BAE at the Maneuver Conference

The US Army had their Maneuver Conference at Ft. Benning a couple of weeks ago.  I've been looking high and low for reports about the various displays but its been almost non-existent.  Even the major manufacturers aren't putting out press releases on their participation there. Maybe its a issue with how they want to present themselves to the public but the only place that seemed to have any info on it was...wait for it...World of Tanks Blog, THE CHIEFTAIN'S HATCH.  The pics below are from that blog.

Sidenote:  What made the Army decide to move Tanks down to Ft. Benning instead of keeping them at Ft. Knox?  Hell, Soldiers would hate it but Ft. Irwin would have made more sense.

Sidenote 1:  I wonder what the bill to BAE is to move all that armor to these exhibitions?  Its got to be a small fortune.

Like the Chieftain's Hatch Blog said, there is alot going on with the turret of that Bradley!  I'd love a rundown of exactly what they have on it.

Amos finally reveals his true motives.

via Defense One.

In his Sept. 16 commentary in Defense One, Gen. James Amos, commandant of the Marine Corps, makes the argument that the Corps would be right-sized at around 174,000 personnel. This comes not long after his office made the argument that a Marine Corps sized at 186,800 Marines was deemed fiscally impossible. I believe that the reason that the Marine Corps is having a difficult time finding the right size is that it remains tethered to the legacy formations of the past. It is possible for the Marine Corps to provide its vital services to the nation for between 120,000 and 150,000 Marines if it embraces a new approach to the future.

Read the entire article.

The talk of building around the MEU is fine.  The talk of focusing on the MEB is misguided.  The MEB is least used formation in the Marine Corps.  MEF's and MEU's have been at the vanguard of the Marine Corps since at least Vietnam (in their current configuration), but what is really disturbing is the adoption of Amos' flawed SPMAGTF's as examples of where we go in the future.

Even more disturbing is the continued focus in HQMC with terrorism/COIN type warfare despite indications from the Vice Chairman that the other members don't share that view.

This proposal to reform the Marine Corps with 150,000 Marines would essentially mean shedding even more Infantry Battalions, seeing Tanks and Artillery Battalions go away and to rely entirely on the Wing.

That can't be allowed.  The only good that came from this article is that it reveals Amos' true motives.  He wants to make the Marine Corps an ocean going 101st that can get their quick but can't hold its own against a true combined arms force.

Meeting Engagement at Senkaku/Diaoyu islands....

via The Diplomat.

For now, though, the upper hand is held by the United States, which has just completed the initial deployment of 24 U.S. Marine Corps Bell-Boeing MV-22B Osprey conventional, or twin tilt rotor aircraft, to Futenma Base in Okinawa. This unique aircraft, by virtue of its twisting rotors and engines at the ends of its wing, can take off like a helicopter, and then cruise at about 280 miles per hour, carrying up to 24 troops or about six tons of cargo to a range sufficient to reach the disputed islands. In a full-out surge, the 24 MV-22Bs at Futenma could potentially put about 500 troops or about 140 tons of weapons and material on the Senkakus or the Sakashimas in about one hour.

and this...

The first example, delivered in May, is now undergoing final modifications in Shanghai. At least three more are expected initially, but China may build many more of an indigenous version. Developed by the former Soviet Union to give its Naval Infantry the ability to rapidly invade NATO countries along the Baltic Sea, the Zubr can lift about 500 troops or up to 150 tons of armor, weapons and material up to speeds of 66 miles per hour. With just four Zubr hovercraft, the PLAN could potentially put 2,000 troops or up to 600 tons of weapons and material on the Senkakus in about four to five hours, or it could reach the island of Miyako-jima in about six to seven hours with a much reduced payload.
If it actually came to a race between the Osprey and the Bison, getting there first would make all the difference, as without the advantage of surprise, an adequately armed defender could significantly damage incoming hovercraft or helicopters. But the outcome would also depend on the result of intensive air and sea battles around these islands. For now, the superior performance of the U.S. Lockheed-Martin F-22A fifth-generation fighter and the Virginia class nuclear-powered attack submarine provide a margin of superiority that undergirds deterrence, but this could change quickly as the PLA Air Force increases the number of capable fourth-generation fighters supported by AWACS radar aircraft, followed by fifth-generation fighters that could even the odds, especially if China decides to strike first. Growing numbers of PLAN air defense destroyers like the new Type 052D could also help deny air dominance to Japanese and U.S. forces.

Read the entire article but we're seeing a widely read thought website, essentially laying out the possible moves in a meeting engagement over some disputed islands in the Pacific.

Things are warming up and instead of being reassured I'm a bit alarmed.

We are heading into a period where our forces will be at their weakest point in 50 years, China is approaching the apex of its own strength (if reports of slow downs in Chinese manufacturing are to be believed) and only now are people taking the threat seriously.

I wonder if historians will say too little too late when studying the reaction of US leaders to a rising Red Dragon.

Paratrooper having a VERY bad day via TacBlog.

Dang.  I'm guessing this must be a jump out of a balloon or something (I think the Brits were doing that kinda stuff at one time).  If it was an airplane he'd be toast.

Chinese SR5 Truck Mounted Universal Multiple Rocket Launcher multiple System (MLRS) System via Chinese Military Review.

Chinese SR5 Truck Mounted Universal Multiple Rocket Launcher multiple System (MLRS) System pic via Chinese Military Review.

Question.  When was the last time that US forces faced devastating enemy artillery?

Answer.  Korea.

China is looking to change that if we ever tangle and their latest truck mounted universal MLRS system will probably be a big part of any future war plans.

Much has been made of the idea of US forces hearing enemy fighters overhead, but just as concerning should be the whistle of enemy artillery.  Historically communist forces believed and relied heavily on huge numbers of gun and missile fire to overwhelm forces in the field and reduce cities to rubble.

Luckily the US Army already has in service the weapon system that should be able to keep enemy artillery at bay (if we can see them approaching in time), the ATACMS.

This is one of those weapon systems that hasn't gotten the attention it deserves but might prove invaluable in the future.

Its quite obvious to me (despite the protests of Elements of Power Blog) that the ground forces of the US are going to have to be prepared to shape the battlespace without assistance from air power.  The ATACMS (built by Lockheed...they really should sector off other divisions to protect them from the coming drama) can do that.  Instead of begging the USAF to put that division thats approaching on their target list, Commanders can simply dial up their own long range rocket artillery to help thin the herd.

Whether we're actually fighting the Chinese or their "stuff" we will eventually cross swords.  It would be best to make any corrections in strategy/procurement now, while we have the time, instead of in the heat of battle.

Blast from the past. via Marine Corps Aviation Association.

1970s -- A U.S. Marine and a U.S. Air Force pararescueman from the 40th Aerospace Rescue and Recovery Squadron (in wet suit) run for a U.S. Air Force helicopter during an assault on Koh Tang Island to rescue the U.S. Merchant ship Mayaguez and its crew May 15, 1975. (U.S. Air Force archive photo)

Advanced Super Hornet Photo Essay courtesy of Intercepts Blog's Christopher P. Cavas.

Read the story and check out the rest of Christopher's great photos here.

F-35 happy talk gets a dose of McCain realism.

I won't lie to you.  John McCain has pissed me off more times than I can count.  He has never met a war he didn't like and is a "immigration reformer" with ideas that quite honestly puzzle me.  When it comes to defense spending he is the Hawk of all Hawks so when I saw this,  I sat up and paid attention.  Make note boys and girls.  This guy is on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

via DoD Buzz.

Days after the U.S. Defense Department signaled an improving relationship with Lockheed Martin Corp. over the cost of the F-35 fighter jet, Sen. John McCain called the program “one of the great national scandals.”
McCain, a Republican from Arizona and the 2008 Republican presidential candidate, was speaking during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing to consider the nominations of several White House appointments, including Deborah Lee James to become the next secretary of the Air Force.
McCain criticized the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter as the government’s first trillion-dollar acquisition program (including sustainment costs). Its repeated cost overruns “have made it worse than a disgrace,” he said. Despite recent efforts to reduce prices on the next batch of aircraft, “it’s still one of the great, national scandals that we have ever had, as far as the expenditure of taxpayers’ dollars are concerned,” he said.

I keep saying it and you keep telling me I'm wrong.

This program is between a rock and a hard place.

Between Democrats that hate spending on the military, Tea Party Republicans that hate wasteful, expensive and fraudulent government spending no matter the department and now the leader of the Republican Hawks coming out against the F-35, its days are numbered.

Air Power Zealots everywhere beware.  Your favorite toy is about to get a haircut. 

American Mercenary on the decision to scrap the A-10...

American Mercenary is a fellow blogger that I've been following religiously for a couple of months now.  Like few others, he's able to boil important facts into a paragraph or two and end debate with his sound logic.  His thoughts on the USAF decision to scrap the A-10 follows...

Right now the USAF has more personnel assigned to it than the US Army. Right now the USAF is talking about downsizing their fleet of tactical aircraft. Proven tactical aircraft. We let the USAF hog the budget, buy nifty toys, then declare them "strategic" and never deploy those toys. The F-35 has been sold as a "silver bullet solution" to people, and they are convinced that this one system will solve all problems. This is ignoring a basic tennet of warfare, you don't need one system, you need the right mix of systems and capabilities.
Cavalry sucks on its own. Armored Brigade Combat Teams don't have the dismounts for effective urban operations. Stryker Brigades lack the heavy punch needed for effective spearhead operations. Infantry Brigade Combat Teams don't travel fast or hit hard in open terrain. Take the strengths of each, and use it to cover the weaknesses of the others, and now you have an effective fighting force.
The USAF is literally ignoring this rule with their "high, fast, and stealthy" mentality of aircraft. We need low and slow to support the ground. The "lets cut the C-27 and A-10 to keep the F-35" is just one more reason to let the Army have fixed wing assets again, because we really do care about low and slow.

Extremely well said (told ya so).

The irony is this.  If by some miracle the US Army is able to get A-10s and C-27s you can bet Marine units will be asking for support.  We're betting the farm on the F-35 to the exclusion of everything else too.  Hell, if my thoughts on boat spaces are correct we might even need to have a few Stryker platoons on float with us. 

Are single role aircraft a bad buy in a multirole world?

The Air Force Chief of Staff reportedly told the Army that he was about to kill the A-10 because he could no longer afford a single mission airplane.

Besides being an outright lie...C-17, C-130, KC-135, SR-71 etc...are all examples of single role aircraft, the A-10 signifies something more dangerous.

The USAF is moving away from close air support.  Words are meaningless, actions are reality.  The reality is that the USAF has been trying for years to dump the A-10..

But back to the bigger issue.

Are single role airplanes such a bad thing?  Consider the carrier air wing of two decades ago.  You know them but let me give you a refresher.

F-14 Fleet Defense Fighter.

A-6 Deep Strike Bomber, Refueler, Electronic Attack.

A-7 Light Strike Aircraft.  Hauls as much as a F-18 but much cheaper.

S-3 Viking.  Anti-Sub specialist, Electronic attack in the ES-3 platform and aerial refueler.

The other pieces of the wing has remained about the same.  We had E-2 Hawkeyes, C-2 Greyhounds, SH-60 SeaHawks etc...Fast forward to today and we have Super Hornets, E-2s, C-2s and MH-60s.

Which is more powerful?  The Carrier Air Wing of 20 years ago or the Wing of today?

The same rationale can be applied to the USAF.  Are they making the same mistake as the USN so many years ago?  Is it a mistake to neck down to a two plane fighter/attack force?  And if it is who will pay the price for that mistake.  I'll give you a hint.  It won't be airmen that pay the price.

It'll be some soldier in a ditch begging JTAC for air strikes and being told that the F-35s are off doing ISR for the next air tasking.  He better hope the cannoneers are set for the fire mission because that will be the only help he'll get.  The Air Wings/Forces have officially abandoned ground forces to fight on there own.

Amphibious Assault Vehicle casualties. Do we have proper controls at ITX?

A photo of Cpl Sell with his family during happier times.  via High Desert Star.  Note:  I get so wrapped up with the weapon systems that the individual is sometimes lost. My heart goes out to the family....a warning goes out to the Marines.  Get your house in order.  This young man went to war and then died during a training exercise?  Yeah.  Even training is hazardous but we've got to do better.

via Marine Corps Times.

A Marine was killed and four others injured when an Amphibious Assault Vehicle caught fire Monday morning at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center in Twentynine Palms, Calif.
Cpl. Nicholas Sell of 3rd Assault Amphibian Battalion, 1st Marine Division, out of Camp Pendleton, Calif., was participating in a battalion assault course as part of the Integrated Training Exercise when his AAV caught fire around 11:20 a.m., Combat Center spokesman Capt. Justin Smith said in a release. Sell, 21, was a native of Eagle Point, Ore., who had been in the Marine Corps since 2010. He had deployed once to Afghanistan.
The Marines who were injured in the AAV fire have not been identified by Marine officials.
One of the injured is in stable condition and is being treated at Arrowhead Medical Center in Los Angeles. The other three were treated and released from Robert E. Bush Naval Hospital at the Combat Center.
According to Combat Center officials, two units are currently participating in the ITX: 2nd Battalion, 3rd Marines, out of Hawaii; and 2nd Battalion, 1st Marines, out of Camp Pendleton, Calif. Sell’s unit had been supporting 2/1.
Thousands of Marines go to the Combat Center annually for ITX, which is a nearly month-long workup to build skills before a deployment, from the personal and squad level up to a battalion-wide final exercise.
ITX replaced Enhanced Mojave Viper as the Marine Corps’ premiere pre-deployment training program in January.
Monday’s incident marks the second training death this year for the Combat Center and the second death during ITX.

Military Training is inherently dangerous.

Even training can get you killed.

I won't even speculate on this one till more info is available.  What is concerning is that this incident happened on a battalion assault course.

Are the proper controls in place or has a gunslinger mentality crept into the ranks because of so much trigger time down range?

I don't know but this is a tragedy.  Comfort to the family of the deceased and get wells to the injured.

The Priceless BlowJob via GruntWorks....mostly safe for work...

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

82nd Airborne Division Spirit Video

A few things...

*America's Guard of Honor?  Never heard them called that before.
*Good to see that the General did have rubber knees while standing in the door.  Fuck!  Good to see the General actually jumping!
*They finally started jumping the T-11s.  Good.  Injuries should go down.
*Go Army, Beat Wake Forest?  Really?  Seriously?  Lame.

How is Belgium even thinking about buying F-35s?

via HurriyetDaily.

U.S. government officials have briefed the Belgian government about the capabilities of the Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 fighter jet, as Brussels prepares to replace its aging fleet of 60 F-16s, a source familiar with the matter has told.
The source, who was not authorized to speak publicly, said Belgium was considering buying 35 to 55 of the new radar-evading F-35 jets. No decisions are expected until late 2014 at the earliest after next year’s elections in Belgium.
Belgium was one of the originalNATO partners to buy the F-16 fighter jet, also built by Lockheed; but unlike Denmark, Norway and the Netherlands, it did not join the international consortium that funded development of the F-35.
U.S. government officials have visited Belgium to discuss the F-35, which is being built to replace the F-16 and a dozen other warplanes in use around the world, according to the source.
U.S. defense officials had no immediate comment.

Someones got to ask so I will.  WHAT IS THE US GOVT PROMISING THESE NATIONS WITH REGARDS TO THE PRICE OF THIS AIRPLANE????

I like Belgium.  They have a beautiful country.  But there is no way in hell they can afford F-35s.

If a certain Northern European country could only afford 37 then Belgium can afford maybe 1.5 of these planes.

I'm convinced beyond all doubt that either rampant criminality is occurring with this program OR we're seeing some type of subsidy being offered by the US govt.

Sidenote:  Sequester is going to continue and the whole defense house is riding on the F-35.  Thats why the posts on this airplane have increased.  You're interested in Marine Corps small arms?  You think that the M27 should be our next service rifle?  The F-35 matters to you.  You think we need an AAV replacement?  You want the MPC?  The F-35 matters to you.  The same applies to the other services.  You a sub driver?  Hornet driver?  Grunt?  Engineer?  Ranger?  Cook?  The F-35 will affect your future.  That's why its being followed closely here.

1st Tanks down under.

Please tell me why we aren't seeing a US Army  Stryker or Armored Brigade co located with Marines in Australia.  Hell, I'll even take an Air Defense Artillery Brigade or even mech artillery.  This is how the Army starts taking steps to becoming part of the Pacific tilt.

Amos on sequestration.

Note:  I half read an article and thought that Amos didn't speak before the HASC because no hard numbers were identified on systems to be cut.

I was wrong.  The only thing is that Amos didn't spell out any numbers at all.  He talked about personnel cuts but as far as weapon systems are concerned he didn't outline anything.  Interesting but understandable.

Its the Marine Corps way.

Cut people before systems.  It has been and probably always will be that way.  What does this mean though?  Hold on to your Record Books.  Amos is saying 174,000, I said 150,000 but the floor might even be lower.  We have F-35's in the pipeline, MV-22s, soon CH-53Ks and then we MIGHT get around to buying an ACV.  Budgets are gonna be wrecked for the foreseeable future.  People cost and people are the first to go in Marine Land.  His testimony is below.

  Hhrg 113 As00 Wstate Amosusmcj 20130918

Has the MLP already morphed into an Afloat Forward Staging Base?

Excuse me one second while I shout from the roof tops yelling I TOLD YA SO!!!!

What the hell am I talking about?  I'm talking about the MLP.  I stated earlier that the MLP was a ship without a real plan, I stated that all three would instead be gifts to SOCOM to be used as Afloat Forward Staging Bases instead.

I got laughed at.  I was told by some "in the know" that I was wrong.  Well check this out from Admiral Greenert (basically the only person on the JCS worthy of the uniform) at the House Armed Service Committee.

Navy: This is drawn from Adm. Greenert’s statement to the HASC.
One Virginia class submarine would be canceled.
Work on the first replacement for the Ohio-class nuclear missile submarines — SSBN-X — would be delayed fiscal from 2021 by one year, leaving the United States with a gap in the most crucial part of the nuclear triad.
One Littoral Combat Ship would not be bought.
Some 11 tactical aircraft – four EA-18Gs, one F-35C, one E-2D, two P-8As, three MH-60s and “about 400 weapons.”
One Afloat Forward Staging Base (AFSB) would not be bought.
Delivery of the USS GERALD R. FORD (CVN-78) would be delayed by two years, raising questions about whether the Navy could keep the requisite number of carriers at sea as needed.

He's talking about what will not be bought if sequestration sticks.

He's talking AFSB, not MLP.

The Marine Corps bought a toy and didn't know what to do with it.  Now the Navy is cleaning up our mess.

Freaking insane.

F-35 disarmament. Giovanni was right.

On Sept 9th I posted a link by Giovanni where he predicted that Western Air Forces would in essence disarm due to the high cost of the F-35.

The Netherlands are the first example of this happening.

They're buying a total of 37 F-35.  No one is saying it but that won't even meet home defense requirements and will in essence keep them out of participation in NATO/UN actions overseas.  They have been neutered by the F-35.  Read the article here to see how spot on his prediction was but a few tidbits to remind you....

The current Dutch government now simply plans to buy as many aircraft as it can with its €4 billion budget – fewer than 40, the Rekenkamer estimated. But even to afford this reduced number, it must cut most other defense spending.
The latest round of cuts, reported Sept. 5, is worth €330 million, and will entail the sale of a logistics support ship which is still being built, the scrapping of an entire Army battalion and the mothballing of six or seven more F-16 fighters.

Yeah.  They sold their Logistics Support Ship, are going to mothball their F-16s and we're soon to see the Army Battalion go away.

Wouldn't those elements that are being sold away be more useful for coalition warfare than a few F-35s?  Additionally we have his view on the USAF, which was basically confirmed by the clown also known as the USAF Chief of Staff.

On current trends, the US Air Force one day will fly only F-35s, KC-46 tankers and the future Global Strike bomber, along with a few – by then elderly - F-22s. This will be a stunning loss of capability compared to the large and diversified combat fleet it operates today, but that is their choice, made by elected representatives and, indirectly, approved by voters. 

Yep, Captain America told the audience at the AFA Association that he told the US Army that he was scrapping the A-10 and that they weren't happy.

Awesome.

Many doubted that the USAF was serious about Close Air Support and this confirms it.  Sorry Elements of Power Blog, the truth is indicated by action, not words.

The Conventional Ground Forces now have two essential items on the to do list.  First they must get their artillery house in order.  Close Air Support is a skill set that has been abandoned by the air arms of our nation.  That means that mechanized, towed and rocket artillery has to fill in the gap.  We must adjust numbers and tactics to make up for the shortfall.  Additionally, the numbers just don't make sense.  By that I mean planning must account for the fact that attacks by enemy aircraft, cruise missiles etc...will have a better chance than ever of attacking our forces.  Air Defense Artillery must take a more prominent role in planning.

Expecting our air forces to deal with that threat is pure fantasy now.

Proactive planning to deal with the reality of air arms designed to fight only the air offense, deep strike, naval strike and strategic recon must happen now.

Giovanni told us as much almost 3 weeks ago. 

A website you should check out...

Just found out about this Reddit sub-site and you should check it out.   Its called Credible Defense and its an amalgamation of some of the major defense articles floating around the blogosphere.  Click here and let me know what you think.

The F-35, The A-10 & The US Army.

First a couple of articles that you might have missed. via The Wall Street Journal.

Gen. Bogdan didn't reveal a target unit price for the F-35 in 2019. "The price needs to come down, no matter what," he said.
His comments came as Lockheed said Tuesday that it was preparing for more international sales of the F-35 in the wake of an agreement to sell at least 37 of the jets to the Netherlands, which has budgeted €4.5 billion ($6 billion) for the deal.
Uncertainty about overseas sales and the eventual tally for U.S. services remains a challenge to efforts to lower costs by boosting production rates.
The Netherlands, which spent 15 years deciding on replacing its aging F-16 fighters, becomes the seventh overseas customer for the F-35, with its initial delivery expected in 2019. The Netherlands cited defense cooperation with Belgium as part of its reason for the buying the F-35, raising the prospect that its neighbor would join other potential customers such as Singapore in evaluating the jet.

The next article you should check out is here.  via Foreign Policy Blog...

 Hostage told Army leaders that, "in order to ensure the jet noise you hear over your heads in the future is friendly, I've got to pair the force down, and one of the things I think I have to give up is [the] A-10. While they were not happy, the accepted it."

How did the service that led operations in Iraq and Afghanistan suddenly become the budget bitch boy?

I don't mind being vulgar but this is ridiculous.  The Army is getting fucked every way possible and it isn't fighting back at all.  Yeah we have Air/Sea Battle now but when it was Air/Land Battle, the indication is that the Navy didn't suffer the way the Army is about to.

I called the USAF Chief of Staff a clown for wearing the Captain America mask at the association.  You know how I feel about Amos.  He's a criminal in uniform and he's done more to weaken the Marine Corps than anyone or any enemy in its history.  Greenert is playing a long game but that left the US Army Chief of Staff.

Now we know.  He's the Air Forces bitch.  He has no plan, no idea and no fight in him.  His service is on the verge of being eviscerated and he hasn't said word one.

In the end Soldiers are gonna pay the price.  Faith will be broken and the Army will be hollow.

Remember this though.  Wars aren't won unless a skinny, testosterone filled teenager that's been taught certain skills with a combat rifle, is capable of living and operating in terrible conditions and sees it all as fun stands on a piece of ground.

A super small Army facing a mechanized, high tech Chinese foe won't do it.  The Marines might win the battle but we need an effective Army to win the war.  We're about to lose that Army...and its a Marine that's telling you so.