Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 8/22/2017 7:09:54 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/22/2017 4:33:02 PM EST by KA3B]

Contracts for Aug. 21, 2017



No. CR-161-17
FOR RELEASE AT
5 p.m. ET Aug. 21, 2017

AIR FORCE

The Boeing Co., Huntsville, Alabama, has been awarded a $349,159,962 contract for Ground-based Strategic Deterrent. This contract is to conduct technology maturation and risk-reduction to deliver a low technical risk, affordable, total system replacement of Minuteman III to meet intercontinental ballistic missiles operational requirements. Work will be performed in Huntsville, Alabama and other various locations as needed and is expected to be completed by Aug. 20, 2020. This award is the result of competitive acquisition and three offers were received. Fiscal 2017 research, development, test, and evaluation funds in the amount of $5,700,000 are being obligated at time of award. Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center, Hill Air Force Base, Utah is the contracting activity (FA819-17-C-0001).

Northrop Grumman Systems Corp., Redondo Beach, California, has been awarded a $328,584,830 contract for Ground-based Strategic Deterrent. This contract is to conduct technology maturation and risk-reduction to deliver a low technical risk, affordable, total system replacement of Minuteman III to meet intercontinental ballistic missiles operational requirements. Work will be performed in Redondo Beach, California and other various locations as needed and is expected to be completed by Aug. 20, 2020. This award is the result of competitive acquisition and three offers were received. Fiscal 2017 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $5,700,000 are being obligated at time of award. Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center, Hill Air Force Base, Utah is the contracting activity (FA819-17-C-0002).
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 7:37:26 AM EST
Good. Long overdue.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 7:39:02 AM EST
I'd rather work in Huntsville than Redondo.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 7:41:47 AM EST
So does that mean just the missiles, or the silos too?
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 8:14:33 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/22/2017 8:17:22 AM EST by KA3B]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By rfoxtrot:
So does that mean just the missiles, or the silos too?
View Quote
I dunno.
Probably just the missiles and to upgrade the current facilities.

I would say that this quote from the contracts says both "total system replacement of Minuteman III", however then there's this: "affordable".

Who knows, I haven't Googles it up to see if there more.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 8:56:01 AM EST
Everything I've read doesn't answer if the warheads themselves will be replaced, but I did read this:

The Air Force has expectations of fielding an initial replacement system by the late 2020s for about $50 billion, but Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James has suggested that the $50 billion was decidedly a floor, and not a ceiling, to the eventual costs.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 9:00:44 AM EST
Tag for the launch consoles that will be internet connected and running TightVNC.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 9:09:12 AM EST
Get SpaceX involved, and we can get the missile bodies back.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 9:20:45 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Birddog1911:
Get SpaceX involved, and we can get the missile bodies back.
View Quote
One subscription to your newsletter please.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 9:23:08 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Birddog1911:
Get SpaceX involved, and we can get the missile bodies back.
View Quote
Or even redirect them as non-nuclear kinetic impactors.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 9:28:55 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Circuits:
Or even redirect them as non-nuclear kinetic impactors.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Circuits:
Originally Posted By Birddog1911:
Get SpaceX involved, and we can get the missile bodies back.
Or even redirect them as non-nuclear kinetic impactors.
If the warheads are delivered, I somehow doubt anyone would even notice the missile itself impacting...

Mike
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 10:09:41 AM EST
So ,will we be able to buy the old Minuteman III icbm's on Ebay someday? Gov auction sites? Maybe we will be able to buy them from CMP? Just saying.....
Maybe the new independent Kalifornia could use them.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 10:10:22 AM EST


<-- Owns stock in both BA and NOC
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 10:11:27 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Circuits:

Or even redirect them as non-nuclear kinetic impactors.
View Quote


use them as decoys....
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 10:11:45 AM EST
does this mean the RRW will move forward too?
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 10:14:30 AM EST
If only we had already developed a new land-based ICBM after MM. We could even have call it something catchy like "MX" or "Peacekeeper".

So many lost opportunities when we don't think ahead....

Link Posted: 8/22/2017 10:16:01 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By dorobuta:
use them as decoys....
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By dorobuta:
Originally Posted By Circuits:

Or even redirect them as non-nuclear kinetic impactors.
use them as decoys....
Use them as decoys with real MIRVs.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 10:21:45 AM EST
By "low technical risk" can I assume that means a manned silo with push button launch and not a networked system of some kind? Because it would really suck if 4CHAN got control of our ground based nuclear deterrent.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 10:25:58 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By motown_steve:
By "low technical risk" can I assume that means a manned silo with push button launch and not a networked system of some kind? Because it would really suck if 4CHAN got control of our ground based nuclear deterrent.
View Quote


I think that means they will be using more modern, but mature technology. Nothing Bleeding edge that could cost development cost overruns like the F35.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 10:32:50 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MNSwede:


I think that means they will be using more modern, but mature technology. Nothing Bleeding edge that could cost development cost overruns like the F35.
View Quote
Yep, we will replace the 40 year old missiles with the 25 year old design that we already retired. 

What was the reason for killing the peacekeeper?
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 10:40:11 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By xd341:
Yep, we will replace the 40 year old missiles with the 25 year old design that we already retired. 

What was the reason for killing the peacekeeper?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By xd341:
Originally Posted By MNSwede:


I think that means they will be using more modern, but mature technology. Nothing Bleeding edge that could cost development cost overruns like the F35.
Yep, we will replace the 40 year old missiles with the 25 year old design that we already retired. 

What was the reason for killing the peacekeeper?
Because it is better to have 500 single warhead missiles than fifty 10 warhead missiles.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 11:00:54 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:
Because it is better to have 500 single warhead missiles than fifty 10 warhead missiles.
View Quote
Also, to comply with the START treaty. And too expensive at the end of the cold war.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 11:03:28 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Circuits:
Also, to comply with the START treaty. And too expensive at the end of the cold war.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Circuits:
Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:
Because it is better to have 500 single warhead missiles than fifty 10 warhead missiles.
Also, to comply with the START treaty. And too expensive at the end of the cold war.
Exactly. We had to downsize our nuclear force. And we could do that by getting rid of 500 Minutemen or 50 Peacekeepers.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 11:09:31 AM EST
I wonder what company and location will do the solid motor.

I did some work at Thiokol on Peacekeeper and SICBM motors/first stage, and that's not work that's done just anywhere.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 11:38:49 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/22/2017 11:44:47 AM EST by limaxray]
The usual (and expected) suspects. They've been doing missile stuff for years. Boeing designed and built most of the capsules in the 1960s. And the wings still running are the ones Boeing built. (Sylvania--yes, the lightbulb company--built 20 of the 100

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MNSwede:


I think that means they will be using more modern, but mature technology. Nothing Bleeding edge that could cost development cost overruns like the F35.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MNSwede:


I think that means they will be using more modern, but mature technology. Nothing Bleeding edge that could cost development cost overruns like the F35.
Exactly.

The newest upgrade, the REACT console, was installed in the mid to late 1990s. Top of the line computer tech at the time was Pentium driven CPUs. The REACT system uses a 286-level CPU, IIRC--so, about 12yo technology at the time. (Which was still better than the 1960s plated-wire memory it replaced.)

Originally Posted By WhiskersTheCat:
Everything I've read doesn't answer if the warheads themselves will be replaced, but I did read this:

The Air Force has expectations of fielding an initial replacement system by the late 2020s for about $50 billion, but Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James has suggested that the $50 billion was decidedly a floor, and not a ceiling, to the eventual costs.
Weapons would be a separate contract/program. DOE does the weapons, not DOD.

Now would be a good time to develop a new weapon to go on the new missile.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 11:46:25 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By limaxray:

Weapons would be a separate contract. DOE does the weapons.

Now would be a good time to develop a new weapon to go on the new missile.
View Quote
Two general questions, since you seem to be knowledgeable.

First, I agree it would be great to develop new weapons. Could that even be done given current treaties? (Meaning, how could we test it? Or would we not need to?)

Second is out of the blue, but not really worthy of its own thread. If a country sunk one of our aircraft carriers, is a nuclear response a possible retaliatory action?
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 11:47:35 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By limaxray:
The usual (and expected) suspects. They've been doing missile stuff for years. Boeing designed and built most of the capsules in the 1960s. And the wings still running are the ones Boeing built. (Sylvania--yes, the lightbulb company--built 20 of the 100



Exactly.

The newest upgrade, the REACT console, was installed in the mid to late 1990s. Top of the line computer tech at the time was Pentium driven CPUs. The REACT system uses a 286-level CPU, IIRC--so, about 12yo technology at the time. (Which was still better than the 1960s plated-wire memory it replaced.)



Weapons would be a separate contract/program. DOE does the weapons, not DOD.

Now would be a good time to develop a new weapon to go on the new missile.
View Quote
If there's anything that sounds like appropriate GFE it's nuclear warheads.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 11:57:25 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By WhiskersTheCat:
If a country sunk one of our aircraft carriers, is a nuclear response a possible retaliatory action?
View Quote
IBTR

(In Before The Recipe)

...or do we have to ask more detailed technical questions to get a recipe?
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 11:59:08 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By NAM:
IBTR

(In Before The Recipe)

...or do we have to ask more detailed technical questions to get a recipe?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By NAM:
Originally Posted By WhiskersTheCat:
If a country sunk one of our aircraft carriers, is a nuclear response a possible retaliatory action?
IBTR

(In Before The Recipe)

...or do we have to ask more detailed technical questions to get a recipe?
Realistically that's a "It depends on the National Command Authority". The guys in the capsule aren't included in the discussion.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 12:08:49 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:


Realistically that's a "It depends on the National Command Authority". The guys in the capsule aren't included in the discussion.
View Quote
Party pooper.

Link Posted: 8/22/2017 12:10:13 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/22/2017 12:20:21 PM EST by limaxray]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By WhiskersTheCat:


Two general questions, since you seem to be knowledgeable.

First, I agree it would be great to develop new weapons. Could that even be done given current treaties? (Meaning, how could we test it? Or would we not need to?)
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By WhiskersTheCat:


Two general questions, since you seem to be knowledgeable.

First, I agree it would be great to develop new weapons. Could that even be done given current treaties? (Meaning, how could we test it? Or would we not need to?)
Sure. Matter of time and money. Between sub-critical testing, and computer models, they could get pretty close.

The really important part is flight testing, and we do that all the time.

Would full-scale testing be better? Yep, especially as the stockpile ages, but we can get by without it.

Or, just back out of the treaty.

Second is out of the blue, but not really worthy of its own thread. If a country sunk one of our aircraft carriers, is a nuclear response a possible retaliatory action?
As SmilingBandit pointed out, the missileers are just the monkeys pushing the buttons. The President always has that as an option...though he'd have to answer for his decision to Congress, the American people, the world, and most importantly, the Coca-Cola company.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 12:11:31 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By limaxray:
...
As Screechjet pointed out, the missileers are just the monkeys pushing the buttons. The President always has that as an option...though he'd have to answer for his decision to Congress, the American people, the world, and most importantly, the Coca-Cola company.
View Quote
I was trying to be as polite as possible about your role in the scenario.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 12:14:03 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:


If there's anything that sounds like appropriate GFE it's nuclear warheads.
View Quote
Now that you mention it, surprised it hasn't been outsourced.

Wonder what that RFP would look like.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 12:16:24 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:


I was trying to be as polite as possible about your role in the scenario.
View Quote
Read a step, do a step, eat a banana, until all missiles are gone, then wait for the opportunity to aggressively fallout on the enemy.

So easy, even an Air Force officer can do it.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 12:16:51 PM EST
So no WOPR then?
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 12:21:52 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By limaxray:


Read a step, do a step, eat a banana, until all missiles are gone, then wait for the opportunity to aggressively fallout on the enemy.

So easy, even an Air Force officer Ron Jeremy can do it.
View Quote
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 12:22:40 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By limaxray:
Read a step, do a step, eat a banana, until all missiles are gone, then wait for the opportunity to aggressively fallout on the enemy.

So easy, even an Air Force officer can do it.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By limaxray:
Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:


I was trying to be as polite as possible about your role in the scenario.
Read a step, do a step, eat a banana, until all missiles are gone, then wait for the opportunity to aggressively fallout on the enemy.

So easy, even an Air Force officer can do it.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 12:22:55 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By LightningII:
I wonder what company and location will do the solid motor.

I did some work at Thiokol on Peacekeeper and SICBM motors/first stage, and that's not work that's done just anywhere.
View Quote
It's not called thiokol anymore. It's now called orbital ATK. I stopped in at Rocket Park here a couple weeks ago. I'm sure them boys would love love love to build some new Rocket motors

It was kind of sad that when you walk through rocket Park. All of the designs that were there were pretty much from the forties through the seventies.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 12:32:19 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:


Realistically that's a "It depends on the National Command Authority". The guys in the capsule aren't included in the discussion.
View Quote
I know it's the President's decision, I just didn't know if we've ever had a policy in the past (or currently) that addressed it.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 12:36:02 PM EST
I'm sure the design will come in on time and under budget...
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 1:51:48 PM EST
Originally Posted By KA3B:

Contracts for Aug. 21, 2017



No. CR-161-17
FOR RELEASE AT
5 p.m. ET Aug. 21, 2017

AIR FORCE

The Boeing Co., Huntsville, Alabama, has been awarded a $349,159,962 contract for Ground-based Strategic Deterrent. This contract is to conduct technology maturation and risk-reduction to deliver a low technical risk, affordable, total system replacement of Minuteman III to meet intercontinental ballistic missiles operational requirements. Work will be performed in Huntsville, Alabama and other various locations as needed and is expected to be completed by Aug. 20, 2020. This award is the result of competitive acquisition and three offers were received. Fiscal 2017 research, development, test, and evaluation funds in the amount of $5,700,000 are being obligated at time of award. Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center, Hill Air Force Base, Utah is the contracting activity (FA819-17-C-0001).

Northrop Grumman Systems Corp., Redondo Beach, California, has been awarded a $328,584,830 contract for Ground-based Strategic Deterrent. This contract is to conduct technology maturation and risk-reduction to deliver a low technical risk, affordable, total system replacement of Minuteman III to meet intercontinental ballistic missiles operational requirements. Work will be performed in Redondo Beach, California and other various locations as needed and is expected to be completed by Aug. 20, 2020. This award is the result of competitive acquisition and three offers were received. Fiscal 2017 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $5,700,000 are being obligated at time of award. Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center, Hill Air Force Base, Utah is the contracting activity (FA819-17-C-0002).
View Quote
What's an ICBBM? 
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 4:01:49 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By WhiskersTheCat:
I know it's the President's decision, I just didn't know if we've ever had a policy in the past (or currently) that addressed it.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By WhiskersTheCat:
Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:


Realistically that's a "It depends on the National Command Authority". The guys in the capsule aren't included in the discussion.
I know it's the President's decision, I just didn't know if we've ever had a policy in the past (or currently) that addressed it.
The US does not have a no first use policy. Just like we don't take military options off the table when dealing with issues we leave the option open.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 4:30:08 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By WhiskersTheCat:....since you seem to be knowledgeable.
View Quote
With a screen name like LimaXray...
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 4:33:00 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By KA3B:


With a screen name like LimaXray...
View Quote
To quote a thread not so long ago, what do I know, I was just a keyturner.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 4:33:02 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By KA3B:
With a screen name like LimaXray...
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By KA3B:
Originally Posted By WhiskersTheCat:....since you seem to be knowledgeable.
With a screen name like LimaXray...
And a weird avatar.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 4:34:13 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By placedesjardins:
What's an ICBBM? 
View Quote
InterContinental BallisticBallstic Missile.
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 4:36:55 PM EST
Limaxray says "have a nice day".

Link Posted: 8/22/2017 4:38:40 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 4:39:47 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By deerranger:
So ,will we be able to buy the old Minuteman III icbm's on Ebay someday? Gov auction sites? Maybe we will be able to buy them from CMP? Just saying.....
Maybe the new independent Kalifornia could use them.
View Quote
The next Leftist President will give them to NorK.

TC
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 4:43:25 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 4:47:50 PM EST
Excellent.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top