Thanks for the link Charles!
via NNBlog.
Something has to be done. The Marines have dithered over the sea-and-shore interface for so long, most of the amphibious fleet is actually younger than the vehicles the Marines use today to “hit the beaches”. Don’t believe me? The AAV-7 entered service in 1971. All but two of the LCUs were delivered by 1970. The first LCAC was launched in 1984.Read the whole thing here.
I mean, when USS DENVER (LPD-9) and USS PELELIU (LHA-5) leave the fleet, the oldest amphib will be USS WHIDBEY ISLAND (LSD-41), commissioned in 1985. Everything else in the Gator fleet is comparably new, and were, in fact, planned around the EFV–but the EFV met it’s demise in 2011.
So little attention is being paid to crossing the sea/shore interface, the Navy’s official LPD Fact File still says that the LPD-17 class LPDs are:
“used to transport and land Marines, their equipment and supplies by embarked air cushion (LCAC) or conventional landing craft and Expeditionary Fighting Vehicles (EFV)…”And they are:
“…built to operate with 21st century transformational platforms, such as the MV-22 Osprey, theExpeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV), and future means by which Marines are delivered ashore.”
Craig Hooper seems to think that the MPC solution that Amos has come up with is the 80% solution and that's good enough.
I'm not so sure.
Amos has 5 months left in his tenure as Commandant and I state again. Why the push now? His indecision has cost the Marine Corps time and money...so despite his history, we're suppose to ignore all that and charge forward at 900 mph on his idea of solving the AAV replacement? I don't think so.
What hasn't the program office ever done? Its never shown us the numbers!
How much will it cost to buy MPC's versus seriously upgrading AAVs? How will and upgraded AAV compare in mobility to the MPC? How do they compare in weapons carriage, troop carriage, and in performing resupply tasks?
Its too late for Amos to rewrite the history books when it comes to how he dealt with the AAV Replacement after the EFV was cancelled. He will be known as the Marine that abandoned the Amtrack so that he could grow the wing. Hopefully the next Commandant will do better.
What in hell is a "transformational platform?" How is that any different from a standard platform?
ReplyDeleteJust wondering.
i don't think they even know anymore. they're all into Pentagon speak...if it isn't about "shaping", "enabling", "relearning the way we do business", "leveraging" then most of the power points, position papers etc would be half as long as they are.
Deletei wonder if they get bonus pay for using a catchphrase so many times?
any Williams it is as you suspect. BULLSHIT!
Reminds me of a strip of "Dilbert" when they were using "Catchphrase Bingo" cards during a business meeting. I'm sure you have seen those bumper stickers "What would Jesus do?"
DeleteNeed one for the modern warrior- "What would Chesty do?"
I can't imagine he or Patton or Sheridan or Halsey et al thinking it would even be acceptable for a man to talk like this, much less a military leader.
Hmmm.. smelling a business opportunity...
I think your Top Brass is waiting for a disaster the size of Pearl Harbour to happen or waiting for a War to be forced on them before they come up again with workable, realistic weapon systems.
ReplyDeleteThe whole MRAP program comes to mind here. Especially Rumsfeld saying he couldnt predict everything his troops would need, and that an army has to fight and make do with what it already has. Atleast Rumsfeld was a civilian when he said that. I shudder to imagine Military Leaders saying that while still in service.
ReplyDelete