The USMC is about to set a dubious record.
They're about to have a vehicle in service for 60 years. At least that's the plan. via Defense Media Network.
The “limited reset effort” currently envisioned would include a set of actions or processes that would restore the personnel variants “to the level achieved at the completion of the 2007 major rebuild.” In addition to an AAV end life of 2030, other assumptions supporting the effort range from a minimum throughput of 96 vehicles per year to an approved acquisition objective of all 1,064 vehicles.Uh.
Fucking Wow. Sorry. Don't care if Amos is saying that he inherited this situation. I don't care. Its his watch now and this is fucking unacceptable.
This is insanity.
Now who still thinks we need F-35's more desperately than we need to fix the AAV issue?
Side Note: Can anyone think of a military power that still utilizes 50 year old armored vehicles? I'd like to take a look at how it turned out if you can think of one. Personally I can't.
Side Note 1: This basically seals it too. All the talk about a RFI being released at the end of this year is officially bullshit. They won't actually start working on the Amphibious Combat Vehicle until 2020 at the earliest. What this announcement is actually telling us is that the ACV is being effectively delayed until the F-35, MV-22 and CH-53K are purchased. Bend over Ground Combat Element....you're getting fucked again (unless you're Recon or MARSOC that is).
Sol, the CVR(T) came into service in 1972, will still be in service by the end of the decade and possibly beyond although in relatively small numbers
ReplyDeleteThe FV432 series is even older than that with them entering service in 1962, still in service today and who knows how long they will still be around
So that is two major vehicle families in UK service that will be as old or older as the AAV
I agree, its crazy though
hmmm. yeah they're in service but not in your frontline units and their replacements are currently in service. additionally i would bet body parts that if they are retained it will be only in a training role. using that example i only need to look to the US Army and the M-113 has been in service just as long, but its not a frontline vehicle and not used as the primary troop transport...sorta like the CRVT and the FV432
DeleteProblem is they can't afford to buy everything at the same time and they've judged the consequences of being without a STOVL aircraft in the future a bigger disaster than having to stretch the lives of the LVTP-7s. Once they get these big aircraft purchases behind them they'll be able to fund an AAV. If they cancelled the F-35B that'd pretty much be it. There is no Harrier assembly line and there is no way a USMC specific aircraft program would be affordable. Imagine the F-35B having the bare the development costs of the entire F-35 program. That's why they had to do it the way they did.
DeleteSpot on. They are both critical, but they can only focus on one. If 2 other services, and 11 other countries were interested in an AAV replacement we would be going for that rather than a STOVL aircraft of our own desire.
DeleteCVR(T) is in Afghanistan right now, FV432 are still very much in service and will be for some time and the last time the FV432 went into Action was Basra, less than 6 or 7 years ago
DeleteNo training units there Sol and there are no replacements in service for either vehicle in service either
Seems like service personnel fighting in antiques is not a wholly USMC activity :)
USAF's B-52 will be well into her 80s by the time the type gets mustered out...
DeleteOnce folks have gotten over the implausible 'romance' of placing an ARG within even old shore-defense reach (current policy is 12nm), and once folks have learned to abandon the idea of floating infantry to shore via AAVs, reason will prevail and GCE would be hauled by fast heavy and light-lift Connectors (LCU-F ? and LCAC/SSC)
Which makes retaining AAV-7 a perfectly fine solution.
And it matches fiscal austerity.
What's wrong with AAV-7 ?
Spend the money to reinvent AAVs on a fine fleet of LCU-Fs...
Wow the oldest serving KC-135's will hit 60 in 2017, the 1955-1956 Airframes has a waker center wing box and were retired. The NEWEST B-52H - tail number 61-0040 -- rolled off the Wichita assembly line on June 22, 1962. It will be 60 on 22 June 2022. And unless she is lost in a crash 78 if they retire in 2040 as planned. Lets not include the T-38's on this list.... The USAF MH-53J's started life as HH-53Bs or C's (some surplus from the Corps!), and 66-14428 the older survivor retired in 2007. How many of the Marine H-53's made it to 51 years old?
ReplyDeleteI think 60 years will be a lot more common than we like to admit going forward. When was the last new built M1 Abrams ordered? I think Bush Sr was still in office? We have just rebuild old hulls. The current plan has then service a total of 81 years.
If you are honest if everyone did not have to have their "own" aircraft and vehicles. we could have saved BILLIONS over the last 30 years. F-14/F-15, F-16/F-18, AH-1/AH-64, Army MGV/EFV. Sharing the basic core vehicles could have saved a fortune. But no one wants to share or use "someone elses" systems. This is a huge problem in our DOD leader ship.
you're talking airframes and i'm talking armor.
Deletedifferent, much different operational circumstances. additionally what airplane is going to fly into an ied or have to swim to shore? additionally you're talking exceptions not the rule. MH-53's started out life as surplus CH-53's from the Marines? bullshit. also the talk about sharing airframes across services is a cluster. i'd like to have seen a carrier capable F-15 but i bet it would have looked wAAAY different from a USAF model...the only way that works is if the Air Force uses a Navy airplane and they don't want that.
Yep, the MH-53 is it's own aircraft, not a mod. And there actually was a naval F-15 considered. By the time they'd beefed up the structure, loaded up the Phoenix missiles system and AWG-9, and added all the high-lift devices required to land on a carrier it was as heavy as a Tomcat. McD didn't even base their Tomcat competitor on it. (Their Model 225 design looked more like a super Phantom with a VG wing.)
Delete"The navalized F-15N was estimated to weigh some 2300 pounds more than the USAF F-15A. The Navy was unhappy about the fact that the F-15N aircraft would be unable to carry or launch the AIM-54A Phoenix long-range missile. Inclusion of this missile would have increased the weight even further. Consequently, the F-15N proceeded no further than the concept stage. "
wait. what? a F-15N????
DeleteYep. They did actually look into the possibility. (And at least one land-based Tomcat plan to replace the F-106's back in the day.)
DeleteTrue story...
DeleteAnd lets not forget the lighter land based fighter ,the F/A-18L...for export...
If I was Northrop I'd still be bummed by that one.
DeleteYes sferrin EVERY MH-53 was a mod. They started life a H-53B/C models before becoming MH-53s. They started in 1964, in 1975 they first rebuild made them "Pave Low II". In 1986 thy "Pave Low III" upgrades started, 41 HH-53Bs, HH-53Cs, MH-53Hs, and CH-53Cs. You may note the USAF never purchased a CH-53 these were surplus from the Marines after the 53E's were came online. Some o f the survivors were rebuilt AGAIN to become the MH-53M Pave Low IV. Never rebuilt??
DeleteAs to sharing I guess the Marines need to dispose of the C-130J they are using since: "sharing airframes across services is a cluster" really? FJ-3/F-86, A3B/B-66, A-7 Corsair, F-4 Phantom, the HUEY family, really? How about the M1 Abrams? I think your right the Marines need to get rid of those, and Hummers, multi service programs......
"Now who still thinks we need F-35's more desperately than we need to fix the AAV issue?"
ReplyDeleteI don't think anything has changed, the only difference is the official numbers for how long they plan on using the AAV. 2030. its the same problem today as it was yesterday, as it will be tomorrow. we know how many tomorrows they are anticipating now.
It doesn't change a thing. "desperate need" has nothing to do with it. there is a desperate need to replace prowlers, hornets, and harriers, the difference, is that one has a chance of happening. not surprisingly, the Marines are betting on the one that they can actually get instead of jerking off to EFV porn for 2 decades again.
"I don't care. Its his watch now and this is fucking unacceptable."
I know whats wrong with this Amos fellow for not turning around around over 2 decades of failure overnight? True loser.
Let me get this straight, he is extending the AAVs in the same way that a half dozen Commandants before him did, while working toward a new vehicle in the future, like a half dozen commandants before him, but this "happened on his watch?"
The EFV was too expensive, too complex, and way too narrow, and thus politically vulnerable. We wasted money, but more importantly time. "lost ground you can recover, lost time never"
stop defending Amos. if you think that he's loved in Marine land, then let me be the one to tell ya. he ain't.
Deletesecond. guess what. in Marine land no one gives a flying fuck what occurred before you hit deck. its your baby now so what did you do to fix it. nothing? well get the fuck out and let me get a hard charger in here who will get the job done.
you know whats annoying me most about this F-35 deal? its not actually following Marine Corps needs. you talk about replacing the Prowler? guess what? the Marine Corps is eventually going to have to buy Super Growlers to do the job...at least if it wants to maintain commonality with the Navy. if not then you're going to have a stealth airplane jamming for unstealthy ones? what kind of sense does that make. you want to talk about the Super Hornet replacement? yeah and the replacement will be the F-35C. the Navy is delaying its IOC and will probably push it back when all is said and done. we have enough spare AV-8B's from the buy from the UK to push that airframe out to at least 2030 so whats the real deal?
THE REAL DEAL IS THAT WE'RE SUPPORTING THE OTHER SERVICES BY KEEPING OUR PLACE IN LINE EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE MORE SERIOUS PROCUREMENT NEEDS!
it makes me sick.
"stop defending Amos. if you think that he's loved in Marine land, then let me be the one to tell ya. he ain't."
ReplyDeleteOh my god! Marines pissed at leadership? This is unprecedented!
the Marine Corps is all about being popular, especially as a leader. At this rate he will never get voted to be the prom queen! I'm asking for a little perspective, and maybe some shared blame. even the MPC you are pimping is considered an LAV replacement. If you want the man to buy you a token force of LAV replacements, while screwing up a plan to vastly enhance Marine fixed wing, you can wish in one hand and cock in the other...
I don't care if he is loved or not, and I am amazed you brought that up when talking about procurement mazes
"second. guess what. in Marine land no one gives a flying fuck what occurred before you hit deck. its your baby now so what did you do to fix it. nothing? well get the fuck out and let me get a hard charger in here who will get the job done."
Damn straight, at this point I usually buy the girl a drink and get my war stories ready.
"you talk about replacing the Prowler? guess what? the Marine Corps is eventually going to have to buy Super Growlers to do the job"
Not true.
"...at least if it wants to maintain commonality with the Navy."
wait what?
"if not then you're going to have a stealth airplane jamming for unstealthy ones?"
huh?
"you want to talk about the Super Hornet replacement? yeah and the replacement will be the F-35C."
the F-35C is replacing the legacy hornets for the USN. not the Super Hornet.
"we have enough spare AV-8B's from the buy from the UK to push that airframe out to at least 2030 so whats the real deal?"
I have tried telling you multiple times what the "real deal" is. You usually just start spewing expletives while forcing your head further up your sphincter. If you want, I can give you long posts about why things are happening the way they are, but it would be nice if I didn't have to repeat myself every time. I'm also trying to be patient. If you want I could start treating you as you treat the people who actually take the time to post on your blog.
Your posts about Marine Air are as painful as those gun grabbers who know dick about firearms telling us about "assault Glocks" and AR stands for "Assault Rifle"-- Yes that what this stuff looks like. You have what my Sgt. Maj. once called "diarrhea of the lip" its a condition where your mouth just keeps running, even though you don't understand what you are talking about.
If you want to talk like men, with real "why are we doing it this way?" questions I would love to do that, that is the purpose of this blog right? to learn? If you want to continue the "I want it now! I don't care!!" strategy that my 6 year old daughter embraces we can do that too, but 2030 is a long time away, and I think you will tire of it.
"Oh my god! Marines pissed at leadership? This is unprecedented!
Deletethe Marine Corps is all about being popular, especially as a leader. At this rate he will never get voted to be the prom queen! I'm asking for a little perspective, and maybe some shared blame. even the MPC you are pimping is considered an LAV replacement. If you want the man to buy you a token force of LAV replacements, while screwing up a plan to vastly enhance Marine fixed wing, you can wish in one hand and cock in the other..."
you are so misinformed it ain't funny. no one gives a fuck about being popular...especially as a leader. that LCPL bullshit games. the most respected leaders are tough as hell, uphold standards, are spoiling for a fight and enforce discipline fairly. Gray, Krulak Sr., of course Chesty are all examples of that. (oh Conrad was pretty good too).
"the F-35C is replacing the legacy hornets for the USN. not the Super Hornet."
hey you stupid fuck. i was talking about the Marine Corps. if the Marine Corps is going to continue the standard "prowler" type missions then the Growler will be bough. its as simple as that.
"I'm asking for a little perspective, and maybe some shared blame. even the MPC you are pimping is considered an LAV replacement"
hey dummy. the MPC is a surrogate for the ACV. it was to replace the AAVs that weren't replaced by the ACV. you know squat about Marine Corps procurement but you have the audacity to come on my page and act like you do. you fucking disgust me. i am really tiring of your bullshit.
if you want an aviation centric Marine Corps then your DADDY Amos is gonna try and give it to you, but be advised you ignorant mother fucker, the US NAVY has doubts about stealth and while its ruled he roost for the past 30 or so years (maybe more), computer tech will win in the end and it'll be sooner rather than later. stealth will get busted and suddenly that advantage will vanish in the blink of an eye.
"no one gives a fuck about being popular...especially as a leader."
DeleteWhy you said:
"stop defending Amos. if you think that he's loved in Marine land, then let me be the one to tell ya. he ain't."
As a shot at his job performance is beyond me then. LCPL games?
"hey you stupid fuck. i was talking about the Marine Corps. if the Marine Corps is going to continue the standard "prowler" type missions then the Growler will be bough. its as simple as that."
No. There are no plans to buy growlers, now or in the future (the line shuts down in 2 years anyway.) the F-35 with the NGJ pods is the future plan (contract just awarded to Raytheon) the Growler will also be getting it. in the Mean time Amos is saying the F-35 is 85 percent as capable as Prowler. Seeing as growlers are getting so damn old they are starting to fly less and less, 85 beats zero percent.
"you know squat about Marine Corps procurement but you have the audacity to come on my page and act like you do."
Someone here has to, you sure as hell don't.
"you fucking disgust me. i am really tiring of your bullshit."
What a compelling argument, you really showed me a logical, conclusive, well educated opinion there. You impressed me with your inside knowledge of USMC procurement and the working of the airwing with "I don't care I want it!" earlier, and now you are declaring I "dont know squat" so it must be true.
Look Sol, I don't expect you or anyone else to know EVERYTHING, we all make mistakes but your lack of general knowledge on some of these subjects is appalling, and all my buddies (not just airwingers) have been having a helluva laugh.
Spoiler: You are going to be disappointed by Amos, probably the next CMC as well, because the plan isn't changing.
This is apparently a blog where you try to bully people into agreeing with you, because you are a Marine (As am I, so you will understand if it doesn't impress me as much, and I require a little more knowledge on the subject before I give you respect) and when it fails (shockingly) you just ban them, or threaten to anyway.
"if you want an aviation centric Marine Corps then your DADDY Amos is gonna try and give it to you,"
he sure is, and you aren't going to get what you want. wait was that an insult?
"the US NAVY has doubts about stealth and while its ruled he roost for the past 30 or so years (maybe more), computer tech will win in the end and it'll be sooner rather than later. stealth will get busted and suddenly that advantage will vanish in the blink of an eye."
wow thats not what you were saying about the F-35 in your blog earlier. What a flip flop. I guess you were actually wrong about something. (I don't expect you to admit it, being the emotional proud insulting lad you are)
When did this become all about stealth anyway?
bully my ass. grow a pair. you're talking shit and you know it. the F-35 won't be in any shape to do the jamming job until 2025 at the earliest and you think the prowlers are going to last until then? no, the Navy will insist that the Marine Corps continue the mission which means that the Marine Corps will be buying Growlers.
Deleteas far as Amos and his popularity is concerned, its simple.. Marines like tough, straight shooting leadership, not politicians. you once tried to play junior psychologist and i'm just setting your crazy ass straight.
you didn't touch the MPC issue. good. i'm a ground guy and i'll eat you up, chew on your bones and feed your heart to my dog on that subject.
about stealth. the stealth issue has been something that has always concerned but never expressed . quite honestly i've been wondering if stealth will even work at sea considering all the trouble the Air Force goes to the keep their aircraft out of weather....additionally i've gotten educated on Russian advances in anti-air missiles and they're going big time to infrared. stealth doesn't defend against that and their long range anti-air missiles are going to that or dual mode systems.
"bully my ass. grow a pair. you're talking shit and you know it."
Deleteprove me wrong. My pair is just fine, you on the other hand seem to have a hard time accepting any kind of criticism. very sensitive.
"the F-35 won't be in any shape to do the jamming job until 2025 at the earliest and you think the prowlers are going to last until then?"
The avionics package on the F-35 without the pods is 85 percent as capable according to Amos.
"no, the Navy will insist that the Marine Corps continue the mission which means that the Marine Corps will be buying Growlers."
Source?
"as far as Amos and his popularity is concerned, its simple.. Marines like tough, straight shooting leadership, not politicians. you once tried to play junior psychologist and i'm just setting your crazy ass straight."
Seems to me he is being pretty straightforward (AAVs to 2030) you just don't like the answers.
"you didn't touch the MPC issue. good. i'm a ground guy and i'll eat you up, chew on your bones and feed your heart to my dog on that subject"
You're a ground guy? no way?! after all your amazing knowledge about the Wing, I would have never guessed.
"the stealth issue has been something that has always concerned but never expressed ."
convenient. especially how you kept those concerns so quiet while chewing out and insulting everyone who disagreed with you on the F-35. You even wrote a little fan fic about it.
"quite honestly i've been wondering if stealth will even work at sea considering all the trouble the Air Force goes to the keep their aircraft out of weather"
Super Hornets already have LO features including RAM. (I know you knew that of course)
"....additionally i've gotten educated on Russian advances in anti-air missiles and they're going big time to infrared."
Let me guess, Airpower Australia?
"stealth doesn't defend against that and their long range anti-air missiles are going to that or dual mode systems."
thats adorable.
THE JAPANESE AND BRAZIL ARE LOOKING TO BUY THE AAV! AS IT NOW STANDS THEY'LL HAVE TO MAKE DO WITH REFURBISHED VEHICLES TO WHATEVER STANDARD WE EVENTUALLY GET UNLESS JAPAN BUILDS THEM AT HOME AT KAWASAKI HEAVY INDUSTRIES!!!!!
Deletewe have an opportunity now.
This is good news!
DeleteYou know, one silver lining behind this is it will allow time for things in Asia/Pacific to shake out a little more and maybe all of a sudden we do a joint project for this with Japan and SK.
ReplyDelete