Air-Power | NatSec Ledger

20.9K posts

Air-Power | NatSec Ledger banner
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger

Air-Power | NatSec Ledger

@NatSecLedger

Old radar types never die; they just phased array! Aerospace, Defense & NatSec related content. No tip jar. I buy my own coffee.

Sumali Mart 2023
1.1K Sinusundan27.7K Mga Tagasunod
Naka-pin na Tweet
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger@NatSecLedger·
PSA: OSINT is geolocating a tank from satellite imagery or scrubbing hundreds of public documents for relevant facts. SLOPINT (Scraped, Lifted, Other-people's Posts as INTelligence) involves scrolling some 400 follower account on social media, bookmarking or screenshotting their post, and filing it as your own reporting or throwing their content into a monetized youtube video. Two very different jobs.
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger tweet media
English
2
68
505
49.8K
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger nag-retweet
Faytuks Network
Faytuks Network@FaytuksNetwork·
Missiles fired at northern Israel from Iran.
Faytuks Network tweet media
English
1
42
199
16.2K
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger@NatSecLedger·
My underlying assumption is that those gulf nations would want to build back their lost or damaged infrastructure and get it back online to recover their economies. This limbo state where they build it with Iran’s funds and then IRGC bombs it in retaliation does not serve those goals. Unless this is pass through where we look like we are funding gulf nation rebuilding using Iran’s cash and those nations then strike their own financial deals with Iran.
English
0
0
2
27
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger@NatSecLedger·
I assume none of this can actually be spent until Iran is deterred from launching waves of missiles and drones at these Gulf allies. Otherwise, they'll simply bomb the exact same targets again.
GIF
Selina Wang@selinawangtv

🚨BREAKING: US planning to use Iranian assets to rebuild Gulf allies, a source familiar with Secretary Bessent’s thinking tells me. “Treasury will utilize all tools available to allow Iranian assets to be made available to our Gulf allies to support rebuilding and repairs for any future damage caused by Iran," the source tells me. This comes as the administration aims to put increased economic pressure on Iran. The Iranian assets could include frozen assets and ships the U.S. has seized. The administration is reaching out to Gulf allies right now and asking for their evaluation. “The Secretary has also directed his team to assess conditions amongst our Gulf allies and request comprehensive estimates of the costs associated with repairing damage Iran has inflicted since the start of the conflict,” the source said. “Treasury will further consider whether Iranian assets could be used to support repairs for past damages.”

English
3
2
49
3.9K
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger@NatSecLedger·
Wishes do not make demand signals. Budgeted dollars so. Please point to the last time an annual budget included buy rates the DAF is now wanting. The DAF literally took a procurement holiday on the F-15 that lasted decades with production to meet foreign demand dropping to less than an aircraft a month. The DAF now wants 4 per month. No responsible publicly traded company is just going to be sitting on that surplus capacity on a $100 MM aircraft.
English
1
0
6
104
Kwizzack Humperdink
Kwizzack Humperdink@MooWadDweeb·
@NatSecLedger The demand signal was there. But, we also have $13 billion carriers with substandard plumbing and poorly designed critical systems. Not excusing NAVSEA's idiotic behavior either, but no new real frigates, no new destroyers, no 6th gen fighter, a completely mucked up Zumwalt, etc
English
1
0
0
90
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger@NatSecLedger·
The industry has one customer. It responded to that demand signal and built an enterprise calibrated to deliver 70–100 fighter aircraft per year domestically, with another 100–120 for export. The problem is the demand signal has now exceeded that capacity for the first time in decades and production won't spin up overnight. You get the industrial base you chose to fund.
Inside Defense@insidedefense

General: Industry can't meet Air Force aircraft demand ow.ly/PjOa106zmZc

English
3
20
197
13.8K
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger@NatSecLedger·
That they are public companies serving just one customer - the government - is the problem. You can’t claim this to be the case and then turn around and blame them from actually responding to 3 decades or demand signal sent by their sole customer. They are not selling hamburgers or smartphones. They will build only the capacity that their single customer is willing to pay for. They cannot sell to whoever they please at whatever terms they please.
English
1
0
7
119
Kwizzack Humperdink
Kwizzack Humperdink@MooWadDweeb·
@NatSecLedger They are govt contractors, not McD's. They behave like a silicon valley start up. Because when the need arises, there is a long lead time to actualize capacity. There should have been some effort, at least, to use taxpayer funds that these MIC parasites profit from properly.
English
1
0
0
112
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger@NatSecLedger·
They could do that once they stop highlighting the problem they the industrial base is fragile and inadequate capacity exists to meet near and mid term capacity needs. As stated under oath by uniformed leaders. They can then pivot to further reducing capacity, reversing the demand signal, turning off COCOM demand signal for rapid capability and fresh capacity and re-do funds towards readiness. Until the next person comes along and rants how readiness is hitting the medium and long term health of the force and eroding its qualitative edge. Then we can go to addressing those and move the funds back to modernization.
English
1
1
3
85
Elliott Pearce
Elliott Pearce@IrishCowboy13·
@NatSecLedger I propose that we reallocate procurement funds to sustainment in upcoming budgets. The COCOMs want sorties. They can get more by increasing availability than by adding jets. The FY27-30 jets aren’t paid for yet except for long lead items. Most of that money is available.
English
1
0
0
72
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger@NatSecLedger·
No. You are not going to get public companies to build and hold surplus capacity when they have just one customer. And that customer has not purchased at those levels since the mid 90s or even earlier. It would be an extremely poor use of their capital and leaders will likely be booted out by shareholders for obvious reasons.
English
1
1
13
357
Kwizzack Humperdink
Kwizzack Humperdink@MooWadDweeb·
@NatSecLedger Caveat that with the previous monetary largess the MIC enjoys going to stock buybacks, outrageous pay scales for executives, and other non-industrial capacity sinks. We got the capacity we were lobbied to have. Capex should always have been the focus, not stock options for CEOs.
English
1
0
1
390
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger@NatSecLedger·
You are not presenting an argument. To do so, propose what you will do. In full detail that balances the competing priorities, COCOM and political tensions and industrial base realities. The Air Force has already slowed the F35 program as it gets over the Blk 4 development hump. The apg -85 situation much like the TR-3 situation is the DODa own making where they never funded contingencies but it is not impacting FY-27-30 buys as those aircraft don’t deliver until early next decade.
English
1
1
4
129
Elliott Pearce
Elliott Pearce@IrishCowboy13·
@NatSecLedger I think we are doing a bad job of balancing readiness with modernization when the F-35 fleet is at 50% availability and we are taking delivery of new F-35s without radar. If we have a fixed pool of money, the dollars spent on radarless jets should go to increasing availability.
English
1
0
0
114
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger@NatSecLedger·
Even if we can sustain the ones we have someone will claim it’s not to their satisfaction and we won’t ever buy new aircraft. We could to decades without buying a single new aircraft in that scenario. This is why these sort of arguments don’t work. The services balance readiness with modernization all the time and will continue to so at all resourcing levels and funding profiles. If you want better readiness advocate specifically for it, not come up with weak arguments that will ultimately hurt the service by making the problem worst
English
1
0
12
396
Elliott Pearce
Elliott Pearce@IrishCowboy13·
@NatSecLedger We need to stop buying new build F-35s until we can sustain the ones we have. Clear the export back log while we finish the APG-85 and build up the parts supply
English
2
0
0
462
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger@NatSecLedger·
@maxxxmoin I know it is a mockery of that account. But its since taken a form of its own as a meme, which is something that is widely used each time an offensive capability penetrates an air defense system.
English
0
0
3
54
Max Moin
Max Moin@maxxxmoin·
@NatSecLedger What air defence doing is mockery of zoka200, i feel like he deserves the reputation for this legendary statement. Great article nonetheless
English
1
0
1
76
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger@NatSecLedger·
The GAM-72 Quail, a full-scale missile, is tested in the Propulsion Wind Tunnel 16-foot transonic wind tunnel of what was then known as Arnold Engineering Development Center in 1958. (U.S. Air Force photo)
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger tweet media
English
1
9
154
6.1K
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger@NatSecLedger·
U.S. Air Force Air Commandos from the 352d Special Operations Wing guide a Romanian Army High Mobility Artillery Rocket System vehicle as it backs inside an MC-130J Commando II during Exercise Trojan Footprint 26 near Bucharest, Romania, May 14, 2026. (📸Benjamin Sutton)
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger tweet media
English
0
1
52
1.8K
Air-Power | NatSec Ledger nag-retweet
John Ridge
John Ridge@WeaponScientist·
These proposals are increasingly nonsensical. Gripen would not provide Canada any sovereignty from the U.S. as the F414-GE-39E engine is subject to ITAR. Rafale is the only “sovereign” option. Moreover, Gripen is the least capable Western fighter on the market. It will only become more obsolescent as time goes on. Sustaining two different airframes will undermine the readiness of both.
🇨🇦 Policy Hawk@CDNPolicyHawk

"According to several sources, the Canadian government is still considering a major fleet of F-35s, consisting of 72 to 88 aircraft, even as Canada moves forward with its Gripen project." "Sources within both the government and the private sector say Ottawa is considering purchasing 72 Gripen aircraft" "'There could easily be a fleet of 140 aircraft', says a source familiar with the ongoing discussions." That makes a heck of a lot more sense than the 30/60 split mentioned in La Presse's article earlier this week. [Quotes translated by Google]

English
59
44
479
62.3K

Tuklasin

@majomaryoku @elonmusk @BarackObama @taylorswift13 @cristiano @BillGates @NASA @nikifrancismediavine