Russian 6th gen (and possibly the SU-57) will have radio-photonic radar?

via National Interest

“The radio-photonic radar will be able to see farther than existing radars, in our estimates. And, as we irradiate an enemy in an unprecedentedly wide range of frequencies, we’ll know its position with the highest accuracy and after processing we’ll get an almost photographic image of it - radio vision," said Vladimir Mikheyev an advisor to the first deputy CEO of the Radio-Electronic Technologies Group (KRET) in an interview with the  state-owned TASS news agency .

Story here. 

Don't mean to be rude but this is for the aviation guys in the audience--ONLY.  Has anyone heard of this before?  Is this actually a line of research?

Open Comment Post. 05 March 2019

Dakota Wood is back pissing me off with his latest article....

via Washington Times.

The Navy is set to defer the purchase of two amphibious ships. It will also try to cancel the planned refueling of the USS Harry S. Truman, scrapping the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier 25 years early.

The Air Force intends to purchase the F-15X, a modernized version of its 1980s fighter, because its F-35 program is not producing new aircraft quickly enough to offset the loss of older F-15 jets.

As for the Marine Corps, we are already hearing reports — echoing those made repeatedly over the last half-dozen years — regarding the difficulty of maintaining readiness, retaining personnel, and recovering from 18 years of sustained land operations.

Despite the military’s obvious funding needs, the new Democratic leadership in the House is skeptical of increased defense spending — especially in an era of huge federal budget deficits and a total national debt of $22 trillion. As a result, the Pentagon seems unlikely to secure a 2020 baseline budget above $700 billion.

That's the freaking obvious but it's a warmup to where he's going.  Check this...

 For the Marines, all of this implies that they will need to make some very difficult decisions if they are going to improve the condition of the service. They will have to reconcile the gaps between size, workload, operational focus, acquisition priorities, and the implications of a smaller amphibious fleet.

The Corps’ senior leaders have consistently mentioned the deleterious effects wrought by high operational tempo: stress on Marines and their families; excessive wear and tear on equipment; and the lack of time available for training.

Yet the Corps has been unwilling to increase manpower to ease the operational load on the force, to reduce its operational commitments, or to reduce the number of capabilities it wants to have organic to the Corps. For example, rather than rely on the Navy or U.S. Cyber Command for cyberwar capabilities, the Marines insist on having their own cyberforce.

Unless the Corps makes admittedly hard decisions about size, workload and capabilities, it will continue to be taxed beyond its abilities, and readiness will continue to deteriorate.

For nearly 30 years, the Corps has maintained that future battlefields will require forces able to conduct “distributed operations” in which small, highly capable units are spread across a large area of operations, disrupting enemy access to key terrain or avenues of approach. Yet, it has not changed its forces to align with that concept, nor has it adjusted its acquisition programs or influenced those of the Navy to field new capabilities presumably needed to conduct such operations.
The Marines are not meant to be a supplemental Army. Their unique charge is to project combat power via the sea in amphibious operations that enable a larger naval campaign.
As the Corps assesses budget realities in a world of great power competition, it will have to make some very difficult decisions about how best to use the people and resources it has. It should measure every decision by the extent to which it aligns with the Corps’ primary purpose, codified in law and applied in practice for the past century or more: contributing to the prosecution of a naval campaign.

Whether the Corps’ investment of 3,000 Marines in special operations or 1,000 Marines in a dedicated cyberforce constitutes “best use” should be up for discussion.
Congress will almost certainly be asking these questions, especially if the Corps continues to report that it is operationally stretched beyond its means but does not appear to be changing its habits.

Story here. 

This dude!  This "analyst"!  This guy irks me to no end.

First, he pushes for a complete STEALTH AIR ARM (fixed wing) that will gobble up maintainers like theres no tomorrow...additionally he's pushed hard for the most expensive two versions of the F-35 (the B and C)...he's lobbied hard for the CH-53K...he lauded the ACV purchase and on top of all that he pushed for the "air centric" Marine Corps that is the backbone of the people that support his "think tank"!  In other words he's made the USMC more manpower intensive in the Wing while the Ground side is making due!

Now.

Now he's saying what?  I'm not exactly sure.  Is he saying that we need more people?  That goes for every service under the DoD banner.  Is he saying that we need to cut back on capabilities?  How about fixed wing!  But no...that would hurt one of the bankrollers of his think tank although it MIGHT be considered a commonsense solution to exploding aircraft costs.  How about simply buying the Super Hornet and letting the USAF take care of the deep fight and the USN the naval battle?

This dude is all over the place.

The worst thing is that the Marine Corps has marched out smartly on one of his ideas.  They're walking a nice course toward a "Commando" type Corps with these Expeditionary Rifle Squads and this joker still ain't happy.

I don't understand him.  Don't get him.  And right now I don't think I'd shake his hand until he clarified his position.

Pentagon Wants 78 Lockheed F-35s in 2020, Six Fewer Than Planned

via Bloomberg

The Pentagon will request 78 F-35 jets built by Lockheed Martin Corp., six fewer than previously planned, in the budget expected to be sent to Congress next week, according to defense officials.

The cutback from the 84 fighters projected a year ago for fiscal 2020 is a setback for Lockheed, the No. 1 defense contractor, even as interest in the plane from foreign buyers increases. The officials asked not to be identified in advance of the budget release.

It’s likely to raise questions from skeptical lawmakers about why the Defense Department, which has spent years saying it needs the more advanced F-35, cut back the planned purchases even as the Air Force is seeking money to buy eight new, upgraded F-15 jets from rival Boeing Co. They would be the first F-15s the Pentagon bought since 2001.

Among the likely questions is whether Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan, a former Boeing official, played any part in the decision to buy fewer planes from Lockheed and more from Chicago-based Boeing. However, Shanahan has recused himself from participation in all Boeing matters.

Story here.

This is kinda obvious.  It's also gonna happen.  The 2020 budget is a mess and all the services are gonna take a haircut.  The only two that haven't said what's gonna be cut is the USAF and USMC.  I guess you could say that the USMC took a cut when the Navy decided to slice two LPDs, but we haven't heard or even seen a whiff of what's on the chopping block for the USAF.

This looks like the cuts they don't want coming home to roost.

The sad thing is that they pushed the B-21 into the realm of the secret budget so it'll survive intact which leaves tankers, F-35's, and little else dangling.

So the F-35 is the sacrifice on the altar of fiscal austerity.  Funny.  They pushed the can down the road and apparently thought they'd never see it again.

If past is prologue then we can see exercises ramping up across the globe, penny packets of US troops deployed to places they shouldn't and a MUCH MORE VISIBLE military stance world wide.

Doesn't matter though.

Money is money and we're running out of it.  If the Pentagon thinks its bad now just wait till after 2025 (I was thinking 2030) and a new President regardless of party.

"They've gouged out hostages' eyes, cut off their ears, scalped, and then killed them..."

via vestnikkavkaza.net

Massacre of civilian population in the Azerbaijani city of Khojaly has numerous documented evidences, including eyewitnesses' accounts, accounts of soldiers of the Russian army. Gradator.ru website cites acoount of Yuri Girchenko, who served in the sapper battalion dispached to Aghdam in 1992. In his book "Army of the State That Doesn't Exist," Yuri Girchenko says: "... on the night of February 25-26, Armenian armed forces with the support of tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and personnel of the Stepanakert 366th motorized rifle regiment took over the city of Khojaly."

According to Girchenko, not the entire regiment participated in occupation of Khojaly, only the second battalion.

"Preparation for this operation took place in secret. But still, commander of the second battalion was one of the leaders of this operation. Why did it happen? It's simple! Commander of the second battalion, and almost all officers of the battalion were Armenians."

On that night, as Girchenko recalls, they gathered all Armenian soldiers in the regiment, as well as several volunteers of other nationalities, and began joint assault on Khojaly together with Armenian troops.

"At 11 PM, two-hour massive shelling of the city from tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers and modified Alazan systems has began. Then, from 1 AM till 4 AM, Armenian armed units launched an offensive operation on the city. Soldiers of the 366th regiment didn't enter the city. Resistance of the Khojaly garrison was quickly suppressed. By 5 AM, a large fire broke out in the city. Almost the entire city was burning..."

“Even before the shelling began, Armenians shouted through the speakers installed on armored personnel carriers that “free corridor" has been created for people who want to leave Khojaly and head towards Aghdam. Armenians warned that only unarmed people would be able to pass and leave the city."

Yuri Girchenko notes that "there was a second post of Armenian armed forces, of which Azerbaijanis didn't know. When people reached this post, Armenians began to shoot Khojaly refugees with machine guns. They killed both armed and unarmed Azerbaijanis. They killed both adults and children, young and old people... This path gradually turned into a bloody mess. There were so many corpses..."

Story here. 

I don't know where this story came from but it's blowing up my news feed. I don't know if its simply advertisement or part of an information campaign because something is about to kick off.

I do know its provocative as hell.

Additionally I've read about flareups between both sides but nothing recently. Does anyone have any scoop on things over there?  Is something about to flare up or is it all about selling a book?

Someone is training hard to kill you...are you ready for the fight?

They're training hard.

Are we?  Or are we running useless exercise after useless exercise across the globe to give the illusion that we are?

Sometimes you need to take a beat, gather yourself and make sure you're headed in the right direction.  That applies to land navigation, personal life choices and things of national importance like the defense of a nation.

The Pentagon needs to take a beat (or two) and decide if its on the right track instead of continuing to plow down a road that might lead to ruin.

Republic of Singapore Navy's Naval Diving Unit

Enjoy this video, courtesy of Republic of Singapore Navy's Naval Diving Unit. #hooyah #NDU pic.twitter.com/ahiZoOMzDN

— Ng Eng Hen (@Ng_Eng_Hen) March 4, 2019

With the war on terror winding down, what is the role for SOCOM???

Time for the fanboys to sit down and listen if they can't be constructive. The question is simple.  With the war on terror winding down then what is the role for SOCOM going into the future.

It's a simple but important question.  Thru the work of some OUTLANDISH leaders, a gullible former president and a fawning SecDef (along with his minions) we saw SOCOM gain enormous power and expand to a size totally out of proportion to it's mantra of being small and effective forces.

Additionally they moved from being a supporting to supported force.  Where once they demanded that conventional forces get out the way, now they're almost insisting that conventionals go where they do.

But back on task.

I put up a blog post trying to piece together one of the few missions I can see them doing in the future...a massive raid to seize nuclear weapons.  Most of the readership shot down the idea without a second thought.  They ignored the fact that the much loved SecDef Mattis even floated the idea AND the fact that such a raid was even put into the wild thru a series of news reports before Trump switched to trying a diplomatic solution to N. Korean nukes.

So if they don't seize nuclear weapons....they don't train foreign forces...they DO internal security for host nations BUT need help from conventional forces to achieve that mission then (again) WHAT DO THEY DO!

Recon?  Special Recon?  No need.  UAVs, sats, cyber and spies can get that done.  TRAP missions?  Conventionals can conduct that mission.  Either USMC MEUs (although they're now trying to give that job to the "Maritime Raid Force" instead of helo company) or the USAF pararescue (don't know if they're tasked to SOCOM or not) and the Army (have no idea how they do it).

Hostage rescue?  Most of the time that's gonna be a law enforcement mission.  FBI Hostage Rescue, GSG-9 or some other paramilitary outfit at the national level will do that job.  If it's overseas in someone else's backyard you can bet that while we might have advisors, except in the most extreme circumstances will you see our people head out.

Piracy?  Civilian shipping companies are tired of the losses and have private security manning boats in bad waters.

Do you get the force of connection?

The focus was on the war on terror and for some reason they believed that the war would indeed last for 50 years.  Dumb move.  Dumb thinking.  The bad thing for the SOCOM bubbas is that they bought into that hook line and sinker.

Now they're left searching for a reason to be.

My answer is simple.

We do as we've always done.

When the war is over we downsize.  This time we need to downsize, reorganize and shed headquarters.

Am I wrong?  If I am then tell me what the mission set is for this force going into the future.  Tell me how you use such a vast force with such a limited mission scope.

If the hard is no longer possible then it no longer needs such a large and expensive force.  The talking point that "you can't build them when you need them" might be true, its also true that you can have excess capacity.  If every unit in SOCOM is a raid unit then all we need is the Rangers, maybe a platoon or two of SEALs and we can call it a day.

Don't just yell.  Tell me where I'm wrong!

Battalion Landing Team 1/4 launch from the U.S.N.S. Pililaau (TAKR-304)...pics by Lance Cpl. Jamin Powell

USS Kearsarge Harrier Flights...pics by Cpl. Aaron Henson

US investigating Pakistan's use of F-16's in the recent air battle..

Thanks to Deckard for the link!

via Haaretz.

The United States said on Sunday it was trying to find out if Pakistan used U.S.-built F-16 jets to down an Indian warplane, potentially in violation of U.S. agreements, as the stand-off between the nuclear-armed Asian neighbors appeared to be easing.

Pakistan and India both carried out aerial bombing missions this week, including a clash on Wednesday that saw an Indian pilot shot down over the disputed region of Kashmir in an incident that alarmed global powers and sparked fears of a war.

A Pakistan military spokesman on Wednesday denied Indian claims that Pakistan used F-16 jets.

Story here. 

I don't even know if this is worth us digging into on these pages.  People are dug in with regard to whether or not Pakistan did or did not use them.

It's doubtful that we'll ever get a clear answer in the open.  Pakistan has the privilege of being courted by both the US and China.  It has a strategic position and with India being staunchly unaligned, the status quo won't change if we don't press the issue much.

In other words there is nothing to gain by totally debunking Pakistan's claims. Nothing at all.  India won't draw closer to us, Pakistan will however fall deeper into China's camp if do.

Only thing left is for the Wing Commander to make a shit ton of money touring Western Air Forces telling his story and to wait for an official after action.

Your Monday Morning Nightmare...Spiders eating--damn near everything!

Thanks to Panthera for the link!

Story here.

Royal Air Force Toral Aviation Detachment in Kabul (RAF Pumas)...

Iveco shopping the VBTP 6x6 in Africa & the Middle East...

via EDR Magazine.

Although usually limited in its participation to exhibitions, Iveco Defence Vehicles is present at the first edition of EDEX. The company has a long history of cooperation with Egypt, and decided to participate to pay respect to the country and to open the door to the Maghreb countries, which delegations are visiting the exhibition, which marked a good start, considering the number and quality of exhibitors.

The Iveco DV view on the Middle East market is that the major countries are trying to becoming as independent as possible in terms of military acquisition, however in the vehicle segment they still have to rely on foreign providers for engines, chassis and components. Iveco DV is thus ready to provide chassis as well as engines, the company being also capable to provide design support. Iveco DV considers a huge advantage being part of CNH Industrial, which possess all vehicles technologies.

Story here. 

I don't quite get IVECO Defense.  They have a very nice portfolio but they seem to be lacking when it comes to defense media, social media and their sales efforts.

It's really a shame.

I would think that their version of the Super AV would be selling like hotcakes after the USMC selected it and their other vehicles are surely competitive too.

Hopefully they step it up soon.

Your Sunday Morning dose of freaking awesome...

View this post on Instagram

The bit where he takes his glasses off ... #youjustgotschooledson

A post shared by Tactical Gear Australia (@tacticalgearaustralia) on Mar 1, 2019 at 5:16am PST

Well done cowboy.  Very well done...

Open Comment Post. 03 March 2019

USMC looks to extend the life of the MTVR...

via Military Spot

Since the Medium Tactical Vehicle Replacement entered service in 2001, it has been the primary tactical wheeled logistics vehicle used to deliver personnel and supplies to forward-deployed units. Its multiple variants enable the workhorse to not only carry fuel, food and supplies, but to also serve as the primary vehicle for towing systems like the Ground/Air Task-Oriented Radar, High-Mobility Artillery Rocket System, and M777 lightweight 155mm Howitzer.

The MTVR provides the medium lift lifeline of any logistics operation, whether at home or in theater. Over 1,000 MTVRs have seen service in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom, and various humanitarian and disaster relief missions across the globe. While the Corps initially planned to retire the vehicle in 2024, leadership recently decided to extend the service life of the vehicle to 2042.

“The MTVR was originally designed to have an item exit date of 2024,” said Walter Kelley, project officer for the MTVR Technology Demonstrator at Program Executive Officer Land Systems. “But being the platform that it is—a robust, good, solid performer—Marine Corps leadership decided to make it last roughly another 20 years.”

Kelley and his team at the Medium and Heavy Tactical Vehicles program office have been busy working with the National Advanced Mobility Consortium—a nation-wide alliance of organizations involved in the translational research and development of prototype, ground vehicle and robotic systems and technologies—to support this lifecycle extension.


“We’re looking at ways to improve maintainability and availability of the platform,” said Kelley. “The fewer times it needs repairs, the more available the vehicle is. All of that helps our readiness—the ability to respond when needed.”

Over the past few years, the program office has worked with NAMC on an effort that showcased the ability to increase both survivability and fuel efficiency of the MTVR by designing a lighter cab. The effort—the Lightweight Cab Initiative—outfitted the cab, where the driver sits, with removable armor and integrated a space frame architecture, further increasing passenger survivability during a rollover event. The program office also found that, by decreasing the weight of the cab, they were also able to increase the MTVR’s fuel efficiency and cut down on the logistics burden associated with refueling the vehicle in theater, thereby saving the Corps’—and taxpayers—money.

“If we can save 10 to 20 percent in fuel economy, that’s millions of dollars in fuel that could be saved with the same number of trucks going the same distances, doing the same stuff, just using less fuel,” said Kelley.

The program office reported their findings from the Lightweight Cab Initiative to Combat Development and Integration Command, the Marine Corps organization ultimately responsible for creating the requirements necessary for the acquisition team at PEO Land Systems to manage.

Currently, the MHTV team is looking for more ways to optimize sustainability and maintainability of the platform. They have turned to NAMC to modify an existing MTVR into a technology demonstrator that leverages known technologies into a single vehicle. The solutions incorporated into the vehicle will demonstrate how potential upgrades can be integrated into the existing MTVR platform.

For this effort, the MHTV team anticipates the contributions and specialties of various companies in the consortium to be combined into the final vehicle demonstrator. Specifically, the program team wants NAMC to modify an existing MTVR to integrate a lightweight modular cab with increased space for personnel and on-board equipment, more fuel-efficient powertrain, added electronic stability control, increased data bus security, and optimized occupant survivability resulting from vehicular rollover.

In addition to the proposed upgraded technologies themselves, the MHTV team will also assess how well the individual components integrate with each other.

“The purpose is [to ensure that] when individual components from different vendors are combined, the puzzle fits together,” said Trung Huynh, lead engineer for the current technology demonstrator effort at PEO Land Systems.

The demonstrator effort will be pursued over the next two years—the first year focused on industry developing the prototype, and the second year focused on the MTVR team evaluating the prototype.

“The outcome of this is getting an integrated truck, meeting the requirements of this technology demonstrator, and taking it to leadership,” said Kelley. “Leadership can then pick and choose what features will best support Marines or whether it would be worth going after a brand new truck.”

As in the case of the Lightweight Cab Initiative, the results of this effort will then be passed on to CD&I for further evaluation and potential creation of new requirements for the MHTV.

“We are doing our due diligence to do market research to determine where things are, where trends are going, and where technology is headed so we can make a truly informed decision as we move forward,” Kelley said.

Hmm.  I was actually thinking that they would do a buy for new vehicles.  This is one of those hidden essentials that don't get enough attention.

Having said that I'm sure numbers will be crunched and a decision made whether it makes sense to upgrade existing or make new buys.

Either way we can't go wrong with the MTVR.  This is one of the hero buys of the last 20 years.

This truck is gonna go down as being worthy successor to the ole 5-ton.

 

General Dynamics UK -- AJAX Infantry Fighting Vehicle..

It is REALLY hard not to be a bit excited for the Brits.  They've picked what appears to be a fine vehicle going forward.  The problem comes in the mix that they're choosing and in trying to figure out exactly what role they see them playing.

Having said that it still looks good.  Real good.

The problem that every nation will face?  Looking at your brand new shiny piece of kit and then glancing over at your allies and wondering "did we make the correct buy"?

Why do I say that?

Cause I'm looking at the Aussies and the vehicles that Rheinmetall is cracking out.  Maybe its all glitter and social media but those boys are JAMMING right now (jamming is an old term used to describe someone that is doing work the right way).  They're almost to the same level of BAE in the 90's.  That amphibious vehicle was a shot out of the blue and the Lynx is the heavyweight IFV no one knew they could build.

The stuff rolling out these days is awesome.  Everywhere I look I'm seeing intriguing vehicles.  The Israeli Namer and Eitan.  The VCBI 2 and Jaguar.  The AJAX and Boxer.  The Lynx and Protected Amphibious Assault Vehicle.  The Singapore NGCV and Terrex 3.  The BAE ACV and AMPV.

We are in a wonder time of armored vehicle development.

China's new 8x8 sporting new turrets...via @RickJoe_PLART Twitter Page...

This was posted back in Jan by Rick Joe but I missed it.  Those turrets look good.  The one mounting one I assume to be a 30mm is kinda old skool though.  everything is under armor these days even the ammo feed so that's a throwback but I'm sure they've studied the industry and gone with what they feel is best.

One thing I've noticed about Chinese 8x8's and other armor.  They're low slung.  I don't think much consideration has been paid to the threat of IEDs.

We've seen a few of their MRAP type vehicles in action and I haven't been impressed.  I'd love to see some of their main line vehicles in foreign hands get combat workouts to see how they perform.

Time will tell...

Gripen NG: a new generation is ready. Are you?

Was doing a scroll thru my video library and came across this jewel from 2013. Long short?  We've been had.

I know this is Saab propaganda but its all within the realm of what we know works and works well.

This plane checks all the boxes.  AESA, reliable & powerful engines, sensor fusion, IRST, links to other aircraft/ships etc....the only thing it doesn't have to make it a so called 5th gen fighter is stealth.

And exactly how durable is stealth in the age of advanced computing power.

Then we have the 1000 pound bear in the room.

Affordability.

If I was suddenly put in charge of an air force for a small country I would be all over this airplane.  It's obvious that arms sales aren't about a certain products capabilities but rather the "loyalty" that comes from the purchase.

I'd buy Gripens, Meteor missiles, probably some Brimstones, a good portion of Storm Breaker SDBs, some Paveways (thousand pound class with the guidance kits) and a good anti-ship missile in the form of the Brahmos.