former Army here

the main thing in sustained battle always comes down to logistics

what happens after a week of intense battle. a month. six months, etc.

none of the 'near peer' foes have anything that remotely resembles the correct logistical capacity to fight a prolonged, projected conflict.

period.

fighting them in THEIR theater? yes, problematic as they have technology now that remotely approximates ours strictly comparing 'gear vs. gear'.

But the old cliche rings true - 'amateurs talk battles / tactics, professionals talk logistics'

No way China or Russia have the training, know-how, ability, capacity, equipment, technology, etc to project a 500,000+ man force thousands of miles and keep them equipped, fed, fueled, repaired, etc. Their forces are not built to perform that way.

Manpower / equipment? Maybe. Logistics? No way, no how.

---------------------------

quote:

Originally posted by sigcrazy7:
This whole discussion is similar to worrying that we don’t have enough horses to fight a large war like we did in WWI.

Yup. This whole idea is crazy to me. But for the thing crashing in Bin Laden's front yard, we wouldn't have known about the stealth chopper they used.

Do we really think we spend all this money on our military and a simple EMP will wipe it all out? Besides, let's say we are completely inept and an EMP will ruin our tech...what's the range of an EMP? Hundred miles? I dunno, but it's not the entire country.

Rolling armored divisions across our country? WTF? How exactly will they do that with our air power? (reference the range of an EMP/shielding). Nukes? anyone think a nuclear power will be overrun and just look at their pretty nukes? Those bitches will be in the air same delivery.

War hasn't been about numbers for a looooong time. You can't win a war without controlling the air IMO. How are they going to control the air with puffy coats and yeti coolers?

When does our lack of manufacturing capacity become a national security concern?

How about the majority of IT Tech support. During my career in IT I made most of my Firewall Support Calls to off shore support. They knew more then us - They had the keys to the castle. Yet alone the expertise that was given to them by money hungry Tech Companies.

Here is an excellent example of a real problem...

US could lose a key weapon for tracking Chinese and Russian subs

WASHINGTON — A key tool in the U.S. Navy’s fight against Russian and Chinese submarines weighs eight pounds, is three feet long and it doesn’t even explode.

The sonobuoy is an expendable, waterborne sensor that has been air-dropped by the hundreds to detect enemy subs, a go-to capability for America and its allies for decades. The Pentagon wants to buy 204,000 sonobuoys in its fiscal 2020 budget request, a 50 percent spending increase over 2018.

But just as the U.S. military needs them most, this critical capability is under threat, and it’s got nothing to do with an enemy nation. Without government investment in the market, the Pentagon says it may no longer have a reliable supplier, according to officials who spoke to Defense News.

Like so many systems in the Pentagon’s arsenal, America has just one proven supplier. In this case, it is a joint venture between the United States and the UK called ERAPSCO. The Pentagon says ERAPSCO will dissolve by 2024 and that neither side of the partnership — Sparton Corp., of Schaumburg, Illinois, and Ultra Electronics, of Middlesex in the U.K. — will be able to make the necessary investments to produce the capability independently.

It’s an “acknowledged weakness” in the industrial base that required the Pentagon find a solution, said Eric Chewning, a top Pentagon official who was until January the head of the Pentagon’s industrial policy office.

As a result, U.S. President Donald Trump in March signed a memo invoking the Defense Production Act to declare domestic production for the five types of AN/SSQ sonobuoys “essential to the national defense” and grant the Pentagon authorities to sustain and expand the capability. The Air Force, in anticipation, issued a market research solicitation to find suppliers beyond ERAPSO.

The Pentagon requires "comprehensive individual production lines ... for the five sonobuoy types, but the two companies would “require assistance to establish independent production lines,” said DoD spokesman Lt. Col. Mike Andrews.

“Due to the significant efforts and expenditures, it is unlikely that either the JV partners (or any other entity) will be independently able to make the necessary investments to develop and produce the required sonobuoy demands by 2024,” Andrews said, adding that “DoD intervention into the market is necessary.”

A staple of the sub-hunting P-8 maritime surveillance aircraft and the MH-60R Sea Hawk helicopter, multi-static active coherent, or MAC, sonobuoys have a battery life of about eight hours. Because they’re tracking submarines that are in constant motion, a sonobuoy dropped in one place may become useless soon after. If a P-8 is hunting blind, its full cache of 120 might get used up in a single mission and abandoned.

“It depends on how much area the P-8 needs to search and how quickly the target submarine is moving,” said naval analyst Bryan Clark, of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. “The search area for the system depends on the detectability of the target submarine. If the P-8 is conducting a barrier search, it may not need to expend that many sonobuoys. If it is tracking a moving, quiet submarine, though, it could use up its entire sonobuoy load and need to come back for reloading.”

With Russian and Chinese sub activity on the rise, anti-submarine forces have been unexpectedly busy in recent years, burning through supplies of all kinds of sonobuoys.

The Navy’s sonobuoy budget climbed from $174 million in 2018 to $216 million in 2019 to $264 million in the 2020 budget request. In 2018, the Pentagon asked Congress for a $20 million reprogramming for sonobuoys for 6th Fleet, after including $38 million for sonobuoys on its unfunded priorities list.

Analysts agree that sonobuoys will only become more important to the U.S. and its allies as Russia and China’s sub technology advances.

“With the new generation of quiet submarines being fielded by Russia and China, traditional approaches to [anti-submarine warfare] using our submarines or surface ships are becoming less successful,” Clark said. “Our ships and submarines have to get too close to the Russian or Chinese submarine to hear them on passive sonar, and ship and submarine active sonars are relatively short range and expose the transmitting platform to detection.”

Russia’s subs are the most capable, and Moscow is devoting considerable resources to modernizing them, said Nick Childs, of the International Institute for Strategic Studies. China’s subs are “technologically still behind the curve,” but the country is investing heavily to become a competitor in underwater capabilities.

“Russia’s submarine force is likely to remain the most potent and challenging of its naval arms, with continued significant investment, and to the extent that its submarines activities continue, [the U.S. Navy will] be demanding of such things as sonobuoys,” Childs said.

Industrial challenge

ERAPSCO produces four of the five types of sonobuoys, which the Navy is in negotiats to buy on a four-year contract through 2023. Looking to boost competition, the service has been pushing Sparton and Ultra Electronics to dissolve the partnership and sell sonobuoys independently at the end of this contract.

But Sparton disclosed in an annual report last year that “due to the significance of the effort and expenditures required, there can be no assurance that Sparton, or both of the ERAPSCO joint venture partners,” would be able to meet the Navy’s requirement independent of one another.

Sparton then sold itself to Cerberus Capital Management, a New York City-based private equity firm specializing in distressed assets, for $183 million, roughly a year later. Cerberus owns major brands like office supply retailer Staples and grocery chain Safeway, but also defense contractors DynCorp, and as of December, Navistar Defense.

Andrews, the Pentagon spokesman, laid out the government’s concerns in a statement to Defense News.

“The DoD/DoN anticipates purchasing over 204,000 sonobuoys per year across the five types. To meet this demand, the DoD/DoN requires secure and stable sonobuoy suppliers,” Andrews wrote. “Based on these requirements and need for a stable sonobuoy industrial base, comprehensive individual production lines are required for the five sonobuoy types.

"This Defense Production Act Title III project is intended to sustain and reconstitute the industrial base for U.S. Navy sonobuoys and ensure at least two sources of sonobuoy manufacturing," Andrews said, adding: "For these reasons, President Trump, DoD, and DoN found use of DPA funds, coupled with industry investment, to be the most cost-effective, expedient, and practical approach to meet critical AN/SSQ series sonobuoy capability requirements."

The Defense Production Act, invoked in Trump’s memo, allows the department to give funding to producers of key industrial needs. It’s something the department is trying to use more in the wake of a major industrial base study, released last year.

“Part of what we wanted to do was inject capital to make sure there was support to the industrial base so that you could have two or more viable suppliers,” Chewning, the former industrial policy head, told Defense News recently. “It just made sense given the existing shortfall, and what had been allowed to happen within the industrial base, that we used the DPA Title III authorities to create incentives to expand production and strengthen.”

Chewning, who is now chief of staff to Acting Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan, said that he was going off information gleaned from before he left the Industrial Policy job. He described the situation as being “active, not reactive.”

Ultra Electronics and Sparton declined to comment on the future of their joint venture.

“Ultra Electronics remains committed to our US Navy partners to ensure the continued success of sonobuoy production and future development efforts. Our focus is, and will continue to be set on meeting the growing ASW requirements of the fleet,” the company said in a statement.

If the United States was open to buying sonobuoys outside its borders, there are other Western producers of the technology, including close allies Britain and France. But those production lines are being tapped by others, and with the U.S. likely to be the biggest procurer of the systems going forward, losing a U.S. internal production capability could lead to shortages worldwide.

And fundamentally, naval analysts Childs and Clark agree having a domestic supplier for the U.S. is vital, both for production needs and for, as Childs puts it, remaining “at the cutting edge of what is a critical technology area."

https://www.defensenews.com/di...se-and-russian-subs/

quote:

Originally posted by KevinCW:

quote:

Originally posted by RNshooter:
My nightmare scenario is: EMP knocks out the grid and fries all of our technology. China establishes a beachhead in California with human wave attacks. They roll 50 armored divisions onto the shore and don't stop until they hit DC.

We would be done before we even got started.

Bruce

And they would transport them here how? Rubber rafts?

...

Jetpacks.

quote:

Originally posted by KevinCW:

quote:

Originally posted by RNshooter:
My nightmare scenario is: EMP knocks out the grid and fries all of our technology. China establishes a beachhead in California with human wave attacks. They roll 50 armored divisions onto the shore and don't stop until they hit DC.

We would be done before we even got started.

Bruce

And they would transport them here how? Rubber rafts?

The US Navy has more ships, and combat power than pretty much every other navy combined. (now I agree that we shouldnt' rest and need to KEEP it this way) but looking at aircraft carriers alone we outnumber the entire world something like 3 to 1...

^This^

quote:

Originally posted by esdunbar:
what's the range of an EMP? Hundred miles? I dunno, but it's not the entire country.

In Forstchen's well-researched book, three took out the whole country.

Although it's been a few years, I've listened to Congressional testimony from experts in the field who state in no uncertain terms, that when this happens, we will be FUBAR as we are woefully unprepared for such an event. Yet, Congress has allocated nothing for hardening the grid. Figure that one out.

As I understand it, most military electronics are hardened.

And people ask me why I prep.

quote:

quote:
When does our lack of manufacturing capacity become a national security concern



About 30 years ago.

I agree with this statement.

Only when you can’t buy what you need. The American dollar is the strongest currency in the world. People will take it at the drop of a hat.

When it comes to textile-based military products (uniforms, small tents, back packs, individual combat equipment, etc), we have already hit a tipping point. Many of the textile manufacturers and skilled sewing personnel that were around 10-12 years ago are now gone. The remaining manufacturers are scrambling to try to keep up with new demand and the war fighter is being forced to wait months or more than a year to get product. It's bad.



.

I’m certainly no expert, but I would expect economic and cyber war much more than a shooting war.

Pertinent to your question, from The Conservative Treehouse:

quote:

U.S. Steel Announces $1.2 Billion Investment to Upgrade Pennsylvania Facilities…
Posted on May 2, 2019 by sundance
The U.S. Steel and Aluminum industry has been a key focus of President Trump in an effort to reestablish a critical industry for America. Part of the administration strategy was broad-based tariffs aimed at curbing China’s dumping of government subsidized product globally. The broad global application of the tariffs defeated the Chinese trans-shipment strategy to avoid them.

Despite opposition from Wall Street republicans and democrats purchased by K-Street lobbyists, the administration policy has been exceptionally successful at driving investment into the U.S. manufacturing base. The multinationals are furious.

PITTSBURGH May 2, 2019– United States Steel Corporation (NYSE: X) announced today it will invest more than $1 billion to construct a new sustainable endless casting and rolling facility at its Edgar Thomson Plant in Braddock, Pa., and a cogeneration facility at its Clairton Plant in Clairton, Pa., both part of the company’s Mon Valley Works.

The cutting-edge endless casting and rolling technology combines thin slab casting and hot rolled band production into one continuous process and will make Mon Valley Works the first facility of this type in the United States, and one of only a handful in the world.

“This is a truly transformational investment for U. S. Steel. We are combining our integrated steelmaking process with industry-leading endless casting and rolling to reinvest in steelmaking and secure the future for a new generation of steelworkers in Western Pennsylvania and the Mon Valley,” said David B. Burritt, President and Chief Executive Officer of U. S. Steel.

“U. S. Steel’s investment in leading technology and advanced manufacturing aligns with our vision to be the industry leader in delivering high-quality, value-added products and innovative solutions that address our customers’ most challenging steel needs for the future. We believe that adding sustainable steel technology to our footprint will create long-term value for our employees, our region, our customers and our investors.”

More at the LINK

Yes!
Exactly the type of thing I was hoping for.
I see China's policy of government subsidized dumping as a broad strategy to choke out many industries in many nations not just as a money making strategy but also as a military one.

Good for Trump! It makes economic and military sense, for us.
It also helps to put PA back in his column, come election day 2020.

Smart.

Bruce

https://www.foxnews.com/world/...iority-pentagon-says

"The Pentagon says Chinese forces remain a growing threat, looking to “contest” the United States military at greater ranges from mainland China, according to a new report released Thursday afternoon."

Section 232 has drastically reduced the dumping of Chinese steel into the US. It has been very effective. Just about the entire country cried and moaned because the price of their car would go up about $100 or their oven $25. We are the Mon Valleys largest customer. USS realizes that they have to do this to survive, integrated mills cannot survive against cheap imports or even domestic steel companies that melt steel instead of producing it.

quote:

Originally posted by sjtill:
Pertinent to your question, from The Conservative Treehouse:

quote:

U.S. Steel Announces $1.2 Billion Investment to Upgrade Pennsylvania Facilities…
Posted on May 2, 2019 by sundance
The U.S. Steel and Aluminum industry has been a key focus of President Trump in an effort to reestablish a critical industry for America. Part of the administration strategy was broad-based tariffs aimed at curbing China’s dumping of government subsidized product globally. The broad global application of the tariffs defeated the Chinese trans-shipment strategy to avoid them.

Despite opposition from Wall Street republicans and democrats purchased by K-Street lobbyists, the administration policy has been exceptionally successful at driving investment into the U.S. manufacturing base. The multinationals are furious.

PITTSBURGH May 2, 2019– United States Steel Corporation (NYSE: X) announced today it will invest more than $1 billion to construct a new sustainable endless casting and rolling facility at its Edgar Thomson Plant in Braddock, Pa., and a cogeneration facility at its Clairton Plant in Clairton, Pa., both part of the company’s Mon Valley Works.

The cutting-edge endless casting and rolling technology combines thin slab casting and hot rolled band production into one continuous process and will make Mon Valley Works the first facility of this type in the United States, and one of only a handful in the world.

“This is a truly transformational investment for U. S. Steel. We are combining our integrated steelmaking process with industry-leading endless casting and rolling to reinvest in steelmaking and secure the future for a new generation of steelworkers in Western Pennsylvania and the Mon Valley,” said David B. Burritt, President and Chief Executive Officer of U. S. Steel.

“U. S. Steel’s investment in leading technology and advanced manufacturing aligns with our vision to be the industry leader in delivering high-quality, value-added products and innovative solutions that address our customers’ most challenging steel needs for the future. We believe that adding sustainable steel technology to our footprint will create long-term value for our employees, our region, our customers and our investors.”

More at the LINK