ST Kinetics outlines Bronco 3 capability

Thanks to Jonathan for the link!

via Janes

ST Kinetics' (STK's) Bronco 3 is the logical evolution of the Bronco 2 (Warthog in British Army service) and factors in many lessons gained from more than 15 years of service of the Bronco 1 with Singapore's ground forces, as well as operational experience of the Warthog in Afghanistan, Dominic Phoon, head of business development with the company's Design and Manufacturing Group, told IHS Jane's.

Development of Bronco 3 commenced in 2010 and Phoon explained that based on its predecessors' survivability records a key design aim was to provide at least Warthog levels of protection, but at no more than Bronco 1's base design gross vehicle weight of 16 tonnes, and not Warthog's ultimate operational weight, which peaked at 21 tonnes. An amphibious capability comparable to that of the original Bronco 1 was also desired. These aims have been achieved with Bronco 3 attaining 5 km/h in the water, and tipping the scales at around 10.2 tonnes unladen.

Phoon disclosed that throughout its use in Afghanistan the UK's fleet of 115 Warthogs survived around 30 direct improvised explosive device strikes, with no crew fatalities, the relatively low strike rate part-attributable to the design's ability to traverse terrain inaccessible to other vehicles, wheeled or tracked.
Actual protection levels for Bronco 3 remain classified beyond basic hull protection of up to Level 4 ballistic. However, both modules have been redesigned and now feature blast deflecting V-shaped hulls suspended from a redesigned and stiffened chassis by four rubber isolators. Additional benefits of this isolator interface include the ability to swap the rear module in less than 30 minutes, and a reduction (when compared to Bronco 2) in noise, vibration, and harshness levels of 50%.

Individual crew seats are an in-house blast-attenuating design and are suspended from the cabin roof. Bronco 3 normally seats 12, the four front cabin seats located as close to the vehicle centreline as possible.

"America first" is racist signalling? I reject that thinking!

Let's go on and have this debate.  The talking point from the left is that "America first" is racist...that its signalling to the KKK and other white supremacists groups.

I reject that.

Note that this line of argument first appeared (at least this is the first place I heard it) on MSNBC on the night of the election and has been shouted from the rooftops on the Rachel Maddow show.

The initial argument was historically accurate.  Certain anti-semitic, anti-war and isolationist groups back during the late 1930's used the slogan America first to fight calls for us to enter the upcoming war.

But the meaning of words and phrases changes over time and I might be naive but I believe that this slogan doesn't have any racist, isolationist or even anti-war meaning to it.

It means what it means.  Start putting America first.  It's a call from the citizenry for the govt to start acting in the interests of the people and not other nations or corporations.  Its not anti-trade, but instead a call for free AND fair trade.  It's not isolationist but it is a call to avoid foreign entanglements.  It does mean that we will fight wars for national survival and win unconditionally.

That's my take.  What's yours?

British Army to acquire JLTVs?

Thanks to Jonathan for the link!

via Defense News.

The British Army is preparing to buy the Oshkosh-built Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) but must first seek approval from the US government to move the deal forward.

"We are working through the Foreign Military Sales process. A letter of request has been sent ‎to our American colleagues, and we expect a response in the next few months," according to Maj. Gen. Robert Talbot Rice, the director of land equipment at the Defence Equipment and Support arm of the Ministry of Defence (MoD).

The MoD confirmed last June that it had held early discussions about purchasing the vehicle, but this is the first acknowledgement that an official request has been lodged with the United States.

Talbot Rice told an audience of industry executives and military personnel at the International Armoured Vehicles conference in London on Tuesday that the Army had opted for the single-source purchase due to its ability to meet UK requirements and its value for money.

"The price point the Pentagon had achieved for a (US) production run of up to 55,000‎ was not going to be matched by other contenders. On the basis of the assessment on price and value for money, we made the case to go the FMS route," he said.

Subject to final approval of the deal from both sides of the Atlantic, a sale will mark the first export success for the Oshkosh Defense-designed vehicle destined to replace the Humvee in US Army and US Marine Corps service starting in 2019‎.

The British purchase is part of the Multi-Role Vehicle-Protected (MRV-P) program. JTLV will meet a requirement for troop-carrying and other light duties.

The second part of the MRV-P requirement — a larger troop carrier and a battlefield ambulance variant — is being competed by the British.

Talbot Rice declined to discuss possible delivery timings for the JLTV beyond saying they would be "slightly behind" first US deliveries.

The Brits have lost their minds!  How is a force this small expected to operate so many different combat vehicles?  Why are they pushing to have a fleet this diverse?  Maintenance, training and even differing performance levels will make this type of fleet a downright nightmare in the field.

I just don't get the thinking.   One last thing.  What is the Ocelot Foxhound suppose to be now?

T-100 out of the trainer contest?

Thanks to Jonathan for the link!

via Raytheon Press Release.

Raytheon Company (NYSE: RTN) and Leonardo have decided not to jointly pursue the U.S. Air Force Advanced Pilot Training program, known as T-X. The companies released the following
statement:
"In February 2016, Raytheon and Leonardo announced their intent to team on the T-X pursuit. While we remain confident that the T-100 is a strong solution, our companies were unable to reach a business agreement that is in the best interest of the U.S. Air Force," said B.J. Boling, Raytheon spokesperson. "Consequently, Raytheon and Leonardo will not jointly pursue the T-X competition."

Too bad.  This was my favorite to provide the USAF with a trainer, homeland defense fighter and light attack platform going into the future.

The F-35 vs. A-10 Fly Off and CAS in denied airspace...

via DoD Buzz.

“It’ll be a very interesting test,” said Pleus, a former F-16 Fighting Falcon pilot who directs the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program’s integration office for the service.
“The A-10 was built to deal with tanks in Europe,” he said. “A low, slow, big cannon on the front of it meant to destroy tanks and assist troops in contacts and do [close-air support]” a mission the aircraft has flown more recently in the Middle East against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS.
Pleus added, “CAS is a mission, not an airplane.”

Then this

“The A-10 is a great CAS platform in a no-threat environment,” Pleus said, adding it was never meant to be a fast, high-flying aircraft that could maneuver in a contested environment — like in current parts of Europe, the Middle East and Asia.
The test between the A-10 and F-35 will be structured and certified by the Defense Department’s Operational Test and Evaluation Office, Pleus said. “That plan is something they are still developing” for the comparison testing “to start undergoing in 2018,” he said.
Citing his F-16 experience, Pleus said he would bet the A-10 comes out “as the better CAS platform” in a no-threat environment against the F-35, which performs similarly to the Fighting Falcon. But “as you now start to built the threat up, the A-10s won’t even enter the airspace before they get shot down — not even within 20 miles within the target.”

Story here.

Pleus is spouting the USAF party line.  "CAS is a mission not an airplane"...and then pivoting to providing CAS in denied airspace.

WTF is he talking about?  How does he define denied airspace?  Is he talking about helicopter traps that the Viet Cong would set up when they somehow got word of an offensive and the US Army Air Cav Div would fly into a meat grinder?

Is he talking about the traps setup by the N. Vietnamese Army when they lucked up and shot down one of our fliers?  Is he talking about one of those missions that would see rescue helicopters, Sandy close air support airplanes and every fast mover available trying to keep heads down while Jolly Green Giants would HOPEFULLY swoop in and rescue our guy?

Pleus and the USAF are once again being deceitful.  Any conversation about the F-35 is a non-starter with its supporters because they are willing to twist facts to such an extent that it is a waste of time.

Even better?  We know that the A-10 will win.  The F-35 doesn't even have its already obsolete aviation suite installed.  The Sniper Pod that the A-10 carries is far more advanced than what the F-35 carries so it will be able to deliver precision munitions more precisely.  We won't even get into gun runs and demonstrations of power.

Israel's Eitan 8x8 APC completes first round of tests!

via Ynet News.

The Ministry of Defense's new wheeled armored personnel carrier (APC), known as the 'Eitan,' has finished its first round of operational testing with the Nahal Infantry Brigade, which will be the first IDF combat unit to make use of the new vehicle.
The Eitan is slated to replace the aging M113 APC, which has been in service since the 1970s.

Story here. 

Point of annoyance?  The Israeli's have designed a new 8x8, are testing it and apparently will get it into service before the Marine Corps even starts buying OFF THE SHELF models.

Blast from the past....Panzer 68 ET

pics via Bmashina Tumblr Page.

Panzer 68 ET - version of the modernization of the Pz 68 of the third series (AA3). Modernization was the installation of additional modular armor and 120mm gun L/44. In 1984, were built and tested a prototype, but adopted this variant and was not accepted.

Eastern Mosul liberated? That was the relatively easy part...across the river is where it'll be a meat grinder!

via DoD Buzz.

The U.S. military on Tuesday backed up Iraqi claims that eastern Mosul has been liberated after 100 days of urban combat marked by incessant ISIS counterattacks, more than 550 U.S. airstrikes, lulls in the fighting and tactical resets.
After a meeting Monday in Baghdad with Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi, Sheikh Humam Hamoudi, the deputy speaker of Parliament, said, “We completed the total liberation of the left bank of Mosul and this is a gift to the Iraqi people.”
In statements Tuesday, Army Lt. Gen. Stephen Townsend, commander of Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve, said that clearing operations are still underway in the eastern half of the city, which is split by the Tigris River, and warned of tougher fighting ahead in the more densely populated western sector.
However, the progress thus far is “a monumental achievement for not only the Iraqi Security Forces and sovereign government of Iraq, but all Iraqi people,” he said.
“This would have been a difficult task for any army in the world,” Townsend said of the Mosul offensive to oust the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria that began Oct. 17.
“And to see how far the Iraqis have come since 2014, not only militarily, but in their ability to put their differences aside and focus on a common enemy, gives real hope to the people of Iraq that — after years of fighting and instability — peace and security are attainable,” he said.
Townsend cautioned that there is a “long way to go” before Mosul is fully liberated. “The fight for western Mosul is likely to be even tougher than the eastern side,” he said.
The first few weeks of the Mosul offensive focused on clearing the outskirts and isolating the city, with the ISF pushing from the south and Kurdish Peshmerga forces from the east and north.
Elite Iraqi Counter Terror Services units then passed through Kurdish lines to make the first attacks into the city, but the drive frequently stalled as ISIS attacked with car bombs, or Vehicle Borne Improvised Exploding Devices. The VBIED attacks averaged five per day, the U.S. said.
U.S. officials also said that ISIS has mounted what was described as a “three-dimensional defense — from rooftops, from the streets, and from a maze of tunnels.

Story here.

Unless we're seeing pics then I have a hard time getting excited about this conflict.  We're so deep into  a propaganda campaign when it comes to information about the fighting that its anyone's guess as to what's what.

But I can tell you this.  If they're claiming to have captured Eastern Mosul then that's just the beginning of the beginning.  Cross the Tigrus and enter the Western part of the city.

That's where the fanatical fight will happen.

That's when that 3d war becomes even more hellish (this type fight was predicted over 20 years ago by General Krulak...the only difference is that the Iraqis aren't trying to deal with refugees on the way in like US forces would be forced to by either the news media or the new camp followers the NGOs).

What am I looking for?  I want to see if the Iraqi Golden Brigade will lead the fight or if they're going to have to be replaced in the line.  They predicted that unit would be destroyed in this fight and everything I've read seems to indicate they're inches away from being combat ineffective.

We'll see what we'll see.

Blast from the past. Showtime 100...Cunningham & Driscoll vs N. Vietnamese Air Defense Complex (Fighters and Surface-To-Air Missiles)

Many point to the Congressman's conviction and jail sentence.  I don't care.  This guy had big brass, fury balls.  Cunningham  & Driscoll will always be pure studs to me.

Below is Showtime 100 the plane flown during this mission...

What I wonder is what would happen today.  The F-4's requirements look eerily similar to the F-35's.  Unfortunately the F-35 doesn't have the same advantages.  Its single engined.  It doesn't have a RIO to assist the pilot in fighting the airplane properly.  Its slower.  In the same scenario would a F-35 win the matchup and get its pilots "feet wet" so that they could be safely recovered?

Open Comment Post. Jan 25, 2017

One Punch Man vs The Incredible Hulk (anime illustration)

The Maxims of General George S. Patton

via The Art Of Manliness.

With the confirmation of General James Mattis as Secretary of Defense, the “Mad Dog’s” no-holds-barred quotes have been making their way around, and he’s been compared to another eminently quotable officer: General George S. Patton. But with all due respect to Mattis, there’s no one truly like the original.

Story here. 

Why am I so enthused about the possibilities with Trump?  Because he has cracked the code.  He seems to realize like few other "elites" that the actions he takes means more than "soaring rhetoric".  Additionally during the first two working days of his administration he is doing what others haven't....He's delivering on his campaign promises.

German bridges are tearing up US armored vehicles, not the other way around!

via Pravda.

The US army has come across "unexpected difficulties" during the redeployment of armored vehicles from the German port of Bremerhaven to Poland.
According to The Wall Street Journal, several vehicles were seriously damaged during the transportation. The vehicles crashed into the bridges, the height of which turned out to be lower than the military expected. Five armored vehicles were left in Germany, and the military have not found a safe way for their transportation yet.
Several US tanks had their batteries discharged upon their arrival to Europe, commander of US forces in Europe, Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges said. He also acknowledged that Washington did not have sufficient knowledge about the infrastructure of those NATO members that used to be part of the former Soviet bloc.
The United States is currently moving to Europe 87 M1 Abrams tanks, 144 armored vehicles M2 Bradley, 18 self-propelled howitzers M109 Paladin and four thousand troops to support operations Atlantic Resolve Operation. The goal of the maneuvers is to contain the potential of the Russian Federation.

Too damn funny!

You're telling me that during this so called "show the flag" exercise that planners didn't do a basic FUCKING ROUTE RECON!

We better hope Russia isn't about to come across the border...it looks like we've forgotten how to do simple stuff.  I guess its true.  Institutional knowledge does evaporate unless regularly exercised.  Oh and don't buy for one minute the excuse about "not having sufficient knowledge about infrastructure".

I bet you can find an old warhorse from the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment that could tell you every and anything you wanted to know about East German infrastructure!

Open Comment Post. Jan 24, 2017.

US Army deactivates its Long-range Surveillance Companies...

via Stars and Stripes.

The Army will quietly deactivate its three long-range surveillance companies in the active-duty force in the remaining days of January, along with four National Guard companies in 2018, the Army said.
The nearly 100 soldiers in each of three active-duty companies attached to three Corps commands at Fort Hood in Texas, Fort Bragg in North Carolina and Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Washington will be reassigned to other units at those posts, said Lt. Col. Christina Kretchman, an Army spokeswoman.
Army National Guard units in Nebraska, Georgia, Indiana and Alabama will fold up their long-range surveillance companies and reassign those soldiers in August 2018, Kretchman said.
Stars and Stripes first reported in July that senior leaders decided to deactivate the companies through an evaluation in the Total Army Analysis, a force structure program used to balance the composition of the force with strategy and resources.
Computer models were used to conclude long-range surveillance companies were not in demand by ground commanders.
Defense analysts have said Army commanders have an aversion to risk and a growing preference to use technology such as satellites and drones for reconnaissance rather than insert small teams of soldiers.
Long-range surveillance companies in the Army are comprised of 15 six-man teams led by a staff sergeant. The teams specialize in navigating forward positions to monitor enemy movement and gather intelligence for commanders.

Wow.

Drones replacing eyeballs on the ground?  No demand from commanders?

The thinking doesn't make any sense.  There is no demand for airborne forces yet the Army maintains a full division of them.  They have an air assault division but every unit in the Army is "air assault" capable.

I wonder if the problem is the size of these units on the new battlefield?  Perhaps they should have followed the sniper model and simply enlarged to be able to better deal with the threat.  SOCOM is doing the same thing with their forces...enlarging to evolve with the changing battlefield.

Budget Wars! Army sends wish list to Congress.

Thanks to Jonathan for the link!

via Defense News.

It also addresses other capability gaps that have come to the forefront as the service increases its concentration on the European theater to deter an aggressive Russia’s possible unwelcome military advancement into Eastern Europe. 
The Army would spend $1.8 billion beyond the 2017 budget to upgrade its armor formations, a direct answer to capability demands in Europe. 
According to the list, the service would accelerate Abrams tank production by two Battalion sets -- recapitalizing older tanks into a new version. 
Bradley Fighting Vehicle production would be sped up to build one cavalry squadron set. The Army would also ramp-up the pace to modernization of 140 Stryker armored fighting vehicles to the Double V-Hull (DVH) variant as well as the production of 18 M88A2 Hercules armored recovery vehicles, which would accelerate the pure-fleet of M88A2 for all Armored Brigade Combat Teams and ABCT support units. 
Among other armor formation upgrades, the Army would procure battalion mortar capability for three ABCTs and would fund research and development to increase fire power of the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle with a 30mm gun. 
US Army Europe has also lamented a capability gap in short-range air defense (SHORAD) and the wish list asks for $1.3 billion to pay for modifications to the Patriot Air and Missile Defense System, procures Patriot Advanced Capability-3 missiles, accelerates Stinger air defense system modifications and a service life extension program and also would fund modifications of the Army’s Avenger short-range air defense systems. 

 Electronic warfare is also a growing concern and the Army would speed up the procurement of ground and air electronic warfare capabilities, an area where Russia is considered to be more advanced. 
The Army is also asking for $2.5 billion for 10 new-build AH-64E Apache attack helicopters and advanced procurement for an additional 10 aircraft, 14 new-build CH-47F Chinook cargo helicopters, 17 LUH-72A Lakota light utility helicopters, and 12 additional Gray Eagle unmanned aircraft. 

Story here. 

How can the Army be so smart, yet so stupid at the same time?

Concentrating on upgrading and rebuilding their force is in keeping with the line from the new administration.  The talk concerning worries about Russia?  Not so much.  The Trump Administration doesn't agree (and I'm with them) but the Think Tank community is also coming around to thinking that they are down the list of threats (and that's if we can't pursue common interests).

ISIS, Iran, N. Korea, and China as an economic foe all rank ahead of Russia according to the latest thinking.

I also don't understand the emphasis on aviation.  I don't see the planning to move the Airborne Light Tank forward and no talk about modifying ATACMS to attack ships at sea.

When the Army was fighting for survival and looking for a place in Air-Sea Battle that's all they talked about.  With Russia being the foe of choice for McCain and the other Neo-Cons in Congress they're reverting back to old habits.

That type thinking will cost them.

This was a chance for the Army to re-tool and pivot toward being ready for a fight in the Pacific.  Instead they're opting for the comfortable terrain of Europe where the fight will never come. 

"Red Eyes" T-90 destroyed in Syria by anti-tank system...

Thanks to FKDahl for the link!  

Vid and story here.

Wow.

I need more info on this.  Doubt we'll get it though.

Pic of the day. T-72A SAA, in the district of Damascus, 09 Jan 2017

Pic via Bmashina Tumblr Page.

The UK gets its Airborne Early Warning System for its new Carriers. Crowsnest goes onto AW101 Helicopters.

via Defense Update.

The British Defence Minister Harriett Baldwin announced a £269M (US$327 million) deal for the procurement of 10 aerial surveillance systems to operate on the Royal Navy new Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft carriers. Initial deliveries are expected in 2018 with initial operational capability in 2020.
Lockheed Martin UK is the prime contractor for the Crowsnest project. The company will integrate airborne early warning radars and passive electronic support measures in the Merlin Mk2 helicopters provided by Leonardo that will also modify the Navy’s 30 AW101 Merlin HM.2 platforms to be able to carry the Crowsnet mission package.

Thales will provide the sensor suite solution for the system. With the new radar Crowsnet will replace the Seaking AEW7 that operated from the decks of the Royal Navy’s Invincible class aircraft carriers that were phased out of service in recent years. The system is an updated and improved version of the Cerberus tactical sensor suite, currently in service on the Sea King Mk7 helicopter.
The Merlin Mk2 Crowsnet will act as the eyes and ears for the Royal Navy’s ships, providing long range air, maritime and land detection and tracking capability. The Merlin Mk2 helicopters already perform a number of other roles for the Royal Navy, including anti submarine warfare, search and rescue.

One day we're going to have to have a real deal discussion on these pages about what a "real" aircraft carrier is and is expected to do.

The Queen Elizabeth Class Carrier is bigger than an America Class LHD (yes I know they've taken to calling them L-Class carriers but that's unmitigated bullshit and something they've pulled out of their asses...much more of that and the big Navy/Carrier Mafia will kick the Marine Corps so hard we'll bleed for years) but will have a similar complement.

It could operate conventional aircraft but they've chosen to go with the F-35B. Which means that while the AW101 will be a big improvement over the legacy system it will in no way compete with the E-2D Hawkeye when it comes to raw performance.

The Royal Navy made a conscious choice to move forward with degraded abilities across the board to include its future AEW system.

Why does this matter?

It matters because one day in the future the Brits MIGHT have to go it alone.
They might have to face another Falklands type situation where that little country that should be a pushover instead is launching advanced anti-ship missiles from long distance....

Making the best of a bad situation.  Dealing with the reality they face now and not relitigating decisions made in the past is what the Brits are doing.

This is good news.  But hindsight makes me wonder if mistakes were made.

Yars Nuclear Capable ICBM Combat Simulation