The Lockheed Martin Havoc as I see it currently.

What does Lockheed Martin's teaming with Patria for the Marine Personnel Carrier Contest tell us?

Lockheed wants to be a player in armored vehicles.
Lockheed sat on the sidelines during the MRAP craze.  I think that they rightfully thought that it was a dead end when it comes to armored vehicle development.  Plus MRAPs are really truck based.  I think that because of that fact MRAPs will never become fully developed as combat vehicles.  8x8 are another case entirely.  If vehicle manufacturers are ever able to crack the code and get MRAP type protection in a real combat vehicle then they'll onto something special.

Lockheed read the requirements.
Lockheed read the requirements and sensed the changing winds of procurement when it selected Patria to team with.  Looking at the requirements plainly, the Marine Corps wanted a vehicle that would provide inland mobility, could cross rivers with ease and in a pinch could swim from ship to shore.  Money would be a factor but so would performance.

The Patria AMV is combat proven.
Lockheed somewhat got slick with the pick of the Patria AMV.  It is well known by any and all who follow armored vehicles.  Polish units have used the AMV (Wolverine in Polish service) to great effect.  Its reputation is well known inside the Marine Corps and many Marines have had a chance to get a close up look at the vehicle down range.

The Problem.
Lockheed Martin has a problem though.  The procurement winds are changing again and they might not be in a position to take advantage of them.  Quite simply, BAE has them by the short hairs.  Why?  Because Paul McNeary reported that BAE is working on not only the AAV Upgrade but also an Amphibious Combat Vehicle based on the AAV hull form AND a new hull.  Additionally they're developing an MPC that looks to have outstanding sea keeping qualities.

The Rub.
The MPC if it comes down to a proven combat vehicle that provides outstanding cross country performance WITH little risk, then the Lockheed Martin HAVOC wins.  If it becomes a price shoot out, and if programs merge then its going to be a rough road for not only the HAVOC but for all the contenders.  Margins.  Return on investment.  Domestic content.  All these issues could make the vehicle so expensive that its not worth building.  Remember, all the companies involved except for General Dynamics will have to establish a production facility (BAE might not have to ... I'm not up to speed on whats going on with their plant in Sealy, TX), they'll have to work out getting suppliers on board etc.  This could easily be a case where the maintenance contract is worth more than the manufacturing.

Conclusion.
I like the Havoc.  Marines that have gotten a chance to run the vehicle like it.  To be honest though I seriously worry that the Marine Corps is on the verge of terminating the MPC program and going with a savagely upgraded AAV renamed ACV much like they did with the change from LVTP-7 to AAV.

Geez! Civilian shooting techniques popping up in the Corps!

I've never shot the close combat course so I'm just going off what I'm seeing in this short video but if what I'm seeing is true then the Marine Corps needs to get a handle on its shooting quick!  Like real quick!

Check out the video carefully.  Did you see it?  At the 00:21 second mark you can see the Marine scanning around him.  Cool you say?  I say bullshit!  Civilians are taught to shoot the "target" and then scan.  Cops are taught that.  Marines should scan with weapon and not just eyeballs.  And this looking over the shoulder crap is straight out of the 100's of schools that are popping up all over America.  Its BS.  You scan with your weapon so that you can engage a threat if found.  I can guarantee you're going to lose time.  Once you get past the startle reflex and then recover enough to use your weapon then you're probably halfway to your wife getting a check from Uncle Sam and your kids not getting to know daddy.

We're seeing image over substance creep into the Marine Corps---just like a $50 dollar Vickers Sling----its just not the Marine Corps that the public knows and loves.  I blame that on "trendy" leadership.  Whatever the case its time to knock it off.

Photo Release: First production-level F-35B arrives at NAS Patuxent River

NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, PATUXENT RIVER, Md. - BF-17, part of the third lot of Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP 3) F-35B Lightning II aircraft, arrives at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md., Oct. 4. BF-17 will temporarily add to the complement of F-35B and F-35C test aircraft at the F-35 Integrated Test Facility before heading to its destination at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif.

The F-35B is the variant of the Joint Strike Fighter designed for use by U.S. Marine Corps, as well as F-35 international partners in the United Kingdom and Italy. The F-35B is capable of short take-offs and vertical landings to enable air power projection from amphibious ships, ski-jump aircraft carriers and expeditionary airfields. The F-35B is undergoing test and evaluation at NAS Patuxent River, Md., prior to delivery to the fleet. (Photo courtesy of Lockheed Martin)

The USMC wants a jungle school. Another chance for the Army.

One of my mentors in the Marine Corps was this crusty ole' Vietnam era war dog who had been there and done that.  He was always a Marine first and foremost but he had been to every school under the son.  When he slowed down he went to an Infantry unit!  Scuba bubble?  Had it.  Gold jump wings?  Yep.  Ranger School?  Did that too.  HALO?  Uhmmm hum.  He even did the Army's Jungle Warfare School in Panama.  When I met him he was on his way out the door but he always took time to share bits of wisdom with the new guys coming aboard.  He was the truth...the real deal.  But lets talk Panama Jungle School.

Supposedly Panama Jungle School is so tough that it makes the course run in Okinawa look like a cake walk (I seriously doubt that but I'm just guessing...besides how bad can monkey meat actually be?)

But more importantly, when the Army ran the school, Google indicates that it ran almost everyone of its Light Fighter and Airborne/Air Assault units through it in addition to Special Operations Forces.  The Marine Corps is showing an interest in a formalized Jungle School instead of a course.  This present the US Army with another opportunity.  Check this out from DefenseNews....

Q. The commandant recently discussed an overhaul of jungle warfare training. What is being considered?

A. We’ve kind of been thinking about this for a while. There’s the training center on Okinawa, Japan. But it’s not anything like what the Mountain Warfare Training Center is for mountain training or cold-weather training because it’s not a service school right now.
The commandant wants us to look at a service-level jungle warfare training center on the model of the Mountain Warfare Training Center up at Pickel Meadows in California. So who is it that we’ll put through this training? Is it forces that are going out to Asia-Pacific? Or could it be anyone?
[At] the Mountain Warfare Training Center we train in mountain climbing, we train in cold weather, but it’s not all that school’s about. It’s about small-unit leader training. In the future, it will be a venue where people will work in those ITXs, so they might be at [different training locations]. So it’s really more than just mountain and cold weather. And as we develop the jungle warfare training center, it’ll be the same thing.
We are also looking at costs because if we were going to take forces from the U.S. that aren’t on their way to deploy to the Pacific, it would cost a heck of a lot to get a unit over there to go through jungle warfare training and then come back.
So is there somewhere here in the western hemisphere where we can do it as well? Do we want one, do we want the other? But we are going to — within a reasonable amount of time — develop a service-level jungle warfare training center if that’s what the commandant decides.

The opportunity for the Army is simple.

It can be fully on board with the turn to the Pacific by running a joint service Jungle School instead of seeing all the services develop individual schools.  The difficulty will in the Army's current structure.  Its a mechanized force and for the Jungle School concept to work for the Army then they'll have to get back to its light infantry roots.

I'm not a fan of purple so it would help if the Army ran and maintained the school and the other services simply had detachments to take care of their service member when they came through.

An Army School, with Army instructors, teaching service member from all the services.

That would be a pretty good way for the US Army to get feet wet and relevant when it comes to the Pacific.

NOTE:  If the Army won't step up and the Commandant wants a good Jungle Warfare School to fall in on then I would recommend teaming up with the French like we have in North Africa, but this time in S. America.  French Guiana reportedly has a tough, effective jungle school that French Marines rotate through.  Anything further South would probably become a cost issue...so that makes Brazil a no-go.

F-35B and F-35C

Really? A new Army PT uniform?

Say it out loud Army?  You're wanting ANOTHER new PT uniform!  Really?  Seriously?  In this time of budget constraints?

WASHINGTON (Army News Service, Oct. 4, 2012) -- Back in February, the Army gave Soldiers a chance to weigh in on the Improved Physical Fitness Uniform. The Army took those Soldier suggestions and developed a possible replacement uniform. Now Soldiers can vote on which one of those they think looks the best.

More than 76,000 Soldiers responded to the initial survey. Among other things, Soldiers commented about uniform fit, moisture wicking and anti-microbial properties and how much the uniform weighs. The Army listened to Soldiers and has developed a new Improved Physical Fitness Uniform, or IPFU.

Now the Army wants Soldiers to weigh in on color options and graphic patterns for the uniform. There are six candidate uniforms -- they are all the same in terms of fabrics, capabilities and durability. What's different is the color of the fabrics and the size, color and shapes of the graphic designs.

All Soldiers have the option to log on and choose which uniform option they like best. The poll goes live beginning Oct. 9, and will be available for 20 days.

Oshkosh Defense S-ATV. Pics and brochure.

S-ATV_PS_9-21-12

Blast from the recent past. I'll drive it!

via DefenseTech (March 2011)...

Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos today shed some much anticipated light on when the Corps could see a replacement for the cancelled Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, telling lawmakers he expects to drive its replacement by the end of his tenure as commandant.
“There are two answers to that, one is as Commandant of the Marine Corps’s answer which is Before I leave leave office four years from now …  we’ll have a program of record, we’ll have steel, there will be a vehicle and I’ll be able to drive it,” Amos said responding to lawmakers questions during a House Armed Services Committee hearing. “I’m trying to pressurize industry, I’m trying to pressurize the acquisition folks, I want the word to get out. If we followed the standard acquisition timeline, which in some cases got us to where we are today, it’ll be 2024.”
To avoid such a fate, the general said the Department of the Navy will be using a model similar to the one it used to quickly buy and field thousands of MRAPs during the height of the Iraq war.
“Something probably that resembles the sense of urgency that we had for the MRAP but probably a little bit more scheduled, and that’s what we’re going to do.”
Now that’s not saying that Amos will necessarily be driving the production model EFV replacement, dubbed the Amphibious Combat Vehicle, but it will will be some sort of early version ACV.

Some might forget.  Some might forgive.  I don't.  The same LACK of urgency that doomed the EFV has reared its ugly head in both the Amphibious Combat Vehicle program AND the Marine Personnel Carrier contest.

Now to add to the misery, we have this speculation from National Defense Magazine.

Mike Blades, senior industry analyst with the firm, said of three major new ground combat vehicle programs — the Army’s new Ground Combat Vehicle and Armored Multipurpose Vehicle and the Marine Corps’ Amphibious Combat Vehicle — one will not survive.

That may pit the Army against the Marine Corps in the budget battles.

"There are three new starts that are going to be happening, and I would eventually guess that at least one of them doesn't happen,” he said. “And I would also guess that one of the two that does happen is going to be based on something that already exists.”

The budget wars are here and the Marine Corps needs to start playing for keeps.  A couple of suggestions.  Cancel participation in the JLTV contest immediately.  Accelerate the MPC and ACV programs.  Cancel the AAV upgrade to prevent an interim vehicle from becoming a permanent vehicle.  Push IOC for the MPC/ACV to 2020 instead of 2030.

Industry will gladly cooperate.  If a company isn't able to meet the timetable then they've just done a Darwin act on themselves...it is survival of the fittest after all. 

 

Marine Air Power Gaggle...

A U. S. Marine Corps AH-1W Super Cobra helicopter with Marine Light Attack Helicopter Squadron (HMLA) 367 provides security as two CH-53E Super Stallion helicopters from Marine Heavy Helicopter Squadron (HMH) 463, Marine Aircraft Group 24 (MAG-24) perform a mid-air refuel demonstration from a C-130 Hercules aircraft during the 2012 Kaneohe Bay Airshow at Marine Corps Air Station, Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii, Sept. 30, 2012. MAG-24 took part in the three-day event featuring performances and demonstrations by both civilian and military aircraft. (DoD photo by Lance Cpl. Kevin Jones, U. S. Marine Corps /Released)

The above pic shows why I believe that the attack helicopter is on the way out when it comes to Marine Corps operations.  Every platform except for the Attack and Utility helos can be refueled in air extending there range.  The reach of the MEU can be extended by utilizing KC-130's and eventually by using the MV-22 in the aerial refueling role.  The AH-1Z will be the last attack helicopter in Marine Corps service.

Next up. Lockheed Martin Havoc!

Good News.

I made contact with Lockheed Martin and they're lining me up with some of their people so that I can give you the 411 on the Havoc.  It will be interesting to see how they're working to solve all the problems that come with getting a vehicle to swim from ship to shore and then fight successfully inland.  The Patria AMV (Lockheed Martin Havoc) is combat tested, reportedly extremly reliable and lethal, and is so powerful that according to the Polish contingent in Afghanistan stops fights when it shows up or prevents fights when first seen.

I'm looking forward to talking to LM about this product.

Another look. The Super AV 8x8 in Italian service and as shown at MDM.

This is another look at the Super AV 8x8 in Italian service and as shown at Modern Day Marine.  During my interview with BAE officials, Nunn stated that there are actually 3 iterations of the Super AV 8x8...I'll simply call them AV-1, AV-2 and AV-3.  Unfortunately info is still spotty on the net and I'm hoping that Ferrans or Bosley can get better info since they live in Europe.  Below are the pics.  If you examine them closely you'll see a family resembalance (even stretching to the Freccia) but the vehicle being presented to the USMC is totally unique.

And now the BAE MPC at Modern Day Marine....

Going over my notes from the interview I failed to get info on the water propulsion system, and whether the USMC MPC would be offered for export (remember the Japanese and S. Koreans are looking at purchasing amphibious vehicles and would probably follow the USMC's move).  Interesting times.  Confidence is EXTREMELY HIGH that I'll get a talk with Lockheed Martin.  SAIC is proving a bit harder and General Dynamics is not even answering the phone.  I'll keep you informed.

The dreaded rear parachute landing fall...

Five U.S. Airmen assigned to the 107th Special Operations Weather Team (SWOT) perform a parachute jump from a C-130 Hercules aircraft, not pictured, at Selfridge Air National Guard Base, Mich., Sept. 17, 2012. The purpose of the jump was for SWOT Airmen to maintain proficiency in the skills needed for special operations missions. (DoD photo by Brittani Baisden, U.S. Air Force/Released)

Click on the pic to make it larger but these guys are just all kinds of screwed up...at least when this pic was taken.   Every single one of them except for the very first guy looks to be headed for a rear plf...and the guy who's shrouds are entangled better get to bicycling quick or he's in for even more hurt!

I would love to see how this turned out!

Enhanced Mojave Viper bites the dust. Now its ITX,

Ok.  This makes sense.  As CDR Salamander would say "this is fullbore"...or URR "about damn time!"

Marines hunt down insurgents in southern Afghanistan

I love grunt talk.  "We go out and punch'em in the mouth"....That's pure dee awesome. 

BAE's Marine Personnel Carrier...An interview

pic courtesy BAE

This morning I had the opportunity to interview the Program Manager of BAE's entrant into the Marine Personnel Carrier Program, John Swift along with Project Engineer Jared Nunn.  I want to thank Marketing Strategist, Sarah Lundgren, for making it all come together.

Sea Keeping.

The BAE MPC has under gone testing in Europe and has even swam out to an LST for testing of its coming aboard and departing the ship.  In addition BAE is using extensive modeling to ensure that it meets Marine Corps requirements.  Its been tested to sea state 2 and has been modeled up to sea state 3.  If BAE is able to get the vehicle to actually operate in sea state 3 then that would equal the AAV and would be best swimming wheeled vehicle ever designed. 

Engine.

The engine is a 560 horsepower Iveco power plant.  It can be tweaked to give increased power if necessary but it should be noted that at this setting the only vehicle in US service that would boast more horsepower (at least to my knowledge) is the Abrams Main Battle Tank.

Side Vent.

I expressed concerns to Jared that the vent on the side of the vehicle (easily seen in the pic above) would be a hit sink and would give away the vehicle when viewed through IR devices or could leak when the vehicle was in the water.  Nunn's answer surprised me.  On land the exhaust from the engine is mixed with cool air to reduce the heat signature.  Sorta like the way the AH-64 does with its engine exhaust to reduce its signature to heat seeking missiles.  What happens when its in the water is extremely unique though.  When in the water, the vent actually allows water into the engine bay and by that process the engine is cooled.  Simple yet elegant.

Protection/Armor.

I asked which armor maker they were using --- Plasan or IBD.  They've done work with IBD but the armor package will be in house via BAE.  Blast seats (suspended) and other now standard anti-ied/blast protection is part of the requirement and will be included in the vehicle.

SUPER AV or US Marine Corps Specific?

One misconception floating around the Internet when it comes to this vehicle is that its the Super AV currently in use by the Italian Army and Marine Corps.  It isn't.   When the USMC first announced this requirement, BAE noticed that the Italian Marine Corps requirement was similar.  This led to the partnership with Iveco.  Further testing and a closer look at what was being asked for in the Marine Personnel Carrier led to changes in the vehicle.  I have said previously that the requirement to transport 95th percentile Marines is a no compromise area in this or any vehicles design and that led to BAE designing a larger vehicle than the Italian version. Other requirements led to the design becoming USMC specific. 

Mil Spec or Commercial?

The next question I had concerned whether the vehicles parts would be mil spec or commercial.  My thinking was that mil spec parts are always of a higher standard.  John stated that contrary to popular belief, in many cases commercial parts are of better quality than mil spec.  He explained it this way.  Iveco is a large truck manufacturer, and those vehicles can rack up a hundred thousand miles a year or more.  Military vehicles often will travel only a couple hundred.  The BAE MPC is being designed to utilize off the shelf components wherever possible but not at the expense of durability or reliability.

US or Overseas content?

With all military programs a certain amount of US content is required.  John state that the BAE MPC will have upwards of 70 percent US content.  Additionally it would make use of Iveco's world wide distribution network. That means that they can leverage Chrysler, or Case International manufacturing facilities here in the US.  American jobs will be created making the vehicle an economic multiplier.  As a side note, the Boeing 787 has 70 percent US content and is considered a US product.

Cube Space on board ship.

The BAE MPC is required to occupy the same or less space than the AAV.  It meets those requirements with room to spare.  I expressed concern when pics of the vehicle appeared on the net showing it to be a rather large vehicle.  Those concerns were misplaced.  As stated previously the vehicle has been tested on older LST type ships and was able to get on and off without problem.  Operating off the San Antonio Class LPD or any of the LHA/LHD's currently in service should be no problem.

Overview.

An interesting contender in the MPC contest.  I've already sent e-mails to Lockheed Martin, SAIC and General Dynamics to see if they'll be as willing as BAE to discuss their offerings.

Personal Observation.

The Amphibious Combat Vehicle and the Marine Personnel Carrier are, as noted by the Congressional Research Office, quite similar in requirements.  The major difference is ship to shore capability.  For the ACV that is a primary requirement, for the MPC its secondary with the crossing of inland water ways and inland mobility being primary.  IF the MPC can operate in sea state 3 and IF it is capable of making that transit at current or better AAV speed then we could easily see these programs merge.  This program and ALL the contestants are worth watching.

UPDATE:

John in the comments asked about weapons fit.  That was discussed.  The program manager stated that the vehicle requirements that they're prepping the vehicle to meet has as part of it the ability to mount anything from a 50 cal to a 30mm cannon.  John also asked about mobility and brought back memories of 29 stumps and washboard road.  I didn't cover off road mobility.  I'll make contact and get info on that.

UPDATE 1:

I e-mailed Sarah to get further info on John's question about the BAE MPC's mobility.  She contacted the Program Manager and hit me with this.  "Our MPC offering is governed for 65 MPH on road speed with up to 45 MPH off road as to compliment the M1A1 mobility in most mission profiles."  That means it meets the gold standard of being able to keep up with the Abrams.  If you remember the initial assault into Iraq during the 2nd Gulf War then you understand why this requirement is so important to the Marine Corps.

They're not worth it.

Check out the latest from AP.

KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) -- A firefight broke out between U.S. forces and their Afghan army allies in eastern Afghanistan Sunday, killing two Americans and three Afghan soldiers and pushing the number of U.S. troops killed in the long-running war 2,000.

The fighting started Saturday when what is believed to have been a mortar fired by insurgents struck a checkpoint set up by U.S. forces in Wardak province, said Shahidullah Shahid, a provincial government spokesman. He said the Americans thought they were under attack from a nearby Afghan army checkpoint and fired on it, prompting the Afghan soldiers to return fire.

The Afghan Defense Ministry said the gunbattle was the result of a "misunderstanding" between international forces and Afghan soldiers manning a checkpoint in the Sayd Abad district.

NATO's International Security Assistance Force, commonly referred to as ISAF, provided a different account.

"After a short conversation took place between (Afghan army) and ISAF personnel firing occurred which resulted in the fatal wounding of an ISAF soldier and the death of his civilian colleague," the coalition said in a statement. It said the three Afghan soldiers died "in an ensuing exchange of fire."

NATO did not say whether it considered this an "insider" attack on foreign forces by Afghan allies.

There has been rising tide of such attacks in which Afghan soldiers or police assault their international allies. The killings pose one of the greatest threats to NATO's mission in the country, endangering a partnership key to training up Afghan security forces and withdrawing international troops.

While it may be days before it becomes clear who fired on whom first, the incident illustrates how tense relations have become between international troops and their Afghan allies.

Officials on both sides went into damage control mode, arguing that Saturday's violence did not mark a new low in Afghan-U.S. relations and urging patience while investigators tried to figure out exactly what had happened.

The deputy commander of NATO's military force in Afghanistan, British Lt. Gen. Adrian Bradshaw, called a last-minute news conference in Kabul to address the incident, even though he had few details to give.

He said the initial report of an insider attack should be amended to note that the incident "is now understood possibly to have involved insurgent fire," and tried to stress that relations between international troops and their Afghan allies "are very strong and very effective."

A spokesman for the Afghan Defense Ministry, Gen. Zahir Azimi, also sought to downplay the incident.

"In a misunderstanding shooting broke out between Afghan army and ISAF forces. As a result of the shooting, three army soldiers were killed, three other soldiers were wounded and number of ISAF forces were killed and wounded," Azimi said in a statement.

These bastards aren't worth it.

Nuff said.

US Navy acts to control tensions in the Pacific.

S. Korea and Japan have been nose to nose.  China and the Philippines have been nose to nose.  Taiwan and Japan have been nose to nose...and we haven't heard one response from our State Dept.  Instead we have a response from the US Navy in the form of TWO carrier battle groups being sent to the region to calm things down.  Check out this press release from the Commander of the 7th Fleet.

Two of the U.S. Navy's global force aircraft carrier strike groups (CSGs) are currently conducting operations in the vital Asia-Pacific region.
Ships of the forward-deployed George Washington CSG, to include the aircraft carrier USS George Washington (CVN 73), its embarked air wing, Carrier Air Wing (CVW) 5, the guided missile cruiser USS Cowpens (CG 63) and the guided missile destroyer USS McCampbell (DDG 85); coupled with the ships of the John C. Stennis CSG, to include the Bremerton, Wash.-based aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74), its embarked CVW 9, and the San Diego-based guided-missile cruiser USS Mobile Bay (CG 53); are currently patrolling the Western Pacific. They are providing a combat-ready force that protects and defends the collective maritime interest of the United States and its allies and partners.

&

The two CSGs are part of a strong U.S. naval presence in the Pacific that has helped to maintain peace and stability in the region as part of the U.S. 7th Fleet, which was established 69 years ago. USS John C. Stennis returned to the 7th Fleet's area of operation four months ahead of schedule to maintain combatant commander requirements for its presence in the region. The crew has been engaging in live-fire exercises, torpedo countermeasures exercises and numerous other training exercises during its current deployment and transit to the U.S. 5th Fleet area of operations.

The issues between these nations stretch back for centuries...in most cases long before the US was even discovered.  Racial, economic and territorial differences make this almost unsolvable.
Conflict will break out.  The best we can hope for is that its contained, and doesn't have longer lasting implications for regional security.  Confidence is not high. Some of the most technologically advanced forces on the planet are nose to nose.  THIS WILL TURN UGLY.

F-35's future? Super Cruise!

via Why the F-35 Blog...

AFRL calculates adaptive technology will improve engine fuel efficiency by 25% over the F135 powering the F-35, increasing aircraft combat radius by 25-30% and persistence by 30-40%. The engine could also help address the anti-access/area-denial challenges posed by a potential conflict with an near-peer adversary such as China, says AFRL. This could be achieved via increasing supersonic-cruise radius by 50% and reducing the aerial-refueling tanker burden by 30-74%.

Go to his site to read the whole thing but yeah.  You read that right.  Even before the F-35 enters frontline service plans are already being laid for the airplane that the USMC, USN, USAF and our allies are going to depend on....WILL SUPER CRUISE!

I love it!

Mass Casualty Exercise Horn of Africa.

GRAND BARA DESERT, Djibouti (Sept. 27, 2012) - U.S. Army Personnel Recovery Security Team members disembark a U.S. Marine Corps CH-53E Super Stallion helicopter during Mass Casualty Exercise 12-1, Sept. 25, 2012, in the Grand Bara Desert, Djibouti. The exercise followed a fictitious storyline, but called for the employment of real-world assets. While French and U.S. forces conduct frequent combined training events, this was the first exercise of this type between the two nations in Djibouti. The U.S. forces involved are assigned to Combined Joint Task Force - Horn of Africa, or CJTF-HOA. CJTF-HOA works with coalition partners, such as the French, and with countries in East Africa to promote regional security and stability. (U.S. Air Force photo by Tech Sgt. Joseph McKee)

U.S. Airmen with the 82nd Expeditionary Rescue Squadron offload an exercise participant from a U.S. Marine Corps CH-53E Super Stallion helicopter at the simulated triage site on French Forces Djibouti base, Djibouti, Sept. 25, 2012, during Mass Casualty Exercise 12-1, a joint U.S. and French medical exercise. The U.S. forces involved are assigned to Combined Joint Task Force - Horn of Africa, or CJTF-HOA. (DoD photo by Tech. Sgt. Daniel St. Pierre, U.S. Air Force/Released)21

A group of Air Force pararescuemen and an Army Site Security Team (SST) from the Kansas Army National Guard, 2nd Combined Arms Battalion, 137th Infantry Regiment, conducted a rescue mission for survivors of an aircraft crash near in Grand Bara Desert...

Army Spc. Jason Mosqueda (left) and Sgt. Darel Long, Kansas Army National Guard 2nd Combined Arms Battalion, 137th Infantry Regiment, Joint Combat Search and Rescue, provide security for an HC-130P from the 81st Expeditionary Rescue Squadron

Note:
When did the Army develop Site Security Teams?

Interesting. Gun Ban Obama website.

Click here to check it out for yourself.