Looking for a solid writeup on the India / Pakistan aerial engagement. It's just been a few days but we should have a clear picture but all I have to go on is the fragments of info that many of you shared.
I was hoping to see some definitive writing on the air battle. If you have then send it my way.
Why?
Because I'm not understanding the critique being leveled at the Indian Air Force. They engaged in battle, supposedly 8 v 24 and came out if not ahead then even. Those sound like fantastic odds to me and a great performance especially concerning the aircraft involved.
Is it all about the idea that an F-16 could be shot down. Is the focus on the hardware and not the pilots doing pilot shit?
That's why I'm hungry for more info.
Saturday, March 02, 2019
SOCOM has only one real mission into the future. Seizing rogue nation nukes...and they're not ready....
SOCOM is going thru a bit of an identity crisis. After years of being involved in the war on terror and after allowing the entire enterprise to morph into one huge "raid" outfit (giving up practically every other mission...pawning it off on the conventional force), they're now faced with the prospect of trying to find missions into the future.
Special Recon? Nope. Sats and UAVs and Cyber have that covered for the most part. No need to risk boots on the ground for that. Training of allied forces? They gave up on that long ago. Conventionals now have that covered. COIN? Yeah of course, but conventionals do that and even when they got the nod to become the supported instead of supporting force they couldn't get the ball across the goal line in Iraq, Syria or Afghanistan.
So besides small scale efforts around the edges that aren't really special operations type missions (lets be honest...most raids don't require the level of training these bubbas purportedly have) and can be handled by well trained conventional forces whats for them to do?
One mission is obvious from the fight between India/Pakistan. Seizing the nuclear weapons from rogue nations.
Check out these links...
https://www.nti.org/gsn/article/the-pentagons-secret-plans-to-secure-pakistans-nuclear-arsenal/
https://www.newsweek.com/north-korea-war-drills-prepare-us-military-invasion-take-kim-jong-uns-nuclear-750773
A quick primer from the articles? Check this out...
Mattis responded to the letter on October 27 via the Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, saying, “The only way to ‘locate and destroy—with complete certainty—all components of North Korea’s nuclear weapons programs’ is through a ground invasion.”The internet sucks because its current and find even recent articles is a pain in the ass, but if you guys remember we talked ad nauseum about the news that SEALs, Rangers, MARSOC and S. Korean Special Ops were all gearing up to make a run at N. Korea's nukes AND conduct a decapitation strike against their leader (this was during the time of Trump calling Kim "rocket man" and the US doing almost daily demonstrations of force by falling aircraft damn near to the border of the NKs).
Experts have warned that a ground invasion of North Korea would get “very bloody, very quickly,” with Mark Fitzpatrick, executive director of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, telling Newsweek last month that any ground invasion would be part of a multipronged effort.
“The key part of a ground invasion would be the effort to seize North Korea’s nuclear assets,” Fitzpatrick said. “[The U.S.] wouldn’t wait too long until after war-level hostilities broke out. They would have to try to seize them before they’re used.”
I won't make you aware of some communication (at least in detail) that I had with UTAHBOB (long time reader) but I'm starting to seriously wonder if it could be pulled off.
When I talked about it before it was with the thinking that it would be a ride into hell.
Now?
Now I think it would not only be a rid into hell but you'd have to campout for a bit while fighting demon hordes, extract the weapons, extract personnel --- all while HOPING that casualties don't rise above 50%.
A quick and dirty run down?
To seize a nuke facility you would have to deal with the embedded security (some version of USMC FAST or Royal Marines, I believe 45 Commando), and additional quick reaction forces.
Just to secure the perimeter and conduct the initial assault you're probably looking at the entire Ranger Regiment along with MARSOC Regiment. The air support required just to get them onsight will be HUGE! Assaulters would probably be your SEAL Platoons along with US Army Special Forces counterparts (hopefully you'd see allies along for the ride so that means in the case of seizing N. Korean nukes S. Korean Special Ops, hopefully a few of our European friends...SBS/SAS, the boys from Poland are well respected, a few maybe from the Netherlands...)...so that increases the size of the air arm just to fly them in.
You'd have to setup a corridor for all this to happen and you'd need some fast movers to provide fire in case they do the obvious and sniff out the move you're making (which they will).
So long story short.
Have we ever seen such a large scale exercise conducted by SOCOM?
If called upon could they actually even assemble such a force?
Could our airpower support a max effort that would last at least a day in support of such an operation?
Is the coordination there even within just the US defense community, across the various commands to make such an action possible?
This is the bad future that we don't want to see. The terrible thing is that as bad as such an operation would be from a casualty perspective (note that I'm just talking about the guys on the ground...we can credibly expect several aircraft to go down during an effort either from enemy action or mechanical failure) we aren't even ready to get it done from a planning perspective as far as I can see it.
Of course the other possibility is that planners have decided that nukes in the wild will be easier to recover than they will from nation state facilities.
I don't know but I hope I'm reading this wrong. This bad future might be coming faster than anyone wants to admit.
Did I miss a new debate in the UK? What brought this tweet from the HMS Queen Elizabeth?
#SupercarrierSaturday— HMS Queen Elizabeth (@HMSQNLZ) March 2, 2019
FAKE NEWS ❌
We don’t have any aircraft.
TRUE STORY ✅
Many aircraft, many nationalities - one fully trained and motivated team; delivering. #WeAreQE pic.twitter.com/c96E3Rb7KW
I just saw this tweet this morning and found it a bit curious. What brought this on? Did I miss a new debate in the UK?
From my seat (with little information) the QE seems a bit defensive about the lack of aircraft operating from its deck. Is there a new round of cuts coming for the Brits?
Two LPD Amphibious Ships Cut From 2020 Budget Plan... IT HAS BEGUN! BUDGET ARMAGEDDON!!!
via Breaking Defense.
Wary of bringing big, expensive warships full of sailors and Marines in missile range of hostile coastlines, the Pentagon plans to cut two new amphibious warships out of the 2020-2024 budget plan to be released later this month, defense officials confirmed.Don't be fooled friends.
The decision to delay the planned purchase of two San Antonio-class Flight II landing dock ships, known as LPDs, out past 2024 is part of a much wider reevaluation of naval warfare. Under high-level pressure to build a fleet better able to face Chinese and Russian precision missiles, the Navy is reducing its investment in large but potentially warships like amphibs and carriers so it can free up money for more offensive weaponry on smaller surface ships, submarines, and aircraft.
The Navy is set to make the request in its fiscal 2020 budget set to be delivered to Congress on March 12, which will also include a controversial plan to cut the mid-life refueling of the USS Harry S. Truman aircraft carrier, essentially retiring the flattop two decades early.
Budget armageddon has begun.
The days of the gravy train are over. The latest round of tax cuts has sealed the deal in a way that I love...smaller govt. The unexpected consequence? This thing happening to the Pentagon is coming a bit sooner than I expected. The 2020's were gonna be terrible but I thought it wouldn't hit till MAYBE 2025 or so.
What does this mean?
Well if you've been following the news then you've seen that the US Army is cutting. Same with the USAF and now the US Navy.
The most dramatic cuts so far have come from the Navy but the writing is on the wall.
Bin Laden, a failed anti-terror/regional realignment and a rising China/resurgent Russia have pushed us into a corner partly of our own making.
At the end of the day, for better or worse, events have lined up to do to us what Reagan did to the Soviet Union.
Can we recover? Yes. But we've got to be smart NOW! We've got to make the hard choices and do the hard thing NOW! The old formula of simply cutting manpower is a non-starter. Tough choices with regard to bases (talking overseas), commitments to "questionable" allies and idiot programs that drain the trough and don't add to combat power must be eviscerated.
Additionally we have to re-examine the Combatant Commander concept, the constantly expanding commands and cut with a cleaver, not a scalpel.
Gents! The going just got tough. We've got to get tougher!
Japan's new helicopter is the old UH-1N...
 | |||||
| 【防衛装備庁に納入（31.2.28）】 | ２月２８日（木）、株式会社ＳＵＢＡＲＵから防衛装備庁に陸上自衛隊新多用途ヘリコプターの試作機が納入されました。 | 新多用途ヘリコプターは、現ＵＨ－１Ｊの後継装備として、災害派遣を含む各種任務を担うために、現在開発中の航空機です。安全に万全を期しつつ各種試験を実施し、機能・性能、安全性等を確認した後に部隊に配備する予定です。 |
Wow. Very interesting. A technologically advanced country would go with such an old design. Is it because it meets requirements, is cost effective and excess capabilities aren't needed?
Extremely practical way of doing things from a budget side, but what happens when a bit more could be the difference between life and death? I imagine this is one of those tradeoffs, or rather "risks", that the big boys are paid to decide....
Friday, March 01, 2019
Video of ISIS "convert" attacking deputy with a knife. Cops need to select better rounds....
Thanks to Gessler for the vid!
A couple things.
1. This dude was mental.
2. Why did they just send one officer.
3. Totally justified shoot.
4. Obviously attempted suicide by cop.
5. Center mass double tap and he survived? They need to select some new rounds. Dude should be DRT...Dead Right There.
6. Was he on a watch list?
7. How many other clowns that think likewise are running around.
8. Gotta put in more range time. Between crack heads, meth heads, tweekers in general, thieves, gangster, nazis and now ISIS freaks the target list is getting long.
9. Good job on the cops part. Body cams have them playing to the cameras. Too bad. The verbal judo is weak because of it.
Don't have anything else. What did I miss?
A couple things.
1. This dude was mental.
2. Why did they just send one officer.
3. Totally justified shoot.
4. Obviously attempted suicide by cop.
5. Center mass double tap and he survived? They need to select some new rounds. Dude should be DRT...Dead Right There.
6. Was he on a watch list?
7. How many other clowns that think likewise are running around.
8. Gotta put in more range time. Between crack heads, meth heads, tweekers in general, thieves, gangster, nazis and now ISIS freaks the target list is getting long.
9. Good job on the cops part. Body cams have them playing to the cameras. Too bad. The verbal judo is weak because of it.
Don't have anything else. What did I miss?
It ain't over...BREAKING: Reports of fresh clashes along the India/Pakistan Line of Control in Kashmir.
BREAKING: Reports of fresh clashes along the India/Pakistan Line of Control in Kashmir.https://t.co/LEw9DGQaqx— Conflict News (@Conflicts) March 1, 2019
Ok. Time for me to bitch and whine.
WTF is going on in the State Dept of the United States and similar organizations in our allied countries? Where the fuck is the UN, China, Russia and the rest of the world?
We have two nuclear powers on the brink and what's the lead story (at least in the US)? The President's son in law got a top secret security clearance despite misgivings of the intel community.
We knew that a year ago.
Other than that it's that Trump did good to walk away from the nuke talks, the US and N. Korea blame each other for their failure and that the House oversight committee will be investigating Kuschner.
While our mainstream media is preoccupied with recycled news, the previously mentioned flareup is threatening to blaze even hotter.
Am I wrong? Is this just an "interest group" thing or are my fellow citizens bat shit stupid?
F-35 News. It's not about cost of the plane. It's about the cost of sustainment!
via Air Force Magazine....
“In a perfect world, were we to have the resources available to us, the 72 would be F-35s. Because an F-15 or any variant will never be an F-35. But this is about capacity.”Story here.
Goldfein added, “the money was not available” to buy 72 F-35s. Asked if that meant the F-15 will be cheaper than the F-35, he said, “we don’t know, because we don’t know what the offer will be on an F-15 variant, but that’s part of the competitive nature going forward for us.”
Wilson hastened to add, however, that unit cost is not the whole story.
“It’s not just the cost of the airplane. It’s the cost to maintain the airframe over its life. And one of the things that’s a little bit frustrating about the F-35 is, Lockheed Martin has not driven down the sustainment cost as fast as we want them to. And when you look at lifespan of the aircraft, cost to maintain the aircraft, fourth generation fighters are less expensive to sustain than fifth generation fighters,” she said.
Goldfein acknowledged that new F-15s would have a service life of perhaps 30 years, but through the 2030s, the fleet will be a fourth/fifth mix. And “this is about ensuring we don’t lose capacity against NDS tasks, in the timeframe we need to build up the F-35 as the quarterback of the joint penetrating team.”
Wilson could not offer an apples-to-apples cost comparison between the F-15 and F-35, but said “we just don’t think there has been enough attention on the sustainment cost [of the F-35]… and driving it down.” She said it is “strategically important” that the sustainment cost of the aircraft be lowered.
Wow! Read the entire article but one thing is clear. Military leadership is NOT QUITE on the same page as their civilian masters!
It's obvious that Goldfein has a different view on things than Wilson.
The battle is between the USAF and the Pentagon, the battle is between the generals and the civilian leadership!
US Army gets a new Medium Tactical Truck....
via Army Recognition.
American Company Oshkosh Defense, LLC, an Oshkosh Corporation Company, announced February 27, 2019, that the U.S. Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command (TACOM) Life Cycle Management Command (LCMC) has placed orders for 354 Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) A1P2 trucks and trailers at a value of $75 million.I read somewhere that the main impetus behind the design change from the cab over design to the traditional truck design was survivability against IEDs. They've retained the uparmored cab from the previous design so its still cost effective.
“Whether it’s moving troops and supplies, recovering vehicles and weapon systems, or hauling equipment, the highly capable FMTV has proven itself time and time again to be a reliable asset for the U.S. Army,” said Pat Williams, Vice President and General Manager of U.S. Army and U.S. Marine Corps Programs for Oshkosh Defense. “Together with the U.S. Army, we have established a robust FMTV program. We look forward to successfully completing the remaining FMTV A1P2 deliveries and seamlessly transitioning to FMTV A2 production without interruption.”
Oshkosh Defense was first awarded the FMTV A1P2 contract in 2009 and to date, has delivered more than 38,100 trucks and trailers.
In February 2018, Oshkosh Defense was awarded a production contract for the next generation FMTV, the FMTV A2. Since receiving the award, Oshkosh has started building vehicles in support of Production Verification Testing (PVT), Live Fire Testing (LFT) and logistics development. Oshkosh expects the FMTV A2 program to transition to low rate production in FY21.
The FMTV A2 fleet of vehicles will be comprised of 16 models, allowing it to perform a wide range of duties from supporting combat missions, to relief efforts, to logistics and supply operations.
The FMTV A2 is available in a complete range of mission specific variants including 5-ton Tractor, 8.8-ton LHS, Cargo 4×4 and 6×6, 10-ton Dump and 5-ton Wrecker. The FMTV A2 offers increased troop protection, while carrying additional payload and providing better ride quality and mobility.
What I wonder is why the US Army and Marines can't get together to buy common vehicles for common tasks like logistics. The MTVR is obviously (in my opinion) a much better for the wide variety of tasks performed by the FMTV. Why don't they simply piggy back on that buy?
Lynx Protected Amphibious Vehicle
Thanks to Dragon for the pic!
The Lynx IFV made into an amphibious vehicle? I need to see the mockup! My question. how do you make the vehicle in the image below .... SWIM!!!
Side note. Has it dawned on anyone that IFVs are now the size of historic medium tanks? Our new ACV (and other new wheeled IFVs like the NAMER) are approaching the size of the M48 Patton MBT!!! Many of them weigh the just under or the same as the T-55 Soviet Era MBT!!!
The revolution in armor is here (at least when it comes to IFVs)! What will be fascinating to see is what happens to the tank. With IFVs soon to standardize around bigger caliber guns (the Russians with the 57mm, the US Army probably with the 50mm, and Europeans going with a mix of 30/40mm guns) can we still call them IFVs? Do we now have tank/IFV hybrids? Will precision missiles replace the big caliber gun? Will the MBT survive in a different form? Perhaps in the shape of the Armata or the old M1 Experimental Test Bed?
Time will tell...
The Lynx IFV made into an amphibious vehicle? I need to see the mockup! My question. how do you make the vehicle in the image below .... SWIM!!!
Side note. Has it dawned on anyone that IFVs are now the size of historic medium tanks? Our new ACV (and other new wheeled IFVs like the NAMER) are approaching the size of the M48 Patton MBT!!! Many of them weigh the just under or the same as the T-55 Soviet Era MBT!!!
The revolution in armor is here (at least when it comes to IFVs)! What will be fascinating to see is what happens to the tank. With IFVs soon to standardize around bigger caliber guns (the Russians with the 57mm, the US Army probably with the 50mm, and Europeans going with a mix of 30/40mm guns) can we still call them IFVs? Do we now have tank/IFV hybrids? Will precision missiles replace the big caliber gun? Will the MBT survive in a different form? Perhaps in the shape of the Armata or the old M1 Experimental Test Bed?
Time will tell...
Lockheed expects F-35 flying costs will take time to come down: executive
via Reuters
Lockheed Martin Corp expects it will take around 15 to 20 years to bring the cost per flight hour of the F-35 below fourth-generation fighter jets such as the F-16, the head of the F-35 program said on Wednesday.------------------
“If we project that out based on the initiatives we have in place, we believe as we move out to the 2035-2040 timeframe we can get that cost down to under what a fourth gen is today,” in the range of $20,000-25,000 per flight hour.Story here.
And now the other shoe has dropped. Now we know why the F-15X is being pushed on the USAF. Now we know why the USN is being able to get away with their reduced buy of F-35C's without opposition from the Pentagon despite the F-35 mafia wanting to push it.
The damn thing won't meet it's promise of being as affordable as 4th gen jets till 2040 (if then).
Forget what this means to the US military with our comparatively HUGE budget. What does it mean for smaller air forces?
My fear?
What if they've low balled this estimate? What if they're NEVER able to get the cost down? Does that mean we've effectively neutered the air arms of our allies by pushing this plane on them?
This generations leadership is making a HUGE gamble with the F-35. It's almost to the point of them having to make it work. The problem with that is it might be impossible to do so!
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)