The "NEW" Marine Corps via Terminal Lance.

The above pic is from Terminal Lance's website.  All I have to say is WHAT THE FUCK!  Holy Mother of God, are you shitting me!

And then I thought a second and realized...this is Amos' Marine Corps.  Rainbows, Bronies and Unicorns all around.

The Army schemes to get more AH-64's. Is this a bet against AF Close Air Support?

Thanks for the article Jonathan!

via DefenseNews.

WASHINGTON — US Army leaders are considering scrapping its entire fleet of Bell Helicopter OH-58 Kiowa Warrior helicopters, while pulling the National Guard’s Boeing AH-64 Apaches into the active-duty force to fill the scout helicopter role as the Army seeks to fulfill its longer-term requirement of a newly developed armed aerial scout, according to several Army and defense industry sources.
The plan also calls for giving active Black Hawk helicopters to the Guard, while taking half of the Guard’s Lakota fleet, using them as active-duty trainers and scrapping its Jet Rangers.
While a final decision has yet to be made, the industry sources had the impression that the deal was all but done.
The deal would be done in the interest of cutting costs and reducing the number of different helicopter types in the Army, but questions remain about the affordability of using the Apache to fill the scout role. Army leadership had already rejected the idea in the early 1990s in favor of the now-canceled Comanche, and expressed doubts about it in a 2011 analysis of alternatives (AoA) document.
The December 2011 AoA for the Armed Aerial Scout (AAS) program — which until last year was envisioned as the eventual replacement for the Kiowa — concluded that fielding the AH-64D Block III to the service’s armed reconnaissance squadrons to replace the Kiowa would be “at least 50 percent more expensive than the currently programmed [recon squadrons].”
The Army also concluded that the AH-64 requires “significantly more maintenance personnel than the other mixes analyzed.”
What’s more, a study conducted by the Logistics Management Institute recently estimated that in recent operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, if the Army used an Apache in the Kiowa scout role, it would have cost an additional $4 billion in fuel, maintenance and operating costs.
Still, “the Army is in a difficult position,” one defense industry source said. The Armed Aerial Scout AoA “said that the most affordable and capable option was Kiowa linked with the Shadow UAV. But the AoA also said that the most capable immediate solution is an Apache, so there’s two sides of this argument. So the Army really is making decisions around cost.”
“This is a budget-driven plan,” said Col. Frank Tate, the Army’s chief of aviation force development. “We are in a fiscally constrained environment, which requires us to make hard choices, but we need to also make smart choices. In developing this plan, everything was on the table.”

I don't know.  Yes, I'm guessing.

But I believe the US Army just told us what it thinks about the Air Force retiring the A-10.  I think the US Army just told us what it thinks about the F-35 providing close air support.  I think we're witnessing the first real indication of how the Army views the F-35.  They're not impressed, they believe that the USAF is out of the close air support business and they're making moves to do it themselves.

The JCS likes to put on a happy face when it comes to jointness.  They're all full of shit and they all know it.  The few members on the staff that have integrity will do what it takes to protect their servicemembers.

Right now that means that the Navy is hedging its bets on the F-35 with the superior F/A-18 Ultra Hornet and the US Army is shelving the good performing Kiowa with Apaches to get more firepower in the air. 

From Attack to Fighter. How have we done in the past?

Doug brought up a great point in responding to an earlier post.  How many times have we seen an Attack or Strike airplane turned into a fighter?  His point and I agree, is that historically its never been successful.  Lets take a walk back in time.

FB-111

This was the first joint fighter project.  No.  Let me clarify.  It was the first naval interceptor and planned air force fighter.  The USN tested and rejected it out of hand despite the strong protests of a diabolical SECDEF.  The USAF accepted it but it served as a light bomber (to use the old fashioned designation) rather than a fighter.  In the role for which it was designed it was a failure.

Tornado ADV

Tornado ADV.  Again what we have is a long range striker that was re-roled into an air defense variant.  It was a missile truck and most people acknowledge that it would have been dog meat in aerial combat against a Flanker or Fulcrum.  Meeting Bear Bombers at range?  Aces.  Meeting a force of Migs or Sukhois coming in to deliver pain?  Not so good.

Sea Harrier

Some smart ass will want to include the Sea Harrier on this list but again I push back and say that it was more an interceptor than an air superiority fighter.  It was designed for fleet defense...the kill the archer scenario.  How do I explain the planes performance in the Falklands?  Excellent pilots that were the equal of any on the planet, the Argentinians fighting at the very end of their planes range and poor leadership of Argentinian forces.  By the numbers the UK should not have won that war.  The Sea Harrier helped but it was the pilots and not the plane that won that war.


Honestly in the current era I can find no contemporary examples of a strike fighter being turned into an air superiority airplane.  Even the F-16, F-15, F-14 and F-18 all started out as air superiority platforms and then had their mission sets expanded to ground attack...not the other way around.

When the F-35 fails, it will be because they tried to take a truck and make it a Ferrari.  A truck is an awesome vehicle, but a race car it is not.

Neither is an attack/strike/deep interdiction airplane a fighter.

Japan's defense buildup is outlined in budget.

  Via Ashai.

Japan's new five-year Mid-Term Defense Program includes outlays for 17 new Osprey tiltrotor aircraft and three Global Hawk surveillance drones to help it respond to China's growing presence in the East China Sea.
The plan, revealed Dec. 13, starts in fiscal 2014. It is expected to be approved in a Cabinet meeting on Dec. 17 along with the National Defense Program Guidelines.
The government plans to use the new aircraft to heighten its capabilities to protect remote islands and to monitor China's activities in waters and airspace near the disputed Senkaku Islands.
It also said it will purchase 52 amphibious vehicles for the Ground Self-Defense Force for use in landing operations. The amphibious vehicles will be the same as those used by the U.S. Marine Corps. The plan also calls for reducing the number of GSDF tanks and replacing them with 99 eight-wheeled maneuver combat vehicles that have higher running capabilities than tanks.
Further spending will include 28 F-35 Lightning fighter jets for the Air Self-Defense Force, as well as four new early-warning aircraft and three new air-refueling and transportation aircraft.
Since the government put the Senkaku Islands under state ownership in September 2012, Chinese government's vessels have repeatedly intruded into Japanese territorial waters around the islands, heightening tensions between the two countries.
The Defense Ministry decided it was paramount to establish amphibious troops that will be able to take back islands in the event they are invaded and occupied.
With the introduction of the 17 Ospreys and 52 amphibious vehicles, the ministry believes the SDF will have landing capabilities comparable to those of the U.S. Marine Corps.

The Japanese are definitely gearing up to become the counterweight to Chinese aggression.

And they're putting their money where their mouth is.

Not just rhetoric on this, they're buying 52 AAVs, 17 MV-22s, Global Hawks, Early Warning Aircraft, Refuelers and finally 28 F-35s.

The number of F-35s should chill that planes supporters...its far fewer than the number that had been bandied about, but the rest of the buy says it all.

The Japanese are expecting a fight.  And they're going to be prepared.

Sidenote:  If the US Marine Corps had operated with a bit more speed, been alot more decisive then we could have a new standard of amphibious tractor on the books with our allies buying the same, therefore reducing everyones costs.  Whether that was the Marine Personnel Carrier, Amphibious Combat Vehicle or even a major upgrade of the AAV, its obvious that an opportunity was lost because of leaderships lust for the F-35.

New J-20 pics from the Chinese Military Review Blog.

It looks like we're following the CSBA's playbook on how to design the military for the future.  I disagree with their vision.  They gut the Army, emphasize the Air Force, make modifications to the Navy (along with cuts) and take the Marine Corps down in size too.

If we're going to follow that (flawed) strategy, then we need a better plane than the F-35.  The J-20 should scare the daylights out of airpower planners.  We need a redesigned and upgraded F-22 if we're going to maintain PARITY.

A deep strike/interdiction turned air superiority platform will not cut it.

Democrat revisionist history on why the background check bill failed.

I've been channel surfing all day.  There isn't a thing on and the Army-Navy game bores me.

Well I happened across MSNBC and heard a discussion on the "Disrupt" news show and they were lamenting the fact that a background check bill couldn't be passed.

They emphasized the background check bill over and over and how it was favored by a majority of the American people.

But they're forgetting something important.

When the President and his Congressional allies rolled out gun control it was with a view of reinstating the assault weapons ban, limits on the size of weapon magazines and a ATF database (I refuse to refer to them as BATFE...thats a re-branding to separate the "new" agency from its bad history...gun guys need to stop calling them BATFE too, it just helps their agenda).

It was another case of the Democrats over reaching.

If they had started and stopped with a background check bill then they would have carried the day.  But they didn't.  Feinstein and her crew got greedy and then got bit.

Long story short?  The gun control freaks are either lying or they're spinning like a fat lady at the gym.

China lands on the moon while we struggle to leave Earths' orbit.

via AP.

BEIJING (AP) -- China on Saturday successfully carried out the world's first soft landing of a space probe on the moon in nearly four decades, state media said, the next stage in an ambitious space program that aims to eventually put a Chinese astronaut on the moon.
The unmanned Chang'e 3 lander, named after a mythical Chinese goddess of the moon, touched down on Earth's nearest neighbor following a 12-minute landing process.
The probe carried a six-wheeled moon rover called "Yutu," or "Jade Rabbit," the goddess' pet. After landing Saturday evening on a fairly flat, Earth-facing part of the moon, the rover was slated to separate from the Chang'e eight hours later and embark on a three-month scientific exploration.
China's space program is an enormous source of pride for the country, the third to carry out a lunar soft landing - which does not damage the craft and the equipment it carries - after the United States and the former Soviet Union. The last one was by the Soviet Union in 1976.

Even the doubters have to be reaching a point where even they cannot deny the obvious.

However China is obtaining this tech, they're rapidly approaching a point of equality and are on a trajectory of superiority within a decade at best.

Every estimate of how long it would take them to achieve certain technological feats has been off.  Quite frankly the only thing that could slow their inevitable rise and challenge to US military superiority is a world wide economic slowdown.

Isn't that ironic.

National survival (such as it is) might depend on a global recession that is deep and will cause irreparable harm to individual families. We do live in interesting times.

3rd ID's Thunder Run. Mech Infantry's finest modern day tactical engagement.

  7514 - Thunder Run - US 3rd Infantry's Drive to Baghdad by eodchris1760

Name the most impressive battles involving mechanized infantry in the modern age.

The Battle of 73 Easting comes readily to mind, but in my opinion it ranks just behind the Thunder Run by the 3rd ID into Baghdad.

It was a classic...I don't even know how you would classify it...mechanized recon by fire? A mech infantry unit performing a mech cavalry mission?

Whatever you call it, I think it was one of the boldest military actions of the war.

Sidenote:  Speaking of 73 Eastings, required reading is found here.  General HR McMasters (yeah he was SERIOUSLY involved in that fight) has his "after action". He's at Benning now and leading the school house since it moved from Ft. Knox (I went to a couple of courses there and that place sucks...heard Benning isn't much better though).

Latest threat to your home? Key bumping.

via Modern Survival Blog.

Thought your front door lock was safe? Have you heard of key bumping?
A relatively new security problem is the threat of “bumping,” in which someone with a ‘bump key’ can open most locks that are commonly used in homes…

Lock bumping, also called key bumping or bump keying, is a lock picking technique used to unlock standard pin tumbler cylinders with a ‘bump key’.
The bumping method is one used by criminals to gain access with a bump key and is a growing problem globally. Bumping attacks are becoming widespread as bump keys can be used to unlock most standard residential cylinder locks which are not bump resistant.
Most home doors use standard cylinder locks…
…which are vulnerable to lock bumping.
The bumping method is non-destructive. When a bump key is used to break into a house there may be no signs of forced entry or damage to the lock.
What can you do about it?
First, awareness of the vulnerability is your first step to better security. Most people have never heard of this, and don’t realize how easy it is for burglars to get into your home.
Whenever you buy new locks…
Check to be sure that they are specifically designed to be BUMP-RESISTANT.

Video from CBS News regarding key-bumping

And the hits keep coming.  I wonder how long before we revert back to the 2x4 across the door to keep intruders out.

F-35. Reading between the lines.

Welsh (Air Force Chief of Staff) said now is not the time to cut the joint strike fighter program.
“I don't believe this is a good time to talk about truncating the buy -- capping it at some number,” he said. “I think that will put the program at risk of financially costing us even more.”

He put it out there.

Now is NOT the time to talk about truncating the buy?  Not the time to talk about capping the number?

The only people doing that are bloggers.  Aviation writers, analyst aren't talking about it.  Most think tanks are in bed with Lockheed Martin.

So what brought on this statement?

There is fear in Lockmart land, the Pentagon and in the shop stewards offices worldwide.  I love it.

Scorpion's First Flight Vid

F-35. Why no discussion of the carrier issue?

Thanks for the article Jonathan.

via Military Times. 

 What this means is that the Pentagon will probably not have to cut readiness substantially,” said Todd Harrison, a defense budget expert with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a think tank in Washington.
Yet that money is not eliminating the long-term threat of the spending caps known as sequestration, which may include big cuts to the size of the active-duty Army, a reduction in the size of the Navy’s carrier fleet and slashing the number of Air Force squadrons. Other proposals include closing military bases, reducing the military retirement package and canceling future weapons procurement.

Read the entire article here.

We've been round and round about how the F-35 is causing the Army and Marine Corps to slash procurement of the GCV, AMPV, MPC, ACV and maybe even delay upgrades to the AAV.

We've talked about the USAF retiring entire classes of aircraft like the A-10 and the KC-10 (our biggest aerial tanker) but nothing has been said about the carriers.

If we get down to 9 or 8 carriers from the current level then not only has the Navy been seriously downsized but the need for the current number of fighter wings goes away too.  And one other thing.  Has anyone noticed that of all the services, only the Navy hasn't stated what it will cut to protect the F-35?  The USMC cut the Marine Personnel Carrier, delayed the Amphibious Combat Vehicle and is looking at cutting the number of personnel.  The Army is doing the same and so is the Air Force.  The Navy hasn't put any cards on the table.  The only thing we've heard is that carriers might be cut...and that is talk by analyst, not the CNO.

This is worth keeping an eye on.

Riverines. What the hell is going on with them?

via PilotOnline.

A Navy chief petty officer is facing charges that he illegally detained five junior sailors for hours on end without access to food, water, a bathroom or legal representation. Last week, another sailor implicated in the case apparently took his own life.
The death was the third presumed suicide this year at Coastal Riverine Squadron 2, the Navy has confirmed - raising alarms about a unit also dealing with allegations of alcohol abuse and cover-ups of wrongdoing.
The Virginia Beach unit is now in the crosshairs of several investigations. The Naval Criminal Investigative Service is looking into the deaths; an inspector general examined the detentions; and the Navy Expeditionary Combat Command is conducting a command climate investigation.
"Certainly, over the last few months, we've had a series of events that have shaken the force and impacted the families," said Capt. Erich Diehl, commodore of Coastal Riverine Group 2, which oversees the squadron at Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek.

Read the entire article here. 

Lets see.  If this was a Marine or Army unit, Diehl would already be fired.  Poor Command Climate, failure to supervise/mentor junior leaders, failure to apply principles of proper discipline, failure to supervise proper discipline in his command...the list goes on.

But those are all issues that will be sorted out in due time.  What has me scratching my head is the detail that these Sailors were assigned to.

An Aviation Security Team?

Riverines?

WTF!!!!  It appears that a bit of over reach is going on here.  I'll hold fire until I can scrounge up more details but this is a peculiar mission for this unit in my opinion.

Chinese warships challenge USS Cowpens.

New age partnership pimps in the Pentagon are probably wetting themselves over this.

New age "cold warriors" probably are getting hardons and hoping that the Rising Dragon tries this shit with their ship.

Either way its another indication of China behaving badly.  Via Bill Gertz and the Free Beacon.

The guided missile cruiser USS Cowpens, which recently took part in disaster relief operations in the Philippines, was confronted by Chinese warships in the South China Sea near Beijing’s new aircraft carrier Liaoning, according to officials familiar with the incident.
“On December 5th, while lawfully operating in international waters in the South China Sea, USS Cowpens and a PLA Navy vessel had an encounter that required maneuvering to avoid a collision,” a Navy official said.
“This incident underscores the need to ensure the highest standards of professional seamanship, including communications between vessels, to mitigate the risk of an unintended incident or mishap.”
A State Department official said the U.S. government issued protests to China in both Washington and Beijing in both diplomatic and military channels.
The Cowpens was conducting surveillance of the Liaoning at the time. The carrier had recently sailed from the port of Qingdao on the northern Chinese coast into the South China Sea.

This is all classic cold war stuff.

I have to admit that its a bit clumsy to send a CG to monitor the Chinese aircraft carrier, but I get the distinct impression that there are some that want to "teach" the Chinese the rules of the road.  Its wasted effort though.  Asian cultures respect strength, and despise weakness.  Until we start operating with an understanding of their rules of the road we'll be playing catch up.

Read the entire article here.

Colonel Killebrew solves the Army Rapid Deployment/Pacific Tilt problem.

Thanks for the article Lee!

You ever have knowledge of certain systems but for reasons unknown you fail to apply that knowledge to current problems?

Colonel Killebrew took a look at the Army's issues with the tilt to the Pacific and basically "bitch slapped" us all.  He reminded me, and you, that this is another problem thats already been solved.  His entire article is a must read but a tidbit.

For deployment by air, the Army has long maintained the 82^nd Airborne Division and other parts of XVIII Airborne Corps to respond to trip-wire emergencies overseas.  The Corps, and particularly the 82^nd itself, are masters at using airlift to move combat-ready forces anywhere on little or no notice.  The 82^nd’s lift of a brigade task force from Fort Bragg to Saudi Arabia demonstrates the global reach of the Army-Air Force team.
Army units know less, though, about the other deployment muscles available.  In the 1980s, the formation of the Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force resulted in the purchase of 8 super-fast sealift ships (FSS), with sustained speeds in excess of 30 knots, for Army use.  (These were the ships that carried the 24^th’s spearheads to the Gulf, and in their subsequent service in the sea bridge they consistently “lapped” other, slower cargo ships.)  After Desert Storm, the Army, through Congress, successfully pressured the Navy to buy 19 Large, Medium-Speed, Roll-On, Roll-Off (LMSR) ships for Army use as well.  Eight went into maritime prepositioning at Diego Garcia, leaving eleven big ships split between the east and west coasts, ready to operate with standby crews on board, and a rate of advance (speed) of about 22 knots.  These are big ships; one LMSR can carry an entire U.S. Army Task Force, including 58 tanks, 48 other tracked vehicles, plus more than 900 trucks and other wheeled vehicles. So the Army has available a fleet of 19 fast cargo ships to carry heavy equipment – and since a normal merchant ship from the East Coast closes European ports in two weeks or less, the Mediterranean littoral should be about a week and a half steaming time.  So much for 45 days!

Uh wow.

No need to redesign the Army so it can move fast to hotspots. That issue has been addressed.  We don't need to design compromised vehicles to fit aircraft.  We can make vehicles that can accomplish the mission.

This is why legacy, tribal knowledge and experience is important.  The silly and uninformed design new solutions to old problems instead of making sure that its a problem in the first place.

It appears that for the US Army, Rapid Deployment of Medium and Heavy Brigades was done a couple of decades ago...they simply forgot.  Read the entire article here.

The Base Leg Blog.

Are you interested in the Pacific Region?  Do you want to keep up with breaking events?  Do you like nicely done aviation photography?

Then "The Base Leg Blog" is someone you should follow.  Oh and tell Mike I sent ya!

F-35. Singapore in no hurry to buy jets.

via Reuters

We're in no particular hurry, because our F-16s are still very operational, and they're due for upgrades. But it is a serious consideration," Eng Hen said.

Read it all here.

Another body blow for the program.  No new orders from Singapore.  No pushing down the cost curve.  Death spiral still in progress.

Scorpion Jet first flight pic.

A question for the AF Chief of Staff regarding Close Air Support.

The AF Chief of Staff's statement regarding close air support and his contention that "destroying the mass of an enemy’s air force (the second echelon, known to most as the reserve) saves the most lives on the ground and at sea" begs a question....luckily, one supplied by Paralus.

After you've destroyed the enemy's air forces, what do you plan on doing with that shiny Air Force of yours if the enemy doesn't surrender and continues to engage our forces on the ground? 

Good question.

My guess.

Have the Air Force equivalent of a LCpl wash and wax it. 

NOTE:  I used the F-35 as the image for this post to illustrate the obvious.  The A-10 is about to be retired early to pay for it, but will you put the F-35 in the weeds?  Will you do firepower demonstrations with it to stay within the rules of engagement?  Will pilots take a 100 Million Dollar plus plus fighter within anti-aircraft gun range to support troops on the ground?  The answer is obvious.  Some will.  They'll be putting their careers at risk, will damage their airplane, will save lives and will be drummed out of the AF because they did what their leadership refused to do.  Those Airmen will keep faith with the ground forces and let it all hang out to help.  If leaders select those like them for advancement (which is true) then I would expect those type of Airmen (fly guys) to be fewer and fewer.

LAV-300 6x6

The LAV-300 6x6 series of amphibious armored vehicles was developed by Cadillac-Gage (now Textron Marine and Land Systems) as a private venture to complement their V-150 Commando 4x4 series. Though not in use by the US military, it is offered to foreign countries. Twelve each of both variants were supplied to the Philippine Marines. The Corps made full use of the LAV-300, using these vehicles to great advantage in the campaigns against the MILF in Kauswagan and the clearing of the Narciso Ramos Highway, among many recent battles.