DOCSLIB.ORG

Calendar No. 447

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Calendar No. 447 Calendar No. 447 104TH CONGRESS REPORT 2d Session SENATE 104±286 "! DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATION BILL, 1997 JUNE 20, 1996.ÐOrdered to be printed Mr. STEVENS, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany S. 1894] The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 1894) mak- ing appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1997, and for other purposes, reports favor- ably thereon and recommends that the bill do pass. New obligational authority Total of bill as reported to Senate ........................... $244,744,904,000 Total of 1997 budget estimate ................................. 234,578,433,000 Amount of fiscal year 1996 enacted ........................ 243,406,197,000 The bill as reported to the Senate: Above fiscal year 1997 budget estimate .......... 10,166,471,000 Over enacted appropriations for fiscal year 1996 ................................................................ 1,338,707,000 25±344 cc CONTENTS Background: Page Purpose of the bill ............................................................................................ 4 Hearings ............................................................................................................ 4 Summary of bill ................................................................................................ 4 Compliance with 602(b) allocation .................................................................. 5 Budgetary impact of the bill ................................................................................... 5 TITLE IÐMILITARY PERSONNEL Military personnel ................................................................................................... 6 Military personnel, Army ........................................................................................ 9 Military personnel, Navy ........................................................................................ 10 Military personnel, Marine Corps .......................................................................... 10 Military personnel, Air Force ................................................................................. 10 Reserve personnel, Army ........................................................................................ 11 Reserve personnel, Navy ......................................................................................... 11 Reserve personnel, Marine Corps ........................................................................... 12 Reserve personnel, Air Force .................................................................................. 12 National Guard personnel, Army ........................................................................... 13 National Guard personnel, Air Force ..................................................................... 13 TITLE IIÐOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE Operation and maintenance overview .................................................................... 14 Servicewide operation and maintenance programs .............................................. 15 Operation and maintenance, Army ........................................................................ 19 Operation and maintenance, Navy ......................................................................... 23 Operation and maintenance, Marine Corps .......................................................... 26 Operation and maintenance, Air Force .................................................................. 28 Operation and maintenance, defense-wide ............................................................ 31 Operation and maintenance, Army Reserve .......................................................... 35 Operation and maintenance, Navy Reserve .......................................................... 35 Operation and maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve ............................................ 35 Operation and maintenance, Air Force Reserve ................................................... 36 Operation and maintenance, Army National Guard ............................................ 36 Operation and maintenance, Air National Guard ................................................ 37 Court of Military Appeals ....................................................................................... 37 Environmental restoration, defense ....................................................................... 38 Former Soviet Union threat reduction ................................................................... 40 Overseas humanitarian, disaster, and civic aid .................................................... 40 TITLE IIIÐPROCUREMENT Estimates and appropriation summary ................................................................. 41 Aircraft procurement, Army ................................................................................... 45 Missile procurement, Army ..................................................................................... 48 Procurement of weapons and tracked combat vehicles, Army ............................. 51 Procurement of ammunition, Army ........................................................................ 53 Other procurement, Army ....................................................................................... 57 Aircraft procurement, Navy .................................................................................... 63 Weapons procurement, Navy .................................................................................. 67 Shipbuilding and conversion, Navy ........................................................................ 69 Other procurement, Navy ....................................................................................... 71 Procurement, Marine Corps .................................................................................... 77 Aircraft procurement, Air Force ............................................................................. 80 Missile procurement, Air Force .............................................................................. 85 (2) 3 Page Other procurement, Air Force ................................................................................ 89 Procurement, defense-wide ..................................................................................... 92 National Guard and Reserve equipment ............................................................... 96 TITLE IVÐRESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION Summary of Committee action ............................................................................... 99 Research, development, test, and evaluation, Army ............................................. 100 Research, development, test, and evaluation, Navy ............................................. 111 Research, development, test, and evaluation, Air Force ...................................... 119 Research, development, test, and evaluation, defense-wide ................................. 127 Developmental test, and evaluation, defense ........................................................ 138 Operational test and evaluation, defense .............................................................. 139 TITLE VÐREVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS Defense business operations funding adjustments ............................................... 140 National defense sealift fund .................................................................................. 140 TITLE VIÐOTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS Chemical agents and munitions destruction, defense .......................................... 141 Defense Health Program ......................................................................................... 143 Drug interdiction and counterdrug activities, defense ......................................... 147 Office of the Inspector General ............................................................................... 150 TITLE VIIÐRELATED AGENCIES Central Intelligence Agency retirement and disability system fund ................... 151 TITLE VIII General provisions ................................................................................................... 152 Compliance with paragraph 7(c), rule 16, standing rules of the Senate ............. 158 Compliance with paragraph 7(c), rule 26, standing rules of the Senate ............. 158 Compliance with paragraph 12, rule 26, standing rules of the Senate ............... 159 BACKGROUND PURPOSE OF THE BILL This bill makes appropriations for the military functions of the Department of Defense for the period October 1, 1996, through September 30, 1997. Functional areas include the pay, allowances, and support of military personnel, operation and maintenance of the forces, procurement of equipment and systems, and research, development, test, and evaluation. Appropriations for military as- sistance, military construction, family housing, nuclear warheads, and civil defense are provided in other bills. HEARINGS The Subcommittee on Department of Defense Appropriations began hearings on the fiscal year 1997 budget request on March 6, 1996, and concluded them on June 18, 1996, after 10 separate ses- sions. The subcommittee heard testimony from representatives of the Department of Defense, other Federal agencies, representatives of organizations, and the public. SUMMARY OF THE BILL The Committee considered a total fiscal year 1997 budget request of $234,678,433,000 in new obligational authority for the military functions of the Department of Defense,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Theater Airlift Modernization Options for Closing the Gap
    Halvorsen loader pulls away from C-130J Super Hercules at Bagram Air Field, Afghanistan, where Airmen from aerial port and airlift squadrons support operations 24/7 at DOD’s busiest single runway airfield (U.S. Air Force/Brian Wagner) Theater Airlift Modernization Options for Closing the Gap By Robert C. Owen merica’s renewed strategic the Nation has and what it expects to whether the POR airlift fleet will be ade- emphasis on state-on-state con- acquire) presents serious shortfalls in quate to the demands likely to be placed A flict highlights significant gaps the ability to maneuver land forces on on it. The discussion then turns to the in the country’s theater airlift capa- the scale, to the destinations, or in the question of whether affordable opportu- bilities, particularly in the Asia-Pacific timeframes desired by Army planners. nities exist to mitigate the gaps identified. region. Quantitatively, there likely will Air commanders also have reason for not be enough airlift capacity available concern since the core aircraft of the Requirements to cover major conflict requirements. theater fleet, the C-17 and C-130, pose Many organizations articulate versions Qualitatively, the current program- capacity and operational risks in their of airlift requirements based on sub- of-record (POR) airlift fleet (what abilities to support high-volume combat jective guesses about future scenarios. operations at forward bases when Moreover, the details of the more threatened or damaged by attack. authoritative Department of Defense Given these gaps between capabilities (DOD) studies are classified. Therefore, Dr. Robert C. Owen is a Professor in the Department of Aeronautical Science at Embry- and requirements, this article considers this article asserts only that the steady Riddle Aeronautical University.
    [Show full text]
  • AIRLIFT RODEO a Brief History of Airlift Competitions, 1961-1989
    "- - ·· - - ( AIRLIFT RODEO A Brief History of Airlift Competitions, 1961-1989 Office of MAC History Monograph by JefferyS. Underwood Military Airlift Command United States Air Force Scott Air Force Base, Illinois March 1990 TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword . iii Introduction . 1 CARP Rodeo: First Airdrop Competitions .............. 1 New Airplanes, New Competitions ....... .. .. ... ... 10 Return of the Rodeo . 16 A New Name and a New Orientation ..... ........... 24 The Future of AIRLIFT RODEO . ... .. .. ..... .. .... 25 Appendix I .. .... ................. .. .. .. ... ... 27 Appendix II ... ...... ........... .. ..... ..... .. 28 Appendix III .. .. ................... ... .. 29 ii FOREWORD Not long after the Military Air Transport Service received its air­ drop mission in the mid-1950s, MATS senior commanders speculated that the importance of the new airdrop mission might be enhanced through a tactical training competition conducted on a recurring basis. Their idea came to fruition in 1962 when MATS held its first airdrop training competition. For the next several years the competition remained an annual event, but it fell by the wayside during the years of the United States' most intense participation in the Southeast Asia conflict. The airdrop competitions were reinstated in 1969 but were halted again in 1973, because of budget cuts and the reduced emphasis being given to airdrop operations. However, the esprit de corps engendered among the troops and the training benefits derived from the earlier events were not forgotten and prompted the competition's renewal in 1979 in its present form. Since 1979 the Rodeos have remained an important training event and tactical evaluation exercise for the Military Airlift Command. The following historical study deals with the origins, evolution, and results of the tactical airlift competitions in MATS and MAC.
    [Show full text]
  • Safety Rules for Nuclear Logistics Transport by the Prime Nuclear Airlift Force
    BY ORDER OF THE AIR FORCE INSTRUCTION 91-115 SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE 1 AUGUST 1998 Safety SAFETY RULES FOR NUCLEAR LOGISTICS TRANSPORT BY THE PRIME NUCLEAR AIRLIFT FORCE COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY NOTICE: This publication is available digitally on the SAF/AAD WWW site at: http://afpubs.hq.af.mil. If you lack access, contact your Publishing Distribution Office (PDO). OPR: HQ AFSC/SEWO Certified by: HQ USAF/SE (Lt Col Ronald E. Morin) (Maj Gen Francis C. Gideon, Jr.) Supersedes AFI 91-115, 1 October 1997. Pages: 7 Distribution: F This instruction implements AFPD 91-1, Nuclear Weapon Systems Surety and Department of Defense (DoD) Directive 3150.2, Nuclear Weapon System Safety Program, December 23, 1996. It applies to Prime Nuclear Airlift Force (PNAF) operations with C-141B, C-17A, and C-130E/E*/H aircraft trans- porting nuclear weapons. Section A assigns responsibilities. Section B contains the nuclear weapon sys- tem safety rules for PNAF operations. The safety rules in Section B may only be changed or supplemented using procedures in AFI 91-102, Nuclear Weapon System Safety Studies, Operational Safety Reviews, and Safety Rules. Paragraph 11.2. applies to the Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard. SUMMARY OF REVISIONS This revision adds the C-17A to the Nuclear Logistics Transport by the Prime Nuclear Airlift Force. A bar (|) indicates revisions from the previous edition. Section A—Authority and Responsibilities 1. Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) Direction. The JCS directs the Chief of Staff, US Air Force, to imple- ment the safety rules.
    [Show full text]
  • Time to Think About a European Union Operated Airlift Capability? Laurent Donnet
    No. 62 April 2015 Time to think about a European Union operated airlift capability? Laurent Donnet The European Council of June 2015 will the development and availability of the assess concrete progress regarding its required civilian and military capabilities to do conclusions of December 2013 and so. Member States were also encouraged to provide further guidance in the most improve the EU rapid response capabilities as promising areas. This could be the right well as to be able to plan and deploy the right time to propose innovative solutions to civilian and military assets rapidly and long-lasting issues and shortfalls - effectively. Here reference to humanitarian aid strategic airlift being one of them – and and disaster response is rather obvious. increased civil/military synergies. Could For responding to natural and man-made the A400M become part of the answer? disasters the Union has an array of instruments, notably those managed by the In December 2013 the European Council European Commission. The European stressed the need to turn the financial crisis Directorate General for Humanitarian Aid and and its impact on national defence budgets Civil Protection (DG ECHO) is responsible into an opportunity, to give a new impetus to for the delivery of Community humanitarian European military capability development in assistance and the Emergency Response order to meet its level of ambition. It also Coordination Centre (ERCC) has been invited its Member States to address remaining established to enable the EU and its Member shortfalls and to safeguard the defence States to respond to the disasters in a timely capabilities required to support the European and efficient manner.
    [Show full text]
  • Gallery of USAF Weapons Note: Inventory Numbers Are Total Active Inventory figures As of Sept
    Gallery of USAF Weapons Note: Inventory numbers are total active inventory figures as of Sept. 30, 2014. By Aaron M. U. Church, Associate Editor I 2015 USAF Almanac BOMBER AIRCRAFT flight controls actuate trailing edge surfaces that combine aileron, elevator, and rudder functions. New EHF satcom and high-speed computer upgrade B-1 Lancer recently entered full production. Both are part of the Defensive Management Brief: A long-range bomber capable of penetrating enemy defenses and System-Modernization (DMS-M). Efforts are underway to develop a new VLF delivering the largest weapon load of any aircraft in the inventory. receiver for alternative comms. Weapons integration includes the improved COMMENTARY GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator and JASSM-ER and future weapons The B-1A was initially proposed as replacement for the B-52, and four pro- such as GBU-53 SDB II, GBU-56 Laser JDAM, JDAM-5000, and LRSO. Flex- totypes were developed and tested in 1970s before program cancellation in ible Strike Package mods will feed GPS data to the weapons bays to allow 1977. The program was revived in 1981 as B-1B. The vastly upgraded aircraft weapons to be guided before release, to thwart jamming. It also will move added 74,000 lb of usable payload, improved radar, and reduced radar cross stores management to a new integrated processor. Phase 2 will allow nuclear section, but cut maximum speed to Mach 1.2. The B-1B first saw combat in and conventional weapons to be carried simultaneously to increase flexibility. Iraq during Desert Fox in December 1998.
    [Show full text]
  • Realignment and Indian Air Power Doctrine
    Realignment and Indian Airpower Doctrine Challenges in an Evolving Strategic Context Dr. Christina Goulter Prof. Harsh Pant Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed or implied in the Journal are those of the authors and should not be construed as carrying the official sanction of the Department of Defense, Air Force, Air Education and Training Command, Air University, or other agencies or departments of the US government. This article may be reproduced in whole or in part without permission. If it is reproduced, the Journal of Indo-Pacific Affairs requests a courtesy line. ith a shift in the balance of power in the Far East, as well as multiple chal- Wlenges in the wider international security environment, several nations in the Indo-Pacific region have undergone significant changes in their defense pos- tures. This is particularly the case with India, which has gone from a regional, largely Pakistan-focused, perspective to one involving global influence and power projection. This has presented ramifications for all the Indian armed services, but especially the Indian Air Force (IAF). Over the last decade, the IAF has been trans- forming itself from a principally army-support instrument to a broad spectrum air force, and this prompted a radical revision of Indian aipower doctrine in 2012. It is akin to Western airpower thought, but much of the latest doctrine is indigenous and demonstrates some unique conceptual work, not least in the way maritime air- power is used to protect Indian territories in the Indian Ocean and safeguard sea lines of communication. Because of this, it is starting to have traction in Anglo- American defense circles.1 The current Indian emphases on strategic reach and con- ventional deterrence have been prompted by other events as well, not least the 1999 Kargil conflict between India and Pakistan, which demonstrated that India lacked a balanced defense apparatus.
    [Show full text]
  • Program Acquisition Cost by Weapon System Major Weapon Systems OVERVIEW
    The estimated cost of this report or study for the Department of Defense is approximately $32,000 for the 2017 Fiscal Year. This includes $13,000 in expenses and $19,000 in DoD labor. Generated on 2017May03 RefID: E-7DE12B0 FY 2018 Program Acquisition Cost by Weapon System Major Weapon Systems OVERVIEW The combined capabilities and performance of United States (U.S.) weapon systems are unmatched throughout the world, ensuring that U.S. military forces have the advantage over any adversary. The Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 acquisition funding request for the Department of Defense (DoD) budget totals $208.6 billion, which includes base funding and Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) funding; $125.2 billion for Procurement funded programs and $83.3 billion for Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) funded programs. Of the $208.6 billion, $94.9 billion is for programs that have been designated as Major Defense Acquisition Programs (MDAPs). This book focuses on all funding for the key MDAP programs. To simplify the display of the various weapon systems, this book is organized by the following mission area categories: Mission Area Categories • Aircraft & Related Systems • Missiles and Munitions • Command, Control, Communications, • Mission Support Activities Computers, and Intelligence (C4I) Systems • RDT&E Science & Technology • Ground Systems • Shipbuilding and Maritime Systems • Missile Defense Programs • Space Based Systems FY 2018 Modernization – Total: $208.6 Billion ($ in Billions) Space Based Aircraft & Systems Related $9.8
    [Show full text]
  • IMTEC-89-53 Military Space Operations: Use of Mobile Ground
    . -. ,(. ,. .“” ,Y .,, . -- II, ./, .I i /, . % . ,L. United States Gdneral Accounting Off& Report to the Honorable &.A0 John P. Murtha, Chairman, Subcommittee on Defense, Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives July 1989 MILITARY SPACE ’ OPERATIONS Use of Mobile Ground Stations in Satellite Control GAO/IMTEC439-63 United States General Accounting Office GAO Washington, D.C. 20548 Information Management and Technology Division B-224148 July 3, 1989 The Honorable John P. Murtha Chairman, Subcommittee on Defense Committee on Appropriations House of Representatives Dear Mr. Chairman: In your January 9, 1989, letter and in subsequent discussions with your office, you asked us to determine (1) how mobile ground stations fit into the Air Force’s overall satellite control architecture, (2) how many sta- tions exist and are planned, (3) what they cost by program element and appropriation account, and (4) how much the Department of Defense budgeted in fiscal year 1990 for mobile ground stations. As agreed with your office, our review focused primarily on mobile ground stations used by the Air Force’s satellite programs and included mobile ground stations used for one Defense Communications Agency satellite program. The Air Force’s satellite control architecture establishes a requirement for mobile ground stations to provide command and control instructions to maintain the position of a satellite in orbit as well as to provide the capability to process information coming from satellites. This network of stations, when completed, is planned to supplement fixed stations and/or to totally command and control a satellite’s position in orbit or process information. As of May 1989, there were 39 existing mobile ground stations.
    [Show full text]
  • The Usaf C-17 Fleet: a Strategic Airlift Shortfall?
    AU/ACSC/0265/97-03 THE USAF C-17 FLEET: A STRATEGIC AIRLIFT SHORTFALL? A Research Paper Presented To The Research Department Air Command and Staff College In Partial Fulfillment of the Graduation Requirements of ACSC by Maj. Randall L. Long March 1997 Disclaimer The views expressed in this academic research paper are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the US government or the Department of Defense. ii Contents Page DISCLAIMER ................................................................................................................ii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS..........................................................................................iv LIST OF TABLES ..........................................................................................................v PREFACE......................................................................................................................vi ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................. vii STRATEGIC AIRLIFT TODAY.....................................................................................1 Introduction and Problem Definition............................................................................1 Thesis Statement.........................................................................................................3 Overview ....................................................................................................................3 STRATEGIC AIRLIFT
    [Show full text]
  • National Reconnaissance Office Review and Redaction Guide
    NRO Approved for Release 16 Dec 2010 —Tep-nm.T7ymqtmthitmemf- (u) National Reconnaissance Office Review and Redaction Guide For Automatic Declassification Of 25-Year-Old Information Version 1.0 2008 Edition Approved: Scott F. Large Director DECL ON: 25x1, 20590201 DRV FROM: NRO Classification Guide 6.0, 20 May 2005 NRO Approved for Release 16 Dec 2010 (U) Table of Contents (U) Preface (U) Background 1 (U) General Methodology 2 (U) File Series Exemptions 4 (U) Continued Exemption from Declassification 4 1. (U) Reveal Information that Involves the Application of Intelligence Sources and Methods (25X1) 6 1.1 (U) Document Administration 7 1.2 (U) About the National Reconnaissance Program (NRP) 10 1.2.1 (U) Fact of Satellite Reconnaissance 10 1.2.2 (U) National Reconnaissance Program Information 12 1.2.3 (U) Organizational Relationships 16 1.2.3.1. (U) SAF/SS 16 1.2.3.2. (U) SAF/SP (Program A) 18 1.2.3.3. (U) CIA (Program B) 18 1.2.3.4. (U) Navy (Program C) 19 1.2.3.5. (U) CIA/Air Force (Program D) 19 1.2.3.6. (U) Defense Recon Support Program (DRSP/DSRP) 19 1.3 (U) Satellite Imagery (IMINT) Systems 21 1.3.1 (U) Imagery System Information 21 1.3.2 (U) Non-Operational IMINT Systems 25 1.3.3 (U) Current and Future IMINT Operational Systems 32 1.3.4 (U) Meteorological Forecasting 33 1.3.5 (U) IMINT System Ground Operations 34 1.4 (U) Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) Systems 36 1.4.1 (U) Signals Intelligence System Information 36 1.4.2 (U) Non-Operational SIGINT Systems 38 1.4.3 (U) Current and Future SIGINT Operational Systems 40 1.4.4 (U) SIGINT
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft of Today. Aerospace Education I
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 068 287 SE 014 551 AUTHOR Sayler, D. S. TITLE Aircraft of Today. Aerospace EducationI. INSTITUTION Air Univ.,, Maxwell AFB, Ala. JuniorReserve Office Training Corps. SPONS AGENCY Department of Defense, Washington, D.C. PUB DATE 71 NOTE 179p. EDRS PRICE MF-$0.65 HC-$6.58 DESCRIPTORS *Aerospace Education; *Aerospace Technology; Instruction; National Defense; *PhysicalSciences; *Resource Materials; Supplementary Textbooks; *Textbooks ABSTRACT This textbook gives a brief idea aboutthe modern aircraft used in defense and forcommercial purposes. Aerospace technology in its present form has developedalong certain basic principles of aerodynamic forces. Differentparts in an airplane have different functions to balance theaircraft in air, provide a thrust, and control the general mechanisms.Profusely illustrated descriptions provide a picture of whatkinds of aircraft are used for cargo, passenger travel, bombing, and supersonicflights. Propulsion principles and descriptions of differentkinds of engines are quite helpful. At the end of each chapter,new terminology is listed. The book is not available on the market andis to be used only in the Air Force ROTC program. (PS) SC AEROSPACE EDUCATION I U S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. EDUCATION & WELFARE OFFICE OF EDUCATION THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRO OUCH) EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROM THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIG INATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OR OPIN 'IONS STATED 00 NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICE OF EOU CATION POSITION OR POLICY AIR FORCE JUNIOR ROTC MR,UNIVERS17/14AXWELL MR FORCEBASE, ALABAMA Aerospace Education I Aircraft of Today D. S. Sayler Academic Publications Division 3825th Support Group (Academic) AIR FORCE JUNIOR ROTC AIR UNIVERSITY MAXWELL AIR FORCE BASE, ALABAMA 2 1971 Thispublication has been reviewed and approvedby competent personnel of the preparing command in accordance with current directiveson doctrine, policy, essentiality, propriety, and quality.
    [Show full text]
  • Usafalmanac ■ Gallery of USAF Weapons
    USAFAlmanac ■ Gallery of USAF Weapons By Susan H.H. Young The B-1B’s conventional capability is being significantly enhanced by the ongoing Conventional Mission Upgrade Program (CMUP). This gives the B-1B greater lethality and survivability through the integration of precision and standoff weapons and a robust ECM suite. CMUP will include GPS receivers, a MIL-STD-1760 weapon interface, secure radios, and improved computers to support precision weapons, initially the JDAM, followed by the Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW) and the Joint Air to Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM). The Defensive System Upgrade Program will improve aircrew situational awareness and jamming capability. B-2 Spirit Brief: Stealthy, long-range, multirole bomber that can deliver conventional and nuclear munitions anywhere on the globe by flying through previously impenetrable defenses. Function: Long-range heavy bomber. Operator: ACC. First Flight: July 17, 1989. Delivered: Dec. 17, 1993–present. B-1B Lancer (Ted Carlson) IOC: April 1997, Whiteman AFB, Mo. Production: 21 planned. Inventory: 21. Unit Location: Whiteman AFB, Mo. Contractor: Northrop Grumman, with Boeing, LTV, and General Electric as principal subcontractors. Bombers Power Plant: four General Electric F118-GE-100 turbo fans, each 17,300 lb thrust. B-1 Lancer Accommodation: two, mission commander and pilot, Brief: A long-range multirole bomber capable of flying on zero/zero ejection seats. missions over intercontinental range without refueling, Dimensions: span 172 ft, length 69 ft, height 17 ft. then penetrating enemy defenses with a heavy load Weight: empty 150,000–160,000 lb, gross 350,000 lb. of ordnance. Ceiling: 50,000 ft. Function: Long-range conventional bomber.
    [Show full text]