Did China just float a Marine Regiment?

via China Defense Blog

Last week, 10 landing ships - including two type 071 Yuzhao class Amphibious Transport Dock LPD and their LCACs - from the 2nd and the 16th Landing Ship Squadrons were out and about in the South China Sea.  A simple math would suggest that a Marine regiment could sardined into those tiny boats.  

Many more pics here. 

This is beyond interesting.  We put a carrier battle group in the region as a wave the flag exercise and what do the Chinese do?

They sailed 10 Amphibious Assault Ships.

I think China Defense Blog is spot on too.  That's enough naval shipping to put a Chinese Regiment AND their equipment on a beach.

That my friends is a wartime deployment.  We sail carrier battle groups all the time.  We sail MEUs regularly. Sailing a small armada in the South China Sea is an unmistakeable message to the entire region.

I wonder if PACOM was paying attention.

Shared NATO Tanker Force. Improve NATO or save AirBus?

Thanks to Waylander for the link!

via UK Defence Journal

NATO has taken another important step forward to improve its ability to refuel aircraft in mid-air, with three countries looking to join a European programme to acquire new refuelling aircraft.
Defence Ministers from Belgium, Germany, and Norway signed a Declaration of Intent to join a European multinational fleet of Airbus tankers, created by the Netherlands and Luxembourg. T
he two countries launched this initiative in July 2016 and a first order was made for two Airbus A330 Multi Role Tanker Transport aircraft, which are due to be delivered in 2020.
The new agreement allows other Allies to join the programme with the provision to enlarge the fleet to up to eight aircraft.

On the surface this looks like a straightforward plan doesn't it?  Trump complained about NATO and now the Europeans are taking solid steps to improve it right?  I mean we've seen how shared gear works on an individual Marine level so nothing could go wrong (sarcasm)!

But back on task.  Why do I have suspicions about the real motives behind this move?  Check this out.  via 4 Traders.

 Airbus (>> Airbus Group) called on Wednesday for new talks with European governments to ease "heavy penalties" for delays to its A400M military aircraft, after taking a fresh 1.2 billion euro ($1.3 billion) charge for Europe's largest defense project.
Airbus (>> Airbus Group) called on Wednesday for new talks with European governments to ease "heavy penalties" for delays to its A400M military aircraft, after taking a fresh 1.2 billion euro ($1.3 billion) charge for Europe's largest defense project.
The appeal comes seven years after Airbus won what at the time was regarded as a definitive 3.5 billion euro bailout for the delayed project, plagued from the start by political wrangling over the choice of new European engines.
Airbus said recent problems with engine gearboxes and delays in supplying defensive aids had led to severe penalties, bureaucratic arguments and cash being held back by governments.
"We cannot go on like that. This is unacceptable and puts a huge burden on Airbus and we need to do something about it," Chief Executive Tom Enders said.
The A400M was ordered in 2003 by seven NATO nations -- Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Spain, Britain and Turkey -- to grant Europe an independent military transport capability.
An unusual fixed-price contract worth 20 billion euros reflected efforts by Airbus at the time to win a major military contract to add to its growing jetliner business.
But it foundered over problems with the West's largest turboprop engines, which were to be supplied by a European consortium instead of Airbus's preference for a Canadian supplier, as well as tight deadlines for military hardware.
Speaking after reporting lower 2016 profits, Enders argued Airbus was still paying for the "original sin" of striking an unrealistic deal 14 years ago, despite having reset the program with the 2010 bailout deal.
The pan-European agency representing the buyers was not available for comment.
But Germany, the largest A400M buyer which has been most critical of the project, expressed little immediate appetite to help Airbus cope with the latest issues.
"It is important that the manufacturer resolves the current problems in the program," a defense ministry spokesman said.

Sounds like AirBus is in a hurt locker. When you have the Chief Executive of the company saying they can't go on like this then you know things are bad.

Do you remember all the talk about the USAF buying the A400?  Those rumors were based on the behind the scenes chaos in AirBus over the trajectory of that program.  They desperately needed a US govt order to save their bottom line.

So I ask again.  Is this tanker buy from a group of European countries designed to improve NATO or an attempt to hand AirBus a lifeline?

Open Comment Post. Feb 23, 2017

Norway dropping Tanks????

via Sputnik

The ongoing overhaul of Norway's defense capabilities still has many question marks hanging over it. For instance, the Norwegian Armed Forces may relinquish its use of heavy tanks and instead rely on missiles to be fired at enemy lines from afar. In any case, Russia is still considered the most likely adversary.
While billion-investments in combat aircraft, patrol aircraft and submarines have already been earmarked in Norway's recent long-term defense plan, the shape of the Norwegian Army and the Home Guard has yet to be fully mapped out. The prospects of merging the Nordic country's land forces will be assessed by an expert committee that is also expected to put forward its military budget proposals.
The committee, which is headed by Brigadier Aril Brandvik, has already identified four key problems with the current land force and is likely to present a wholly new concept of land defense. Only one of the three options currently on the table retains the existing defense structure with tanks and armored vehicles. The other two possibilities instead rely on lighter and mobile materiel, as well as closer interaction with other branches of troops, Norwegian newspaper Klassekampen reported.

Wow.

This is .... frustrating.  While our US Army and Marine Corps have all but acknowledged that we will lose air superiority in a future war, the Norwegians are still clinging to those Lockheed Martin briefing slides on the F-35 and believe that it will sing, dance and kill enemy forces.

Sad.  Real sad.

The Iranians are smoking crack...

Vid via Defense Tech...



Someone in Iran is smoking crack.

If they actually believe they could go toe to toe with the US and not get curb stomped all the way to hell.  I don't know why but this vid irks me.  It shouldn't but it does.

AAV-SU @ AAV Test Branch, Camp Pendleton...pic by Monique Randolph.

Interesting.

So the AAV Test Branch is already putting a few of these rigs to the test.  I'll never see it but I would love to know if it actually delivers performance improvements that seem likely with all the upgrades being done.

CoffeeJoeJava's point about the ACV not being a good enough improvement over the baseline vehicle (now the AAV-SU) that it's not worth changing has a bitter truth to it.  Do we buy a new rig just for the sake of the new car smell?

Would it make sense, if the AAV-SU delivers, to simply improve it across the fleet and keep motoring with it?  Dollars are finite.  Capability more important than flash.  Finally tracks.  Tracks make sense for Marine Corps operating environments.

I just don't know but its worth thinking about.

Patria AMV continues testing above the Arctic Circle...

Blast from the past....Marines 66 (The Marine Corps in Vietnam)

EA-6 Prowler photo spread! Aviation Photography Digest has a must see!

Aviation Photography Digest has a fabulous photo spread on this soon to be retired warhorse.  I've always thought that the EA-6's "stretched" body would have made a fabulous follow on to the A-6.  Make the backseats into fuel tanks and we'd have the long range striker/carrier capable arsenal plane that everyone is clamoring for.  It would be high subsonic, could probably carry 20 AIM-120D's and could go a long way.

It's not to be.  Regardless the EA-6 has served the nation well.  We don't know it yet but it will be missed.

General Dynamics LAV/Stryker illustrated growth path

Thanks to Skylancer for the pic!!!

Pretty darn awesome.  What I never realized is how low the horsepower is for the Stryker Double V-Hull.  I understand that it's what the US Army asked for but in comparison the LAV700 must be a speed demon.

I can see future upgrades involving MTU's compact engines becoming more and more attractive as these vehicles gain more and more weight.

Said it before and I'll say it again.  It's nice to see that General Dynamics has gotten its mojo back.  They're working on new concepts and incorporating new but TESTED tech into their vehicles.  With them being the probable builder of the Israeli Eitan APC in the US, I fully expect them to be in the pole position for the Army Stryker replacement program that is coming sooner rather than later.

F-35C problems mount. Now it needs new outer wings....

Thanks to FNU for the link!!!

via Next Big Future.

The outer wings of 32 carrier-based F-35C-models need to be replaced to carry the Raytheon AIM-9X Sidewinder, the aircraft’s primary dogfighting weapon.
The U.S. Navy variant experienced an undisclosed amount of oscillation or turbulence during flight trials with the AIM-9X in December 2015, and Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan says aircraft already delivered need to be retrofitted with strengthened wings.
The outer, folding portion of the wing has inadequate structural strength to support the loads induced by pylons with AIM-9X missiles during maneuvers.
Engineers have already produced an enhanced outer wing design, which is now undergoing flight testing. The issue has impacted the timeline for fielding AIM-9X, which is being rolled out for the Navy in Block 3F
Because of a seven-year schedule delay, the fifth-generation F-35 fighter will carry air superiority missiles that are one generation behind missiles on F-18s, which are already carrying the newest AIM-9X Block II and AIM-120D.
The missile must be delivered in time to support initial operational test and evaluation and complete the 17-year F-35 system development and demonstration phase by May 2018. The Navy, in particular, must be cleared to fly and shoot the AIM-9X to declare combat-ready status with its first squadron of F-35C Block 3F aircraft in 2018.
The F-35 team is adding a moving target capability, as reported by Aviation Week on Feb. 15. There are currently no plans to install weapons capable of hitting moving and maneuvering targets, such as an insurgent driving away in a pickup truck. The F-35’s laser designator cannot lead the target, its basic inventory of late-1990s guided bombs will fall short if that target moves briskly.
The military is integrating Raytheon’s GBU-49 Lot 5 Enhanced Paveway II, which automatically corrects for target speed and direction as well as wind conditions. The Marines have expressed a preference for the Raytheon GBU-53B Small Diameter Bomb Increment II, but that is not slated for full integration and flight clearance until Block 4.2, around fiscal 2022 or later.

The hits keep coming for the F-35.

This is particularly devastating news for the F-35C.  Mattis has ordered a review of the F-35 in comparison to the F-18 Super Hornet for Navy use and this will add extra fuel to the fire to make more buys of the latter.

But let's say that I'm all wrong.

The F-35C still has issues as does the entire program.  We won't even go over the fact that the electronics are so old that the F-35 can't hit moving targets with it, unlike its 4th gen counterparts that use latest generation Sniper pods.

It's facing the problem of weight.  Remember the weight reduction effort that was undertaken early in the program?  I don't have the figures in front of me but this plane has been suffering tremendous bloat with all the issues that have popped up.  Performance has to be suffering across the board.  Any thought that the F-35 would be able to match the performance of an F-16 when it comes to speed, agility and even range have to be called into question.

This program has already failed.  Even Bogdan knows it...even if he can't say so publicly.

Open Comment Post....Feb 22, 2017

Blast from the past....Vought V-507

This blast from the past is wrapped up in a bit of internet mystery.  Some are saying that this is an early competitor for the advanced interceptor contest that eventually became the F-14.

Others are saying that Vought didn't build it but that they simply acquired it with the buy of Ling Temco (I didn't even know that company existed, never mind whether its true or not).

Either way it was gonna be a sleek, fighter that promised nice speed and an amazing weapons load (if they could get it to work).  Consider it an early "Payloads Over Platforms" concept that didn't get past the mock up stage.

TACAIR NETWORK has the best info on this fighter if you're interested!

General Dynamics Light Armoured Vehicle 700 (LAV 700)

Thanks to John for the link!!!

via IHS Janes

General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) is showing its latest Light Armoured Vehicle 700 (LAV 700) for the first time – the most advanced vehicle in its class to have been developed by the company.
This is being shown in the command post (CP) configuration and is one of many versions currently in production for an unidentified export customer, which is believed to be Saudi Arabia. The LAV 700 is a further development of the LAV 6 developed to meet the requirements of the Canadian Army.
The CP version of the LAV 700 being shown at IDEX has a gross vehicle weight of 31,000kg, of which 11,000kg is the payload made up of crew, weapons, ammunition, onboard equipment and armour package. It is powered by a Caterpillar C13 diesel developing 711hp coupled to an Allison 2800 fully automatic transmission.
Like the latest production Stryker (8x8) infantry carrier vehicles for the US Army, the LAV 700 features inherent mine blast protection due to its double-V hull. LAV 700 also features scalable ballistic protection, energy-absorbing seats and a laser warning system.
Armament fitted includes a Kongsberg Protector remote weapon station, which is typically armed with a stabilised .50 M2 HB machine gun (MG) and a 7.62mm co-axial MG.
Mounted on the roof towards the rear is a 7.62mm MG that is provided with a shield. Integrated into the roof on either side are banks of Galex grenade launchers, which are coupled to the laser detectors.
A high level of cross-country mobility is possible due to the installation of independent hydro-pneumatic suspension with variable height control. The driver can select normal, transport or mine-high ground clearance. Cameras provide situational awareness through a full 360° and the open electronic architecture allows for the rapid installation of subsystems.
While the LAV 700 on show at IDEX is in the CP version, there are many more variants including ambulance, armoured personnel carrier, command and control, direct and indirect fire support, anti-tank, security, reconnaissance and surveillance and repair/recovery vehicles.

Looks like General Dynamics has gotten its mojo back!

I took a hard look at the requirements for the Aussie competition and their vehicle fit the bill perfectly.  Requirements!  That's what we should be slamming the military on.  If they're loosely written or poorly worded then it leaves manufacturers guessing instead of knowing what's being asked for.

But back on task.  The LAV700 is the perfect evolution of the LAV. Evolutionary instead of revolutionary is the way ahead and I'm glad to see a major manufacturer embracing that.  I haven't been this excited about a GD product since I first saw the Technology Demonstrator they rolled out years ago.  This looks like a winner to me.

The evolution of the Terrex 2 Amphibious Combat Vehicle.

The Terrex 2 ACV has seen a bit of an evolution since the contest began...

Above you see the rig as it was first presented to the public by SAIC and Singapore Kinetics.  What is the difference from the version operated by the Singapore Army?  From what I can tell just an enlarged swim vane.

At this point in the contest the requirement was for "limited" ability to swim from ship to shore and the Marine Corps was still emphasizing inland waterway mobility.  That would soon change and the offer of manufacturers being able to gain "extra credit" for achieving ACV 1.2 (the actual requirement to swim from ship to shore) pushed them to revise the vehicle.

That was a blow to BAE and IVECO since their offering was made from the
start to replace the AAV completely.  Below you see the "updated" Terrex 2 ACV.

What I find confusing is that Singapore Kinetics offered a "Terrex 3" for the Australian CRV. As you can see below it offers the same general layout as the Terrex 2 ACV (which is different from the Terrex 2 operated by Singapore) and appears to differ only in the weapons fit.

While the Terrex 3 didn't make the finalist list with the Aussies, if they should happen to win the ACV competition then the fact that its been demo'ed with a large caliber cannon is refreshing.  It's ready out of the box to be made into a family of vehicles.

Side note.  What is up with the nomenclature they're giving these vehicles?  Terrex 2 covers three different vehicles?  The Singapore version, the original US ACV version and also the updated version, and yet the version offered to the Aussies is called Terrex 3 which also shares the body style of the updated Terrex 2 ACV?  Clean this up Singapore Kinetics!!!!

Either way this goes I'm encouraged.  Its taken far too long, but at the end of the day our Marines will get a vehicle (Terrex 2 or Super AV) that provides the protected transport and hopefully (after its funded) lethality that they deserve and the nation needs.

CIA Freezes Aid To Free Syrian Army

via Sputnik

No military assistance will be delivered to the FSA by the CIA "until matters are organized," a source on the ground in Syria told Reuters. Specifically, FSA commanders said that the agency could be worried that, with growing jihadist assaults across the region, including the mass execution of up to 200 last week, the CIA is wary of putting cash and weapons into the hands of combatants that could then be given to regional terrorists.

About damn time!  Story here.  Have you noticed that this story is not widely publicized here in the US?  Reason?  Because the American people would be outraged to learn that killing ISIS wasn't the primary goal of CIA/DoD operations is Iraq and Syria.  Removing Assad from office was.  Its obvious that Trump's CIA director pick is finally making moves and starting to sort things out.

Don't worry about what Trump says.  Dude is a 70 years old guy.  Speaking in the politically correct, socially approved way is unknown to him and something I find refreshing.  Watch what Trump does!  This is great news!

J-20 with four huge drop tanks. UPDATED with video!

Thanks to Filippo for the pic!

Wow.  It would appear that they're planning on this plane going far, firing it's missiles and returning to base.

The Chinese are shaping up to be a worthy enemy.  I hope we're steady enough to curb stomp them.

UPDATE:  Sam found this vid of the plane in flight.  Thanks dude!  The more
I see of it the more I'm convinced that the Chinese built a stealthy F-111B analog.  A long range interceptor/striker...that's how I view the F-111B developing if it had been put into service by the Navy.  AIM-154's for the interceptor role and then loaded with bombs for the striker mission.  Of course the J-20 isn't thought to be carrier capable but you get the idea.

US Army fleshing out plans to revitalize Air-Defense units...

This is a Boeing test bed for work on their laser.

via Breaking Defense.

The service’s plan to revive SHORAD involves

*deploying to Europe about 50 more of its current Avenger systems, Humvees mounting multiple Stinger missiles;

*developing requirements for new “Maneuver SHORAD” equipment — such as lasers mounted on armored vehicles to keep up with frontline units — for which an Initial Capabilities Document is expected out by April;

*and ultimately quadrupling the SHORAD force — if funding can be found — to put air defenders in every Army division and combat brigade, both active-duty and National Guard.

Adding these assets would allow frontline units to maneuver independently even in the face of air attack, a key part of the emerging Multi-Domain Battle doctrine. “Our ability to defeat air and missile defense threats would be central to that Multi-Domain Battle,” said Maj. Gen. Brian McKiernan, commander of the Army Fires Center at Fort Sill, which oversees both offensive artillery and air and missile defense.

Quite honestly I didn't know that the Army still had Avenger weapon systems in its inventory.  It'll be interesting to see how they deploy them.  I'd like to see them mounted to Strykers or as a worst case measure on JLTVs, but the Humvee is just too elderly to keep up with the force.

Deploying 50 of them to Europe seems rather hyperbolic.  Russia isn't crossing the berm.  Sending so many forces there seems rather provocative.  Am I the only one that sees that big red dragon hiding in that mass of trees?

Lots of needs, little money.  Even with the Trump defense buildup there will be things left undone.  Budget Hawks will bite so it will be interesting to see what actually gets prioritized.

Mattis says Pentagon to focus on Warfighting, not feel good activities...

via Breaking Defense.

It’s time to focus the Pentagon on warfighting and get it out of the myriad auxiliary activities that distract it from its main purpose. Secretary Mattis made his position clear in his confirmation hearing: “[W]e have to stay focused on a military that is so lethal that on the battle field it will be the enemy’s longest day and worst day when they run into that force.” That commitment, combined with President Trump’s focus on management efficiencies and willingness to disrupt long-standing practices, opens a window of opportunity.
Many commentators have criticized the extensive skein of activities the military does that have nothing to do with fighting, but few get beyond the rhetorical stage. It’s hard. Refocusing the Pentagon and reducing support activities involves painful trade-offs and offending powerful interest groups. Those activities exist for a reason and boast passionate supporters.

This is awesome.

This is how the meme's about Mattis being blunt, and rock solid came into being.  Talk is cheap however.  He's gonna have to put his shoulder to the wheel and do hard work to get this done.

We'll see how it works out.

SAIC Unveils First Amphibious Combat Vehicle 1.1 to U.S. Marine Corps!!!

via Business Wire

Science Applications International Corp. (NYSE: SAIC) today unveiled its first Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV) 1.1 prototype to the U.S. Marine Corps during a ceremony held at the company’s integration facility in Charleston, South Carolina. This vehicle is the first of 16 to be delivered for testing by the Marine Corps, which is scheduled to begin next month.
“SAIC is incredibly proud to deliver this modern, high-tech, highly-capable solution to the Marine Corps. Our employees and team members worked tirelessly to successfully deliver this solution to the Marine Corps on time despite delays due to an initial contract award protest,” said Tom Watson, SAIC senior vice president and general manager of the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps Customer Group. “We are confident that this vehicle is equipped with the latest technology which will strengthen the amphibious capabilities of the USMC today and into the future.”

SAIC’s ACV 1.1 solution is an enhanced, customized variant of ST Kinetics’ TERREX vehicle fielded by the Singapore Armed Forces. Tailored to meet Marine Corps requirements, SAIC’s ACV is an 8x8 wheeled, armored amphibious vehicle with improved survivability, mobility, lethality, and C4ISR capability tailored to transport Marine Corps fighting units from ship to shore. SAIC’s ACV engine and transmission offers 600 horsepower for outstanding mobility while still exceeding fuel economy targets.
On land, the ACV 1.1’s independent suspension system improves ground mobility and ride quality for Marines. In water, its hydraulically driven propulsion systems with full independent thrust control authority and innovative water mode cooling solution supports safe operation at Sea-State 3 for ship-to-shore operational employment and through six-foot plunging surf.

Within the vehicle, state-of-the-art technologies include 360-degree situational awareness, force protection through leading blast protection seats, and a V-Over-VTM hull design to keep Marines alive in combat. All Engineering, Manufacturing, and Development (EMD) vehicle hulls are manufactured and integrated in the United States.

“Our vehicle was designed with future Marines in mind. We are equipping a new generation of Marines with the latest technology that they have grown accustomed to and using it as a way that will improve warfighting capability and could potentially save their lives,” said Bernie Ellis, SAIC ACV 1.1 program manager.

SAIC has a proven track record – more than 10 years – of modifying and upgrading armored vehicles for the Department of Defense ensuring warfighters are protected during combat, while securing command and control and repair capabilities. ST Kinetics is one of Asia's leading land systems and specialty vehicles companies having delivered hundreds of TERREX vehicles to the Singapore Armed Forces as well as the Warthog, a twin chassis, multi-purpose articulated tracked carrier, to the British Armed Forces.

Last February, the Marine Corps awarded SAIC a $121.5 million contract for the EMD phase of the ACV 1.1 program. Additionally, SAIC is currently the prime contractor providing the Marine Corps with initial survivability upgrades to 10 Assault Amphibious Vehicle (AAV) prototypes.

We have two good candidates.  The Terrex 3 is really starting to grow on me and I don't think we can go wrong with whoever we pick.

We just need to get it DONE!