Defense One Summit Live!

A little birdy landed on my window sill and told me I needed to keep one eye on the Defense One Summit today.  You can catch it live here (they're live streaming it) but below is a quick "run down" of events/topics...

Agenda
7:15-8:00 AM: Registration and networking
8:00-8:40 AM: Breakfast Sessions
Session 1: The Potential and Peril of the Future Robot Army
A discussion on the advantages, pitfalls and ethical implications of autonomous systems and artificial intelligence in modern warfare.
Speakers:
- Ramez Naam, Futurist, Computer Scientist, Author and Futurist, Singularity University
- Michael Horowitz, Associate Professor, Political Science, University of Pennsylvania
Moderator: Patrick Tucker, Technology Editor, Defense One
Session 2: CEO Breakfast:Defense Industry CEO’s talk about how defense businesses are evolving for the new era of national security.
Speakers:
- William “Bill” Lynn III, CEO, Finmeccanica North America andDRS Technologies, Inc.
- Ellen Lord, President and CEO, Textron Systems
Moderator: Marcus Weisgerber, Global Business Reporter, Defense One
9:00-9:30 AM: The Future of the U.S. NavyRethinking the Navy’s priorities—and its people—for the age of terrorism and global conflict.
Speaker: Chief of Naval Personnel Vice Adm. William Moran
Moderator: Stephanie Gaskell, Executive Editor, Defense One
9:30-10:00 AM: Rethinking the Army of the FutureHow Russia, ISIS and money changes the U.S. defense budget, force structure and role of conventional ground forces.
Speaker: U.S. Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray OdiernoModerator: Tom Bowman, Pentagon Reporter, NPR
10:00 AM-10:30 AM: War Powers in the Age of Terrorism
Speakers:
- Senator Tim Kaine, D-Va.- Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif.Moderator: Molly O’Toole, Politics Reporter, Defense One.
10:35-11:20 AM: Spotlight Sessions
11:20-12:05 PM: Lunch Keynote
Speaker: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin Dempsey12:05-12:50 PM: On the Purpose of the Military
A conversation with the chairman about Iraq, today’s conflict and how the U.S. military should be used to meet America’s national security commitments.
Speaker: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin DempseyModerator: Kevin Baron, Executive Editor, Defense One
12:50-1:20 PM: Dessert and Networking/Solutions Lab
1:20-2:05 PM: Spotlight Sessions
2:05-2:45 PM: Keeping America SafeA discussion on intelligence, cyber spying and counterterrorism.
Speaker: Michael Vickers, Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence
Moderator: Gordon Lubold, Senior Military Reporter/Editor, Defense One
2:45-3:15 PM: Conflict, Military Intervention and International InstitutionsSpeaker: Samantha Power, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations
Moderator: Gayle Tzemach Lemmon, Senior Fellow, Council on Foreign Relations and Author of The Dressmaker of Khair Khana
3:15-3:30 PM: Networking Break
3:30-4:00 PM: Cyberwarfare Defense
A discussion on the future of military robotics, defending the Internet of Things from cyberwar and looking beyond the electronics horizon for modern warfare.
Speaker: Arati Prabhakar, Director, Defense Advanced Projects Research Agency
Moderator: Patrick Tucker, Technology Editor, Defense One
4:00-4:30 PM: The Offset Strategy
Robert Work, Deputy Secretary of Defense, looks at how the U.S.will retain its technological edge in the coming decades.
Speaker: Robert Work, Deputy Secretary of Defense
Moderator: Marcus Weisgerber, Global Business Reporter
4:30-4:40 PM: Closing Remarks
Send us a tweet @DefenseOne if you have any questions during the day.

I'll be tuning in to see what Work has to say.  The guy is going to be a player and he made a comment about forward deployed versus surge forces that many ignored but I believe will dramatically affect current Marine Corps operations...specifically the SPMAGTF-CR.  More on that later.  If I have time I'll tune into what Dempsey is saying but all the hope I had for his tenure has dissipated.  He is simply another politician in uniform.  On second thought, I think I'll be skipping his talks.

Did you notice anything?

The Marine Corps and USAF are not represented in this discussion.  I thought that perhaps the Navy would be pinch hitting for us but the speaker seems to be focused on Navy centric topics.  Why the USMC and USAF would either not be invited or choose not to participate is puzzling.  I don't know if it means anything but I'll be chewing on that one for a bit.

UK’s Rapid Reaction Force Challenger II Tanks on exercise...

Reserves from The Royal Wessex Yeomanry (RWxY) have been demonstrating their growing capability to deliver support to the UK’s Rapid Reaction Force, by taking part in a live firing exercise on the Lulworth Ranges in Dorset.  The Challenger 2 Main Battle Tanks have been manned entirely by Reserve crews from squadrons based in Dorset, Devon, Wiltshire and Gloucestershire. The troops took part in a live firing exercise, testing their abilities and ensuring they have the skills required to deploy as part of the UK’s Rapid Reaction Force.  To the soldiers, who have been training using gunnery simulators, at Bovington or in Donnington, it was an inspiring experience and the culmination of months of hard work.  Commanding Officer Lt Col Chris McGregor said: “We can train in simulated environments but there is nothing better for a soldier than getting in the equipment that they are going to have to use in conflict, potentially.  "It really gives people an incentive to do all of the long and arduous training that is required to reach the standards needed to fire a vehicle like this.”

Simple question.

If you're using Reserves for your Rapid Deployment Force, how rapid can it be?  Does the British Army use only full time reserves?  If not then the force is a joke.  I wonder if Think Defence Blog can clear up my confusion.  More to come.

General Dynamics and HQMC have some explaining to do!

Forgive me people.  I got to beat this drum again.

Remember the video I posted yesterday titled ACV Ground Modernization?  One part of it has me punching walls.  When talking about the reason for the cancellation of the EFV they said it was because of "trade-off" that were unacceptable.

But then we have Amos' exit "story" in the Marine Corps Times and we have the following...

Since then, Amos has dedicated significant time overseeing the Corps’ replacement program, the Amphibious Combat Vehicle. “Before I leave 3½ years from now, we’ll have a program of record, we’ll have steel, it will be a vehicle and I’ll be able to drive that,” Amos told a congressional panel in 2011.
The ACV has had its share of challenges as well, including late-in-the game shifts from plans for a high-speed vehicle to a low-speed one, from a uniform acquisition process to a phased approach, and from tracks to wheels. In an essay published by Marine Corps Times earlier this year, two retired officers also raised concerns about the ACV’s potential bulkiness and its ability to conduct sea-based assaults from distances of up to 100 miles.
But Amos is close to making good on his word. At a June think tank event in Washington, he said at least four manufacturers are producing off-the-shelf amphibious vehicles as a near-term solution for the Corps. To date, he said at the time, he had ridden in all four.
Here too, Amos has had to contend with circumstances beyond his control in managing the Marine Corps. The retired general suggested the technology for high-speed amphibious vehicles simply isn’t well enough developed yet, forcing Amos to move in other directions. Loren Thompson, chief operating officer for the Lexington Institute think tank, said budget constraints had a vote in the process.
“The failure to make progress on a new amphibious tractor must be a source of great frustration” for Amos, Thompson said. “The service has needed a replacement of the [amphibious assault vehicle] for decades, and Amos made funding of that replacement a top priority. But budget caps and technology constraints derailed his plans.”

My problem with General Dynamics AND Headquarters Marine Corps is simple and goes to visibility on this program.

Scuttlebutt has it that GD offered the Marine Corps a non-planing version of the EFV.  Word also has it that the USMC turned it down.

Ok.  That was then.  This is now.

The EFV was tested against IEDs.  The EFV was able to carry a Marine Rifle Squad.  The EFV would be a one for one instead of a two for one replacement for the AAV...unlike any of the Marine Personnel Candidates.

So why didn't the Marine Corps jump all over GD's offer?  Why isn't GD offering us a bargain basement price to get in this vehicle now?  What gives?

Sidenote:  Did you catch all the promises and money that is being promised toward various programs in this video?  This is what I caught and I might have missed a few...

1.  A LCU Replacement.
2.  A new LCAC.
3.  Modifications to the JHSV.
4.  Continued study on a high speed ACV.
5.  Further upgrades of the MPC.
6.  Upgrades of the AAV.
7.  Start date by 2019.

I don't see how this is possible.  Defense experts and government officials are already stating publicly that they don't see sequestration ending before 2016.  Additionally the USMC is still faced with an F-35 IOC of 2015 and unless that is changed then there is NO money left.  This needs repeating.  THE BUDGET TRAIN WRECK IS HERE.  THERE IS NOT ENOUGH MONEY TO FULLY RECAPITALIZE LEGACY MUCH LESS DEVELOP AND FIELD NEW VEHICLES.  Too much time was wasted.  Opportunities were squandered.  A bias toward the F-35 has damaged the USMC's ability to adjust to current fiscal reality.  We're screwed and if you watch the video again you can see "I hope they believe this bullshit" flashing in the eyes of every speaker.

US hostage review is about public reaction & women in combat.

First check this out from the Times (read the entire article)...

The Obama administration confirmed on Tuesday that it was reviewing its policy on securing the release of United States citizens taken hostage abroad, but that the ban on paying ransom would not change.
Word of the review, disclosed by an under secretary of defense in a letter to a Republican lawmaker, came as the administration was grappling with a series of beheadings of American captives by the Islamic State militant group, which posted a video Sunday announcing the third such killing.
Some family members of hostages have criticized what they see as an unacceptable refusal by the administration to grant concessions, including ransom payments, to hostage-takers.
Unlike European governments, which have paid many millions of dollars in ransom to win the release of citizens held by the Islamic State or other militant groups, the United States has said it will never pay money to rescue its citizens. It has also privately pressed other governments not to pay.

This is being sold as a simple review of hostage policy but make no mistake about it.

The ground is being laid to face two troubling issues that will smack the American public (the uninformed, not you guys) right between the eyes.  First up is the fact that the last remaining US hostage is a female.  We haven't seen any pictures of her.  We don't know her name but is she next in the cue for those ignorant, inhuman bastards that form ISIS.

When ISIS publishes the video of her being beheaded...and lets hope that's all the post...the US public will go ape.  It wouldn't surprise me to see certain liberal groups calling for intensified bombing and for troops to be put on the ground.

But another issue is lurking in the background.  Women in combat.

I despise the Obama administration for being so "forward" looking that they're already laying the ground to fight off critics when the uninformed finally see the reality of the Middle East via one of America's daughters having her head sawed off.  But I hate them even more for thinking that "equality" for the sake of equality should apply to combat that they're pushing other daughters of this nation into.

America has been sleep walking for the entire term of the Obama Administration's time in office.  Fairy dust has been spread and silliness has been the primary concern, not real issues facing our nation.  Its a shame that some young woman will have to die to wake up the vast majority of us.

RoK Marine AAV Ops.

This is the Chinese radar that they claim can detect the F-22.

All pics via Aereo.jor.br

A tidbit from Aereo.jor.br...

A new Chinese radar, presented at the International Exhibition of Aviation and Aerospace China, which ended on Sunday in Zhuhai, can locate the supposedly undetectable F-22 fighter jets from the United States, said a Taiwanese specialist.
Su Guan-Chiun, the Taiwanese military journal International Defence editor, said in an article published today that the available information indicates that the new radar can detect stealth fifth-generation American fighters such as the F-22.
The new radar systems developed by China will help to resist the growing use of stealth aircraft from other countries and allow the Asian power to strengthen its defenses.

I don't know.

I'll wait to see what the boys over at Air Power Australia have to say about it.  Oh and spare me.  They have the best online documentation of Chinese threat aircraft, vehicles and radar I've seen on the internet.  Yeah.  I'll get their opinion and see if this is boasting or a real possibility.

A Marine Corps Recruiter let one get away...via Marine Historical Society.

This is just filled with awesomeness....and a few less stripes for the person who did this!

ACV Ground Modernization Video

My take on this vid?

The Marine Corps is trying to damp down the fire that's brewing about the ACV/AAV/MPC programs.

Did you notice that all these programs are due to start in 2019-2020?  They're looking for breathing space to get the F-35/CH-53K/MV-22 buys completed.  The procurement trainwreck has us by the short hairs and this is simply propaganda to tell everyone that they've worked the problem, have a
solution, and to shut the fuck up.

HQMC would be a no-go if this was a scored event.  Unfortunately this isn't an exercise and Marines will die because of massive vacillation on the part of leadership.  Remember the old missive....  Doing nothing is still doing something.  HQMC has done nothing and Marines will pay for it.

F-35 & F-22 combine capabilities in operational integration training mission

AMX-13 Upgraded with 105mm Cannon & Improved Armor.

Many thanks to Joe for finding this pic!  

This tank never should have gone out of service!  The US Army is looking for "airborne armor" and this would have filled that role perfectly!  If we can't innovate maybe its time to take a look at modernizing Sheridans in storage to a 21st century level.

Special Note to World of Tanks!  Buff the damn T69!  The M41 is a tier 7 and has better specs, the AMX in the lower tiers have better specs etc...you guys nerfed the only real threat in the USA line when you castrated the T57 and now even the pathetic AMX 50 is more powerful!  Enough with the anti-US bias!

RoK Army 11th Mechanized Infantry Division river crossing ops.

NOTE:  Interesting.  A reader stated that the Koreans would simple use the MBT's deep fording kits along with the strangely amphibious K21 to avoid having to conduct bridging operations across rivers.  It appears he was mistaken.

Chinese Military Cargo Aircraft via Chinese Military Review Blog.

All pics from Chinese Military Review Blog.  

Y-20.

JL-600.

Y-30.

Note:  Of all these aircraft the one that stirs my imagination and concerns me the most is the JL-600.  A quick blast from the past.  The USMC experimented and by all indications actually used the R3Y Tradewind as part of its "Rapid Deployment Force" during the 1950's and up until the Vietnam War.  Consider it an early form of the USMC's Air Contingency MAGTF (its a shame that the SPMAGTF-CR's went Hollywood instead of simply reinforcing an existing concept).  If China has plans to do the same, and can integrate its air and sea assault forces, then the US/Japan have already lost the race to reinforce islands in the Pacific.  Let's hope they're pure rescue and anti-sub planes.

1st Tanks conducts Mechanized Assault Course...Photos by Lance Cpl. John Baker

Sidenote:  I wonder how many more years tanks has as a dedicated part of the USMC.  I have no crystal ball but everything points to the Marine Corps giving up tanks in the next 10 years...they'll call it "enhancing" the Corps expeditionary capability.  The reality will be something different.  The US Army is currently operating the M1A2 TUSK (Tank Urban Survivability Kit) and they're supposedly looking to upgrade those tanks to the M1A3 standard soon.  Meanwhile the Corps still uses M1A1 Abrams.  The choice will be stark.  Either pay extra to keep a legacy vehicle going that is less and less compatible with the US Army standard OR dip into the budget to upgrade to the M1A2 Tusk..and later M1A3, while buying F-35's, MV-22's, CH-53K's, JLTV's, replacement MTVR's AND some type of ACV/MPC/AAV replacement.  Marine Tanks are already dead.  They just haven't been told.  

New E-Mail Address!

Hey all!  Just a heads up that I dumped the Yahoo E-mail (too, too, too many problems) and I've created a new Gmail addy.  The legacy (like how I used Pentagon speak?) address will be up for 15 days while I migrate to the new account.  So drum roll....you can now reach me at....

Talk.to.Snafu@gmail.com

Thanks!

Blast from the past...Proposed AAV Upgrades

Below is a post that I did back in Sept 2012.  I had become alarmed by the delays with the ACV/MPC and this was my proposal to make the AAV relevant again.  Are you fucking listening HQMC???  Enough game playing, its the AAV forever so lets get this done.

My frankenstien AAV upgrade...

The MTU powerpack for the PUMA infantry fighting vehicle excels with its outstanding power-to-weight ratio and extremely compact design. Together with the 10V 890 engine, the powerpack includes a Renk 6-speed transmission unit, the starter-generator and the air cooling and filtering plant.

1. MTU Powerpack....I want something compact and powerful. If you can give me a diesel engine that puts out 1500 horsepower then we're cooking. I'll accept a little less if I have to but I want max power in a compact package. MTU has the track record of providing this kind of powerplant. Just to show that I have some international flavor I'll even compromise and take the powerplant from the PUMA IFV..yeah its only a little over 1000 horsepower but I'll take it. No! I want it in my redone AAV.
Elbit 30mm RWS (foldable trialed on the AAV)

2. Firepower. This one is tricky. It depends.... Do we want our Track Commanders fighting heads down? Are we going to designate a crewman as gunner so we can have a RWS...if we stick with the MK44 turret will it take up too much room on the AAV? Will a RWS be too tall? Are foldable options good enough? It really doesn't matter what they decide as long as its 30mm or bigger. I despise the RAFAEL mount but it does have the option to mount anti-tank missiles along with the gun. Leaning toward the ELBIT option as its already been trialed on the AAV.

CV-90 Armadillo sporting rubber tracks.

3. Tracks. I don't know how this one is gonna go over. I believe at one time the tracks were used to help with self righting. We can find another way to accomplish that mission but its time to switch to rubber tracks. I admittedly don't know as much about them as I should and this one might be subject to getting dumped from the list...for instance can you shorten the track and run with it if you sustain damage with rubber like you can with steel? Do they last as long? Are they cost effective? If they are then its time to get on the rubber bandwagon. Besides BAE has already done this the CV90 and SEP.

4. Trophy or some other anti-missile system. Detractors like to talk about AAVs never being used in an amphibious assault. Even if they're not RPG's and Anti-Tank missiles dot the landscape. How about we build in the latest anti-missile defense onto the vehicle instead of questionable add-on armor that won't do the job against the latest threats and add unnecessary weight? I have no idea of what works and what doesn't but its a thought.

5. More to come. The goal is to upgrade the AAV to such an extent that if Congress goes crazy (and they will) and money dries up, that we can have a vehicle that is good enough to serve another 20 years if need be. Upgraded power, transmission, suspension, firepower, protection and ride should help get us more than halfway there. I have no faith that the ACV will be developed on schedule and am beginning to wonder about the Marine Personnel Carrier Program. The budget crunch is coming and their is no sense of urgency when it comes to programs except for the F-35 and MV-22. This is unsat. TIme for the groundside to get what it can while it can.

1st Cav training in Lithuania....photo by Staff Sgt. Keith Anderson

1st Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division Soldiers dismount a M2/M3 Bradley Fighting Vehicle and advance on a target as dismounted Hungarian soldiers and soldiers in Hungarian BTR-80 Armored Personnel Carriers lay suppressive fire during a NATO demonstration at the closing ceremony of Iron Sword 2014 in Pabrade, Lithuania, Nov. 13.

Israel cutting its F-35 order.

via YNETnews.

While declining to go into detail about the closed-door discussions, Steinitz cited misgivings about whether the F-35's range, payload and manoeuvrability would suit Israel's needs. The Israelis are also husbanding a defense budget which, though buoyed by some $3 billion in annual US grants, faces cuts.
Other concerns include the fact the jet's electronic systems are American-made, and Israel will not be able to equip it with Israeli-made systems. This would also have ramifications on exports of the Israeli Military Industry to foreign air forces.
The Americans can also supervise the use made of the plane, which led Britain to threaten to cancel its purchase.
The decision is a blow to the security establishment and to the Air Force. According to ministers who took part in the discussions, this is the first time in years the ministerial committee refuses to automatically approve a defense purchase request.
The ministers were angry that the defense establishment announced the purchase as a "done deal."

I've been getting bombed with the news that the F-35 was going to be bought in fewer numbers than the Israeli Air Force wanted.

Considering the way that the Obama Administration has acted toward the Israeli State...the fact that the Israeli Prime Minister would probably like to toss another brick in the window of the administration...I initially blew this off to politics.

Then I re-read the article.

"...Misgivings about whether the F-35's range, payload and manoeuverability would suit Israel's needs..." 

That is a damning indictment of the F-35.

Additionally though it adds to the confusion surrounding the program.  If this is how they really feel about the airplane then what is prompting them to purchase any of them?

My guess?  Politics.  Supposed ties to the US military and intel communities.  And probably a desire to get their hands on one so that they can do an accurate assessment of capabilities that will be in the hands of Turkey and possibly other Muslim nations in the region.

So how good is the Chinese VT-4 Main Battle Tank?

Check this out via EnglishPeople'sDaily.

According to Western military publications, the VT-4 is equipped with an electronic-controlled diesel engine with 1,200 horsepower, giving the tank a cruise speed of 68 kilo-meters per hour. Its main gun is a 125-mm smoothbore that can fire various shells,including a kinetic energy penetrator and high explosive anti-tank warhead. In addition, itcan also fire anti-tank missiles with a maximum range of 5,000meters.
"It has an advanced fire-control system, a new-type active protection system and a state-of-the-art fully automatic transmission device," he said. "In addition, the inter-unitnetwork connects commanders of tanks and armored vehicles under a combat group,enabling them to share battlefield data in real time."
The VT-4 can compete with any first-class tank used by Western militaries such as theUnited States' M1A2 Abrams and Germany's Leopard 2A6, Liu said, adding that Russia'sT-90 is no match for the Chinese tank in terms of technology.

This is the first time that I'm hearing good news coming out of the Chinese govt/military.

If the tank actually can compete with the M1A2 Abrams and Leopard 2A6 then thats one thing...but I doubt it.  And that's where the good news comes in.  We're seeing the first hint of hubris in Chinese pronouncements.

Arrogance makes you lazy.  You don't work as hard.  I look forward to an arrogant China.  They'll be easier to bloody up properly if they believe their propagandist.

JMSDF DDH 182 ... pics by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Patrick Dionne

The Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force (JMSDF) helicopter destroyer JDS Ise (DDH 182), foreground, and the JMSDF destroyer Akizuki (DD 115) participate in a photo exercise with the amphibious dock landing ship USS Germantown (LSD 42) for exercise Keen Sword. Exercise Keen Sword is a bilateral field training exercise held biennially since 1986. The exercise is designed to increase the interoperability of U.S. Forces and the JSDF to effectively and mutually provide for the defense of Japan, or respond to a regional crisis or contingency situation in the Asia-Pacific region. Germantown is part of the Peleliu Amphibious Ready Group (#PELARG14), commanded by Capt. Heidi Agle, and is conducting joint forces exercises in the U.S. 7th Fleet area of responsibility. 

Hmm.  No wonder the Chinese are freaking out about this helicopter carrier.  Its much larger than I thought and looks to be approaching the size of our LHD's.  Evolutionary development would indicate that the Japanese are just a few years away from finally getting a real deal, 100% aircraft carrier...if their economy doesn't implode first that is!

Forcible Entry. Time to get real across all the services...

This has been bugging me for awhile now.  The only service that talks forcible entry is the Marine Corps.  The US Army has "returned" to its roots but only in a limited way.  Don't understand what I'm getting at?  Ok, then follow along.

Amphibious Assault.

I wasn't a fan of the former Commandant, but one thing he did do right is keep his eyes and by extension the eyes of the Marine Corps squarely on forcible entry.  The debate has been heated, I've absolutely loathed his ideas of becoming a "tilt rotor" biased force but at least the discussion and the THINKING was taking place.  I'm of the opinion that we will have to do it the old fashioned way.  Carriers, USAF Bombers, 82nd parachuting in waiting for us to link up with them before they're over run, a full scale Marine Expeditionary Brigade running the whole thing and a Regiment sized Landing Team to get the job done before follow on Stryker Brigades land to exploit the initial assault.

Yeah its rolling back enemy defenses, feints to draw off enemy defense and a whole lot of naval gunnery pounding the enemy just for fun but its workable.  It can be done.  It will be messy but forcible entry is never pretty.

Airborne Assault.

Not real solid on the concept of operations for an Airborne Assault except for what I've read and picked up in a few short conversations with Para-Troopers on how they apply their skill set.  From what I gather this is risky beyond belief.  You send a Division Ready Company, Brigade or higher into bad guy land and then expect this lightly armed force to hold a set piece of ground (or create havoc) behind enemy lines until they're linked up with.  But in discussing forcible entry we also have to remember the insertion method.  You're flying C-130's into a hostile area (and if we're treating them like we treat USMC amphibious ops) that's against a moderate to high tech force...which means that they will be facing S-300/400/500's on the run in to the drop zone.  They'll be facing enemy fighter planes.  If by the Grace of God they make it to the drop zone then they'll immediately be faced with linking up with their comrades all while fighting off mechanized infantry or even combined arms task forces that play it smart and simply call in artillery strikes on their positions.  It can be made to work but is much more risky than any amphibious operation, will be operating farther away from supporting forces, will require the dedication of probably the entire remaining USAF to stay supplied and will desperately need those much maligned Stryker Brigades to take the governors off their vehicles and zoom in to help out.

Heliborne Assault.

This form gives me the jitters.  I can see Amphibious and Airborne but for some reason the Joint Chief's list this a one of the three forms.  I'm not sure and I'm not sold on it.  Never forget the mauling that our Apache's got in an assault they carried out against a mechanized division.  Small arms chewed them up.  But before I go on, let me state clearly that I've never discussed how the 101st would conduct a forcible entry operation.  I've never even read a scenario that would make it a viable option.  Quite honestly in my opinion the 101st would be better served to revert back to an Airborne outfit, farm out its helicopters to the rest of the Army and relieve some of the pressure on the 82nd.

Conclusion.

Its easy to toss stones at the USMC when it comes to the forcible entry mission, but lets be honest here.  Currently the USMC is really the ONLY game in town when it comes to getting into bad guy land when the bad guy doesn't want you there and they're not adjacent to a country that will let you stage.

I doubt very seriously if the JCS will ever get serious about the forcible entry mission but if we're going to be real then we have to acknowledge that at least the USMC is taking the role seriously.