Current Nuclear Weapons Development
- Thread starter bobbymike
- Start date
- Joined
- 21 April 2009
- Messages
- 13,174
- Reaction score
- 6,071
NuCUlar Links of the day:
1) Updated Russian Nuclear Forces
http://bos.sagepub.com/content/early/2015/04/13/0096340215581363.full.pdf+html
2) Minuteman III replacement opinion piece
http://lexingtoninstitute.org/the-minuteman-iii-icbms-future/
1) Updated Russian Nuclear Forces
http://bos.sagepub.com/content/early/2015/04/13/0096340215581363.full.pdf+html
2) Minuteman III replacement opinion piece
http://lexingtoninstitute.org/the-minuteman-iii-icbms-future/
- Joined
- 21 April 2009
- Messages
- 13,174
- Reaction score
- 6,071
Navy Contemplates Next-Generation, Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missile
Posted: April 29, 2015
Navy leaders -- already publicly fretting about the affordability in the 2020s of both a new Ohio-class submarine replacement program and its conventional shipbuilding plan -- are beginning to contemplate yet another high-priority, big-ticket weapon system requirement that could significantly compound already daunting budget pressures: a next-generation, submarine-launched ballistic missile. Vice Adm. Terry Benedict, Navy strategic systems programs director, said the service -- in a previously unreported development -- is beginning to explore the need for arming the future Ohio Replacement Program fleet beyond 2042, the current service-life end date for the deployed nuclear-armed D-5 Trident II missile. Preliminary options being discussed span from further life-extension efforts for a missile first acquired in 1987 to a clean-sheet, new-design project, he said. "That's a discussion that I'm having with Navy leadership right now," Benedict told InsideDefense.com during a brief interview on April 13.
Between 1987 and 2012, the Navy acquired 533 D-5 Trident II ballistic missiles. The strategic weapon system is reaching its 25th year of deployment and has reached the initial design-life goal. The Navy is executing a plan to extend the service life of the weapon. To date, the Navy has spent $36.8 billion to develop, acquire and modify the current D-5 fleet. In March, the Pentagon sent Congress a report that indicates the Navy plans to spend a further $4.7 billion on the D-5 and begin winding down the acquisition portion of the program in the early 2020s. The Navy's fiscal year 2016 budget request includes $1.1 billion for modifications of the D-5 missile inventory, including $468 million to work on flight-test instrumentation, solid-rocket motors and the post-boost control system and $613 million for the life-extension program.
Benedict said the time has come to begin preparing for what comes after the end of the current D-5 program of record, which concludes in FY-42. "Is it another life-extension effort, where we go attack the systems, the sub-systems that are necessary for obsolescence or for refreshment, or is it the next-generation SLBM?" the three-star admiral posited, using the acronym for submarine-launched ballistic missile. "We haven't done that requirements set yet; we haven't done that decision spot yet," he continued. "In fact, that's an effort we're paying a lot of attention to right now. We know at some point we'll have to do something. We don't know the exact point." Because of the likely huge costs associated with a new-start program, Benedict he is "trying to push that as far right as I can," referring to delaying for as long as possible a new initiative that carries a substantial tab.
However, Benedict added that the Navy must contend with factors pressing for a decision sooner rather than later. "Physics and programmatics are trying to pull it in farther," he said. "Every missile I fly [in a test] is a missile that moves it to the left." "We're trying to strike that correct balance within the program," Benedict said. "We won't get to 2084 with the number of missiles that we have in the current configuration that we have," he said, referring to the projected service life of the Ohio Replacement Program submarine fleet. "So, we'll have to do something," he said.
What's the window for making a decision on what comes next? "That depends on whether someone would give me a requirement to build a next-generation capability, which would take longer, or someone would tell me, 'No, we want you to refresh the necessary components,' which would allow me to push that decision out some," Benedict said. Navy leaders have some space to contemplate a way forward. Benedict said the discussions he is having with top brass and civilian leaders are not intended to affect the FY-17 to FY-21 spending plan currently being developed. "It is a FY-20-ish type of decision," the vice admiral said. On April 2, the Navy sent Congress a new 30-year shipbuilding plan that calls for budget increases "commensurate with the funding required to procure" the $139 billion Ohio Replacement Program. The Navy is branding the new strategic deterrence submarine its highest modernization priority; telegraphing it will sacrifice other elements of its modernization plan if budget topline relief is not found.
Similarly, Pentagon acquisition executive Frank Kendall last month warned the requirement to modernize the entire portfolio of strategic weapons capabilities threatens to destabilize the Defense Department's budget in the next decade. "We have a problem with recapitalizing the strategic deterrent," Kendall said April 17. Kendall said the Pentagon needs an additional $10 billion to $12 billion annually beginning in FY-21 to modernize this basket of capabilities. In a January report on the projected costs of DOD's nuclear forces from 2015 to 2024, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that spending on bombers, ICBMs and submarines would jump to $18.2 billion in FY-21, $20.2 billion in FY-22, $17.7 billion in FY-23 and $18.6 billion in FY-24. Those estimates did not account for development of a next-generation SLBM. -- Jason Sherman
Posted: April 29, 2015
Navy leaders -- already publicly fretting about the affordability in the 2020s of both a new Ohio-class submarine replacement program and its conventional shipbuilding plan -- are beginning to contemplate yet another high-priority, big-ticket weapon system requirement that could significantly compound already daunting budget pressures: a next-generation, submarine-launched ballistic missile. Vice Adm. Terry Benedict, Navy strategic systems programs director, said the service -- in a previously unreported development -- is beginning to explore the need for arming the future Ohio Replacement Program fleet beyond 2042, the current service-life end date for the deployed nuclear-armed D-5 Trident II missile. Preliminary options being discussed span from further life-extension efforts for a missile first acquired in 1987 to a clean-sheet, new-design project, he said. "That's a discussion that I'm having with Navy leadership right now," Benedict told InsideDefense.com during a brief interview on April 13.
Between 1987 and 2012, the Navy acquired 533 D-5 Trident II ballistic missiles. The strategic weapon system is reaching its 25th year of deployment and has reached the initial design-life goal. The Navy is executing a plan to extend the service life of the weapon. To date, the Navy has spent $36.8 billion to develop, acquire and modify the current D-5 fleet. In March, the Pentagon sent Congress a report that indicates the Navy plans to spend a further $4.7 billion on the D-5 and begin winding down the acquisition portion of the program in the early 2020s. The Navy's fiscal year 2016 budget request includes $1.1 billion for modifications of the D-5 missile inventory, including $468 million to work on flight-test instrumentation, solid-rocket motors and the post-boost control system and $613 million for the life-extension program.
Benedict said the time has come to begin preparing for what comes after the end of the current D-5 program of record, which concludes in FY-42. "Is it another life-extension effort, where we go attack the systems, the sub-systems that are necessary for obsolescence or for refreshment, or is it the next-generation SLBM?" the three-star admiral posited, using the acronym for submarine-launched ballistic missile. "We haven't done that requirements set yet; we haven't done that decision spot yet," he continued. "In fact, that's an effort we're paying a lot of attention to right now. We know at some point we'll have to do something. We don't know the exact point." Because of the likely huge costs associated with a new-start program, Benedict he is "trying to push that as far right as I can," referring to delaying for as long as possible a new initiative that carries a substantial tab.
However, Benedict added that the Navy must contend with factors pressing for a decision sooner rather than later. "Physics and programmatics are trying to pull it in farther," he said. "Every missile I fly [in a test] is a missile that moves it to the left." "We're trying to strike that correct balance within the program," Benedict said. "We won't get to 2084 with the number of missiles that we have in the current configuration that we have," he said, referring to the projected service life of the Ohio Replacement Program submarine fleet. "So, we'll have to do something," he said.
What's the window for making a decision on what comes next? "That depends on whether someone would give me a requirement to build a next-generation capability, which would take longer, or someone would tell me, 'No, we want you to refresh the necessary components,' which would allow me to push that decision out some," Benedict said. Navy leaders have some space to contemplate a way forward. Benedict said the discussions he is having with top brass and civilian leaders are not intended to affect the FY-17 to FY-21 spending plan currently being developed. "It is a FY-20-ish type of decision," the vice admiral said. On April 2, the Navy sent Congress a new 30-year shipbuilding plan that calls for budget increases "commensurate with the funding required to procure" the $139 billion Ohio Replacement Program. The Navy is branding the new strategic deterrence submarine its highest modernization priority; telegraphing it will sacrifice other elements of its modernization plan if budget topline relief is not found.
Similarly, Pentagon acquisition executive Frank Kendall last month warned the requirement to modernize the entire portfolio of strategic weapons capabilities threatens to destabilize the Defense Department's budget in the next decade. "We have a problem with recapitalizing the strategic deterrent," Kendall said April 17. Kendall said the Pentagon needs an additional $10 billion to $12 billion annually beginning in FY-21 to modernize this basket of capabilities. In a January report on the projected costs of DOD's nuclear forces from 2015 to 2024, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that spending on bombers, ICBMs and submarines would jump to $18.2 billion in FY-21, $20.2 billion in FY-22, $17.7 billion in FY-23 and $18.6 billion in FY-24. Those estimates did not account for development of a next-generation SLBM. -- Jason Sherman
- Joined
- 9 October 2009
- Messages
- 19,999
- Reaction score
- 10,514
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32529406
http://politics.slashdot.org/story/15/04/29/2139205/the-united-states-just-might-be-irans-favorite-new-nuclear-supplier
http://politics.slashdot.org/story/15/04/29/2139205/the-united-states-just-might-be-irans-favorite-new-nuclear-supplier
- Joined
- 9 October 2009
- Messages
- 19,999
- Reaction score
- 10,514
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/30/us-iran-nuclear-idUSKBN0NL09220150430
- Joined
- 21 April 2009
- Messages
- 13,174
- Reaction score
- 6,071
US Strategic Command boss Adm. Cecil Haney visited F.E. Warren AFB, Wyo., to gather feedback from airmen involved in the Minuteman III ICBM mission and to chair a forum of ICBM stakeholders across the Defense Department, according to a base release. The forum “allows me to listen to our leadership,” said Haney, adding that the gathering allows those involved in the mission to “meet as one team and look at how we can sustain this very important capability.” Haney, who spent April 27-28 on base, has spoken frequently to Congress and in public appearances about the investments needed across the nuclear triad in the coming years, and has pointed to the importance of modernizing command and control elements of the triad in order to preserve the responsiveness of the nuclear deterrent.
- Joined
- 21 April 2009
- Messages
- 13,174
- Reaction score
- 6,071
From AFA:
Carter, Dempsey Support New Nuclear-Armed Cruise Missile
—Otto Kreisher5/7/2015
Defense Secretary Ash Carter and Joint Chiefs Chairman Army Gen. Martin Dempsey supported development of a new nuclear-capable cruise missile and the updated warhead for it, both of which were challenged during a Senate Appropriations Committee’s defense panel Wednesday. Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.), former chairman of the Senate Select Intelligence Committee, said she understands the need for the Long-Range Strike Bomber, but did not understand why the Air Force wanted to spend an estimated $1.8 billion for the new cruise missile and a like amount to refurbish the W80 nuclear warhead to arm it. She said the program “undermines our commitment to nuclear reduction.” Carter said developing the Long Range Standoff missile, which is expected to replace the Air Launched Cruise Missile by 2025, was a “recognition that air defenses were improving around the world.” The W80 warhead is old and “it too needs work,” he said. “I hope we can accommodate both.” Dempsey said the new missile is part of the effort to sustain the nuclear triad of bombers, land- and sea-launched ICBMs. “All the [service] chiefs support the triad to maintain our deterrence,” he said. The new missile would allow Air Force bombers to strike targets from outside the reach of ground-based air defenses
Carter, Dempsey Support New Nuclear-Armed Cruise Missile
—Otto Kreisher5/7/2015
Defense Secretary Ash Carter and Joint Chiefs Chairman Army Gen. Martin Dempsey supported development of a new nuclear-capable cruise missile and the updated warhead for it, both of which were challenged during a Senate Appropriations Committee’s defense panel Wednesday. Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.), former chairman of the Senate Select Intelligence Committee, said she understands the need for the Long-Range Strike Bomber, but did not understand why the Air Force wanted to spend an estimated $1.8 billion for the new cruise missile and a like amount to refurbish the W80 nuclear warhead to arm it. She said the program “undermines our commitment to nuclear reduction.” Carter said developing the Long Range Standoff missile, which is expected to replace the Air Launched Cruise Missile by 2025, was a “recognition that air defenses were improving around the world.” The W80 warhead is old and “it too needs work,” he said. “I hope we can accommodate both.” Dempsey said the new missile is part of the effort to sustain the nuclear triad of bombers, land- and sea-launched ICBMs. “All the [service] chiefs support the triad to maintain our deterrence,” he said. The new missile would allow Air Force bombers to strike targets from outside the reach of ground-based air defenses
- Joined
- 21 April 2009
- Messages
- 13,174
- Reaction score
- 6,071
From ACA:
Air Force Wants 1,000 New Cruise Missiles
Arms Control Today
UPDATED: May 7, 2015
By Kingston Reif
The U.S. Air Force is planning to build about 1,000 new nuclear-capable air-launched cruise missiles (ALCMs), several sources said last month. The projected purchase would roughly double the size of the existing U.S. fleet of ALCMs. A knowledgeable source said in an April 7 e-mail that the plans called for 1,000-1,100 new missiles at a cost of roughly $9 billion. In a subsequent e-mail exchange, Maj. Kelley Jeter, an Air Force spokeswoman, confirmed the number of planned missiles, but declined to comment on the cost. “The draft acquisition strategy currently plans to procure approximately 1,000 missiles,” Jeter said. That number “provides enough weapons to meet the operational requirement” for U.S. Strategic Command, as well as spares and test missiles, she added. Jeter did not specify how many weapons the Air Force is planning to assign to each of these categories. Acquisition planning and development activities for the new missile are well under way, Jeter said. The Air Force is aiming to receive approval later this year from the Office of the Secretary of Defense to go to the next stage of the acquisition process, which includes maturing the technology, refining requirements, and finalizing cost estimates for the new missile. The first new missile is slated for completion in 2026.
The Air Force does not currently plan to develop a conventional variant of the new missile, Jeter said. “There is currently no validated requirement” for a new conventional ALCM, “nor is there funding for such a variant,” she said. President Barack Obama determined in 2013 that the United States has more deployed strategic nuclear weapons than it needs for its security. It is not clear how the addition of 1,000 new missiles would comport with that determination. It is also unclear whether the Air Force can afford a new cruise missile given the budget constraints imposed by the 2011 Budget Control Act and the costs of rebuilding other elements of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. Public remarks by top Pentagon officials have repeatedly acknowledged the limits that the act imposes on their plans. Frank Kendall, undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology, and logistics, said on April 14 that beginning in 2021, the Defense Department will have to secure an additional $10-12 billion annually above current funding levels for nuclear forces in order to afford the current nuclear weapons modernization plan. The department has “a huge affordability problem” with regard to nuclear modernization, Kendall said.
Nuclear-armed ALCMs are part of the U.S. nuclear triad of delivery systems consisting of land-based missiles, submarine-launched missiles, and long-range bombers, which can carry ALCMs and gravity bombs. ALCMs are carried by the B-52 long-range bomber and can attack targets at great distances. In a June 2014 letter to the leadership of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Kendall stated that long-range bombers armed with nuclear ALCMs “assure our allies and provide a unique and important dimension of U.S. nuclear deterrence in the face of increasingly sophisticated adversary air defenses.”
http://www.armscontrol.org/ACT/2015_05/News/Air-Force-Wants-Thousand-New-Cruise-Missiles
Air Force Wants 1,000 New Cruise Missiles
Arms Control Today
UPDATED: May 7, 2015
By Kingston Reif
The U.S. Air Force is planning to build about 1,000 new nuclear-capable air-launched cruise missiles (ALCMs), several sources said last month. The projected purchase would roughly double the size of the existing U.S. fleet of ALCMs. A knowledgeable source said in an April 7 e-mail that the plans called for 1,000-1,100 new missiles at a cost of roughly $9 billion. In a subsequent e-mail exchange, Maj. Kelley Jeter, an Air Force spokeswoman, confirmed the number of planned missiles, but declined to comment on the cost. “The draft acquisition strategy currently plans to procure approximately 1,000 missiles,” Jeter said. That number “provides enough weapons to meet the operational requirement” for U.S. Strategic Command, as well as spares and test missiles, she added. Jeter did not specify how many weapons the Air Force is planning to assign to each of these categories. Acquisition planning and development activities for the new missile are well under way, Jeter said. The Air Force is aiming to receive approval later this year from the Office of the Secretary of Defense to go to the next stage of the acquisition process, which includes maturing the technology, refining requirements, and finalizing cost estimates for the new missile. The first new missile is slated for completion in 2026.
The Air Force does not currently plan to develop a conventional variant of the new missile, Jeter said. “There is currently no validated requirement” for a new conventional ALCM, “nor is there funding for such a variant,” she said. President Barack Obama determined in 2013 that the United States has more deployed strategic nuclear weapons than it needs for its security. It is not clear how the addition of 1,000 new missiles would comport with that determination. It is also unclear whether the Air Force can afford a new cruise missile given the budget constraints imposed by the 2011 Budget Control Act and the costs of rebuilding other elements of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. Public remarks by top Pentagon officials have repeatedly acknowledged the limits that the act imposes on their plans. Frank Kendall, undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology, and logistics, said on April 14 that beginning in 2021, the Defense Department will have to secure an additional $10-12 billion annually above current funding levels for nuclear forces in order to afford the current nuclear weapons modernization plan. The department has “a huge affordability problem” with regard to nuclear modernization, Kendall said.
Nuclear-armed ALCMs are part of the U.S. nuclear triad of delivery systems consisting of land-based missiles, submarine-launched missiles, and long-range bombers, which can carry ALCMs and gravity bombs. ALCMs are carried by the B-52 long-range bomber and can attack targets at great distances. In a June 2014 letter to the leadership of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Kendall stated that long-range bombers armed with nuclear ALCMs “assure our allies and provide a unique and important dimension of U.S. nuclear deterrence in the face of increasingly sophisticated adversary air defenses.”
http://www.armscontrol.org/ACT/2015_05/News/Air-Force-Wants-Thousand-New-Cruise-Missiles
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/08/asia/north-korea-missile-test/
Had to tweak my Sinpo Class illustration
Had to tweak my Sinpo Class illustration
Updated analysis of North Korean ballistic missile sub
More http://www.hisutton.com/Analysis%20-%20Sinpo%20Class%20Ballistic%20Missile%20Sub.html
More http://www.hisutton.com/Analysis%20-%20Sinpo%20Class%20Ballistic%20Missile%20Sub.html
- Joined
- 21 April 2009
- Messages
- 13,174
- Reaction score
- 6,071
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/03/150326204631.htm
Sandia MESA's silicon fab in October began producing base wafers for Application-Specific Integrated Circuits for the B61-12 Life Extension Program, W88 Alteration 370 and W87 Mk21 Fuze Replacement nuclear weapons
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140117103925.htm
A ground-penetrating bomb, minus its nuclear components, rammed through a target at the remote Coyote Canyon test range in Sandia National Laboratories' first such rocket-driven impact test in seven years. Engineers said the Sandia components on the weapon performed as expected
Sandia MESA's silicon fab in October began producing base wafers for Application-Specific Integrated Circuits for the B61-12 Life Extension Program, W88 Alteration 370 and W87 Mk21 Fuze Replacement nuclear weapons
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140117103925.htm
A ground-penetrating bomb, minus its nuclear components, rammed through a target at the remote Coyote Canyon test range in Sandia National Laboratories' first such rocket-driven impact test in seven years. Engineers said the Sandia components on the weapon performed as expected
- Joined
- 21 April 2009
- Messages
- 13,174
- Reaction score
- 6,071
From AFA
The three-branched nuclear weapons delivery triad remains a vital component of US defense, said Maj. Gen. Garrett Harencak, assistant chief of staff for strategic deterrence and nuclear integration, during an AFA and industry-sponsored breakfast event Wednesday on Capitol Hill. Acknowledging the triad—consisting of strategic bombers, intercontinental ballistic missiles, and submarine-launched ballistic missiles—is an emotionally charged issue to many observers, Harencak said the weapons, nonetheless, are essential to western society. “The world is not safer today” than it was during the Cold War, Harencak said. “Capabilities take years,” he added, alluding to potential enemies. “People would rather not have nuclear weapons,” Harencak said. “I get that ... Our goal is to work toward a nuclear-free world,” but the world community is not likely to forswear violence and “hug it out,” he added. No military leader wants to walk into the Oval Office in the aftermath of an attack and be in the position of saying, “Mister President, we cannot neutralize that threat,” Harencak said. Hence, the continued need for a strong nuclear triad. “Nothing says stability more than ICBMs over all 50 states,” he said. “My best military advice is, ‘be prepared.’”
The three-branched nuclear weapons delivery triad remains a vital component of US defense, said Maj. Gen. Garrett Harencak, assistant chief of staff for strategic deterrence and nuclear integration, during an AFA and industry-sponsored breakfast event Wednesday on Capitol Hill. Acknowledging the triad—consisting of strategic bombers, intercontinental ballistic missiles, and submarine-launched ballistic missiles—is an emotionally charged issue to many observers, Harencak said the weapons, nonetheless, are essential to western society. “The world is not safer today” than it was during the Cold War, Harencak said. “Capabilities take years,” he added, alluding to potential enemies. “People would rather not have nuclear weapons,” Harencak said. “I get that ... Our goal is to work toward a nuclear-free world,” but the world community is not likely to forswear violence and “hug it out,” he added. No military leader wants to walk into the Oval Office in the aftermath of an attack and be in the position of saying, “Mister President, we cannot neutralize that threat,” Harencak said. Hence, the continued need for a strong nuclear triad. “Nothing says stability more than ICBMs over all 50 states,” he said. “My best military advice is, ‘be prepared.’”
- Joined
- 9 October 2009
- Messages
- 19,999
- Reaction score
- 10,514
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/no-iran-sanctions-relief-end-2015-best-german-143544378.html
seruriermarshal
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 4 May 2008
- Messages
- 1,177
- Reaction score
- 536
bobbymike said:
Seems like they used E-6 control launch .
- Joined
- 21 April 2009
- Messages
- 13,174
- Reaction score
- 6,071
Inside Defense:
USAF Begins Effort To Integrate Nuclear Weapon On Joint Strike Fighter
The Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center has commenced early risk-reduction work to arm the Joint Strike Fighter with a strategic weapon, the first steps in integrating the B61-12 Life Extension Program with the F-35A in an effort to give the service's newest combat aircraft a nuclear capability early in the next decade.
USAF Begins Effort To Integrate Nuclear Weapon On Joint Strike Fighter
The Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center has commenced early risk-reduction work to arm the Joint Strike Fighter with a strategic weapon, the first steps in integrating the B61-12 Life Extension Program with the F-35A in an effort to give the service's newest combat aircraft a nuclear capability early in the next decade.
- Joined
- 9 October 2009
- Messages
- 19,999
- Reaction score
- 10,514
Via the Drudge Report:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150530/eu--iran_nuclear_talks-0172303335.html
http://news.yahoo.com/iran-rejects-inspections-nuclear-deal-111718539.html
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150530/eu--iran_nuclear_talks-0172303335.html
http://news.yahoo.com/iran-rejects-inspections-nuclear-deal-111718539.html
- Joined
- 9 October 2009
- Messages
- 19,999
- Reaction score
- 10,514
6 powers agree on ‘snapback’ if Iran fails to honor N-deal (Reuters, via The Yomiuri Shimbun)
- Joined
- 9 October 2009
- Messages
- 19,999
- Reaction score
- 10,514
http://news.yahoo.com/no-trust-iran-nuclear-talks-top-negotiator-165801434.html
- Joined
- 21 April 2009
- Messages
- 13,174
- Reaction score
- 6,071
http://breakingdefense.com/2015/06/forbes-leads-house-battle-for-ohio-replacement-fund/?utm_campaign=Contact+SNS+For+More+Referrer&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=snsanalytics
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/06/09/hasc-chair-ohio-sub-replacement-costs-crowding-out-navy-programs/
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/06/09/hasc-chair-ohio-sub-replacement-costs-crowding-out-navy-programs/
- Joined
- 9 October 2009
- Messages
- 19,999
- Reaction score
- 10,514
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/iran-abandons-past-nuclear-promises-as-deal-deadline-looms/
- Joined
- 21 April 2009
- Messages
- 13,174
- Reaction score
- 6,071
Navy, Contractors In Discussions About Structure Of Ohio-Class Replacement
General Dynamics and Huntington Ingalls, the Navy's two submarine builders, are in discussions with the service about how to structure the Ohio-class replacement program, according to the two companies' chief executives.
General Dynamics and Huntington Ingalls, the Navy's two submarine builders, are in discussions with the service about how to structure the Ohio-class replacement program, according to the two companies' chief executives.
- Joined
- 9 October 2009
- Messages
- 19,999
- Reaction score
- 10,514
http://news.yahoo.com/iran-wont-allow-nuclear-inspections-jeopardize-state-secrets-130937002.html
- Joined
- 9 October 2009
- Messages
- 19,999
- Reaction score
- 10,514
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_RUSSIA_MILITARY?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-06-16-07-28-22
