Wednesday, July 02, 2014

MPC News. Where is the experimentation?


Everyone knows my feelings about the current Commandant of the Marine  Corps.

If you're unfamiliar, suffice to say that I believe that he is a habitual liar, focused exclusively on the Air Wing to the detriment of the rest of the Marine Corps, has used his power and authority to punish Marines undeservedly, is a political opportunist, is bought and paid for by certain corporations and is totally unsat to hold the position of an Officer of Marines much less the leadership of the world's best fighting organization.

With that being said.

Where is the experimentation with regards to the Marine Personnel Carrier or the Program offices re-branding of it into the ACV 1.1?

Making a move from a vehicle that holds 17 Marines to one that holds 9 is a major undertaking.

How will that work exactly?  How will you disperse the squad among these vehicles?  The company?  How will the manning charts change because you have more vehicles in the AAV section aboard ship?  How will more vehicles in the AAV section affect cube space aboard ship?  How will they deploy? Since we're going to have mixed vehicles for at least a while will they swim to shore from ships along with AAVs?  Will AAVs swim while the MPC is carried ashore? Pure battle taxi or because they're supposedly more robust will we employ them in a quasi IFV fashion?

Making procurement decisions without proper planning is common in this current edition of HQMC.

We should have borrowed Strykers from the US Army, done proper experimentation with Wheeled Armored Personnel Carriers with Marine Corps Infantry/Amphibious Assault Vehicle Battalions and determined whether it was a fit or not. 

The problem is stark though.

We have little time before sequestration hits full force.  If the Republicans regain Congress as many expect then you better believe that cost cutting will be big on the list of things to do.

Second, we're already spending money, reprogramming funds etc...to follow a plan that apparently has been pulled out of someone's fat ass...and the fault of that isn't entirely Amos'.  The MPC concept arose from the fact that the EFV's cost ballooned out of control.  A mixed fleet was acceptable when the plan was for the assault force to arrive by EFV and the assault follow on echelon to come in on LCAC and ride into combat in MPCs.

Now they're talking of the MPC/ACV 1.1 hitting the beach in LCACs in the assault wave!

As late as this program is, everything needs to stop till Dunford comes into office. We've waited the entire term of this Commandant.  We can wait 3 months till a new one arrives and cleans up this mess.

3 comments:

  1. As a former Combat Cargo Officer, all I have to sya about this is....where the heck are they going to put them. I used to joke all the time that one of the modifications the Navy is going to do to the amphib fleet was to put a trailer hitch on the back so we can pull a barge behind.

    We have to wonder...for a service that has its roots in Naval shipping...why are we getting so BIG? EVERYTHING the Marine Corps has these days is HUGE. Ships are not getting any larger, it was tried with LHA 6 and we see what happened there. I mean, we are getting ships that have NO WELL DECKS!?! Where are we putting these huge assets?

    Ever seen an F-35 up close? Massive! CH-53K? Huge. MV-22? Big. MCV/ACV-1? Huge. MTVR? Huge. Uparmored HMMWV? Huge.

    The Marine Corps was always a light fighting force.....guess were are heading back to that since we will run out of space on ships for everything but personnel. I guess that means more infantry! Oh, I am sorry...that seems to be the only area where the Corps is getting smaller.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. well said. we're talking about doubling the number of vehicles in the AAV section to carry the same number of Marines and no one is talking about how it will fit. and i was focusing on the MPC. add in the other vehicles and you're looking at a major league problem.

      stop joking about the barge thing. these kooks just might try it!

      Delete
    2. I think Coffee Man's comment goes to the heart of the Marines' identity problem right now. What benefit do they bring to the table beyond what the Army does? Are they the light, fast-hitting, rapid-deployment, low maintenance force? The heavy, elite, armored spearhead? What's their competitive advantage supposed to be?

      It seems that Amos has been concentrating on flashy equipment, rather than solid force strategy.

      Delete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.