AFSOC wants the Combat Rescue Mission back...

via DefenseNews.

WASHINGTON — The future of a long-stymied US Air Force effort to buy new combat search-and-rescue helicopters is once again uncertain as top-level generals are intensely debating the type of aircraft and which arm of the service is best suited to conduct this critical mission.
For several months, Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) has been quietly lobbying to take over the combat search-and-rescue (CSAR) mission from Air Combat Command (ACC), arguing, according to sources and internal Air Force documents obtained by Defense News, they can do the mission with fewer aircraft, at lower cost.
AFSOC wants to perform the mission with Bell-Boeing CV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft and a small contingent of Sikorsky HH-60 helicopters, the same type of aircraft that fly the mission now. The active-duty would operate a mix of CV-22s and HH-60s, while the Air National Guard and Reserve, as they do now, would only fly HH-60s.
The intense debate, which involves a handful of senior generals, comes as the Air Force is preparing to award a contract for up to 112 new helicopters to replace battle-worn HH-60G Pave Hawks.
The Air Force spat is just one example of the internal battles raging throughout a military grappling, for the first time in more than a decade, with how to handle smaller budgets.

This is interesting.

Para-Rescue wants to get back into SOCOM.

Air Combat Command wants to have its own organic rescue component on hand for recovery of its pilots.

SOCOM itself is probably staying out of it (at the command level).

At issue?  Para-Rescue is wanting a new vehicle to help perform its mission, already works a great deal with SOCOM with regards to exercises, proficiency training and with other government agencies---it already sees itself under the SOCOM tent.

And the last maybe biggest issue is that AFSOC already has CV-22s.

This fight might tell us more about where things will go in the post Afghanistan period than anything else.  IF AFSOC gets the mission back then they've succeeded in helping SOCOM wall off its budget against stagnation or even cuts.  If Air Combat Command wins then by default it will get new equipment..

AFSOCs biggest problem?  The USMC.  Its going to devote an MV-22 squadron to special operations the same way the Navy has devoted a MH-60 squadron for the same use.  Para-Rescue will end up losing because everyone has combat/jump/scuba qualified Corpsmen/Medics.  Even Battalion Recon has Corpsmen that have been to the Basic Recon Course.

Still.  This internal fight is gonna be good.

Blast from the past. Vought F7U-3M "Cutlass" with Sparrow I missiles

pics via Aeroman.

Philippine Soldiers Kidnapped.

via the Washington Post.

MANILA, Philippines — Communist rebels posing as government troops have abducted five Philippine army soldiers on the outskirts of a southern city, the military said Tuesday.
New People’s Army guerrillas wearing military uniforms stopped the soldiers aboard two motorcycles at a road block late Monday outside Davao city, said local army spokesman Capt. Raul Villegas.
The soldiers in civilian attire were unarmed and on their way to the market to buy supplies for a community feeding program, Villegas said.
The group’s team leader sensed that the gunmen manning the road block weren’t soldiers and jumped off the motorcycle and leapt into a ravine to escape, leaving his five comrades behind, he said.
The rebels usually release captured soldiers after determining they were not involved in human rights violations and other abuses. Arrangements are made with local officials, who coordinate a limited cease-fire with the military to allow the safe return of the captives to government representatives.
The rebels have been fighting in one of Asia’s longest-running insurgencies. Talks to end the uprising have stalled for nearly two years due to disagreements between the two sides over the release of several jailed rebel leaders.

Another of those long running insurgencies that many don't know about. Everyone talks about the US performing partnership missions with all these nations in the Pacific but I can actually see US participation as being problemsome.

For example.  What happens if US Soldiers are kidnapped while in the Philippines?  SOCOM will be tasked with a mission to recover them and would likely succeed.

The fallout?  Cheers in the US and an escalation in the violence in the Philippines.  Where once you had a low scale insurgency you suddenly have full scale warfare.

This country and the whole Pacific bears watching.

A Fighter Attack Squadron lost and still no one held responsible.

Remember the attack on Camp Bastion/Leatherneck?

A Marine Fighter Attack Squadron was rendered combat ineffective and lives were lost.

Now compare and contrast that with the incident in Las Vegas where about 8 Marines were killed.

The difference?

Commanders were held responsible within weeks.  Careers were dramatically altered.  Lives changed.  Accountability confirmed.

We have none of that in the Camp Leatherneck attack.  We don't even have a good after action report (at least one that is publicly available).

Jones, Conway, Krulak, Grey and other greats would have had someones ass in the sling for such an event.

And you wonder why I think the Marines are adrift?

The Brits are unusual people...and the RAF Regiment is just plain weird.

via Breach-Bang-Clear.

I was wrong. The Marine Corps was wrong.

No graphics on this one guys.  Just plain rear view mirror gazing.

The F-35, EFV and the V-22 were too big a price to pay for the dream of over the horizon amphibious assault.

I was wrong when I said (and argued) that they were just what we needed.

We could easily have made due with say the S-92 in place of the V-22 and F/A-18E/F, instead of F-35s.  Our air power wouldn't be state of the art but it wouldn't be breaking the bank, it would be sufficient to carry out Marine Corps taskings and it wouldn't have put even "traditional" amphibious assault in jeopardy like we're facing now.

The Marine Corps was wrong when they continue to stick to the yardstick of over the horizon attack.  They're also wrong for attempting to design amphibious ships and vehicles to act in that arena.

It was a bridge too far then and now. The troubled development process that was painfully illustrated by the EFV was an early warning sign that we all missed.

I missed it.  HQMC missed it.  Marine Corps leadership missed it.

Marine Corps institutional fear about being rendered irrelevant has served it well in the past but this time it worked against us.  We guard amphibious assault so vigorously that we missed the obvious.

So what if it becomes a combined service effort that involves elements of the Air Force and Army.  So what if its not a pure Marine Corps and Navy effort?

The other two forms of forcible entry are as difficult to perform now as any...maybe more and the threat to those forces performing those missions is perhaps even greater, yet the Airborne and Air Assault Forces never seem to express the "fear" that the Marine Corps does.

The Marine Corps as an institution needs to have a serious come to Jesus moment and get its shit straight.  

70 million (down from 100 million) for a CH-46 replacement is a sign of mental illness.  A replacement for the Harrier that is coming in at 150 million dollars each when we can get F/A-18's that can perform the MARINE CORPS mission of providing close air support for our infantry is insane.  Delaying the replacement for a Amphibious Assault Vehicle that is almost 50 years old while we prioritize the buying of the above aircraft AND a CH-53K which I haven't mentioned yet is a sign of illegal drug usage.

I just acknowledged the false assumptions that I made regarding Marine Corps procurement.  Hopefully, someone in HQMC has the balls to tell the Commandant that we're on the wrong road and need to turn around.  If a blogger can see this so can those in charge of the Marines.

Women in the Rangers??? Navy SEALs????

relax feminist...take your anger out on the guys that like to morph female body builders...she is no where near this big in real life but it does illustrate the point...gender norming will be done to get women into the infantry...standards won't be lowered for women...they're going to be lowered for everyone.

via New York Times.

Women will be permitted to serve in the most intense and physically hazardous combat positions in the military, including the Navy SEALs, the Army Rangers and the Marine infantry, senior defense officials said Monday.

Read the rest of this nonsense over at the Times.

War is reality.

Its not the kind, friendly, backstabbing halls of Congress or Universities where they "discuss" the issues of the day.

Put women in Infantry units and the units will suffer.

Put them in the Rangers, SEALs, MARSOC, or Special Forces and those units will suffer.

Don't believe the bullshit about standards not being lowered.  They will, and from the looks of the politically correct bastards in the Joint Chiefs of Staff AND sorry son of a bitches that will do anything to make rank and what you see in the next war will be suffering the likes of which will make stomachs turn.

American women WILL be brutalized by the enemy.  They will be sexually assaulted, gang raped, drug through the streets and humiliated in ways that I can't begin to imagine.

But this is gonna happen which leads me to the next question.

If women can fight in our front line combat units then why are their domestic violence laws?  If two people are equal then its a simple physical confrontation.  If women can fight then isn't being a gentleman outmoded?

The elites are viewing this as a simple case of equality, but reality...both in society and combat will show that this is a decision that will have consequences in both arenas. 

Drug war in Mexico? Not when they're building improvised armored vehicles!

Its becoming obvious that we're no longer seeing a drug war in Mexico.  Quite honestly it hasn't been a drug war for a long time.  Its some type of quasi criminal insurgency with the goal of .... I have no idea what the real goal is but when you have the criminal insurgents building armored vehicles that take anti-tank weapons to destroy them, and can shake off machinegun fire then you have something weird going on.

Afghans take over security from NATO. How long before the unfinished civil war kicks off?

via Hindu Times.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai announced at a ceremony on Tuesday that his country’s armed forces are taking over the lead for security nationwide from the U.S.-led NATO coalition.
The handover of responsibility is a significant milestone in the nearly 12-year war and marks a turning point for American and NATO military forces, which will now move entirely into a supporting role. It also opens the way for their full withdrawal in 18 months.
“This is a historic moment for our country and from Wednesday all of the security operations will be in the hands of the Afghan security forces,” Mr. Karzai said at the ceremony, held at the new National Defense University built to train Afghanistan’s future military officers.
Mr. Karzai said that in the coming months, coalition forces will gradually withdraw from Afghanistan’s provinces as the country’s security forces replace them.

Put on your thinking cap and remember your history. What was one of the major clues that terrorist activity was soon to occur back in 2001?  I'll give you a hint.  A commander for this group was killed and intelligence analyst went crazy.

The assassination of Commander Massoud of the Northern Alliance.

Want a serious kick in the pants?  The military wing of the Northern Alliance reformed when the US began getting serious about peace talks with the Taliban.  Many, myself included, picked this up as a signal that peace wouldn't be allowed.  Once the US left, the war would be back on and the Northern Alliance would once again be back in action fighting their old foes.

So my question is simple.

How long before what we're seeing in Syria is repeated in Afghanistan?

Bell 525 Relentless Press Release

"The Bell 525 Relentless program truly exemplifies our focus on meeting the mission needs of our customers. When our Customer Advisory Panel told us they wanted a helicopter with best-in-class performance characteristics and passenger amenities across a range of mission needs, we listened," said John Garrison, president and CEO of Bell Helicopter. "The updates we are sharing today are further evidence we are delivering on our customer commitment to provide an aircraft that delivers unmatched, cost effective performance."

The Bell 525's enhanced specifications include a flight cruise speed at max continuous power and max gross weight of 155+ kts (306 kph), a range of 500+ nm (926 km) and a useful load of 7,400+ lbs (3,357 kg). The maximum gross weight for the Relentless is 19,300+ lbs (8,754 kg). The Bell 525 Relentless can also perform CAT-A take offs and landings to and from a helipad at maximum gross weight on a hot day.

Maricopa County Sheriff's Office Vehicles...

Concept Art. Man-Shark.

Japanese Work Alongside Marines for San Clemente Island Exercise. video by LCPL Reel.

NOTE:  I wasn't going to post this video, but it points out what appears to be a culture problem that I didn't see coming to the Marine Corps.

Do you see all that banter?  Have you seen how the General running that MEB has been grabbing as much screen time as possible?  Have you noticed that same General sounds more like a Senators Aid than a warrior?

My first thought was "Chesty would fuck these bastards up" if he was around today.

My second was...how did the Marine Corps become a place where a soft spoken Marine General (that sounds more comfortable at cocktail parties than battlefields) could rise in rank.

More than ever we need a reformer like Conway, Krulak, Gray or Jones as the next leader of the Marine Corps.  More later.

Tattoo Tuesday. Asian pivot edition.

First CH-53K to fly soon.

via AINonline.

The first four flying versions of the U.S. Marine Corps’ next generation CH-53K helicopter wereadvancing through assembly at Sikorsky Aircraft’s West Palm Beach, Florida, facility earlier this year. “We’re well beyond the paper side of the aircraft. We’re building this thing,” Marine Col. Robert Pridgen, H-53 program manager, told reporters at the Navy League conference in April.

When I first read this I thought it was a non story but a closer look revealed that they're reporting from the Paris Air Show so I would imagine there is work going on behind the scenes to get Germany and Paris to consider buying the beast.

Son of a fucking BITCH!

via ELP Blog.

Marines Put Marine Personnel Carrier On Shelf Due To Budget Constraints
The Marine Corps is putting the Marine Personnel Carrier, the complement to the Amphibious Combat Vehicle, on ice, and it may not be resurrected for 10 years, according to service, industry and congressional sources.


Well of course. When you have money going into a gold-plated USMC tac-air (MV-22, F-35 and the 53K), those ground elements (the reason why we have a Marine Corps) will suffer.

CDR Salamander writes that you should never blog mad.

Internet etiquette experts say you should count to 10 before you press the publish button.

I've counted to 100 and I'm left with this.

THAT SON OF A BITCH AMOS HAS GOT TO GO.  The USMC is now the funding source for the Air Wing?  We have two aviation commandants and a logistics bubba.  No one is looking out for the Ground Combat Element.

The Marine Corps as we know it is no more.  It is aviation centric and Amos will go down in history as one of the most ineffective and misguided leaders the Marines have ever known.  He needs to be throat punched. 

Is the USAF combat ineffective? Are they still mission capable?

I was doing my afternoon round of web military stories and happened across an AOL story on the USAF and the no fly zone in Syria.  One line stopped me cold.

“It depends on the risk you’re willing to accept,” Gen. Welsh told reporters this morning, in response to a question from the incomparable Tony Capaccio of Bloomberg News. The Air Force has currently had to ground about 33 squadrons, Welsh had already told the audience at an Air Force Associationbreakfast, 12 of them “combat-coded” fighter and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) units. Another seven have been reduced to doing only basic “takeoff and landing” training, although Welsh was optimistic the funds freed up by sequestering federal workers would buy back their readiness – albeit not immediately.
“If we have aircraft that would be needed to conduct a no-fly zone, and they haven’t been flying, hopefully we would have time to get them up to speed before we use them,” Welsh told the clustering reporters.

Uh.  Wow.

33 squadrons gone whether through combat or financial consideration is still 33 squadrons gone.

If that isn't bad enough the good General goes on to say that he "hopes they would have time to get (the remaining squadrons) up to speed."

That means that even with those type of draconian cuts, the remaining squadrons are not combat capable and would need to build up to deployment. Make no mistake about it, this isn't like a certification for deployment.  This is an issue of USAF squadrons not being basically trained to perform their mission sets.

By the Generals own words, we have at least a portion of our active duty USAF that is combat ineffective and mission incapable...unless they have time to get ready.  This is probably the most honest, scariest, most worrying statement that I've heard from any of the Service Chiefs.

I've seen waste in the DoD and believe that weapons systems are being bought that aren't justified (see previous post about the MV-22 vs. MH-60) but this shows me that Sequestration has gone from being an abstraction to an actual threat to national security.  We have got to get it fixed.

Is one MV-22 worth 4.5 MH-60R/S?

I was going over the Marine Corps aviation budget and the question must be asked.  Is one MV-22 worth 4.5 MH-60R/S?  via AOL

“In 2010 we have had a 28 percent increase in readiness; at the same time we’ve had a 19 percent decrease in maintenance costs, as measured by cost per flight hour,” an obviously pleased program manager replied when I asked him for the latest numbers. “I’m unaware of any other program that has demonstrated an increase in readiness while lowering flight hour costs.”

This news come fresh on the heels of the V-22 program landing an impressive commitment from the Pentagon for a $6.5 billion, five-year mulityear contract for 99 Ospreys. The average unit price for the V-22s ordered across that deal is $70 million, he told reporters here during a briefing at the Boeing chalet. While that isn’t, strictly speaking news (the redoubtable Rick Whittle reported that for us in February), he buried the information and we want to make sure you know.)

Sorry but I'm not entirely convinced that the speed that the V-22 brings is worth 4.5 MH-60s.

Not for Marine Corps mission sets.  There is no justification for the Marine Corps to have an all V-22 fleet of aircraft.

None.

NOT ONE.

The Marine Corps is talking about a financial trainwreck affecting procurement.  That's bullshit and Sweetman (listen up buddy cause I won't ever admit this again) was right.  We could have afforded the EFV, the MPC and or the ACV if we weren't paying (now 70 mill but at the time) 100 mill a piece for the V-22.

This is borderline criminal and the Corps is out of balance because of it.

The Brits have a problem with their carriers.

British Naval Aviation should be sitting pretty right now.

They're about to get their F-35B's...The USMC is already looking at using the MV-22 as a refueling platform and you can bet that someone in the Commandant's office (or in the Assistant Commandant for Aviation) is already looking at the concepts for an early warning version.

So with the purchase of the F-35B and a few V-22's in the future, you can have a pretty impressive fighter force operating from those flat decks.

Sharkey Ward though is throwing cold water on the whole idea. via his news letter.

The Air Marshal does not appear to understand that the decks of U.S. Navy and US Marine Corps carriers are 4 inches thick - whereas our new carrier decks are no more than 1 inch thick. The Air Marshal’s comments are therefore misleading at best. Scientific/engineering judgement is that our thin new carrier decks will not be able to withstand the thermal effects of F35B STOVL vertical landing operations. There is therefore a massive latent/hidden cost waiting in the wings for the provision of a new and much thicker flight deck for our new carriers. Gray and Hillier should both be required to provide this cost estimate and place it in the equation for comparison with cat and trap costs.

How much it will cost to reinforce the Elizabeth classes flight decks is anyones guess but it won't be cheap.

This will be fun to watch.

A400 Paris Air Show Flight Demonstration Pics.