-ever operational flight carrying a new multi-function sensor system, according to Eglin Air Force Base Public Affairs 1st Lt. Savannah Bray.

On 13 July, an F-16 Fighting Falcon piloted by Lt. Col. Jeremy “Clutch” Castor, from the 85th Test and Evaluation Squadron, flew its first-ever operational flight carrying the Legion Pod that supports collaborative targeting operations in radar-denied environments.

Use of the Legion Pod and its IRST capabilities allows a pilot to have another sensor that integrates with the aircraft and builds a more complete picture of the battlespace. Because of its use of infrared, it provides the ability to identify, track, and shoot enemy aircraft in a RADAR jamming environment to include stealth aircraft that a traditional radar may not see.

“The men and women of the 84th TES continue to push the bounds of Developmental and Operational Test and Evaluation, advancing USAF and DoD (Department of Defense) objectives in leaps and bounds across the multi-domain warfighting spectrum,” said Lt. Col. Zachary Probst, Commander, 84th TES.

The Operational Flight Program Combined Test Force is known for its ability to significantly reduce the test timeline by integrating developmental and operational test from start to finish, requirements to fielding. This approach allows operational flight programs, and the hardware that integrates with them, like the Legion Pod, to be expeditiously fielded to the Combat Air Forces. The F-16 Legion Pod integration leveraged the previous achievements on the F-15C which reduced the test timeline on the F-16 from four years to only six months and saved the Air Force over $1 million in software design and integration costs, effectively “Bringing the Future Faster.”

---------_______________--------------_______________---------
These upgrades and more will allow the Viper to continue to be one of the most lethal multi-role fighters in existence.

The Dude · Aug 5, 2020

BONE_Buddy said:
Last couple of things, and that is all for tonight:

U.S. Army wants new 155mm artillery system

The U.S. Army this week took another step toward replacing the current fleet of towed howitzers, releasing a request for proposals for more mobile, lethal, and survivable 155mm artillery systems. The

defence-blog.com

U.S. Army wants new 155mm artillery system
View attachment 1494161

The U.S. Army this week took another step toward replacing the current fleet of towed howitzers, releasing a request for proposals for more mobile, lethal, and survivable 155mm artillery systems.

The Pentagon is looking for industry solutions that are able to meet U.S. Army future requirements of the 155mm mobile howitzer program.

On Jul. 30, the Army posted a solicitation on the U.S. government’s main contracting website, for vendors to participate in a Shoot-Off Evaluation concerning the future of the Army’s mobile howitzer effort at Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona in FY2021.

Also added that the United States Government recognizes the risk of US ammunition compatibility with foreign cannon systems, so the USG will provide a M776 Cannon Assembly, currently used on M777 Towed Howitzer and qualified with all US ammunition, to vendors who wish to utilize it in their Shoot-off Evaluation system. Providing the M776 Cannon as Government Furnished Equipment is contingent upon the contractor having a viable integration concept for its use.

At the same time, a collaborative team from AM General and The Mandus Group developing new 155mm forward recoiling howitzer mounted on an FMTV ( Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles), called the Brutus.

Howitzer is capable of using a wide range of ammunition for deployment against protected and unprotected targets, to create counter-mobility obstacles to block the manoeuvres of enemy armoured forces and to obscure or illuminate an area.

No further details on the howitzer have been released but noted that the U.S. Army interested in new, more mobile, lightweight artillery pieces.

_
Don't make too much of this, we are still in the middle of the Extended Range Cannon Artillery program after all. This is just a feeler being put out to the industry to survey capabilities. Unless something truly spectacular pops up, don't expect much.
____________________________________________

Army takes next step toward buying more M72 light rocket launchers

The U.S. Army has finalized its requirements for M72-series light rocket launchers. The solicitation, released Jul 31 on Federal Business Opportunities, states that the U.S. Army Contracting Command i

defence-blog.com

View attachment 1494174

The U.S. Army has finalized its requirements for M72-series light rocket launchers.

The solicitation, released Jul 31 on Federal Business Opportunities, states that the U.S. Army Contracting Command issues the subject solicitation for the manufacturing, testing and delivery of the M72 Light Assault Weapon (LAW) variants and components for Shoulder Launched Munitions (SLM) training systems.

In 2019, the Army Contracting Command announced it is conducting market research to fund information from industry for production program supporting Army and Marine Corps ammunition stockpile requirements for M72 LAW and its variants, the M72AS Sub-caliber Trainer Launcher, the M72AS Sub-caliber Trainer Rocket, and the Components for Shoulder Launched Munitions Training Systems (SLM).

According to notice, the Army Contracting Command requires:

M72A7 LAW with Graze Fuze Function and Night Vision Device (NVD) Mount. The M72A7 LAW utilizes a shaped charge warhead, is used against light armored targets and can only be fired in the open field environment.

M72E8 LAW Fire from Enclosure and NVD Mount. The M72E8 LAW utilizes a shaped charge warhead with base detonating fuze, is used against light armored targets and can be fired from within an enclosure.

M72A9 LAW Anti-Structure Munition and NVD Mount. The M72A9 LAW has the capability to penetrate brick, adobe, concrete block, and urban terrain walls, doors and windows in most common Military Operations and can only be fired in the open field environment.

M72E10 LAW Fire from Enclosure Anti-Structure Munition and NVD Mount. The M72E10 LAW contains an enhanced explosives warhead with base detonating fuze, has the capability to penetrate brick, adobe, concrete block, and urban terrain walls and can be fired from within an enclosure.

M72AS Trainer Launchers. The M72AS trainer launcher is the training system for the M72 weapon system.

M72AS 21mm Subcaliber Training Rockets. The 21mm Training rocket is the ammunition for the M72AS training system

M72AS 21mm Subcaliber Inert Trainer. The Inert Training rocket is a classroom tool for the M72AS training system.

Components for Shoulder Launched Munitions Training Systems (various)

The M72 LAW is a portable one-shot 66-mm unguided anti-tank weapon that is issued as a round of ammunition.
_
You know, they have been trying to kill the LAW for decades.

Replacements have come and gone home in shame.

The LAW never dies...

It'll be really interesting to see if the US Military starts looking seriously at those scramjet equipped rounds that the Israelis have been messing around with for tanks and field artillery. It definitely gives a huge range boost to artillery and would make them a cheaper, more viable alternative to expensive missile systems. The technology could even be upscaled and make naval arty more viable for modern warscapes, especially combining smart weapon technology and the scramjet range/speed boost into the same projectile. It would definitely be great for softening up coastlines for beach landings by Marines, something the old battleships excelled at and a role the Navy would be smart to fill again.

BONE_Buddy · Aug 5, 2020

Interesting technology, stupid clickbait article name (because everything that is additive manufacturing is 3D printing these days.):

The Marines 3D-Printed a Rocket Launcher Shelter in 36 Hours

Meet the newest tool in their arsenal: a 3,800-pound beast named the Vulcan.

www.popularmechanics.com

The Marines 3D-Printed a Rocket Launcher Shelter in 36 Hours
Meet the newest tool in their arsenal: a 3,800-pound beast named the Vulcan.

The Marine Corps recently tested a 3D printer capable of fabricating entire buildings within hours.
The shelter was built to accommodate a HIMARS multiple launch rocket system.
3D printing promises stronger, more durable structures for a more mobile Marine Corps.

The U.S. Marines recently tested a 3D printer capable of constructing entire buildings with quick-drying concrete. In just 36 hours, ICON's Vulcan 3D printer whipped up a concrete structure that can hold a HIMARS truck-mounted multiple rocket launcher system.

The result is a durable structure that can be built virtually anywhere the Marines deploy, sheltering personnel, vehicles, and supplies from the weather. See the printer in action here:

The Vulcan is a 3,800-pound beast that's designed to spray layers of proprietary Lavacrete, which is a fast-curing polymer concrete that can be ready for use as soon as 12 to 24 hours after printing. Lavacrete has a strength rating of 6,000 pounds per square inch (psi).

Concrete with a psi rating of 5,000 or above is used when “high impact resistances, very low wear rates, or extreme conditions are expected.” Plus, 6,000-psi concrete blocks radiation, leading to its use in the construction of nuclear power plants.

The Vulcan printer works by spraying down layers of the Lavacrete that harden into horizontal cross-sections of the building. Engineers can then lift the cross-sections upright and assemble them into a complete building. The process is akin to building a salami stick out of individually made slices.

{ The Vulcan 3D printer printing one of four arches. Once the arches were completed, they were raised upright and assembled into a single structure. }

In a recent test at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton in southern California, the Marines built a shelter for a M142 HIMARS multiple launch rocket system in just a day and half. The Marines printed four 26-by-13-by-15-foot arches, then assembled them together to create a single building.

Once the building was complete, the Marines rolled the truck-mounted weapon system inside for a fit check. The result was a weatherproof shelter that can protect Marines and their equipment from the elements, including tropical weather, enemy weapons fire, and even radiation.

The Vulcan, which operators control with a tablet, can print an 8.5-by-28-foot structure at a rate of 5 to 7 inches a second. It can print structures up to 2,000 square feet and has been used to build complete houses in the U.S. and Mexico. The Vulcan is fed by ICON’s Magma material delivery system, which mixes the Lavacrete ingredients to produce a building material tuned to temperature, altitude, and humidity.

{ A HIMARS rocket launcher rolls off a LCAC hovercraft during exercise Ssang Yong 14. On small islands HIMARS vehicles will not be able to maneuver away from enemy fire and will need protection to survive. }

A system like Vulcan is right up the alley of the new, leaner Marine Corps. The Marine Corps is in the midst of a reorganization designed with China in mind, reorienting from a second land army to an island-hopping force capable of operating in the South China Sea. Once the Marines seize an island from the enemy, they'll have to dig in to repel enemy air, missile, and ground counterattacks.

A shelter made of Lavacrete could protect Marine Corps forces from artillery, rocket, and missile barrages in ways wooden structures and trenches can’t. Vulcan could also conceivably be used to build fortifications, including aircraft shelters, bunkers, and revetments to store ordnance, supplies, and protect weapon systems.

The Marines’ experiment is part of the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) Construction Scale Additive Manufacturing effort.

"DIU's role is to accelerate commercial technology into the Department of Defense and with this demo, a technology that empowers military personnel to operate robotic systems to construct buildings and fortifications, as well as bridges, culverts, and anti-vehicle obstacles. After this successful demonstration, we will be working to scale this technology across the Department to the other Services," said Jeremiah Diacogiannis, DIU program manager.
_______________

It will be interesting to see what this technology develops into when it matures.

Deployed Ships Underway	Non-deployed Ships Underway	Total Ships Underway
46	33	79

Fleet Forces	3rd Fleet	4th Fleet	5th Fleet	6th Fleet	7th Fleet	Total
3	1	2	23	15	56	100

War Developing and Upcoming Military Technology - Something new at least 3 times a week.

Not dead yet.

Well hung, and snow white tan

Operation: Desert Snek

Welcome to the watering hole

Well hung, and snow white tan

Kill a Commie for Mommy.

Not dead yet.

Not dead yet.

Well hung, and snow white tan

Loaded Like A Boxcar Moving Like A Racecar

Operation: Desert Snek

Loaded Like A Boxcar Moving Like A Racecar

Not dead yet.

Not dead yet.

Not dead yet.

Well hung, and snow white tan

Operation: Desert Snek

Not dead yet.

Kill a Commie for Mommy.

Not dead yet.