Thomas C. Theiner Profile picture
Sep 27, 2022 21 tweets 6 min read Read on X
Pentagon budget realignment files are a magnificent source of info about what the US military is up to, what classified programs US Special Operations Command runs in Ukraine, and what equipment has been sent to Ukraine.

Let's dive in - a thread 🧵:
1/n
These Pentagon papers include all items the Pentagon ordered to replace equipment sent to Ukraine up to 12 August 2022.

I.e the Pentagon ordered:
• $1,381,308,000 of Javelins and $73,123,000 of Javelin Command Launch Units (CLU) to replace the Javs sent to Ukraine.
2/n
• $808,811,000 of Stingers. Interestingly $505,054,000 worth of the Stingers are for the Marine Corps, which hasn't ordered Stingers since 2005.
• $31,136,000 M777 howitzer spare parts have been ordered to replace the spares sent by the Marines to Ukraine
3/n
Speaking of M777 howitzers:
• $237,188,000 of M795 projectiles have been ordered and $92,108,000 of M982 Excalibur projectiles
• $396,944,000 are being spent on M232A1 propelling charges, various fuzes, and M82 primers
• $1,698,000 for EPIAFS fuze setters to set Excaliburs
4/n
Even more interesting - the Pentagon spends:
• $10,000,000 to increase 155mm ammo production at the existing plant
• $200,000,000 for a new M795 metal parts plant
• $30,000,000 for a new M795 load, assemble and pack plant
• $265,850,000 for a new propelling charges plant
5/n
• $33,000,000 to increase M739A1 fuze production
• $7,000,000 to increase M82 primer production
• $8,000,000 for 155mm production line spare parts
• $30,000,000 for a dedicated XM1113 and XM1210 production line to speed up introduction of these new projectiles
6/n
Staying with artillery:
• $298,000,000 for counter battery radars (and $53,000,000 for AN/MPQ-64 Sentinel air-defense radars)

To replace M777 howitzer towing trucks and ammo transporting trucks the Pentagon ordered:
• $74,267,000 worth of FMTV
• $13,361,000 worth of FHTV
7/n
Now let's have a look at everyone's favorite American icon - the M142 HIMARS. The Pentagon ordered $399,913,000 worth of M142 HIMARS launchers. That's at least 100 launchers... but in the Pentagon papers one can find a hint that the Army is replacing its M777 with M142.
8/n
Until 12 August the Pentagon ordered $139,599,000 of GMLRS rockets. According to these Pentagon papers M31A2 rockets cost $774,750 per pod of six... so we can assume (with a margin of error) that Ukraine received around 180 pods with 1,080 rockets in July.
9/n
And the Pentagon is also increasing M142 and GMLRS production:
• $77,000,000 to procure long lead items for GMLRS
• $44,000,000 to shorten GMLRS production times
• $71,500,000 to increase M142 HIMARS production

10/n
Other interesting info in the ammo section:
• $30,913,000 for 7.62mm machine gun ammo
• $74,750,000 for .50 machine gun ammo
• $72,415,000 for 40mm grenades for Mk 19 automatic grenade launchers ($12,094,000) and M320A1 grenade launchers ($5,268,000)
11/n
• $26,832,000 for AT-4 anti-tank rockets
• $19,115,000 for M72 LAW
• $47,323,000 for a non defined "shoulder launched munition" (I have no clue what that could be)

The ammo section has just small amounts for hand grenades ($3,618,000) and mines ($1,635,000) - either the
12/n
US Army has enough of these or Europeans deliver most of the stuff here.

Mortar ammo orders are also rather small:
• $11,204,000 for 60mm ammo
• $11,308,000 for 81mm ammo

But a lot of body armor, helmets etc. have been ordered: $321,068,000
13/n
Other interesting stuff:

• $867,020,000 for Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle (AMPV) to free up M113 for Ukraine
• $77,508,000 to replace "small, medium, and large assault craft" for the US Navy

But now comes the REALLY juicy stuff!
14/n
• $50,000,000 for a program "to integrate design features that enhance interoperability of systems [identified for possible future export] with those of friendly foreign countries"

Likely this program includes stuff like the AGM-88 HARM on Ukrainian Mig-29 integration.
15/n
Air-defense missiles:
• $74,264,000 for 78 AIM-120D for the Navy
• $112,348,000 for 118 AIM-120D for the Air Force

which makes sense as the US needs to replace the AIM-120 that will be sent to Ukraine with the NASAMS 3 systems, but the Pentagon also ordered
16/n
• $288,491,000 for 76 Patriot PAC-3 MSE missiles

Either these are for the US Patriot battalions in Poland or they are the first sign of US Lend-Lease for Ukraine.

Also in the Pentagon papers is a $3 million funding for an undefined classified program... and

17/n
$9,123,000 for two "Military Intelligence Programs" run by the US Special Operations Command for a "classified requirement".
Where these programs are taking place - I don't know. What these programs are about - I don't know.

18/n
But as the funding for these two is listed in a publicly accessible Pentagon document I assume they are not classified as "secret" and therefore more likely something like "training Ukrainian Special Forces", rather than something like "ISTAR behind russian lines".
19/n
There are also dozens of entries for the funding of US forces deployed to Europe, but I believe what the US has sent to Ukraine and is now backordering to be more interesting.
As the @DeptofDefense released the last file on 12 August I am looking forward to the next one,
20/n
as that will have more GMLRS ammo, 105mm ammo, likely HARM backorders, and I am sure a lot of unexpected stuff.

21/end

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Thomas C. Theiner

Thomas C. Theiner Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @noclador

Mar 17
To give you an idea, why European militaries prefer US-made weapons to European-made weapons:

Europe militaries urgently need a ground launched cruise missile capability... the US already had such a (nuclear) capability in 1983, then dismantled all of its BGM-109G Gryphon
1/10 Image
ground launched cruise missiles after signing of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty.
russia of course broke this treaty after putin came to power and after 15 years of ignoring russia lying about it Trump finally ordered to withdraw from the treaty in August 2019.
2/n
Just 16 days after withdrawing from the treaty the US Army began to test launch Tomahawk cruise missiles form land (pic) and in June 2023 (less than 4 years later) the US Army formed the first battery equipped with the Typhon missile system.
And as Raytheon has a production
3/n Image
Read 10 tweets
Mar 8
These are the 🇬🇧 UK's HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales aircraft carriers.

First, as you can see in this picture, only one actually carries aircraft. The UK barely had enough money to buy the F-35B for one. For the other the Blairites expected the US Marine Corps
1/9 Image
to provide the required aircraft, because the two carriers were bought so the Royal Navy could fight alongside the US Navy against China in the Pacific.

But the US does NOT want the British carriers anywhere near its carrier strike groups, because the UK carriers would slow
2/9
down a US carrier strike groups, as the UK did not have the money for nuclear propulsion.
And as the UK doesn't have the money for the ships that make up a carrier strike group (destroyers, frigates, submarines) the UK expected the US Navy to detach some of its destroyers and
3/9 Image
Read 9 tweets
Mar 8
🇬🇧 decline: Only one SSN is operational, three are no longer fit for service and got no crews. One carrier has no air wing and has been sent to rust away. The other carrier only has an air wing when the RAF cedes a third of its fighters. Only 1 destroyer is operational. The
1/5
frigates are falling apart. New Type 31 frigates won't get Mark 41 VLS or bow Sonar. The RAF took 48 of its Eurofighters apart, because it got no money for spares. The army has just 14 155mm howitzers. The Ajax vehicle is injuring the troops it carries. The Warrior IFVs are
2/5
outdated and falling apart. They amphibious ships are not deployable / crewed for lack of funds. The UK has not anti-ballistic missile system (e.g.Patriot). There is only money for 12 F-35A, the smallest F-35A order on the planet. The tank force is at its smallest since 1938.
3/5
Read 5 tweets
Mar 4
International Law is worthless paper if you cannot and will not back it up with military power.

Dictators do not care for international law. But they fear the US Air Force. The moment the US signaled it would no longer back "international law" putin annexed Crimea and Assad
1/10
gassed his people. International Law is what defence laggards hide behind to not have to spend for their own security (hoping the US will save them from their irresponsibility) .

European politicians like to grandstand about "international law" but NO European nation has the
2/n
the means (nor the will) to the enforce it. European politicians grandstanding about international law always do so in the belief that the US will enforce their balderdash.
So European politicians lecturing the US about "international law" now are utter morons, because they
3/n
Read 10 tweets
Feb 21
All this "NATO is unprepared for the use of drones like the war in Ukraine" is ridiculous, because:

• of course NATO is unprepared for the use of drones like the war IN (!) Ukraine,
• because that is not how a NATO-russia war will be fought. NATO, even just European NATO,
1/4
fields: 244 F-35, 403 Eurofighter, 183 Rafale, 177 modern F-16, 3 Gripen E, and 896 older fighter types.
A total of 1,906+ fighters (without the US Air Force and Royal Canadian Air Force; and with more new fighters entering European service every week).

russia, when counting
2/4
generously can't even put half that fighter strength into the field, and the 1,010 modern European NATO fighters would devastate russia's fighter force.

With NATO air supremacy comes absolute dominance of the battlefield. Every russian moving near the front would get bombed
3/4
Read 4 tweets
Feb 15
Gripen fans keep hyping the Gripen with fake claims & as long as they do, I will counter them:

Scandinavian Air Force officer about the Gripen E: It can either be fully fueled or fully armed or flown from short runways. Never can 2 of these things be done at the same time.
1/25 Image
The Gripen fans keep claiming that the Gripen has a better range than the F-35 and can fly from short runways... then admit that its max. range can only be achieved with external fuel tanks, which weigh so much that the Gripen E can no longer fly from short runways.
2/n
External fuel tanks also mean: the Gripen becomes slower, the radar cross section increases (making detection more likely), the fuel consumption increases,... and even with all 3 external fuel tanks the Gripen E carries 1,340 kg less fuel than the F-35A carries internally.
3/n
Read 25 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(