Thomas C. Theiner Profile picture
Jul 20, 2023 19 tweets 7 min read Read on X
A new Pentagon budget realignment file dropped (thank you @osmnactej for finding it).

Again it has a lot of interesting info about what weapons have been sent to Ukraine... and what the Pentagon is ordering more than $2 billion from the US industry to replace it.
1/22 Image
• $105.5m Javelin Anti-tank guided missiles
• $3.35m M67 Hand grenades

It seems a lot of smoke grenades have been given to Ukraine (which are used by infantry as here in Iraq):
• $2.78m M18 Smoke grenades (Red)
• $0.59m M18 Smoke grenades (Yellow)
• $1.55m M8 Smoke Pots
2/n Image
• $38.4m M7A4 Bradley Fire Support Team (BFIST) artillery forward observer vehicles
• $15.6m 25mm ammo for the Bradleys' M242 chain gun
• $1.14m Bradley spares
• $0.2m Bradley Operator Tablets

3/n Image
Other infantry equipment:
• $3.06m M2 and M240 machine guns, and M2 modifications
• $3.05m M2 .50 ammo

Until now the US delivered $2.18m in night vision devices to Ukraine... this time: $58.14m!
• $29.6m PVS-7 Night Vision Goggles
• $28.5m PVS-14 Night Vision Monoculars
4/n
Image
Image
M1235A4 MaxxPro DASH OGPK vehicles & M1151A1 Integrated Armor Package Humvees given to Ukraine are being replaced with JLTV Heavy Gun vehicles respectively M1165A1B3 Expanded Capacity Command & Control/General Purpose Humvees.

• $51.1m JLTV
• $23.3m M1165A1B3
5/n
Image
Image
A lot of demolition munitions for breaching obstacles, with three things standing out:

• $7.86m Clearing charges
• $3.01m MP03 Bangalore Torpedo Demolition Kits
• $3.32m MK155 Mine Clearance System Launcher
6/n
Ukraine also received Selectable Lightweight Attack Munition (SLAM), which is a demolition munition AND an off-route mine AND a belly attack mine. It can be triggered by the operator, by its passive infrared sensor or its magnetic influence sensor, in

• $2.65m M4A1 SLAM
7/n
Image
Image
short I think this means Ukrainian special forces and partisans are placing SLAMs in the russian rear to ambush russian vehicles.

And now let's move on to artillery, which at $1.634 billion is once again forms the lion's share of the Pentagon's acquisitions.
8/n
• $122.4m for M992A3 Carrier Ammunition Tracked (CAT) vehicles, which carry extra rounds and charges for the M109A6 Paladin self-propelled howitzers given to Ukraine.

In total the Pentagon is buying $1 billion of M109A7 and M992A3 CATs in FY23. So it is likely Ukraine will
9/n Image
receive more M109A6 in the future.

The realignment file also contains a "classified effort"... but thanks to the overall acquisition sum for this effort I can say that it is GMLRS rockets:

• $71.3m "classified effort" ($2,1 billion in FY23) = around 12,450 M30/M31 rockets
10/n Image
$193.7m are spent on "Ammunition Production Base Support Industrial Facilities":

• $18.5m for increased 155mm acceptance testing
• $24.7m for new Iowa Army Ammunition Plant (pictured) industrial facilities and
• $150.5m for new Load, Assemble and Pack (LAP) facilities

11/n Image
In total the Pentagon has spent by now at least $777.55m to increase US 155mm artillery ammo production capacity. Another $65m is being spent on the facilitization of HF-1 Steel for artillery shells.
For the first time the Pentagon is listing High Explosives for artillery
12/n
ammo production, which makes me suspect it has to be bought it from a foreign source:
• $32.1m IMX-104 for undisclosed 155mm rounds
• $47.6m TNT for M795 artillery rounds

The Pentagon is also spending $123m for redesigned components for obsolete Excalibur parts, which
12/n
will allow the increase of Excalibur production.
Speaking of which:

• $41.1m M982A1 Excalibur ($801.8m FY23 total = around 8,000 rounds), which are being used extensively by Ukraine to hit russian vehicles and equipment.


13/n
Other artillery ammo:

• $70.6m M795 High Explosive rounds
• $158m for undisclosed "155mm extended range projectiles", which I suspect are the new M1113 RAP projectiles, which replace M549A1 RAP.

Due to its streamlined shape and high-performance rocket motor the M1113
14/n Image
has a range of 40+ km (M549A1 RAP: 30km). Likely Ukraine is receiving all the remaining M549A1 RAP.

As for fuzes - the Pentagon is ordering two:
• $15.15m M739 Point Detonating fuzes
• $76.48m M767 Electronic Time fuzes

The latter is a surprise... I would have expected
15/n
an order for M762 Electronic Time fuzes, which are used for base ejecting projectiles... like the M483A1 DPICM and M864 DPICM cluster munitions projectiles.

M767 is used with High Explosive rounds or i.e. M110 Smoke projectiles... it could be that the US is running out of
16/n
M739 fuzes and using the M767, which includes a point detonating option, as a interim solution until M739 production can be ramped up (The Pentagon earmarked $33m for a new M739 production line in July 2022).

17/n Image
No howitzer can function without charges... and this time the Pentagon is spending $541.27m on charges (!) and another $70m on MACS material.

And this is interesting: so far the Pentagon ordered only M231 (pictured the green blocks) and M232A1 charges, and also spent $265m
18/n Image

• • •

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

May 12
In February 2022 putin declared war on Europe & his army marched on Kyiv.
Since then European EU/NATO nations have added and/or are forming these active (!) battalions to their armies:
(Worst 2 countries are of course the two loudmouths)

🇵🇱 +44 (3 recon, 4 tank, 12 infantry
1/14 Image
2 anti-tank, 6 artillery, 5 air defence, 4 engineer, 1 signal, 1 CBRN defence, 1 transport, 5 logistic)
🇸🇪 +22 (10 infantry, 3 artillery, 2 engineer, 1 signal, 1 EW, 1 intelligence, 1 transport, 3 logistic)
🇷🇴 +10 (2 infantry, 3 drone, 3 engineer, 1 signal, 1 logistic)
2/n Image
🇧🇪 +7 (1 recon, 1 drone, 1 cavalry, 1 artillery, 1 engineer, 1 logistic, 1 transport)
🇦🇱 +5 (4 infantry, 1 air defence)
🇩🇪 +4 (3 artillery, 1 air defence)
🇭🇺 +4 (1 cyber, 1 mechanized, 1 engineer, 1 logistic)
🇸🇰 +4 (1 paratrooper, 1 drone, 1 engineer, 1 signal)
3/n
Read 14 tweets
May 8
Europe has to realize that there are two global military powers that it will have to find an arrangements with to safeguard its future security:
🇺🇸 the US
🇺🇦 Ukraine

These two have the highest defence materiel production output, and troops from these two are present in the
1/9 Image
highest number of nations around the globe (Ukrainian troops are fighting russians in every nation, where russia has allied with the regime; a will to fight our enemies that is sorely lacking in the rest of Europe).
Minor powers like the UK or middling powers like France,
2/9
can't provide as much security (troops, defence equipment, tech innovation, will to fight, etc.) as Ukraine or the US.
While Ukrainians fight, innovate and produce vast amounts of war materiel, Europe continues to fiddle as the fire of war spreads across the continent.
3/9
Read 9 tweets
May 2
Fellow Europeans on here claiming that Europe doesn't need the US to fight off russia are delusional:

Does Europe have enough cruise missiles? No.
Is Europe investing to fix this? Also no.
Does Europe have enough tanker aircraft? No.
Is Europe investing to fix this? Also no.
1/6
Does Europe have enough maritime patrol aircraft? No.
Is Europe investing to fix that? Also no.

Does Europe have any ballistic missiles? No.
Is Europe investing to fix that? Also no.

Does Europe have enough SEAD/DEAD aircraft? No.
Is Europe investing to fix that? Also no.
2/6
Does Europe have enough logistic units aircraft? No.
Is Europe investing to fix that? Also no.

Does Europe have enough air defence? No.
Is Europe investing to fix that? Also no.

Does Europe have enough recon satellites? No.
Is Europe investing to fix that? A bit.
3/6
Read 6 tweets
Apr 25
On 2 April 1982 Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands.
3 days (!) later a 🇬🇧 Royal Navy task force left the UK to retake the islands.
That task force included: 2× aircraft carriers, 8× destroyers, 16× frigates, 6× attack submarines... a fleet bigger than today's Royal Navy.
1/8 Image
22 Royal Fleet Auxiliary ships provided logistic support... in total 127 ships sailed, and the Royal Navy still (!!) had enough destroyers, frigates, submarines to fulfil its NATO obligations.
It was an awesome display of military power, professionalism, courage and grit.
2/n Image
On 28 February 2026, after weeks of tension, the Iran War began... and even though the UK had been asked by the US for bases weeks earlier, the Royal Navy was caught wholly unprepared... and then it took the Royal Navy 10 days (!) to get 1× destroyer out of port, which after
3/n
Read 8 tweets
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

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!

:(