I got an e-mail today and to be honest I really expected it a bit earlier.
The issue is simple. The sender believes that since word of the MPC "delay" became news I've been on a jihad against the F-35, the V-22 and Marine Air in general.
I reject that.
I wholeheartedly reject it.
Forgive me but an eyeballs test of the current situation shows a tremendous gap being created. For most of its history, Marine Air has flown hand me downs from the Navy. For most of its history it has made do with aircraft that had as its primary function support of Marine Ground Forces.
Now we have something different.
We have Marine Air flying cutting edge equipment that outpaces what the Navy, Air Force and Army are flying. They're equipping with exotic equipment that is taking up a larger portion of the budget and appear to support forces other than the Marine Corps.
From a Joint Force perspective this might be a good thing.
From the view of the Ground Combat Element its disturbing.
I've focused on the AAV replacement but the issues are really bigger than that. Yes. We desperately need a replacement for a vehicle that is soon to approach 50 years in service (I'll say it again, can you imagine using LVTP-5's during Iraq Wars 1 and 2). To once again delay its replacement is a disgrace. To see that the US Army has placed into service the Stryker, canned the FCS, developed an upgraded Stryker and placed it into production and service and is now developing a Ground Combat Vehicle is telling. We are developing an unbalanced force that is biased toward heliborne operations. It will be a force that is aviation centric. I reject that as being "UnMarine Like". The focus of the Corps has always been the Infantry. To move away from that is to embrace a concept that is something different.
But back on task...I have never said that the F-35 isn't capable. I have never said that the MV-22 isn't a good airplane.
I have questioned whether they should be taking up as much of our budget as they are.
Long posts aren't my style so I'll add this. I'll be researching budget documents to bolster my case, but consider this. Delaying the buys of F-35's and MV-22's could easily put into production and service a full complement of Marine Personnel Carriers. I'll have the numbers to back my claim tonight or early tomorrow.
This is only tangentially related, but I'll toss in a bit of Army perspective. FCS was a cluster, and GCV is shaping up to be no better. The smart route, at least in my eyes, would have been a CV-90 purchase. It fits the bill, and also solves the problem of dispersal of dismounts among vehicles, to a degree. Common sense is often not the Army way though...
ReplyDeletemy thing is that the Army got its people into armored protection. consider this. the Marine Corps put out to industry the challenge of developing a wheeled apc that could swim. industry met and exceeded the requirements and the Marine Corps backed away! would you trust the Marines again if you were a manufacturer?
DeleteA large part of me suspects that industry will not forget this. The defense industry has a long institutional memory, and are not prone to forgetting being given the finger. In the future, this episode will be remembered, and the priority of response will be altered accordingly. Face is an important factor, and this cost Marine procurement more than they will ever admit.
Delete"From the view of the Ground Combat Element its disturbing." - Quote of the week.
ReplyDeletei just wish it wasn't true. its not public but there is friction developing inside the Corps that will lead to trouble.
Deletepeople downplay many of the issues but this aviation centric swing (and that wouldn't be an issue if we were properly funding===read that to mean buying a MPC and getting the ACV done) coupled with all the social change that is being forced upon the Ground Combat Element is going to push a revolt.
what that revolt will look like is beyond me but there will be pushback and it won't be pretty.