Singapore getting cold feet on the F-35.

via Bloomberg.

Singapore has put on hold a decision to buy as many as 12 of Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-35 jets, according to information from the Pentagon’s program office.
The island nation’s permanent secretary of defense development informed the U.S. in mid-June that it was delaying final steps toward purchasing four of the fighters by about 2022, with an option to buy eight more, according to the information presented to Pentagon officials last month as part of their regular reviews of the costliest weapons program.
While Singapore gave no indication of when it might revive efforts to buy the F-35, the U.S. continues to encourage the Asian city-state to buy the fighter. “We welcome Singapore’s interest in purchasing the F-35 aircraft,” President Barack Obama said in opening remarks at a White House press conference last week with Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

The Singaporeans aren't fools.  They won't buy an airplane that doesn't work and this is an indication that they don't believe it will work....even in 2022.

Those Chinese islands are gonna be a serious military problem...

Note.  All pics are from CSIS (here).

Sorry sports fans but this thing is almost a done deal.  Once the Chinese put up there version of a SOSUS field then we no longer have any advantage that we can count on to contain them in the Pacific.

Over a decade of warfare in the Middle East and the idea that it would last for generations has left us unprepared for the big fight in the Pacific.  Additionally we allowed greedy corporations to sell their souls and our national security so that they could increase profit margins by way of dual use technology.

We created the monster and the dragon looks ready to strike.  The A2/AD complex is almost complete.  These islands along with their carriers, long range anti-ship missiles, aircraft, fast attack boats and ballistic anti-ship missiles mean they've achieved perfect victory.  They are close to winning before the war even starts.

About the AAV Survivability Upgrade ....

Remember the rollout of the AAV survivability upgrade by SAIC?  New flotation armor (I think) added to new blast seats, increased horsepower...it didn't go as far as I wanted but it was better than what we had.

What had me scratching my head was the appendage on the back of the thing.  What was that?  Then it hit me when I was looking at the photos.  It wasn't venting for an auxiliary power unit...it was freaking racks for jerry cans!

I don't know whether I should be shocked that they would engineer such a solution to carry water or amazed.  Whether you love it or hate it, its still quite interesting...oh and it should keep the water a bit cooler too!

Vietnam looking to upgun its Marines Corps...

via ASEANmildef

TASS news agency, citing sources from the Russian defense industry said, Vietnam is likely to order a batch of BMP-3F armored vehicles to strengthen the Navy reviews.
Specifically, the newspaper wrote, "the Navy beat Vietnam is facing many difficulties due to lack of amphibious armored vehicles can support modern credible firepower amphibious operations.

At the end of July, they have conducted an amphibious maneuvers invade the island, including the mobilization of means such as light tanks PT-76B, armored vehicles carrying military BTR-60PB wheel, they are transported by 2 lander rose project 771 (NATO designation Polnochny layer).At the end of July, they have conducted an amphibious maneuvers invade the island, including the mobilization of means such as light tanks PT-76B, armored vehicles carrying military BTR-60PB wheel, they are transported by 2 lander rose project 771 (NATO designation Polnochny layer).These are already very outdated weaponry, so in the event of a real war, Vietnam is difficult to win over the enemy, "the source said.These are already very outdated weaponry, so in the event of a real war, Vietnam is difficult to win over the enemy, "the source said.Expert commentary added: "If the Hanoi fight a specific army, the naval task force will be presented before they defeated high risk.PT-76B tanks are not strong enough to destroy infantry fighting vehicle middle class, the main tank and other technical equipment of the enemy. I suppose they will not have much chance to recapture an island in real combat environment. "However, Hanoi has considered the possibility of buying a plot of amphibious armored vehicle modernization. We have proposed two options for Vietnam as infantry fighting vehicle BMP-3F (naval version) and self-propelled antitank gun 2S25. Navy reviews of Vietnam have expressed their interest to both vehicles on.

Two things.  First. It irks me to no end that our diplomats and military planners seem convinced that the alliances that they're working so hard to build will always remain.  Alliances shift...so do interests.  Just because its in a certain country's interest to be seen as moving closer to the US today DOES NOT mean that it will always.  This is especially true in Asia.  You're dealing with the land of practicality...if the US is seen as the weak horse then they'll drop us like a bad habit.

Second.  Moves like this one has me shouting at the rooftops about how wedded the USMC is to the Company Landing Team concept.  We are disbanding our premier combined arms team concept to chase waterfalls while the rest of the world is trying to duplicate what we're throwing away.

The futurists in the Strategic Initiatives Group are getting it wrong.

Canadian helicopters at Camp Pendleton (pics)

Is Airborne Assault still viable as a forcible entry option?

Tim, a reader of the blog found this tidbit...

"Moving Airborne Forces with Strategic Airlift
United States Army airborne forces, namely the 82nd Airborne Division, require a considerable amount of airlift to deploy. The large quantity of vehicles and the space they require in aircraft is the primary reason. The Logistics Handbook for Strategic Mobility Planning contains two models for estimated strategic airlift to deploy the unit. A mix of C-141s and C-17s would require 1,010 C-141s and another seve nty-nine C-17s. This quantity would move the equipment and 4,430 of the paratroopers. An additional 8,719 paratroopers would still require transportation. A total of 1,009 C-141s and forty-seven C-5s move the unit’s equipment and 4,516 paratroopers, leaving another 8,633 to deploy. This is a huge amount of airlift, mostly because of the bulk of
wheeled vehicles.29"

The above passage is from a paper written by then Major Delancey while at the Army Staff College.  It reads like a primer on the MRZR (at the time he was partial to the Flyer ITV) but the questions he raises about the amount of lift required to get one Airborne Brigade Combat Team to conduct forcible entry operations bears study.

The upshot?

Even with the 82nd moving to lighter vehicles the number of aircraft required to move them is staggering.  We already know that except under ideal conditions the 101st is NOT a credible forcible entry option.

Can the same be said of the 82nd?  Is Airborne Assault still viable as a forcible entry option?

Army Special Operations has a dim view of the Marine Corps..via War is Boring.

via War is Boring.

“Elitism,” was how Research Planning described the Marines. “The USMC considers itself to be superior, both individually and institutionally, to the other services and the Army in particular.”

And this.

According to the reference guide, Marines were unlikely to accept the idea that Army commandos could provide skills the Corps didn’t already possess.
“SF soldiers working with USMC elements should be aware that the Marines are likely to genuinely feel that the SF and SOF communities possess no capability not resident in the Corps.”
An appendix in the manual provides descriptions of other offices in the Pentagon, elements of the Department of State and other segments of the U.S. government. However, it doesn’t offer any descriptions of these groups’ internal culture or suggestions on how to interact with their employees.

Interesting.  Very interesting.  Amos practically put the Marine Corps on its knees looking to pleasure any SOCOM unit that came its way and this is the result?

The Marine Corps is posting SOCOM Liaison Units attached to our MEU's and this is their viewpoint?

Arrogance, your name is Army Special Operations.

F-35 propaganda disguised as a news article.

via National Interest.

Air Force Gen. Herbert “Hawk” Carlisle, commander of Air Combat Command, this week declared the F-35A fighter jet ready for combat. While many pundits and politicians have questioned the worth of this jet, the only people who know the ground truth are the pilots themselves.
A total of 174 U.S. pilots currently have been trained to fly Lockheed Martin’s F-35A Lightning II. The Heritage Foundation recently interviewed 31 of these former F-15C, F-15E, F-16C, and A-10 pilots. Each expressed a high degree of confidence in the F-35A, their new fifth-generation platform.

This article has filled my in box.  All the F-35 fan boys are pointing to this article as proof that the plane has finally delivered.

Awesome fan boys!  Do you feel swell?

Question before you start chest pounding.  Do you know who wrote the article?  The dude's name is John Venable.  Do you know who he works for?  He works for The Heritage Foundation.  Do you know what The Heritage Foundation is?  Its a quasi governmental think tank that leans toward what we've been told is conservative values.  They're advocates.  They're pushing for an accelerated F-35 buy.  Even worse?  National Interest clearly stated that the article was first published in The Heritage Foundation's in house magazine first yet no one seems to have followed the link to check it out.

This entire article is just another bit of fucking propaganda.  You've been deceived.

NOTE:  The purpose of the article is clear.  Check this part out.

In full production, the F-35A is projected to cost less than the four-plus generation Eurofighter Typhoon, the French Rafale M, or the latest version of the F-15K Strike Eagle.

The Pentagon and their sycophants are basically on their hands and knees begging for this airplane to go into full rate production now.  Even though we know that the upgrades to planes we already own will be prohibitively expensive. But the part that should worry the fan boys is this.

Concurrent development of the F-35A certainly has had its challenges, and the risks for delays and cost overruns should have been factored into the acquisition process. They were not.
Component, sensor, and airframe development were (and still are) all happening at the same time, and even small changes in the weight, size, performance, and schedule of any component could affect the weight, size, performance, and schedule of the entire system.

Venable is one of the biggest boosters of this program that I've seen...second only to Spudman and Ionosphere (they're tied)...and even he is saying that this program is not yet out of the woods.

Concurrency was a nightmare.  Procurement malpractice and will go down as two of the biggest failures of this generation of generals.  The first being their inability to defeat 40K ISIS savages operating in the open desert.

 

The 82nd needs the A400M

If you've been following the blog then you know that I haven't been a fan of the A400M.  Its cost over runs, slow development, protracted and painful in service has caused me to view it as the F-35 of tactical air lifters.

But reality is reality and if the US Army is serious about making the 82nd "mech capable" (Mike Sparks you were ahead of your time) then its gonna need a new air lifter.

To get to the point the weakness in the Army's plan for the 82nd is the C-130.  Its too small and short ranged to meet the requirements going forward.

Doing air drops of the MRZR won't be a problem.  I've seen guys with suspension systems on their rigs that could seemingly survive a drop from height without parachute!  No, the problem comes with resupply.  The issue becomes getting enough combat power on the drop zone fast enough.  Additionally the idea of escorting aircraft/clearing a corridor for the transports points to fewer planes carrying more so that the risk to assets suppressing the enemy (thinking EA-18G, JSTARS, even Burke's launching cruise missiles) is minimized.

Add a new light tank to the mix and your problems increase.  I love the idea of the 82nd becoming a hybrid motorized/mech force.  My concern is the same for the USMC's Company Landing Team, just on a larger scale.

We could see a brigade of paratroopers on the wrong end of a very long supply line having to worry about not only evacuating wounded, replenishing ammo/food/water but also maintaining/refueling vehicles.

The C-130 is too small to get that job done.  The perfect airplane for the mission (except for lacking rough field landing capability) was the C-141 but that plane is long gone. The irony?  The Army is locked in a savage battle with the Air Force for funding.  If they want to make their 82nd mech dream come true they're gonna have to go to bat to get the USAF another shiny new airplane.

101st deactivates its Pathfinder Company.

Thanks to John for the link!

via FtCampbell Courier

“Today is a significant day, and will no doubt be a day to remember,” said Lt. Col. Ryan P. Boyle, the commander of 5th Bn., 101st CAB. “The last time something of this magnitude occurred for our Pathfinder’s was Oct. 16, 2013 when Fox Company conducted its final static-line jump. It has been almost three years since then but the Soldiers standing on the field today continue to carry on the legacy of excellence of this proud unit. Before we bid farewell Fox Company Pathfinders, we pause to recognize the unique history and legacy of this incredible organization.”
The 101st Pathfinders can trace the unit’s heritage all the way back to the night of June 6, 1944, and many other conflicts through the decades. They bring more to the table than just a storied lineage. The 101st Pathfinders provide a unique set of skills that differentiate themselves from other infantry units.
“The main missions for Pathfinders are downed-aircraft recovery, personnel recovery, landing-zone reconnaissance and pick-up zone control,” said Staff Sgt. Adam Brousseau, a Pathfinder team leader with Co. F, 5th Bn., 101st CAB. “We have a specialized mission. Most infantry units don’t train on what we do. We’re experts at anything relating to aircraft because we train with the air crews and pilots pretty much every day. The Pathfinder inactivation is definitely a loss of an asset.”

Is it just me or is the 101st being marginalized to the point of "no longer being special"?

I don't quite know what to make of this.  In theory they're saying that "every Brigade" will be pathfinder qualified but many years of Army history says that it needs to be specialized.  What makes them think it can work now?  What makes this move reasonable?

Time to read up on the Pathfinder mission sets but at a glance this doesn't seem right.

F-35 News. They just can't push down the cost curve!

via Defense News.

The Air Force is facing a variety of demands, James added, and there simply may not be space in the budget to afford any more F-35s.
“Realistically speaking, given that we've had so much difficulty getting sequestration lifted, I worry about the money. I'm not sure where the money would come from,” she said.
Carlisle noted Aug. 2 that increasing the number of F-35s bought would boost economic order quantity, bringing the cost per jet closer to its $85 million target. On the other hand, moving slowly could lead to the Air Force spending more money upgrading fourth-generation airplanes that would otherwise be removed from service.
“I need more [F-35s] sooner to replace legacy airplanes and airplanes that are going to require money to do service life extension and do capability increases if I don’t replace the F-35,” he said. “So I would like to see the numbers go up to at least 60 if I can. 80 would be optimum, but given the fiscal constraints that we’re in today, 80 would be very, very hard to get to.”

And then this.

Boosting the buy in 2018 is an unlikely prospect because the Air Force would have to take money from other procurement accounts in order to do so, he said. Even then, it has few options. The service cannot make big cuts to its KC-46 tanker program without breaking its fixed-priced contracting agreement. Slashing other procurement programs, like the T-X trainer and Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System, would not yield enough cash to meaningfully increase procurement.
“You’re left with two choices,” Aboulafia said. “You either grow the topline [budget]. Good luck with that. Or you take cash away from the bomber, which doesn’t appear to be likely.”
Ramping up to a rate of 60 per year in 2021 is still the current plan, James said, but that could change.
“We're working our way through the next five year plan, the [program objective memorandum] that we're putting together right now, and everything in that POM at this point, is still up for discussion,” she said.

You get the force of connection here?  That slimy ass Air Force General is doing his very best to boost the number of F-35's despite the fact that it hasn't completed development.

I wonder if the good general thinks people believe him when he talks about having to upgrade legacy aircraft and the implication that it would be a waste of money when we all know that these "early" F-35's require modification/upgrades that will make legacy upgrades look cheap in comparison?

But even better is the fact that the real goal is to up production in any way possible to push down the cost curve.  They couldn't get an allied country to go for early buys and the budget won't allow them to do it either.

This is just too good!

The budget train wreck is slow motion and so is the F-35 death spiral. 

15th Airborne corps airdrops in Tibet with Y-9 ...pics via China Defense Blog

More pics here.

What do I see?  Looks more like promotional pics to me.  They're highlighting the Y-9 (which I know nothing about) and their paratroops.

What has me spinning is the oxygen masks.  It looks like they're doing a static line jump "Russian" style but higher than we would consider normal.  I wonder why that is?  Its the only explanation I could come up with for them using oxygen.  Oh and its a Hollywood jump too.  No weapons, no packs, just their main and reserve.

Nick Bare's Back From The Field | Army Training Vlog (I'm enjoying this guys stuff!)

No need to reinvent the wheel but I wish some Jarhead Lt would make a VLOG like this one.  Pretty interesting.

They do "field time" kinda strange though.  I guess the days of 30 days out and not see the barracks are over.

I called it too.  This guy is done.  He's leaving the Army.  Too bad for them but definitely expected.  

US Army to meet with industry to build a light tank

via DoD Buzz

The U.S. Army plans to meet next week with firms to discuss the idea of developing a new light armored vehicle with mobile protected firepower.
The Army plans to hold a so-called industry day on Tuesday at Fort Benning in Georgia to discuss the requirements for such a vehicle, essentially a light tank, in the areas of lethality, mobility, protection, transportability, sustainability, energy and cyber, according to a statement released on Thursday from the service.
The MPF program “will be a lightweight combat vehicle that provides the Infantry Brigade Combat Team long range, precision direct fire capability that ensures freedom of movement and action during joint expeditionary maneuver and joint combined arms operations,” according to the statement.
Speaking at the event will be Maj. Gen. Eric Wesley, commanding general of the Maneuver Center of Excellence; Lt. Gen. John Murray, deputy chief of staff for programs (G8); Brig. Gen. David Bassett, program executive officer for ground combat systems; and Col. William Nuckols, director of the maneuver requirements division, according to the Army.
The service has been experimenting with ways to bring more firepower to soldiers.
Army officials recently conducted at Benning a live-fire demonstration of 30mm cannons mounted on the Light Armored Vehicle (Combat Reconnaissance Vehicle) and Flyer Advanced Light Strike Vehicle, both of which are made by General Dynamics Corp.
The exercise featured the ground mobility vehicle 1.1 prototype firing the M230-LF 30mm cannon and the light armored vehicle combat reconnaissance vehicle prototype with a Kongsberg turret firing an integrated MK44 30mm cannon.
The Army quietly canceled its Light Reconnaissance Vehicle program in June, opting instead to equip cavalry scout units with the more general-purpose Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, designed to replace a third of the Humvee fleet.
That decision came without notice after maneuver leaders held a two-week vehicle assessment at Benning last August involving six companies as part of a platform demonstration to evaluate prototypes from industry. Instead, the Army will equip scout units in infantry brigade combat teams with JLTVs with potential sensor and lethality upgrades, officials maintain.

The Army is playing games.  Do you know how long the Army has been talking about a Light Tank (this time)?  Since at least 2012.  Do you know how the Army handles urgent requirements...even when it comes to vehicles?  They sole source it and dare industry to protest.

My prediction?

This is more fools gold for manufacturers.  They will meet, they will talk and industry will respond.

And at the last minute the Army will cancel the whole thing...again.

Why isn't Australia building a Marine Corps?

Troops of the Royal Australian Regiment disembark from U.S. Marine Corps amphibious assault vehicles during RIMPAC 2012. Department of Defense photo

Much discussion has revolved around the Land 400 Phase 2 contest and while we all have different positions on the vehicles selected the vast majority feel that Australia needs a Marine Corps.

I personally find it stunning that a nation with such a rich maritime history, one that was part of the "empire" doesn't have a Marine Corps.  Its almost obscene!  So why hasn't Australia built a Marine Corps and if they DID what would it look like?

What type force?  Full spectrum or Commando?

This is the building block of the force and will tell us what it should be.  In short should they follow the example of the Royal Marines or the USMC?  If they go in the direction of the Brits then they'll be a lightweight but effective force.  Optimization will be to raiding and other Commando missions but against more capable opponents they will see their utility diminished.  If they follow the USMC example they will build a medium weight force that can flex from low spectrum up to peer state threat level combat.  IT WILL be much more expensive, will require at least another dedicated battalion from the Australian Army and will probably require dedicated squadrons from the Australian Air Force to provide supporting fires in the maritime environment.

What specialized equipment?

Besides the basics what type of specialized equipment would the Aussies need?  Again this goes toward what type of force they've building.  If they go the Royal Marine route then the BVS-10 to transport Marines inland toward their raid sites would seem to make sense.  The issue for them isn't armoring but all terrain capability.  Additionally the BVS-10 gives a limited ship to shore capability.  NOTE!  If the Aussies do decide to go the Commando way then I'm sure they'll find that their most important asset is the LCM-1E that they've bought.

What will the 2RAR actually deliver?

Despite all my musing above I think its obvious what the Australians are doing.  They've bought completely into the USMC's Company Landing Team concept and the 2RAR will simply provide a "Ready" Company for emergencies, a Company afloat and then one doing training.  I personally believe that the CLT is biased toward Counter Insurgency and Special Operations Support.

The result?

Australia will once again find itself falling behind other advanced militaries in the region.  Who has Marine Corps (or is building them)?  Japan, S. Korea, Philippines, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, China, Taiwan and probably a few I've missed.  The bigger question is one I can't answer.  Why would a nation choose not to build a capable,  swing role force?

Army Armored Vehicles Conducts Tactical Water Crossing (vid)...

Halfway thru this video I was screaming at the monitor saying "YOU'RE FUCKING HALF ASSING IT ARMY!".

Then at the very end I saw the VIP tent and realized that its another dog and pony.  Still this is depressing.  River crossings are complex military operations and you don't see maneuver forces...especially mechanized forces doing the work.

I disagree that Russia is a threat.  Maybe not a friend but definitely not a threat.  If those in power believe that they are then stuff like this needs to be getting attention.  "Thunder Runs" around Europe isn't doing work.  Its showing the flag.  If you're actually talking about defending then your Combat Engineers need to get up to speed on creating obstacles/choke points, Maneuver Forces need to practice defense in depth (to include natural barriers/choke points)...If Russia is the threat claimed then we need to see a totally different approach from our forces on the continent...to include our allies.

Question for gun guys. What is your carry ammo?

Quick question for the gun guys.

What is your carry ammo and what grain do you like?  Everyone is biting hard on 115 grain these days (single stack 9's have seen to that) and 147 seems to be out of style....a few stick to the 124 as a good compromise and then you see manufacturers like Hornady coming out with 135 now.

The reason why I ask is because I'm currently rocking Critical Defense 115 grain and while its soft shooting out of my Glock 26...while I like to prioritize shot placement....I'm really wondering if its expansion is enough to put down a drugged up dude with decent size.

I know I'm contradicting myself but while shot placement is king, shock/blood loss has a place too.

Should I reconsider and move back to 147 grain?  What is the best on the market in that size that's available to civilians?

Side note:  I am not interested in the hybrid bullets that are hitting the market today that promise dramatic penetration.  Over penetration is as big an issue as anything.  Shooting thru the assaulter, thru barriers and then hitting grandma minding her own business is NOT my idea of a good day. So no offense to Ruger Polycase or Lehigh Extreme I'm just not interested.

General Dynamics! What were you guys thinking!!! Defence Technology Review was right.

I know you guys are getting tired of this but I have to beat this drum one more time.  What the fuck was General Dynamics thinking by entering the LAV 6.0 instead of the Piranha 5 for the Land 400 contest?

The latest news that has me spinning?

MikeKiloPapa a reader that serves in the Danish military informs us that the Piranha 5 as delivered to their forces has STANAG lvl 5 out the box!  Defence Technology Review was right.  They really did pick the wrong vehicle to enter into that program.

Aermacchi M-346FT (pics)

Increase in wheeled 8x8 size (pics)

Thanks to Kinetics for the pic.

How far has 8x8 development come in the past two decades?  Consider the above pic.  You're looking at the Piranha 5 on the right and the LAV 6.0 on the left (as you look at the pic).  The size difference is readily apparent.  Consider the LAV 6.0 the vehicle that everyone always screams about.  A dramatically upgraded version of something we already have in service.

During ordinary times that would be more than enough, but we're not living in ordinary times and the state of the art is advancing rapidly.

How far have we come?  The above pic is from STRATEGY PAGE and you can see the LAV-25 (an upgraded version still serves in the USMC) next to the LAV-III (Stryker in US Army service).

The Styker/LAV-III/LAV 6.0 is a toy next to the Piranha 5 and that vehicle is dwarfed by the Eitan, Terrex 3 and Super AV.

Is bigger always better?

No.  Not at all.  But bigger does give an indication of advancing technology.  It does give growth potential and the ability to carry larger caliber weapons and to flex into other roles (family of vehicles).

I've had my doubts about wheels but I've seen the MTVR go places a HUMVEE couldn't.  The USMC Land Systems Office believes that a 8x8 can do the job that the tracked AAV does today while offering better protection, easier maintenance  and still be able to swim from ship to shore.

Sometimes you just have to accept the innovation that is coming.  IEDs are a threat and force survival requires that our APC/IFV provide protection against that threat.  For at least the time being...wheels are king.