Pics: Why is the USA constantly arming at an insane pace? – The US Air Force’s radical plan for a future fight er could field a jet in 5 years

[The wild, insane amount of money being ploughed into US arming, and new weapons designs, can only mean that the elite and Jews are extremely keen to ensure that at all costs that the USA remains the No 1 power in the world.

I am still utterly convinced that Europe will do better. However, all technology in white hands, especially military technology is good.
But one needs to ensure that this stuff is for the benefit of whites. Eventually we need to grab these things for our race.
What I do find concerting is the incredible amount of money that goes into US weapons development. There has to be a LOT of wastage too. Its beyond insane. It is probably fueled by Jews printing money out of thin air.
On the good side, the USA has 390 million guns concentrated in the hands of 50 million (probably mostly WHITE) families. This is where FREEDOM really resides. Using those weapons … whites can get the USA back from the Jews at any time. Jan]

Concept art released by the the Air Force Research Lab in 2018 shows a potential next-generation fighter concept, or F-X. (Air Force Research Laboratory)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Air Force is preparing to radically alter the acquisition strategy for its next generation of fighter jets, with a new plan that could require industry to design, develop and produce a new fighter in five years or less.

On Oct. 1, the service will officially reshape its next-generation fighter program, known as Next Generation Air Dominance, or NGAD, Will Roper, the Air Force’s acquisition executive, said during an exclusive interview with Defense News.

Under a new office headed by a yet-unnamed program manager, the NGAD program will adopt a rapid approach to developing small batches of fighters with multiple companies, much like the Century Series of aircraft built in the 1950s, Roper said.

“Based on what industry thinks they can do and what my team will tell me, we will need to set a cadence of how fast we think we build a new airplane from scratch. Right now, my estimate is five years. I may be wrong,” he said. “I’m hoping we can get faster than that — I think that will be insufficient in the long term [to meet future threats] — but five years is so much better than where we are now with normal acquisition.”

Air Force Prepares to Hash Out Future Fighter Requirements

Air Force Prepares to Hash Out Future Fighter Requirements

The Air Force is exploring a variety of technologies to help inform requirements for its next fighter plane.

By: Valerie Insinna

The Century Series approach would be a notable departure from the Air Force’s former thinking on its future fighter. In its “Air Superiority 2030” study released in 2016, the Air Force described a long-range, stealthy sensor-shooter called “Penetrating Counter Air,” which would act as NGAD’s central node networked with sensors, drones and other platforms. The Air Force would use prototyping to speed along key technologies in the hope of maturing them early enough for inclusion in advanced aircraft fielded in the early 2030s.

But what Roper calls the “Digital Century Series” would flip that paradigm: Instead of maturing technologies over time to create an exquisite fighter, the Air Force’s goal would be to quickly build the best fighter that industry can muster over a couple years, integrating whatever emerging technology exists. The service would downselect, put a small number of aircraft under contract and then restart another round of competition among fighter manufacturers, which would revise their fighter designs and explore newer leaps in technology.

The result would be a networked family of fighters — some more interrelated than others — developed to meet specific requirements and including best-in-breed technologies aboard a single airframe. One jet might be optimized around a revolutionary capability, like an airborne laser. Another fighter might prioritize state-of-the-art sensors and include artificial intelligence. One might be an unmanned weapons truck.

Sign up for our Early Bird Brief
Get the defense industry’s most comprehensive news and information straight to your inbox

What’s going on with America’s next fighter designs?

What’s going on with America’s next fighter designs?

The U.S. Air Force and Navy have ongoing efforts to create a new fighter design, but what does that look like?

By: Aaron Mehta, Valerie Insinna, David Larter

But the point, Roper said, is that instead of trying to hone requirements to meet an unknown threat 25 years into the future, the Air Force would rapidly churn out aircraft with new technologies — a tactic that could impose uncertainty on near-peer competitors like Russia and China and force them to deal with the U.S. military on its own terms.

Imagine “every four or five years there was the F-200, F-201, F-202 and it was vague and mysterious [on what the planes] have, but it’s clear it’s a real program and there are real airplanes flying. Well now you have to figure out: What are we bringing to the fight? What improved? How certain are you that you’ve got the best airplane to win?” Roper wondered.

“How do you deal with a threat if you don’t know what the future technology is? Be the threat — always have a new airplane coming out.”

This rendering of a Next Generation Air Dominance aircraft, by Lockheed Martin, shows a tailless stealthy future fighter. (Lockheed Martin)This rendering of a Next Generation Air Dominance aircraft, by Lockheed Martin, shows a tailless stealthy future fighter. (Lockheed Martin)

How does the Air Force get there?

Three industrial technologies enable a Century Series approach for NGAD and will set requirements for participants, Roper said. The first is agile software development — a practice where programmers quickly write, test and release code, soliciting feedback along the way from users.

The second, open architecture, has long been a buzzword in the defense community, but Roper said industry often uses it to describe a system with plug-and-play hardware. NGAD, ideally, would be fully open, with interchangeable hardware and the ability for a third party to develop software for the system.

The final technology, digital engineering, is the most nascent and possibly the most revolutionary, Roper said. While aerospace engineers have used computers for decades to aid in the creation of aircraft, only recently have defense companies developed 3D-modeling tools that can model an entire life cycle — design, production and sustainment — with a high level of accuracy and fidelity. The process would allow companies to not only map out an aircraft in extreme detail, but also model how a production line would work using different levels of manning or how maintainers would carry out repairs at a depot.

“You could start learning so much before you ever bent the first piece of metal and turned the first wrench, so that when you did do it for the first time, you already have learned. You’re already up to a level of proficiency that in the past you would have to be in the 100th aircraft to have,” he said. “And then if you kept going and you modeled the maintenance, then you could go after the part of the life cycle that constitutes the 70 percent of what we pay."

Few defense programs have used digital engineering so far, Roper said. The Air Force is requiring Northrop Grumman and Boeing to use the technique to develop their respective versions of the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent.

Boeing drops from next-generation ICBM competition

Boeing drops from next-generation ICBM competition

This move leaves Northrop Grumman as the sole bidder in the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent program.

By: Valerie Insinna

Boeing has also demonstrated the technology with its clean-sheet T-X trainer, taking its design from concept to first flight in three years and beating out two competitors that offered modified versions of existing jets.

During a May visit to Boeing’s production facility, Paul Niewald, the company’s chief engineer for the T-X program, described how the company crafted its digital T-X design with such precision that parts could be joined without shims — the material used to fill in gaps between the pieces of an aircraft — and only one master tool was needed during the plane’s production.

In total, Boeing was able to reduce by 80 percent the manual labor needed to manufacture and assemble the aircraft, Niewald said.

This artist's rendering from Boeing shows one concept for the Air Force's future fighter, known as Next Generation Air Dominance. (Boeing)This artist’s rendering from Boeing shows one concept for the Air Force’s future fighter, known as Next Generation Air Dominance. (Boeing)

But creating a simple training jet like the T-X is much different than manufacturing a penetrating fighter jet like the NGAD, and there is no proof that those new manufacturing techniques will work for a more advanced aircraft, argued Richard Aboulafia, an aerospace analyst with the Teal Group.

Aboulafia suggested the Air Force might be “overreacting” to the struggles of the F-35, where a “one-size-fits-all” approach and a focus on software and sensors produced a very expensive aircraft that took almost two decades to develop. But a Century Series approach, he warned, could prioritize the development of new air vehicles at the expense of investments in new weapons, radars, sensors, communications gear or other enabling technology.

“With the F-35, we had too much [emphasis on] systems and not enough [on the] air vehicle. Maybe this is going too far in the other direction,” he said. “Isn’t the truth somewhere in between where you have two or three air vehicles but a greater resource allocation for systems? In other words, the truth isn’t the F-35 and the truth isn’t the Century Series. Can’t we just think in terms of something in between, a sensible compromise?”

Rebecca Grant, an aerospace analyst with IRIS Independent Research, expressed enthusiasm for a new fighter design effort, saying that engineers could push out options for a Century Series style effort “extremely quickly.” However, she added that the choice of engine, the integration of its communications suite, and the decision whether to make the platform manned or unmanned would be key variables influencing the design of the air vehicle.

“[A Century Series approach] strikes me that it truly is traditional in a way because this is how it was done in the past. And I think that’s what they’re trying to get to. They want fresh designs. But the difficulty is always as you start to make the most important trade-offs and identify the most important criteria,” she said. “Those become pretty serious driving functions pretty quickly."

A (potential) game plan

The new NGAD program office will determine the final acquisition strategy for the Digital Century Series — including the length of the development cycle, procurement quantities and contracting mechanisms. However, Roper revealed to Defense News his thinking for how the program might work:

  • Put at least two manufacturers on contract to design a fighter jet. These could include the existing companies capable of building combat aircraft — Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman — as well as new entrants that could bring a unique technology to the table.
  • Have each company create a hyper-realistic “digital twin” of its fighter design using advanced 3D modeling. Use those models to run myriad simulations of how production and sustainment could occur, hypothetically optimizing both and reducing cost and labor hours.
  • Award a contract to a single fighter manufacturer for an initial batch of aircraft. Roper said that industry could build about a squadron’s worth of airplanes per year, or about 24 aircraft. Include options in the contract for additional batches of aircraft. Air Combat Command leadership has told Roper that 72 aircraft — about the number of aircraft in a typical Air Force wing — would be a viable amount for normal operations.
  • While that vendor begins production, restart the competition, putting other companies on contract to begin designing the next aircraft.

As it forms the NGAD acquisition strategy, the new program office will also explore how defense primes would be compensated for their work. Most current Air Force programs are awarded to the company that can provide the most capability at the lowest price, leading to a status quo where vendors underbid to secure a contract and reap profits only when platforms are mass-produced and sustained.

Budget watchdog warns this fighter could cost three times that of the F-35

Budget watchdog warns this fighter could cost three times that of the F-35

The Congressional Budget Office is warning of an expensive price tag for the US Air Force’s next fighter jet.

By: Valerie Insinna

But if a Digital Century Series construct is adopted, the Air Force may pay companies more money upfront during the design phase and require them to produce planes with a shorter design life; for instance, a jet with a lifespan of 6,000 flight hours instead of manufacturing aircraft designed to be kept in the skies for 20,000 hours, Roper said.

"That opens up the opportunities to do things very differently, different structural designs, not doing full-scale fatigue testing and all of things we do on the geriatric Air Force to keep things flying,” he said. “Where is the sweet spot where we are keeping airplanes long enough to make a real difference but not so long that we’re paying a premium to sustain them or not able to refresh them with better aircraft?”

One obstacle to the Digital Century Series approach may be persuading Congress to approve the necessary funding. The House Armed Services Committee already recommended cutting funding for the NGAD program in the fiscal 2020 budget request, from $1 billion to $500 million — a sign that the committee may not be sold on the Air Force’s path forward.

Roper said the idea has generated a “good response” from the congressional defense committees but acknowledged that lawmakers have questions about the approach. He also noted there will need to be a means to pay the bills, particularly in the early stages of the development cycle when multiple companies are on contract to design aircraft.

“I think the theory is sound, it’s the funding required and how big of an industry base we can sustain,” he said. “I don’t want to leave companies out, but I also don’t want to go so big that we fail because of funding, not because of the soundness of the idea.”

Source: https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/2019/09/16/the-us-air-forces-radical-plan-for-a-future-fighter-could-field-a-jet-in-5-years/

2 thoughts on “Pics: Why is the USA constantly arming at an insane pace? – The US Air Force’s radical plan for a future fight er could field a jet in 5 years

  • 13th January 2020 at 8:22 pm
    Permalink

    Simple, answer is in the PROTOCOLS (Talmud). The jews own or control all the munitions, aerospace, supply, metals, media, religions, education, finances, industry,transportation, retail, wholesale, etc, EVERYTHING a jew can steal from a white goy dupe. They got it “fair and square”, they issue the worthless currency which our white folks will kill for, and can buy anything or anyone with the click of a mouse. They laugh themselves to sleep at night at our meek subservience. We whites don’t have a clue, and actually think we are free…. ha ha ha ho ho ho yuk yuk yuk

    Don’t fret. I know someone who works in the Aerospace industry (Boeing) and they have shot themselves in the foot with Affirmative Action and bringing in third-world staffing with wogs, niggers, spics, watusis and every other kind of cheap Bonobo labor Trump and his jew masters can bring in to replace white engineers and technicians.

    In my relative’s highly technical department, the supervisors are niggers, female niggers, wogs, female wogs, anything but whites, they need to fill the quotas imposed by your jew government. Anything to displace whites and put them living under the bridges and underpasses. White Genocide.

    That’s why the 737 Max is looking like a flying coffin. A recent Boeing whistleblower said in his report that the supervisors were “monkeys”, meaning non-whites incompetent affirmative action quotas. This does not make for a good work environment when savvy efficient white workers are treated like white trash by mongrels, detritus, effluent, and assorted flotsam and jetsam called humans, and their white managers who are responsible for this discrimination.

    Until whitey wakes up to the jew Protocols, things can only go downhill for us.

    What we need is that when a white meets a fellow white, the main thing he should recognize that this is a fellow white, a tribe member. Jews do this, niggers do this, spics do this, wogs do this, every other non-white does this immediate recognition and bonding. Only whites could care less if the person is a fellow white.

    The jew has done a good job on us white goyim.

    Reply
  • 13th January 2020 at 6:28 pm
    Permalink

    Why you ask? Its simple.

    To prevent inflation. The U.S biggest export is the U.S dollar. When those dollars come flying back to the U.S they have to get spent & the biggest spender, money maker is the U.S military industrial complex.

    If billions move back to the U.S it will result is severe inflation, one way to curb that is in the defense industry which is a giagantic industry employing millions upon millions throughout the U.S and its various subcontractors.

    This keeps their military might going by continuing their military tech progress & superiority & at the same time making sure hyper inflation doesnt kick in. We are going to see America more active in wars, this slows the stock market down and it is better to slow the market down with rumors of wars than to have the FED jump in which will literally crash the economy if they introduce rate hikes which will result in higher interest rates, resulting in a very long down turn.

    What we see America doing is using economics like never before to prevent the fed raising interest rates, its great now but at some point America will be bankrupt through and through, down completely.

    If they continue to bomb places, create panic, tension on the international scene to slow the markets down then eventually that is going to result in a future conflict which is going to result in more dollars being spent to fund it.

    We could see low to negative interest rates up until the 3rd world war and after that, the scenario Siener van Rensburg painted comes true with America being bankrupt and nothing of its former self.

    America is bankrupt. It prints money out of thin air, which is used to knock out countries and install puppet dicators and exports all that inflationary, expansionary currency from their own market/country, injects it into building up the war torn country by lending billions and gets to control that country.

    Every single country which America has overthrown since the late 1880s has always had their banks funded with U.S dollars. The four or five countries opposed to this recently were Libya, Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Russia, China and Turkey.

    Not so much Turkey but since the attempted coup in Turkey, they have been doing deals not in US dollars but cross currency transactions. This is why China, Russia will have to be confronted because they keep on bypassing the U.S dollar and the result will be all that inflation will go back to the US and one coffee would cost you the same as it does in Zimbabwe.

    Thats what happens when you play around with economics & fudge the books and numbers.

    It always comes back to bite you.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: