U.S. nuclear weapons sustainment in a very bad way
The U.S. has a problem. It is a power with nuclear weapons. Like any other system those things have to be sustained to remain credible. This is not happening as it should.
“First we need to fix the infrastructure that supports our nuclear stockpile,” said Chilton, speaking at an Air Force Association conference in Los Angeles. But “we can’t just continue to sustain [Cold War weapons] in our inventory. … It’s a new world in the 21st century, and we need weapons that were designed for and support the needs of the 21st century.”
Of particular concern, Chilton said, is the deterioration of the nation’s nuclear laboratories, which he called “decrepit.” These laboratories must be modernized in order to attract and retain the scientists needed to sustain a weapons program, he said.
He also said that since the U.S. no longer tests nuclear weapons, the nation must continue to invest in an aggressive stockpile management program to ensure that existing weapons remain reliable and safe.
Chilton warned that the community of nuclear experts has become dangerously small and the military has failed to replenish the talent pool since the 1980s and 1990s.
“We have skipped a generation,” he said. “We’ve got to do something about that.”
.
Joint Strike Fighter history from 2000
Here is some more F-35 history. Specifically history about the Joint Strike Fighter and how it was perceived then back in the year 2000. I have had a copy of this article for some time. It was brought up again today by Winslow Wheeler in this Huffington Post commentary. Wheeler and his merry band are not the only ones that have warned us for a very long time about the F-35 program. There are others.
Carter is also contemplating a downsizing of the F-35’s performance requirements, perhaps in a manner that will be hard for overseers, if any, in Congress to find and/or in a manner that may complicate the program for the Air Force and further dampen the already tepid enthusiasm for the aircraft in the Navy.
.
Fifth generation sales effort to the Middle East
SOUTHWEST ASIA - Gen. Norton Schwartz, U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff, and Lt. Gen. Mike Hostage, U.S. Air Forces Central Command commander, pose with Emirati military members and crew members from Langley Air Force Base, Va., Nov. 13, 2009, in front of an F-22 Raptor during the aircraft's first visit to the Gulf region. U.S. Air Force F-22s are participating in bilateral training opportunities with Coalition partners at the United Arab Emirates Air Warfare Center through Dec. 10. The training is intended to strengthen military-to-military relationships in the region, promote regional security, improve tactical air operations, and enhance interoperability of forces, equipment and procedures. (U.S. Air Force photo/2nd Lt. Kidron B. Vestal)
How important is increasing sales of the F-35 to the Middle East? “Very” as the program needs to put some additional potential sales on the board least we forget that the purpose of the F-35 is to be a money -spinner as well.
How to generate that interest? Deploy the F-22 to the region for exercises. Lockheed Martin has already used the advertising angle of “fifth generation fighters.” This is a marketing campaign as seen from this video that shows the gullible that you aren’t buying into an F-35 per se, but a fifth generation fighter and lucky you, the F-22 is also a fifth generation fighter.
Stephen Trimble reported an additional connection from the Dubai ’09 air show and what this has to do with the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
This was supposed to be a big show for the Dassault Rafale. But after the first day it’s already clear the United Arab Emirates isn’t any closer to signing a long-awaited contract.
“I hope that within a couple years the UAE, like many other countries, will have a fifth-generation fighter,” says Brig Gen Ibrahim Naser Alalawi, deputy commander of the UAE Air Force and Air Defence. Alalawi was speaking at the Dubai International Air Chiefs conference held yesterday morning at Dubai’s Knowledge Village Conference Centre.”
So, yes the F-22 showed up at the Dubai ’09 air show. In addition it is going to exercise in the region with the UAE. This method isn’t new as the F-22 has been on this kind of a road show before with Japan.
“We can put you into a new fifth-generation fighter for half the cost (or even cheaper if you double-down on PowerPoint engineering analysis belief) of an F-22”, is the sales pitch. It always has been.
.
F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)–Not ready
So what will the senior pentagon procurement man Ashton Carter need to consider (along with other D.C. leadership) about the risks facing the F-35 program?
They have to consider the same things that the head of the Australian Defence Material Organisation (DMO) and other senior Australian leadership have to take on board. That is; that the F-35 program is still very risky. Risky enough that buying a bunch of “mistake jets” before the F-35 aircraft, as a combat system, is figured out, is the wrong decision.
This paper by APA (along with a raft of other similar documents) titled ‘F-35 JSF Program: Assessment of Top Level Programmatic Risks’ is a warning to our elected officials that it is just too early to jump in and procure the aircraft in any number.There are two big reasons. There is not enough flight-testing done to make any informed decision. Just as important is the human risk. That is not only the people making the aircraft, but politicians and military leadership using faith-based marketing, telling us everything is OK when it is not.
It is short-sighted for leadership to talk about purchasing quantities of F-35 aircraft when one doesn’t even know the value of the item in question. The F-35 is not ready for anyone to make large purchase decisions.
.
The USAF’s pain is that of its own making
The United States Air Force has some superb people and leaders. Too bad none of them are in the top leadership position.
In a situation of its own making, the USAF sees more pain ahead; that from the temporary help known as a Secretary of the USAF. All service secretaries are temporary help that have to be brought up to speed. In the end, their only contribution to the fight is warming very expensive office furniture at the taxpayer’s expense. Empty suits.
But back to that pain: the USAF has so many recapitalisation problems of hardware that it is hard to know where to start fixing things.
It would be helpful if the USAF would stop ordering steak on a hamburger budget. There is always time for one more air refuelling tanker fiasco, just for old times sake. The politics going into the next selection process is already there in place.
The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter will indeed have a shot at bleeding the USAF white. Unlike the U.S. Navy, the USAF has no plan-B if the F-35 goes bad. And the pain our temporary help refers too is contributed in part by the F-35. This is real loss of face for the USAF top leadership after blindly singing it’s praises earlier this year in front of elected officials.
A new long range bomber? This is feeble mined fantasy. It will never happen.
And what about those savings from killing F-22 production and retiring hundreds of legacy fighters early? This will only bring the death spiral of the USAF fighter recapitalisation effort into even more peril much faster. The other peril is that the USAF has been ignoring its core reason for existing.
And so, ever since the end of the Cold War, USAF leaders could have fixed this. We pay a lot of money to send these clowns to expensive “war colleges” and all they do is eat the books.
Add Operations: USELESS DIRT 1 and 2 and a failing economy to all of this and you have what is essentially the stripping of U.S. power projection. Past the year 2020, the U.S. will learn the true meaning of what it is like to be denied entry into a theatre of interest.
This cannot be allowed to happen for so many reasons that relate to world security.
.
Lazy watch behavior contributed to nuke sub accident
A heavily redacted report via the freedom of information act shows the cause of a U.S. Navy nuke submarine collision with an amphibious warfare ship last March. The report reveals that a lackadaisical watch environment existed on the USS Hartford and this contributed to the collision with the USS New Orleans at the mouth of the Persian Gulf.
Now that something this grotesque in command failure has happened, I am sure Navy inspectors will be even more on the lookout when they pack their hatchet and go on tour.
During the hour before the collision, investigators say, sonar operators in charge of monitoring nearby ships were chatting informally; the supervisor left his station; the navigator was taking an exam while listening to his iPod; and the officer in command did not check the periscope.
The lax behavior that day wasn’t unusual, according to the report. The Hartford’s command leadership routinely observed informal behavior by sailors operating the submarine, but did not immediately correct it, investigators found.
Those driving the ship would often slouch in their seats with one hand on the controls, and sometimes take their shoes off. Sonar operators and radiomen were missing from their stations for extended periods, and speakers were added to the radio room to listen to music during work.
.
H/T- War News Update
.
Drag out the video
Things going a bit slow? Make a swish video that has a complete disconnect from reality.
U.S. Navy version of “How?”
How? That is what the lastest LockMart adverts start out with as their theme for a variety of products. This would work well for the U.S Navy as their results of the shiip building roadmap beg lots of questions. For example; how can they possibly know what they are doing?
How then did we get to where the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) is so goofed up as to; well it is hard to decide where to start.
The cost of the ship when initially sold to congress was unrealistic. So much so that if you took several subject matter experts and had them guess at the cost of an LCS you would have received a better estimate.
With the LCS, we have a frigate sized ship that has a destroyer price tag and the firepower of a corvette. The need for ultimate speed is nuts too. Isn’t it better that the Navy keep their fuel costs down? And, what pirate can outrun a helicopter? As for patrol surveillence footprint, airpower in the form of the P-3, P-8, BAMS and so on, have that one beat too. I guess we should just be thankful that it is painted grey and floats.
CDR Salamander’s observations on a recent Navy revelation that the first real deployment of an LCS will need 20 more crew—who by-the-way will be in living facilities than can only cause no end of inconvenience toward the whole ship—show quite plainly that Navy thinking on the topic of future ship needs, has driven off the known map of reality. The U.S. Navy does not know what it is doing.
How did all this happen? The Wikipedia definition of groupthink has almost all the answers.
.
Links of Interest 18 Nov 09
MV-22, F-35B: Systems Engineering Fail!
Littoral Combat Ship–Truth trumps PowerPoint <–Note, important link… Once again: "Why can't Daddy program manage?"
Dubai 09: Lockheed projects strong Middle East market for C-130J
Keel laying ceremony held for Ford carrier
.
leave a comment