User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 7:37:26 AM EST
[#1]
Good. Long overdue.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 7:39:02 AM EST
[#2]
I'd rather work in Huntsville than Redondo.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 7:41:47 AM EST
[#3]
So does that mean just the missiles, or the silos too?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 8:14:33 AM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So does that mean just the missiles, or the silos too? 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. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 8:56:01 AM EST
[#5]
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 9:00:44 AM EST
[#6]
Tag for the launch consoles that will be internet connected and running TightVNC.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 9:09:12 AM EST
[#7]
Get SpaceX involved, and we can get the missile bodies back.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 9:20:45 AM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Get SpaceX involved, and we can get the missile bodies back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 9:23:08 AM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Get SpaceX involved, and we can get the missile bodies back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 9:28:55 AM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Or even redirect them as non-nuclear kinetic impactors. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Get SpaceX involved, and we can get the missile bodies back. Mike |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 10:09:41 AM EST
[#11]
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 10:10:22 AM EST
[#12]
<-- Owns stock in both BA and NOC |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 10:11:27 AM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Or even redirect them as non-nuclear kinetic impactors. use them as decoys.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 10:11:45 AM EST
[#14]
does this mean the RRW will move forward too?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 10:14:30 AM EST
[#15]
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.... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 10:16:01 AM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
use them as decoys.... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Or even redirect them as non-nuclear kinetic impactors. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 10:21:45 AM EST
[#17]
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 10:25:58 AM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
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. 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 10:32:50 AM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
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. 
What was the reason for killing the peacekeeper? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 10:40:11 AM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
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? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
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.
What was the reason for killing the peacekeeper? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 11:00:54 AM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Because it is better to have 500 single warhead missiles than fifty 10 warhead missiles. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 11:03:28 AM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Also, to comply with the START treaty. And too expensive at the end of the cold war. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Because it is better to have 500 single warhead missiles than fifty 10 warhead missiles. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 11:09:31 AM EST
[#23]
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 11:38:49 AM EST
[#24]
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
Quote HistoryQuoted:
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. Quote HistoryQuoted:
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. 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.) Quoted:
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. Now would be a good time to develop a new weapon to go on the new missile. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 11:46:25 AM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
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. 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? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 11:47:35 AM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 11:57:25 AM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If a country sunk one of our aircraft carriers, is a nuclear response a possible retaliatory action? (In Before The Recipe) ...or do we have to ask more detailed technical questions to get a recipe?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 11:59:08 AM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
IBTR (In Before The Recipe) ...or do we have to ask more detailed technical questions to get a recipe? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If a country sunk one of our aircraft carriers, is a nuclear response a possible retaliatory action? (In Before The Recipe) ...or do we have to ask more detailed technical questions to get a recipe? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 12:08:49 PM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Realistically that's a "It depends on the National Command Authority". The guys in the capsule aren't included in the discussion. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 12:10:13 PM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
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?) Quote HistoryQuoted:
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?) 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? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 12:11:31 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
... 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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 12:14:03 PM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If there's anything that sounds like appropriate GFE it's nuclear warheads. Wonder what that RFP would look like. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 12:16:24 PM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was trying to be as polite as possible about your role in the scenario. So easy, even an Air Force officer can do it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 12:16:51 PM EST
[#34]
So no WOPR then?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 12:21:52 PM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
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 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 12:22:40 PM EST
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
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. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I was trying to be as polite as possible about your role in the scenario. So easy, even an Air Force officer can do it.  I Don't Want To Set The World On Fire-The Ink Spots |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 12:22:55 PM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
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. 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 12:32:19 PM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Realistically that's a "It depends on the National Command Authority". The guys in the capsule aren't included in the discussion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 12:36:02 PM EST
[#39]
I'm sure the design will come in on time and under budget...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 1:51:48 PM EST
[#40]
Quoted:
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). |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 4:01:49 PM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
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. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Realistically that's a "It depends on the National Command Authority". The guys in the capsule aren't included in the discussion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 4:30:08 PM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:....since you seem to be knowledgeable. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 4:33:00 PM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
With a screen name like LimaXray...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 4:33:02 PM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
With a screen name like LimaXray... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:....since you seem to be knowledgeable.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 4:34:13 PM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What's an ICBBM?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 4:36:55 PM EST
[#46]
Limaxray says "have a nice day".
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 4:38:40 PM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'd rather work in Huntsville than Redondo. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 4:39:47 PM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
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. TC |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 4:43:25 PM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Good. Long overdue. This is good news 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2017 4:47:50 PM EST
[#50]
Excellent.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2023 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
