Fuerza Aérea de EE.UU. (USAF)

Fuerzas aéreas de todo el mundo y elementos que las componen

Moderadores: Lepanto, poliorcetes, Edu, Orel

Re: Fuerza Aérea de EE.UU. (USAF)

Notapor Pathfinder el Lun Nov 22, 2021 12:01 am

14yellow14 escribió:Muy interesante este artículo y lo que creen los mandos de la USAF que será su futuro:

Wargames Show Air Force Isn’t Accelerating Fast Enough, Hinote Says

https://www.airforcemag.com/wargames-show-air-force-isnt-accelerating-fast-enough-hinote-says/


The Air Force’s mantra under Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. has been to “accelerate change or lose,” but the most recent wargaming indicates, so far, the latter, according to Lt. Gen. S. Clinton Hinote, the Air Force’s futurist. The corrective action is to speed up the deployment of large numbers of unmanned systems and to proliferate operating locations to complicate an enemy’s decision-making, he said.

“Unfortunately, the wargaming says that we’re not accelerating our change fast enough,” said Hinote, the deputy chief of staff for strategy, integration, and requirements, during a webinar hosted by the Center for a New American Security. Brown’s mantra is proved right by the outcomes of recent exercises—about which Hinote did not elaborate—saying, simply, “We’ve got to go faster.”

He noted that the Air Force “used to” think it had until 2030 or so to achieve its evolution but now sees the need to get to a new posture by around 2027, given the advances being made by China and other potential adversaries. That horizon makes it “more difficult to imagine” starting new systems now that will be ready by then, making an imperative of connecting the equipment already in hand, he asserted. The short timeline also puts a priority on training, he said, which will make “a huge difference there.”

Hinote said the Air Force has recently opened up some of its exercises to Capitol Hill staffers and members of Congress, allowing the stakeholders to “help us shape the game, and we took the results back to them to show them what happened.” It’s “one of the ways of helping us tell the story of the change we need and the fact that we need to get after it faster,” he said.

The Air Force has pitched Congress to allow the retirements of legacy platforms and systems that are no longer relevant in order to free up manpower and funds for new systems, but Congress has been skeptical so far.

Future Combat Power

The Air Force is now looking to large numbers of unmanned aircraft as one way to achieve the combat power needed without the expense of building every airplane with a seat, displays, and an escape system for a human operator. The profusion of airborne targets, he said, will make an adversary’s job harder and make it easier for USAF to achieve air superiority at the time and place of its choosing. Hinote did not mention the Next-Generation Air Dominance, or NGAD, system as central to this mission.

The service will soon be doing experiments to examine “what does a unit of combat power look like?” he said. “If they’re flying all of these small unmanned aircraft around … to accomplish different things?” he continued. “I don’t know what that looks like, yet. … We need to experiment with that and exactly how to build those units.” However, he called the work “exciting … because we get a chance to shape that for the next generation of Airmen.”

Air superiority has become “much more challenging,” Hinote said, and “it will require us to think differently than we have in the past.” In fact, “I have a lot of trouble with” the idea of perpetual air dominance. For while total air control was a “prerequisite” to almost all military operations, but Hinote said, “I don’t see [that] as a viable thing to try to establish.” New thinking will be needed about “how we’re going to penetrate into those contested areas and how we’re going to create that effect of air superiority.”

The Air Force will have to put more thinking into defending the homeland from air attack and projecting forces forward to protect allies, he said.

“We are going to have to … reimagine air superiority for the next 40 years,” he said.

Hinote expounded on the need to multiply operating locations to complicate the enemy’s targeting problem, saying the Air Force will transition toward a force that increasingly will be “runway independent,” taking advantage of unmanned systems that can launch from a vehicle or patch of ground using “rocket-assisted takeoff” and recover by parachute, and aircraft that can take off and land either on a short runway or road, or vertically. He said the service must evolve from being concentrated on three or four bases to “tens … to thousands.”

“The best way of defending yourself, … given all the firepower an adversary like China could bring to a fight, is you’ve got to disperse; you’ve got to spread out; you’ve got to be able to take a punch to the point where they can’t concentrate on just a few targets.” That translates to more bases and more—smaller—formations, he said, where decision-making is in the hands of people on the scene applying commanders’ intent, especially if communications are interrupted, as they likely will be.

Adversaries have learned to make their crucial assets, such as air defenses, mobile, and now the Air Force must adopt that mindset as well, Hinote said. “We want to create that same issue for them.”

A Strategy of Denial

The Air Force will apply a “strategy of denial” in its future deployments, he said. “It’s going to be very important for us to create power projection capabilities that can survive and defend in those very contested areas, which means they need to be different than they were before,” he asserted.

Underlying it all will be joint and multi-domain operations, where decision-makers can view agnostically provided intelligence then choose from which domain an effect will be delivered. This, too, will complicate an adversary’s planning and posture, he said.

Asked what key capabilities the Air Force needs, “certainly you’re going to see better weapons. Right now we’re in need of a better air-to-air weapon, a better ship-killing weapon, and a better surface-to-air-missile-killing weapon,” he said.

The service has said little about its AIM-260 successor to the Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile, used for dogfighting, except that it’s meant to redress the advantage that China has with its long-range PL-15 missile. The Air Force is buying the stealthy Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) in small quantities and has talked about using directed energy systems to spoof or destroy surface-to-air missiles.

“The F-35 of the future will be very different from the one we’re buying today,” Hinote said, as it will have far greater sensing and communicating capabilities to populate a combat cloud of data that all combatant commands will be able to “pull” from. He also said he believes allies should be trusted with far more data and intelligence than they are now, to help them do better in a coalition fight.

The F-35 will be key to creating the data sphere that unmanned aircraft, with artificial intelligence, will use to accomplish their missions, he said.

“Use humans to do what humans do best, and I have a feeling that’s going to change a lot of things,” he said.

Hinote also asserted that small companies—new entrants in defense—will be needed to build the numbers of unmanned aircraft the Air Force will need, with the traditional primes still having “a huge role to play” building “those very military-specific things that really only they can do.”

But the smaller vendors are “an incredibly interesting part of the industrial base” that can make platforms inexpensively with “the potential to produce large amounts of … unmanned aircraft, autonomous collaborative platforms,” Hinote said. “That would be a defense industrial base really worth building, and we’re hoping to see that.”


No tiene desperdicio el artículo y aborda muchos temas sobre el futuro de la USAF pero aplicable a otras fuerzas.


Hay una declaraciones del retirado general Deptula, comentando eso mismo, que lo diga un general en activo, ya es la confirmación que la cosa va por ahí. Poco a poco retirarán los grandes Awacs como centros de mando y control, y esas labores las harán los furtivos, más el envío y toma de información por las distintas plataformas desde la "nube".
¡No hay golpe más fuerte que el que te da la realidad!

http://www.aeropathfinder.blogspot.com
Avatar de Usuario
Pathfinder
 
Mensajes: 3054
Registrado: Jue Jul 27, 2017 9:44 pm

Re: Fuerza Aérea de EE.UU. (USAF)

Notapor Truquichan el Lun Nov 22, 2021 12:15 am

El concepto general es "mesh" y edge computing. Todo se integra sin bloqueos y la info sale masticada desde cerca del sensor(adios awacs). La coordinación en algun caso concreto, puede ser, central, local o programada. Si un enlace falla puede ser sustituido por otro disponible. Lo que detecta un satelite y un dron y un f35 se procesa y decide adecuadamente(que facil es decirlo) si es el mismo ping o distintos, quienes le tienen marcado y eso alimenta a todos los que interese...y por todos puede ser hasta un misil tonto barato cuyo mayor y mas caro sensor son el enlace y una expoleta de proximidad, que se lo endiña el vector mas cercano, tonto o prescindible. Esta ultima decisión, de momento es manual del piloto y su avion o un Reaper, dentro de nada será de un wso o desde Alaska a un rebaño/jauria y mas tarde de la ia con poder de decisión una vez confirmada las dos velas negras al ping y esa ia puede estar en cualquier lado. Dependera de las ROE que se vayan creando segun crezcan capacidades.
Calmatum et Tranquilitis

Hunde en la miseria o indulta a tus terrores aeroprimigenios favoritos en: ESPANTOS AERONAUTICOS
Avatar de Usuario
Truquichan
 
Mensajes: 2204
Registrado: Vie Jun 25, 2021 9:21 am

Re: Fuerza Aérea de EE.UU. (USAF)

Notapor Orel el Lun Nov 22, 2021 2:23 pm

Desde luego, se viene esa evolución muy interesante, como vemos muy centrada en drones (por varias razones: generar masa de combate, abaratar coste, reducir bajas y poder lanzarlosy recuperarlos desde bases más pequeñas y por tanto más numerosas y dispersas). Y la aviación tripulada cada vez más como "gestora del campo de batalla" y menos como combatiente.
Llevamos años diciéndolo en el podcast y aquí.
Avatar de Usuario
Orel
Moderador
 
Mensajes: 45908
Registrado: Sab Sep 24, 2005 11:33 am
Ubicación: España, en el bocho

Re: Fuerza Aérea de EE.UU. (USAF)

Notapor champi el Mar Nov 23, 2021 6:58 pm

Sobre la disponibilidad: https://www.airforcemag.com/fighter-mis ... l-in-2021/
Nov. 22, 2021 | By John A. Tirpak
Mission capable rates dropped in 2021 for every Air Force fighter type except the A-10, reversing progress in 2020, according to data released to Air Force Magazine.

“Mission capable” rates are a common measure of readiness and relate to an aircraft’s ability to perform at least one of its core missions; for example, the multirole F-16 is tasked for air-to-air combat, ground attack, or suppression of enemy air defenses. By contrast, “full mission capable” refers to an aircraft that is ready to perform all of its assigned missions. Full mission capable rates were not provided.

The Air Force aims for MC rates between 75 percent and 80 percent on most aircraft, but none stood at that level as fiscal 2021 ended.

The declines are noteworthy even though the Air Force has sought to de-emphasize the rates and instead focus on unit readiness as a more accurate way to evaluate combat capability. Also noteworthy is that 2020’s gains were achieved at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, when greater restrictions were placed on the physical proximity of workers in backshops and depots.

The :arrow: F-35A rate declined from 76.07 percent to 68.8 percent from 2020 to 2021 as an increasing number of F-35s came due for their first big engine overhauls. A shortage of engines has grounded about 40 F-35As over the past year, a level that the F-35 Joint Program Office predicts could hold for several years.

Still, the F-35A mission capable rate remained above that of 2019, when it was just 61.6 percent.

With operating costs disappointingly high, the Air Force has throttled back on new F-35A purchases until the more capable Block 4 version is ready and operating costs can be brought down to a more sustainable level. Congress has gone along, with members recognizing that adding airframes has only exacerbated a shortage of parts and made it harder to achieve objective mission capable rates.

The next biggest drop struck the :arrow: F-15E fleet, which saw MC rates fall three percentage points, from 69.21 percent in fiscal 2021 to 66.24 percent. The decline continued a trend; in fiscal 2019, the Eagle’s MC rate was 71.29 percent.

The F-15C and D rates also fell. The C model declined to 69.48 percent from 71.93 percent, and the D model fell from 70.52 percent to 68.56 percent. As with the E model, the C and D declines continued a trend dating to 2019, when rates were in the 70s. The Air Force’s F-15C fleet is beyond its planned service life, and the jet is encumbered with numerous operating restrictions and “vanishing vendor” parts shortages.

The :arrow: F-16C and D fleet similarly shed percentage points: The C model turned in an MC rate of 71.53 percent in fiscal 2021, down from 73.9 percent in fiscal ’20. The D model came in at 69.32 percent, down from 72.11 percent. Both aircraft were above 70 percent in fiscal 2019.

The stealthy :arrow: F-22 continued to hover at just over 50 percent, reflecting the fleet’s relatively small size and numerous challenges. The Air Force said the rate was just 50.81 percent in 2021, about one percentage point down from 2020, and just about equal to 2019, when it was at 50.57 percent. The Air Force has chalked up low F-22 MC rates in recent years to challenges caring for the jet’s low observable systems as well as continuing repercussions from severe damage inflicted on about 10 percent of the fleet by Hurricane Michael in 2018. Parts obsolescence is also an issue.

The venerable :arrow: A-10s are the healthiest, if least capable, jets in the fighter force. Perhaps benefitting from an ongoing re-winging program, the A-10 MC rate ticked up from 71.2 percent in fiscal 2020 to 72.54 percent in fiscal 2021. The A-10 is generally less sophisticated than the other fighters, with fewer sensor systems, and its maintainers are generally more experienced, as most Warthogs belong to the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve.

When Jim Mattis was Defense Secretary early in the Trump administration, he ordered the Air Force and Navy to raise MC rates for fighter aircraft to 80 percent. The Air Force never achieved that goal, saying at the time that MC rates were not a meaningful indicator of overall readiness for war. A frontline deployed unit typically is close to 100 percent mission capable because parts are prioritized for such units, while squadrons recently returned from deployments can see MC rates decline rapidly.

Editor’s note: This story was updated at 8:12 p.m. Nov. 22 with the correct F-15D rates.


Contrato para QF-16 (23/11/2021): https://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts/ ... e/2852757/
...
AIR FORCE

The Boeing Co., St. Louis, Missouri, was awarded a not-to-exceed $49,677,000 firm-fixed-price letter contract for QF-16 Production Lot 6 Block 25 and Block 30 Unique Material for Drone Peculiar Equipment Package, program integration support, production line support material and warranty for drone peculiar equipment lay-in material. Work will be performed in St. Louis, Missouri, and is expected to be completed by April 30, 2025. This award is the result of a sole source acquisition. Fiscal 2021 Navy weapons procurement funds in the amount of $4,186,507; and fiscal 2022 procurement funds in the amount of $20,651,992 are being obligated at the time of award. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, is the contracting activity (FA8678-22-C-0003).
...
champi
Moderador
 
Mensajes: 13499
Registrado: Vie Nov 21, 2008 10:53 pm

Re: Fuerza Aérea de EE.UU. (USAF)

Notapor Atticus el Mié Nov 24, 2021 12:39 pm

Hay una declaraciones del retirado general Deptula, comentando eso mismo, que lo diga un general en activo, ya es la confirmación que la cosa va por ahí. Poco a poco retirarán los grandes Awacs como centros de mando y control, y esas labores las harán los furtivos, más el envío y toma de información por las distintas plataformas desde la "nube".


Eso es asi y tampoco lo es. Tenemos que tener en cuenta que la historia de los USA en este campo ha sido siempre el de una fuerte centralizacion. Ellos poco menos que estan entrando en el mundo de la informacion distribuida con el entusiasmo del converso. Pero eso ha sido la norma para los demas por mucho tiempo. Hemos sido los demas los que nos hemos partido los cuernos con enlaces de datos y sistemas de distribucion de la informacion. Los demas somos los que hemos invertido un monton en desarrollar y equipar con sistemas tipo MIDS a nuestros aviones. Y he señalado en cursivas lo de "equipar" porque ya sabemos que los americanos en enlaces de datos estan igual que todo el mundo, pero realmente la inmensa mayoria de su flota no dispone de esas capacidades. Pero que nadie se confunda que no estoy llamando a los americanos anticuados ni nada de eso. Todo es perfectamente logico y normal. Es precisamente la superioridad yanqui la que lleva a eso. La USAF da dos golpes en el suelo y te despegan quince Sentry para controlar y comandar el espacio de batalla aereo. Eso no estaba al alcance de nadie mas. Para ellos lo normal era ir en tu F16 "pelao" en este asunto y que un controlador en un AEW te lo de todo cocinado y mascado. En ese contexto, embarcar algo tipo MIDS pues tampoco es que fuera crucial. Pero para los demas, los que pegamos dos golpes en el suelo y vienen a regañarte porque no hay dinero para arreglar el parque, para esos "los demas" el intercambio de datos distribuido es fundamental porque es la manera mas barata de lograr parte de ese algo.
Durante muchos años ambas cosas han convivido sin problemas y los americanos pensaban, no sin razon, que el poder efectuar la gestion del espacio aereo desde una plataforma con una vision de conjunto muy superior a la de un señor en su cabinita era mejor. No tenian motivo para lanzarse a carreras por las redes de datos en las que otros llevan decadas liados. Pero como las cosas cambian, varios factores lo han hecho. El primero es que los AEW volantes ya no son invulnerables a los misiles de muy largo alcance enemigos. No necesitan derribarlos, con que se vean obligados a actuar con restricciones ya les vale a los malos. Ademas llega la hora de sustituir a esa famosa flota de AWACs y tanto dinero como entonces ya no hay. En el presupuesto de la USAF hay otras cosas que "chupan" como condenadas. Igual el tema de disponer automaticamente unas capacidades de gestion del espacio aereo tan bestias como con las que se ha venido actuando ya no esta tan claro. Y ahi estan los enlaces de datos. Y ahi estan los americanos descubriendolos entusiasmados. Creando estandares incompatibles entre si, con capacidades practicamente calcadas, como si no hubiera un mañana. Y descubriendo que la tecnica ya te permite hacer "cositas" con esos sistemas de intercambio de informacion que antes, en los ochenta, no se podia. Y recordad que la flota americana es basicament una flota ochentera heredada. Hasta que no lleguen las plataformas nuevas con sus nuevas caracteristicas las cosas seguiran mas o menos igual.

Pero que yo me alegro de que esten descubriendo el hilo negro y que, una vez mas, nos convenzan los anglosajones de que le pongamos "Drake" a un paso porque dicen que fueron los primeros en pasar por ahi. Ah, y el telefono recordad que lo inventaron tambien los anglosajones ¡Que Meucci ni que Meucci! Nada nuevo bajo el sol.
----------------------------------

"Un cerdo que no vuela solo es un cerdo". Marco Porcellino.
Avatar de Usuario
Atticus
 
Mensajes: 7123
Registrado: Jue Ago 22, 2019 1:57 pm
Ubicación: Mecanisburgo

Re: Fuerza Aérea de EE.UU. (USAF)

Notapor champi el Mié Nov 24, 2021 7:58 pm

Están sondeando el mercado para un DIRCM para aviones de gran tamaño: https://sam.gov/opp/8f8eb9ab07394913aa9 ... d83a1/view
...
TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS: Design approaches shall be in compliance with the following technical requirements. While this document reflects existing performance requirements, the proposed system will require evolution with technological enhancements/improvements to increase system capability against upgraded and modernized threat systems, and meet operational safely, suitability, and effectiveness requirements through a system’s operational life cycle.

The Air Force Large Aircraft Infrared Countermeasures Program Office, Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Wright Patterson AFB Ohio, is considering contracting with companies that possess capabilities to accomplish hardware/software design, fabrication, integration, installation, test, documentation, and product support of a system that meets the requirements specified in this announcement. Installation hardware includes, but is not limited to, system and aircraft wiring, mounting structures, fairings and countermeasures system Line Replaceable Units (LRUs). Companies must be able to design, produce a system, and support hardware/software test activities which include qualification and design verification tests, ground and flight tests, and accomplish flight and operation certifications for modifications on commercial and military aircraft. Companies must be able to provide technical data, computer software, and test results in support of airworthiness requirements as outlined in **MIL-HDBK-516C and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations needed for Supplemental Type Certification (STC).

The proposed system should have a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Assessment of 7 or higher and a Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL) Assessment of 9 or higher.

Product Support on the proposed system includes the following functional requirements: Program/Business Management; Logistics and Product Support Management; Process Control Management for sustainment; Sustaining Engineering, to include Configuration Management, Reliability and Maintainability Analysis, and Diminishing Manufacturing Sources/Material Shortages (DMSMS); Support Equipment; Technical Data Management; Training; Packaging, Handling, Shipping & Transportation (PHS&T); Software Maintenance and Management; Depot Repair of Government Furnished Equipment /Government Furnished Material (GFE/GFM) LRUs and Test Stations; Material Support and Technical Field Support. Interested parties must be able to deliver and sustain a fully compliant system by February 2023.

Typical aircraft types include, but not limited to, the following:

• Boeing 747-400, Boeing 747-8, Boeing 737-400, Boeing 737-700
• Boeing C-17
• Boeing CH-147
• Boeing KC-46
• Boeing KC-135
• Bombardier BG5000
• Lockheed C-130J
• Lockheed C-5
• Gulfstream C-37
• Lockheed HC/MC/AC-130J
• FAA/Challenger
...

Y cambio de algunas LRU para el B-2, posiblemente para mejorar la disponibilidad: https://sam.gov/opp/ed11a11054b34c209bc ... 51a28/view
...
The Air Force has a requirement for the services of Applications/Programs and Indentures (API) Data Cleanse. This project is to determine a configuration baseline for the acquisition of obsolete Line Replaceable Units (LRUs) on the B-2 aircraft in order to bring the operational aspect of teh B-2 sustainment effort to a long term war ready standpoint. This project will provide updates to the Air Force Technical Orders and updates to D200F.
...
champi
Moderador
 
Mensajes: 13499
Registrado: Vie Nov 21, 2008 10:53 pm

Re: Fuerza Aérea de EE.UU. (USAF)

Notapor Orel el Jue Nov 25, 2021 11:16 am

Sobre la disponibilidad: https://www.airforcemag.com/fighter-mis ... l-in-2021/
Nov. 22, 2021 | By John A. Tirpak
Mission capable rates dropped in 2021 for every Air Force fighter type except the A-10, reversing progress in 2020, according to data released to Air Force Magazine.

“Mission capable” rates are a common measure of readiness and relate to an aircraft’s ability to perform at least one of its core missions; for example, the multirole F-16 is tasked for air-to-air combat, ground attack, or suppression of enemy air defenses. By contrast, “full mission capable” refers to an aircraft that is ready to perform all of its assigned missions. Full mission capable rates were not provided.

The Air Force aims for MC rates between 75 percent and 80 percent on most aircraft, but none stood at that level as fiscal 2021 ended.

The declines are noteworthy even though the Air Force has sought to de-emphasize the rates and instead focus on unit readiness as a more accurate way to evaluate combat capability. Also noteworthy is that 2020’s gains were achieved at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, when greater restrictions were placed on the physical proximity of workers in backshops and depots.

The :arrow: F-35A rate declined from 76.07 percent to 68.8 percent from 2020 to 2021 as an increasing number of F-35s came due for their first big engine overhauls. A shortage of engines has grounded about 40 F-35As over the past year, a level that the F-35 Joint Program Office predicts could hold for several years.

Still, the F-35A mission capable rate remained above that of 2019, when it was just 61.6 percent.

With operating costs disappointingly high, the Air Force has throttled back on new F-35A purchases until the more capable Block 4 version is ready and operating costs can be brought down to a more sustainable level. Congress has gone along, with members recognizing that adding airframes has only exacerbated a shortage of parts and made it harder to achieve objective mission capable rates.

The next biggest drop struck the :arrow: F-15E fleet, which saw MC rates fall three percentage points, from 69.21 percent in fiscal 2021 to 66.24 percent. The decline continued a trend; in fiscal 2019, the Eagle’s MC rate was 71.29 percent.

The F-15C and D rates also fell. The C model declined to 69.48 percent from 71.93 percent, and the D model fell from 70.52 percent to 68.56 percent. As with the E model, the C and D declines continued a trend dating to 2019, when rates were in the 70s. The Air Force’s F-15C fleet is beyond its planned service life, and the jet is encumbered with numerous operating restrictions and “vanishing vendor” parts shortages.

The :arrow: F-16C and D fleet similarly shed percentage points: The C model turned in an MC rate of 71.53 percent in fiscal 2021, down from 73.9 percent in fiscal ’20. The D model came in at 69.32 percent, down from 72.11 percent. Both aircraft were above 70 percent in fiscal 2019.

The stealthy :arrow: F-22 continued to hover at just over 50 percent, reflecting the fleet’s relatively small size and numerous challenges. The Air Force said the rate was just 50.81 percent in 2021, about one percentage point down from 2020, and just about equal to 2019, when it was at 50.57 percent. The Air Force has chalked up low F-22 MC rates in recent years to challenges caring for the jet’s low observable systems as well as continuing repercussions from severe damage inflicted on about 10 percent of the fleet by Hurricane Michael in 2018. Parts obsolescence is also an issue.

The venerable :arrow: A-10s are the healthiest, if least capable, jets in the fighter force. Perhaps benefitting from an ongoing re-winging program, the A-10 MC rate ticked up from 71.2 percent in fiscal 2020 to 72.54 percent in fiscal 2021. The A-10 is generally less sophisticated than the other fighters, with fewer sensor systems, and its maintainers are generally more experienced, as most Warthogs belong to the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve.

When Jim Mattis was Defense Secretary early in the Trump administration, he ordered the Air Force and Navy to raise MC rates for fighter aircraft to 80 percent. The Air Force never achieved that goal, saying at the time that MC rates were not a meaningful indicator of overall readiness for war. A frontline deployed unit typically is close to 100 percent mission capable because parts are prioritized for such units, while squadrons recently returned from deployments can see MC rates decline rapidly.

Editor’s note: This story was updated at 8:12 p.m. Nov. 22 with the correct F-15D rates.

Un resumen rápido:

USAF MC rates for FY2021 (FY2020).

F-35A: 68.8% (76.07%)
F-15E: 66.24% (69.21%)
F-15C: 69.48% (71.93%)
F-15D: 68.56% (70.52%)
F-16C: 71.53% (73.9%)
F-16D: 69.32% (72.11%)
F-22: 50.81% (>51%)
A-10: 72.54% (71.2%)

Source: https://www.airforcemag.com/fighter-mis ... l-in-2021/

https://twitter.com/GuyPlopsky/status/1 ... 0829015044


Saludos
Avatar de Usuario
Orel
Moderador
 
Mensajes: 45908
Registrado: Sab Sep 24, 2005 11:33 am
Ubicación: España, en el bocho

Re: Fuerza Aérea de EE.UU. (USAF)

Notapor Truquichan el Jue Nov 25, 2021 3:58 pm

champi escribió:Están sondeando el mercado para un DIRCM para aviones de gran tamaño: https://sam.gov/opp/8f8eb9ab07394913aa9 ... d83a1/view
...
TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS: Design approaches shall be in compliance with the following technical requirements. While this document reflects existing performance requirements, the proposed system will require evolution with technological enhancements/improvements to increase system capability against upgraded and modernized threat systems, and meet operational safely, suitability, and effectiveness requirements through a system’s operational life cycle.

The Air Force Large Aircraft Infrared Countermeasures Program Office, Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Wright Patterson AFB Ohio, is considering contracting with companies that possess capabilities to accomplish hardware/software design, fabrication, integration, installation, test, documentation, and product support of a system that meets the requirements specified in this announcement. Installation hardware includes, but is not limited to, system and aircraft wiring, mounting structures, fairings and countermeasures system Line Replaceable Units (LRUs). Companies must be able to design, produce a system, and support hardware/software test activities which include qualification and design verification tests, ground and flight tests, and accomplish flight and operation certifications for modifications on commercial and military aircraft. Companies must be able to provide technical data, computer software, and test results in support of airworthiness requirements as outlined in **MIL-HDBK-516C and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations needed for Supplemental Type Certification (STC).

The proposed system should have a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Assessment of 7 or higher and a Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL) Assessment of 9 or higher.

Product Support on the proposed system includes the following functional requirements: Program/Business Management; Logistics and Product Support Management; Process Control Management for sustainment; Sustaining Engineering, to include Configuration Management, Reliability and Maintainability Analysis, and Diminishing Manufacturing Sources/Material Shortages (DMSMS); Support Equipment; Technical Data Management; Training; Packaging, Handling, Shipping & Transportation (PHS&T); Software Maintenance and Management; Depot Repair of Government Furnished Equipment /Government Furnished Material (GFE/GFM) LRUs and Test Stations; Material Support and Technical Field Support. Interested parties must be able to deliver and sustain a fully compliant system by February 2023.

Typical aircraft types include, but not limited to, the following:

• Boeing 747-400, Boeing 747-8, Boeing 737-400, Boeing 737-700
• Boeing C-17
• Boeing CH-147
• Boeing KC-46
• Boeing KC-135
• Bombardier BG5000
• Lockheed C-130J
• Lockheed C-5
• Gulfstream C-37
• Lockheed HC/MC/AC-130J
• FAA/Challenger
...

Y cambio de algunas LRU para el B-2, posiblemente para mejorar la disponibilidad: https://sam.gov/opp/ed11a11054b34c209bc ... 51a28/view
...
The Air Force has a requirement for the services of Applications/Programs and Indentures (API) Data Cleanse. This project is to determine a configuration baseline for the acquisition of obsolete Line Replaceable Units (LRUs) on the B-2 aircraft in order to bring the operational aspect of teh B-2 sustainment effort to a long term war ready standpoint. This project will provide updates to the Air Force Technical Orders and updates to D200F.
...


En consonancia con lo que vamos leyendo (mucho lo pasas tu) de otra de las estrategias a medio plazo de la USAF: Ser intocables les tiren lo que les tiren, por que saben que ahora si que no pueden evitar que les tiren piedras en ciertos potenciales conflictos.
Calmatum et Tranquilitis

Hunde en la miseria o indulta a tus terrores aeroprimigenios favoritos en: ESPANTOS AERONAUTICOS
Avatar de Usuario
Truquichan
 
Mensajes: 2204
Registrado: Vie Jun 25, 2021 9:21 am

Re: Fuerza Aérea de EE.UU. (USAF)

Notapor champi el Vie Nov 26, 2021 6:34 pm

Contrato de mantenimiento durante un año para los T-1A Jayhawk (24/11/2021): https://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts/ ... e/2854300/
...
L-3 Communications Vertex Aerospace LLC, Madison, Mississippi, has been awarded a $69,384,000 firm-fixed-price contract for contractor operated and maintained base supply of the Air Education and Training Command fleet of 178 T-1A trainer aircraft. Work will be performed at Randolph Air Force Base, Texas; Laughlin AFB, Texas; Vance AFB, Oklahoma; Columbus AFB, Mississippi; and Pensacola Naval Air Station, Florida, and is expected to be completed by Nov. 30, 2022. This award for option four is the result of a competitive acquisition and three offers were received. Fiscal 2022 operations and maintenance funds in the amount of $9,900,000 are being obligated at the time of award. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Tinker AFB, Oklahoma, is the contracting activity (FA8106-18-C-0001). (Awarded Nov. 22, 2021)
...
champi
Moderador
 
Mensajes: 13499
Registrado: Vie Nov 21, 2008 10:53 pm

Re: Fuerza Aérea de EE.UU. (USAF)

Notapor champi el Mar Nov 30, 2021 7:11 pm

Contrato del AFRL para el programa WEBSTAR ("Weapon Engagement Simulation Technology for Advanced Research", 29/11/2021): https://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts/ ... e/2855927/
...
Science Applications International Corp., Reston, Virginia, has been awarded a $99,000,000 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for Weapon Engagement Simulation Technology for Advanced Research (WESTAR). The contract provides for the development of multi-spectral and multi-modal phenomenology modeling capabilities towards the research, development and transition of Air Force munitions. Work will be performed at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, and is expected to be completed by Nov. 30, 2026. This award is a result of a competitive acquisition and one offer was received. Fiscal 2021 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $2,843,404 are being obligated at the time of award. Air Force Research Laboratory, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, is the contracting activity (FA8651-22-D-1001).
...

Por lo que he podido leer, parece que este programa se inició oficialmente en marzo de este año: https://sam.gov/opp/d28b50895fb247ec938 ... 777be/view

De uno de los pdf asociados: https://sam.gov/api/prod/opps/v3/opport ... ved&token=
...
Brief Program Summary: The Air Force Research Laboratory, Weapon Engagement Division (AFRL/RWW) is seeking a contract for research and development for the Weapon Engagement Simulation Technology for Advanced Research (WESTAR) Program. The overarching goal of this contract is to provide a cohesive research strategy to conduct basic, applied, and advanced technology demonstration research, that directly furthers the Science and Technology Strategy of the Air Force (also known as AF Vision 2030) to deliver all :arrow: five desired strategic capabilities: global persistent awareness; resilient information sharing; rapid, effective decision making; complexity, unpredictability, and mass; and speed and reach of disruption and lethality.
...
champi
Moderador
 
Mensajes: 13499
Registrado: Vie Nov 21, 2008 10:53 pm

Re: Fuerza Aérea de EE.UU. (USAF)

Notapor champi el Jue Dic 02, 2021 10:29 pm

Informe del CSIS, "U.S. Military Forces in FY 2022: Air Force": http://defense360.csis.org/wp-content/u ... rForce.pdf
champi
Moderador
 
Mensajes: 13499
Registrado: Vie Nov 21, 2008 10:53 pm

Re: Fuerza Aérea de EE.UU. (USAF)

Notapor Truquichan el Vie Dic 03, 2021 8:57 am

champi escribió:Informe del CSIS, "U.S. Military Forces in FY 2022: Air Force": http://defense360.csis.org/wp-content/u ... rForce.pdf


:c2
Calmatum et Tranquilitis

Hunde en la miseria o indulta a tus terrores aeroprimigenios favoritos en: ESPANTOS AERONAUTICOS
Avatar de Usuario
Truquichan
 
Mensajes: 2204
Registrado: Vie Jun 25, 2021 9:21 am

Re: Noticias aéreas

Notapor Truquichan el Mié Dic 08, 2021 1:21 pm

La noticia bomba del dia:
No se retirará ningún A10 en el FY22
El congreso ha aceptado el retiro de todos los modelos propuestos y cantidades, con la excepción del A10. No se va a tocar ni un remache de los actuales en este periodo.

https://breakingdefense.com/2021/12/con ... exception/

Tampoco es que sea la leche, pero ese modelo tiene muchos seguidores... Brrrrt.
Calmatum et Tranquilitis

Hunde en la miseria o indulta a tus terrores aeroprimigenios favoritos en: ESPANTOS AERONAUTICOS
Avatar de Usuario
Truquichan
 
Mensajes: 2204
Registrado: Vie Jun 25, 2021 9:21 am

Re: Fuerza Aérea de EE.UU. (USAF)

Notapor Truquichan el Mié Dic 15, 2021 8:27 am

Para dar jugo al ATT...
Aparece en los mentideros la opcion del Gripen C/D para el ATT
https://www.forbes.com/sites/erictegler ... f39c8c1c99

A ver, como he ido comentando, realmente lo quieren para ya y sería una opción interina para la que la compra de +100 aparatos les da igual de donde vengan mientran salgan baratos. En este caso hay hasta stock. Siempre los pueden recolocar como agresores al final, incluso vendiéndolos a Draken y otras.
Calmatum et Tranquilitis

Hunde en la miseria o indulta a tus terrores aeroprimigenios favoritos en: ESPANTOS AERONAUTICOS
Avatar de Usuario
Truquichan
 
Mensajes: 2204
Registrado: Vie Jun 25, 2021 9:21 am

Re: Fuerza Aérea de EE.UU. (USAF)

Notapor Atticus el Mié Dic 15, 2021 12:37 pm

Truquichan escribió:Para dar jugo al ATT...
Aparece en los mentideros la opcion del Gripen C/D para el ATT
https://www.forbes.com/sites/erictegler ... f39c8c1c99

A ver, como he ido comentando, realmente lo quieren para ya y sería una opción interina para la que la compra de +100 aparatos les da igual de donde vengan mientran salgan baratos. En este caso hay hasta stock. Siempre los pueden recolocar como agresores al final, incluso vendiéndolos a Draken y otras.



Yo soy de los de: "El gripen always in my team", pero eso es una locura. ¿Que necesidad tendria de Gripen el pais del F16? Vale que las cifras de mantenimiento del Gripen C es brutal de buena, pero si eres los USA... pues coge el diseño del F16 y saca una "version barata", que incluso se podria decir que el Gripen C es un "overkill" para estas cosas.
----------------------------------

"Un cerdo que no vuela solo es un cerdo". Marco Porcellino.
Avatar de Usuario
Atticus
 
Mensajes: 7123
Registrado: Jue Ago 22, 2019 1:57 pm
Ubicación: Mecanisburgo

PrevioSiguiente

Volver a Fuerzas aéreas

¿Quién está conectado?

Usuarios navegando por este Foro: Majestic-12 [Bot] y 28 invitados