Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 58 of 58

Thread: The Rumsfeldian Revolution is Over !!!

  1. #46
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Defense Professional Shek's Avatar
    Join Date
    23 Feb 05
    Location
    Krblachistan
    Posts
    11,636
    Quote Originally Posted by Shipwreck View Post
    The Danaides' barrel needs more water :
    While I haven't seen this actual proposal, I can tell you that the baseline budget for the Army is too small if we want to maintain the current equipment and force. The baseline needs to increase so that we can deflate the supplementals and put the Army on track to be able to prevent deferred maintenance issues that put us behind the power curve even before 9/11.
    "So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand." Thucydides 1.20.3

  2. #47
    Banned Shipwreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Jan 06
    Posts
    2,347
    Quote Originally Posted by Shek View Post
    While I haven't seen this actual proposal, I can tell you that the baseline budget for the Army is too small if we want to maintain the current equipment and force.
    The Army keeps pursueing chimera projects in the name of the Rusmfeldian revolution, thereby pouring more water in the Danaides barrel instead of maintaining the current equipment and force :

    U.S. Army, DoD Spar Over Early End to Tank Buys
    By Kris Osborn
    Defense News
    Published: 20 Sep 14:29 EDT (18:29 GMT)

    The U.S. Army wants to shift more than $1 billion from the Abrams tank to the Future Combat Systems (FCS) program, but the Office of the Secretary of Defense is unconvinced, Army and Pentagon officials said.

    The disagreement springs from the Army's Program Objective Memorandum (POM), or procure-ment plan for 2010-15. Sent to OSD on July 18, it calls for adding money for FCS research and development, a total of more than $2 billion in 2010 and 2011, and adding about $350 million to FCS procurement through 2013.

    To pay for this, the Army would drop plans to upgrade hundreds of Abrams tanks and scrap a last planned purchase of at least 30 new tanks, saving a total of $1 billion through 2013. As well, it would slash planned purchases of Strykers, saving $1.3 billion, and reduce purchases and upgrades of Bradley Fighting Vehicles, saving $417 million.

    The DoD comptroller's office is especially opposed to cutting Abrams funds, a senior Pentagon official said.

    "There is something about having a 72-ton tank that can take hits and absorb all kinds of punishment. It has a place in irregular warfare," the senior Pentagon official said.

    But Army officials say they don't want to retire the Abrams.

    "It is simply a case of putting modernization dollars into the future force as opposed to 1970s technology," one Army official said.

    They say a more deployable and networked force built upon FCS technologies should be the spending priority in years to come. In addition, FCS officials maintain the new MGV will bring unprecedented survivability to the battlefield.

    "The MGVs will provide the soldier with an array of crew protection, to include advanced lightweight armor composites, crew mine blast protection, active protection systems, thermal management and radar. Most important, the FCS network provides better situational awareness, allowing soldiers to engage targets at greater distances," said FCS communications manager Paul Mehney.

    "This level of survivability demands great increases in vehicle power generation and distribution," he said. "The platform must also have enough space for hardware integration. MGV design takes both of these challenges into account. MGV is being designed to allow for continuous power upgrades."

    They also say the extra $2 billion-plus is needed because Congress has cut roughly $1 billion from proposed FCS budgets since 2004. The money will help buy FCS spinout technologies such as robots, UAVs and ground sensors.

    "Besides, most of the Abrams fleet has already been upgraded and modernized," the Army official said.

    Hundreds of tanks have been upgraded as they have returned from service in Iraq and Afghanistan, with early Abrams being turned into M1A1 AIMs (Abrams Integrated Management) or M1A2 SEPs (System Enhancement Package). The newer variants have third-generation depleted-uranium armor with graphite coating, digital command-and-control architecture, digital color terrain maps and new sensors.

    "The latest-generation tank has an independent thermal viewer for use in an environment where you can see multiple threats and engage them simultaneously instead of having the entire crew staring at one threat," said Lt. Gen. Stephen Speakes, deputy chief of staff for Army programs, G8. "A soldier has a right to demand that. In fact, it has materially saved lives to have that additional capability."

    The Army reset 241 Abrams tanks and 364 Bradley armored vehicles were reset last year, according to a November Army information paper on reset. The effort has put the Army on track to reduce the number of Abrams variants from five to two by 2011.

    Typically, POMs are sent to the White House and its Office of Management and Budget in the fall, so the Abrams-FCS spending debate will likely be resolved before next year.

    Although POMs are generally compiled every two years, the Army will likely create a new one next year after the new president takes office, the senior Pentagon official said.

    In its 2009 budget request, which is not part of the current debate, the Army asked for about $1 billion to buy 127 Strykers, $302 million to buy 371 Armored Security Vehicles, $52.9 million to buy nine Abrams tanks and $589 million to upgrade other Abrams tanks.

    One analyst questioned the wisdom of slashing fleets of battle-tested vehicles.

    "If this POM makes it through OSD in one piece, the Army is really rolling the dice. All this money is going to FCS, but you just shut down the Abrams, Bradley and Stryker programs," said Dean Lockwood, an analyst with Forecast International, a Connecticut-based consulting firm.

    The Pentagon's Program Analysis and Evaluation has asked the Army for additional justification on how the money would be spent, a senior Army official said.

    FCS Gaining Support

    Plans to add money to FCS in the 2010-2015 POM have been in the works for at least six months.

    FCS has been gaining support among lawmakers and Army leaders, thanks largely to recent tests that showed progress toward mobile battlefield networks and other gear.

    In an August test at Fort Bliss, Texas, FCS-equipped vehicles, UAVs and sensors shared pictures and full-motion video in real time.

    There's also Ground Soldier Ensemble, a newish program intended to give soldiers a secure, portable network radio.

    "Fundamentally, it provides two essential ingredients for what a small tactical unit needs," said Allan Resnick, director of capability, developments and assessment, Army Capabilities Integration Center, Fort Monroe, Va. "It provides secure voice communications among everyone in the squad. In addition to that, it provides a position update as to where a squad is, so soldiers can talk to each other on a radio that is secure."

    JTRS Handheld Manpack Small (HMS) radios are to arrive by next summer, replacing surrogate radios used in development. Its two channels allow access to classified and unclassified networks, anti-jam capabilities and more.

    Meanwhile, the first prototype Non-Line-of-Sight Cannon has begun test-firing at Yuma Proving Ground, Ariz., and begun mobility and reliability testing intended to clear its way for service in 2015. A total of eight NLOS-C prototypes will be produced between 2008 and 2009. Another of the eight Manned Ground Vehicles, the Mounted Combat System, recently had its 120mm cannon integrated with a turret. Tests of the auto-loader are planned for Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md., and service entry in 2010 or 2011, said Maj. Gen. Charles Cartwright, FCS program manager said.

    Link

  3. #48
    Banned Shipwreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Jan 06
    Posts
    2,347

    Latest debacle : USS San Antonio

    Heads should be rolling for this :

    San Antonio laid up in Bahrain
    By Andrew Scutro - Staff writer
    Navy Times
    Posted : Friday Nov 7, 2008 9:43:49 EST

    NORFOLK, Va. — The troubled amphibious transport dock San Antonio — in the middle of its first deployment — has been forced to undergo two weeks of maintenance in Bahrain due to leaks in its lube oil piping system, Navy officials said.

    “They had a scheduled port visit,” said Lt. Nate Christensen, spokesman for 5th Fleet in Bahrain. “They’re in port for two weeks for a maintenance availability on some lube oil deficiencies. It’s related to the diesel generators.”

    Pat Dolan, a spokeswoman at Naval Sea Systems Command, confirmed that the problem involved leaks in the system.

    The yard period began earlier this week, although the exact day was unavailable.

    In late August, on the eve of its maiden deployment, San Antonio was stuck at the pier for two days with a broken stern gate while the rest of the Iwo Jima Expeditionary Strike Group got underway. That was the latest in a string of performance problems with a ship that was delivered late and at $1.8 billion, $1 billion higher than planned. A July 2005 inspection report made clear the first ship of the LPD 17 class would have perpetual problems.

    Inspectors found “poor construction and craftsmanship ... throughout the ship,” and officials singled out problems with wiring. “Poor initial cable-pulling practice led to what is now a snarled, over-packed, poorly assembled and virtually uncorrectable electrical/electronic cable plant,” the report said.

    Its condition — along with another poor performance in 2007 — prompted Navy Secretary Donald Winter to publicly chide shipbuilder Northrop Grumman, saying the fleet “still does not have a mission-capable ship” two years after delivery.

    Now in the Persian Gulf, San Antonio needs an extra-long pit stop for a problem that was foreshadowed in the July 2005 inspection report. “Lube oil temperature regulating valves in the main propulsion diesel engine (MPDE) lube oil systems were improperly set. Incorrectly regulated MPDE engine lube oil temperature prevented the ship from making full power for a sustained period.”

    The April 2007 inspection report notes several subsequent lube oil problems.

    While the ship is under repair in Bahrain, off-duty crew will be taking liberty ashore as well as conducting community relations projects, Christensen said.

    Link

  4. #49
    Banned Shipwreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Jan 06
    Posts
    2,347

    USS San Antonio Pics

    This is CRIMINAL...

    USS San Antonio Weld Defects

  5. #50
    In Memoriam/OAF-Old Aggravating Fart Senior Contributor Shamus's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 Apr 07
    Location
    Sebastian,Florida
    Posts
    4,059
    Quote Originally Posted by Shipwreck View Post
    This is CRIMINAL...

    USS San Antonio Weld Defects
    By the looks of those welds the boys in the high school metal shop class could have done better.
    "Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves, therefore, are its only safe depositories." Thomas Jefferson

  6. #51
    Dirty Kiwi Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    10 Nov 04
    Location
    Te Whanganui a-Tara, Te Ika a Maui, Aotearoa
    Posts
    19,870
    Wow, that really is completely amateur.
    In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

    Leibniz

  7. #52
    In Memoriam/OAF-Old Aggravating Fart Senior Contributor Shamus's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 Apr 07
    Location
    Sebastian,Florida
    Posts
    4,059
    Shipwreck,what kind of pressure are we talking about in the lube oil system(lbs per square inch)?
    "Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves, therefore, are its only safe depositories." Thomas Jefferson

  8. #53
    Banned Shipwreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Jan 06
    Posts
    2,347
    Quote Originally Posted by Shamus View Post
    Shipwreck,what kind of pressure are we talking about in the lube oil system(lbs per square inch)?
    I believe it's around 30 psig.

  9. #54
    Resident Curmudgeon Military Professional Gun Grape's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Mar 05
    Location
    Panama City Fl
    Posts
    9,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Shipwreck View Post
    This is CRIMINAL...

    USS San Antonio Weld Defects
    More of that high quality workmanship that unions are known for.

    That's why we should always "Look for that Union Label" .

    And when we find it, run away as fast as we can

  10. #55
    Banned Shipwreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Jan 06
    Posts
    2,347
    More neocon vaporware :

    DARPA puts out request for flying sub

    Navy Times, Staff report
    Posted : Tuesday Nov 11, 2008 10:43:49 EST

    A flying submarine, similar to the one in the 1960s television show “Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea,” might be in the Navy’s future. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is looking for someone to develop such a vessel, which could be used by special operations teams to come ashore undetected.

    On the Irwin Allen-produced TV show, which aired from 1964 to 1968, the flying sub was kept in a bay in the belly of a mother sub, the Seaview, and was used for exploration, to transport VIPs to the mother ship and on some operations.

    The London Telegraph, which reported the DARPA proposal, described the concept as a James Bond-type vehicle that could operate as a submarine as well as an aircraft. DARPA wants a flying and submersible vehicle that carries eight people, plus equipment, at least 1,150 miles by air, 115 miles on the surface of the sea and 14 miles underwater in eight hours or less, and be able to make a round trip within three days.

    Basement tinkerers, get busy — the deadline for submissions is Dec. 1.

    Link

  11. #56
    Banned Shipwreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Jan 06
    Posts
    2,347

    More on the San Antonio Debacle

    Gator oil leaks: What went wrong?
    By Andrew Scutro - Staff writer, Navy Times
    Posted : Sunday Nov 16, 2008 16:31:30 EST

    NORFOLK, Va. — Experts who have examined the photos of major oil leaks aboard the amphibious transport dock San Antonio are calling the workmanship on the new amphib “sloppy,” “unacceptable” and “criminal.” One former chief engineer said any other CHENG in the Navy would be “thankful this wasn’t their ship.”

    But it is someone’s ship, and despite the finger-pointing, experts say the Navy has a serious problem on its hands.

    The ship that was handed over to the Navy late, incomplete and $1 billion over budget now has more unwanted attention. A little over two months into its deployment, the ship entered the yard on Oct. 31 in Bahrain to fix the oil leaks — an embarrassing midcruise pit stop that’s expected to last longer than the initial two-week estimate.

    Not long after the ship entered the yard, a series of photos showing lube oil leaking from failed welds in one of the ship’s main machinery spaces surfaced on the Internet.

    On Nov. 12, Time magazine called the San Antonio “the Navy’s Floating Fiasco.” And its newest woes have the attention of the Navy’s highest authorities.

    “The secretary has been briefed on the issue and has been getting periodic extended updates about the progress of the repairs,” said Capt. Beci Brenton, spokeswoman for Navy Secretary Donald Winter.

    While the brass is watching and the shipbuilder defends its work and promises to make fixes, one question remains: How was this allowed to happen? And are other problems lurking?

    ‘I’m fuming’

    Margaret Mitchell-Jones, spokeswoman for shipbuilder Northrop Grumman, defended the contractor’s performance and said the company is taking “corrective actions.”

    “The quality of our work is something we take very seriously, and we have a rigorous program in place that includes inspecting and evaluating our work to ensure it adheres to the Navy’s requirements,” she said in a statement. “When issues arise, we aggressively address them in an immediate and methodical way. Upon hearing there may be a problem with lube oil leaks on LPD 17, we immediately responded with technical staff to assist in the Navy’s efforts and began our own in-house critique.”

    She added that “we are proactively conducting a comprehensive review of our procedures, processes and policies surrounding the LPD-class ships currently under construction at our Gulf Coast shipyards. This effort includes the implementation of short-term corrective actions until, aligned with our customer, we fully determine the cause and need for any long-term corrective actions to ensure conformance and reinforce the commitment to quality we have in our work. We have invited and welcomed Navy participation throughout our own internal review process.”

    On Capitol Hill, lawmakers also are taking notice. Josh Holly, a spokesman for the Republican side of the House Armed Services Committee, said members “continue to follow [San Antonio’s] challenges. The seapower subcommittee is aware of the most recent issues, although the Navy has not briefed us yet.”

    Rep. Joe Sestak, D-Pa., a former vice admiral, said after viewing the photos: “It looks like more of a systemic problem from when it was built.”

    “The ones who suffer are the bluejackets,” said Sestak, a member of the House Armed Services Committee and former top warfare requirements and programs officer for the Navy.

    Naval analyst and author Norman Polmar put it more bluntly.

    “It’s criminal. It’s criminal that the Navy accepted this ship,” he said. “And this is two and a half years after the Navy accepted the ship. It’s bad enough that it was delivered this way.”

    Polmar said he thinks the San Antonio should be towed back to the shipyard.

    “As a taxpayer and as a naval analyst,” he said, “I’m fuming.”

    The first-in-class ship was delivered late and incomplete at $1.8 billion, $1 billion higher than planned. Two InSurvs — one in 2005 and a second in 2007 — made clear the ship would have long-term problems.

    Following the lube oil leaks, inspectors from Naval Sea Systems Command, Naval Surface Force and regional maintenance commands have gone aboard the follow-on ships in the class — the New Orleans, Mesa Verde, Green Bay and New York — to examine welds in the lube oil system. Navy Times has learned the engineers did not find systemic problems, but they did find faulty welds, according to sources familiar with the inspections.

    Who’s to blame?

    Those familiar with the situation do not blame the crew or Navy engineers for the problem, comparing it with the discovery of a flaw in your car’s chassis during a road trip: You may have topped off the oil and filled the gas tank before you left, they say, but you can’t be expected to examine work completed long ago, when the car was built at the auto plant.

    Even those responsible for ensuring the material condition of the fleet — the ultracritical Board of Inspection and Survey — do so under certain assumptions, one Navy source said.

    “Even InSurv wouldn’t have found faulty welds,” the Navy source said.

    Cmdr. Jensin Sommer, a spokeswoman for 2nd Fleet, said her command “certifies units for deployment and for integrated training with carrier and expeditionary strike groups so they’re ready for integrated operations.”

    “That’s a different type of readiness than material condition,” she added.

    Pat Dolan, spokeswoman for Naval Sea Systems Command, said naval engineers declined a request to explain the damage because they refused to comment on photos that had not been officially released.

    The photos were posted on a blog and later authenticated by Dolan.

    She did say that when the ship pulled into Bahrain, it was greeted by a crew of more than 30 engineers, pipefitters and welders flown to Bahrain from the U.S.

    As of Nov. 13, there were no initial cost estimates and no available progress reports. “We’re still looking at mid- to late November for the repairs to be completed,” Dolan said.

    She added that engineers are conducting a “root-cause analysis” and the repair and ship crews are fixing the flaws, noting “some that require replacing whole sections of pipe.”

    Earlier, Dolan said the oil leaks had not posed a danger to sailors working near them.

    Other problems lurking?

    Naval experts and engineers familiar with the San Antonio’s history are concerned that if these welding problems went undiscovered until now, what other problems are waiting to pop up?

    Jan van Tol, a retired captain who commanded the amphibious assault ship Essex, said he had deployments during his career commanding three ships that were interrupted by major breakdowns, and that it’s not unusual to have technical experts come aboard.

    But the size of the repair team and the nature of this casualty is notable, he said.

    “It surprises me to see oil leaking from such major points. I associate leaks with moving parts,” he said. “What’s unusual is the sheer number of people who are going out to address what appears to be a wider-ranging problem.”

    Van Tol said he thinks any such flaw — if detected — would have prevented the ship’s deployment. So how did the ship get as far as it did?

    “Are these systemic problems in one or more of the ship’s systems and physical plant? If they are, that goes to the question of craftsmanship and why did the Navy accept the ship? Are there ship-wide problems of a similar nature of poor craftsmanship and quality assurance? Who made the decisions to allow it to reach this point?” he said. “It raises the question of supervision and oversight, both at the shipyard and on the Navy’s side.”

    He won’t go as far as other critics, but he did say the situation “certainly doesn’t look good.”

    “It’s imperative to take a harsh, harsh look at how they got to this place. The Navy really needs to learn some harsh lessons,” he said.

    Those lessons may soon be in the syllabus.

    Sestak, the former three-star, has called for a hard look at the defense acquisition process since his arrival in Congress in 2007. He believes the problems aboard the San Antonio are a symptom of a larger institutional breakdown among the defense industry, the Pentagon and Congress.

    As a former commander in the fleet, he said he finds it hard to believe that the San Antonio could have been allowed to deploy if anyone knew these breakdowns were imminent.

    “I expected to be handed machines of war that had a certain level of readiness I then had to maintain. At times there were unexpected problems. Something could break. But I never expected to deploy with a machine of war, particularly a relatively new one, that had systemic problems that would take weeks at a time [to fix],” said Sestak, who commanded the George Washington Carrier Strike Group.

    “When it’s something that appears systemic to the construction of the machine of war, we’re giving short shrift to our warriors out there.”

    He said operators preparing for deployment care about how the ship and the crew perform; it’s not their job to inspect welds. Quality construction is supposed to be a given, something certified long before the ship is ever put into action.

    In pre-deployment certifications, “they’re not looking inside the welds. They’re looking at how it’s operating at that moment,” he said.

    Sestak said the LPD 17 class is just one weapon system among many with major problems.

    “I’d like to go back to ‘What are the institutional processes that permitted this to happen?’ That is where I’d like to go back to the sources and find out how this can be done better,” he said. “I have proposed that we should have hearings on acquisition reform in the new session, with LPD 17 part of that.”

    For Polmar, the naval analyst, the Navy’s experience with the San Antonio is a scandal worthy of investigation. He compares it to the infamous Air Force tanker deal that sent an Air Force civilian and an industry executive to jail.

    Besides the money and shoddy product, Polmar said putting such a problematic ship to sea put sailors’ lives at risk.

    “It’s as big in some respects as the tanker deal because it’s difficult to get to the truth of this,” he said. “It’s difficult to find out who accepted the ship. People went to jail and were fined in the tanker deal, and that’s the minimum of what should happen here.”

    What’s particularly shocking, he said, are the repeated problems in such a new product.

    “We’re talking about a warship,” he said. “You can see how the oil is leaking through those welds. You may see that on a ship that is 20 or 30 years old, not a ship that’s two or three years old.”

    One naval historian, who asked not to be named because of his affiliations, was asked to think of another surface Navy program this problematic.

    “The only thing I’d compare it to are [the littoral combat ship] and DDG 1000,” he said. “It just seems like the Navy can’t get it right anymore.”

    Link
    Polmar got it right for once : IT'S NOTHING LESS THAN CRIMINAL !!!

  12. #57
    Banned Shipwreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Jan 06
    Posts
    2,347

    Another $500M down the drain...

    Will Obama KILL this program ? I certainly hope so...

    U.S. Department of Defense
    Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)
    Contract


    FOR RELEASE AT 5 p.m. ET
    No. 983-08
    November 26, 2008

    Lockheed Martin Systems Integration, Owego, N.Y., is being awarded a $500,000,000 modification to a previously awarded cost-plus-award-fee contract (N00019-05-C-0030) to provide additional funds for engineering development efforts in support of the System Development and Demonstration (SDD) of the VH-71 Presidential Helicopter.

    Work will be performed in Patuxent River, Md. (28 percent); Owego, N.Y. (26 percent); Yeovil, United Kingdom (20 percent); Cascina Costa, Italy (15 percent); Rolling Meadows, Ill. (3 percent); Lynn, Mass (3 percent); Clifton, N.J. (2 percent); Denton, Texas (1 percent); Grand Rapids, Mich. (1 percent); and Rancho Santa Margarita, Calif. (1 percent), and is expected to be completed in December 2014. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

    The Naval Air Systems Command is the contracting activity.

  13. #58
    Senior Contributor BenRoethig's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Jan 04
    Location
    Dubuque, Iowa, United States
    Posts
    1,458
    Probably. The VH-71 has had a lot of problems.
    F/A-18E/F Super Hornet: The Honda Accord of fighters.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Jagger vs Lennon:
    By Parihaka in forum Multimedia & Jukebox room
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10 Mar 08,, 01:38
  2. Salute the forgotten hero on his birthday.
    By globaltracker in forum International Politics
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 04 Oct 06,, 03:02
  3. Iran Cultural Revolution Urged
    By Parihaka in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 24 Sep 06,, 13:01
  4. China's Tech Revolution
    By oneman28 in forum International Economy
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02 Jun 05,, 08:02
  5. Lebanon's Hollow 'Cedar Revolution'
    By lulldapull in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 76
    Last Post: 09 Mar 05,, 21:34

Tags for this Thread

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •